Prepared for the State Of Alaska by ECI/Hyer Architecture and Interiors

March 24, 2012

Space Standards Report

Overview The current State of Alaska Offi ce Space Standards were put into eff ect approximately 10 years ago.

At the me the current standards were dra ed, they followed the methodology and alloca on styles of most standards. Since that me there have been drama c changes in technology, mobility, business prac ces, and the demographic makeup of the work force. Private organiza ons, other states and the federal government have changed their approach to their space standards to account for these changes in the work environment. The most recent space standards use alterna ve methods resul ng in:

• A more densely populated fl oor plan determined by a simple square footage mul plier

• Open planning to foster team work and communica on

• Support for alterna ve work solu ons such as telework, hoteling and desk sharing

• Smaller private offi ces located on the interior to provide more natural light to the higher occupancy open work sta ons

• Increases to shared team, mee ng and heads down focus spaces

• Visitor or public mee ng spaces located near the public entry, securely away from exposure to staff work sta ons and paperwork

• Telecenters providing offi ce space for visi ng directors/staff rather than dedica ng duplicate permanent space

2. Limit Private Offi ces, Turn Individual Mee ng Spaces into Shared Mee ng Spaces

Once the total suite square footage is determined, layouts can be developed with universal worksta ons for most employees. Private offi ces are limited to 10% of the overall space request, are smaller in size and are located near the building core.

When smaller offi ces are created for managers, individual mee ng space can be moved into a shared venue to be used by the en re staff .

By providing public mee ng spaces close to the entry guests are kept securely away from individual work sta ons and informa on that may be within view.

To support the open environment, other small collabora ve team or conference rooms are also located throughout the suite. In addi on to provid-ing space for small mee ngs these spaces become a place for occasional concentrated work, and private telephone calls.

Recommenda ons 1. Move to a universal square footage approach to space alloca on

We recommend adop ng a simple square footage ra o format for determining agency space needs. Suite square footage is determined by mul plying the number of employees supported within the suite by a simple square foot ra o. This produces a rentable or usable square foot target for the basic offi ce suite using primarily an open plan standard.

Once the total square footage for the suite is understood. Closed offi ce space can then be appor oned from the overall suite’s square footage. The natural outcome is that offi ces shrink when it is apparent that space is being taken from work sta ons and support spaces to accommodate oversized, rarely used offi ce space

O en offi ce suites have some unique rooms serving special needs of each par cular offi ce. Just as is done now, square footage for these individual rooms can be added to the suite’s base square footage for each of these special areas as individually required.

3. Create Telecenters and U lize Short Term Off -Site Space as Necessary

The state has been providing mul ple offi ces for ex-ecu ve posi ons that need to conduct business in more than one loca on. These are generally large offi ces with both desks and mee ng tables. Al-though some agencies allow staff use these spaces when no one is in residence, for the most part they remain unoccupied offi ce space.

Another alterna ve might be to create a Telecenter for execu ve level posi ons to u lize. These spaces would be reserved in advance when visi ng.

Because of the mobility of technology, alternates such as off -site space might be needed for overfl ow during mes of high visi ng occupancy. Generally because this is an execu ve level of staff u lizing this type of accommoda on asking visitors to travel to conduct business is likely acceptable.

4. Commit to a Pilot Project to Study the Feasibility of Alterna ve Work Styles

Alternates from Telecenters to Telework programs as well as other opportuni es such as fl ex- me and desk sharing need to be addressed for the state to truly maximize the use of vacant or under u lized space.

This is a very important aspect of space reduc on and the actual occupancy of exis ng work space is a concern. At any given me in visi ng state offi ces it is apparent that there is a high percentage of under u lized space.

A study of an exis ng space to determine actual usage and a pilot project are recommended to demonstrate how a desk sharing or hoteling model might work as a standard in a state offi ce.

If the state cannot u lize alterna ve work applica- ons, it is likely that a model of 190 to 195 SF per

person will be the best that can be achieved If incorpora ng alterna ve offi cing a reduc on to 180 to 185 SF per person could be realized.

5. Determine Incen ves for implementa on

Once a pilot project has been completed the stan-dards can be adopted by agencies in expiring leases. However it is expected that a capital expenditure will be needed to assist agencies to create the types of spaces that will succeed.

The pilot is very important as an instruc onal tool to demonstrate how this new standard looks and func ons. Training is recommended to assist work-ers to adapt to and maximize the poten al off ered in theses new surroundings.

Implementa on of a new set of standards can take several years. Each space will need to be evalu-ated on it’s own merit for inclusion in upgrading to the new standard based upon factors such as size, length of lease and an cipated overall savings.

Technology is now capable of allowing employees to be mobile, to work with colleagues remotely and across me zones, and to get work done in a variety of se ngs both inside and outside of the tradi onal offi ce. Alternate work places can save money, increase work fl exibility, and make the most effi cient use of real estate. And these new fl exible workplaces are also providing gains in worker produc vity.

When designing a workplace - the advent of plug and play, untethered technology and mobile ways of using space has all but eliminated the challenge of deciding between openness versus enclosure, individual work or interac on. In a hybrid work-place, employees have the op on of working individually in a quiet space or working with their colleagues in open, collabora ve team areas.

Examples of work space op ons include: worksta- ons, touchdown spaces, privacy or focus rooms,

phone booths, open project spaces, visitor or team rooms, lounges and dens.

Innova on in work environments is not a ma er of technology alone, new forms of cross-organiza on-al coopera on, leadership and management and incen ve schemes are required.

The federal government has found through a GSA study that the average u liza on of workspace in the US and Europe from 8 - 5 is 35 to 50 percent, so at any given me over 50 percent of all work spaces are not being used. Even without alternate work styles many knowledge workers spend less than half their me at their offi ce due to travel, meet-ings, illness, fl ex schedules, etc. So a building that is 95% occupied may only be 45% u lized.

A Technion Survey indicates that, by 2015, workplace u liza on is expected to increase from today’s levels between of 35% and 50% to 85%, as the desk-to-employee ra o is addressed and space is reappor oned.

Although open, collabora ve spaces provide more op ons, an overall reduc on in square footage is generally moderate when simply shi ing from private offi ces to open shared space. As individual spaces decrease there is a need to increase collabora ve areas, quiet and mee ng spaces.

A key component to decreasing under u lized space is to employ strategies that allow desk sharing or hoteling work spaces and work from home or satellite sites. Without these strategies the state will not be able to realize nearly as signifi cant a savings in space as is possible.

Discussion of fi ndings“Space shapes behavior, so if you want people to share informa on, collaborate be er and innovate more, you have to invest in the kinds of spaces that help them do that. It is possible to leverage real es-tate and be er u lize it by providing workers with choice and control – these are the new status sym-bols for knowledge workers.”, Jim Keane, President of the Steelcase Group

Collabora on between employees has become recognized as an eff ec ve means to produce higher quality informa on in a shorter amount of me by promo ng crea vity, knowledge, teamwork and coordina on. Formal studies have determined the most eff ec ve working environments today are those which encourage short informa on exchanges in a loosely structured environment. Most current state infrastructure inhibits these exchanges. By adding varied styles of work spaces mul ple working styles are supported - including those based upon the fl exibility of available technology.

The predicament of how to help employees concentrate and get work done -- which is tradi onally thought to require an enclosed offi ce space -- while also allowing for the signifi cant benefi ts of open and fl exible offi ce environments needs to be addressed. The solu on is to provide a selec on of individual heads-down and shared collabora ve work space op ons.

Evalua on of Exis ng SpaceWe have taken a preliminary look at leased and state owned space in both Juneau and Anchorage to determine the order of magnitude of poten al savings if the state space standards were to change to a SF per person model at three diff erent levels.

Level 1 includes some alternate offi cing

Level 2 is a middle ground es mate

Level 3 would include fl ex- me, desk sharing and telework alterna ves

These studies show that once implementa on is complete, a poten al annual lease savings of between $3.9 to over $4.5 million in Anchorage and from $2.1 to over $2.4 million in Juneau.

Similar reduc ons in State owned buildings could free up from 75,000 to 85,000 SF of space in Anchorage and 58,000 to 66,000 SF in Juneau for consolida on out of leased space and a poten al savings of between $4.6 million and $5.1 million dollars annually at the average lease rates in each city.

This is a very broad brush calcula on and there are many variables that would apply to each project depending upon the exis ng infrastructure and furnishings.

Included at the end of the report is a demonstra- on of poten al savings comparing an actual state

agency request and the recommended space stan-dard alloca on in leased facility.

Cost of Implementa on - Leased Facili es

A payback period of 5 to 12 years has been calculated for implementa on of new standards based upon a SF / person + alternate offi cing. Assump ons made include:

For Agencies who currently own or have already budgeted to supply their own new furnishings:

$50/SF Construc on for Tenant Improvements or $9,500 / staff member.

For agencies who do not have a furniture budget

$7,000 - $10,000 / staff member for furniture.

Total cost per staff member ranges from $9,500 to $19,500.

Taking an average period of 7 years, to implement a new space standard, the yearly investment would range from $3.4 million to $6.6 million for the com-bined leases. The savings lease expenses, would yield approximately $570,000 to $645,000 the fi rst year and expand each year to the full savings of $3.9 to $4.5 million by the 7th year.

Note that these numbers do not include escala on

Cost of Implementa on - State Owned Facili esA payback period of 10 to 19 years has been cal-culated for implementa on of the new standards. The state owned facili es are able to reallocate space so do not exhibit the extent of excess space that a fi xed lease area can. Although the overall savings look a rac ve the cost to realize that sav-ings is more signifi cant per staff member so has nearly double the payback period.

Although there is not parity for the cost to imple-ment the savings between leased and owned savings it is recommended that the state imple-ment the same upgrades and policies in both types of facili es. The benefi ts go beyond monetary in employee sa sfac on, improved produc vity and a rac ng future talent.

With the 7 year implementa on for State owned facili es the yearly investment would range from $2.4 to $4.6 million for the combined facili es with a poten al reduc on in leases in the fi rst year from $660,000 to $740,000. However the complexity of due to the small scale of these projects would likely require much more construc on than this broad brush es mate shows.

Current Space Standards This fl oor plan serves 34 employees -20 employees in this layout are supported by an offi ce ranging in size between from 128 sf- 132 sf; 14 employees are allocated an 86 sf cubicle crea ng an overall basic suite with 10,635 square feet. The overall ra o of area within in this basic suite per supported worker is:

8,905 sf / 34 = 262 usable sf per employee.

This suite includes an addi onal 1,728 square feet of unique spaces beyond that which would be contained within a basic suite. These “special areas” added to the typical offi ce base program area are:

· 2 monitored washrooms – 124 sf (62 sf ea)· A departmental library - 213 sf · A large training room - 667 sf· A large hearing room - 724 sf

The total square footage for this par cular suite is: 8,907 sf + 1,728 sf = 10,635 sf

Comparisons of the Two Space Alloca on Systems*Suite Density

* These layouts compare an actual, though unused, suite layout developed recently under the current Alaska State Standards with a layout generated from merged State of Washington and Joint BLM/Forest Service Oregon and Washington guidelines.

Suite Specifi c Area0 5’ 10’ 30’

Hearings Room

File

s

Files

Equipment

Equipment

Equi

pmen

t

Telecom

Mens Womens

Elec Jan

StorageBreak

DataWorkroom

Media on Media on

W/C

W/C

Training Room

Library

Revised Space Standards This fl oor plan serves 55 employees - 43 employees have full day occupied worksta ons or offi ces, 8 have half day occupied worksta ons and 1 is an inter. There are 3 telecommuters, which are not calculated. For a total of 48 e

The usable suite area is 10,635 sf

This area includes 1,745 SF of special spacebasic suite per supported worker is:

8,890 sf / 48 e = 185 usable sf per e.

The “special areas” included above the typical offi ce base program area are:

· 2 monitored washrooms – 124 sf (62 sf ea)· A departmental library - 215 sf · A large training room - 680 sf· A large hearing room - 726 sf

The total square footage for this par cular, suite is: 8,890 sf + 1,745 sf = 10,635 sf

Suite Specifi c Area0 5’ 10’ 30’

Hearings Room

Files

Equipment

Equipment

EquipEq

uipm

ent

TelecomMens Womens

Elec Jan

Storage

BreakDataWorkroom

Media on

Media on

W/C

W/C

Training Room

Library

Private offi ce (20) - varies from 128 sf to 132 sf

Cubicle (14) - 86 sf

Recep on, contains 1 cubicle

Equipment

• Private offi ces are arranged around the perimeter, group spaces are placed near the core.

• Employees access a common work area shared by the suite as a whole.

Comparisons of the Two Space Alloca on Systems*Layouts by Func on

Current Space Standards

* These layouts compare an actual, although unused, suite layout developed recently under the current Alaskan State Standards with a layout generated from merged State of Washington and Joint BLM/Forest Service Oregon and Washington guidelines.

0 5’ 10’ 30’

Hearings Room

Files

Equipment

Equipment

Telecom

Mens Womens

Elec Jan

StorageBreak

DataWorkroom

Media on Media on

W/C

W/C

Training Room

Library

File

s

Equi

pmen

t

Private offi ce - (8/8 e) ; (7) 126 sf + (1) 150 sf

Full me in offi ce worksta on (33/33 e) - 64-72 dedicated sfRecep on with worksta ons (2/2 e) - 153 dedicated sf

Half me in offi ce worksta on (4/2 e) - 36-48 dedicated sfData entry worksta on (4/2 e) - 36-48 dedicated sf

Telecommuter worksta on (3/0.75 e) - 20-25 dedicated sfNon-dedicated (Interns, and others) worksta on (1/0.25 e) - 20-25 non-dedicated sf

Internal small conference rooms available to all employees for private discussions, phone calls, and mee ngs - 1 per 10 open plan worksta ons - 40 open worksta ons = 4 small conference rooms. This plan supports (3) 125 sf + (1) 150 sf small conference rooms or (4) totalEquipment

• Worksta ons and open plan areas are arranged around the perimeter, closed rooms are placed near the core.

• Employees grouped into working groups with shared access to small conference rooms and equipment areas.

0 5’ 10’ 30’

Hearings Room

Files

Equipment

Equipment

EquipEq

uipm

ent

TelecomMens Womens

Elec Jan

Storage

BreakDataWorkroom

Media on

Media on

W/C

W/C

Training Room

Library

Revised Space Standards

• This layout method was developed to minimize distrac ons between employees. Few opportuni es exist for unplanned discussions. Internal staff communica on happens primarily through formal mee ngs, informal communica on is minimized.

• Each fi eld, i nerant, or telecommu ng worker, requiring an offi ce presence, occupies a cubicle or offi ce.

Areas conducive to informal discussions

Comparisons of the Two Space Alloca on Systems*Collabora on Spaces And Support for a Variety of Work Types

Current Space Standards

* These layouts compare an actual, although unused, suite layout developed recently under the current Alaskan State Standards with a layout generated from merged State of Washington and Joint BLM/Forest Service Oregon and Washington guidelines.

Hearings Room

Files

Equipment

Equipment

Telecom

Mens Womens

Elec Jan

StorageBreak

DataWorkroom

Media on Media on

W/C

W/C

Training Room

Library

File

s

Equi

pmen

t

• This layout method was developed to enhance collabora on and provide means for including alterna ve work strategies within a tradi onal offi ce se ng. Informal communica on is supported throughout the fl oor plan, greatly enhancing the ability for employees to collaborate and share informa on. Four small conference rooms support mee ngs and discussions where some privacy may be required as well as a place for occasional concentrated work.

• Field, i nerant, and telecommu ng workers, can have worksta ons tailored to their offi ce support requirements.

Areas conducive to informal discussions

Small conference rooms available for mee ngs and private discussions

Worksta ons for employees who require a dedicated worksta on for part of the work week such as fi eld and i nerant staff .

Worksta ons for employees who work primarily out of the offi ce but who retain a dedicated work area within the offi ce such as telecommuters.

Hearings Room

Files

Equi

pmen

t

TelecomMens Womens

Elec Jan

Storage

BreakDataWorkroom

Media on

Media on

W/C

W/C

Training Room

Library Equipment

Equipment

Equip

Revised Space Standards

• 52% of the fl oor is passive / semi-passive. 48 % of the fl oor is ac ve / semi-ac ve.

• 60 % of the fl oor is closed for airfl ow and ligh ng, 40% of the fl oor is open for airfl ow and ligh ng.

• 26 of 33 employees receive daylight and views.

Ac ve area has daylight, view, open air, and open ligh ng - 9% of Area, 7 employees

Semi-ac ve area has daylight, view, closed air and closed ligh ng - 39% of area, 19 employees

Semi-passive area has closed to daylight, closed to view, open air and open ligh ng - 31 % of area, 7 employees

Passive area no daylight or view, closed air and closed ligh ng - 21 % of area

Comparisons of the Two Space Alloca on Systems*Internal Offi ce Environments

* These layouts compare an actual, although unused, suite layout developed recently under the current Alaskan State Standards with a layout generated from merged State of Washington and Joint BLM/Forest Service Oregon and Washington guidelines.

Hearings Room

Files

File

s

Equipment

Telecom

Mens Womens

Elec Jan

StorageBreak

DataWorkroom

Media on Media on

W/C

W/C

Training Room

Library

Equi

pmen

t

Current Space Standards

• 66 % of the fl oor is ac ve / semi-ac ve. 34% of the Floor is passive / semi-passive.

• 50 % of the fl oor is open for airfl ow and ligh ng. 50% of the fl oor is closed for airfl ow and ligh ng.

• 53 of 55 employees receive daylight and views.

Ac ve area has daylight, view, open air, and open ligh ng - 39% of area, 45 employees

Semi-ac ve area has daylight, view, closed air and closed ligh ng - 28% of area 8 employees

Semi-passive area has closed to daylight, closed to view, open air and open ligh ng - 11% of area 2 employees

Passive area no daylight or view, closed air and closed ligh ng - 22% of area

Hearings Room

Files

Equi

pmen

t

TelecomMens Womens

Elec Jan

Storage

BreakDataWorkroom

Media on

Media on

W/C

W/C

Training Room

Library Equipment

Equipment

Equip

Revised Space Standards

Bibliography

Space Alloca on Standards Department of Administra on Division of General Services State of Alaska

Space Alloca on Standards Manual General Administra on State of Washington

Space Standards Policy Manual Facili es Division Department of Administra ve Services State of Oregon

Space Alloca on Standards Real Estate Services Division Department of General Services State of California

State Facili es Manual Department of Administra on State of Idaho

Government Offi ce Space Standards Province of Bri sh Columbia

Offi ce Space Standards and Guidelines Northwest Territories Canada

Space Loca on, Alloca on, Layout and Measurement Standards Policies State Building Commission State of Wisconsin

Manual for Space U liza on Bureau of Real Estate Department of General Services State of Pennsylvania

Space Planning Policy and Procedures Division of Real Estate Services Commonwealth of Virginia

Offi ce Planning Guidelines Infrastructure and Transporta on Accommoda on Services Division Government of Manitoba

Offi ce Accommoda on Workspace and Fit-Out Standards Offi ce Accommoda on Management Framework Queensland Government

Space Planning Policy Service First Colloca on and BLM Oregon /Washington Space Policy USDA Forest Service, Region 6 DOI Bureau of Land Management, Oregon / Washington

Special Space Requirements U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Department of the Interior United States Government

Rocky Mountain Research Sta on USFS Forest Service Manual Real Property Management US Forest Service Department of Agriculture United States Government

U liza on Guide for Calcula ng DOI Constructed Assets Department of the Interior United States Government

US A orney’s Manual US A orneys Offi ce Department of Jus ce United States Government

Telework and Flexiplace Handbook Department of the Treasury United States Government

Fit-Up Standards: Technical Reference Manual Public Works and Government Services Canada

Transporta on Capital Program and Property Management Department of Highways and Public Works Government of Canada

Offi ce Space Planning Guidelines United Na ons Administra ve Management Services United Na ons

States and Provinces U.S. Government Agencies Canada And the United Na ons

Workplace U liza on and Alloca on Benchmarks Offi ce of Real Property Management General Services Administra on United States Government

The New Federal Workplace, a Report on the Performance of Six Workplace 20-20 Projects Public Building Service General Services Administra on United States Government

Offi ce Space Review Current Prac ces and Emerging Trends Offi ce of Government wide Policy Offi ce of real Property General Services Administra on United States Government

Real performance Results - 2002Innova ve workplaces Division Offi ce of Real Property Management General Services Administra on United States Government

Space Requirements Public Buildings Service General Services Administra on United States Government

Workplace Research, Collabora ve Knowledge Work Environments General Services Administra on United States Government

AgilQuest - MobilityJohn H. Vivadelli, President & CEO, AgilQuest

How Emerging Work Strategies are Changing the Work Place

Steelcase 360 Ezine

Workplace of the Future SurveyTechnion Corpora onIn collabora on with CoreNet Global,Jones LaSalle and Cisco

Offi ces that Work - Balancing Communica ons, Flexibility and Cost

Internal Workplace Studies ProgramCornell University

Space StandardsGulf Power

The Private-to-Open Spectrum Herman Miller

Benching: An Idea Whose Time Has Come ... Again

Steelcase Workspace Futures

On the Move, How Mobile Employees are Changing the Workplace

Herman Miller

Revisi ng Offi ce Space StandardsChanging Nature of Work and Trends

Haworth

GSA Publica ons and Studies Academic and Private Studies

People and the Workplace Innova ve Workplaces Division Offi ce of Real Property Management General Services Administra on United States Government

Customer Guide to Real Property Public Building Service General Services Administra on United States Government

Managing Uncertainty - Integrated Por olio Strategies for Dynamic Organiza ons Internal Workplace Studies Program Cornell University

Driven by Design Legal Management Magazine, May/June 2006 American Law Associa on