School of Engineering Precinct Plan

School of Engineering Precinct Plan

June 27, 2018

Acknowledgements S/L/A/M/ Architects & Engineers, P.C. is pleased to present the results of the Precinct Plan for the Phase 2 of the School of Engineering Redevelopment and Growth. We would like to thank Rutgers University, the School of Engineering and specifically the people below for their efforts in helping make this a successful process.

School of EngineeringDr. Thomas Farris - Dean, School of Engineering

Sue Kilduff - Associate Dean for Administration and Planning

Dr. Henrik Pedersen - Associate Dean for Academic Programs

Institutional Planning and Operations: Jeff Livingston - University Architect

Frank Wong - Assistant Vice President, University Planning and Development

Jennifer Stuart - Director, University Planning and Development

Leigh Ann Kimber - Manager, University Planning and Development

Brendan Torres - Associate Planner, University Planning and Development

Richard A. Votta, RA - Senior Design Planner/Estimator, Office of the University Architect

SOE Faculty Planning CommitteeDr. Frank Moon

Dr. Adrian Mann

Dr. Emina Soljanin

Dr. Hao Lin

Dr. Haym Benaroya

Dr. Helen Buettner

Dr. Mark Pierce

Dr. MK Jeong

Dr. Waheed Bajwa

PrefaceThis Precinct Plan brings together the vision, principles, and goals of the Rutgers 2030 Physical Master Plan and the School of Engineering Five-Year Strategic Plan 2015-2020 to create a physical resources document that aligns with and enables the successful implementation of both.

The vision for Rutgers 2030 coordinates the academic, research, and partnership aspirations of Rutgers University - New Brunswick and establishes a foundation for future planning decisions. It is based on a strong commitment to five primary principles:

1. Create a world-class learning environment at Rutgers2. Reinforce amenities that improve the experience for all Rutgers

stakeholders3. Enhance the experience of moving through and between the

districts4. Implement strategies for more efficient and effective utilization

of land, facilities, and resources5. Utilize technology, consolidated services and amenities to enable

students to better coordinate the choices they make regarding class schedules, housing, and transportation.

Rutgers University School of Engineering Strategic Plan 2015-2020 defines the School’s role in fostering the integration of education, government, and industry to achieve regional and national economic growth that is innovative, responsible, and sustainable. The plan identifies specific strengths and targets areas of development. The School of Engineering’s goals are:

1. To be recognized as one of the nation’s top engineering colleges2. To advance highly specialized, relevant research in the areas of

advanced manufacturing and computing, healthcare science, energy, and materials

3. To drive economic growth in New Jersey4. To cultivate an actively engaged Rutgers engineering community5. To provide a capstone to the School’s excellence in education,

research, and real-world student experience with a new engineering complex of sustainably designed classrooms, laboratories, offices, and common space

The importance of engineering to the United States cannot be overemphasized. Our country’s historical place in the global marketplace is to invent and inspire. The need and opportunity for more engineering majors and careers is significant. The School of Engineering (SoE) at Rutgers University – New Brunswick is in a unique position to leverage this opportunity. The School of Engineering has a rich history. It was constituted in 1914 but its activity in the engineering sciences and engineering education dates from 1864 with the establishment of the Rutgers Scientific School Engineering Precinct as defined in Rutgers 2030

Engineering Precinct

making it the oldest academic unit at Rutgers. The School is spread across 21 buildings on the Busch and Livingston campuses and has over 194 faculty, including 27 distinguished professors, and over 100 professional administrative and research support staff. Its research active faculty regularly host international visiting scientists and experts in a variety of engineering research fields. In 2017, SoE enrolled over 3,900 undergraduates and 1,100 graduate students, made 370 graduate appointments, and awarded 1,237 degrees. Women comprise 1 in 4 students and 1 in 5 faculty.

Richard Weeks Hall of Engineering is the first phase of a multi-phase and multi-year plan for development and growth for the School of Engineering. Weeks Hall will open in Summer 2018 and will be the School’s new flagship building. With Weeks Hall nearing completion, the School wanted to determine the next step to maintain momemtum for growth. Therefore, this study determines details for what Phase 2 will be and more broadly what direction will be taken in future phases.

The detailed plan for Phase 2 and the Long-Range Plan outlined in this study will provide a road map for the University and School to follow as they continue to connect physical needs in the form of laboratories, classrooms, and collaboration spaces with strategic goals and objectives. These projects will continue to create a world-class environment for learning and discovery, train students for high quality jobs, promote economic advancement for the region, and strengthen our country’s place in the global economy.

Executive Summary

Data Collection

ProgramA. Phase 2

B. Future Phases

PlanningA. Phase 2

B. Future Phases

Student Projects Garage

1

2

3

4

Executive Summary


Executive Summary

ES : 1

PURPOSE OF STUDYThe School of Engineering 2015-2020 Strategic Plan identified achievement of excellence in education, research, and real-world student experience with the need for a new engineering complex of sustainably designed classrooms, laboratories, offices, and common space. It is critical that this School infrastructure goal strategically align with the Rutgers 2030 Physical Master Plan for Rutgers University-New Brunswick. This Precinct Plan serves as the tool to aid the School of Engineering in meeting the goals of both the SoE Strategic Plan and Rutgers 2030, which identifies space for a reconfigured engineering quad near the Busch Student Center. It provides a roadmap for facility renewal, replacement and expansion, continuing a growth phase for the School of Engineering to 2030 and beyond that is supported by the Chancellor’s strategic goal to significantly grow the School of Engineering.

The Precinct Plan outlines the future phases of facility developments necessary to meet SoE’s strategic needs, with an emphasis on Phase 2 which is the next step after the completion of Phase 1 - Weeks Hall. This Study provides a plan to decant the outmoded Engineering Building, to optimize utilization of the Fiber Optics Building, to use quality and quantity of space to advance School strategic priorities, and to address the needs of Rutgers Formula Racing and other student organizations by developing a school-level program for hands-on learning, along with a phased implementation strategy. Proposed development, as depicted in Figure ES.1, aligns with the goal of Rutgers 2030 to create dense development near transit hubs.

STUDY OBJECTIVES1. Advance the Rutgers 2030 Physical Master Plan and SoE

Strategic Plan2. Assess the Engineering Buildings for Phased Decanting and

Demolition3. Demolish CAES Modular Structure and Vacate RUTCOR4. Demolish Existing Rutgers Formula Racing Building5. Plan Appropriate Renovation and Expansion Opportunities6. Enable Other Strategic Initiatives

STUDY PROCESS The study process consisted of four phases – Data Gathering & Analysis, Programming, Planning, and Phasing – each of which had specific objectives and deliverables and all of which are documented in this report. Meetings were held throughout the process with School of Engineering administration and two presentations were made to the Faculty Committee to obtain timely input and feedback from key stakeholders.

LONG-RANGE PROGRAMThrough this process a program and plan was developed to accomplish two key goals:

1. Outline the strategy for the phased demolition of the Engineering Building

2. Provide space for planned growth within the School of Engineering

Figure ES.2 shows how the School of Engineering creates replacement space for the Engineering Building’s phased demolition with simultaneous growth and facility expansion. In each successive phase, some amount of space is vacated, shown as a negative in the chart, while that space is replaced elsewhere within the precinct and additional space is added to accommodate growth in the school. Through this phased development, outmoded space within the School’s physical footprint that no longer meets the functional needs of the SoE and that has a significant backlog of deferred maintenance is replaced. Outmoded space includes the Engineering Building which contains 115,212 NSF or 30% of existing SoE space, as well as an additional 22,275 NSF in Rutgers Formula Racing, CAIT, Solvents Building, and Civil Engineering Lab for a total of 137,487 NSF or 36.5% of existing SoE space to be replaced. The School’s footprint expands by an additional 126,100 NSF for an total increase of 33% to SoE’s total existing space.

Figure ES.1Long-Range Space Precinct Plan

Executive Summary ES : 2

Phase 1376,000

Phase 2361,000

Phase 3397,000

Phase 4447,000

Phase 5502,000

500,000

400,000

300,000

200,000

100,000

0

Exis

ting

From

Prio

r Pha

se /

Repl

acem

ent /

Gro

wth

Vaca

teVac. CAITVac. EEBVac. CivE

Vac. Solvents

ExistingAfter

WeeksHall

ExistingFromPriorPhase




A Wing

A Wing

A WingA Wing

Vacate A

B Wing

B Wing

B WingVacate B

D Wing

D Wing

Vacate D

C Wing

Vacate C

Vacate RFR

Replace C

SPG

Replace D

Replace B Replace AGrowth

Growth

Growth

ReplaceOthers

Figure ES.2Long-Range Space Program including Demolition, Replacement, and Growth

PHASE 2 PROGRAMThe Phase 2 program is designed to accomplish 3 major goals:

1. Enable the next phase of faculty research growth 2. Provide flexible wet and dry research lab space3. Allow for the decanting of C-wing

Phase 2 enables the next steps in faculty research growth by providing additional research laboratory space, programmed and planned to align with the way that 21st century science is conducted. Phase 2 provides the opportunity to move away from individual, siloed labs that accommodate only individual researchers to more open, combined labs that accommodate interdisciplinary research teams. This allows research space to be allocated and reallocated based on funding and need. The proposed planning of wet and dry research space intentionally moves graduate student desk space out of wet labs and into a combined, open area. This provides multiple benefits. Wet lab space is maximized for those types of activities, student work areas are accommodated in a safer, non-lab environment, and most importantly, students from multiple research groups are co- located to promote synergistic interactions and the sharing of knowledge and ideas.

Phase 2 allows for the decanting of the Engineering Building C-wing and begins the process of phased development for the precinct by creating flex space outside of the planned Engineering Quadrangle in order to kick off the iterative process of vacating and demolishing existing facilities to construct new facilities. A renovation and expansion of the current Fiber Optics Building into a contemporary, flexible research facility allows for the first partial decanting of the Engineering Building.

Table ES.1 summarizes the mix of spaces recommended as the next step in aligning the physical resources of the School of Engineering with its strategic plan. All functions necessary for 21st century cutting-edge research and learning will be accommodated in Phase 2 including research and teaching labs, offices, and collaboration spaces. The Phase 2 Engineering Building positively impacts the School’s future physical environment, provides a dynamic social and academic mixing space, and completes the framing of the new engineering quadrangle currently being formed by the completion of Weeks Hall. The facility’s strategic location will enhance the developing pedestrian spine as shown in Rutgers 2030 in this area, which links the future transportation hub at the Busch Student Center to the main quadrangle while highlighting the commitment to engineering in this important location.

Table ES.1Summary of Phase 2 Space Program by Function

Offices and Support 9,262 SFResearch Lab and Support 13,500 SFTeaching Labs and Support 3,750 SFCollaboration 2,550 SFBuilding Support 1,125 SFTotal Net Square Feet 30,187


Executive Summary

ES : 3

STUDENT PROJECTS GARAGE The SoE has identified a key short-term initiative, the Student Projects Garage, to address the lack of space for student organizations to work on hands-on projects. This dedicated shop space will provide students the opportunity to conceptualize and build scale-sized projects for the purpose of inter-collegiate competition, as well as engage young engineers in hands-on learning and cross-disciplinary collaborations. The overall experience will aid and develop project and equipment management skills.

The Garage will advance the reputation of the Rutgers School of Engineering among peer institutions, many of which have been providing similar project spaces for years.

This small-scale project is achievable in the short term and will contribute to a comprehensive academic experience for engineering students.


CONCLUSION The proposed Precinct Plan consisting of the Phase 2 Program, the Long-Range Program, and the Student Projects Garage will positively support the alignment of the physical resources of the School of Engineering with its Strategic Plan and Rutgers 2030 by providing a flexible approach for improvement and development of the Busch campus in general and the School of Engineering precinct specifically. This plan reinforces the established academic hub and strengthens Busch’s identity as the science and engineering district.

Data Collection 1

1 : 1 School of Engineering Precinct Plan

Data Collection and Findings

DATA COLLECTIONThe project team collected data regarding the existing programs and the existing conditions of the physical resources for the School of Engineering to achieve a clear understanding of what is working and what space deficiencies need to be mitigated. This began with a better understanding of how much space the SoE currently has and how the space is being utilized.

Because Phase 1 – The Richard Weeks Hall of Engineering – is scheduled to be completed and occupied in Summer 2018, it was decided to document existing space distribution as how much space will be allocated to each department or program upon its completion. Along with the total amount of existing space, the project team also analyzed how existing space is distributed by department and by function so that these could be compared to space allocation metrics and benchmarks.

Existing quantities of personnel by job classification was also documented. The number of personnel helps to drive the need for office, research lab, and collaboration space. It was important to understand what type of research is being performed – wet, dry, and/or high-bay experimental research – and what specific needs exist for shared and core resources within and among departments and programs. Members of Rutgers University School of Engineering and Institutional Planning and Operations undertook walk-throughs of

D

BAC

Computing Research & Education Building Electrical

EngineeringCenter for Advanced

Infrastructure and Transportation

Civil Engineering

Fiber Optics Building

CeramicsBiomedical Engineering

Richard Weeks Hall of Engineering

Engineering Precinct 2018

existing research space to document existing types of labs, benchwork, equipment, and services to provide a detailed understanding of how research space is utilized and if there were any redundancies that could be mitigated.

Teaching lab requirements are driven by the curriculum, the number of students to be accommodated, the number of lab sections required based on the appropriate size of class sections, the need for hands-on, experiential learning, and the equipment and instrumentation to which students need access. Due to these factors, the net square feet per seat in an engineering teaching lab tends to be higher than for other sciences.

Finally, science and engineering are interdisciplinary undertakings. It is important to understand the current trends in informal and formal collaboration environments and to compare the existing conditions to benchmarks for these types of spaces.

1 : 2Data Collection and Findings

BME CBE CEE ECE ISE MAE MSE UG ED ENERGY PKG PSM DEAN TOTALS

Full Time Faculty

Full Professor 11 10 8 18 7 18 14 86

Associate Professor 7 4 3 7 2 5 2 30

Assistant Professor 4 4 4 8 3 7 1 31

NTT Teaching 1 1 5 1 2 1 1 1 13

NTT Research 9 5 12 2 6 34

Part Time Faculty

PT Teaching 1 1 3 8 1 3 1 1 5 24

PT Research 1 1 1 3

Full-Time Administrative Staff

School 4 3 3 6 3 5 4 15 1 8 52

Research 3 3 30 9 4 4 53

Full-Time Graduate Student Employees

Teaching Assistants 11 10 7 43 5 27 2 1 106

Research Assistants 10 32 24 60 5 13 26 170

Post-Doc Research Assistants 3 6 5 3 7 11 1 36

Other Students

Fellows 22 17 2 24 11 14 4 94

Totals 85 97 102 194 38 101 77 17 0 8 0 13 732

Grad Students (Total) 108 185 126 326 123 151 58 2 6 19 1104

Grad Students (PhD) 51 63 49 137 39 79 42 460

Undergrad Majors 350 282 256 839 190 806 96 1028 61 3908

PERSONNELThe project team examined in detail how the total personnel by department and type of personnel drive the need for all types of space.

Table 1.1 shows the existing number of people across all classifications of personnel by department. In Phase 2 it is anticipated that the number of personnel will grow and the school is working with the Chancellor’s office to develop an appropriate plan for growth.

Table 1.1Existing Personnel by Department and Classification

BME Biomedical EngineeringCBE Chemical & Biochemical EngineeringCAIT Center for Advanced Infrastructure & TransportationCEE Civil & Environmental Engineering

Dean Dean's OfficeUG Undergraduate EducationECS Engineering Computer ServicesECE Electrical & Computer EngineeringISE Industrial & Systems Engineering

MAE Mechanical & Aerospace EngineeringMSE Materials Science & Engineering

NJAMI NJ Advanced Manufacturing InstitutePKG Packaging Science & EngineeringAvail Available to be Reassigned



3529 3893 3861 3869 3558 3558 3558 3558 3557 3568 3867 3899 3859 3883 3870 XXXX 4108 4109 4110 4111 8846

Engineering Department Rutg

ers

Form

ula

Raci

ng

(RFR

)

Biom

edic

al E

ngin

eerin

g Bu

ildin

g (B

ME)

Cent

er fo

r Cer

amic

Re

sear

ch

Fibe

r Opt

ics

Mat

eria

ls

Rese

arch

Bui

ldin

g (F

BO)

EB W

ing

A

EB W

ing

B

EB W

ing

C

EB W

ing

D

Civi

l Eng

inee

ring

Labo

rato

ry (C

iv E

)

Solv

ents

Bui

ldin

g

Cent

er fo

r Adv

ance

d En

ergy

Sys

tem

s (C

AES)

Cent

er fo

r Adv

In

fras

truc

ture

&

Tran

spor

tatio

n (C

AIT)

Elec

tric

al E

ngin

eerin

g Bu

ildin

g (E

E)

Com

putin

g Re

sear

ch &

Ed

ucat

ion

Bldg

(CO

RE)

Cent

er fo

r Ope

ratio

n Re

sear

ch (R

UTC

OR)

Rich

ard

Wee

ks H

all o

f En

gine

erin

g

Geo

logi

cal C

ore

Repo

sito

ry

Cent

er fo

r Adv

In

fras

truc

ture

&

Tran

spor

tatio

n (C

AIT)

CAIT

Asp

halt

Lab

Uni

vers

ity H

ousi

ng

Furn

iture

/ Fab

ric S

hop

SoE

Inno

vatio

n Pa

rk

Tota

l Dep

artm

ent

% o

f SoE

Biomedical Engineering 47,390 47,390 12.6%

Chemical & Biochemical Engineering 1,420 2,438 30,316 34,174 9.1%

Civil & Environmental Engineering 5,951 17,853 23,804 6.3%

Center for Advanced Infrastructure & Transportation 9,611 1,531 6,087 6,848 2,590 26,667 7.1%

Electrical & Computer Engineering 1,258 17,861 14,583 13,387 47,089 12.5%

Industrial & Systems Engineering 739 9,353 10,092 2.7%

Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering 2,142 4,103 6,846 966 24,232 448 38,737 10.3%

Materials Science & Engineering 24,022 9,594 24,953 5,946 64,515 17.2%

Packaging Science & Engineering 575 179 1,636 2,390 0.6%

New Jersey Advanced Manufacturing Institute 15,166 15,166 4.0%

Dean's Office 4,123 5,957 575 2,561 4,793 3,397 410 24,331 46,147 12.3%

Undergraduate Education 3,803 3,803 1.0%

Engineering Computer Services 2,431 688 3,757 6,876 1.8%

Available to be Reassigned 2,688 475 511 5,637 9,311 2.5%

TOTALS 6,265 54,767 24,597 12,155 34,757 18,348 33,790 28,317 5,951 448 0 9,611 17,861 30,162 0 61,107 1,531 6,087 6,848 2,590 20,969 376,161

Percentage of Total Engineering (NSF) 1.7% 14.6% 6.5% 3.2% 9.2% 4.9% 9.0% 7.5% 1.6% 0.01% 0.00% 2.6% 4.7% 8.0% 0.00% 16.2% 0.40% 1.6% 1.8% 0.7% 5.6% 100%

EXISTING SPACE DISTRIBUTION BY DEPARTMENT BY BUILDING POST PHASE 1

As of February 2018, the total space allocated to the School of Engineering is 376,161 NSF as seen in Table 1.2. It is interesting to note that SoE space is located on the Busch and Livingston campuses and that most departments have space in multiple buildings which is reflective of trends towards interdisciplinary programs and collaborations. Upon occupancy, Weeks Hall will have the highest percentage of total engineering space, followed closely by the Biomedical Engineering Building. At 17.2% Materials Science & Engineering has the highest existing departmental percentage of space, while Biomedical Engineering, Electrical & Computer Engineering, and Dean’s Office follow at 12 to 13%.

Table 1.2Space Allocation by Building (NSF)


3529 3893 3861 3869 3558 3558 3558 3558 3557 3568 3867 3899 3859 3883 3870 XXXX 4108 4109 4110 4111 8846

Engineering Department Rutg

ers

Form

ula

Raci

ng

(RFR

)

Biom

edic

al E

ngin

eerin

g Bu

ildin

g (B

ME)

Cent

er fo

r Cer

amic

Re

sear

ch

Fibe

r Opt

ics

Mat

eria

ls

Rese

arch

Bui

ldin

g (F

BO)

EB W

ing

A

EB W

ing

B

EB W

ing

C

EB W

ing

D

Civi

l Eng

inee

ring

Labo

rato

ry (C

iv E

)

Solv

ents

Bui

ldin

g

Cent

er fo

r Adv

ance

d En

ergy

Sys

tem

s (C

AES)

Cent

er fo

r Adv

In

fras

truc

ture

&

Tran

spor

tatio

n (C

AIT)

Elec

tric

al E

ngin

eerin

g Bu

ildin

g (E

E)

Com

putin

g Re

sear

ch &

Ed

ucat

ion

Bldg

(CO

RE)

Cent

er fo

r Ope

ratio

n Re

sear

ch (R

UTC

OR)

Rich

ard

Wee

ks H

all o

f En

gine

erin

g

Geo

logi

cal C

ore

Repo

sito

ry

Cent

er fo

r Adv

In

fras

truc

ture

&

Tran

spor

tatio

n (C

AIT)

CAIT

Asp

halt

Lab

Uni

vers

ity H

ousi

ng

Furn

iture

/ Fab

ric S

hop

SoE

Inno

vatio

n Pa

rk

Tota

l Dep

artm

ent

% o

f SoE

Biomedical Engineering 47,390 47,390 12.6%

Chemical & Biochemical Engineering 1,420 2,438 30,316 34,174 9.1%

Civil & Environmental Engineering 5,951 17,853 23,804 6.3%

Center for Advanced Infrastructure & Transportation 9,611 1,531 6,087 6,848 2,590 26,667 7.1%

Electrical & Computer Engineering 1,258 17,861 14,583 13,387 47,089 12.5%

Industrial & Systems Engineering 739 9,353 10,092 2.7%

Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering 2,142 4,103 6,846 966 24,232 448 38,737 10.3%

Materials Science & Engineering 24,022 9,594 24,953 5,946 64,515 17.2%

Packaging Science & Engineering 575 179 1,636 2,390 0.6%

New Jersey Advanced Manufacturing Institute 15,166 15,166 4.0%

Dean's Office 4,123 5,957 575 2,561 4,793 3,397 410 24,331 46,147 12.3%

Undergraduate Education 3,803 3,803 1.0%

Engineering Computer Services 2,431 688 3,757 6,876 1.8%

Available to be Reassigned 2,688 475 511 5,637 9,311 2.5%

TOTALS 6,265 54,767 24,597 12,155 34,757 18,348 33,790 28,317 5,951 448 0 9,611 17,861 30,162 0 61,107 1,531 6,087 6,848 2,590 20,969 376,161

Percentage of Total Engineering (NSF) 1.7% 14.6% 6.5% 3.2% 9.2% 4.9% 9.0% 7.5% 1.6% 0.01% 0.00% 2.6% 4.7% 8.0% 0.00% 16.2% 0.40% 1.6% 1.8% 0.7% 5.6% 100%



OVERALL SPACE DISTRIBUTION BY FUNCTIONFigure 1.1 shows the percentage of space by function. As expected, research labs and office space comprise over 70% of existing space. The percentage of instructional space appears to be low, but many classes are held in buildings that are easily accessed from the School of Engineering precinct but are not part of the SoE itself. This is in conformance with Rutgers University - New Brunswick’s practice of centrally holding and scheduling most classrooms and is acceptable to SoE. However, instructional labs, which are specialized spaces with specific equipment and are managed by SoE are housed in SoE buildings. Currently teaching labs occupy 9% of the space.

OfficeTeaching LabsResearchClassroomCollaborationBuilding SupportUnfinished

Research171,668

Office102,237

Teaching32,657

Classroom27,993

Collaboration 27,790

Unfinished8,048

NSF

Bldg. Supp.5,768

26% 9% 46% 7% 7% 2% 2%

Figure 1.1Space Distribution by Function


OfficeTeaching LabsResearchClassroomCollaborationBuilding SupportUnfinished

OFFICE SPACERutgers University has recently revised standard office and workstation space allocations for all classifications of personnel as shown in Table 1.3. These changes were made in acknowledgment of the interdisciplinary and collaborative nature of 21st century learning and research and with the expectation that more collaboration seats will be provided. Existing office spaces within the SoE are significantly larger than the new standards due to the structural/planning grids of the existing buildings and to the fact that people and disciplines were much more siloed when the existing buildings were designed and constructed.

Grade

Offices Workstations

200 NASF 130 NASF 90 NASF 80 NASF 60 NASF 30 NASF

1

PresidentExecutive VPSenior VPProvostsAcademic Deans

2

Vice PresidentsExecutive DirectorsStaff DeansChairpersonsDepartment Heads

Senior DirectorsDirectors

3 (2) Post-Doctorial Fellows *(6) Part Time Lectures *(4) Administration Fellows *

Associate DirectorsAssistant DirectorsBusiness ManagersFaculty in Special DisciplinesTenured FacultyPart-Time Faculty

4

(2) Non-Tenured Faculty *(6) Part Time Lecturers *(4) Work Study Students *(2) undergrad Resident *(6) Teaching Assistants *

Part Time FacultyNon-Tenured FacultyAdministrative SupportTA’s/GA’s (shared)*

5Administrative supportPostdoctoral FellowsPart time LecturersResidence CounselorsGraduate Assistant

6

Administrative SupportPart Time LecturersAdminstration FellowsTeaching AsstitantUndergrad Residence

7 Student Work StudyStudents*

* Assumes sharing office space equally

Table 1.3Office Space Standards



RESEARCH LAB SPACEThe allocation of research space per scientific personnel varies significantly from department to department, which is a consequence of the needs for different types of spaces in different programs as well as obvious inefficiencies in space usage. The lack of a centralized space management protocol that is endorsed by all programs, can lead to loose criteria for the assignment of lab space, and the collection and storage of unused and/or out-of-date equipment in the labs themselves. A key objective of the School of Engineering is to optimize its physical resources. Therefore, a more rigorous and uniform methodology for allocating research space should be developed that incorporates the concept of sharing resources, avoiding duplication and robustly responding to changing needs.

Figure 1.2 shows the total net square feet of research space per department while the red dots indicate the average allocation of research space per tenure/tenure track (T/TT)faculty. The range for all departments is 240 to 1,750 net square feet per faculty with the exception of Materials Science and Engineering which is approximately 2,300 NSF.

MSE41,180

Dean 6,421

ECE18,926

CEE / CAIT26,204

CBE18,384

Avail2,232

BME23,037

MAE16,782

ISE2,869

1,059

# = NSF Research Space per T/TT Faculty

NSF

Res

earc

h Sp

ace

per D

epar

tmen

t NSF Research Space per T/TT Faculty

NJAMI15,166

1,021

1,747

574

239

559

2,288

Figure 1.2NSF of Research Space per Department


INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE Instructional spaces for lecture and recitation sections are predominantly held in buildings that are accessed outside the School of Engineering precinct. This is in conformance with Rutgers University - New Brunswick’s practice of centrally holding and scheduling most classrooms and is aligned with the SoE strategy beyond Phase 1. Therefore, despite the planned growth in the precinct plan, classrooms are only replaced when existing classrooms are vacated and demolished. The School does not plan to increase classroom space and it is expected that no additional lecture-format classroom spaces will be included in the long-range planning. Figure 1.3 shows current weekly instructional periods on the Busch Campus in and around the SoE precinct.

68

5843

47

42

95

16

18

12

12

20

3

Weekly Instructional Periods in SoE Buildings

Weekly Instructional Periods in Non-SoE Buildings

Figure 1.3Existing Number of Instructional Periods Per Week per Building




Num

ber o

f Ins

truc

tiona

l Per

iods

Util

ized

per

Wee

k

24

18

23

40

2428 28

25

1620

50

5-10

60% Utilization = 21 Instructional Periods per Week

Num

ber o

f Sea

ts p

er T

each

ing

Lab

TEACHING LAB UTILIZATIONRutgers University - New Brunswick has 35 instructional periods weekly from 8:40 AM to 8:00 PM Monday through Friday, so a typical utilization target of 60% for teaching labs would provide for 21 slots. As shown in Figure 1.4, most of SoE’s existing teaching labs fall below this target. This is a consequence of many factors, including the need for specialized spaces that are specific to a program learning outcome and not easily adapted by the other programs. Discussions with SoE led to the conclusion that while the quantity of teaching labs is generally adequate, better quality of spaces and attention to special opportunities to share space is needed.

Figure 1.4Teaching Lab Utilization - Fall 201635 Instructional Periods Weekly: 8:40 AM - 8:00 PM


Target: 60 - 75 NSF per seat

TEACHING LAB NET SQUARE FEET PER STATIONThe size of teaching labs, especially when the net square feet per student work station was analyzed, is a deficiency that needs to be mitigated. Contemporary experiential, hands-on learning means that students will work in groups, instructors need space to circulate throughout the room, technology is required to share individual and group work, and accommodation of equipment and instrumentation is crucial. The result is that a target of 60 to 75 net square feet per student station should be incorporated into future space allocations. Figure 1.5 illustrates that most of the existing teaching labs are currently below this target.

It was noted by SoE that some instructional labs are too small to accommodate the students using them. There are instances of students completing their lab work while sitting in corridors and of required equipment being distributed among unconnected, smaller rooms, so that faculty must circulate between multiple instructional labs in order to teach the students who are spread out among these rooms.

NSF

per

Sea

t

Figure 1.5Existing Teaching Labs: NSF per Seat



COLLABORATIONIt is expected that collaboration space is approximately 10% of the total space in a science or engineering building. This includes spaces such as event spaces, conference rooms, open student project labs, non-class computer labs, teaming rooms, study spaces, and huddle rooms. While total existing collaboration space appears to be adequate in square footage, the ability of the spaces to accommodate a wide range of collaborative activities should be considered.

BUILDING SUPPORTBuilding Support includes loading dock, receiving, cylinder storage, and other typical functions as they occur. The major recommended addition is to include some Central Storage space so that unused lab equipment can be stored in less finished, less expensive space rather than being stored in research labs, which are typically the most costly spaces in a science or engineering building.

FIBER OPTICS BUILDINGThe Fiber Optics Building has a workable structural/planning grid and the floor-to-floor height at 15’-4” that is in alignment with today’s planning standards for science and engineering buildings. By renovating the areas outside of the auditorium and making an addition to the Fiber Optics Building, an inviting and efficient engineering structure that is reflective of the 21st century can be created. Renovations will require that MSE can be consolidated into the Engineering Building’s A Wing and Center for Ceramic Research, in order to vacate the Fiber Optics building. Space for activity currently taking place in the Fiber Optics Building will be identified.

VACATED SPACE AVAILABLE FOR REASSIGNMENTTable 1.4 shows space that will be available for reassignment at the end of Phase 1 when Weeks Hall is complete. As wings of the Engineering Building are vacated and eventually demolished the available vacated space in those wings will be eliminated.

Building Room No NSF Sub-TotalEB A A102 439

A119 208A131 244A135 248A139A 268A146 451A147 716A147A 114 2,688

EB B B250 475 475

EB C C262 511 511

CORE601 457601A 163602 396604 179605 132607 187606 178608 183610 179611 185612 174613 178614 174616 181617 185618 181620 172631 442634 467703 387734 438736 443738 201700A 213700B 513701B 109

CORE Space to be reassigned to ISE to replace decanted Rutcor Offices -1,059 5,637

TOTAL UNASSIGNED SPACE 9,311

Table 1.4


PRECINCT AS SHOWN IN RUTGERS 2030Determining which wing of the Engineering Building should be decanted first was an important part of the data collection process. An important consideration was to acknowledge that the A Wing and C Wing have the largest backlogs of deferred maintenance.

The Rutgers 2030 Physical Master Plan is another key piece of data considered prior to programming and planning. Figure 1.6 depicts the Engineering Precinct as shown in Rutgers 2030, as compared to the existing condition in Figure 1.7.

Rutgers 2030 Goals:• Support the teaching, research, and partnership focus areas

of Rutgers University – New Brunswick while providing

a united and coordinated vision for the four districts – College Avenue, Cook/Douglass, Busch and Livingston

• Respond to the unique history and traditions of each campus, while providing a renewed vision responsive to the strategic plan for the University and the colleges, schools and administrative units that occupy them

• Provide a vision for future land and space planning on each district, driven by and reflective of the goals and initiatives of the strategic plan and by the plans of the individual districts

Understanding how the Engineering Building will be decanted in concert with working towards the goals of the Rutgers 2030 are important considerations.

Figure 1.6Rutgers 2030 Physical Master Plan - Engineering Precinct

Figure 1.7Engineering Precinct 2018 (Engineering buildings shown in orange)



CONCLUSIONData Collection focused on the quantity and quality of functional space types required for SoE and findings are as follows.

• Faculty and staff offices are robust in size and can be decreased with an associated increase in collaboration space to create an interdisciplinary environment.

• Graduate student workstations should be co-located outside of wet research labs along with a variety of collaboration spaces to create a synergistic environment for knowledge creation and transfer.

• Research labs should be arranged for wet and dry research activities, while the need for high-bay space can be accommodated in Weeks Hall. Research labs should be combined as appropriate to accommodate interdisciplinary activities and to reduce redundancy.

• Teaching labs are undersized to support experiential, hands-on learning. Increased space allocations will also enhance safety by enabling visual connection between instructors and students during all tasks.

• Collaboration spaces should be updated to assure adequate opportunities for student real world, hands-on activities outside of formal instructional spaces.

Program 2

2 : 1

Program


PROGRAMThe program for each phase of the Engineering Precinct Plan is intended to provide flexible research and instructional space along with faculty office space and student workstations. The plan will address a critical need for adaptable research space that can accommodate evolving research collaborations and research targets. Open and shared facilities will foster interaction and collaboration between students, faculty, and research staff. Teaching labs will provide appropriate instructional space to accommodate the number of students and equipment required to support experiential, hands-on learning. Common areas will be defined by an energetic, distinctive and visible design approach with a variety of types of interaction spaces. Technologies and emerging practices of sustainable engineering will be incorporated to create contemporary and dynamic environments.

PHASE 2 AND LONG-RANGE PROGRAMSPhase 2 is the next step in the development of a new engineering complex that will gradually replace the SoE’s primary facility constructed in 1961. Over time, the aging and sub-standard Engineering Building structure will be demolished. It is envisioned that each new renovation and/or addition to the precinct will be a standard bearer for SoE, continuing to move the SoE away from siloed disciplinary space towards a collaborative, interdisciplinary environment with shared resources and easily re-assignable and reconfigurable space that will inspire SoE faculty and students, the Rutgers community, corporate partners, and research.

The Phase 2 program accommodates a total of 18 faculty and their research groups including offices, research lab and support space, associated teaching labs, and collaboration space. The 18 faculty are intended to be comprised of 12 wet researchers and 6 dry researchers. Wet and dry research space is intended to be flexible enough to accommodate almost any discipline.

In addition to the Phase 2 program, a long-range program has been developed that will provide all academic departments with upgraded and permanent facilities. The plan structures an integrated and flexible approach to the use of space that will permit periodic review of space assignments based on instructional and research demands and productivity. For example, the Phase 2 program envisions a 2-story renovation, but this may be increased in a final design to acknowledge the Chancellor’s plan to rapidly grow engineering.

PHASE 2 DETAILED PROGRAMIn order to develop the detailed Phase 2 program, it was necessary to determine which wing of the Engineering Building would be decanted first. While the primary candidates were A Wing and C Wing, the rationale for selecting the C Wing as the first wing to be removed from use is as follows:

1. High On-going maintenance costs: The C Wing currently incorporates research and instructional spaces with fume hood and exhaust needs on 3 floors. The A Wing space has fewer fume hoods per floor and has only 2 floors. Even less fume hood and exhaust requirements are found for B Wing and D Wing, except for the Micro-Electronics Research Laboratory space. The roof penetrations and generally poor performance of the exhaust fans in C Wing is a continuing maintenance problem. Like MERL, the remedy is to close the space instead of the very costly alternative of new roofs and roof structures.

2. Physical Condition: Roof leaks in the C Wing are a continuing challenge to the research equipment, the ongoing experiments and the office spaces. Damage to equipment and furnishings as well as research teams unable to complete some of their planned experiments needs a timely remedy.

3. Initial Cost: The A Wing also houses 2 specialized spaces that would be very costly to move. These include the CSOPS (Center for Structured Organic Particulate Systems) continuous manufacturing pilot plant and the Nion UltraSTEM Microscope.

Once the decision was made to decant C Wing first, the next step was to determine what replacement and growth space would be required for Phase 2. The largest C Wing occupant is CBE. CBE’s existing space allocation in the C Wing is 30,316 NSF and, with CBE space in the A Wing and BME building, CBE’s total existing space is 34,086 NSF. By applying space allocation standards to the number of personnel and making adjustments for specific needs, it was determined that existing CBE space could be replaced with 30,187 NSF as outlined in the Phase 2 Detailed Program shown on pages 2-2 through 2-6. The Pilot Lab will remain in A Wing. A summary of the Phase 2 Detailed Program by space function is shown below in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1Phase 2 Detailed Program by Space FunctionOffices and Support 9,262 SFResearch Lab and Support 13,500 SFTeaching Labs and Support 3,750 SFCollaboration 2,550 SFBuilding Support 1,125 SFTotal Net Square Feet 30,187

2 : 2Program

NON-CBE SPACE TO BE DECANTED FROM C WINGExisting C-Wing floor plans are shown in Figure 2.1. CEE, Chemistry, ECE, ISE, and MAE each have a small amount of existing space in C Wing. CEE will vacate its space in C Wing when its move to Weeks Hall is completed, while ISE and MAE have already vacated some of their existing C Wing space. Therefore, the total existing space that needs to be relocated for these smaller occupants when C Wing is decanted is 2,488 NSF (see Table 2.2). Currently, there is 9,902 NSF of space available for reassignment throughout the SoE, so the 2,488 NSF can be easily accommodated.

All Other Existing Space Existing Program to be Relocated

Entity SpaceC Wing

Room No.

NSF Status NSF

CEE Research Labs C262 511 Moving to Weeks

Hall

CHEM Research Labs C105 400 Relocate if C Wing is

decanted 400

ECE Research Labs

C204, C206, C207, C212

1,258 Relocate if C Wing is decanted 1,258

ISE Offices C110 252 Relocate 4 grads if C Wing is decanted 252

ISE Research Labs C208 487 Already vacated

MAE Offices C111 291 Relocate 4 grads if C Wing is decanted 291

MAE Research Labs C211 388 Already vacated

MAE Research Labs C213A 287 Relocate if C Wing is

decanted 287

Total Existing NSF of Non-CBE Space 3,874

Total Existing NSF of Non-CBE space to be relocated in Phase 2

2,488

SPACE ALLOCATION STANDARDSThe Phase 2 program incorporates Rutgers University’s new space standards for offices and workstations and implements allocation standards for research labs. Understanding the space requirements for engineering research and teaching labs are specific and unique to each lab, the following targets were established:

• 185-200 NSF per person for wet labs • 60-75 NSF per person for dry labs• 60 NSF per seat for teaching labs

These targets are based on industry standards and benchmarks that the project team has derived from previous projects.

C-Wing Basement Level

C-Wing Level 1

C-Wing Level 2

Figure 2.1C-Wing Floor Plans

Table 2.2Existing Non-CBE Space

2 : 3

Program


Existing Right-Sized Program

Space EN Wing A EN Wing C FBO BME

Total Existing NSF

No. of Personnel

No. of Seats

No. of Rooms

Total Occ. or Seats

Standard NSF per Occ.

Total NSF per Standards Notes

Office / AdministrationFaculty - Chair 557 557 1 130 130Faculty - Professor 1,780 305 2,085 9 90 810Faculty - Assistant Professor 943 943 4 90 360Faculty - Associate Professor 485 485 4 90 360Faculty - Other 88 325 413NTT Teaching 214 214 1 80 80NTT Research 115 115 5 80 400PT Teaching 1PT Research 1Post-Docs 6 60 360Fellows 0 0 0 17 Fellows are included in PhD GradsGrads (PhD) 5,187 5,187 Existing grad desks = 97; grads broken out into wet and dry in next two linesGrads (PhD) wet 42 60 2,533 63 total PhD Grads, assume 67% wet Grads (PhD) dry 21 75 1,559 63 total PhD Grads, assume 33 % dryUndergrads 54 30 1,620 3 per 18 faculty, assume 2 share 1 desk = 27 desks @ 60 NSF per deskAdmin 973 973Admin - School 3 80 240Admin - Research 3 80 240Dept. Reception / Waiting 100Chair’s Conference 5 1 5 26 130Work Area / Copy 120Mailboxes 100General 226 226 120Subtotal 88 10,690 420 11,198 155 5 9,262Research Labs and ServiceResearch Labs 2,350 12,817 1000 16,167 Includes Engineering Research CenterResearch Lab Service 2,099 2,099Wet Research Labs - 12 PI’s 54 200 10,800 42 GRA's + 6 Post-Docs + 6 NTT or PT Res Fac = 54 scientific personnel. Research Lab Service @25% 2,700Subtotal 2,350 14,916 1000 18,266 54 13,500Class Labs and ServiceClass Lab - 8 seats (C140) 470 470Class Lab - 12 seats (C239B) 604 604Class Lab - 10 seats (C251) 350 350Class Lab - 12 seats (C217) 541 541Class Lab - 12 seats (C217A) 351 351Class Lab - 16 seatsClass Lab - 50 stations 50 60 3,000 Up to 50 students per section working at equipment, includes discussion areaClass Lab Service @ 25% 248 248 750Subtotal 2,564 2,564 50 3,750

PHASE 2 DETAILED PROGRAM The Phase 2 detailed program on the following pages show the existing CBE space and the final right-sized program which is based on the space allocation standards and adjusted for SoE’s specific needs. This section is followed by the long-range program which represents the future phases of the Engineering Precinct Plan.

2 : 4Program



Total Existing NSF

No. of Personnel

No. of Seats

No. of Rooms

Total Occ. or Seats



Office / AdministrationFaculty - Chair 557 557 1 130 130Faculty - Professor 1,780 305 2,085 9 90 810Faculty - Assistant Professor 943 943 4 90 360Faculty - Associate Professor 485 485 4 90 360Faculty - Other 88 325 413NTT Teaching 214 214 1 80 80NTT Research 115 115 5 80 400PT Teaching 1PT Research 1Post-Docs 6 60 360Fellows 0 0 0 17 Fellows are included in PhD GradsGrads (PhD) 5,187 5,187 Existing grad desks = 97; grads broken out into wet and dry in next two linesGrads (PhD) wet 42 60 2,533 63 total PhD Grads, assume 67% wet Grads (PhD) dry 21 75 1,559 63 total PhD Grads, assume 33 % dryUndergrads 54 30 1,620 3 per 18 faculty, assume 2 share 1 desk = 27 desks @ 60 NSF per deskAdmin 973 973Admin - School 3 80 240Admin - Research 3 80 240Dept. Reception / Waiting 100Chair’s Conference 5 1 5 26 130Work Area / Copy 120Mailboxes 100General 226 226 120Subtotal 88 10,690 420 11,198 155 5 9,262Research Labs and ServiceResearch Labs 2,350 12,817 1000 16,167 Includes Engineering Research CenterResearch Lab Service 2,099 2,099Wet Research Labs - 12 PI’s 54 200 10,800 42 GRA's + 6 Post-Docs + 6 NTT or PT Res Fac = 54 scientific personnel. Research Lab Service @25% 2,700Subtotal 2,350 14,916 1000 18,266 54 13,500Class Labs and ServiceClass Lab - 8 seats (C140) 470 470Class Lab - 12 seats (C239B) 604 604Class Lab - 10 seats (C251) 350 350Class Lab - 12 seats (C217) 541 541Class Lab - 12 seats (C217A) 351 351Class Lab - 16 seatsClass Lab - 50 stations 50 60 3,000 Up to 50 students per section working at equipment, includes discussion areaClass Lab Service @ 25% 248 248 750Subtotal 2,564 2,564 50 3,750

2 : 5

Program




Total Existing NSF

No. of Personnel

No. of Seats

No. of Rooms

Total Occ. or Seats



Collaboration

Faculty/Staff/Grads 18 Faculty +63 GRA's + 6 Post-Docs + 6 NTT or PT Res Fac + 6 Admin = 99 personnel; target ratio personnel to collaboration seats = 1:1

Conference 991 991 Use large conference rooms in other locationsSmall Collaboration Rooms 4 8 32 25 800Medium Collaboration Rooms 8 8 64 25 1,600Conference Service 145 145UndergradsNon-Class Computer Lab (C233) - 20 seats 664 664Non-Class Computer Lab (C241) - 6 seats 346 346Non-Class Computer Lab 0 30 0 Will use non-class computer labs in Weeks HallStudent Project SpaceStudy 0 25 0 Will use small and medium collaboration roomsBreak-outKitchen 150Sub-Total 2,146 2,146 96 2,550Building SupportCentral Storage 500Loading Dock 225Receiving 300Cylinder Storage 50Other 50Sub-Total 0 0 1,125TOTAL PROGRAM AREA 2,438 30,316 0 1,420 34,174 30,187

PHASE 2 DETAILED PROGRAM continued

2 : 6Program



Total Existing NSF

No. of Personnel

No. of Seats

No. of Rooms

Total Occ. or Seats



Collaboration

Faculty/Staff/Grads 18 Faculty +63 GRA's + 6 Post-Docs + 6 NTT or PT Res Fac + 6 Admin = 99 personnel; target ratio personnel to collaboration seats = 1:1

Conference 991 991 Use large conference rooms in other locationsSmall Collaboration Rooms 4 8 32 25 800Medium Collaboration Rooms 8 8 64 25 1,600Conference Service 145 145UndergradsNon-Class Computer Lab (C233) - 20 seats 664 664Non-Class Computer Lab (C241) - 6 seats 346 346Non-Class Computer Lab 0 30 0 Will use non-class computer labs in Weeks HallStudent Project SpaceStudy 0 25 0 Will use small and medium collaboration roomsBreak-outKitchen 150Sub-Total 2,146 2,146 96 2,550Building SupportCentral Storage 500Loading Dock 225Receiving 300Cylinder Storage 50Other 50Sub-Total 0 0 1,125TOTAL PROGRAM AREA 2,438 30,316 0 1,420 34,174 30,187


Program

End of Phase 1 End of Phase 2 End of Phase 3 End of Phase 4 End of Phase 5

Engineering Department NSF Location NSF Location NSF Location NSF Location NSF Location

Biomedical Engineering 47,390 BME 47,390 BME 47,390 BME 47,390 BME 47,390 BME

Chemical & Biochemical Engineering 34,174 SoE C, SoE A, BME 32,336 Ph 2 Bldg (vacate 30,316 from SoE C), SoE A, BME 32,336 Ph 2 Bldg, SoE A, BME 32,336 Ph 2 Bldg, SoE A, BME 29,898 Ph 2 Bldg, BME (pilot Lab absorbed

into Weeks Hall)

Civil & Environmental Engineering 23,804 Civ E Lab, Weeks 23,804 Civ E Lab, Weeks 23,804 Civ E Lab, Weeks 23,804 Civ E Lab, Weeks 23,804 Weeks, Ph 5 Bldg (incl 5,951 from Civ E Lab)

Center for Advanced Infrastructure & Transportation 26,667 CAIT Busch, CAIT Livingston, Furn/Fabr Shop 26,667 CAIT Busch, CAIT Livingston, Furn/

Fabr Shop 26,667 CAIT Busch, CAIT Livingston, Furn/Fabr Shop 26,667 CAIT Busch, CAIT Livingston, Furn/

Fabr Shop 26,667 CAIT Livingston (incl 9,611 from CAIT Busch)

Electrical & Computer Engineering 47,089 CORE, EEB, SoE C, Innov Park, Weeks 47,089 CORE, EEB, Innov Park, Weeks, Ph 2 Bldg (incl 1,258 from SoE C) 47,089 CORE, EEB, Innov Park, Weeks, Ph 2

Bldg 47,089 CORE, EEB, Innov Park, Weeks, Ph 2 Bldg 47,089 CORE, Innov Park, Weeks, Ph 2 Bldg,

Ph 5 Bldg (incl 17,861 from EEB)

Industrial & Systems Engineering 10,092 SoE C, CORE 9,353 CORE (vacate 739 from SoE C) 9,353 CORE 9,353 CORE 9,353 CORE

Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering 38,737 SoE A, SoE B, SoE C, SoE D, RFR, Solvents 35,629 SoE A, SoE B ,SoE D, Solvents (vacate

966 from SoE C and 2,142 from RFR) 35,629 SoE A, SoE B, Solvents, Ph 3 Bldg (incl 24,232 from SoE D) 35,629 SoE A, Solvents, Ph 3 Bldg (incl 6,846

from SoE B) 35,629 Weeks, Ph 3 Bldg, Ph 4 Bldg (incl 4,103 from SoE A and 448 from Solvents)

Materials Science & Engineering 64,515 CCR, FBO, SoE A, Innov Park 54,861 CCR, SoE A, Innov Park 54,861 CCR, SoE A, Innov Park 54,861 CCR, SoE A, Innov Park 54,861 CCR, Innov Park Ph 5 Bldg (incl 24,953 from SoE A)

Packaging Science & Engineering 2,390 SoE, A, CORE, Innov Park 2,390 SoE, A, CORE, Innov Park 2,390 SoE A, CORE, Innov Park 2,390 SoE A, CORE, Innov Park 2,390 CORE, Innov Park, (incl 575 from SoE A)

NJAMI 15,166 Weeks 15,166 Weeks 15,166 Weeks 15,166 Weeks 15,166 Weeks

Dean’s Office 46,147 RFR, BME, CCR, FBO, SoE B. SoE D, CORE, Weeks 42,024 BME, CCR, FBO, SoE B, SoE D, CORE,

Weeks 42,024 BME, CCR, FBO, SoE B, CORE, Weeks (incl 8,829 from SoE D) 42,024 BME, CCR, FBO, CORE, Weeks, Ph 4

Bldg (incl 4,793 fromSoE B) 42,024 BME, CCR, FBO, CORE, Weeks, Ph 4 Bldg

Undergraduate Education 3,803 SoE B 3,803 SoE B 3,803 SoE B 3,803 Ph 4 Bldg (incl 3,803 from SoE B) 3,803 Ph 4 Bldg

Engineering Computer Services 6,876 SoE B, SoE D, Weeks 6,876 SoE B, SoE D, Weeks 6,876 SoE B, Weeks (incl 688 from SoE D) 6,876 Weeks, Ph 4 Bldg (incl 2,431 from SoE B) 6,876 Weeks, Ph 4 Bldg

Student Projects Garage 0 5,000 Student Projects Garage 5,000 Student Projects Garage 5,000 Student Projects Garage 5,000 Student Projects Garage

Available for Reassignment 9,311 9,311 9,311 9,311 9,311

Future Growth Phase 3 36,000 Phase 3 Building Growth 36,000 Phase 3 Building 36,000 Phase 3 Building

Future Growth Phase 4 50,000 Phase 4 Building Growth 50,000 Phase 4 Building

Future Growth Phase 5 57,000 Phase 5 Building Growth

TOTAL NSF SPACE 376,161 361,699 397,699 447,699 502,261

-14,462 NSF decrease from Phase 1-9,594 Vacated - FBO13,012 Reno - Phase 2: Optimize FBO17,175 New - Phase 2: FBO Addition5,000 New - Student Projects Garage-33,790 Vacated - C Wing-6265 Vacated - RFR

21,538 NSF increase from Phase 169,749 Phase 3: D Wing Replacement and Growth-33,749 Vacated - D Wing

71,538 NSF increase from Phase 167,873 Phase 4: B Wing Replacement and Growth-17,873 Vacated - B Wing

126,100 NSF increase from Phase 11127,170 Phase 5: A Wing, CAIT Busch, EEB, CIV E LAB, Solvents Replacement and Growth-36,259 Vacated A Wing-9,611 Vacated - CAIT Busch-17,861 Vacated - EEB-5,951 Vacated - CIV E Lab-488 Vacated - Solvents

LONG-RANGE PROGRAMPhase 1 in Table 2.3 represents the quantity of space that each department will occupy as well as the buildings in which that space will be located at the end of Phase 1 when Weeks Hall is completed and occupied. This chart tracks net square feet across the 5 phases of development of the Precinct Plan. This program structures the phased demolition of the Engineering Building as well as strategic growth.

Over the five phases 122,000 NSF of the Engineering Building will be replaced and an additional 125,000 NSF of growth is accommodated.

Table 2.3Long-Range Space Phasing Program

2 : 8Program

End of Phase 1 End of Phase 2 End of Phase 3 End of Phase 4 End of Phase 5

Engineering Department NSF Location NSF Location NSF Location NSF Location NSF Location

Biomedical Engineering 47,390 BME 47,390 BME 47,390 BME 47,390 BME 47,390 BME

Chemical & Biochemical Engineering 34,174 SoE C, SoE A, BME 32,336 Ph 2 Bldg (vacate 30,316 from SoE C), SoE A, BME 32,336 Ph 2 Bldg, SoE A, BME 32,336 Ph 2 Bldg, SoE A, BME 29,898 Ph 2 Bldg, BME (pilot Lab absorbed

into Weeks Hall)

Civil & Environmental Engineering 23,804 Civ E Lab, Weeks 23,804 Civ E Lab, Weeks 23,804 Civ E Lab, Weeks 23,804 Civ E Lab, Weeks 23,804 Weeks, Ph 5 Bldg (incl 5,951 from Civ E Lab)

Center for Advanced Infrastructure & Transportation 26,667 CAIT Busch, CAIT Livingston, Furn/Fabr Shop 26,667 CAIT Busch, CAIT Livingston, Furn/

Fabr Shop 26,667 CAIT Busch, CAIT Livingston, Furn/Fabr Shop 26,667 CAIT Busch, CAIT Livingston, Furn/

Fabr Shop 26,667 CAIT Livingston (incl 9,611 from CAIT Busch)

Electrical & Computer Engineering 47,089 CORE, EEB, SoE C, Innov Park, Weeks 47,089 CORE, EEB, Innov Park, Weeks, Ph 2 Bldg (incl 1,258 from SoE C) 47,089 CORE, EEB, Innov Park, Weeks, Ph 2

Bldg 47,089 CORE, EEB, Innov Park, Weeks, Ph 2 Bldg 47,089 CORE, Innov Park, Weeks, Ph 2 Bldg,

Ph 5 Bldg (incl 17,861 from EEB)

Industrial & Systems Engineering 10,092 SoE C, CORE 9,353 CORE (vacate 739 from SoE C) 9,353 CORE 9,353 CORE 9,353 CORE

Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering 38,737 SoE A, SoE B, SoE C, SoE D, RFR, Solvents 35,629 SoE A, SoE B ,SoE D, Solvents (vacate

966 from SoE C and 2,142 from RFR) 35,629 SoE A, SoE B, Solvents, Ph 3 Bldg (incl 24,232 from SoE D) 35,629 SoE A, Solvents, Ph 3 Bldg (incl 6,846

from SoE B) 35,629 Weeks, Ph 3 Bldg, Ph 4 Bldg (incl 4,103 from SoE A and 448 from Solvents)

Materials Science & Engineering 64,515 CCR, FBO, SoE A, Innov Park 54,861 CCR, SoE A, Innov Park 54,861 CCR, SoE A, Innov Park 54,861 CCR, SoE A, Innov Park 54,861 CCR, Innov Park Ph 5 Bldg (incl 24,953 from SoE A)

Packaging Science & Engineering 2,390 SoE, A, CORE, Innov Park 2,390 SoE, A, CORE, Innov Park 2,390 SoE A, CORE, Innov Park 2,390 SoE A, CORE, Innov Park 2,390 CORE, Innov Park, (incl 575 from SoE A)

NJAMI 15,166 Weeks 15,166 Weeks 15,166 Weeks 15,166 Weeks 15,166 Weeks

Dean’s Office 46,147 RFR, BME, CCR, FBO, SoE B. SoE D, CORE, Weeks 42,024 BME, CCR, FBO, SoE B, SoE D, CORE,

Weeks 42,024 BME, CCR, FBO, SoE B, CORE, Weeks (incl 8,829 from SoE D) 42,024 BME, CCR, FBO, CORE, Weeks, Ph 4

Bldg (incl 4,793 fromSoE B) 42,024 BME, CCR, FBO, CORE, Weeks, Ph 4 Bldg

Undergraduate Education 3,803 SoE B 3,803 SoE B 3,803 SoE B 3,803 Ph 4 Bldg (incl 3,803 from SoE B) 3,803 Ph 4 Bldg

Engineering Computer Services 6,876 SoE B, SoE D, Weeks 6,876 SoE B, SoE D, Weeks 6,876 SoE B, Weeks (incl 688 from SoE D) 6,876 Weeks, Ph 4 Bldg (incl 2,431 from SoE B) 6,876 Weeks, Ph 4 Bldg

Student Projects Garage 0 5,000 Student Projects Garage 5,000 Student Projects Garage 5,000 Student Projects Garage 5,000 Student Projects Garage

Available for Reassignment 9,311 9,311 9,311 9,311 9,311

Future Growth Phase 3 36,000 Phase 3 Building Growth 36,000 Phase 3 Building 36,000 Phase 3 Building

Future Growth Phase 4 50,000 Phase 4 Building Growth 50,000 Phase 4 Building

Future Growth Phase 5 57,000 Phase 5 Building Growth

TOTAL NSF SPACE 376,161 361,699 397,699 447,699 502,261

-14,462 NSF decrease from Phase 1-9,594 Vacated - FBO13,012 Reno - Phase 2: Optimize FBO17,175 New - Phase 2: FBO Addition5,000 New - Student Projects Garage-33,790 Vacated - C Wing-6265 Vacated - RFR

21,538 NSF increase from Phase 169,749 Phase 3: D Wing Replacement and Growth-33,749 Vacated - D Wing

71,538 NSF increase from Phase 167,873 Phase 4: B Wing Replacement and Growth-17,873 Vacated - B Wing

126,100 NSF increase from Phase 11127,170 Phase 5: A Wing, CAIT Busch, EEB, CIV E LAB, Solvents Replacement and Growth-36,259 Vacated A Wing-9,611 Vacated - CAIT Busch-17,861 Vacated - EEB-5,951 Vacated - CIV E Lab-488 Vacated - Solvents

2 : 9

Program


CONCLUSIONThe Phase 2 Program is the next step in the redevelopment of the School of Engineering precinct. It allows for growth and/or relocation of 18 research groups into an environment that includes wet and dry research with co-located office and workstation space for faculty and students; teachings labs that are sized to accommodate faculty, students, and equipment in a safe, integrated, and experiential learning environment; and collaboration space that will promote interdisciplinary activities in support of knowledge creation and transfer. The Long-Range Program provides a flexible approach for improvement and development during future phases of the School of Engineering growth; it responds to known facility needs and anticipates responses to future programmatic requirements that cannot be fully known at this time.

Planning 3

3 : 1

Planning


A key component to the Phase 2 program resides in the Atrium which is the “connector” between the instructional and office spaces in the existing Fiber Optics Building and the addition which houses research laboratories and support functions. A variety of collaboration spaces are provided in the Atrium from opportunities for spontaneous, informal interactions to larger, formal conferences. These spaces are intended to complement the common spaces found across the quad in Weeks Hall, thus increasing the range of collaborative activities that can be accommodated. These spaces will encourage collaborations among the housed programs as well as the entire SoE community including external collaborators. The Phase 2 Atrium will be energetic, celebratory and visible, and most importantly, will capture the attention of students and faculty to draw human energy into the facility in a way that 21st century engineering should.

As the next step in the School of Engineering’s Precinct Plan, Phase 2 creates a 67,630 gross square foot interdisciplinary facility that will continue the process of expanding and improving the space available to its faculty, staff, and students. With renovation and addition, Phase 2 will enable a reinvention of the current Fiber Optics Building into a highly effective instructional and research environment as well as the decanting and eventual demolition of the C Wing of the Engineering Building (see Figure 3.1). C Wing is one of the four separate buildings or wings of the Engineering Building, interconnected by enclosed corridors. The building structures are cast-in-place concrete framing with precast concrete wall panels and brick veneer. Wings A, B, and C have two floors above grade, and D-Wing has one floor. C-Wing also has a partial basement.

The Existing Floor Plan in Figure 3.2 shows the existing Fiber Optics Building and the Proposed Floor Plan shows that the existing building will be renovated, and an addition will be made. Figure 3.3 summarizes the transformation to the existing building. By making the existing building more efficient, 5,000 net square feet of additional programmatic space can be gained and an addition of 21,060 net square feet will be added to provide a total of 37,130 net square feet. The overall gross square footage is 67,630 for an overall efficiency factor of 57% which is within the target range for a program of this type.

Phase 1Weeks Hall

Phase 2Decant C Wing

Phase 2Renovation and Expansion

EngineeringQuadrangle

Figure 3.1Phase 2 Site Plan

3 : 2Planning

Existing Floor Plan

Proposed Floor Plan

Renovation New Construction

PHASE 2 - RENOVATING AND EXPANDING FBO The next step in the development of the SoE’s Precinct Plan is to transform the Fiber Optics building into a flexible, interdisciplinary wet lab facility. The expansion plan is approximately 31,000 GSF*.

The Fiber Optics Building has a workable structural/planning grid and the floor-to-floor height is 15’-4” that is in alignment with today’s planning standards for science and engineering buildings. By renovating the areas outside of the auditorium, which is scheduled to remain, and making an addition, an inviting and efficient engineering structure that is reflective of the 21st century can be created.

*Further detail is required on existing and new mechanical systems and infrastructure in order to determine the necessary amount of space needed for nonassignable area.

AREA

(sf)

30,500NEWGSF

36%

21,060NEWNSF

13,475RENONSF

18,330RENONSF

37,130RENOGSF

37,130RENOGSF

57%

BuildingEfficiency

BuildingEfficiency

+5,000

Existing Net nsf

ProposedNet nsf

ExistingGross nsf

Proposed Gross nsf

Figure 3.2Existing and Proposed FBO Floor Plans

Figure 3.3Space Summary

3 : 3

Planning


PHASE 2

Lecture Hall

Lab Support

Wet Lab

Atrium

Offices/Dry Research

Class Labs

Support

The diagrams in Figure 3.4 and Figure 3.5 were established in response to a number of key planning drivers reinventing the former Fiber Optics Building to a contemporary flexible research facility:

1. Expand to the north. This idea allows for a new engineering quadrangle to be framed by the most recent new construction (Biomedical Engineering, Weeks Hall and this expansion). This will set up a wonderful design opportunity for developing an outdoor environment off the future pedestrian path shown in the Rutgers 2030 Plan.

2. Focus new construction on wet lab and research space as much as possible. In concert, focus as much of the dry and office areas from the program in the renovated areas. This would allow spaces requiring the heaviest amount of infrastructure to be located in new construction.

3. Wet labs are envisioned to be transparent with views in from the Atrium and out to the engineering courtyard.

4. Locating dry/office space in the renovated area enables SoE to avoid using the highest cost (per SF) space for the simplest of program space.

5. The Atrium – Reflects a character of space that encourages students and faculty to congregate along a pedestrian pathway while putting as much science on display celebrating engineering teaching and research. Ongoing reearch will be readily visible to building users as well as visitors or those passing through.

Figure 3.4First Floor Concept

3 : 4Planning

PHASE 2

Lab Support

Wet Lab

Atrium

Offices

Grad Workstations

SupportOffices/Dry Research

6. The Loading Area will remain in its current location where it can be accessed from the existing parking in the short term. In the long term the main pedestrian spine can be used before and after hours to get vehicles to the dock. Since this will be on the future pedestrian spine the design solution puts new construction over top of the dock to help conceal the service area.

7. Wet Labs are positioned to be on display from the public Atrium celebrating engineering research. Location will also benefit with northern exposure to the engineering quadrangle.

8. Although a basement level is not shown it is expected that there will be one to house mechanical systems.

Figure 3.5Second Floor Concept

3 : 5

Planning


PHASE 2 INTERIOR

The reinvented character of the new facility will celebrate and inspire engineering. The existing façade had opened to a parking lot, but will now house a daylit atrium and pedestrian concourse putting science on display and opening up to the newly developed engineering courtyard (see Figure 3.6).

Existing view from same location as concept rendering

Figure 3.6Concept Sketch and Potential View

3 : 6Planning

LONG RANGE PLANNING


The Busch District Engineering Precinct is shown in Figure 3.7. In conjunction with defining the best next step in construction for the SoE (Phase 2) the team was challenged with defining a high-level response to a longer range problem. These diagrams define the phased decanting of the Engineering Building over time while building towards the framework outlined in Rutgers 2030 as well as responding to the strategic initiative to grow the School of Engineering over the long term.

The precinct, defined by 7 phases, replaces 115,000 net square feet housed in the Engineering Building while expanding the School by 125,000 additional net square feet. Decanting the Engineering Building over time will take further due diligence regarding utilities, infrastructure and swing space but this planning effort provides a framework accounting for the phased demolition without creating further sprawl resulting in a dynamic precinct.

Figure 3.7Existing Busch District Engineering Precinct

3 : 7

Planning


PHASE 1Completion of Weeks Hall

Each successive Phase is planned to provide:

• replacement space in advance of decanting and demolishing an existing wing

• some amount of net space growth with each new phase• replacement of oldest or most deficient buildings first• ability to avoid temporary construction (“swing space”) • consistency with the overall framework of the Rutgers

2030• improved density on campus by building mostly 4-story

buildings

Aerial view of SoE buildings at the Busch Campus with the completion of Weeks Hall

D

BA

C

CORE

EE

CAIT

CIV-E

FBO

CeramicsBME

Weeks Hall

3 : 8Planning

PHASE 2

2.1 Decant Fiber Optics Building to A Wing and Center for Ceramics Research -10,200 NSF2.2 Renovate Phase 2: New Addition +15,000 NSF2.3 Renovate and Construct Addition to FBO +16,500 NSF2.4 Construct Student Projects Garage + 5,000 NSF2.5 Decant C Wing - 33,790 NSF2.6 Decant and Demolish Rutgers Formula Racing - 6,265 NSF

ConstructDecantExistingNew

D

BA

C

CORE

EE

CAIT

CIV-E

CeramicsBME

Weeks HallPhase 2


3 : 9

Planning


3.1 Demolish C Wing 3.2 New Construction +61,000 NSF3.3 Decant D Wing - 33,800 NSF

PHASE 3

D

BA

CORE

EE

CAIT

CIV-E

CeramicsBME

Weeks HallPhase 2



Phase 3

3 : 10Planning

PHASE 4

4.1 Demolish D Wing 4.2 New Construction +67,900 NSF4.3 Decant B Wing - 17,900 NSF

BA

CORE

EE

CAIT

CIV-E

CeramicsBME

Weeks HallPhase 2



Phase 3

Phase 4

3 : 11

Planning


5.1 Demolish B Wing 5.2 New Construction +112,500 NSF5.3 Decant and Demolish A Wing - 36,300 NSF 5.4 Decant CAIT - 9,611 NSF5.5 Decant EEB - 17,900 NSF5.6 Decant CivE Lab - 6,000 NSF5.7 Decant Solvents - 500 NSF

PHASE 5

CORE

EE

CAIT

CIV-E

CeramicsBME

Weeks HallPhase 2



Phase 3

Phase 4

Phase 5

3 : 12Planning

FUTURE PHASING /CONSTRUCTIONEnvisioning buildout of space beyond the planned expansion of the SoE, in conformance with the Rutgers 2030.

Phase 6

Phase 7

With the completion of Phase 5, the SOE goals of replacing outmoded buildings and adding 33% net space to accommodate future growth will be accomplished.

Rutgers 2030 indicates that the engineering quad would consist of a mixture of engineering buildings as well as other academic and classroom buildings.

The removal of the vacated EE, Civ E and CAIT buildings will provide space for additional non-SOE buildings.

A notional Phase 6 building is shown at the strategic corner where the new pedestrian boulevard angles into the main Busch quadrangle lawn. This may represent a shared academic use, such as an extension or replacement of the Science and Engineering Research Center. This location, adjacent to the Busch Student Center transit hub, is consistent with the goal of Rutgers 2030 to intensify development of key resources around hubs.

Phase 7 illustrates the completion of the concept of a grouping of buildings organized around a green space, as envisioned in Rutgers 2030; however the phased construction-demolition approach results in a series of interlocking smaller scale spaces, rather than a singular monumental green space.

3 : 13

Planning


2030 FOCUS ON ENGINEERING

The Rutgers 2030 Plan (see Figure 3.8) provided a great start to this planning effort. The proposed precinct plan, Figure 3.9, begins with the tenets of Rutgers 2030 and is also informed by:

1. An understanding of how decanting the Engineering Building could be phased in manageable projects. Decanting and demolishing the Engineering Building in one phase would result in too large of a project and likely result in further sprawl rather than consolidation of the precinct.

2. A high-level program reflecting both replacement of antiquated departmental facilities and projected growth of the School.

3. Providing spaces for University academic high-tech classrooms in addition to dedicated SoE space.

4. The desire to provide more intimate outdoor spaces and not compete with the main quadrangle.

Figure 3.9School of Engineering Precinct

Figure 3.8Rutgers 2030 Engineering Precinct

Student Projects Garage 4

4 : 1



STUDENT PROJECTS GARAGEStudent-run project teams contribute immeasurable value to the Rutgers community. They teach students technical skills, give them hands-on experience, help them find professional opportunities, attract potential new students, and represent the University on a national stage, driven by members who dedicate up to 40 hours a week.

Organizations, all of which contribute immeasurable value to the Rutgers Engineering community, that currently participate in student projects include:

• American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics• ChemE Car• Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers• Rutgers Formula Racing• RU Solar Car

However, all of these organizations lack adequate spaces and tools. Current work spaces lack proximity to machine shops and makerspaces, and often the necessary tools, leading to inefficient design and build processes. Additionally, some existing locations will soon be demolished or reallocated.

In order to maintain a competitive edge the SoE has identified a key short-term initiative in the development of the Student Projects Garage. The Student Projects Garage will advance the reputation of the Rutgers School of Engineering among peer institutions, many of whom have similar project spaces. Furthermore, such a space would allow student organizations to share tools, work together, and more effectively contribute to the Rutgers engineering reputation.

PROGRAM DRIVERSTable 4.1 details the proposed program for the Student Projects Garage. Program drivers for the Student Projects Garage are:

• Inspirational shop space for innovation• Cross-disciplinary collaboration• Hands-on Learning, Scale-size builds• Highly-visible national competitions

Engineering Technology Building at SUNY, Buffalo State

Rutgers IEEE Robotics Team

Rutgers Formula Racing Team and Rutgers Solar Car

3a

4 : 2Student Projects Garage

Space No. of Rooms NSF per Room Total NSF per Function

Assembly Space

Assembly Garage 4 500 2,000

Sub-Total 2,000

Support Spaces

Machine Shop 1 300 300

Composite Fabrication Shop 1 150 150

Sanding Room 1 150 150

Club Office 4 150 600

Clean Assembly 1 150 150

Maker Space 1 150 150

Chemical/fume hood room 1 150 150

Paint Room 1 150 150

Shared Storage 1 150 150

Sub-Total 1,950

Other

Toilets (single occupant) 1 80 80

Lobby 1 120 120

Mechanical Space(s) 0

Sub-Total 200

Total Program Area 4,150

Site

B

AC FBO

Ceramics

BME

Weeks Hall

Table 4.1Student Projects Garage Program

Figure 4.1Student Projects Garage Site Location Plan

4 : 3



Assembly Garage4 Bays @500

Machine CompFab

ToiletMaker

Locating the Student Projects Garage on the site of the former packaging engineering building (see Figure 4.1) provides a great opportunity for visibility from a major vehicular circulation spine of the campus. This will also be true in the long term when the project to create a new loop road around

Half of RFR to remain during construction

Central Utility Plant


Storage Fume Hood

Clean Assembly

Paint Sand

Offices Offices

Figure 4.2Conceptual Site Plan

Figure 4.3Conceptual Floor Plan

Busch Campus, planned to pass directly in front of this site, is complete. Many vehicles and pedestrians will experience the building and therefore providing transparency towards the public became a design driver. Figure 4.3 illustrates a conceptual floor plan for the Student Projects Garage.

4 : 4Student Projects Garage

Simple, modular planning, combined with off-the-shelf building systems and components, display a cost effective “Engineering” aesthetic, as illustrated in Figure 4.4 and Figure 4.5.Figure 4.4Interior Character Sketch of Shop Area

Figure 4.5Street View

Documents

School of Engineering Precinct Plan