UNIVERSITY OF EXETER
INFRASTRUCTURE DUAL ASSURANCE
19 November 2009
Discussed:
1.
Masterplanning

It was agreed to recommend to ISG to concentrate on North Park area only
because East Park would not need to be developed until much further in the
future.

Discussion should concentrate on what suits the site and how it could be
adapted to meet the needs of the University. Buildings 15m wide should be
suitable for all future requirements. Natural ventilation options might not
necessarily be the most efficient if considering carbon footprint.
2.
Cellular Office Space

DJA recommended reading the report in today’s Times Higher about a joint
18-month research study by researchers from Loughborough University,
Nottingham Trent University and the University of Leicester on cellular office
space versus open plan. The report does not necessarily recommend open
plan.

It was clear that further dialogue would be required on newly created offices.
The new space created for DARO on the 2nd floor of Northcote House was a
good example. DJA could let PL have a report from Personnel on
Homeworking which takes into account staff use of hotdesking.

DJA reported a good debate was had at SMG where certain requirements for
academic staff were raised such as the need for privacy and quietness.
Possible to have designated rooms for books/teaching space for student
tutorials; break out spaces. SMG also raised concerns about recruitment and
retention if the University were unable to provide rooms. Was this more a
cultural concern as younger staff are more accepting of open plan offices?

It was suggested that Dave Beavis be asked to produce a comprehensive
plan for debate at a future ISG.
3.
Heritage Buildings

A letter had been sent to Philip Bostock today at Exeter City Council
reassuring them of the University’s commitment to maintaining its historical
buildings.
4.
NatWest Bank and the Forum

This was a major issue that DJA wished to raise at ISG today.

DJA had a meeting with Geoff Pringle, Michele Shoebridge and Debbie Brett
on 18 November. The Bank had complete security of tenure to stay where
they were until 2015. Previous agreement negotiated some time in ‘90s
exempted the Bank from the Landlord and Tenancy Act. Through GP’s
negotiations, they had agreed to move into temporary accommodation from
March/April 2010 for almost two years while the Forum Project is being built.
However, RBS Board’s policy for any new branch required a minimum of 250
sq m of space. This needed to be followed up as such a large space would
have serious consequences for the Forum Project.

Total cost of moving the bank (temporary accommodation, legal fees,
compensation to Bank and the cost of the new building, including 5 ATMs)
would be £2m. King Sturge assured the University that these costs were
reasonable and it was obvious that we had no alternative but to accept these
conditions and to take each problem step-by-step.

On the income side, the Bank’s rent would be £60,000 per annum, which
included a service charge. The Bank might wish to negotiate a new lease.

The University was unable to approve Santander coming on campus,
because NatWest had an exclusivity clause.

There could be a shortfall of £1m in the Forum Project and a debate is
needed on how we could meet this.
5.
Construction Costs Benchmarking Study

PL felt the study could be improved and would wish to discuss further with
Hugh McCann. He believed that we needed to look at the baseline costs,
then at the different uses as there would be different variables/add-ons; we
should not exclude costs from outside the HE sector.

Recommend to ISG that we look at this at a future meeting after PL and Hugh
McCann had discussed further.

There is some good stuff in the report, such as benchmarking with other
universities, but needed to look into standardisation issues and whether they
were appropriate in each context (i.e. best forms of construction, how to
report it and how to get the benefits of common components).
6.
Wellcome Wolfson Clinical Research Centre

Recommend to ISG to support this proposal, which needed to be approved by
February 2010. £7.5m grant from Wellcome Wolfson for the first stage; DJA
would speak to Professor John Tooke to ask if the £5m from PCMD
reserves could be increased to £7m; the hospital would take over some space
in the new building and would provide some funding; our bid would be for
research labs and associated offices (about £16-17m); equipment would
come from grants. Proposal would go to Council on 9 December for
consideration.
7.
Project Monitoring Reports

Geoffrey Pope Building: Discussion of the current position. Hugh McCann
would report further to ISG.
8.
Costs Related to IT Network

Sally Wilcox had expressed concern that understanding of the issues were not
fully researched initially; an apparent lack of knowledge in terms of where
services were and other issues relating to buildings which needed to be
discussed with Hugh to find a way to improve the record system. There were
issues regarding network upgrade, asbestos, ducting, communications and
space. Ensure role of Project Manager included this as part of job specification.