Live!
Thu 28 Aug 2008
- The award-winning student news website of Imperial College

Live! - News

Union publishes latest Masterplan

Dec 14 2005 18:30
Thomas Tibbits
The Concept design report was published on Monday evening, 24 hours ahead of the third Union Council meeting this year, where a decision was sought to approve the plan.

The Redevelopment Master Plan of the Beit Quadrangle , to give its full name, is the product of the architects’ labours since the first Masterplan was approved in one of the last Council meetings last academic year.

The 117 page document certainly looks nice, but does it contain what the students need? A quick critique of the plan has been performed by Live! so you don’t have to.

Of the key improvements listed, a new lift features, and appropriately at number 2 on the list, new toilet accommodation will also be built. Other benefits include the replacement of mechanical plant to comply with the new part L in the building regulations, as well as bringing the catering facilities up to scratch. The plan also warns that the ‘implementation strategy’ will depend on there being available funding. No, really.

Money

Your reporter hears that the Union is committing all of its reserves to the project, on the basis that the College will also ‘match fund’ what the Union gives and fundraises. Having already spent over one hundred thousand pounds on the preliminary work for the plan, there is little money available for other things.

Bars

A new bar will be constructed on the first floor, which will be open to the public at all times and presumably is hoped to generate extra revenue for the Union. The plans reveal that the expected use of the new lounge bar, with its bottled alcohol and newspapers is as many as 53 customers per hour. To make way for the added retail space, the second floor mezzanine will be developed where the new student activities center will be located, leaving the recently refurbished East Basement as enhanced storage facilities for clubs, which will be welcomed.

Entertainment

dBs will be refurbished completely, moving the stage to the furthest corner of the room, while the bar and food outlet will be revamped. The Union bar survives unscathed, and da Vincis gets a new name, Otto’s. Whether Lord Beit would have approved is anyone’s guess, but at least efforts are being made to lighten up and improve access to the space with more doors to the quad. Much of the design detail around the support areas such as the kitchens have yet to be finalised.

Games Room

The second floor plays host to the Games Room, where Snooker and other ball games will be housed. Opposite the Concert Hall will be made over, but not by DramSoc, in order to make the room more flexible in its use. The ever popular cinema projection facility will remain.

Gym

The controversial issue of the Gym has ensured that there will remain Gym provisions on the third floor of the building, though the roof will be lower than previously. Opposite on the east side will be the new presidential suite and associated offices, though the Permanent Secretary does get a slightly larger office than the President. Future Deputy Presidents will have to share office space, but this might at least mean that there will always be someone to talk to when you need them!

So that completes the main space use plans, but a considerable amount of the report is devoted to the services in the building. Your reporter has a special interest in these parts, as the hidden costs of the building and future running costs are tied up in these behind-the-scenes facilities.

Energy consumption

Controversially, the architects propose that the current heating and ventilation systems are not up to the job, and want to remove our supply of free heat from the College’s steam network, currently delivered by 750kW heat exchangers. They then propose that two new boilers be placed on the roof, with an unspecified capacity. Electricity to the quad is currently delivered via substations in the Albert Hall, which supplies our estimated demand of 100kW. Amazingly, the architects have decided that the electricity use in the building will quadruple after the refurbishment, and have specified a 630kW peak transformer. Anyone who ‘does the math’ will quickly work out that the Union finances might be stretched by such a scheme. Indeed at the Council meeting on 13th December, many questions were raised about the future energy consumption of the building. The architects have specified new air-conditioning and chiller units that soak up energy, and added to the new gas demand from the boilers, it looks like the energy efficiency of the building will suffer.

Your reporter wonders aloud if the 10% of ‘principal costs’ that must be spent on the energy efficiency of the building according to the building regs (see above) are just going to pay lip-service to the requirements given the massive hike in carbon dioxide emissions associated with the new building. Nowhere in the report has double glazing even been mentioned, nor the possibility of earning ROCs for the Union by installing a modern efficient *CHP* unit, which would also be eligible for subsidy from the government.

Surveillance

Finally the new CCTV systems will offer much wider coverage, with joystick controlled cameras and wipers for wet weather. We expect that security personnel will enjoy their new toy.

If you have any comments or queries about the proposed plans, that will affect the users (us) of the building for many years to come, you can submit your feedback to the Union mailto:yoursay@imperial.ac.uk.

Email this Article | Share on Facebook

Discussion about “Union publishes latest Masterplan”

The comments below are unmoderated submissions by Live! readers. The Editor accepts no liability for their content, nor for any offence caused by them. Any complaints should be directed to the Editor.
Dec 14 2005 22:23
 

Isn't there meant to be an author for these things?

Dec 15 2005 01:10
 

Probably not - the article mentions the Permanent Secretary which has been considered to be a breach of the Staff-Student protocol in the past. Better off left anonymous...

3. tom t   
Dec 15 2005 09:48
 

Apparently the server is somewhat up the spout, and various things like pictures cannot be located.

I am however happy to take the author's credit.

4. note   
Dec 15 2005 15:02
 

I am concerned simply by the lack of storage in the plans. It also doen't appear to be at all club specific so it is likely to be rather unsecure. I see a lot of contingency claims on the horizion...

Dec 15 2005 18:27
 

"Deputy Presidents will have to share office space"

...does the design for this space include firework-proofing?

Dec 15 2005 21:14
 

I don't think this constitutes as news, more like a rant. Is Live! trying to qualify its lack of objectivity?

Dec 16 2005 12:28
 

Yes

8. tom t   
Dec 16 2005 14:02
 

Oi. The only opinion section is clearly begun with 'the reporter wonders aloud....' and the other material is factual and presented without bias, and readers will be easily able to discern opinion from fact.

It's true, for example, that in the current concept plan the President's office on the third floor will be smaller than the Perm Sec's, though not by much.

If 'student' wishes to narrow his identity from one in 10,000 I'd take his flippancy more seriously. Personally I think members ought to be informed as far as possible about the plans and submit their opinions. We are, after all, committing all our reserves to the project, reserves that have been built up directly as a result of members such as myself putting money behind the bar over the years. If the refurbishments are misguided, they will impact future students for many years to come and will be almost irreversible. There is now a further sense of urgency as we're told the project must be complete by the centenary clebrations in 2007, and given the way the project was started by the previous President, I'd be surprised if there weren't attempts to hurry things through without proper scrutiny. As usual, the paper that went before Council was only published 24 hours in advance of the meeting, when the rules say 7 days are mandatory, and being 117 pages in length, that leaves little time in busy end of term schedules to digest such a long document in time for the meeting.

I'm glad someone's having a rant if that's how it's perceived, otherwise no one will say anything until after the building's built, when there will be lots of moaning about this and that, and scapegoats will be sought. On your head be it!!

Dec 16 2005 15:43
 

It is a rant.

The design plan has been around for a week before the Council meeting, although I agree that it was not officially on the Union website.

Also, the plan is not a fait accompli, but more of a discussion paper. Things are still being discussed and changed. If you have a problem with it, let the union (the president) know.

Whether the Coffee bar will be open to the public, and if so when, is up for debate, as the architects stated during their presentation to Council.

That the concert hall gets a makeover to make it more flexible is maybe a bit overstated.

If you have issues with the plan, raise them with the union now.

10. JJ   
Dec 18 2005 09:01
 

Aren't reserves for 'unforseen expenditure'?

11. Ant   
Dec 18 2005 12:27
 

I'm surprised i haven't heard more comments about the games room, it seems to be the surrender of a large amount of area to a few clubs. Plus usually snooker is played in dark rooms under artificial light, but in these plans the tables are being moved to a bright naturally lit room, which won't be able to be blacked out due to the windows being shared with the new floor above.

12. Dan L   
Dec 19 2005 16:57
 

I don't think this is a rant - more an informative news article.

The whole project does seem to be a very expensive way of effectively creating a "coffee shop", and putting some much needed paint on the walls. However it does seem a shame that their is no mention in the plan of the original objectives. A quick SWAT anaysis to see if these have been met shows:

1) To combine the offices and the student services centre. - FAILED - On opposite sides and seperate floors of the building.

2) To improve flow through the building - FAILED - Removal of half the bottom floor staircase amongst other things..

3) To create a low carbon building - FAILED - increased energy consumption - by more than 100%!

So overall the plan really has no benefits. On top of which there are still no firm financial figures to show what the increased revenure from a cafe would be.

I think that committing the entire reserves to a project that has no current financial justification, and reduces storage and dedicated meeting room space is a little silly...

Dec 19 2005 17:29
 

Interesting - it seems that dB's will be going back to the same layout as it was all those years ago before the expansion. Hope they move the DJ box as the old set up was a nightmare for the DJ...

Dec 20 2005 23:07
 

The DJ booth is marked on the plans as being right at the other end of the room (on the north side of the room, by the entrance doors from the foyer).

If they plan to have live music in db's after the refit, then looking at the plans there doesn't seem to be anywhere to put a sound desk without it being right in the way. Anyway I bet they'll rip the nice audio multicore that is currently in db's out and not replace it. That will scupper any plans for live music. I really hope they consult students properly and proactively. It's the little things that they won't think of that will cost a fortune to install at a later date.

Dec 21 2005 10:14
 

Consult on the little things - yeh right!

I seem to remember that students were invited to meet the architects but then union staff decided that this was not on, so they chuicked half the students out the meeting....

Oh well - the joys of representation - or rather sabbs' dictatorships....

16. Sid   
Dec 21 2005 11:27
 

One of the joys of Live! is the really intelligent and excellent discussions we have, if any of you genuinely think there are issues in the current plans which are not being addressed, please bring it to the attention of the ICU President. These issues should be addressed and posting them on Live! will not necessarily do that.

17. Panto   
Dec 21 2005 12:05
 

Lets get in the christmas spirit:

Oh yes it will!

Dec 21 2005 14:55
 

But Sid, we do raise these issues to the ICU President and it often makes no difference.

They utter meaningless phrases in reply like 'we're improving student activities' and then put in a 4th bar without regard. I'm sorry but a bar does not constitute Student Activities.

Besides surely you could raise these issues to her yourself, now that you have been made aware of these things.

Dec 22 2005 10:05
 

Oh no it doesn't

Oh YES it does.

Jan 09 2006 10:24
 

I happen to now work in the company designing the M&E plant... Don't know anything about the design but as you say it should comply with PartL so it should be energy efficient in some respect. We have some sustainability specialists.. Hope it gets better

21. Dan L   
Jan 09 2006 19:04
 

That's funny - I could have sworn that the plans haven't gone out to tender yet, let alone a contractor being chosen....

If you want to drop me a line - I would be very interested to hear from you - (dan at ic.ac.uk)

Jan 10 2006 11:15
 

Dan, But how can initial costing etc have taken place without a reasonable basic design having been undertaken?

All quite normal for such projects as far as I can tell.

Add your comment:

If you can see this, something is broken (either with your browser, or with our system). Please leave the box below empty, or your comment will be considered to be spam.
Live!

See Also

  1. Rules only made to be broken?
    21 Jun 05 | Random Rant
  2. No Confidence Meets the Darkness
    01 Mar 05 | Off the Wall
  3. The Union Masterplan
    12 Dec 04 | News

Live! Poll

Are A-levels getting easier?





Live!
15 Readers Online
0 on this page