physics goals for new science building
DESCRIPTION
Physics Goals for New Science Building. More better quality space Should allow for expansion of physics department (30 year plan!) New nanotech labs New integrated space for HEP+Shop New planetarium. New Science Building Plan. The problem: $29M available Existing plan costs $37M - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Physics Goals for New Science Building
1) More better quality space
2) Should allow for expansion of physics department (30 year plan!)
3) New nanotech labs
4) New integrated space for HEP+Shop
5) New planetarium
New Science Building Plan
The problem:
1) $29M available2) Existing plan costs $37M3) Chemistry teaching labs must go in new building
What this means:29/37*189,600 available = 148,600 sq ft148,600*.6=89,200 assignable sq ftcompared with 113,800 in default building
So shortfall is 24,600 assignable sq ftIf Science Ed (5000 asqft) and classsrooms (12500) moved to science hall remaining shortfall is 7100 asqft
Acceptable Solutions
1) Administration finds extra $2.3M Need 89,200+7,100=96,300 so (96,300/113,800)*$37M=$31.3M
2) Build biggest building that you can with chemistry+physics splitting the shortfall. Each must subtract ~3500 asqft Internal recommendation: Physics teaching labs are 9550 asqft. All of this or 7650 (1900 is astronomy labs) could be left in science hall, until a new teaching building is built. This would allow us some expansion space.
3) Build Physics Research Building This would be 52000+12,500 (chem labs) 64,500 asqft would be about $19.5M Rest could be used to renovate Science Hall for chemistry, science ed, etc.
Other Solutions
4) Build ANOTHER new CRB with remaining ~$15M allocated to upgrading Science Hall (Phase 3), where SH becomes Physics Hall. (downside includes 2 new CRB’s one old PRB, will be encroached on by other users, live in a building for 2 years that is being modified. Upside could get more space, basement guys don’t have to move).
5) Various options that split up physics department
Other Issues
1) Expansion space is an important issue and should not be neglected
2) Current division still not equitable: Don’t forget there is a CRB Example: Faculty offices Chem Faculty 11x250 Chem Adjunct faculty 10x120 Chem Lounges 3x350 Total: 5,000 (and this is for ½ the faculty!) Phys Faculty 10x250 Phys Faculty 6x180 Phys Fac/adjunct 8x150 Total: 4,780!
Why less space, no lounge, 2 tiers and only 16 faculty?