She has also experience in modular construction, particularly in the student accommodation market and the great benefits this brings in this regard..
Of course, there are a wide range of other health, safety, and environmental regulations to incorporate, as well as the possibility of insurance or employer standards and recommendations that can, for example, dictate sprinklers even when this isn’t a legal necessity.. 9.Façades & finishes..
Existing office façades and finishes may be unsuitable for more stringent lab conditions.. For most office to lab conversions façades will simply require locking of openable windows and general making good.However, for Containment Level 3 (or BSL3) labs and above, cleanrooms, environments requiring exceptionally tight tolerances, and other more onerous requirements, façades can be quite problematic.Airtightness is a particular challenge that can make a perfectly adequate office facade ill-suited for lab use, or may result in suppliers unwilling to guarantee lab performance, or disputes during commissioning.
In such cases, rather than re-clad the building (which defeats most of the point of a conversion) a possible solution is a ‘box in a box’ lab fit-out, though this will be more expensive and will reduce net usable space..Furthermore, given how much energy labs consume compared to an office it may be sensible to improve the performance of an older façade, which will, of course, add cost and programme, and there can be other issues around cladding, for example, some systems and materials used in offices are not accepted by life science businesses and insurers for fire safety and loss prevention reasons.. Office finishes are unlikely to be suitable for lab use, and it is almost always best to complete a full strip-out of the office at the start of a project.
This will simplify design and construction in the long-run, and will often expose hidden defects or complications (see below.)
Raised access floors will also ideally be sealed or removed to minimise future sources of contamination.Today, rarely does an architect oversee the entire building process, from analysis to aesthetics, engineering to construction.
Yet architects have a unique capacity to critically understand and engage with the myriad stakeholders involved in a design process – and those who will ultimately use building and be affected by its presence.By fracturing the design process, traditional approaches to design and construction make room for ballooned budgets (being over budget is a built-in assumption at this point), rushed decision making, sacrificed ethics and injurious miscommunication and lack of trust.
Design to Value embraces complexity, acknowledging the complementary nature of ‘value drivers’: the financial, aesthetic, socio-environmental and processual.Rather than breaking down the design process into discrete, rigid steps, Design to Value seeks nuance and the space for innovation in the layers of each project.