Estate Strategy 2011–2015 - University of Portsmouth

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2.5 Space utilisation The University aims to use teaching space as efficiently as possible, whilst offering students convenient, reasonably spacious and fit for purpose facilities. There is, of course, a conflict between these two aims: raising utilisation (defined as the product of frequency of use and room occupancy) inevitably generates complaints of overcrowding and less than convenient timetables. Therefore, applying too much pressure on space utilisation can have undesirable consequences. During 2008–09 the University appointed SUMS 4 to review its timetabling processes, which are of course closely related to space utilisation. In their report SUMS notes that ‘space utilisation [at Portsmouth] is so good that it can be compared with the best [in the sector]’. These Key Performance Indicators are in line with the University’s EMS Peer Group. 2.7 Functional suitability The functional suitability of each building is also assessed as part of the annual EMS return to HEFCE using four categories from excellent through to poor. The majority of the estate achieves an excellent rating which, together with the results achieved under the assessment of condition, reflect the level of investment the University has made in the estate and the level of importance it places on having a good quality learning and working environment. General teaching space is categorised as either pooled or dedicated, pooled space being generally managed and timetabled centrally and dedicated space being departmentally managed and timetabled. However, the final timetable coordination is undertaken centrally by the Central Timetabling Unit. Excellent 79% Good 20% Fair 1% Utilisation statistics are produced each semester, the average results for the first semester 2008–09 are given in the table below. Poor 0% Table 1. Space utilisation summary Pooled space Dedicated space Frequency Occupancy Utilisation 79% 55% 44% 68% 50% 37% Overall occupancy rates for the halls of residence are monitored on a regular basis and consistently report high levels of space efficiency. Average occupancy levels across all halls for the 2008/2009 academic year is reported as 98.76% 2.6 Running costs As previously mentioned, the University submits data to the HEFCE backed EMS data collection exercise. Key outcomes from the 2009 submission are noted below. • Total property costs per m 2 (NIA) – £95 per student head – £782 • Maintenance costs per m 2 (GIA) – £21 • Energy costs per m 2 (GIA) – £9.74 Gas as a percentage of total energy costs – 29% Electricity as a percentage of total energy costs – 71% • Energy consumption kW/h per m 2 (GIA) – 192 kW/h per student FTE – 2518 Figure 4. Functional suitability of the built estate 2.8 Summary During the course of the outgoing Plan the University has been able to maintain its estate at an overall good standard and achieve space utilisation levels in line with the best in the sector. Projects currently underway or scheduled for this plan period should see an end to the poorer quality estate either by refurbishment or replacement. 3. Out-turn from the 2006–2010 Estate Strategy The outgoing Estate Strategy set the University some key goals in terms of improvements to the estate, many of which have been achieved. These goals and their outcomes are highlighted in Appendix 3. 4. Overview of requirements Through the implementation of its previous Capital Plan and Estate Strategy the University has made good progress towards the strategic objectives of replacing poor quality space, refurbishing existing buildings, ensuring that learning spaces are fit for purpose, meeting the needs of new subject areas (e.g. Dentistry and Law), and providing new student accommodation. We still have some poor quality space which it is uneconomic or impractical to refurbish (particularly the Wiltshire Building and Eldon West). We also have two 4 Southern Universities Management Services. 6 ESTATE STRATEGY 2011–2015 UNIVERSITY OF PORTSMOUTH
uildings that require extensive refurbishment if we are to retain them for the medium to long term (Mercantile House and St. George’s). Finally, we have one student hall which is outdated and cannot easily be updated (Burrell Hall). There is a significant and persistent unmet demand for student housing. The University’s home/EU student numbers are likely to remain fixed for the next few years. There may be some growth in international student numbers (for example from ICP), and this may have implications for student housing needs. However, it does not seem likely that any major expansion of the University’s academic space will be needed during the lifetime of this Strategy. Two Faculties (CCi and HSS) suffer from having their activities dispersed across more than one separated site. An aim of this Strategy is to co-locate Faculties as far as possible. This aim will be largely met by moving the School of Architecture and SCAFM to the proposed Eldon West and NTR buildings (see later), and also by moving SECS and ICJS to the new Victoria Building (again see later). Thus, the University’s likely space requirements and strategy can be summarised as follows: • We need to provide space for academic activities (i.e. teaching and research) at about the current level. • We must work to ensure that our teaching and research spaces (laboratories, lecture theatres, seminar rooms etc) meet current and future Faculty requirements for size, configuration, facilities and equipment. This may mean re-configuration of room sizes and layouts has to take place as teaching/research needs change. • There is a continuing demand from academic staff for individual cellular office space. However, this demand is unsustainable in terms of general provision for academic and support staff. The design of any new build or major refurbishment project will be based on sensitively designed shared office areas accompanied by adequate and appropriate provision of private interview rooms. This should lead to a more cost effective and efficient use of space resources. Where it is considered there is supportable justification to deviate from this policy this will require the prior approval of the Directorate. • Our aim is to maintain the quality of our existing stock of student accommodation, and as finances and opportunities permit make available further student bedrooms. As a very rough estimate we may need another 1500 bedrooms in addition to the number available in 2009/10. We should not necessarily aim to own or lease additional student housing – seeking development partners may be a more effective way to secure additional student housing and reduces the financial risk to the University. • The University’s Professional Services and Support Departments are dispersed across a number of buildings, some of which are not well optimised for their current use. As opportunities arise we should consider co-locating Professional Services and Support Departments in larger, more energy-efficient and betterquality buildings – especially where this allows us to dispose of or terminate leases on some of our smaller and less desirable properties. 5. Planning the future estate 5.1 Background Recent years has seen the University invest heavily in its estate with transformational results. The estate has been transformed from one with a disparate collection of buildings spread across a number of areas of the city in varying states of condition and functional suitability to one predominantly located in the heart of the city comprising buildings in good condition and providing a high level of functional suitability. This has been achieved by a mix of property acquisitions, disposals, refurbishments and a number of new purpose-built buildings. This process has been guided by previous Estates Strategies building on an initial framework set out in 1992, updated in 1999/2000 and a master plan which set out a vision for the future of the University in 1992. Most of the aspirations of that plan have now been achieved. In 1995 a detailed planning study of Ravelin Park was undertaken to inform possible future developments in that location as it was clear that the available land for future development was limited. The amenity value of the park was recognised and therefore the resultant plan was landscape driven which maintained the amenity value whilst identifying a number of sites, predominantly to the north of the park, which could be developed. The plan was formally adopted by Portsmouth City Council as planning guidance for future planning decisions. Langstone Campus had the benefit of a planning consent for a further 680 study bedrooms, however, the decision was taken in 2002 not to pursue a renewal due to the strengthening of planning policy relating to open spaces, playing fields and housing, coupled with the difficult planning history of the site. 5.2 Overview of future development opportunities As intimated previously in this document the University has limited opportunities for undertaking developments on land in its existing freehold ownership. Where such opportunities do exist they generally require demolition of existing building stock as part of the development. There are however a small number of possibilities for such developments which are expanded upon later in this Strategy but in summary they are: • Anglesea-Burnaby area on land released as a result of previous or future demolition of poorer quality buildings. • The remaining undeveloped sites identified in the Ravelin Park development plan referred to in paragraph 5.1 above and consisting mainly of the site of the previous Student Union building, Alexandra House. • Wiltshire Building site. UNIVERSITY OF PORTSMOUTH ESTATE STRATEGY 2011–2015 7
Page 1 and 2: Estate Strategy 2011-2015
Page 3 and 4: Contents Page no. 1. Introduction a
Page 5: aspiration therefore is to ensure t
Page 9 and 10: 5.4.2 Swimming Pool Site, Victoria
Page 11 and 12: 8.3 Sustainable construction and re
Page 13 and 14: Appendix 1 Data Building Gross Cond
Page 15 and 16: Appendix 2 Maps Portsmouth UNIVERSI
Page 17 and 18: Appendix 3 Out-turn from the 2006-2

Estate Strategy 2011–2015 - University of Portsmouth

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?