Science Building Working Group

SCIENCE REPLACEMENT BUILDING (SRB) – Summary and Status

Summary of Recent Events:
3/29- Visit to Santa Monica
College science facilities with full tour;
3/31- Special Division Meeting focusing on our immediate strategy
4/7- Meeting with tBP and Science Building Working Group
5/5 – Review of Status of SRB Issues & Timeline with the Division

The Basic Goal of tBP Meeting: A Concept w Zero Growth (as opposed to negative growth) that accommodates our Lab Instructional needs. Issues include:

1)     Lab & Service Space TradeoffsAvoiding negative growth requires expanded Lab classroom space which can be traded off against service space, but only a limited amount. Likewise, some official Lecture classrooms can double as labs.

2)       Informal Use of GSF & GrowthProper planning of GSF can make possible future new classroom space in the post-SRB timeframe. There still will be a need for Lecture space outside the SRB.

3)       Swing Space Swing Space will certainly be an issue of cost and convenience. Conversations with those at Rio Hondo and elsewhere who’ve experienced it indicate that Swing Space can be relatively painless although it is costly and is highly dependent on construction schedule changes.

4)     Scheduling & Classroom SizeProductive scheduling of classes during the day and during the week can reduce the stress on science facilities. Deciding how big our large classrooms should actually be is also a topic of discussion.

5)     The Current Timeline for this Project is:
       
June/04: FPP
        Summer/05: Governor’s  signature
        Nov/05: State Bond Election
        Fall/06: Begin Preliminary Design with Faculty/Staff
        June/08: Begin Construction (18 mo)
       
 Jan/10: Move In

6)     The Biggest Issue is Cost: The planned Bond is for $22M with matching funds of $2M. We do not know the actual cost of the project but a variety of indicators – including scaling from Santa Monica’s project and one architect’s estimates – suggest it will exceed our planned funding. Other Colleges have recently solved this problem by benefiting from contingencies from the state and contributions from their own Boards.

The Science Building Working Group has consisted of the following: Jake Sapiro, Annie Bianchino, Lili Barabas, Tom Morris, Stephanie Cashin, and Elise Phan.