design solutions


Designing research into university estates


Vice president of Stantec’s UK practice, David Martin, discusses the role of architectural best practice in supporting translational research and medicine to ensure innovations in the laboratory are rapidly transposed into successful improvements in medical treatment and technology


U


NIVERSITIES play a vital role in


ensuring scientific innovation drives improvements in medical treatment and technology. In recent years, there has been an


acknowledgement across the university, healthcare, pharmaceutical and technology sectors that the contribution of educational establishments and postgraduate study will have a much greater and faster impact if it is more closely aligned to medical practice and commercial product development. However, new drugs, therapies and


treatments must go through a rigorous process of development and testing before they can gain approval for mainstream use. Any physical and theoretical gaps between research and the patient/clinician extend this development and trial phase so a ‘translational research’ approach to sharing skills and resources is required across disciplines to enable innovation at the scientist’s bench to develop into new treatments at the patient’s bedside much more quickly and with fewer obstacles. Closer contact between research


functions, product development and clinical practice can be supported by a built environment that encourages translational research through co-location. If opportunities for formal and informal inter-disciplinary engagement are also designed into such higher education research buildings, the value of


embedding a translational research philosophy is significantly enhanced. Translational research has been


embraced by universities, hospitals and research organisations around the world. UK examples include the Manchester Interdisciplinary of Biotechnology (MIB), designed by Stantec. Meanwhile, in North America, Stantec has recently delivered the Djavad Mowafaghian Centre for Brain Health at the University of British Columbia campus in Vancouver, where more than 50 per cent of the 13,000 sqm building has been allocated as a base for University of British Columbia researchers and psychologists, with the remainder providing clinical space for Vancouver Coastal Health physicians. For translational research facilities like


this to deliver research, clinical and patient benefits, they must provide an environment designed to offer enhanced collaboration both as a wider strategy of campus cohesion through co-location and as an environment where creativity can flourish and disciplines can intertwine. The success of a cohesive campus relies


on an acceptance that there is a commercial element to developing new therapies, treatments, drugs and diagnostic tools. Ideally, therefore, there should be development opportunities for educational, medical and commercial partners within a single location, connected by a public realm environment that enables both active (deliberate) and passive (incidental) opportunities for interaction between different groups. The masterplanning element of


successful translational research developments is therefore critical to the


highereducationestates 23


success of both the campus and individual facilities because it enables co-location and collaboration in both a macro and granular sense. The development of large-scale bio campuses in the UK is a clear indication that there is broad acceptance of this notion, reversing traditional silo-based approaches and driving collaboration. The challenge of designing


translational research buildings goes beyond co-location because facilities must also enable collaborative creativity to flourish. Much of that challenge relates to the inexorable reality that it is not possible to care for a patient in a lab any more than it is possible to carry out scientific research at the patient bedside. In reality, not every element of a research


building can be translational; many task- oriented activities need to be located in a task-specific location. This leaves us with two major areas of translational influence


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37