Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
From concept to Commissioning : The Library Scheduling, Programming, Phasing
Marie-Françoise BISBROUCKLIBER, Bolzano, March 19, 2004
The two last seminars organised by the LIBERArchitecture Group: Warsaw (2000), Leipzig (2002)
Introduction
This paper will examine the situation from certain aspects, in particular:
• The team formed by the Library and its Partners• Financing the operation• The Program• The Choice of the Architect• The obligatory Program Phases and the Time
required for each• The “additional sites” accompanying the Main
Project
The Library Partner Team
1. The Head Librarian and his/her team
• His/Her WILL to have a new building, a building extension or restructuring works
• This WILL stems from an appreciation: “What is wrong in my present Library?”
The answer is : “Lots of things!”:• Absence or quasi absence of free access
collections• Lack of reading areas• Insufficient differentiation between reading-
areas and other accommodations• Lack of office space• Insufficient computer assets• Absence of relaxation or social areas for
students, etc.
The desire to change things and the development of a “wish-list”:
• It does not “yet” constitute a Program for a Future Building, but a First Draft
• To define the initial space requirements to accommodate the desired changes
• To provide a discussion base around which to organise the major functions
• To operate in absolute terms, that is without consideration of external contingencies
2. The role of the University President
• We have to convince him/her• If not: nothing is going to happen!• The University President is the only Party
able to take the to the Political Level= to the Financial Level
3. At this stage, the main tasks for the Library Manager are :
• To develop a detailed building Program• To organise discussion with immediate associates
as well as with the Library Staff in general on multiple topics
• To create Working Groups and workshops in several areas:
° how best to change access to the collections° developing information technology° user training° conservation of collections° changes in the internal work organisation of the
Library staff° opening the Library to the world of work and the
economy, the cultural environment, etc.
• The Working Groups must function with openness and freedom to purpose and innovate (Not simply “slapping the Future on the Present”)
• Subsequently, they will need to prioritise their wants and needs
• The necessity to have a fall-back title or designation for certain areas!
• The Working Groups as prime-mover for change
4. Other parts of the Program with other Players
• The possible need to find land on which to build (local authorities)
• The search of temporary premises if the present building must be demolished (University, local authorities)
• Determining financing for the operation by the corresponding political authorities: how much? How soon? Splitting the budget to build in successive phases? etc.
• Ιncreasing requirements and technicality = ever-more specialised contractors in different fields as data processing, buildings construction techniques, safety standards, acoustics, environmental qualities, etc.
Multiple Partners required in the design
BUT
The Library Project Manager has to be clearly identified• He/She has to remain the sole point of contact with the Contracting Authority = The political financier of the operation• Later on in the process, He/She will delegate part of his/her responsibilities to his/her specialised associates in the more technical fields (data-processing, audio-visual, etc)• Qualities for a Library Project Manager• Not underestimate ourselves (nor the Others…)
5. Come back to the Program
• The program is a document that addressesvarious requirements (operational,behavioural, environmental)
• Drafted in terms that arecomprehensible to theusers
• Directly usable by thedesigners to give it anarchitectural form
In functional terms, the Program follows a logicalprocess:
• The defining of objectives• Determining activities• Organising activities according to functional
diagrams• Planning traffic routes• Expressing requirements associated with each
activity• Stating the performance levels required of the
building and its equipment
This part of the Program is directly managed by the Library
The Library has also a role to play in terms of theinternal environmental of the building:
• Admissible sound level for various spaces• Lighting level for reading areas in particular,
including computer lookup• Temperature• Relative humidity (for book storage, etc.)• Equipment footprints• Floor loads• Power and utilities requirements• Protection of property• Access control, etc.
In environmental terms, the Program describes:
• The urban and site contexts• The role of the future building within the site
and its immediate environment• Links between activities within the building
and those in the surroundings
This part is the preserve of the ContractingAuthority and the related engineeringmanagements
Drafting of such a Program is achieved in Phases,each with an increasing level of detail,corresponding of the phases of the proposedDesign:• The general Program provides the basis for
establishing sketch plans and the PreliminaryDesign
• The specific Program serves for producing theDetail Design
• The definitive Program serves for producing theFinal Design (= “The Project”)
Harmonising the Program with the Projectconditions the success of each Project Phase.
The role of the Library will be constantmonitoring, to ensure that the definition ofrequirements remains at all times in phase withthe current Project phase.
The difficulty being to stay just abreast ofoperations
6. Come back to the other Partners
Programing cannot be restricted to “simply”the Building Program itself.The Program is subdivided according to theParties for whom it is intended, into:• A building program for the Architects
and Engineering design Offices• An “Equipment Program” for the
Architects and Designers• An “Operations Program” for
organisation and managementspecialists
• An “Environment Program” for TownPlanners
As these additional players come on board atvarious points, joining the others, it is difficultfor Library staff to determine who is who andhandle coordination.
At each drawing stage, the Library shouldensure that the functional needs of the libraryare taken into account by the Architect.
7 . The Design and Programming Process Summary
Specialisedtown planners
Users(Readers)
Users(Library)
ContractingAuthority
EnvironmentCriteria
BehavioralCriteria
OperationalCriteria
Cost andbuilding-time
Criteria
Manufacturing &Maintenance
Criteria
SafetyCriteria
Where ? Why ? How ? How muchand When ?
Environmentalrequirements
Behaviouralrequirements
Operationalrequirements
Cost anddelivery timerequirements
Manufacturing &Maintenancerequirements
Safetyrequirements
Architecturaland technicalrecommen-
dations
Functionaldiagrams
Performance levelsof building and equipments
PROGRAMMING
Formalising of interior and outside areas
Specialisedtown
planners
Users(Readers)
Users(Library)
ContractingAuthority
Spatial organisation Building sub-systems
Equipmentsub-
systems
Implementingsafety
requirements
DESIGN
Formalising of interior and outside areas
Specialisedtown
planners
Users(Readers)
Users(Library)
ContractingAuthority
Commissioning
Modifications to operational and behavioural requirementsUSE
New spatialorganisation
Modifications toEquipment sub-
systems
New safetyrequirements
8. And now to our Architect…
He/She is the main Player in the Operation:• Without Him/Her our Building will not get off the
ground!• Necessity of dialoguing• Architecture Juries Make-up• Technical committees
9. Phasing and Deadlines
Operation Duration
(1)
Cumulativeduration
(1)
Scale ofdocuments
Notes
PROGRAM
6 to 12months
6 to 12months
-
Library visits
Photography
Creating reference-documentbase (standards)
Set up working groups (2)
Draft feasibility scenarios
Sketch out fixtures,furnishings & equipment(FF&E) from onset of Program
Operation Duration Cumulativeduration
Scale ofdocuments
Notes
Architecturecompetition
6 to 12months
12 to 24months
Sketches:1/500th- and1/200th-scale
drawings
Library to be present intechnical committee andjury
Preliminarydesign
Safety studyApplicationfor Building
Permit
4 to 6months
16 to 30months
1/200th- and1/100th-scale
drawings
Extremely closeinvolvement of Library indeveloping the PreliminaryDesign
(corresponds toorganisation of libraryareas)
Operation Duration Cumulativeduration
Scale ofdocuments
Notes
DetailDesign
4 to 6months
20 to 36months
1/100th-scale
drawings
Development of technical solutions(construction and operation of thebuilding)
Library often required to examinetechnical documents that are hard toread and interpret
More library visits, specialisedexhibits (library furnishings etc.)
Refining (by Library) of FF&E fileDetailed organisation of collectionsand staff
Creation of a photographic recordshowing progress of site
Drafting description of buildingsignalising
Preparing to move in
Operation Duration Cumulativeduration
Scale ofdocuments
Notes
ProjectSub-contracting File 4 to 6
months24 to 42 months 1/50th- and
1/20th-scaledrawings
Tender Negotiations 2 to 6months
26 to 48 months
Appointment ofcontractors; Signing
of Agreements
2 months 28 to 50 months
Site works12 to 24months
40 to 74 months
Site handover,remedial works and
snag-clearing
2 to 4months
42 to 78 monthsPublicising
opening of newbuilding
Installing fixtures,furnishings &
equipment (FF&E)
2 months 44 to 80 months
Operation Duration Cumulativeduration
Move in 1 to 2months
45 to 82months
Safety Committee report(allowing opening ofbuilding to public)
Move in staff andservices
1 month 46 to 83months
Opening to Public (and HERE is where it really starts …)
As conclusion
“For architects who have had the fortune to build them,libraries always retain a place among their finer buildings,they are the most Inspired, the most Masterful, as if a fineosmosis was taking place between this book – the mostprecious of objects to one and all -- and this shell thatenvelops it and protects it. Each library is a joyous event:constructing, magnifying this book-object, anddemonstrating the sense of it.”
And more
“The building must be very legible, it must attract like amagnet. But once he has been welcomed, the reader must besheltered. The library must reinforce the protection that thebook gives the reader, which is - in reality - helping to guidehim through the world.”
Pierre RIBOULET, architect
Thank you for attention
BUT
If you have two minutes more…
University Libraries in project2004-2006
Bordeaux 1. Extension (+ 2600 m² do) et restructurationdu bâtiment construit en 1964 par L. Sainsaulieu et P. Daurel.
Total du chantier : 7194 m² doDurand, Ménard, Thibault, architectes
Bordeaux 1. Restructuration-extension du bâtiment
Durand, Ménard, Thibault, architectes
Bordeaux 1
Bordeaux 1
Université de Versailles St Quentin. 7800 m² doBU de St Quentin. Ripault et Duhart, architectes
Université de Versailles St Quentin. 7800 m² doBU de St Quentin. Ripault et Duhart, architectes
Lyon II. Chevreul. 6350 m²Architecte : Thierry Van de Wyngaert
Lyon II. Chevreul. 6350 m² Architecte : Thierry Van de Wyngaert
Lyon II. Chevreul. 6350 m² Architecte : Thierry Van de Wyngaert
Brest. 5109 m² do. Beaudouin, architecte
Brest. 5109 m² do. Beaudouin, architecte
INSA Lyon Michel Rémon, architecte4700 m²
INSA Lyon Michel Rémon, architecte4700 m²
INSA Lyon Michel Rémon, architecte
Reims. Croix-Rouge. 9480 m² do
Chabanne, architecte
© axyz
Chabanne, architecte
Reims. Croix-Rouge. 9480 m² do © axyz
Reims. Croix-Rouge, 9480 m² do.Chabanne, architecte
Reims. Croix-Rouge. 9480 m² do
Chabanne,architecte
René Dottelonde, architecteLe Havre 8500 m² do
Le Havre
René Dottelonde,architecte.8500 m² do
René Dottelonde,architecte. 8500 m² do Le Havre
Le Havre, 8500 m² do . René Dottelonde, architecte
2e étage
Le Havre, 8500 m² do . René Dottelonde, architecteRez-de-chausssée
La Réunion, Bu sciences. 2700 m²do
Alain Bocquée, architecte
La Réunion, Bu sciences.2700 m² do
Alain Bocquée,architecte
Façade SudFaçade Est
Coupe transversale
Coupe longitudinale
La Réunion, Bu sciences. 2700 m². Alain Bocquée, architecte
Paris XII. Droit - Créteil. 3000 m² doMichel Rémon, architecte
Paris XII. Droit - Créteil. 3000 m² doMichel Rémon, architecte
Plan du 1er niveau
Paris XII. Droit - Créteil. 3000 m² doMichel Rémon, architecte
Plan du 2e niveau
Université Paul SabatierToulouse III. Extension et restructurationde la BU.Arch. : SCP Espagno et Milani.
Mulhouse. Réhabilitation de la Fonderie. Projet de la Faculté des sciences économiques, sociales et juridiquesEtat actuel (été 2003)
Photo :Mongiello-Plisson et Emergence Architect
Mulhouse. Réhabilitation de la Fonderie. Projet de la Faculté des sciences économiques, sociales et juridiques
Avec un pôle documentaire en droit, économie, gestion, et histoire industrielle (environ 3000 m²)
Phot
o:M
o ngi
ell o
-Plis
son
et E
mer
gen c
eA
rchi
tect
ure
Mulhouse. Réhabilitation de la Fonderie. Projet de la Faculté des sciences économiques, sociales et juridiques
Photos :Mongiello-Plisson et Emergence Architecture
Fonderie.Etat intérieur actuel (été 2003)
Photos :Mongiello-Plisson et Emergence Architecture