Bringing an existing building up to lab-ready standards often requires installation of additional utility shafts to deliver large quantities of fresh and conditioned air. Photo by Mike Sears | Courtesy

In the Boston area, there is no shortage of businesses and institutions that need more lab space – and need it fast.  

With the pressures of speeding life-saving drugs to market, the importance of supporting research and development, and an absence of readily available lab-ready space, it is more important than ever to develop a simple yet sophisticated process for identifying and evaluating lab conversion opportunities. 

When our clients find a property that might suit their needs, they need to act quickly to assess finances and risk assessment. We are one of the first team members they call to help them make the right decision. 

A Deeper Look for Some Buildings  

In the local market, including the hotspots of Boston, Cambridge, Somerville, Waltham and Watertown, we are seeing some buildings that, at first glance, would not seem suitable. This is where our expertise comes in handy, as we can quickly create a scorecard and help our client evaluate the pros and cons, possibilities and impossibilities in establishing a cost model and schedule. 

We use this scorecard at our initial walk-through to evaluate 10 key aspects of the property. We do this alongside a team of collaborative consultants, including design professionals, and trade partners, who recognize the short but critical time frame and understand the client’s needs. 

We all know our part and scatter amongst the building systems, meeting up later to share thoughts, challenges and solutions as we fill in the scorecard. The process is successful because we each know our roles, responsibilities and what the client needs to inform their ultimate decision regarding acquisition and conversion. We roll up our sleeves and get right to work without a learning curve. 

The following list includes the features that we evaluate, and for each one, we establish of list of observations and limitations. We also create a dashboard on any observed constraints, assigning a green light for items that can easily be solved with typical methods and cost, a yellow light for items that can be solved but would take significant cost or time and a red light for any items that cannot be modified no matter how much money is thrown at the problem. A red light does not necessarily mean the project is not viable, but it might translate to a major concession or compromise that could limit potential tenants. 

Building type: We look at building construction, type and size. These things will affect control zones and chemical quantities, and fire rating and egress challenges for single or multitenant layouts. This will dictate the requirement for chemical storage rooms. We also look at floor-to-floor heights as anything under 10 feet will be extremely challenging. 

Building envelope: We look at roofing, glazing and waterproofing details, as water and air infiltration within lab buildings can have catastrophic consequences. It is also problematic to have operable windows in the lab space, even if they are in a new condition. 

Asbestos, lead, mold or other hazardous materials analysis: A healthy building and environment are critical for human welfare and research requirements. We take samples of all materials for rapid testing. 

Structural load sizing: We evaluate the building structure as this will affect equipment areas for both lab areas and MEP systems and might also affect vibration, which could have a negative impact on certain types of research equipment, especially nuclear magnetic resonance or centrifuges. Vibration can come from both internal and external sources. 

ADA compliance and other building code issues: It’s important to always understand current and upcoming code implications and to examine egress pathways, building access layouts and restroom configurations. 

Elevators/loading/circulation: Freight elevators and loading docks are a must for life sciences buildings. If they do not exist, is it feasible to add or modify existing systems? 

Utilities and sizing: One of the longest lead items currently is coordinating with utility companies for upsizing existing services. A priority is creating a load letter, submitting it to the utility company, and getting on the engineering queue. This process can take between 10 and 18 months. The first step is to evaluate the existing services to assess if the watts per square foot, and gas and water loads, are suitable. 

Shafts and risers: MEP systems for lab buildings typically exist on the roof. Due to the large quantity of outdoor and conditioned air required, shafts and risers between all floors will be required. We assess possible areas for new pathways from lower levels to the roof early to ensure compatibility with future layouts and structural limitations. We also look at potential side wall louvered locations. 

Existing MEP systems: While many existing systems within a non-lab building will not be suitable for some areas of the building, they may be able to be reused for office, support and common areas. We quickly assess the viability of these systems, as anything we can repurpose will save on the project timeline, design costs, demolition, procurement and installation.   

Local zoning and historic ordinances: In addition to code issues, it is important to understand specific local limitations. These hurdles can create major obstacles even if the physical building is a perfect conversion candidate. We start by contacting the local jurisdictions to ensure we understand acoustical, use, wastewater, R&D/manufacturing, easement limitations and neighboring concerns. 

With the right team in place to assess conditions and opportunities, these 10 concerns are a great place to start your evaluation and create a dashboard for the potential owner’s decision process, giving your client an essential advantage in today’s challenging real estate market. 

Bill Olson is senior director of life sciences at North Reading-based Columbia.