There's a space rush going on: funding for life science is blossoming and research organizations need space immediately, and sizable amounts of it. Complicating the problem, pandemic-created space inventory is primarily in the form of office space with floor-to-floor heights and MEP systems incompatible with modern research missions. Russ Chernoff examines practical ways of getting science space quickly in today’s market, including large-scale mid-project design shifts, adaptive renovations, fast-track developer-built science facilities, penthouse and sub-basement additions, core relocations, and more. He sets out pros and cons for each solution, and critical details for success.
The demand for state-of-the-art highly specialized laboratory space is increasing dramatically, and research organizations are being challenged to deliver these spaces quickly, sustainably, and at low cost. Modular, prefabricated structures can be the solution to this challenge. In this session, Prashant Gongal examines two case studies of modular facilities – one built on an existing terrace over a parking structure (five modules) and another on a brown field site (10 modules) – which utilized existing utilities, provided redundancy and uninterrupted operation from external disruption, and were delivered with improved speed to market, costs, and sustainability goals.
O&M for new science buildings: What’s the number? Bridging the planning gap between “build” and “operate” to prevent post-construction operational failure
The criteria for project success is ultimately “build AND operate.” Not just “build.” Too many new science building capital projects end construction only to face O&M staffing that is too little, too late, and unprepared. This results in building operational failures that damage whole science programs and cause financial losses for the sponsoring institutions. Steve Westfall demonstrates here how the unique O&M manpower requirements for a new science building are actually knowable, quantitatively, years in advance of construction completion, and how that number can be used to drive institutional action plans for assuring that great new science buildings will be operationally successful, great new science buildings.
Thematic STEM vs. focused-discipline science buildings: Value-based analysis for today's competitive academic institutions
The benefits of collaborative science have triggered an interdisciplinary science and engineering building boom pressing institutions toward program convergence, shared physical resources, open workspace, and team-based research and education. But is this facility direction the right choice for your institution? Session leaders contrast the decision making and planning strategies that determined the designs of two distinct science facilities at University of Massachusetts, Amherst – one dedicated-science building and one built for trans-disciplinary groups. They detail benefits and pitfalls for each approach, illustrate solutions for unexpected mid-project changes, and deliver post-occupancy findings.
In this session you’ll see facility strategies for accelerating speed to market, integrating emerging technologies, better equipping the biopharmaceutical and biomanufacturing workforce, and delivering space to attract industry partners. Session leaders examine today’s regulatory compliance and scalability drivers that are driving facility design decisions, and they identify best practices for developing “GMP-like” environments, advancing new bio therapies for commercial and clinical translation, attracting and retaining talent, leveraging partner capabilities, and linking research to manufacturing readiness. They profile the facility infrastructure Georgia Tech is putting in place to establish a leadership position in healthcare innovation, precision medicine, biomanufacturing, and value-based healthcare delivery.
New intelligent technologies that combine control and management of HVAC, containment, lighting, and daylighting in a single platform are enabling organizations to move beyond the traditional (and costly) “lab as energy consumer” approach to a holistic operating efficiency strategy. Paul Fuson demonstrates the advantages of Siemens’ Total Room Automation for Life Science in engaging building operators, energy managers, EHS officers, lab managers, and scientists to significantly impact energy consumption, operations, safety and compliance. He illustrates new technology implementations, and new ways of using old technologies, to monitor utilization, improve interaction of lab occupants and building systems, and deliver safe and efficient buildings.
This webcast provides a brief overview of United States building and fire codes as they relate to laboratory design, construction, and operations. Jacob Werner and Jeremy Lebowitz detail code requirements that govern chemical use in buildings including control areas, laboratory suites, and high hazard occupancies. Using diagrams and examples, the presenters illustrate how hazmat limits determine decision making on lab design and construction.
The demand for CGMP clinical batch trial suites are on the rise at academic institutions, and rigorous grant application and facility design and construction requirements must be navigated with precision. Mark Paskanik, Amy Caparoni and Steve Triggiano use a case study from the Duke Human Vaccine Institute to chart the steps and techniques used to coordinate stakeholder input and meet regulatory guidelines while staying true to project vision, budget, and schedule. They present a fly-through video of the space, highlight cGMP construction techniques, and highlight unique university organization strategies to increase speed to market.
Critical vibration control strategies for nanolithography, e-beam metrology and high-sensitivity instruments
Electron beam lithography, electron microscopes, and emerging ultra-precision instruments are becoming critical for the success of nanotech, materials, and life science research programs and facilities, and building vibration is a potential program killer you need to get ahead of! Steve Ryan details how to plan for the extremely low-vibration environments demanded by nanoscale and other advanced technology spaces, including passive vibration isolation, massive isolated plinths, and point-of-use inertial active vibration control pedestals. He examines case studies of new construction and renovations at Oregon Health Sciences University, MIT.Nano, and the New York Structural Biology Center.
Leveraging the Entrepreneurial Mindset of Silicon Valley: The Sobrato Campus for Discovery and Innovation at Santa Clara University
STEM programs across the country are looking to integrate student entrepreneurship programs with science, engineering and technology curricula, and there’s no more fertile ground for this than in Silicon Valley. Presenters will detail how nine campus buildings at Santa Clara University were designed, renovated, and occupied over the course of 10 months to create a 330,000-sf integrated center for transformational STEM education. Learn how they set out key details for collaborative learning environments that mirror the entrepreneurial mindset of the surrounding region, and established learning neighborhoods, project, and makerspaces to support cross-discipline inquiry and collaboration among traditionally disparate academic programs.