AS&HF Article

Sponsor

FACILITY PLANNING
Renovate or Replace:
Planning for the Future in a Recession

University planners today frequently face challenges as state funding is delayed and donors postpone their donations. However, they still need to offer safer structures that have better amenities, newer technology, updated mechanical and plumbing systems, and a healthier physical environment. Architects can address spatial relationships, help campuses plan for the future by building in flexibility, and advise them on the cost of maintaining operations during construction while ensuring that they are maximizing the return of investment on their existing facility or new project. And more importantly, they can assist in answering the “fix or not to fix” question in light of today’s economic downturn.

When deciding whether to fix or not to fix, planners should ask key questions such as, “If we don’t replace the building now, how long will it last?” Other vital questions may include:

• Does the building meet current codes?
• Can the building be updated to accommodate today’s instructional teaching modalities and modern
technologies?
• Is the facility properly sized for the present-day school population and prepared for the future population?
• Is the facility operationally efficient?
• Is the building structurally sound?
• Does the building have historical significance?

Measures such as the Facilities Condition Index (FCI) can help school facility managers determine whether renovation or replacement is financially practical. The FCI calculates the amount of deferred maintenance divided by the current replacement value for a building. However, some universities and colleges already have their own cost analysis standards. Within the California State University system, the general rule is that if a renovation costs approximately 60 percent of the cost for brand new construction, then the school renovates.

Why Renovate?
Not surprisingly, more universities today are choosing to renovate due to funding limitations. Many architectural and engineering firms advise higher education clients to revive a space as a first matter of course as opposed to demolishing and starting again. It is not only a cost-effective solution, but a sustainable solution. Often the underlying structure of an existing building may be sound, but the mechanical, electrical, plumbing or IT systems are outdated. Even if a building is not suitable for educational use any longer, it may be converted for other uses such as administrative offices, IT departments, community health centers or residential units.

Campus renovations for different building types will vary. For example, adding new IT infrastructure, audio visual systems, flexible lab spaces, safety upgrades, ADA compliance upgrades and energy efficient systems are vital to the renovation of a science and technology building. In the revival of a performing arts facility, however, upgrades in mechanical, electrical and technology systems are critical for meeting today’s needs for lighting design and control, audio systems, acoustic requirements, multi-media presentations, and varied mechanical ventilation requirements for patrons, performers, and equipment. Safety needs must meet current codes, such as fire protection at theatre stages and fly lofts; and safety rigging and catwalks. In contrast, the restoration of a student activities center may focus on the creation of social gathering spaces, areas for a variety of food options with display cooking and fresh produce, Wi-Fi access, and providing ample electrical outlets for laptop plug-ins or iPods. Each building type on campus requires varying degrees of knowledge of function, technical specialties, and timing. In general, science building and performing arts centers are more expensive to renovate compared to classroom or student centers due to the intricacies involved with the building systems and program requirements.

Often a renovation will be less about form and more about functional excellence. A renovation provides universities and colleges with an opportunity to correct design inadequacies, address safety and sustainability issues, improve functional systems and preserve campus history. An educational institution will often change its curriculum and academic programs as the needs of students and teachers evolve. As such, physical spaces on campus must reflect these changing needs—whether it means creating larger spaces for IT, converting science labs into classrooms to accommodate a growing student population or adding a state-of-the-art acoustics system to a performing arts center. At a campus within the California State University system, school officials recently conducted a study to determine the cost of converting a nine-story 218,000 square foot building that formerly housed science labs. The cost was 41 percent less than the cost to build an entirely new facility. Upgrades would include new mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems, as well as compliance
with current seismic codes and ADA regulations. Built in the 1970s, the current facility contains mostly labs with
a few general classrooms, a lecture hall, faculty offices and support spaces. Initial plans call for the renovated building to include lecture spaces, classrooms, faculty offices, and the campus IT department. A vertical renovation is typically more complicated because high-rises have different code requirements, structural issues and mechanical needs. Because building occupants are stacked vertically, exits are integral to the design. Larger classrooms also needed to fit into the existing structural bay size without moving existing corridors.

Despite the benefits, renovations can be challenging. Air quality and working conditions must be safe for faculty, students, and staff. A hazardous material study of the existing building should be conducted to see if materials, such as asbestos and lead, need to be removed. Schools should also consider hazards in the design of the classroom and lab environments, which could include solvent and paint exposure, dust, welding fumes,
and noise. It can be extremely challenging to continue existing academic programs while a renovation takes place. In many cases, students will be moved into temporary classrooms during the construction phase. In some cases, the temporary construction fence between the existing building and construction site must also be acoustically treated so as not to disturb classes in session. These are all factors to consider when undertaking a renovation project.

Why Replace?
When the renovation needs are too extensive, it may be more cost-effective for a school to replace a facility. Newly constructed facilities offer tremendous opportunity to create the best possible environments for learning, studying, working or socializing with newer technology and a healthier physical environment. One of the main benefits is that the space can be customized to fit a specific academic program. In a renovation, planners may have to compromise the size or shape of a space due to existing floor-to-floor heights or column spacing. New buildings also provide an opportunity to utilize a holistic approach to sustainability, beginning with the building site orientation all the way to the finishes and materials.

To stay in budget, schools can opt for alternates when bidding a new construction project. Bid alternates offer flexibility and lessen the amount of redesigns. At East Los Angeles College in Monterey Park, designers originally master planned three new buildings around a central plaza for the math and science departments. Due to cost escalation, the school instead opted for an 118,000 square-foot complex that includes a new math/chemistry/life sciences building in the first phase and the renovation of two existing facilities—a physics building and earth sciences building—in the second phase. This allowed the school to keep the original three- building concept of the master plan intact. The new building will be comprised of two masses to minimize the large scale, while a glass-walled circulation core connects the halves. It is slated to be LEED-Silver. For the two renovations, the designers could not cut any new openings in existing shear walls because that would trigger a full seismic upgrade with the Division of State Architect. Renovation upgrades include all new electrical and mechanical systems, ADA compliance, and IT. In this case, both new and old construction were used to create a master plan that was not only cost-efficient, but also sustainable and pays tribute to the school’s architectural tradition.

Planning for the Future
Campus facilities managers that bring architects early into the planning process may have an advantage in deciding whether to renovate or replace. Regardless of present-day funding limitations, schools must continue to accommodate the future needs of their students, faculty, and staff. Whether they decide to fix or not to fix, the benefit to planning now is that they will be ready to act when the dollars finally do arrive.

James Matson, AIA, serves as associate vice president and director of higher education for the Los Angeles office of HGA Architects and Engineers. For more information, please visit www.hga.com.

Sponsor

Your browser does not support inline frames or is currently configured not to display inline frames.

Sponsor

Individual/Corporate Member:

American School & Hospital Facility magazine and FacilityManagement.com are educational tools that teach institutional facilities professionals and the building team to operate, maintain and design structures efficiently, economically, safely, securely and green. The editorial mission is to report on the topics, issues, trends and products that impact facilities management.