University of Bristol Phi Strategic Brief
Decant Scenarios
Presentation to Physics
10 October 2007
Content
• Background and Purpose
• Decant Options – Preferred Option– Other Options– Preferred Option in Detail– Questions at the end please
• Questions/Conclusions
Background and Purpose
• Decant is the next big decision . . . . .• ‘Unlocks’
– Next Phase of construction– Disruption Tolerance– Ultimate Design (e.g. East Wing)
• Physics Input• Integral part of Strategic Brief, Stage 2
which concludes Christmas 2007• A Strategic Plan for Decant (not detailed)• £44M Phi Budget
Decant Issues• Downtime of Research Groups• Movement of Equipment• Squeezing Up• Reliance on Other Projects• Isolation of Services• Number of Moves• Duration of Overall Project• Cost of Moving Equipment (capital and
opportunity)
Decant Options
• All options involve continued use of Level 2 Teaching Labs and 5 main Lecture Theatres
• Strike a balance between all of the Decant Issues– The least pain (making the project journey
tolerable)– The optimum final design (making the
project journey worthwhile)
Option 1 (Preferred)
1.1 Principle• Particle, Astro and Theory (PAT/others?)
move out of HH Wills Building (desk-based activity)
• Construction is then completed in 3 phases
• Remaining 2/3 occupants ‘move around’ the construction
• PAT move back in at completion of Project
Option 1 (Preferred)
1.2 Headlines• Starts January 2008 and Completes April
2013 (5¼ years)• 36 months of construction within HH
Wills Building in 3 phases• 6 move operations (including 2 for PAT)• A 2 centre department (PAT/others) for
4½ years
Option 1 (Preferred)
1.3 Reasoning
• No major squeezing up• Quicker project duration• Does not heavily influence the final
design• Does not rely upon other projects
(creates own decant space)• Least ‘painful’ overall
Option 2
2.1 Principle• PAT move out (as Preferred Option)
• Remaining occupants split into two and must squeeze up
• 2 phase construction
• PAT move back in
Option 22.2 Headlines• Starts Jan 2009 and completes December 2012
(5 years)
• 36 months of construction within HH Wills Building
• 5 move operations (inc. 2 for PAT)• A 2 centre department for 4 years
2.3 Reasoning• Squeezing up during construction (2/3 of current
space for 3 years)• Not much speedier than Preferred Option
Option 33.1 Principle• Move PAT out of HH Wills Building• Move all from East Wing to HH Wills
Building• Demolish and Rebuild East Wing
(larger)• Move all into East Wing and refurbish
‘old’ building• Move all to final destinations (inc. PAT)
Option 3
3.2 Headlines• Starts January 2008 and completes
August 2013 (5¾ years)• 52 months of construction/demolition
within HH Wills Building• 5 move operations (inc. 2 for PAT)• 2 phase construction• 2 centre department for 5 years
Option 3
3.3 Reasoning• Major demolition disruption to both HH
Wills Building and NSQI• Add. £16M+ project cost• Long project and disruption duration• Higher risk profile
Option 4
4.1 Principle• Whole of HH Wills Building moves
out into vacated (and refitted) existing Bio-Sciences Building
• HH Wills Building refurbished in one phase
• All return to HH Wills Building
Option 44.2 Headlines• Commences mid 2010 and completes April
2014 (4 years)• Single phase construction within HH Wills
Building• 2 move operations for everyone
4.3 Reasoning• Reliance upon other projects (current issues)• Delay commencement until 2010 (inflation and
UoB commitment)• Some squeeze up necessary
Variants on Option 4
• As 4 plus demolition and rebuild of East Wing
• As 4 with 2 phase construction (due to non availability of all of existing Bio-Sciences)
Option 5
5.1 Principle• Piecemeal refurbishment of HH Wills
Building (small pockets of construction)• Multiple and small construction phases
5.2 Headlines• 8+ year project duration• Multiple move operations (10+)
Option 5
5.3 Reasoning• Many moves (4 for some users)• Decant influences final design• Services isolations (e.g. flooding risks)• Big Decant spend• High disruption
Option 6
6.1 Principle• Move into a bespoke new Physics building
6.2 Headlines• 4 year project duration• One (phased) move operation• Higher Project Cost• Await site availability (2015+)
Option 6
6.3 Reasoning• Questionable Site Availability• Delay to Start (Inflation and UoB
commitment)• Reliance on other Projects• Higher Risk Profile
Option 7
Do Nothing Option – Why Not?• Safety• Design Life (under investment)• Systems Failure• Environmental Constraint on Physics
Functionality (and reputation)
Preferred Option – Details
• Programme
• Diagrammatic Decant Sequence
Option 1 (Preferred)
A. Principle• Particle, Astro and Theory (PAT) move
out of HH Wills Building (desk-based activity)
• Construction is then completion in 3 phases
• Remaining 2/3 occupants ‘move around’ the construction
• PAT move back in at completion of Project
Preferred Option (1)
• 3 Construction phases split horizontally
• Certain areas remain in-situ
CPT Slides
Preferred Option (1)
1.3 Reasoning
• No squeezing up
• Quicker project duration
• Does not rely upon other projects
What Next …….
• Analysis of Physics’ Questionnaires• Estates Meeting 15/10/07• Decant Details inc. Briefing developed• Strategic Brief complete by Christmas
’07• Start design of Phase 2 – January ’08• First Decant – September ’08• Construction commences April ‘09
Questions / Discussion
Feedback
Top Related