The Benefits of Renovated Laboratories

In an age of scarce financial resources and shortened deadlines, many laboratory-based organizations find that repurposing existing buildings is a less costly and faster way to bring facilities on-line than constructing new laboratories. With investments in research and development declining, money for the capital expansion portion of projects is limited.

Laboratory renovations are a fraction of the cost of ground-up construction. Repurposing savings can be dramatic. Greenfield construction (building from the ground up) costs $650 per square foot, while conversions average $225 per square foot or less, depending on the extent of the renovations. Design and construction expenditures can vary greatly depending on what the facility is used for, but significant savings can be realized by renovating an existing facility as opposed to building a structure from the ground up. Further savings are possible if many of the basic laboratory utilities already exist. As shown in Figure 1, cost per area decreases as the size of the facility increases; more importantly, laboratory renovations are typically 33% of the cost of a new laboratory construction.


Figure 1 - Cost of project versus size of project.

Lease rates are also more competitive in repurposed facilities. In the recession-hit Silicon Valley (San Francisco, CA), for example, office vacancy rates at the end of the fourth quarter of 2009 reached 19%, and space dedicated to research and development was just over 16%, according to commercial real estate advisory firm Grubb & Ellis. A further inducement to laboratory location in the area was the drop in the asking rate by an average of $2.53 per square foot full service for office space and $1.04 per square foot NNN (triple net lease) for R&D locations.

Permitting times are reduced significantly for renovations versus greenfield construction. Nonlaboratory buildings are commonly retrofitted for laboratory use. This saves time and eliminates lengthy, complex entitlement and city planning approval processes. It is easier to build laboratories in single-, two-, or three-story buildings in which companies can take advantage of control areas allowed by codes.

In Northern California, which leads the nation in biotechnology activity, San Francisco-based Dome Construction has undertaken numerous laboratory conversions, often converting office spaces into laboratory spaces, as inexpensive commercial real estate becomes more available.

Repurposing in large technology campuses

Large technology campuses must be carefully repurposed to prevent mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) issues as the infrastructure associated with a single-occupant campus is converted to a multitenant campus. Many large campuses were built with central plants designed for a single-user company occupant. When multiple tenants occupy a single campus, accountability for operation and maintenance and use fees must be divided between the tenants. Control systems can be used to apportion accountability for these central plants. The existing central plants can also be redesigned to have a smaller carbon footprint.

A contractor with a savvy MEP team can assist in the site and building evaluation and to determine how best to proceed with construction, while keeping in mind the expenditures of improving existing central plants or dividing facilities into building-specific systems.

Complying with complex building codes

Many of these new laboratory buildings were constructed under old codes and for different occupancies. Buildings constructed under the 2001 California codes were based on the 1997 Uniform Building Code and the 1997 Uniform Fire Code. These facilities were designed with the control area concept, which allowed four control areas per building and up to 100% of exempt amounts of chemicals for each control area, and had one-hour vertical and horizontal separation requirements.

The 2007 California code, for instance, is based on the 2006 International Building Code and International Fire Code. The control area concept allows multiple control areas per floor but limits the control areas from extending vertically through floors. The difficulty of this for operational laboratories is that it restricts the amount of exemption of Class 1 flammables that can be used in open systems above the third floor. This limits the number of researchers on upper floors. It also requires two-hour fire-resistant floor ratings for buildings over four floors.

As an alternative, Type L occupancy, based roughly on the old H-8 occupancy, uses a laboratory suite concept in place of the control area concept and does not limit the number of laboratory suites that may be constructed in a building or on a floor. Laboratory suites may span floors and also require new construction of Type-IA, IB, IIA, or IIIA. Type IV buildings could also work, but this kind of building construction is seldom encountered, especially for buildings of four stories or higher. Buildings of three stories or less can be of Type IIB, but require one-hour floors if there is more than a single control area. Type VA construction requires only one-hour vertical separation. During renovation of a laboratory building that was originally constructed under a different code, all of the above issues require careful consideration of intended use and applicable new code.

Managing hazardous issues

The intended usage of any hazardous materials must be defined; this and the existing building systems can have a significant impact on the site-selection process. It is essential to find a general contractor who understands existing building construction and will look above ceilings and in crawlspaces. Key MEP systems, structural systems, and control areas must be identified during the due diligence phase in order to repurpose the office and warehouse structures into laboratory facilities.

Repurposing vacant offices into science-oriented facilities raises new issues. It requires expertise on the part of the construction firm, including MEP services and knowledge of special hazardous code. An integrated project team is important during site selection and preconstruction.

The first consideration is floor-to-floor heights. Laboratories and data centers, for instance, require ductwork clearances, separation of data from some power-generating lines, and base mechanical and electrical equipment to meet demands. Creative alternatives such as low-flow fumehoods, chemical distribution systems, chilled beams, and other technical solutions can offset considerations for laboratory or data spaces. The existing building, including electrical and HVAC infrastructure to support data centers, must be carefully analyzed and supplemented since many were built under old building, fire, and ADA codes and for different occupancies.

Conclusion

A checklist of issues to consider in repurposing a space is as follows:

  • Nature of the work to be performed by the new tenant, including work flow, adjacencies, and chemical utilization and waste stream involved
  • Required setbacks
  • Robustness of the existing MEP utilities to support and control the processes of the occupant
  • Structural system of the building, including floor vibration experienced by research and manufacturing equipment, which could impact production
  • Streamlining and perfecting the conceptual process by using building information modeling (BIM) techniques.

Renovation should utilize BIM software to preplan construction, especially in tight spaces originally designed for other commercial use. BIM allows one to visualize how people, material, laboratory samples, waste, and equipment flow through a facility. This is especially critical when moving from a single-occupancy facility to a multiple-occupancy one.

The regulatory requirements of the new facility are important concerns. Issues regarding code can be addressed with the use of BIM and other computer-modeling technologies.

When considering ground-up to renovated structures, many factors must be reviewed carefully. Some may argue that new buildings are worth the lengthy permitting process and additional capital and time requirements if these costs are to be amortized over long periods of time. Renovations can be good alternatives for resource-poor organizations that need to become operational faster and at less cost than would be required for new construction. Both alternatives can make sense for laboratory operators.

Ms. Spradlin is Director-South Bay, Dome Construction, 2121 Oakdale Ave., San Francisco, CA 94124, U.S.A.; tel.: 415-641-0800; fax: 415-642-2812; e-mail: [email protected].