140723 july 23rd meeting

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,

HASTINGS COLLEGE OF THE LAW 200 McALLISTER: KANE HALL PROGRAMMING + PLANNING

SPACE BLOCKING MEETING TWO OF TWO 07.23.14

proprietary and confidentialUC Hastings College of the Law Kane Hall Programming and Planning

AGENDA

2

REVIEW

1. GUIDING PRINCIPLES

2. FINALIZED CONCEPTUAL ORG. MODEL

3. MOVE-IN SPACES

DISCUSS

4. POTENTIAL PROGRAM BLOCKING SCENARIOS

GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND BOUNDARIES REVIEW

1.


4

PROCESS

• Engage all stakeholders in the project process. • Provide a range of options for optimal strategies. !LONG RANGE CAMPUS PLAN

• All strategies will support the LRCP 1.0 and preceding strategic reports. • Design for the needs of the students. • Leverage 100 McAllister for potential revenue-generating opportunities. • Increase student life and activity at 200 McAllister, and in particular the ground floor. Improve

first impressions of the campus.

GUIDING PRINCIPLESREVIEW


GUIDING PRINCIPLESREVIEW

5

CLINICS, CENTERS, AND JOURNALS PROGRAMS

• Design to serve the mission(s), teachings, services, and scholarship of each clinic, center, and journal.

• Serve the needs of both the individuals and the group for all programs. • Integrate programs into the intellectual life of the students and the College. • Provide opportunities for students and practitioners to work together and collaborate. • Maintain and strengthen the unique identity and brand of each program. • Maintain and improve the operations and physical relationships for each clinic, center, and

journal, as well as the inter-relationships between programs. • Design with flexibility in mind – grants and funding swings often cause staff fluctuation. • Design with clients in mind, which considers confidentiality and accessibility. • Remain cutting-edge and innovative with regard to tools and technology in order to remain

competitive. • Design with the consideration of economies of scale by maximizing staffing spaces and

developing common area spaces for similar or overlapping programs. • Improve wayfinding and path of travel to the clinics, centers, and journals. Make them easily

accessible to the broader community. • Ensure the security of students, faculty, staff, and the clinics, centers, and journals. • Employ sustainable design by considering the use of natural light, material choices, and

furniture selection. • Preserve the window line for shared and multi-functional space.


BOUNDARIESREVIEW

6

MOVE-OUT

• Relocate all programs in the 3rd, 4th, 22nd, and 23rd floor of 100 McAllister to 200 McAllister. • Consider the relocation of Health Services to a more private location on campus.

MOVE-IN

• Potential 200 McAllister relocation sites: 1st floor; 2nd floor health clinic; 4th and/or 6th floor library).

• Minimize cost of renovation and avoid changes that necessitate major changes to building systems.

• Preserve to the maximum extent possible previous investments in physical plant improvements.

• Preserve or increase the amount of student study space and classrooms on campus. • Preserve the special collections archive located on the 6th floor of 200 McAllister . • Maintain the amount of private faculty offices located on the 6th floor of 200 McAllister . • Journals must have 24 hour access. • Prioritize approaches and projects that minimize construction period disruptions to ongoing

academic operations. • All relocated programs will be moved in no later than January 2016.

FINALIZED CONCEPTUAL ORG. MODEL REVIEW

2.


8

CLASSROOM/SEMINAR

CLASSROOM/SEMINAR

CLASSROOM/SEMINAR

CLASSROOM/SEMINAR

CLASSROOM/SEMINAR

CLASSROOM/SEMINAR

CLASSROOM/SEMINAR

CED

OFFICE/ WORKSTATIONS

CGA


SEEE


IR


SMALLMEETING

(2-6)

NEW CLINIC


STUDENT WORKSTATIONS

RECEPTION/LOBBY

JOURNALOFFICE

JOURNALOFFICE

JOURNALOFFICE

JOURNALOFFICE

JOURNALOFFICE

JOURNALOFFICE

JOURNALOFFICE

JOURNALOFFICE

JOURNALOFFICE

PUBLISHINGOFFICE

MEETINGOFFICES/

WORKSTATIONS

RESOURCEW

LL

RECEPTION

IN2

MEETINGOFFICES/

WORKSTATIONS

RESOURCE

RECEPTION

CONS.

MEETINGOFFICES/

WORKSTATIONS

RESOURCE

RECEPTION

FU

TURE

MEETINGOFFICES/

WORKSTATIONS

RESOURCE

RECEPTION

CSLGL

MEETINGOFFICES/

WORKSTATIONS

RESOURCE

RECEPTION

CGRS

MEETINGOFFICES/

WORKSTATIONS

RESOURCE

RECEPTION

CN

DR / ME.

MEETINGOFFICES/

WORKSTATIONS

RESOURCE

RECEPTION

SMALLMEETING

(2-6)

BREAKOUT BREAKOUT

BREAKOUT

BREAKOUTBREAKOUT

BREAKOUT

COPYROOM/

STORAGE

LOUNGE

BREAK/ KITCHEN

MEDIUM MEETING ROOM /

BREAK-OUT(6-12)

COPYROOM/

STORAGE

RESOURCELIBRARY

LOUNGE

BREAK/KITCHEN

SMALLMEETING

(2-6)

SMALLMEETING

(2-6)

MEDIUM MEETING ROOM /

BREAK-OUT(6-12)

CLINICSCENTERS JOURNALS

GENERALFACULTY

MLPS


RHRC


FINALIZED ORG. MODELCONCEPTUAL ORGANIZATION MODEL – ALL PROGRAMS

MOVE-IN SPACES3.


UNDERSTANDING EXISTING CONDITIONSSPACE TEST FIT

10

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

Total Existing Space Program

Total PossibleRelocation Space

34,217 SF

25,346 SF

100 McAllister

198 McAllister

200 McAllister

1st Floor

6th Floor Opportunity

Classroomrs

Special Collections

Offices

Offices

Conf/Mtg/Resources

Instructional

Load/Circulation


11

OPPORTUNITY AREAS200 MCALLISTER– 6TH FLOOR

200 MCALLISTER 6TH FLOOR

6TH FLOOROF LIBRARYOpp.

OPPORTUNITY AREA

Opp.

***ANY MOVE WILL KEEP OR EXPAND EXISTING STUDENT STUDY SPACE


12

OPPORTUNITY AREASMCALLISTER 200 – 1ST FLOOR

200 MCALLISTER 1ST FLOOR

SCIENCE ANDTECHNOLOGYLAW JOURNAL

SLJTJOURNAL

FORMER BOOKSTORE, STUDENT CENTER,ANDBUSINESS CENTER

Opp.OPPORTUNITY AREA

Opp.

Opp.

Opp.

OFFICE

OFFICE

OFFICE

FORMER BOOKSTORE

BUSINESS CENTER

CONF.

LOBBY

STUDENT INFO CENTER


SCIENCE ANDTECHNOLOGYLAW JOURNAL

SLJTJOURNAL

FORMER BOOKSTORE, STUDENT CENTER,ANDBUSINESS CENTER

Opp.OPPORTUNITY AREA

Opp.

Opp.

Opp.

OFFICE

OFFICE

OFFICE

FORMER BOOKSTORE

BUSINESS CENTER

CONF.

LOBBY

STUDENT INFO CENTER


13

UNDERSTANDING EXISTING CONDITIONSSPACE TEST FIT

DRAFT

Page 3 of 9

UC HASTINGS - KANE HALL PROGRAMMING & PLANNING

SPACE BLOCKING – Existing Square Footage Comparison7.23.2014

Centers

Clinics

Journals

CLINICSEXISTING ASF

CENTERSEXISTING ASF

JOURNALSEXISTING ASF

SPACE BLOCKING: THREE SCENARIOS

4.


15

SCENARIO 1: FLEXIBILITY OPTIMIZATION200 MCALLISTER 6TH FLOOR

DRAFT

Clinics / Centers / Journals

Interaction

Classroom / Seminar

General Offices

Student Study

Page 4 of 9

PROS: � Most flexible arrangement

maximizes ability for programs to expand and contract smartly and affordably

� Clear delineation between research programs and student spaces

CONS � Elongate space limits internal

layouts of programs; less opportunity for brand identity development

� No “grand entrance sequence”

UC HASTINGS - KANE HALL PROGRAMMING + PLANNING

FLEXIBILITY OPTIMIZATION – Scenario 1 of 3200 McAllister 6th Floor7.23.2014

PROS:

• Most flexible arrangement maximizes ability for all programs to expand and contract smartly and affordably

• Clear delineation between research programs and student spaces

CONS:

• Elongated space limits internal layouts of programs; less opportunity for brand identity development

• No "grand entrance sequence”


DRAFT


Interaction

Classroom / Seminar

General Offices

Student Study

Page 5 of 9

CONS � Research programs are “landlocked”

which makes expansion difficult � Student-oriented programs

(e.g. classrooms) are distributed throughout potentially creating traffic through research programs

PROS: � Orientation of program massing

optimizes ability to develop unique identities within each program space

� Primary reception allows for “grand entrance sequence”

� Separation of front and back of the house operations


IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT OPTIMIZATION – Scenario 2 of 3200 McAllister 6th Floor7.23.2014

16

SCENARIO 2: IDENTITY OPTIMIZATION200 MCALLISTER 6TH FLOOR

PROS:

• Primary reception allows for “grand entrance sequence”

• Separation of front and back of the house operations

CONS:

• Research programs are “landlocked” which makes expansion difficult

• Student study space base limited amount of natural light exposure


17

SCENARIO 3: WITH JOURNALS200 MCALLISTER 6TH FLOOR

DRAFT


Interaction

Classroom / Seminar

General Offices

Student Study

Page 6 of 9

PROS: � Locating a majority of classrooms

on the first floor may reduce traffic and noise

CONS � Need to occupy first floor of

building in order to incorporate all necessary programs


SPACE BLOCKING – Scenario 3 of 3200 McAllister 6th Floor7.23.2014

PROS:


• Locating a majority of classrooms on the first floor responds to goals of the LRCP and makes the first floor of 200 McAllister a more vibrant place on campus

CONS:

• Leaving the first floor open for the relocation of HR and Fiscal in the future also responds to the recommendations in the LRCP to consolidate all student services into one building



18


DRAFT


Interaction

Classroom / Seminar

General Offices

Student Study

Page 7 of 9


SPACE BLOCKING – Scenario 3 of 3200 McAllister 1st Floor7.23.2014

PROS: � Locating a majority of classrooms

on the first floor may reduce traffic and noise

CONS � Need to occupy first floor of

building in order to incorporate all necessary programs

PROS:


• Locating a majority of classrooms on the first floor responds to goals of the LRCP and makes the first floor of 200 McAllister a more vibrant place on campus

CONS:



SCENARIO 3: WITH JOURNALS


SCENARIO COMPARISONPROS AND CONS

19

DRAFT

Page 8 of 8

UC HASTINGS - KANE HALL PROGRAMMING & PLANNING

SPACE BLOCKING – Comparison

PROS: � Most flexible arrangement maximizes

ability for programs to expand and contract smartly and affordably

� Clear delineation between research programs and student spaces

PROS: � Primary reception allows for “grand entrance

sequence” � Separation of front and back of the house

operations

PROS: � Primary reception allows for “grand entrance

sequence” � Locating a majority of classrooms on the

first floor responds to goals of the Long Range Campus Plan and makes the first floor of 200 McAllister a more vibrant place on campus

CONS � Elongate space limits internal layouts

of programs; less opportunity for brand identity development

� No “grand entrance sequence”

CONS � Research programs are “landlocked” which

makes expansion difficult � Student Study Space has limited amount of

natural light exposure

CONS � Leaving the first floor open for the

relocation of HR and Fiscal in the future also responds to recommendations in the Long Range Campus Plan to consolidate all student services into one building

� Student Study Space has limited amount of natural light exposure

1. FLEXIBILITY OPTIMIZATION 2. IDENTITY OPTIMIZATION 3. 6TH FLOOR W/JOURNALS

1. FLEXIBILITY OPTIMIZATION !PROS:

• Most flexible arrangement maximizes ability for all programs to expand and contract smartly and affordably

• Clear delineation between research programs and student spaces !

CONS:

• Elongated space limits internal layouts of programs; less opportunity for brand identity development

• No "grand entrance sequence”

2. IDENTITY OPTIMIZATION !PROS:


• Separation of front and back of the house operations !

CONS:

• Research programs are “landlocked” which makes expansion difficult


3. 6TH FLOOR WITH JOURNALS !PROS:


• Locating a majority of classrooms on the first floor responds to goals of the LRCP and makes the first floor of 200 McAllister a more vibrant place on campus !

CONS:



140723 july 23rd meeting

Engineering

Transcript of 140723 july 23rd meeting