Web viewThe document captures all the feedback gathered from the 10 faculty stakeholder workshops undertaken as detailed below

FBL New Build stakeholder workshop feedback and responses – Concept Design Stage

The document captures all the feedback gathered from the 10 faculty stakeholder workshops undertaken as detailed below.

Stakeholder Group DateOrganisation Studies 6 May 2014Human Resource Management 6 May 2014Marketing 7 May 2014Accounting and Finance 7 May 2014Economics 8 May 2014Law 14 May 2014Strategy and Operations Management 15 May 2014Faculty Executive Support Staff 19 May 2014Executive Education Support Staff (EDC) 19 May 2014IT, Learning Technologists, ASC 20 May 2014

General Feedback

Question 1: What was the initial brief for the architects?

The vision/aim for the building set within the Design Brief which was issued to all tendering design teams is outlined below:

The Faculty of Business and Law (FBL) project will deliver a new academic building for the faculty of a standard comparable to those of its competitors. Located in the Heartzone of the Frenchay campus masterplan the building will enable the faculty to deliver its mission to be professionally engaged, vocationally oriented, internationally connected and academically strong.

Business benefitsThe project will provide FBL with the capability to deliver the business benefits of increased student numbers, practice based & project lead learning and increased interaction with the business community. The FBL project will coordinate with other Heartzone projects and be a flagship building in the centre of the campus.

Business functions to be deliveredAcademic space to deliver Accounting, Economics & Finance, Business & Management, Law, Bristol Institute of Legal Practice, staff space, external business facing spaces (eg for CPD),post graduate spaces, lecture theatres and professional law spaces.

Student NumbersFBL currently provides courses for approximately 5,500 fte students. Current student projections indicate that the number of students will rise to 10,000 fte by 2020/2021. The total area of new accommodation required to meet the planned growth has been assessed at c 18,800m2.

Development StrategyThe proposal is to maximise the development of the site. An initial capacity study has indicated that a building of up to 15,000m2 can be accommodated (subject to planning) on the site. The building accommodation allowance for FBL on the site is c 13,000m2, with the balance of the building accommodation to be provided on a shell and core basis. The residual accommodation has currently no identified use and will be fitted out by the University at a later date. The building design will need

Prepared by Marianne Reed – June 14


to carefully integrate the accommodation being provided on a ‘shell and core’ basis to ensure that the functionality of the FBL is not compromised.

Currently it is envisaged that FBL will need to make use of existing university accommodation in addition to the new accommodation to meet the planned growth in student numbers. Specialist spaces and PC labs will be provided in full to meet the anticipated growth in student numbers; however additional staff offices, lecture theaters and general purpose teaching rooms (GPTR) that will be required to meet the planned growth in student numbers will be accommodated in existing university accommodation. It is also intended that some areas of initially unused specialist space and unused staff offices will be used as GPTR in the early years to accommodate growth; a flexible design will be required to meet this requirement.

Question 2: What was the thinking for such a diagonal design?

The form of the building responds to the shape of the site (as defined within the Frenchay campus masterplan proposals) the surrounding existing buildings and the proposed buildings and infrastructure which will be built over the coming years.

In plan the buildings west wing follows the line set by the proposed pedestrian route which will link the visitor car park to the north of the FBL site to the plaza to the south of the FBL site. The east wing is aligned with the proposed road that runs to the east of the FBL plot. These two geometries are not parallel and therefore creates a building form that I believe is being referred to as diagonal.

Question 3: Will the space be fully accessible to students?

Yes, the vision is to have a building that is accessible to staff and students.

Question 4: What will be the access and security policy on the building?

The access and security is currently being reviewed. It is envisioned that the building will be zoned so that different area can operate under different security strategies with different hours of operation.

Question 5: Does it comply to DDA requirements?

The building will be designed to comply fully with the ‘Building Regulations Approved Document Part M: Access to and Use of Buildings’ and the British Standards outlined within ‘BS 8300: Design of buildings and their approaches to meet the needs of disabled people - Code of practice’.

Consultation with the universities estates department and other stakeholders as part of the design process will be undertaken to ensure an accessible development is delivered that meets the needs of all building users.

Question 6: Will there be disabled toilets on each floor?

Yes. The current design has 2 no. separate accessible/disabled toilets on each floor. There will also be ambulant toilet cubicles within the male and female toilet facilities on each floor.



Question 7: How large will the women’s toilet cubicles be as in some of the current toilets in UWE the cubicles are very small and cramped and it’s difficult when having to use the sanitary facilities.

The female toilet cubicles will be based on the industry standard size of circa 800mm x 1500mm which is a suitable size to accommodate sanitary facilities. At the university a number of the existing female toilet cubicles are smaller than current standards. For example the cubicles within 3E029 are only circa 700mm in width.

Question 8: How big will the lifts be? Important when running events so trolleys etc need to be transported up and down

The current concept design has allowed space for 4 no. 18 person passenger lifts to be accommodated within the building. During the detailed design stage full analysis of the vertical circulation provision will be undertaken to ensure adequate provision is provided at all times.

Question 9: Will there be event space e.g. for the DEA?

Yes, the building is being designed to ensure there is enough space throughout the building to cater for events. For example there is a large break out space outside the 300 seat lecture theatre that could be used, the atrium space on the ground floor links to the café which could be used for larger events. There will also be space on the 4th floor which may be linked to a potential roof terrace.

IT

Question 10: What is the IT strategy in relation to the future of staff equipment? Tablets etc.

Academic staff

The university is moving away from desktop PC’s to allow academic staff to be more flexible (to allow working from home, travelling and to use as a PC), so by the time the new building is open the standard kit for academic staff will be:

Suitably weighted laptop Docking station 22” monitor

Other staff

Traditional PC 22” monitor

There will be flexibility to look at dual screens and other equipment on an individual ‘needs’ basis.

Question 11: Will we be looking to use laptops more effectively as part of our teaching?

As we are moving towards providing laptops to Academic staff and we are installing Wi-Fi everywhere on campus this is facilitating the use of such equipment more flexibly in the teaching environment. We are working closely with IT Services to ensure we fit the building appropriately with IT infrastructure and kit.



Question 12: Secure data is increasing (in Economics) so the situation of those staff using secure data needs considering.

Where there’s a requirement for secure data we will ensure we manage it appropriately. This could be managed by ensuring staff who use secure data are located together within an office space. This would ensure confidentiality and data protection. We will be looking at this in more detail as we move forward.

Question 13: We are currently lacking laptop bars, particularly in the EDC area, but also around the university. Will this be considered?

Yes, we are looking at creating a variety of spaces, so laptop bars will be considered within the design of the space.

Staff space

Question 14: Clustering staff within their subject areas may create silos which is something we already have within current academic accommodation.

We are designing a building which accommodates both staff space and teaching space on each floor, and due to the size of the building and the amount of academic and teaching space that is required within the building, the way of space planning has led to staff space being clustered around break out spaces and a kitchenette. We have worked on designing the space to our 16/17 staff projections and have currently clustered staff on floors by department, however the way staff are accommodated is flexible and could potentially change. Due to the size of the building inevitably some clustering will happen however vision of the new building is to promote collaboration and the space will work to ensure staff do not stay solely within their clusters.

Question 15: By not having private staff office zones and by creating staff office spaces close to teaching spaces, the amount of students walking past staff offices or waiting for seminars outside of staff offices may take away the sense of staff having any private space.

We’ve been working with the architects on the design of the build and the plans have been changing on a daily basis. We are creating a building that has a combination of office space and teaching space on each floor but we are zoning the building as far as possible to keep the teaching more condensed in one wing and academic space in the other wing. As a result of feedback from a recent academic stakeholder group we have changed the plans to take into consideration offices that were originally planned directly opposite teaching space, and we are looking at the access routes into teaching spaces to try, as far as possible, to manage this away from office spaces.

Question 16: Within the staff space it is important to create enough break out spaces so they naturally promote different meeting spaces e.g. places to meet students informally and non-confidentially, space to meet students confidentially, place for staff to meet and have lunch etc

The plans for the new building are being designed with social learning, informal and formal breakout spaces as a key component. This is one of the main visions of the new building and we are working



with the architects to ensure we have created enough of these spaces, varied enough to naturally create their own usage.

Question 17: How are office spaces allocated to staff, what is the criteria and how are the number of required offices calculated (does this take into account the number of research active staff?)? i.e. 1 person, 2 person, 4 person etc.

CRITERIA FOR OFFICE SIZESingle Offices:Head of DepartmentJ Grade staff with director rolesResearch Centre DirectorsProfs (expectation for need is based on being in 3 days or more per week)AHoD (subject group)

Double office:AHOD (other)Programme managers (110 wlb and above)AProfs

4 per office:SL and L with fte at .5 or greater

More open plan space:L/SL with less than .5 fteAL’sAssistant LecturersOther visiting staff

Localised Open plan:Exec AdminResearch AdminExecutive Education AdminIT, Learning Technologists, Academic Success Centre staffPhD students

Question 18: How do people comment on how the office space is allocated?

This was an Executive decision which was negotiated after a lot of discussion with the Board of Governors. Initially there was a push for more shared space, however the Faculty Executive felt larger shared spaces would be detrimental and would not support the way in which academic staff work, therefore it was agreed to work on a variety of smaller office sizes.



There will be a number of stakeholder sessions looking at the detail of how the offices will be configured. We are keen to ensure the views and opinions of staff are considered and there are effective mechanisms in place for staff to input into the detailed design stage of the project.

Question 19: 4 person offices won’t work well for staff particularly for those staff supervising a high level of students. How will this be managed in terms of meeting spaces and noise distractions for other colleagues?

We need to create an environment that responds to business need, supports the requirements of staff and is fit-for-purpose, whilst using our estate effectively. We are working with the design team to ensure quiet private spaces are created as well as ensuring staff are accessible and visible to students, colleagues and partners.

As we move through into stage 3 of the project (Developed Design stage) we will be working with the architects and with staff to look at the configuration of the office space including office layout and furniture solutions (i.e. potentially floor to ceiling solutions breaking the room into smaller pods). We will be working closely with staff when looking at the detailed design of the office space to ensure we create an environment which works in the best way possible and creates the least amount of distraction possible for other colleagues.

The building is being designed with an emphasis on formal and informal break out/meeting space and social learning space. This will allow staff to take students away from their office, if appropriate, and meet them in other spaces, either spaces created close to their offices, within their staff cluster space, or somewhere else within the building e.g. café, break out spaces located throughout the building. If a staff member needs to see a student and access their computer to make notes or access information there will be formal and informal break out/meeting spaces available for the staff member to take their laptop and dock it giving them access to all their files (as if it’s their desk PC).

Question 20: Shared offices of 4 wouldn’t work effectively as staff often need to see students in their offices as they require access to their computer, notes etc.

If there are times when a member of staff is seeing a student but requires access to their computer and they are unable to see a student in their office, some of the informal/formal breakout and meeting spaces will have the IT facilities to enable staff to dock their laptop. Once the laptop is docked staff can essentially use their laptop as their PC.

Question 21: Security may be difficult to manage in a 4 person office i.e. locking doors.

The responsibility for ensuring security is maintained for shared offices will remain with the staff as it currently does. The use of electronic access control and locking systems via proximity readers or security card systems for offices will be explored in the detailed design stages of the project.



Question 22: If there are other meeting spaces available for staff to take students (e.g. outside the office in break out space or individual meeting pods) this may be highly utilised in peak times, but under-utilised in quiet times. Wouldn’t it be more efficient to make offices 2 person offices and take away some of the meeting spaces. In the current design, at peak times staff will be struggling to find space to meet students, and in quiet times staff will be sharing office space (up to 4 - crammed) and look out onto empty breakout/meeting space so under-utilised space.

Within the department office clusters a significant allowance for staff breakout and meeting rooms has been allocated within the concept design. The design team and university fully understand the importance of ensuring this space is utilised in peak and off peak periods and is fit for purpose. Also see answer to question 19 in regard to the strategy for 4 Person offices.

Question 23: Will there be blinds for privacy? What will the policy be on this for offices?

As we move into the detailed design phase of the project we will look at this kind of detail. There are a number of different options to help with privacy and we will be looking at these options with staff as part of upcoming detailed stakeholder sessions. However, the offices and space is intended to facilitate an open environment and therefore there is likely to be some element of visibility.

Question 24: Will staff be able to move furniture around in their offices?

As we move forward with the project this will be developed further. We are not in the detailed design phase at this point in the project. But we will be working with staff to look at furniture solutions going forward.

Question 25: Sound transfer is really important. Will noise levels from the atrium be an issue?

The FBL New Build project team include a wide range of specialists. An organogram that outlines the design team can be viewed on the FBL blog (on the 'About the project' page under the 'Stride Treglown' section).

The design team includes an acoustic engineer who will be advising on all acoustic matters including acoustic separation between rooms and spaces and acoustics within rooms and spaces in regard to audibility of speech.

Question 26: What is the ratio of staff to a photocopier?

UWE policy is the photocopier ratio is based on distance not numbers of people in an area. The distance is 10 metres from a mono printer, 20 to a colour and 25 to an MFP.

Question 27: In the 4 person office 2 people may be a long way from a window. This wouldn’t be very satisfactory.

The way the offices will be configured will be discussed in detail as we move forward into the next stage of the project. The design team understand that there is some concern over the design of the office space and we will therefore work with staff to ensure we create an environment that works in the best way possible. To do this we will be creating mock offices for staff to test and 3D visuals allowing staff to walk through the building in an interactive manner.



Question 28: What storage will be available for staff in more open plan spaces?

As we move forward into the detailed design stage of the project we will be working closely with staff to ensure we create an environment which is suitable for our needs. We will be creating mock ups of office space where we will be providing furniture options which can be tried and tested by staff. Feedback from staff on this will then help to determine the furniture we eventually procure and the potential layout.

Question 29: Some AL’s wouldn’t want to be in open plan space as they are heavily utilised and why should they not have some more private office space. They are still marketing, seeing students and having confidential information on screens etc.

There are many options available as we move into the detailed design stage of the project in relation to layouts of furniture and partitioning solutions and we will be working closely with staff to gain feedback and suggestions. We will be creating staff office mock ups where different options will be provided for staff to test and provide feedback.

The building is also being designed with informal and formal break out/meeting space being a key attribute, so staff who share office space will have other spaces available to meet students and work in quiet spaces. These spaces will have the IT infrastructure to allow staff to dock their laptops and therefore have access to essentially their desk PC.

Question 30: Will there be private space for staff? E.g. common room, space for staff to meet, eat and collaborate?

The design team understand the need for staff to have some space which is dedicated to staff and although the building will be accessible to staff and students there are ways we can create space which is private and dedicated to staff. Collaboration across subject clusters and departments is a key theme coming from the stakeholder workshops so we are looking at how the design of the build can facilitate this effectively.

Since running these stakeholder sessions, we are now looking at the design of the building to find ways of creating a staff only space.

PC Labs

Question 31: Currently PC labs are set up badly for collaborative teaching. Might want to think about the layout of the PC labs in the new build and set them up in a more collaborative style.

These rooms need to be set up for the new teaching regimes so we will work with staff to ensure they are suitable for our needs going forward into the new building. The design and format of these spaces is a collaborative effort between the Faculty, Facilities and IT Services.



Teaching space

Question 32: Some of the plans seem to create corridors which we would like to move away from. There’s a worry that there could be bottlenecks with the capacity of students using the space particularly around some of the teaching areas. Do not want to replicate the corridor issue we have in our current space.

One of the visions of the new build is to move away from long corridors. The new building will have a very different feel from our current space and we are working daily with the architects to ensure they understand our vision in respect of this. The plans are ever evolving and we are designing breakout and social learning spaces on each floor and utilising circulation space in a more efficient manner, moving away, as far as we can, from long corridors.

Question 33: A lot of UG modules are around 160 – 180 students so will this teaching be scheduled in space outside of the new build?

There will be the need to timetable some teaching outside of the new build. There will be a large 300 seat lecture theatre and 2 Harvard style lecture theatres (100 seat and 60 seat) within the new build as well as 16 x 25 seat flat teaching spaces and 8 x 50 seat flat teaching spaces (excluding Professional Paw, Executive Education and Team Entrepreneurship space). We are working closely with colleagues within timetabling to model how the building may be timetabled as effectively as possible. As we move through the project we will bring the new build onto the agenda of the faculty Timetabling and Resources Committee where we will work with academic colleagues to ensure we achieve the most effective and efficient timetabling.

Question 34: There should be smaller lecture theatres (than 300 seat) as 300 is too large but 100 and 60 Harvard is too small.

The lecture theatre requirement was a university decision based on need.

Question 34: Will furniture be easily moveable? Think about how furniture is used and how it can be moved. Will storage in seminar spaces be considered?

We will start to look at furniture solutions as we move through the detailed design phase of the project. We will be getting staff feedback on furniture solutions and we are currently looking at procuring the furniture supplier who will be able to advise us and provide options.

Question 35: I’ve seen some good furniture solutions in other institutions. How do I feed this into the project?

Please let us know of any good ideas from other institutions. You can post this feedback on the blog on the staff suggestions page, or you can email Marianne Reed ([email protected]). We are visiting institutions based on staff suggestions, so we are very happy to get this kind of feedback.

Question 36: Things to write on in classrooms is really important – glass boards etc. Will this be considered?



This will be considered and as we move into the more detailed design stages of the project we will work with staff to ensure we are setting up the teaching spaces effectively and equipping them with suitable equipment. We are working closely with IT Services and they are keen to mock up some teaching spaces to ensure we equip our spaces in the best way possible.

Question 37: We need designated signed space for the MBA.

There will be designated space for the MBA.

Question 38: We increasingly need more flexible large teaching spaces as teaching methods are changing. Have these types of spaces been factored into the build?

There are a number of 50 seat flat teaching spaces but in addition we have an 80 seat flat flexible space and 2 x Harvard Lecture Theatres (100 seat and 60 seat). There is a potential for the 60 seat Harvard to be designed in a flexible manner to allow for more flexible teaching i.e. not tiered and furnish with flexible, moveable furniture. The furniture solutions will ensure maximum flexibility.

Question 39: Some spaces will need to be quite private e.g. law courts. How will this be managed, particularly if we are showcasing these spaces?

Although we will be showcasing spaces there are many options for ensuring privacy in the form of blind solutions, frosting etc. This will be developed during the detailed design stage of the project and staff feedback will be considered when looking at this kind of detail.

Future expansion/change

Question 40: Is there space for professional services to move into the building if required further down the line?

The space we are designing is flexible enough to be reconfigured in the future and used for other activities.

Question 41: Can walls move? Will they be moveable for future flexibility? How easy will the space be to reconfigure?

Future flexibility has been considered with the overall design with regard to the structural frame and the ability to potentially move internal walls due to them not being load bearing. The use of movable partition walls is also being considered for certain rooms.

Question 42: Will the building be flexible enough to allow for a shift in the way departments are clustered?

Academic office space is designed across each floor of the building which allows for future reconfiguration. The office space is currently designed on our 16/17 staff projections, however the design of the building will allow for future flexibility for a growth or contraction in cluster numbers. The teaching space and office space is designed flexibly enough to reconfigure if required e.g. infrastructure for electrics via raised floor etc.



Café

Question 43: Is the café big enough? Really need to think about the suitability of the offer

The FBL New Build will house a café on the ground floor which will be located close to the main entrance. The Faculty vision is to create an environment which promotes social learning and collaboration, so we would envisage the café fitting with this vision and therefore would include a mixture of soft seating, tables, chairs and group pods. We have an allocated amount of space for the café which the architects are designing and they will be advised by a catering consultant.

In terms of the offer, it is important that the menu range is appropriate in terms of food and beverage. It should provide a range of hot and cold high quality food and beverage. It should be healthy and varied with hot meals and snacks, freshly made sandwiches, salads, healthy snacks and grab and go items. The coffee offer should also be considered to ensure it is good quality. Ideally as much of the produce should be locally sourced.

We are working with the UWE Facilities team, including the General Manager and the Executive Chef to look at our food offer and to develop our catering brief and we have researched a number of other institutions and their offer to ensure we are providing a service which is of comparable quality.

Question 44: Will there be a café/restaurant for staff?

There won’t be a private staff café or restaurant, however there will be different styles of spaces available where staff can meet and eat or have a coffee. There will also be break out and collaboration space on each floor of the building and the design team will be working with staff to gather feedback and suggestions on how this space will meet the needs of staff most effectively.

Question 45: Will there be more private space to entertain business clients which can be flexible for other use?

There are private meeting spaces located in close proximity to the café which haven’t been designed in detail yet however these spaces could provide the private spaces required to entertain business clients. These spaces could be flexible so bookable to entertain when required, but open access in other times.

There will also be space located on the 4th floor within the Executive Development Centre.

Parking

Question 46: What’s the parking strategy going forward?

The parking strategy falls outside of the remit of this particular project, however it falls within the larger UWE Masterplan project.

The UWE Masterplan website has a FAQ section (http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/aboutus/visionandmission/uwenewcampus/uwenewcampusmasterplan/masterplanfaqs.aspx) which provides answers to many questions including parking.

The answers it provides in relation to parking are:


http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/aboutus/visionandmission/uwenewcampus/uwenewcampusmasterplan/masterplanfaqs.aspx

http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/aboutus/visionandmission/uwenewcampus/uwenewcampusmasterplan/masterplanfaqs.aspx


1. The University’s strategy is to reduce parking demand rather than to increase parking provision. The University has introduced new travel initiatives to reduce the number of

single occupancy car journeys to Frenchay and to increase travel by bus.The consolidated campus will provide fewer parking spaces for university use than is

currently available across all the campuses. The Masterplan provides flexibility to meet parking demand if circumstances change.

The transport assessment that accompanies the Masterplan outline planning application concludes that the impact on the highway network of the proposed developments will be

less than is currently permitted under existing permissions.The Masterplan has been designed to ensure that junctions and car parks are located and

sized to mitigate the risk of congestion as much as possible.2. The Masterplan includes 900 parking spaces proposed as part of the Stadium scheme, as

well as a potential extension to the Stadium car park. The stadium car park is intended to open before the closure of the University's temporary Car Park 20 on land east of

Coldharbour Lane. A visitor car park is proposed north of the Heart Zone, accessible from the North Gate.

The Masterplan makes allowance for about 4,450 total parking spaces across the campus, including areas not identified for primary UWE use. This includes proposals for remodelled

and decked car parking areas adjacent to the East and North Gates as identified on the plan.

Question 47: What parking will be available during the construction phase of the project as inevitably some staff parking will be taken away from around the FBL site?

Communication has been published (3 June 14) via our Internal Communications team which

outlines the parking arrangements over the coming summer period. The communication states:

As communicated in last week’s Weekly News, this summer will see another phase of refurbishment to existing campus buildings. You can view details about some of the main projects and plans in the Summer Works Projects presentation (PDF). We will also shortly be starting some of the preparatory works for the new-build projects for the new Students' Union and FBL building.

Please be aware that in order for these works to take place and to allow contractors access to the site, there will be some temporary disruption to staff car parks at Frenchay over the summer. Whilst the main car parks 1,2, 3 and 20 will remain open, some car parks will be closed to staff altogether and some general use car parks will be available for use by both staff and contractors. We will ensure that accessible parking spaces continue to be available and you’ll have noticed that some of the link barriers around the Frenchay campus have been raised to allow the smooth flow of traffic on site.

Please view the Frenchay Car Parking Arrangements document (PDF) for more details and to find out where you should park during this time.


https://share.uwe.ac.uk/sites/marketing/internal-comms/Internal%20Communications/Masterplan/Frenchay%20car%20parking%20arrangements.pdf

http://dmtrk.net/27I8-2G797-G10FBK-12NZLO-1/c.aspx

http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/aboutus/departmentsandservices/professionalservices/internalcommunications/weeklynews/archive/27may2014.aspx


Staff based at Glenside and Bower Ashton have been communicated with locally regarding any disruption to car parking at these sites over the summer.

If you have any questions, please contact [email protected].

A follow up communications will be issued shortly by Internal Communications to address further

parking arrangements.

Building environment and design

Question 48: Are we looking at the climate over the long term (i.e. 25 years) as we don’t want a building that will over heat every year. What is the strategy on this?

The current design will be developed further by use of dynamic thermal modelling software to assess overheating of the building. The model will use current UK Government and CIBSE approved weather data and also future weather data based upon MET office global warming medium to high CO2 projection files for the year 2050. The results of the modelling exercise will facilitate the most appropriate design solution to be integrated into the building.

Whilst we cannot predict future weather, we can attempt to plan and design for it using the most appropriate scientifically calculated and UK government approved weather files which take into account potential global warming scenarios.

Question 49: Will we have control of heating and lighting within the building? Some control over the environment would be good.

The design team understand the need for personal control of internal environments in relation to heating, lighting and ventilation and will be providing further detail in the later design stages of the project.

Question 50: When will it be know the amount of glass being used i.e. glass doors etc?

This will be developed for both the teaching spaces and office spaces during the detailed phase of the project. In relation to the office spaces, this kind of detail will be incorporated as part of the office mock ups where we will be presenting different options.

Question 51: Why are we designing a building with a large atrium when this space could be utilised to create more office/teaching space? Infilling the atrium will generate revenue so why create space that can’t be used but still costs money to heat and ventilate?

The atrium provides natural light into the centre of the building which is vital in order to create a healthy and pleasant environment that people want to inhabit.

If the atrium was completely in-filled with office and teaching spaces you would create internal rooms with no natural light (no windows) that would rely solely on mechanical ventilation.

Question 52: Could we widen some of the link bridges and create more social space and increase utilisation?


mailto:[email protected]


The design team are working to create as much break out/meeting/social learning space as possible within this build of different varieties. Options for small social learning spaces on or linked to the bridges is currently being tested by the design team.

Question 53: Will there be locker space for cyclists?

There will be storage facilities within the building that could be used by cyclists for their personal equipment. This may be facilities within office space.

Question 54: Will there by showers?

Yes there will be showers. Currently we have allocated showers on the ground floor of the building with changing facilities and an accessible shower facility.

Question 55: How big are the shower facilities in relation to S block as students and staff can use those facilities and there are often queues?

The design team is currently reviewing the cycle and shower provision for FBL as part of the wider campus strategy. Following this review further detailed information on the shower facilities will be provided.

The current concept design allows for a similar level of provision in regard to shower numbers as S Block however does not provide a separate changing area and central locker room. The current concept design is based on shower cubicles that incorporate changing space within them.

Question 56: What is the landscaping strategy for this project and the wider master plan as UWE is currently a green campus?

Five key landscape objectives have been identified by the master plan and are being embraced ion thee landscape design of the FBL project:

1. Set out a clear strategy to redistribute private vehicles to the periphery of the campus and promote a pedestrian priority campus, freeing up large areas of the campus currently designed for vehicles.

2. Replace the majority of existing tarmac and kerbs at the heart of the campus with well-designed landscape and surface materials with minimal kerbs providing quality public spaces, reducing air pollution, vehicle noise and benefiting ecology throughout the site.

3. Promote a campus landscape which embraces a sustainable design philosophy. With opportunity to exploring soft engineering solutions, SUDS, swales and water attenuation, meaningful habitat creation and a clear tree planting strategy.

4. Creation of a new plaza at the centre of the campus to serve future development and provide a destination in its own right.

5. Establish the highest standard of quality in design of the external environment, specification of materials and workmanship. Design continuity will spread throughout the campus maintaining quality and a consistent pallet of materials fit for purpose.



The design of landscape will use suitably specified materials to install a sense of arrival and inspiring civic pride.

Brief Methodology

The landscape design for the FBL project provides a unique environment for the UWE campus. The distinctly urban character to the eastern boulevard and HUB space becomes progressively softer moving east through the green plaza referred to as “Frenchay Square”

Within Frenchay Square there is a grove of tree planting to provide shade and address the sense of scale between the lower SU building and the larger FBL building. Large expanses of formal lawn and contrasting wild flower meadow grasses compliment the new built forms and the opportunity for sustainable water management in the form of swales and rain gardens are being investigated to promote a species rich landscape and support the Universities sustainable ethos. The significant green space helps manage level changes across the space and provides much valued sun seeking opportunities for the campus population in the warmer months. Running north to south is an avenues of large tree species and tree groups within hard landscape areas provide opportunity for social and solitary relaxation, rain gardens

The landscape character is unified by a consistent design language which will be reinforced through repeat detailing and a selected palette for furniture, retaining structures and paving. Planting design will have an emphasis on drought tolerant species and sensitive combinations which complement each other for maximum impact throughout the academic year. With good planting design maintenance should be reduced leaving plants to grow to their full size.

Strategy

The landscape strategy addresses the need of the end user and results in series of spaces with distinct landscape elements:

Frenchay Square

Primary circulation routes are marked by quality concrete block surfacing with plank dimension units. Gentle gradients allowing clear navigable routes that offer inclusive design and access, with restricted vehicular access to Wallscourt Farmhouse.

The square has been designed to allow for a limited volume of vehicles through this pedestrian priority space. Pedestrian movement is managed through careful placement of furniture and planting to encourage pedestrian circulation away from these light traffic areas. The BRT dedicated route is noted by a variation in size and with visually contrasting material to edge of significant crossing zones (flush silver grey granite kerbs). This appearance is a visual contrast to aid vehicle navigation and pedestrian safety.

Congregation space/outdoor reading/amenity space. A blend of soft and hard landscape creating opportunities for social and solitary relaxation with seating and tree planting. This promotes east/west circulation and secondary north/south movement through the campus. Natural Stone Paving and SUDS opportunities arise in this area.



The southern façade is framed by planting and seating/steps. A water features is being considered and is an opportunity to create a ‘wow’ factor on arrival to the campus with UWE brand signage on facing wall and feature lighting.

UWE Boulevard

This primary pedestrian access includes a colonnade to the eastern façade and is predominantly hard landscape for uninterrupted circulation with occasional seating along its length. To the boundary with the existing P block soft landscape is proposed to manage the interface with the existing building and to provide an opportunity for a central soft landscape strip through the boulevard when the neighbouring site is developed in the future. Planting with seasonal interest provide species rich planting for improved habitat within the campus. Break out terraces provide opportunity for respite, help to activate the key arrival area with views across the space and increased passive surveillance. Level spaces for informal seating and spill out/alfresco dining spaces are provided.

Visitor Car Park

The visitor car park is orientated to improve north south connections, retaining the number of spaces provided for in the outline planning application.

Shared surfaces create a sense of arrival to the campus with distinctive paving, taxi pick up and drop off area with a canopy.

Cycle Hub is proposed in prominent location for students, staff and visitors, emphasising UWE’s sustainable credentials at the main arrival space.

Prominent replacement tree planting using distinctive Giant Redwood “Wellingtonia” is proposed to the western edge of the car park to off-set the loss of tree planting necessary as part of the car park development. This also reflects the conclusions set out in the LVIA document submitted as part of the outline planning application

The Planting of a timber crib retaining wall in the form and appearance of a ‘Green Wall’ is being explored, offering structural retention and provides an attractive route towards the heart of the campus from the north.


Documents

Web viewThe document captures all the feedback gathered from the 10 faculty stakeholder workshops undertaken as detailed below