Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Monday, October 3, 2016 5:03 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: FW: New Space Usage Agreement

Tom and Cathy,

I'm passing along the below email I received from Randy Anderson. This is the third request I've received from ITS in the last two months to assign Mason space to outside consultants/vendors. Aquia 208 office has been assigned as a shared office for two consultants (via Space Use Agreements they arranged with Legal) that are working with ITS on a year-long or so project. Given the space constraints at FX, I would like to ask that you consult with senior leadership to ask if they are supportive of this continued arrangement to let consultants occupy Mason space.

Please advise,

Joy

Associate Director, Space Management Facilities Campus Planning George Mason University (703) 993-2468

-----Original Message----- From: Randy Anderson Sent: Monday, October 03, 2016 3:44 PM To: Joy Staulcup Subject: New Space Usage Agreement

Joy,

We have a need for another space usage agreement, this one with Ernst & Young. They want to have two to four consultants stationed here on campus three days per week, for an engagement that is expected to last through mid- December. Aquia 351 has been proposed as a temporary office and consulting space for this purpose. How should we proceed?

Randy --- Randy D. Anderson Director, Process and Planning Information Technology Services George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1B5 Fairfax, VA 22030 phone: 703-993-3445

1 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, October 3, 2016 5:46 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue;Lisa A Reeves Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

2 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Kelly Hayward Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 4:13 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: ReportViewer-187.xls Attachments: ReportViewer-187.xls

Cathy, Attached is an updated report. Deniz had me add one earlier.

Kelly

3 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 12:11 PM To: Lisa A Reeves Subject: FW: Planning report Attachments: ReportViewer-186.xls

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Kelly Hayward Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 8:37 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: Planning report

Cathy, Attached is your report. I will keep my eye out for the pedestrian signage. If it comes in today I will resend this report.

Kelly

4 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Kelly Hayward Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 8:37 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: Planning report Attachments: ReportViewer-186.xls

Cathy, Attached is your report. I will keep my eye out for the pedestrian signage. If it comes in today I will resend this report.

Kelly

5 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Lisa A Reeves Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 8:56 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: FW: Program Document Attachments: 2016.09.23-GMU_Program_Document-Draft (small).pdf

Cathy, Katlyn sent two documents late Friday. Do you need me to print you a copy in color? Thanks, Lisa

From: Leach, Katlyn [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 6:03 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey ; Weirick, Laura ; Lisa A Reeves Cc: McNay, Gary ; Cline, Floyd ; Harney, Paul Subject: Program Document

Cathy,

Please see the attached updated program document for Robinson Hall. We welcome your questions and comments as this is for final review.

Please let us know if you have any immediate questions and we hope you have a wonderful weekend.

Thank you,

Katlyn Leach, Associate AIA, LEED AP BD+C Arch I

Perkins+Will 1315 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30309 t 404.443.7520 [email protected] perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

6 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 5:42 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue;Lisa A Reeves Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

7 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Leach, Katlyn Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 6:03 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Weirick, Laura;Lisa A Reeves Cc: McNay, Gary;Cline, Floyd;Harney, Paul Subject: Program Document Attachments: 2016.09.23-GMU_Program_Document-Draft (small).pdf

Cathy,

Please see the attached updated program document for Robinson Hall. We welcome your questions and comments as this is for final review.

Please let us know if you have any immediate questions and we hope you have a wonderful weekend.

Thank you,

Katlyn Leach, Associate AIA, LEED AP BD+C Arch I

Perkins+Will 1315 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30309 t 404.443.7520 [email protected] perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

8 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Leach, Katlyn Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 5:58 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Laura K Manno;Lisa A Reeves Cc: McNay, Gary;Cline, Floyd Subject: Program Document Attachments: 2016.09.23-GMU_Program_Document-Draft (small).pdf

Cathy,

Please see the attached updated program document for Robinson Hall. We welcome your questions and comments as this is for final review.

Please let us know if you have any immediate questions and we hope you have a wonderful weekend.

Thank you,

Katlyn Leach, Associate AIA, LEED AP BD+C Arch I

Perkins+Will 1315 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30309 t 404.443.7520 [email protected] perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

9 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Alexis Brearley Iszard Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 4:23 PM To: Frank Strike;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: Fwd: Tracking Log Attachments: Master_Project Tracking Log.xlsm; ATT00001.htm

Frank and Cathy,

Attached is the draft of log of projects to be discussed at tomorrow's project review. This is not sorted and may have some small modification made between now and then. I final electronic copy will be sent prior to the meeting. Please let me know if you have any comments.

Thanks,

Alex Iszard, P.E. Senior Project Manager Facilities Project Management & Construction George Mason University 703-993-9220 Office 571-217-7987 Cell <-- Please Note New Cell Phone Number

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Fahim Panjshiri" To: "Alexis Brearley Iszard" Subject: Tracking Log

Sir,

Attached is the unlocked Log. I am still working on curves.

Kindest Regards,

Fahim Panjshiri, EIT Project Engineer George Mason University Facilities|Project Management & Construction Office: 703-993-5877 Cell: 703-599-4544

10 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 1:08 PM To: McNay, Gary;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robinson Utility Infrastructure;Lisa A Reeves Cc: Harney, Paul;Kluesner, Gene;Leach, Katlyn;Cline, Floyd;Thomas G Calhoun;Frank Strike;Nancy S Pickens Subject: RE: Robinson/ infrastructure Program status and next steps

We would need to check with Debbie about academic Advising. The vibe I got from her when I last met 1 x 1 with her was that all the academic advisers may be located in the Dean’s suite. I did n[t get the impression it was a shared office for them to drop in. Let me check and get back to you.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner for Academic & Research Facilities George Mason University

From: McNay, Gary [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 1:01 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey ; Laura K Manno ; Robinson Utility Infrastructure ; Lisa A Reeves Cc: Harney, Paul ; Kluesner, Gene ; Leach, Katlyn ; Cline, Floyd ; Thomas G Calhoun ; Frank Strike ; Nancy S Pickens Subject: Robinson/ infrastructure Program status and next steps

Cathy, Laura and team,

Regarding the meeting this afternoon. Attached are two updates we would ask that you review. This can be in the meeting or offline- your choice.

The program document will be complete delivered electronically on Friday 9.22 for final review

We believe that this attached space schedule includes the most recent review comments to balance the sf ( with great help from Laura.) We have also attached a page from the program document with revised narratives re: the strategic plan as requested. I am prepared to be online for the meeting today to finalize this document if desired.

The one question we had in the space schedule- is about the academic advising component. This space schedule holds one office for that. We heard it would be a part of the Deans suite. Please confirm needs.

We welcome your questions.

Regarding the proposed next steps once the Project starts for SD.

11 b. Cost review/ strategy session ( set cost targets for all trades/ systems) c. Building systems and sustainability strategies. MEP systems/ Structural/ site /storm water d. Harris theater programming/ design mini charrette (mostly about phasing options) e. building massing and form simplification f. prototyping of all spaces and adjacencies- academic workplaces, classrooms, public spaces, MIX spaces, g. Brand expression start up H. Maintain outstanding comments list for completion of design items during SD.

Please verify if you are interested in meeting this afternoon or if we should resolve the few outstanding items by email/phone..

Regards, gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal 1315 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30309 t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 [email protected]

Perkins+Will Ideas + buildings that honor the broader goals of society perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter

Please consider the environment before printing this email. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute, copy, or alter this email.

Regards, gm

12 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Nancy S Pickens Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 1:08 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: FW: Robinson/ infrastructure Program status and next steps Attachments: Copy of 160920 GMU Robinson Hall_space schedule_LM.gm2.xlsx; GMU_Program_Document - Editedgmin progresspg 22.pdf

Cathy – did you ever get the chance to review the last set of comments on the Code study? Thanks! Nancy

Nancy S. Pickens, R.A. Senior Project Manager George Mason University 703-993-2644

Cathy, Laura and team,

Regarding the meeting this afternoon. Attached are two updates we would ask that you review. This can be in the meeting or offline- your choice.

The program document will be complete delivered electronically on Friday 9.22 for final review

We welcome your questions.

Regarding the proposed next steps once the Project starts for SD.

13 e. building massing and form simplification f. prototyping of all spaces and adjacencies- academic workplaces, classrooms, public spaces, MIX spaces, g. Brand expression start up H. Maintain outstanding comments list for completion of design items during SD.

Please verify if you are interested in meeting this afternoon or if we should resolve the few outstanding items by email/phone..

Regards, gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal 1315 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30309 t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 [email protected]

Perkins+Will Ideas + buildings that honor the broader goals of society perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter

Regards, gm

14 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 1:01 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Laura K Manno;Robinson Utility Infrastructure;Lisa A Reeves Cc: Harney, Paul;Kluesner, Gene;Leach, Katlyn;Cline, Floyd;Thomas G Calhoun;Frank Strike;Nancy S Pickens Subject: Robinson/ infrastructure Program status and next steps Attachments: Copy of 160920 GMU Robinson Hall_space schedule_LM.gm2.xlsx; GMU_Program_Document - Editedgmin progresspg 22.pdf

Cathy, Laura and team,

Regarding the meeting this afternoon. Attached are two updates we would ask that you review. This can be in the meeting or offline- your choice.

The program document will be complete delivered electronically on Friday 9.22 for final review

We welcome your questions.

Regarding the proposed next steps once the Project starts for SD.

!. Review impact of Vision / program goals on the design work 2. Review Space schedule with constituents and set up specialty meetings for all spaces/ functions 3. Review next steps when SD begins a. Building committee and Campus leadership updates b. Cost review/ strategy session ( set cost targets for all trades/ systems) c. Building systems and sustainability strategies. MEP systems/ Structural/ site /storm water d. Harris theater programming/ design mini charrette (mostly about phasing options) e. building massing and form simplification f. prototyping of all spaces and adjacencies- academic workplaces, classrooms, public spaces, MIX spaces, g. Brand expression start up H. Maintain outstanding comments list for completion of design items during SD.

Please verify if you are interested in meeting this afternoon or if we should resolve the few outstanding items by email/phone..

Regards, gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal 1315 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30309 t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 [email protected]

Perkins+Will Ideas + buildings that honor the broader goals of society perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter

Regards, gm

16 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 6:14 PM To: Frank Strike Subject: Fwd: Work Load Update Attachments: Project Tracking - Combined 9.16.2016_v1.02.xlsm; ATT00001.htm

That was a quick exit.

Is he aware of tomorrow morning's meeting?

I don't think this is something that can be the responsibility of an intern.

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Fahim Panjshiri" To: "Frank Strike" , "Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey" Subject: Work Load Update

Mr. Strike & Ms. Pinskey,

Attached is the tracking log with all the proposed changes. Hopefully I didn’t miss anything. Pick lists & Multi-Select lists have been implemented. There is some code so Macros need to be enabled. I have asked individual PM’s under Alex team to send me their updates. I have yet to do this for Nancy’s & Martha’s team. This is my next step and I will send it out tomorrow (9/21). Once I have updates from all three teams the tracking log will be complete. Because we rearranged and changed the sheet significantly I will need a day or two to fix my sheets and re-run the simulation to produce the work load for all three teams.

Kindest Regards,

Fahim Panjshiri, EIT Project Engineer George Mason University Facilities|Project Management & Construction Office: 703-993-5877 Cell: 703-599-4544

17 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Fahim Panjshiri Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 6:06 PM To: Frank Strike;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: Work Load Update Attachments: Project Tracking - Combined 9.16.2016_v1.02.xlsm

Mr. Strike & Ms. Pinskey,

Kindest Regards,

Fahim Panjshiri, EIT Project Engineer George Mason University Facilities|Project Management & Construction Office: 703-993-5877 Cell: 703-599-4544

18 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 11:12 AM To: McNay, Gary ([email protected]);Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Cc: Robinson Utility Infrastructure Subject: Additional detail to Office / Workspace needs Attachments: 160608_Office Analysis - With Detail Added.xls

Gary:

Some time ago, I shared my Office analysis worksheet with you. That file was named: 160608 Office Analysis. The line items in that spreadsheet were from the original planning program but I had added al line at the boot of each department to show “Revised Total based on CHSS 2016 Data”. While we were not given specific titles as part of the 2016 faculty/ staff counts, I was able to identify numbers of offices/ workstations/ shared workstations needed. As we were working through program recently, it became clear to me that showing assumptions and detail of the 2016 counts would be helpful. Attached is the initial worksheet with some minor detail added below each department. These represent actual counts of people for adjuncts, GRAs and wage. Per my noted on that same sheet, we need to assume % shared for adjuncts and GRAs. (i.e. the numbers here do not represent that % but the actual numbers of adjuncts, GRAs and wage).

I did notice that I seem to have 6 more office for Criminology Law & Society than the CHSS counts would indicate necessary. Can’t remember why I did that. But good news is that there has been some growth in other Dept. which can easily make use of the 6 if they are not needed for CLS. Therefore the Total number of offices shown remain 28 for assumption purposes but you will see the 2 numbers below that only adding up to 22.

Hope this makes sense. I do think seeing the breakdown of assumptions for each workspace type will be helpful as we go along….

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner for Academic & Research Facilities George Mason University

19 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Frank Strike Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 6:44 AM To: Fahim Panjshiri;Nancy S Pickens Cc: Alexis Brearley Iszard;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Martha Sansaver;Annmarie Irwin;Robert M Herman;Christy Hogan Subject: FW: Tomorrow's project review spreadsheet Attachments: Copy of Project Tracking - Combined 9 15 2016.xlsx

Fahim, as defined in the meeting on Friday, please provide the updated column headings as soon as you can. Nancy, we plan to go over your data at 3 P.M. today. Does this work for you since you were off last week?

V/r Frank

From: Fahim Panjshiri Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 9:19 AM To: Frank Strike ; Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Cc: Alexis Brearley Iszard Subject: RE: Tomorrow's project review spreadsheet

Attached is the complete file. Including Alex, Nancy, Martha, and Jane’s team sorted respectively.

Thanks

Fahim

From: Frank Strike Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 8:27 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey ; Fahim Panjshiri Cc: Alexis Brearley Iszard Subject: RE: Tomorrow's project review spreadsheet

Fahim, Alex said you had an updated copy. Pls forward ASAP.

Vr Frank

Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE smartphone

------Original message ------From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Date: 9/15/16 6:03 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Frank Strike , Fahim Panjshiri Subject: Tomorrow's project review spreadsheet

20 Frank and Fahim - I was thinking we were going to get a preview copy prior to the meeting tomorrow illustrating the sort that we talked about a couple days ago.

Could I please look at a sample first thing tomorrow morning and prior to the meeting?

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

21 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 5:39 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue;Lisa A Reeves Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

22 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Fahim Panjshiri Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 9:19 AM To: Frank Strike;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Cc: Alexis Brearley Iszard Subject: RE: Tomorrow's project review spreadsheet Attachments: Copy of Project Tracking - Combined 9 15 2016.xlsx

Attached is the complete file. Including Alex, Nancy, Martha, and Jane’s team sorted respectively.

Thanks

Fahim

From: Frank Strike Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 8:27 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey ; Fahim Panjshiri Cc: Alexis Brearley Iszard Subject: RE: Tomorrow's project review spreadsheet

Fahim, Alex said you had an updated copy. Pls forward ASAP.

Vr Frank

Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE smartphone

------Original message ------From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Date: 9/15/16 6:03 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Frank Strike , Fahim Panjshiri Subject: Tomorrow's project review spreadsheet

Frank and Fahim - I was thinking we were going to get a preview copy prior to the meeting tomorrow illustrating the sort that we talked about a couple days ago.

Could I please look at a sample first thing tomorrow morning and prior to the meeting?

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

23 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Fahim Panjshiri Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 9:14 AM To: Frank Strike;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Cc: Alexis Brearley Iszard Subject: RE: Tomorrow's project review spreadsheet Attachments: Copy of Project Tracking - Combined 9 15 2016.xlsx

Sir,

This file has been sorted for Martha’s team. Other teams are hidden. I will have hard copies for the meeting.

Thanks

Fahim

From: Frank Strike Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 8:27 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey ; Fahim Panjshiri Cc: Alexis Brearley Iszard Subject: RE: Tomorrow's project review spreadsheet

Fahim, Alex said you had an updated copy. Pls forward ASAP.

Vr Frank

Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE smartphone

------Original message ------From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Date: 9/15/16 6:03 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Frank Strike , Fahim Panjshiri Subject: Tomorrow's project review spreadsheet

Frank and Fahim - I was thinking we were going to get a preview copy prior to the meeting tomorrow illustrating the sort that we talked about a couple days ago.

Could I please look at a sample first thing tomorrow morning and prior to the meeting?

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

24 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 5:45 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue;Lisa A Reeves Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

25 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Friday, September 9, 2016 12:42 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: PROGRESS!!!! Attachments: 160908 GMU Robinson Hall_space schedule_LM & GM.xlsx

Cathy:

So Gary and I ended up locking ourselves in a conference room yesterday to resolve the program. I am happy to report that both Gary and I think we are in a good spot. For the 1st hour we churned and churned but then finally…a breakthrough!

Gary did take a stab at identifying internal circulation (1.35 factor) in one calculation and also just doing another blanket building efficiency calc. In either case we still had a significant overage of ASF. (I can show these to you once you are back.) He also revised program to calculate ASF for offices / workspaces based on your direction yesterday (343 offices x 120, etc.).

To solve the problem we actually backed away from the efficiency conversation for a moment as we continued to be stuck on that even with the different calculation options. Instead I asked us to approach this differently. I asked myself if generally speaking we had to cut large amount of ASF out no matter what calc. method we use, how would I suggest we do that given the initial planning program. The attached program is our result.

I think it would be easier to explain details in person, but here are a few assumptions which I truly believe are most reasonable:  The ASF allocated for PIA is out. While I am sure Debbie would have loved to have considered adding another unit in in PIA’s place, that isn’t a luxury we can afford and this protects SF for other CHSS departments. This seems an easy program cut as it does not displace anyone/anything. This was over 6600 SF  There was 2400 ASF for CHSS Research space (excluding History and New Media) which appeared to be nothing more than (4) 600 SF rooms that was to be used for GRAs. If we assume that GRAs and Faculty for those research centers have been accounted for in the workplace numbers, then we should not need the 600 SF per center as a separate line item. We can choose to take the ASF for center members and let them sit in neighborhoods or we take that workspace SF out of neighborhoods and create research centers for them. Additionally one of the centers included in the 2400 is located in Commerce and should stay there due to lease; another (Cochrane) I believe has gone away. In my opinion the separate line items totaling 2400 SF were double counting if we are tracking workspace for these center member so we took that 2400 out. I would keep History & New Media as a good fit for Robinson and the MIX. Of note, we programmed 3750 for them but they have sprawled to over 6000 in Enterprise. We will need to reconcile.  Gary had 10 neighborhoods organized around 5 neighborhood centers (a neighborhood center located between 2 neighborhoods). Since workplace ASF was calculated separately as you directed then we can remove the 5th neighborhood center which was approx. 2000 ASF and distribute the workspaces between 8 neighborhoods instead of 10. In the past when we talked about 8 neighborhoods, we - including Debbie - seemed good with that number.

I believe that by making these moves, we can significantly reduce ASF without impacting function, flexibility or major program items. The core program elements remain. We were also able to increase ASF for DoIT to 3000, include the new and needed anthropology lab & support space and to provide (1) extra large conference room that can meet the needs for larger event space (40 at tables & chairs or more if set up in lecture style)

26 If you assume these changes, then we appear to be around 127,000 ASF with an additional 3800 available. This 3800 will likely end up being the internal circulation we all agree is necessary and it will count as ASF. At roughly 130,000 ASF we would be within the 217,858 GSF approved building if we are 60% efficient but I expect that efficiency to improve as we start to layout concepts and more accurately calculate efficiency. Good news is that we appear to be in a good spot at 60% and if we improve upon that %, we only gain opportunities by adding ASF. By tackling things this way, I feel we have a workable program that stays true to intent and need and programmatically should not result in the need for additional cuts later.

I hope this makes sense. Gary is cleaning this up and verifying all calculations. I have looked at your calendar. Would you be able to have a working lunch with me Monday from 12-1 to review? Since I will be in research retreat all day Tuesday and Wed, I will miss the Wed Robinson meeting so I want you have an understanding and comfort level with what we did before then.

Hope you are enjoying your weekend travels, Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner for Academic & Research Facilities George Mason University

27 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, September 5, 2016 5:43 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue;Lisa A Reeves Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

28 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 11:22 AM To: Charles Spann Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: RE: Revised Plan for ITS relocation to free up Innovation 4th Floor spaces

Charlie,

I am happy to discuss if there is some other way to meet the Mason on-line space program need without using room 427 if there is equipment and staff in that space that are critical to GMU-TV functions. I may have another idea that may work to handle this need, so can you give me a call to discuss? Also, do you know which room on the 3rd floor Joy Taylor was referring to?

Joy

Associate Director, Space Management Facilities Campus Planning George Mason University (703) 993-2468

From: Charles Spann Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 11:09 AM To: Joy Staulcup Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: RE: Revised Plan for ITS relocation to free up Innovation 4th Floor spaces

Joy,

I walked through the space yesterday. You are correct, there aren’t props in 427, they are in 459. That said, 427 is full of production equipment (cameras, cables, tripods, etc.) that GWU-TV uses daily. The same is true for 459. I was able to walk through, but I was not left with the impression that the items were storage. I would not classify this as storage as much as I would say it is production work space. Did you have a proposal on where the wage staff would go? I don’t think it is reasonable to ask that they move this to another location. Can we find another solution for the collaborative area and staff?

One option Joy Taylor mentioned is repurposing a training room that ITS has on the 3rd floor for the training room you have in 400 and then moving the staff planned for 427 into 400?

Thank you Charlie

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2016 12:20 PM To: Charles Spann Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: RE: Revised Plan for ITS relocation to free up Innovation 4th Floor spaces

29 Ok, Charlie, but I don’t ever recall seeing props stored in Innovation room 427 – only electronic looking equipment and there were a few student stations. Room 459 is the TV studio scene dock storage and we aren’t asking to reassign that room. I only asking if some of the critical equipment that TV studio may have stored in room 427 (which we do need for Mason on-line) could be moved into the existing storage rooms (459 or 460) that remain assigned to TV studio. Either way we will have to work out some solution for what needs to come out of 427, so just let me know what you find.

Joy

Associate Director, Space Management Facilities Campus Planning George Mason University (703) 993-2468

From: Charles Spann Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2016 11:56 AM To: Joy Staulcup Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: RE: Revised Plan for ITS relocation to free up Innovation 4th Floor spaces

Hi Joy,

Thank you for the tour of Fenwick and this summary.

I have discussed it with Marilyn, and she is very concerned about the loss of GMU-TV prop space. The storage next to GMU-TV is used to store props for the set. Having this on another floor would be a hassle. I plan to visit Innovation this afternoon to see first hand how this space is used so that I can best speak to our requirements. I’ll report back after that.

Thank you Charlie

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Monday, August 29, 2016 1:14 PM To: Charles Spann Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: Revised Plan for ITS relocation to free up Innovation 4th Floor spaces

Charlie,

I’ve revised the slides to incorporate the changes we discussed in our Friday meeting, and I will deliver a new large print version of those slides to you this afternoon so that you will have them to review with Marilyn. Per our discussion, the following items need to be resolved, but do not prevent us from moving forward if Marilyn and you give me the “ok” to proceed after you take a look at the edits I made to the plan.

30 2. We will add the construction of a new office for Joy Taylor in the portion of new assigned JC 311E space in the project scope for this relocation, and the construction of an additional private office on the 1st floor of the Fenwick A-Wing assigned space for an office for Crystal Clemmons (timing of that construction TBD). 3. You had asked whether the additional workstations in the Fenwick A-Wing 2nd floor suite A244 area could be used to consolidate more ITS staff since only (6) workstations are needed to relocate the Innovation 4th floor staff. I discussed with Cathy and she is agreeable to continuing that discussion to see what may be feasible, but would like to have that be a separate line of conversation and relocation would be done as a separate project from our Innovation 4th floor relocation project. I’ve attached a copy of the floor plan with notes about assignment/uses of the rooms in Rivanna Module since you had listed the Desktop Support staff as one possible group to relocate. I don’t know if all these staff are still with that dept since I haven’t received space/occupants updates from Jean to the contrary, but this at least provides the general amount of staff that would need to be accommodated. There would need to be at minimum (16) stations to accommodate staffing and some other support spaces, so we’ll have to determine if trying to relocate them is even feasible. We can continue that discussion as a separate ITS planning exercise, but just at least wanted you to know that Cathy is agreeable to that possibility.

Once you’ve reviewed the slides to make sure I captured everything, and have a chance to review with Marilyn, please send me an email (with her copied) to let me know I am clear to move forward with presenting this option to Michelle Marks and Kim Eby. I will include you in that review meeting so that you will hear their feedback and can help us work through the next steps of potential timing for these relocations.

Thanks,

Joy

Associate Director, Space Management Facilities Campus Planning George Mason University (703) 993-2468

31 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 9:42 AM To: McNay, Gary Attachments: 160608_Office Analysis.xls

32 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 9:07 AM To: McNay, Gary Attachments: Robinson-Hall Program Used for Sept 2015 Resubmit-LKM Working.xls

33 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 8:49 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Laura K Manno;Nancy S Pickens;Frank Strike;Lisa A Reeves Cc: Cline, Floyd;Harney, Paul;Kluesner, Gene;Leach, Katlyn Subject: Documents for our call this morning Attachments: CPandgm Vetted Comments 8.29.16- Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response.with hidden cells for review8.30.16.xlsx; GMU Robinson Hall_space schedule_9.30.16v8.xlsx; program analysis worksheet 8.31.16.xlsx; Copy of 160602_Planning Program vs. PW Proposedgmedit.xlsx

Cathy, Laura and team,

Attached are some of the the tools we will use for the call this morning. The 8.30.16 space schedule will document todays decisions to balance the sf to meet the 218,000 gross max for Robinson ( we will need to plug in Harris as a check to make sure it fits in the 2000 sf gross estimate

The Planning program vs current program spreadsheet will be used to compare workstation numbers.

The “ program analysis worksheet shows a quick comparison between the 2015 planning program non office elements and the current space schedule. The biggest delta is in the specialty classrooms, labs, and centers associated with the departments. We are hoping to balance nsf between the conference spaces, community kitchens and MIX to zero out the 5000nsf overage in the current spreadsheet.

The “CP and gm vetted comments” program review spreadsheet show the key issues and questions that need confirmation. All other owner comments are being addressed and are still in the spreadsheet – just hidden.

Thanks! gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal 1315 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30309 t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 [email protected]

Perkins+Will Ideas + buildings that honor the broader goals of society perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

34 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Monday, August 29, 2016 1:14 PM To: Charles Spann Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: Revised Plan for ITS relocation to free up Innovation 4th Floor spaces Attachments: Rivanna Module Space Assignments-Uses.pdf

Charlie,

1. Innovation 427 – this room has equipment/items stored that belong to GMU TV but is to be reassigned to meet Mason On-line consolidation needs. We need to ask that you coordinate with GMU TV to have them do a complete inventory of the items that are stored in that room, and surplus/dispose of any equipment/items that may be stored but are generally not used or are obsolete. Once we know the final amount of items that need to be relocated, we can determine if those can be moved and stored in the existing storage rooms assigned to GMU TV (Innov 459 and 460) or if we need to look at other ITS assigned storage space in Innovation to develop a plan for relocating the items to those locations. 2. We will add the construction of a new office for Joy Taylor in the portion of new assigned JC 311E space in the project scope for this relocation, and the construction of an additional private office on the 1st floor of the Fenwick A-Wing assigned space for an office for Crystal Clemmons (timing of that construction TBD). 3. You had asked whether the additional workstations in the Fenwick A-Wing 2nd floor suite A244 area could be used to consolidate more ITS staff since only (6) workstations are needed to relocate the Innovation 4th floor staff. I discussed with Cathy and she is agreeable to continuing that discussion to see what may be feasible, but would like to have that be a separate line of conversation and relocation would be done as a separate project from our Innovation 4th floor relocation project. I’ve attached a copy of the floor plan with notes about assignment/uses of the rooms in Rivanna Module since you had listed the Desktop Support staff as one possible group to relocate. I don’t know if all these staff are still with that dept since I haven’t received space/occupants updates from Jean to the contrary, but this at least provides the general amount of staff that would need to be accommodated. There would need to be at minimum (16) stations to accommodate staffing and some other support spaces, so we’ll have to determine if trying to relocate them is even feasible. We can continue that discussion as a separate ITS planning exercise, but just at least wanted you to know that Cathy is agreeable to that possibility.

Thanks,

Joy

Associate Director, Space Management Facilities Campus Planning

35 George Mason University (703) 993-2468

36 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 29, 2016 5:39 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue;Lisa A Reeves Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

37 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Deborah Boehm-Davis Sent: Friday, August 26, 2016 3:51 PM To: Laura K Manno;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Sean Mallon;Robinson Utility Infrastructure Cc: Jill Bowen Subject: Copy of 160825_MIX-Community-Classroom Program - Proposed Edits REV-DAB.xlsx Attachments: Copy of 160825_MIX-Community-Classroom Program - Proposed Edits REV-DAB.xlsx; 160817_Program Doc - MIX Text Revised- LKM SM dab.docx

Attached are my edits to the documents you sent. On the excel spreadsheet, there were numerous typos which I corrected (when I did that, I put an “x” in the next field to alert you to that. All changes were in column E. More substantive comments follow in column F. Overall, though, I think this looks good. I like increasing the square footage assigned to classrooms; I think this is a great suggestion. I appreciate the MIX space becoming integrated with the remainder of the building and making it welcoming for faculty as well as students.

I note that the “phone booths” might be interesting in some of the neighborhoods to allow people to make private phone calls when they don’t have a private office.

If you have any questions about my comments, let me know.

Best, Debbie

38 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Kelly Hayward Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 3:23 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Cc: Thomas A Drerenberger Subject: Planning and Spacemanagement WO's.xls Attachments: Planning and Spacemanagement WO's.xls

Cathy, He is your report. Kelly

39 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Lisa A Reeves Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 10:49 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: 2016 CPSM Manual Attachments: CPSM 2016 Rev 0 - 042016.pdf; DEB Notice Effective 04.20.16.pdf

Hi Cathy, find attached the CPSM Manual effective April 20, 2016 and the DEB Notice which summarizes the changes since Revision of the 2014 edition that was issued on 4-1-15. The manual is 336 pages and I wasn’t sure if you want a printed copy, if so, let me know and I’ll take care of it. Thanks, Lisa

Lisa Reeves Projects Administrator Campus Planning, Facilities George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MSN 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 Phone: 703-993-2929 Fax: 703-993-2524 Email: [email protected]

40 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 9:56 AM To: McNay, Gary;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robinson Utility Infrastructure;Cline, Floyd;Kluesner, Gene;Leach, Katlyn;Harney, Paul;Wolfgang, Stephanie;Thomas A Drerenberger;Frank Strike;Thomas G Calhoun;Nancy S Pickens;Deniz Callahan;Celli, Robert;Weinfurther, Kurt;[email protected];Lisa A Reeves Subject: RE: Robinson/Infrastructure Weekly Progress Meeting Attachments: 160718_CHSS Comment Clarifications - LKM.docx

Here is the narrative where I clarified CHSS comments with the Dean. (see attached)

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner for Academic & Research Facilities George Mason University

From: McNay, Gary [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 9:42 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey ; Robinson Utility Infrastructure ; Cline, Floyd ; Kluesner, Gene ; Leach, Katlyn ; Harney, Paul ; Wolfgang, Stephanie ; Thomas A Drerenberger ; Frank Strike ; Thomas G Calhoun ; Nancy S Pickens ; Deniz Callahan ; Laura K Manno ; Celli, Robert ; Weinfurther, Kurt ; [email protected]; Lisa A Reeves Subject: RE: Robinson/Infrastructure Weekly Progress Meeting

Cathy, or Laura, could you send (or resend) a copy of “Laura’s Narrative” that is mentioned in the comments? I may already have it but can’t find it in my email box.

Thanks! gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 9:15 AM To: Robinson Utility Infrastructure ; Cline, Floyd ; McNay, Gary ; Kluesner, Gene ; Leach, Katlyn ; Harney, Paul ; Wolfgang, Stephanie ; Thomas A Drerenberger ; Frank Strike ; Thomas G Calhoun ; Nancy S Pickens ; Deniz Callahan ; Laura K Manno ; Celli, Robert ; Weinfurther, Kurt ; [email protected]; Lisa A Reeves Subject: RE: Robinson/Infrastructure Weekly Progress Meeting

41 All – we will be meeting today with the following agenda:

1. Update on Funding 2. Program Comments – see attached File with new comments by Mason in red 3. Agenda for next week’s meetings – Land and Building and Building Committee updates. 4. Other new business – status of Action items.

We will have the attached file up for viewing on the screen.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

-----Original Appointment----- From: Robinson Utility Infrastructure Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2016 10:31 AM To: Robinson Utility Infrastructure; Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey; Floyd Cline; Gary McNay; Gene Kluesner; Katlyn Leach; Paul Harney; Stephanie Wolfgang; Thomas A Drerenberger ([email protected]); Frank Strike; Thomas G. Calhoun; Nancy S Pickens; Deniz Callahan; Laura Manno; Celli, Robert; Weinfurther, Kurt; [email protected]; Lisa A Reeves Subject: Robinson/Infrastructure Weekly Progress Meeting When: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 3:00 PM-4:30 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada). Where: Facilities Management Room 6/Videoconference (Bluejeans)

Good Morning,

Beginning Wednesday, August 3rd, we will be using Bluejeans, a web based videoconference solution, to connect you to the Robinson/Infrastructure Weekl Progress Meetings at 3:00 p.m. EST. To join the meeting we ask that you paste this link: https://bluejeans.com/350856906 into your browser about 10 minutes prior to the start of the meeting. You will be prompted to fill in your name and it will ask how you would like to connect. You will connect via your computer, and then click on “Join Meeting.” See attached Bluejeans Guide. You can share this link with other remote participants. If you can provide Lisa Reeves ([email protected]) with a list of participants each week, that would be helpful but not necessary.

<< File: Bluejeans Guide.docx >> Additionally, to ensure that everything will run smoothly, we would like to test the same link with you prior to the day of the meeting. We are available Monday-Thursday 9am-7pm EST, and Friday 9am-4pm EST. Please email [email protected] or call (703)993-5580 to schedule your test. You may also reach out to either that email or phone number if you have any trouble connecting the day of the meeting. -Christina

Christina M. Sanders Global TelePresence Specialist, CVT Information Technology Services 42 George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MSN 1F3 Fairfax, VA 22030 Phone: 703-993-5591 | Fax: 703-993-4544 Mobile: 571-214-8790 [email protected] http://doit.gmu.edu/faculty-and-staff/course-tools/conferencing-services/

43 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 9:15 AM To: Robinson Utility Infrastructure;Floyd Cline;Gary McNay;Gene Kluesner;Katlyn Leach;Paul Harney;Stephanie Wolfgang;Thomas A Drerenberger ([email protected]);Frank Strike;Thomas G. Calhoun;Nancy S Pickens;Deniz Callahan;Laura Manno;Celli, Robert;Weinfurther, Kurt;[email protected];Lisa A Reeves Subject: RE: Robinson/Infrastructure Weekly Progress Meeting

All – we will be meeting today with the following agenda:

1. Update on Funding

2. Program Comments – see attached File with new comments by Mason in red 3. Agenda for next week’s meetings – Land and Building and Building Committee updates. 4. Other new business – status of Action items.

We will have the attached file up for viewing on the screen.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

Good Morning,

Beginning Wednesday, August 3rd, we will be using Bluejeans, a web based videoconference solution, to connect you to the Robinson/Infrastructure Weekl Progress Meetings at 3:00 p.m. EST. To join the meeting we ask that you paste this link: https://bluejeans.com/350856906 into your browser about 10 minutes prior to the start of the meeting. You will be prompted to fill in your name and it will ask how you would like to connect. You will connect via your computer, and then click on “Join Meeting.” See attached Bluejeans Guide. You can 44 share this link with other remote participants. If you can provide Lisa Reeves ([email protected]) with a list of participants each week, that would be helpful but not necessary.

Christina M. Sanders Global TelePresence Specialist, CVT Information Technology Services George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MSN 1F3 Fairfax, VA 22030 Phone: 703-993-5591 | Fax: 703-993-4544 Mobile: 571-214-8790 [email protected] http://doit.gmu.edu/faculty-and-staff/course-tools/conferencing-services/

45 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 9:01 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: For discussion in 1 x 1 Attachments: Executive Comm Present - Class & Office Slides.pptx; 160817_Office vs. Shared Workspace.xlsx

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner for Academic & Research Facilities George Mason University

46 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 5:38 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue;Lisa A Reeves Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

47 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 15, 2016 5:40 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

bacteria, making the fixture easier to More than 100 clean and keeping it cleaner longer. facilities experts from prestigious Read more . . . organizations will show attendees how to run facilities and properties more effectively during NFMT

Vegas, Nov. 1 to 2 at the Mirage Events Center in Las Vegas. NFMT Vegas is free to attend. Registration includes access to more than 70 conference sessions, entry to the Expo Hall, facility tours, and networking.

Building Operating Management, sponsor of NFMT Vegas, indicates that more than 1,500 building owners, facilities leaders, property managers, and other key decision-makers from across the country are expected to attend.

Sessions include:

Taking Your FM Career to the Next Level with Teena Shouse, CFM, IFMA Fellow, President, FM Transitions;

BIM2FM: Leveraging your BIM Data for Facility Management with Michael Tardif, Managing Partner, Building Informatics Group, LLC; How Facility Managers can use BACnet to Implement an Internet of Things (IoT) Strategy; Grant Wichenko, President, Appin Associates; Budgeting a Carpet Care Maintenance Plan, Lewis G. Migliore, President, LGMTCS and Associates; Energy Management, Smart Controls and Automation, Cristian Carnevale, CEO, Acotel Net Changes in the 2017 National Electric Code, Mike Leitzel Electrical Training Specialist, TPC Trainco; The Importance of a CMMS as a Knowledge Management Tool, Chris Kluis, VP of Strategy and Business Development, Mintek Mobile Data Solutions; among others

Read more . . .

Rendezvous Room Booking & Crestron streamline meetings

Booking the perfect meeting space just got easier, thanks to the recent collaboration between NFS Technology Group, providers of Rendezvous room booking software, and Crestron, a manufacturer of integrated technology for automation, control, and management.

Rendezvous room booking software from NFS, and Crestron Fusion Cloud, a cloud-based enterprise management system, seamlessly combine to create a truly connected workplace environment and end-to-end solution. Crestron Fusion Cloud enables technology managers to globally monitor, manage, and control room devices, as well as display meeting details inside and outside the scheduled room. It also enables them to collect device and room usage data so they can make informed, intelligent decisions to improve workflow.

With this joint solution, employees can find a meeting space, book the room and catering, set-up lighting, control temperature, lower window shades, and bring remote offices into the meeting by video conferencing seamlessly for a timely start. Crestron scheduling touch screens outside the room enable them to instantly see room status, book the room, or release it if unused (requires occupancy sensor). Adding the Crestron PinPoint app provides employees with a personal, mobile, dynamic scheduling tool; contextual information enables them to book spaces based on where they are, what they're trying to do, and with whom they are working.

NFS will be at World Workplace booth 1618 in San Diego.

Oct. 25-28: ISSA/INTERCLEAN NA, Chicago

If you are serious about the professional cleaning industry, ISSA/INTERCLEAN North America

1. Draws people who matter: Nearly 16,000 of the world's leading industry professionals, including top distributors, building service

58 contractors, and in-house decision-makers attend the show, making this the best networking opportunity of the year.

2. Showcases the hot trends: More than 700 exhibitors from more than 25 countries will be showcasing thousands of products and services, featuring all the innovation the industry has to offer.

3. Offers non-stop learning: With education all week-including more than 60 seminars and workshops-this event offers strategic, high-level executive advice.

4. Includes co-location events: Six other industry organizations will be there, making it six different events all under one roof!

Find it all at issa.com/show.

McMorrowReports.com, 572 Valley Rd., Suite 43008, Upper Montclair, NJ 07043

SafeUnsubscribe™ [email protected] Forward email | Update Profile | About our service provider Sent by [email protected] in collaboration with

Try it free today

59 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 8, 2016 5:39 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

60 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2016 5:06 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: FW: School of Business space data updates

Tom – sending this along FYI. Business space liaison has indicated that they’ve had six resignations so there will be vacant offices. May be opportunities to meet some office needs by looking at whether those positions need to be in private offices when they are re-hired since I know some of them were in student service positions. If they could look at shared offices for those new staff, could free up some offices for new faculty if that is Dean Nutter’s immediate need.

Joy

Associate Director, Space Management Facilities Campus Planning George Mason University (703) 993-2468

From: Diane Vermaaten Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2016 9:03 AM To: Joy Staulcup Subject: RE: School of Business space data updates

Joy, Yes, next week works. I just got back in the office yesterday so I am playing catchup. We have also had six resignations in the last four weeks so there are a lot of updates. We have posted recruitments (or are in the process of posting) for all the positions but I’ll simply provide you with the position that is designated to a particular office when I cannot provide a name.

Thanks, Diane

Diane Vermaaten, MBA, PhD Assistant Dean of Finance & Operations School of Business Phone: (703) 993-3725

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2016 8:58 AM To: Diane Vermaaten Subject: RE: School of Business space data updates

Diane,

61 I don’t have a specific deadline, but was hoping to get the updates as soon as possible so that I can get them made before things start to get busy again as everyone returns from being out of office/vacations etc. in mid-August and we start to get busy again with requests, meetings, etc. Is getting the updates back to me early next week feasible for you?

Joy

Associate Director, Space Management Facilities Campus Planning George Mason University (703) 993-2468

From: Diane Vermaaten Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2016 8:22 AM To: Joy Staulcup Subject: RE: School of Business space data updates

Good morning Joy, By what date do you need this returned to you?

Thanks, Diane

Diane Vermaaten, MBA, PhD Assistant Dean of Finance & Operations School of Business Phone: (703) 993-3725

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2016 11:23 AM To: Diane Vermaaten Cc: Melanie S Pflugshaupt Subject: School of Business space data updates

Diane,

I’ve attached a current copy of the space data/assignment report for School of Business assigned spaces. I try to do a full review/update of unit assigned space data in July since it’s a little slower for me and my unit space liaisons, and I can capture the future academic year space assignments that would be active for the upcoming fall semester for new faculty hires, etc. that units may have. If you can please review the report to make sure I have the correct station count, dept code, and correct occupant name(s) listed in the Comments column, I would appreciate it so that I can go ahead and get those updates done. I know that you will have some temporary moves/assignments during construction, but I don’t want to capture those on this report since they are temporary. If your assignment updates can represent the future assignments of spaces, post renovation, that represent how the staff offices, staff workstation areas, and faculty offices are assigned, that’s what I’m looking for so that I don’t have to do another round of changes later in August/start of fall. Just saves us both time to add the future occupant info now if you already know that plan.

The report shows the office highlighted in green (009) that is being removed by the renovations, so I’ll update the space data to reflect that area as waiting/reception area as soon as I get the updated drawing from Alex and send it to our space database vendor to update our floor plans. The new office (056A) that is being added in the Development area with the renovation (assume that is still part of the final project) is listed on the report and highlighted in yellow, so

62 please let me know the future occupant of that office. All other information for stations or offices that were noted as vacant in our previous review are listed in red font so that you can provide updated occupant information if those positions were filled, or relocations of existing staff or faculty were/are going to be made.

Thanks for your help with this,

Joy

Associate Director, Space Management Facilities Campus Planning George Mason University (703) 993-2468

63 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2016 11:25 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Thomas G Calhoun;Laura K Manno Cc: Frank Strike;Harney, Paul Subject: RE: Benchmark Visit - officing - The New School - Parsons

Look forward to finding a way to get this into the conversation.

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company's "Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture"

-----Original Message----- From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2016 10:51 AM To: McNay, Gary ; Thomas G Calhoun ; Laura K Manno Cc: Frank Strike ; Harney, Paul Subject: Benchmark Visit - officing - The New School - Parsons

Gary/Tom/Laura - I'm sitting in a conference and they are talking about incentives to reduce need for on-campus office space for faculty - I think if we restart in earnest we should look at visiting the New School in Manhatten - they are doing some interesting things. They are doing financial incentives in addition to giving highest quality space to shared space - not so great space to private offices. They also give best space to younger faculty who they want to encourage getting tenure. Interesting.

64 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2016 10:51 AM To: [email protected];Thomas G Calhoun;Laura K Manno Cc: Frank Strike;Paul Harney Subject: Benchmark Visit - officing - The New School - Parsons Attachments: image1.JPG; ATT00001.txt

65 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 1, 2016 5:56 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

66 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 10:14 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Laura K Manno Cc: Harney, Paul;Leach, Katlyn Subject: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response.with hidden cells for review.xlsx Attachments: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response.with hidden cells for review.xlsx

Cathy,

Sending the file you could not open …

If you think it is not beneficial to have the full team call today we can do it next week for those that are available. if there are items you feel need to be addressed in the pricing, that would be a reason to have a more focused call. we have asked our estimator to be complete by the 5th, which is a week later than the original schedule.

At the least, maybe we have a call to listen to the concerns you addressed in your earlier message and we defer the meat of the program concerns through email and in the call next week? Im on PTO the week of the 8th.

Gratefully, gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

67 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 10:12 AM To: Lisa A Reeves Subject: FW: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response.with hidden cells for review.xlsx Attachments: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response.with hidden cells for review.xlsx

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: McNay, Gary [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 9:35 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey; Laura K Manno; Nancy S Pickens; Frank Strike; Thomas G Calhoun; Elizabeth D Long Cc: Harney, Paul; Cline, Floyd; Leach, Katlyn; Kluesner, Gene Subject: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response.with hidden cells for review.xlsx

Cathy and team,

Confession- One of my faults is to make things more complicated than necessary. With that knowledge, we welcome your insights into how to simplify our conversation today to the level that is most productive.

Our work in this phase is about: 1. Setting the consensus vision; 2. Creating a smart, flexible space schedule that supports that vision; 3. Building an intelligent budget/ value model for decision support; 4. Gaining insight into directions that will be productive; 5. Defining the areas of greatest opportunity and/or risk to manage going forward. 6. Your concerns here… We decide together how to accomplish those goals.

Key elements of the program document that we are striving to pin down with you; 1. The vision , guiding principles and goals that will drive our conversations and frame the design decisions 2. The space schedule and the intent behind it. ( while maintaining as much flexibility as possible) a. Proper balance of each functional area in relation to the stated goals for the project. ( Mason ) b. Include the building support elements, to help n-t-g and create a smarter platform for design ( PW ) c. Have a clear strategy on how the n-t-g issue will be presented in relation to BCOM requirements ( Mason and PW) 3. Those elements/ systems/ intentions that we intend to explore during design to meet the established goals ( we don’t need to decide to day) 68 a. MEP/energy b. Storm water c. Technology d. Healthy building systems e. Your concerns here…

The attached spreadsheet hides the cells that do not seem to have an impact on the cost estimate or space schedule. After we have the discussion about the items above, we could choose the items on your highlighted list from yesterday, start on those in the attached list, and schedule another call to go through the rest. A face to face visit can be set up as needed as well.

Looking forward to listening to your thoughts, concerns and ideas, and having a productive call.

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal 1315 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30309 t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 [email protected]

Perkins+Will Ideas + buildings that honor the broader goals of society perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter

Please consider the environment before printing this email

69 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 9:46 AM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: FW: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response.with hidden cells for review.xlsx Attachments: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response.with hidden cells for review.xlsx

This all requires an institutional vision – I don’t know what that is beyond what they have already written down…..do you have any feedback. I am not sure the meeting this afternoon is worth having with no feedback on the space issues – we can go through some of the stuff at this staff level – but at some point leadership has to help make some decisions and provide some consensus input – based on what Laura said yesterday that Sean said I think we may be thinking too big on the Maker space – apparently Sean went and looked at all sorts of spaces recently around the east coast and they are all about as big as the one we have in Innovation already.

Also they want to know about the money – any more on that?

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

Cathy and team,

Key elements of the program document that we are striving to pin down with you; 1. The vision , guiding principles and goals that will drive our conversations and frame the design decisions 70 2. The space schedule and the intent behind it. ( while maintaining as much flexibility as possible) a. Proper balance of each functional area in relation to the stated goals for the project. ( Mason ) b. Include the building support elements, to help n-t-g and create a smarter platform for design ( PW ) c. Have a clear strategy on how the n-t-g issue will be presented in relation to BCOM requirements ( Mason and PW) 3. Those elements/ systems/ intentions that we intend to explore during design to meet the established goals ( we don’t need to decide to day) a. MEP/energy b. Storm water c. Technology d. Healthy building systems e. Your concerns here…

Looking forward to listening to your thoughts, concerns and ideas, and having a productive call.

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal 1315 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30309 t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 [email protected]

Perkins+Will Ideas + buildings that honor the broader goals of society perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter

Please consider the environment before printing this email

71 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 9:35 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Laura K Manno;Nancy S Pickens;Frank Strike;Thomas G Calhoun;Elizabeth D Long Cc: Harney, Paul;Cline, Floyd;Leach, Katlyn;Kluesner, Gene Subject: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response.with hidden cells for review.xlsx Attachments: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response.with hidden cells for review.xlsx

Cathy and team,

Key elements of the program document that we are striving to pin down with you; 1. The vision , guiding principles and goals that will drive our conversations and frame the design decisions 2. The space schedule and the intent behind it. ( while maintaining as much flexibility as possible) a. Proper balance of each functional area in relation to the stated goals for the project. ( Mason ) b. Include the building support elements, to help n-t-g and create a smarter platform for design ( PW ) c. Have a clear strategy on how the n-t-g issue will be presented in relation to BCOM requirements ( Mason and PW) 3. Those elements/ systems/ intentions that we intend to explore during design to meet the established goals ( we don’t need to decide to day) a. MEP/energy b. Storm water c. Technology d. Healthy building systems e. Your concerns here…

Looking forward to listening to your thoughts, concerns and ideas, and having a productive call.

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C 72 Practice Leader, Principal 1315 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30309 t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 [email protected]

Perkins+Will Ideas + buildings that honor the broader goals of society perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter

Please consider the environment before printing this email

73 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 9:18 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: FW: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response..xlsx Attachments: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response..xlsx

I have printed both Gary’s email and the comments which I will take a look at before our meeting this afternoon.

These questions are big ones. The kinds of things he is asking in his email text are things that seem like they need to be answered by the Executive committee as a whole. That executive committee collectively needs to stand behind whatever decision they made together.

I thought we would (via these comments) identify the items that need to go to Exec committee for absolute resolution and then schedule a meeting to get direction on those items. Agree with you, with BOV this week access to Exec for quick answers seems virtually impossible. Can there be an Exec meeting next week?

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner for Academic & Research Facilities George Mason University

From: McNay, Gary [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 10:25 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey ; Laura K Manno ; Frank Strike ; Nancy S Pickens ; Lisa A Reeves ; Thomas G Calhoun Cc: Harney, Paul ; Wolfgang, Stephanie ; Cline, Floyd ; Leach, Katlyn ; Kluesner, Gene Subject: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response..xlsx

Lisa, Cathy and Team,

For tomorrows conversation at 3 we propose the following agenda ( in addition to finding out that funding is imminent…!)

74 i. This may be better than specific sf numbers to provide some flexibility in the numbers as the NTG is adjusted. 2. Review the blue, pink and green items on the attached spreadsheet for intent.( see parag Our responses to the comments received on the 18/19th are attached. We recommend we focus on the items that have Vision, cost and or policy implications. To help simplify the conversation, we have color coded the responses in “column F” to focus on those that we believe need leadership attention now or may have an impact on the pricing underway. The green (executive level decision,) blue (discus and resolve,) and pink color cells (cost implications,) are those we recommend touching tomorrow. The white cells are simple clarifications and/or items that will receive more attention in design. Item in green cells require executive level input or decisions. The bright yellow color represents items we are changing now.

3. Discuss the level of approval expected for the programming document. a. Acceptance of the Vision and Guiding principles in the program document as key design drivers b. Strategy for space allocation c. Pathway to technology decisions that will impact space and cost d. Other? i. Narrative about Harris Theater scope/allowance? ii. Narrative about separate infrastructure project iii. 4. Schedule for completion of Program Document

Thank you! gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal 1315 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30309 t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 [email protected]

Perkins+Will Ideas + buildings that honor the broader goals of society perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

75 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 10:25 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Laura K Manno;Frank Strike;Nancy S Pickens;Lisa A Reeves;Thomas G Calhoun Cc: Harney, Paul;Wolfgang, Stephanie;Cline, Floyd;Leach, Katlyn;Kluesner, Gene Subject: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response..xlsx Attachments: Copy of Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-pw response..xlsx

Lisa, Cathy and Team,

For tomorrows conversation at 3 we propose the following agenda ( in addition to finding out that funding is imminent…!)

1. Discuss the strategy for how space will be allocated. a. Will we use a proportional model for workplace, classroom, MIX? b. Will the classrooms numbers be fixed based on the most recent note from Laura? c. How fixed is the 17,000 nsf allocated to the MIX? d. How to finalize on the space allocation for offices? – our recommendation is to set a square footage for the workplace component and then sort out the way that allocation is spent with the users/ leadership. e. Intentions for addressing the n-t-g requirements and what the published space schedule will include. f. % of NSF Allocation per functional unit, MIX, Classroom, Workplace, Informal learning i. This may be better than specific sf numbers to provide some flexibility in the numbers as the NTG is adjusted. 2. Review the blue, pink and green items on the attached spreadsheet for intent.( see parag Our responses to the comments received on the 18/19th are attached. We recommend we focus on the items that have Vision, cost and or policy implications. To help simplify the conversation, we have color coded the responses in “column F” to focus on those that we believe need leadership attention now or may have an impact on the pricing underway. The green (executive level decision,) blue (discus and resolve,) and pink color cells (cost implications,) are those we recommend touching tomorrow. The white cells are simple clarifications and/or items that will receive more attention in design. Item in green cells require executive level input or decisions. The bright yellow color represents items we are changing now.

Thank you! gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C 76 Practice Leader, Principal 1315 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30309 t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 [email protected]

Perkins+Will Ideas + buildings that honor the broader goals of society perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

77 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 8:00 AM To: McNay, Gary;Kluesner, Gene;Harney, Paul Cc: Frank Strike;Nancy S Pickens;Thomas G Calhoun;Laura K Manno;Lisa A Reeves;Wolfgang, Stephanie;Celli, Robert ([email protected]);Weinfurther, Kurt;Elizabeth D Long Subject: RE: Information Request - Robinson and Utility Infrastructure Attachments: Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-07.26.2016.xlsx; Space Standards for Building Service Spaces and Telecom Rooms.docx

Gary – here is a copy of the spreadsheet that had the remaining comments on it that Mason had to address – this is a subset of the original spreadsheet – actually it is the full spreadsheet with rows hidden for comments that did not require further discussion at Mason. This spreadsheet represents items that require further discussion here. We have discussed several of the facilities related outstanding items and system issues. Please find attached the results of those discussions – you will note on the items we discussed there is bold, italic, underlined text – that is the further response on the comment. There is also a sheet attached that includes building support – that is something I am assuming you are including in the net to gross – I prefer not to do it that way – when we have done it that way in the past we are missing important program elements when starting the schematic design phase – this also helps better align the net to gross number. I am in the process of getting a final review of this information on our end but it is worst case scenario in my opinion so I think okay to send to you in this draft form. Some of the information is taken from our Design Manual – mostly the section on Telecom requirements. The balance was from a previous design manual and will soon be incorporated into the current manual.

Please let me know if there are questions – I am somewhat concerned that we are estimating a document that we are not quite comfortable with – especially from the standpoint of the systems narrative and the building concepts etc. I realize your point of view that we are looking at worst case and we are going to need to cut budget wise but I want to make sure we have the same basic understanding and agreement on systems proposed before we go down that road.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 8:24 PM To: McNay, Gary; Kluesner, Gene; Harney, Paul Cc: Frank Strike; Nancy S Pickens; Thomas G Calhoun; Laura K Manno; Lisa A Reeves; Wolfgang, Stephanie; Celli, Robert ([email protected]); Weinfurther, Kurt; Elizabeth D Long Subject: Re: Information Request - Robinson and Utility Infrastructure

78 in red that we are working on getting final answers on - many of these are overarching issues that we need to provide clarification on. Some are design team issues we need clarification on - all self explanatory.

The second file contains some clarifying comments from Debbie Boehm Davis. The 3rd and 4th documents are ones we have sent before with what I believe is one change that Debbie requested. Laura can provide additional information if necessary.

Once you have had a chance to review please let me know when you want to schedule time to discuss any additional comments you have - I suspect we will need an extended time to review and discuss questions and next steps.

Thanks Cathy

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Friday, July 15, 2016 8:42 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey; Kluesner, Gene Cc: Frank Strike; Nancy S Pickens; Thomas G Calhoun; Laura K Manno; Lisa A Reeves; Harney, Paul; Wolfgang, Stephanie; Celli, Robert ([email protected]); Weinfurther, Kurt Subject: RE: Information Request - Robinson and Utility Infrastructure

Cathy, Thanks for the update. We are grateful for the time and energy you are putting into the program review process. We look forward to reviewing them with you.

Gratefully, gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 6:28 PM To: Kluesner, Gene Cc: Frank Strike ; Nancy S Pickens ; Thomas G Calhoun ; Laura K Manno ; Lisa A Reeves ; Harney, Paul ; McNay, Gary ; Wolfgang, Stephanie ; Celli, Robert ([email protected]) ; Weinfurther, Kurt Subject: Re: Information Request - Robinson and Utility Infrastructure

Thanks for this information I appreciate your quick response - I suspect we will move back the date by the 3 months - since project funding is delayed - it is delaying project so I think it is acceptable to make the change but Tom will make that final determination.

In terms of program comments we have received over 400 comments in total - several of us spent the day vetting and de-conflicting comments - we will be completed with that process by close of business Monday. That's when we will be sending you back the complete set of comments (yes we realize that's after the deadline of 15th) - it will include about 15-20 comments that we will need to do some further vetting on before we can give final direction. We will work to expeditiously get those items addressed. There will be plenty for you to work on while we finalize those answers.

I think we will need to schedule up to a half day when we can get together to discuss the "bigger" or overarching comments to get closure and provide you with direction so that you can finalize the program/BOD for pricing.

Once you see comments and have a chance to digest we can discuss best time for that meeting. Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 14, 2016, at 4:50 PM, Kluesner, Gene wrote: Cathy:

Assuming that we are authorized to start Schematic Design Phase by end of August (after Program/BOD and Budget sign-off & approvals) we would be potentially 2-3 months off our current schedules. After analyzing our design schedule, we could reduce the DD phase from 5 to 4 months on both projects and shave some time off the review phases, then the schedule would anticipate construction starting on both projects by May 2018. Construction completion would remain as original. Please note that our goal is to provide all the program required classrooms in the phase one building (which is over 75% of the building) so you will have those operational for the start of fall classes in 2020. That may be of interest to the state reviewers.

Gene Kluesner, AIA, LEED AP Practice Leader, Associate Principal t 202.624.8378 m 202.257.3822 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 10:06 AM To: Harney, Paul ; McNay, Gary ; Kluesner, Gene ; Wolfgang, Stephanie ; Celli, Robert ([email protected]) ; Weinfurther, Kurt Cc: Frank Strike ; Nancy S Pickens ; Thomas G Calhoun ; Laura K Manno ; Lisa A Reeves Subject: Information Request - Robinson and Utility Infrastructure

All –we have been asked to provide confirmation of information we had previously submitted to DPB/BCOM on project schedule – Based on where we are today and what was a design start of March 2016 – do you believe we need to update any of these dates at this time for the two projects listed below– this would assume we would keep moving after approval of program in early August– I know we have lost some time in working on Schematic Design concurrent with completing the program/basis of design – this will remain true – we will not start schematic until we have completed with program/BOD approval. At this point have we impacted the start of construction and construction completion dates as listed below? There is some urgency in providing confirmation of this information so if possible we would like a collective response by COB today or first thing tomorrow morning. Please reply to all with the requested information. Thanks Cathy

Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 7:53 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: Academic VII Program Attachments: 120918_Academic VII _Program - Last before project stop.pdf

Here is the last full program from 2012. The building support spaces are listed on page 4. I don’t see unisex restroom or recycling which are two often listed. Occasionally we also see lactation rooms.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner for Academic & Research Facilities George Mason University

82 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 2:17 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: FW: Robinson Report by Group

FYI

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Deborah Boehm-Davis Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 1:49 PM To: McNay, Gary; Laura K Manno Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: RE: Robinson Report by Group

Thanks Gary. I recognize the importance of light, and not closing it off by rimming the outside of the building with closed offices. I also understand the desire for safety. However, there are articles surfacing showing that individuals working in offices with totally transparent windows are stressed and do not do their best work there. Further, although I understand that students want to feel safe in a meeting with a faculty member, they may not want to be seen crying or where someone can read their lips and know what is being discussed. We need to balance privacy against transparency. I am not saying that we need to have this issue solved right now. I know you are still developing your plans for the building. However, I didn’t want you surprised later on that faculty are VERY concerned about a totally open concept (that is, where they can be fully observed while working in their offices).

Meantime, if you have other questions about the data I sent you, I’ll do my best to answer it.

Best, Debbie

From: McNay, Gary [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 11:28 AM To: Deborah Boehm-Davis; Laura K Manno Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: RE: Robinson Report by Group

Debbie, Thank You!

We will definitely use this in developing strategies going forward. I know we will have questions about how to properly interpret the data going forward. The surprising discovery is that faculty are in their office 20-25 hrs/ week on average. I am guessing that this is during peak time- the traditional 40 hr. workweek.

The transparency issue is such a challenge we must continue to work through. It is tough to imagine making a decision today to diminish the experiences of a large segment of users when the building opens , and for all generations 83 future. It seems that many faculty only know environments that promote isolation because they have not experienced healthy workplace communities. Because of the high proportion of faculty office to other types of academic – we would imagine that 50% or more of the offices would not be located on an exterior wall. In a traditional arrangement, there would be a caste system with the “second class” citizens deprived light and views if we took the “no glass” approach for those on the outside wall. . With a more transparent model, more of the faculty would benefit equally from views to nature and to the larger community.

Community safety concerns area also pushing the design direction toward transparency in campus settings. Many campuses are in conversations about requiring a second person in the office when faculty meet with a student (or peer) of the opposite sex, or require that the office door be open, or that the wall have enough transparency to allow visibility of the meeting. Campuses like VA Tech have decided that transparency is the most effective strategy for safety in the aftermath of the tragedy on that campus. All things considered, the kind of logic that was used when the original Robinson was designed may not be the best planning model for future academic communities and generations of faculty.

We can’t really have a productive conversation about this until we are able to test different options with you describing kind of environments being considered. This task is at the top of the list when we start the design phase.

Respectfully, gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

From: Deborah Boehm-Davis [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 2:05 PM To: Laura K Manno ; McNay, Gary Cc: Robert I Matz Subject: Robinson Report by Group

Dear Laura and Gary,

I am sending along the report coming out of the survey we did with the faculty and staff in CHSS. Instead of sending you the “summary” report, we broke out all of the answers by the “category” of person who answered the questions – adjunct faculty, term faculty, tenure/tenure-track faculty/admin faculty and staff. If you want the summary document, we can produce that as well. It should give you an idea of where people feel most productive and the activities in which they engage during the week.

The report is the “standard” report generated by the survey software. I haven’t gone in to summarize the comments or count mentions of other places people work, e.g.

I hope this provides you with some of the information you requested. In addition, the comments reflect some strong feelings, particularly regarding having offices with transparent walls. A discussion of that issue has been circulating among chairs, sparked by the survey going out.

If you have any questions, let me know. We had roughly 250 responses, which is much less than half of those eligible to respond.

Best, Deb 84

Deborah A. Boehm-Davis Dean, College of Humanities and Social Sciences University Professor, Psychology Department George Mason University MSN 3A3 Fairfax, VA 22030-4444 Phone: 703-993-8715 Fax: 703-993-8714

85 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 7:07 AM To: Joy Staulcup;Laura K Manno;Elizabeth D Long;Aurora M Roque;Debbie L. Brady;John S Forgy;Kathleen A Mccormack;Courtney Fronce;Deniz Callahan Cc: [email protected] Subject: Projects in Planning - Updated List of Projects Attachments: 07_25_2016 Planning Update - Preliminary.xls

This is the list that we will be reviewing in our meeting tomorrow afternoon. I have hardcopies in my office – you can stop by and pick one up if you want one before the meeting – if you pick one up please bring it to the meeting. Thanks Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

86 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 5:34 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

87 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 2:31 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Cc: McNay, Gary ([email protected]) Subject: FW: Robinson Report by Group Attachments: Robinson Report by Group.docx

Cathy:

FYI – you were not copied….

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner for Academic & Research Facilities George Mason University

From: Deborah Boehm-Davis Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 2:05 PM To: Laura K Manno ; McNay, Gary ([email protected]) Cc: Robert I Matz Subject: Robinson Report by Group

Dear Laura and Gary,

The report is the “standard” report generated by the survey software. I haven’t gone in to summarize the comments or count mentions of other places people work, e.g.

If you have any questions, let me know. We had roughly 250 responses, which is much less than half of those eligible to respond.

Best, Deb

Deborah A. Boehm-Davis Dean, College of Humanities and Social Sciences University Professor, Psychology Department George Mason University MSN 3A3 Fairfax, VA 22030-4444

88 Phone: 703-993-8715 Fax: 703-993-8714

89 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 8:24 PM To: McNay, Gary;Kluesner, Gene;Harney, Paul Cc: Frank Strike;Nancy S Pickens;Thomas G Calhoun;Laura K Manno;Lisa A Reeves;Wolfgang, Stephanie;Celli, Robert ([email protected]);Weinfurther, Kurt;Elizabeth D Long Subject: Re: Information Request - Robinson and Utility Infrastructure Attachments: Robinson_Hall_-_Vetted_Program_Comments.zip

Please find attached a copy of the spreadsheet containing Mason's review comments on the program and basis of design document - there are four files - first is the spreadsheet that we sent out for comments - the one sent out was slightly modified from the one you sent for our use. There are several comments highlighted in red that we are working on getting final answers on - many of these are overarching issues that we need to provide clarification on. Some are design team issues we need clarification on - all self explanatory.

Thanks Cathy

Cathy, Thanks for the update. We are grateful for the time and energy you are putting into the program review process. We look forward to reviewing them with you.

Gratefully, gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 6:28 PM To: Kluesner, Gene Cc: Frank Strike ; Nancy S Pickens ; Thomas G Calhoun ;

90 Laura K Manno ; Lisa A Reeves ; Harney, Paul ; McNay, Gary ; Wolfgang, Stephanie ; Celli, Robert ([email protected]) ; Weinfurther, Kurt Subject: Re: Information Request - Robinson and Utility Infrastructure

Once you see comments and have a chance to digest we can discuss best time for that meeting. Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 14, 2016, at 4:50 PM, Kluesner, Gene wrote: Cathy:

Gene Kluesner, AIA, LEED AP Practice Leader, Associate Principal t 202.624.8378 m 202.257.3822 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 5:52 PM To: Frank Strike Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Laura K Manno;Lisa A Reeves Subject: FW: Robinson Hall Replacement - Request for Program Document Review and Comment Attachments: GMU_Program_Document-FinalDraft-small.pdf; Robinson Hall Replacement - Program Review Comments - 07_01_2016.xlsx

Frank- The form you attached is a blank form – did you have comments? Beth

From: Frank Strike Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2016 6:29 AM To: Elizabeth D Long Subject: FW: Robinson Hall Replacement - Request for Program Document Review and Comment

Attached comments provided. V/r Frank

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:16 AM To: Paul C Bowden ; Marc Fournier ; Christine Clark-Talley ; Ruth J Townsend ; Rick Davis ; Colin J Reagle ; Thomas A Drerenberger ; Randy Anderson ; Susan Kehoe ; Elliott G De Luca ; Philip A Stamper ; Lauren Long ; Thomas G Longo ; Joshua Cantor ; Laura K Manno ; Constance P Benson ; Ronald Carmichael ; Una Murphy ; Janet P Walker ; [email protected]; Margaret Lo ; Barbara Lubar ; Thomas G Calhoun ; Joy Staulcup ; John S Forgy ; Frank Strike ; Erich A Miller ; Paul C Didier ; Jay W Marsh ; Thomas Hardy Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: Robinson Hall Replacement - Request for Program Document Review and Comment

All- Please find attached a copy of the draft program for the Robinson Hall Replacement Project – Destination Mason. A similar email has also been sent to the Robinson Building Committee, the technology group and Facilities staff. It would be helpful if you could review the document and provide your comments back to me with a copy to Lisa Reeves ([email protected]) by noon on July 13, 2016. We welcome your comments on any portion of the document, but ask that you pay particular attention to the following sections:

 2-Project Vision & Guiding Principles, pages 8-20  3-Strategic & Master Plan Review, pages 21-23 93  7-Site & Building Concepts, pages 67-88  8-Site Amenities, pages 89-103

Once we have received everyone’s comments we will compile and forward applicable comments to Perkins + Will for their inclusion in the final draft program – for your information we will also provide you with a copy of all comments received. If you feel there are others in your organization or through-out the university that would provide substantive comments please forward this request.

Please use the attached spreadsheet to capture your comments – the sheet is self-explanatory but if you have questions please let me know and I will assist. At this stage you will be filling out columns B (your name),C (comments source reference),D (your comment or observation) and E (if there is a document or drawing that needs to be referenced on a particular page) – as noted above we will send out all comments received to the group along with the consultants comments and an indication of whether the comment was accepted or rejected by Mason. We will discuss this in more detail in our August Land & Building meeting which is scheduled for August 16, 1:30-3:30 in Merten 3300.

Once we are in the final draft stage, the document will be given to our cost estimator to provide an estimate of cost for the project based on the building program we have established at this first phase of the building development process. As you may know we have a budget for this building project so this is a chance to reconcile our current needs as described to the consultant over the last 3 months with the budget originally established for the project.

Thank you in advance for your attention to this request and we look forward to your comments.

Beth

Elizabeth D. Long, AIA Architect/Planner Office of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703.993.6184

94 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 5:20 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Cc: Elizabeth D Long;Lisa A Reeves Subject: Robinson Hall - Vetted Program Comments Attachments: Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-07.18.2016.xlsx; 160718_CHSS Comment Clarifications - LKM.docx; 160718 _Facullty Stall Counts - vacant positions.pdf; 160608_Office Analysis.xls

Importance: High

Cathy:

Here are the vetted comments in Excel format along with the CHSS comment clarifications from my meeting with Debbie. I have also attached the Office Analysis I did that is probably the best doc to u se when trying to see the numbers of faculty/staff spaces. Please note however that the office analysis does not include the brand new information about the 43 vacant positions.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner for Academic & Research Facilities George Mason University

95 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 1:54 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Lisa A Reeves Cc: Elizabeth D Long Subject: Robinson Program comments - CHSS Clarifications Attachments: 160718_Program Review Comments - Supplemental CHSS.docx

Importance: High

Here are my notes from my meeting with the CHSS Dean. These notes clarify the CHSS comments. IF needed we can cut and past them into comments sheet cells.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner for Academic & Research Facilities George Mason University

96 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Lisa A Reeves Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 9:53 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: RE: Robinson comment review Attachments: Vetted Comments - Robinson Hall Replacement-Master Program Review Comments-07.13.2016.xlsx

Here you go!

-----Original Message----- From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 9:09 AM To: Lisa A Reeves Cc: Elizabeth D Long ; Laura K Manno Subject: Re: Robinson comment review

Thanks Lisa - can you also send me a copy of the spreadsheet called "Vetted..." Thanks

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 18, 2016, at 8:58 AM, Lisa A Reeves wrote: > > All, you have Room 6 at 1:30 today. I'll see if I can get CVT to set up Bluejeans in time for the meeting. Cathy, I'll send you the link to join and I hope you feel better soon. :) Lisa > > -----Original Message----- > From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 8:52 AM > To: Lisa A Reeves ; Elizabeth D Long ; Laura K Manno > Subject: Re: Robinson comment review > > I think she reserved Room 6 - I am unfortunately going to be out sick today - so I am thinking if you guys could call me this afternoon we could go through the comments like we were the other day - maybe Lisa could help set up this blue jeans thing - I think I could do it through the wifi on my home computer - that way we could look at the same document. > > . > > Thanks Cathy > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Jul 18, 2016, at 8:46 AM, Elizabeth D Long wrote: >> >> Lisa- >> Can you reserve FAC 106 for us?

97 >> Thanks. >> Beth >> >> >>

98 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 5:37 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

99 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 10:14 AM To: Lisa A Reeves Subject: FW: Robinson Hall Replacement Attachments: 2016.07.08-GMU_Program_Document-Draft.pdf; 2016.07.08-GMU_Program_Document- Draft_pg32-37.pdf; 2016.07.08-GMU_Program_Document-Draft_pg40-61 (fox) .pdf

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: McNay, Gary [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 4:01 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Cc: Laura K Manno Subject: Robinson Hall Replacement

Hi Cathy,

After a review of our draft document I found enough graphic typos, or inconsistencies to revise a few pages for clarity.

Those sections are attached here with a new master.

The items we fixed… Two of the prototype spaces were placed in the wrong location. Two of the graphic space program sections were mis-labeled and the material legend for finishes was inadvertently deleted. Some dimensions and notes in the plan prototypes were garbled in translation when the final pdf was printed. The office page showed very transparent corporate workplace images, which may be too much for the faculty without a step-by-step process to get there..

I can forward this to the users in your list if desired. I apologize that I did not do a better QC before we sent them.

Let me know if I should send.

Regards,gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

100 Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 12:04 PM To: Kim Eby ; Thomas G Calhoun ; Susan Kehoe ; Nancy S Pickens ; Marylou Holly ; Sean Mallon ; Anthony Hoefer ; McNay, Gary ; Deborah Boehm-Davis ; Harney, Paul ; Julie Christensen ; Stephen Nodine ; Kluesner, Gene ; Eve Dauer ; David J Miller ; Frank Strike ; Jan L Arminio ; Mills Kelly ([email protected]) ; Jill Bowen ; Laura K Manno ; Jennifer H. Atkinson Cc: Leach, Katlyn ; Kathleen A Curtis ; Jenna M Mcgwin ; Lisa A Reeves Subject: RE: Robinson Hall Replacement - Request for Draft Program Document Review

Friendly reminder that comments are due to myself, Laura Manno and Lisa Reeves ( [email protected] ) by noon on July 13, 2016. Please let me know if there are questions.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 7:08 AM To: Kim Eby; Thomas G Calhoun; Susan Kehoe; Nancy S Pickens; Marylou Holly; Sean Mallon; Anthony Hoefer; McNay, Gary; Deborah Boehm-Davis; Harney, Paul; Julie Christensen; Stephen Nodine; Kluesner, Gene; Eve Dauer; David J Miller; Frank Strike; Jan L Arminio; Mills Kelly ([email protected]); Jill Bowen; Laura K Manno; Jennifer H. Atkinson Cc: Leach, Katlyn; Kathleen A Curtis; Jenna M Mcgwin; [email protected] Subject: Robinson Hall Replacement - Request for Draft Program Document Review

All – Please find attached a copy of the draft program for the Robinson Hall Replacement Project – Destination Mason. It would be helpful if you could review the document and provide your comments back to me with a copy to Lisa Reeves ([email protected]) and Laura Manno ([email protected]) by noon on July 13, 2016. Once we have received everyone’s comments we will compile and forward applicable comments to P+W for their inclusion in the final draft program – for your information we will also provide you with a copy of all comments received. If you feel there are others in your organization or through-out the university that would provide substantive comments please forward this request.

Please use the attached spreadsheet to capture your comments – the sheet is self-explanatory but if you have questions please let me know and I will assist. At this stage you will be filling out columns B (your name),C (comments source reference),D (your comment or observation) and E (if there is a document or drawing that needs to be referenced on a particular page) – as noted above we will send out all comments received to the group along with the consultants comments and an indication of whether the comment was accepted or rejected by Mason. We will discuss this in more detail in our August building committee which is tentatively scheduled for August 17, 9-11:30 – we will be adding that to calendar’s shortly.

101 Once we are in the final draft stage, the document will be given to our cost estimator to provide an estimate of cost for the project based on the building program we have established at this first phase of the building development process. As you may know we have a budget for this building project so this is a chance to reconcile our current needs as described to the consultant over the last 3 months with the budget originally established for the project.

Thanks in advance for your attention to this request and we look forward to your comments. Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

102 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Jill Bowen Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 12:09 PM To: Lisa A Reeves;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Laura K Manno Cc: Deborah Boehm-Davis;Robert I Matz Subject: Robinson Hall Replacement - Program Review Comments - CHSS Dean's Office Attachments: Copy of Robinson Hall Replacement - Program Review Comments - 07-12-2016 - CHSS.xlsx

Cathy,

Attached are the program review comments from the CHSS Dean’s Office.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Thanks, Jill

103 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 10:01 AM To: Paul C Bowden;Marc Fournier;Christine Clark-Talley;Ruth J Townsend;Rick Davis;Colin J Reagle;Thomas A Drerenberger;Randy Anderson;Susan Kehoe;Elliott G De Luca;Philip A Stamper;Lauren Long;Thomas G Longo;Joshua Cantor;Laura K Manno;Constance P Benson;Ronald Carmichael;Una Murphy;Janet P Walker;[email protected];Margaret Lo;Barbara Lubar;Thomas G Calhoun;Joy Staulcup;John S Forgy;Frank Strike;Erich A Miller;Paul C Didier;Jay W Marsh;Thomas Hardy Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Lisa A Reeves Subject: FW: Robinson Hall Replacement - Request for Program Document Review and Comment Attachments: GMU_Program_Document-FinalDraft-small.pdf; Robinson Hall Replacement - Program Review Comments - 07_01_2016.xlsx

All- This is just a friendly reminder that comments on the Robinson Hall Program Document are due back to me and copied to Lisa Reeves [email protected] by Wednesday, July 13. The original email with the request and the attachments is included below for your convenience. As members of the Land & Building Committee, your input is critical to the success of this important project. We look forward to receiving your comments and incorporating them into the next phase of design. Thank you. Beth

Elizabeth D. Long, AIA Architect/Planner Office of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703.993.6184

104 Cc: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Robinson Hall Replacement - Request for Program Document Review and Comment

 2-Project Vision & Guiding Principles, pages 8-20  3-Strategic & Master Plan Review, pages 21-23  7-Site & Building Concepts, pages 67-88  8-Site Amenities, pages 89-103

Thank you in advance for your attention to this request and we look forward to your comments.

Beth

Elizabeth D. Long, AIA Architect/Planner Office of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703.993.6184

105 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 5:36 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

106 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Friday, July 8, 2016 5:11 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: FW: Robinson Hall Replacement Attachments: 2016.07.08-GMU_Program_Document-Draft.pdf; 2016.07.08-GMU_Program_Document- Draft_pg32-37.pdf; 2016.07.08-GMU_Program_Document-Draft_pg40-61 (fox) .pdf

30 revised pages – that’s over a third of the document – that adds to the statement I made earlier – I told him I did not want to ask everyone to now review a revised document half way into the review period – I told him we will see if people comment and we will also then use these sheets as a part of the revision.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: McNay, Gary [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 4:01 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Cc: Laura K Manno Subject: Robinson Hall Replacement

Hi Cathy,

After a review of our draft document I found enough graphic typos, or inconsistencies to revise a few pages for clarity.

Those sections are attached here with a new master.

I can forward this to the users in your list if desired. I apologize that I did not do a better QC before we sent them.

Let me know if I should send.

Regards,gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal 107 t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

Friendly reminder that comments are due to myself, Laura Manno and Lisa Reeves ( [email protected] ) by noon on July 13, 2016. Please let me know if there are questions.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

108 detail in our August building committee which is tentatively scheduled for August 17, 9-11:30 – we will be adding that to calendar’s shortly.

Thanks in advance for your attention to this request and we look forward to your comments. Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

109 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Friday, July 8, 2016 4:01 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Cc: Laura K Manno Subject: Robinson Hall Replacement Attachments: 2016.07.08-GMU_Program_Document-Draft.pdf; 2016.07.08-GMU_Program_Document- Draft_pg32-37.pdf; 2016.07.08-GMU_Program_Document-Draft_pg40-61 (fox) .pdf

Hi Cathy,

After a review of our draft document I found enough graphic typos, or inconsistencies to revise a few pages for clarity.

Those sections are attached here with a new master.

I can forward this to the users in your list if desired. I apologize that I did not do a better QC before we sent them.

Let me know if I should send.

Regards,gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

110 Friendly reminder that comments are due to myself, Laura Manno and Lisa Reeves ( [email protected] ) by noon on July 13, 2016. Please let me know if there are questions.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

Please use the attached spreadsheet to capture your comments – the sheet is self-explanatory but if you have questions please let me know and I will assist. At this stage you will be filling out columns B (your name),C (comments source reference),D (your comment or observation) and E (if there is a document or drawing that needs to be referenced on a particular page) – as noted above we will send out all comments received to the group along with the consultants comments and an indication of whether the comment was accepted or rejected by Mason. We will discuss this in more detail in our August building committee which is tentatively scheduled for August 17, 9-11:30 – we will be adding that to calendar’s shortly.

Thanks in advance for your attention to this request and we look forward to your comments. Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

111 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Harney, Paul Sent: Tuesday, July 5, 2016 11:19 AM To: Bob Celli ([email protected]);Laubscher, Brian;Coleman, David;Jeremy Johnson ([email protected]) Cc: Cline, Floyd;McNay, Gary;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Frank Strike;Nancy S Pickens;Deniz Callahan;Wolfgang, Stephanie Subject: Mason Robinson Hall Replacement & Campus Utilities - Draft Pre-Schematic Documents Attachments: 6147A-GMU-MP-Memo.pdf; GMU_Program_Document-FinalDraft-small.pdf

Bob et al:

Attached are the pre-schematic documents for the Mason projects:  Final Draft of the Utility Master Plan Update Memorandum. Responses to Mason’s comments are on the last three pages within the PDF.  Preliminary Draft of the Robinson Hall Replacement Program Document

Regarding the latter, and as discussed in our weekly meeting, we will be collecting comments from Mason in the next two weeks before issuing the Program Document to Forella Associates for cost estimation on July 18th.

We’re not sure what the expectations are for Donley’s review of these documents, but we thought you would benefit from having these at least for your information.

Thanks,

Paul

Paul Harney, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Senior Project Architect, Associate Principal 1250 24th Street, NW, Suite 800, Washington, DC 20037 t 202.624.8302 m 415.595.4981 [email protected]

Perkins+Will Ideas + buildings that honor the broader goals of society perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter

Please consider the environment before printing this email

112 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, July 4, 2016 5:45 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

113 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Friday, July 1, 2016 10:16 AM To: Paul C Bowden;Marc Fournier;Christine Clark-Talley;Ruth J Townsend;Rick Davis;Colin J Reagle;Thomas A Drerenberger;Randy Anderson;Susan Kehoe;Elliott G De Luca;Philip A Stamper;Lauren Long;Thomas G Longo;Joshua Cantor;Laura K Manno;Constance P Benson;Ronald Carmichael;Una Murphy;Janet P Walker;[email protected];Margaret Lo;Barbara Lubar;Thomas G Calhoun;Joy Staulcup;John S Forgy;Frank Strike;Erich A Miller;Paul C Didier;Jay W Marsh;Thomas Hardy Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: Robinson Hall Replacement - Request for Program Document Review and Comment Attachments: GMU_Program_Document-FinalDraft-small.pdf; Robinson Hall Replacement - Program Review Comments - 07_01_2016.xlsx

 2-Project Vision & Guiding Principles, pages 8-20  3-Strategic & Master Plan Review, pages 21-23  7-Site & Building Concepts, pages 67-88  8-Site Amenities, pages 89-103

Thank you in advance for your attention to this request and we look forward to your comments.

Beth

Elizabeth D. Long, AIA

114 Architect/Planner Office of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703.993.6184

115 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Friday, July 1, 2016 7:26 AM To: Joy Staulcup;Elizabeth D Long;Debbie L. Brady;John S Forgy;Deniz Callahan;Thomas A Drerenberger ([email protected]);Frank Strike;Joshua Cantor;Margaret Lo Cc: Laura K Manno;Thomas G Calhoun Subject: Robinson Hall Replacement - Request for Program Document Review and Comment Attachments: GMU_Program_Document-FinalDraft-small.pdf; Robinson Hall Replacement - Program Review Comments - 07_01_2016.xlsx

All – Please find attached a copy of the draft program for the Robinson Hall Replacement Project – Destination Mason. Via this email - I am sending this to my staff and other Facilities Directors and Auxiliary Enterprise to review and comment and distribute to their staffs for review if you feel they would provide substantive comments. A similar email has also been sent to the building committee, the land and building committee and also the technology group. If there are others you think should be sent a direct invitation please let me know.

It would be helpful if you could review the document and provide your comments back to me with a copy to Lisa Reeves ([email protected]) and Laura Manno ([email protected]) by noon on July 13, 2016. Once we have received everyone’s comments we will compile and forward applicable comments to P+W for their inclusion in the final draft program – for your information we will also provide you with a copy of all comments received. If you feel there are others in your organization or through-out the university that would provide substantive comments please forward this request.

Please use the attached spreadsheet to capture your comments – the sheet is self-explanatory but if you have questions please let me know and I will assist. At this stage you will be filling out columns B (your name),C (comments source reference),D (your comment or observation) and E (if there is a document or drawing that needs to be referenced on a particular page) – as noted above we will send out all comments received to the group along with the consultants comments and an indication of whether the comment was accepted or rejected by Mason. We will discuss this in more detail in our August building committee which is tentatively scheduled for August 17, 9-11:30 – we will be adding that to calendar’s shortly.

Thanks in advance for your attention to this request and we look forward to your comments. Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

116 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Friday, July 1, 2016 7:20 AM To: Crystal L Clemons;Thomas D Shifflett;Joy E Taylor;Marilyn T Smith;Tim Murphy;Ben Allen;Laurellen Phelps Cc: Virginia Mahoney;Kimberly Raley;Cline, Floyd;Frank Strike;Susan Kehoe;Nancy S Pickens;Lisa A Reeves;Kim Eby;Laura K Manno;Whitney L Sublett;[email protected];Stephen Nodine;[email protected] Subject: Robinson Replacement - Request for Draft Program Document Review - IT workshop attendees Attachments: GMU_Program_Document-FinalDraft-small.pdf; Robinson Hall Replacement - Program Review Comments - 07_01_2016.xlsx

All – As we discussed yesterday - please find attached a copy of the draft program for the Robinson Hall Replacement Project – Destination Mason. It would be helpful if you could review the document and provide your comments back to me with a copy to Lisa Reeves ([email protected]) and Laura Manno ([email protected]) by noon on July 13, 2016. Once we have received everyone’s comments we will compile and forward applicable comments to P+W for their inclusion in the final draft program – for your information we will also provide you with a copy of all comments received. If you feel there are others in your organization or through-out the university that would provide substantive comments please forward this request.

Please use the attached spreadsheet to capture your comments – as we discussed yesterday it would be helpful if we could get one set of all comments from this group consolidated to one sheet – the sheet is self-explanatory but if you have questions please let me know and I will assist. At this stage you will be filling out columns B (your name),C (comments source reference),D (your comment or observation) and E (if there is a document or drawing that needs to be referenced on a particular page) – as noted above we will send out all comments received to the group along with the consultants comments and an indication of whether the comment was accepted or rejected by Mason. We will discuss this in more detail in our August building committee which is tentatively scheduled for August 17, 9-11:30 – we will be adding that to calendar’s shortly.

Thanks in advance for your attention to this request and we look forward to your comments. Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

117 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Friday, July 1, 2016 7:12 AM To: Kim Eby;Thomas G Calhoun;Susan Kehoe;Nancy S Pickens;Marylou Holly;Sean Mallon;Anthony Hoefer;McNay, Gary;Deborah Boehm-Davis;Harney, Paul;Julie Christensen;Stephen Nodine;Kluesner, Gene;Eve Dauer;David J Miller;Frank Strike;Jan L Arminio;Mills Kelly ([email protected]);Jill Bowen;Laura K Manno;Jennifer H. Atkinson Cc: Leach, Katlyn;Kathleen A Curtis;Jenna M Mcgwin;[email protected] Subject: Robinson Hall Replacement - Request for Draft Program Document Review Attachments: GMU_Program_Document-FinalDraft-small.pdf; Robinson Hall Replacement - Program Review Comments - 07_01_2016.xlsx

Please use the attached spreadsheet to capture your comments – the sheet is self-explanatory but if you have questions please let me know and I will assist. At this stage you will be filling out columns B (your name),C (comments source reference),D (your comment or observation) and E (if there is a document or drawing that needs to be referenced on a particular page) – as noted above we will send out all comments received to the group along with the consultants comments and an indication of whether the comment was accepted or rejected by Mason. We will discuss this in more detail in our August building committee which is tentatively scheduled for August 17, 9-11:30 – we will be adding that to calendar’s shortly.

Thanks in advance for your attention to this request and we look forward to your comments. Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

118 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cline, Floyd Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 6:13 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Nancy S Pickens;Laura K Manno;Frank Strike;Thomas G Calhoun;Lisa A Reeves Cc: McNay, Gary;Wolfgang, Stephanie;Cline, Floyd;Kluesner, Gene;Harney, Paul Subject: GMU Robinson Hall - DRAFT Programming Document Attachments: GMU_Program_Document-FinalDraft-small.pdf; GMU Review Comments.xlsx

Sorry for the Delay. Please see attached for the Draft Programming Document for Robinson Hall. The resolution has been reduced to allow this email friendly copy, however, a higher res file can be transferred if needed. Please also see attached a comment form to help track comments. Thanks!

Floyd Cline, AIA, CDT, LEED® AP BD+C Senior Project Architect, Senior Associate 1315 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30309 t 404.443.7662 [email protected]

Perkins+Will Ideas + buildings that honor the broader goals of society perkinswill.com | Blog | Facebook | Twitter

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

119 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 7:31 AM To: Hendershott, Ken Cc: Alexis Brearley Iszard;Frank Strike;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: George Mason University - Institute for Advanced Biomedical Innovation - Cost Review Assistance Attachments: 160601 GMU IABRL SD DWG.PDF; 160603_IABRL 3rd Floor Fitout - BOD.pdf; 160606 IABRL 3rd floor estimate- REV.pdf

Importance: High

Ken:

Thanks to you and your team for offering to assist us with this effort. As Alex may have explained, we are in the process of fitting out the 3rd floor warm lit shell (roughly 17,000 SF) of our Life Science Lab Building on our PW campus. This building houses our newly established Institute for Advanced Biomedical Innovation. Goal of this project is to fit out the 3rd floor to roughly match what has already been done on floors 1 and 2 which includes open wet labs (BSL-2), lab support and office/work/collaboration spaces.

The total project budget approved for this fit-out by the state is $3.8M which means we have $2.55M available for construction funding. Initial base-line estimates @ SD level from our design team are coming at $3.9M for construction only! That said, design shown is in line with the requested scope so this is not a case of the designer over designing. We are trying to reconcile numbers to know if the base estimate received ($3.9M) is accurate or not so we can better determine levels of remediation required.

I have attached the SD set of drawings here along with the SD level basis of design narrative. I am also attaching the base estimate (SD) received for your reference. In just a bit, I will have our IT manager upload the base building as-built drawings to an FTP site and I will send you the link to those. Those drawings and the narrative will help to clarify what base systems already exist. For this 3rd floor fit-out we are really just tying into existing building and lab systems.

Casework and built in lab equipment including autoclaves, fume hoods, ice machines and biosafety cabinets should be included in the construction costs. Office, systems and conference/ collaboration furniture should not. We know design team base estimate assumed furniture was in construction number so we know we have some “savings” there. They have been told to remove those costs from the construction estimate.

In all capital projects, the scope of the telecom wiring is included in the general contractor’s scope. The only telecom infrastructure that is not part of that scope is any major equipment necessary to fit out the telecom closets. I believe security is handled in a similar manner.

I will be out of town July 1-13 so please let me know if you or your team have any general questions before I leave. In my absence, Alex can probably answer questions about basic assumptions.

Design team has been working towards PD and is in the process of starting the next round of estimating. We will be meeting with BCOM on July 21 to review design progress so if there is any feedback by then, that would be very helpful.

Thanks in advance and I will send link to as-builts as soon as I have it, Laura

120

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner for Academic & Research Facilities George Mason University

121 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 5:21 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Laura K Manno;Frank Strike;Nancy S Pickens Cc: Harney, Paul;Kluesner, Gene;Cline, Floyd Subject: Mason Robinson Finishes and Tech schedule.xlsx Attachments: Mason Robinson Finishes and Tech schedule.xlsx

Cathy and Laura,

This is a document we intend to put into the programming document.

It is a combination of finishes , power density and technology , we may decide to break the 3 pieces apart as we do the edits. But this will get the conversation started.

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

122 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 5:43 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

123 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 3:54 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Laura K Manno;Frank Strike;Thomas G Calhoun;Nancy S Pickens Subject: GMU Robinson Hall_space schedule_6.22.16V2.xlsx Attachments: GMU Robinson Hall_space schedule_6.22.16V2.xlsx

Cathy,

As requested, Current Robinson Replacement space schedule attached. Please forward to Marie and others as needed.

Regards, gm

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

124 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 5:40 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

125 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Friday, June 17, 2016 3:09 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Laura K Manno;Kluesner, Gene;Harney, Paul;Rogers, David Cc: Horvat, Diana;Nancy S Pickens;Frank Strike Subject: GMU Robinson Hall space schedule_6.17.16V2.xlsx Attachments: Copy of Copy of Copy of GMU Robinson Hall_space schedule_6.17.16V2.xlsx

Team,

The attached space schedule is what we are using for blocking and stacking and adjacencies. Please review all especially the office and Classroom counts. This includes 297 closed offices, 6-7 Office neighborhoods and a classroom count similar to what was discussed in Marylou’s office.

Have a great weekend!

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

126 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2016 5:21 PM To: Alan W Jones;Alexis Brearley Iszard;Ali Andalibi;Andrew Witham;Elizabeth D Long;Bill Miller;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Chris Nayeri;David A Prudom;Debbie L. Brady;Deborah Crawford;Fahim Panjshiri;Gregg Black;James L Mccarthy;Jean E Callahan;John F Gibbemeyer;John Hanks;John S Forgy;Joy Staulcup;Michael J Mauck;Mohammad N Waseem;Paul C Didier;Ruth J Townsend;Stephen G. Nash;Steve Vollmer Cc: Laura K Manno;Emeka Ezidinma;'[email protected]' Subject: Institute for Advanced Biomedical Innovation - Schematic Design Level Review Attachments: IABR - Design Review Stakeholders.xlsx; IABI 3rd Floor Fit-out_Design Review Form.xlsx; 160601 GMU IABRL SD DWG.PDF; 160603_IABRL 3rd Floor Fitout - BOD.pdf; 160601 GMU IABRL SD Specs ToC.PDF; 160616_Stakeholder Memo - SD.pdf

Importance: High

All:

You have been identified as being a key stakeholder and/or key consulting party for the 3rd Floor Fit-out Project within our existing Institute for Advanced Biomedical Innovation Building on the SciTech Campus. Please see the attached memo with project description and review process information. I have included a list of identified stakeholders here for your reference. If I have missed anyone, please let me know. This is how I will track who has/has not provided review comments.

Each of you is being requested to review the set and to coordinate with your colleagues for any additional comments. Please use the attached Design Review Form as this will make the consolidation of comments much easier. I would ask that each of you try your best to have SD design review comments back to me by no later than COB Monday June 27, 2016.

PDF files for the Schematic Design (SD) level drawings, a Basis of Design (BoD) narrative and a draft Table of Contents for the future specifications book are attached. Hard copies are also available and will be distributed as follows on Friday June 17:

 (1) set to the code/permitting office  (1) set to be placed in the Facilities Admin Building on the upstairs open work table overlooking the lobby (someone at the front desk can help you find this location if required) – these should not leave the Fac. Admin Building  (1) set to be delivered to the Deb Crawford – VP of Research – Deb can coordinate and share with appropriate end users  (1) set to Paul Didier with EHS  On Monday June 20 an additional set will be delivered to Conference Room 6 in the Facilities Management and Operations Building.

I thank you in advance for your participation. This is an important university initiative and we need to your participation to get it right! Laura

127 Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner for Academic & Research Facilities George Mason University

128 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 5:40 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

129 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2016 8:48 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Laura K Manno;Cline, Floyd;Rogers, David;Harney, Paul;Horvat, Diana Cc: Kluesner, Gene Subject: Copy of Copy of GMU Robinson Hall_space schedule_6.8.16V1.xlsx Attachments: Copy of Copy of GMU Robinson Hall_space schedule_6.8.16V1.xlsx

Team, This is an in-progress space schedule for understanding of direction and as a collaboration tool.

This space schedule may be missing as many as 20 offices, the information is still being analyzed. The total gross allowed is 218,000

Regards,

130 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, June 6, 2016 5:44 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

131 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Thomas G Calhoun Sent: Wednesday, June 1, 2016 4:33 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: RE: Revised Academic Advising

Thanks. I had not sent, but was doing so this afternoon. Tom

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 4:30 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: FW: Revised Academic Advising

FYI – in case you have not passed this to JJ yet – here is the most up to date version with the revisions they requested they were minor – some furniture savings since they just purchased new office furniture.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 4:28 PM To: Jay W Marsh; Nena M Rogers Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: Revised Academic Advising

Jay, Nena- I think I have made all of the revisions discussed at our meeting this morning. I reviewed the program with Joy and she mentioned that per University standards, the advising staff would be located in shared offices or open office work stations. This could potentially open up an additional study room on the lower level.

Beth

Elizabeth D. Long, AIA Architect/Planner Office of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703.993.6184

132 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Jennifer Canfield, VCE Sent: Wednesday, June 1, 2016 4:30 PM To: Debbie L. Brady Cc: 'Karl A. Schnurr';'Tilkey, Robert (VADOC)';Alexis Brearley Iszard;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: RE: KS16GMU18C GMU Enterprise Lower Level - LINKS workstation proposal Attachments: KS16GMU18C_GMU Entereprise Hall Lower Level Brady_LINKS_PROPOSAL_06-01-16.pdf

Debbie - please find the LINKS quote package attached.

DIVI is to follow shortly - I'm putting that together now.

I have talked with the Richmond office team.

If we have a fully approved eVA order at VCE by Friday 6/3/16, then we can commit to a completed installation by 8/12/16.

Thank you! Jenn

Jennifer Meier Canfield, CID Contract Designer/Virginia Correctional Enterprises (VCE) phone: 757-576-1199 www.GoVCE.net For order status inquiries, please call: 800-823-2823 For repair needs, please call: 804-743-4162

From: Debbie L. Brady [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 12:22 PM To: Jennifer Canfield, VCE Cc: 'Karl A. Schnurr'; 'Tilkey, Robert (VADOC)'; Alexis Brearley Iszard; Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: RE: KS16GMU18C GMU Enterprise Lower Level - LINKS workstation for review/comment

All,

This “ process” is taking an excessive amount of time and is at the expense of GMU for our project completion dates. The process needs to be steam lined on your end so that your clients project completion dates/needs can be met. If I had gone directly to the manufacturer, I would be receiving the product by now. This would be faster than the time frame that you are still trying to produce a quote.

At this point, I need you to provide an update on the delivery timeframe. I originally needed the product by the end of June and you indicated that you could provide the product was early August(see previous email below) . Is that still the case? Please let me know what your delivery time frame is for this product by then end of the day. If I cannot receive this product/installed by the second week of August , we will need a release and go to another source.

Thanks Debbie

133

Copy of original email sent to me 4/26/16 :

Hi Debbie,

Thank you for the opportunity to work with you on the Enterprise Hall Lower Level project at GMU. Our management was out of town all of last week at a conference and met yesterday to discuss this amongst a number of other projects that we are working on and based on the review of the project we are not in a position currently to meet the tight timeline you have laid out for this project, which is about 60 days or less once we provide the quotes to GMU. The earliest that we could complete Enterprise Hall Lower Level would be early August. That is based on a few factors that were reviewed, to include the 75 day lead time we currently have on Links and Divi product Collections and the fact that we are busting at the seams to get the yearend push of products that all agencies across the state have ordered to empty their fiscal vaults. So, the lead time for this project is 75 days after the receipt of an order from GMU and of course there are details that need to be reveiwed on what is needed to make sure we meet the product requirements specified. We would love to work on the project with you and provide the great products that have been so well received by the end users on recent projects at GMU, but we will need additional time (early August) to complete the project.

Thank you,

Karl

Karl Schnurr VCE/Sr Account Representative 10398 Democracy Lane, #101 Fairfax, VA 22030 (703)995-9772 (804)283-6573-Cell

From: Jennifer Canfield, VCE [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 12:39 AM To: Debbie L. Brady Cc: 'Karl A. Schnurr'; 'Tilkey, Robert (VADOC)' Subject: RE: KS16GMU18C GMU Enterprise Lower Level - LINKS workstation for review/comment

Debbie - Both the LINKS and DIVI quotes are in a group review process.

We will not be able to finish the review until later in the afternoon on Wednesday.

As soon as it is ready, we will forward the quotes.

Thank you! Jenn

134 From: Jennifer Canfield, VCE [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 3:56 PM To: 'Debbie L. Brady' Cc: 'Karl A. Schnurr' Subject: RE: KS16GMU18C GMU Enterprise Lower Level - LINKS workstation for review/comment

Debbie- due to some unforeseen circumstances this morning in Richmond, I was not able to get the quotes reviewed and prepared.

We will aim to have those for you Tuesday COB or first thing Wednesday morning.

Have a great weekend- Jenn

From: Jennifer Canfield, VCE [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 5:18 PM To: 'Debbie L. Brady' Cc: 'Karl A. Schnurr' Subject: RE: KS16GMU18C GMU Enterprise Lower Level - LINKS workstation for review/comment

Debbie - both the LINKS and the DIVI are in for coding/pricing now.

I will be out of the office until 100PM tomorrow without access to my phone/email as I will be at one of our facilities.

As soon as I am out of the facility, I will let you know an update about the quote packages.

Thank you! Jenn

From: Debbie L. Brady [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 3:56 PM To: Jennifer Canfield, VCE Cc: 'Karl A. Schnurr' Subject: RE: KS16GMU18C GMU Enterprise Lower Level - LINKS workstation for review/comment

Jennifer

Do you have the final quote on this? I need to get this ordered.

Debbie L. Brady

135 From: Jennifer Canfield, VCE [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 3:59 PM To: Debbie L. Brady Cc: 'Karl A. Schnurr' Subject: RE: KS16GMU18C GMU Enterprise Lower Level - LINKS workstation for review/comment

Thank you! Jenn

From: Debbie L. Brady [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 3:49 PM To: Jennifer Canfield, VCE Subject: RE: KS16GMU18C GMU Enterprise Lower Level - LINKS workstation for review/comment

They should remain solid

From: Jennifer Canfield, VCE [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 3:47 PM To: Debbie L. Brady Cc: 'Karl A. Schnurr' Subject: RE: KS16GMU18C GMU Enterprise Lower Level - LINKS workstation for review/comment

Debbie - we will revise the quote so all overheads have the glazed doors.

Would you like the 2 lat file/storage cabinet units side by side in 056 to also be glazed doors or remain as solid doors?

Thank you! Jenn

From: Debbie L. Brady [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 2:56 PM To: Jennifer Canfield, VCE Cc: 'Karl A. Schnurr' Subject: RE: KS16GMU18C GMU Enterprise Lower Level - LINKS workstation for review/comment

Jennifer,

Please see attached revisions for the links. 1. 008 seating area- approved 2. Bench with cross bar- approved 3. 056- all overheads on desks are the glazed doors . 136 4. Grommet locations approved on storage credenza

Let me know if you have any questions,

Thanks Debbie L. Brady

From: Jennifer Canfield, VCE [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 2:04 PM To: Debbie L. Brady Cc: 'Karl A. Schnurr' Subject: KS16GMU18C GMU Enterprise Lower Level - LINKS workstation for review/comment

Hello again, Debbie.

Attached is a PDF of the various LINKS workstations and related 3D views.

These have also been sent to Codes for pricing and set-up, but we wanted to give you a chance to review before the final quote.

Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.

Thank you! Jenn

137 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Sent: Wednesday, June 1, 2016 4:30 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: FW: Revised Academic Advising Attachments: Field House Plan.pdf; Academic Advising Plan.pdf; Academic Advising Program- Revised.pdf; Academic Advising Project Budget-Revised.pdf

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 4:28 PM To: Jay W Marsh; Nena M Rogers Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: Revised Academic Advising

Beth

Elizabeth D. Long, AIA Architect/Planner Office of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703.993.6184

138 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Wednesday, June 1, 2016 4:28 PM To: Jay W Marsh;Nena M Rogers Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: Revised Academic Advising Attachments: Field House Plan.pdf; Academic Advising Plan.pdf; Academic Advising Program- Revised.pdf; Academic Advising Project Budget-Revised.pdf

Beth

Elizabeth D. Long, AIA Architect/Planner Office of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703.993.6184

139 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, May 30, 2016 5:39 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

140 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2016 5:43 PM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Laura K Manno Cc: Leach, Katlyn;Harney, Paul;Cline, Floyd Subject: Copy of GMU Robinson Hall_space schedule_5 23 16gmedit2.xlsx Attachments: Copy of GMU Robinson Hall_space schedule_5 23 16gmedit2.xlsx

Cathy and Laura,

Consider this an early exploratory study for the program elements that may be in Robinson Hall.

This is clearly over the 218,000 sf total. (we know that it cannot be over- we are not trying to grow the building)

It would be helpful for you to take a look and make some comments that will help us understand the value system we need to apply.

We’re not sure where the informal space was originally planned.

In VA (BCOM) it is often necessary to build the air handlers exposed on the roof and incorporate a number of mechanical/ electrical, building support and other non-program spaces in the space schedule to get close to their requirements. 65% ntg is physically impossible with normal space allocation standards. 55% is a good place to begin – for now, but not to publish to BCOM.

If we have to meet BCOM standards we may have to hold the sf per level of any double or triple height spaces which will reduce our allowable more. Terraces, inhabited roofs, and overhangs are counted at 50%. We expect that we will need help from Mason administration to make a stand when/if the ntg issue comes up with BCOM.

Many of the walls should be glass. We will have to protect that cost through the design phases.

The AV funding is an area that will require careful consideration. One virtual learning room can be 500K. What is the technology budget now?

What other contingencies should we consider?

We added some larger classrooms (126 and 72 seat) in anticipation of the economic pressures- but we believe it is a good idea in any case. If accepted that might reduce the number of smaller classrooms.

Perhaps we shoot for 210,000 sf gross at this stage to create some contingency. That would mean a target of 115,500K for the net sf target.

We welcome your thoughts.

Have a great Holiday – if you can take it.

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture” 141

142 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 9:30 AM To: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey Subject: List to use for Friday's proj review mtg Attachments: 5_23_2016 Open in SM and P).xls

Cathy,

I’ve attached a revised version of the “projects in planning” Monday report we got from Schooldude. I wanted to add a few notes to one of the w/o that was assigned to me (temporarily) at Friday’s WIB (proj #46) on the attached list. Please use this version of the spreadsheet as you do your formatting/printing for the meeting instead of the one that you got from SchoolDude this morning.

Thanks,

Joy

Associate Director, Space Management Facilities Campus Planning George Mason University (703) 993-2468

143 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 5:40 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

144 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Alexis Brearley Iszard Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 2:08 PM To: Katherine J Powers;Donald R Phillip;Nancy S Pickens;Martha Sansaver;Elizabeth D Long;Laura K Manno Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Frank Strike Subject: RE: Supplemental General Conditions Attachments: 20080903 Appendix 3 - GMU CM Contingency Log.pdf; 20081107 Appendix 1 - GMU CM Price Breakdown Chart.pdf; 20090123 GMU CM at Risk Supplemental GC.pdf; 20080903 Appendix 2 - GMU CM Subcontractor Buy-out.pdf

Kathy,

Attached is what the supplemental GCs upon which I handed you in the meeting were based. The document handed in the meeting was pared back because I believe a decent amount of the attached is a duplication of the CPSM and/or the State’s General Conditions. It was written to include only items that were specific to Mason. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Alex Iszard, P.E. Senior Project Manager Facilities Project Management & Construction George Mason University 703-993-9220 Office 571-217-7987 Cell

From: Katherine J Powers Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 8:32 AM To: Donald R Phillip ; Nancy S Pickens ; Alexis Brearley Iszard ; Martha Sansaver ; Elizabeth D Long ; Laura K Manno Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey ; Frank Strike ; Katherine J Powers Subject: Supplemental General Conditions

Good Morning,

I am working on creating “GMU Supplement General Conditions”. Don tells me he has his supplemental general conditions (which he said he would send me) but he also mentioned that he believes that each PM has their own that they like to use. I would like to create a template of conditions that could be used for all Mason contracts that could be modified by deleting those that are needed for each specific contract. I was hoping you could all send me your (and those PMs on your team) supplemental conditions so I could compile them.

Also, for A/E contracts it looks like we also add GMU specific “needs”; not sure if this is the same as Supplemental General Conditions. For example, we had discussed at our Monday meetings adding the requirement for A/Es to provide a submittal log. I would like to create a list of these GMU requirements so we have a template. Please send me the GMU requirements that you have added to your A/E contracts and I will compile them.

145 Thanks, Kathy

Kathy Powers, P.E., CFM Facility Management Engineer George Mason University 703-993-6131 Facilities Management (http://facilities.gmu.edu)

We are Your Facilities Management Team Dedicated Professionals Providing World-Class Facilities Delivering Exceptional Customer Service

146 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Martha Sansaver Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 4:34 PM To: Alexis Brearley Iszard;Bill Miller;Donald R Phillip;Frank Strike;Gregg Black;Nancy S Pickens;Paul C Didier;Robert P Donahue;Zhongyan Xu Cc: Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Joy Staulcup Subject: RE: WIB May 13,2016 Attachments: WIB May 13 2016.pdf

To All:

Attached is a list of the projects reviewed at the WIB on Friday 5/13/2016.

Martha

Martha J. Sansaver, R.A. Senior Project Manager Facilities Project Management & Construction George Mason University 4400 University Drive MS 2C1 Fairfax, VA 22030 Phone: 703-993-9813 Cell: 703-599-9503 Fax: 703-993-2524 [email protected]

147 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 11:38 AM To: Deborah Crawford Cc: Thomas G Calhoun;Frank Strike;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;VP of Research Executive Assistant Subject: FW: GMU IABRL - 3RD FLOOR FIT-OUT Attachments: A-00-12 - CHEMICAL QUANTITIES & CONTROL AREAS - SECOND & THIRD FLOORS.pdf; 2016-05-11 3rd Floor Fitout v2 - offices same as 2nd floor.pdf; 2016-05-11 3rd Floor Fitout v1 - conf and visualization.pdf

Importance: High

Deb:

I forwarded these questions last week but had not yet had time to share my own thoughts. To keep this project on schedule, I’d like to see if you and I can come up with a consolidated response within the next day or two so they can take an initial stab at layout. I think with some key questions answered they can prepare a design for our review while we investigate answers to other questions a bit more thoroughly. Please see my thoughts in red below.

I have copied a few Mason parties here that were in our initial kick-off meeting last week. I have not shared any of this with the design team – I prefer a consolidated response.

If we can get them feedback ASAP, then maybe we can consolidate a progress review with them on the same day as the clean room meeting. I still need some dates from you for next week to set that clean room meeting up. Maybe if you have a day next week with 2-3 hours open we can consolidate? I have copied your admin here so we can start looking for dates.

Laura

From: Esch, David [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 3:33 PM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Popp, Joe ; Averill, Alan Subject: GMU IABRL - 3RD FLOOR FIT-OUT

Laura,

As we discussed on Monday below are some questions and assumptions for the 3rd floor fit-out. Please run these past the appropriate folks for responses; clarifications and edits. If we could get responses by COB tomorrow that would be great, if later then ASAP will help us keep to the schedule.

--Dave

1. Is there a desired total number of Principal Investigator’s (“PI’s”) to fit into the area we are designing on the 3rd floor? Likely unknown at this time – will likely be based on research opportunities and funded research. 2. Understanding there are not yet occupants identified, are there any specific Functions and/or type of science expected to be performed? Deb with feedback as required

148 3. What is the most likely space assignment per PI? One bay of open lab per? Two bays per? or is there no standard and that depends on future recruitment? At this time, we do not have any standards in place. I hope that is something we can work towards soon. Open lab concept is totally new to Mason and will be a cultural shift. 4. We are showing one large open lab for the open bench zone, with no intermediate walls. See the attached plan which is lightly revised from that we showed on Monday. Other than we discussed, are there any walls required in the Open Labs? Note that introduction of such walls reduces flexibility and adaptability, though that was done downstairs for specific users; Robin Couch and Barney Bishop. Mason had asked the design team to design the 3rd floor such that in a couple of select locations, walls could be added if we needed to subdivide. I do think even with best efforts it will be hard to assume best wall placement and design to add walls later. The conversation we had last week about potentially building in 1 or two smaller “specialty” labs to divide the large open lab space is an interesting one. A way of more strategically dividing space now and providing us with a couple different lab scales to assign. Please confirm direction – may need to discuss with David Wu. a. At our meeting we briefly discussed having one or two walled off labs, each would probably have immediately one associated Equipment Room and Tissue Culture room lab support (or reasonably close access to same). *** Shortly we will share three versions of introducing a walled-off lab, for your consideration. If we go with a 1 or 2 specialized labs, direct access to an equipment room makes sense for each. At present we do want to include a Tissue Culture room on the 3rd floor such that each floor has at least one, but this support space was meant to be a shared resource and not associated with any particular lab. We do not have budget for dedicated and shared TC rooms. b. Note that after determination of wall locations we’ll need to vet the layouts to be sure we have appropriate fire egress. c. Also note that per the original design: We design these open lab areas such that even if you have a wall we expect the door to remain unlocked at all times to allow for fire exiting. This turned out to be a problem on the 2nd floor where CLIA certified lab is located. Original design team assumption was that there could be egress through that space which was not a sound assumption based on CLIA certification. If we know there could be enclosed labs needed on the 3rd floor then we would need to consider location, options and operations carefully to avoid a similar issue. This is a problem if you will have a lab that must be locked against passage to/from an adjacent lab, and we ran into this problem with CLIA and had to make some late changes. In general: We are going to assume all areas within the open lab remain open for passage from adjacent open lab space, irrespective of whether there is a door there or not, unless we hear otherwise in which case we need to discuss one-on-one. 5. Sharing of equipment was originally established as the basis for the LSLB project. Please confirm that the equipment in the following Lab Support spaces can still be shared (not dedicated to PI’s). a. Autoclaves; Two Autoclaves are to be provided. These include: one Clean for sterilization of lab tools (yes), products, etc; one Dirty for the sterilization of lab waste (yes). Please confirm that these two Autoclaves will accommodate expected needs. This is our typical standard; budget does not assume any more than the shared 2. b. Autoclave; We designed the 3rd floor to potentially have an autoclave in Room 3104 “FUTURE AUTOCLAVE”. Was this ever installed? This was introduced when we didn’t know who would occupy the 3rd floor, and there was a possibility the portion of the 3rd floor under GMU control would not have access to an autoclave. If we provide the “normal” compliment of two adjacent locations similar to that on the 2nd floor is there still a desire for this single autoclave to be installed in the future? The “future” autoclave in room 3104 was never installed. I think proposed use and assignment of this lab space would determine if one is ever required in that location. Equipment funds would need to be found for this is required – not included in project budget. c. Equipment Rooms, both large and small. Yes – we would expect to see both large and small equipment rooms for sharing. Deb, please also let us know if there are best practices on ratio of dedicated vs. shared equipment spaces. Today, first residents of the Institute have grabbed both equipment rooms and offices to the point of leaving very little left to share. Likely, similar to space assignments in open labs, we will need to figure out some policies on use of shared spaces. d. Tissue Culture Rooms other than those that might be “captured” as a result of a closed off lab. (It is assumed that the BSC’s will not be shared between PI’s, but that a two-BSC TC room could be shared between two

149 PI’s). I am still not sold on the idea of any captured Tissue Culture rooms – may not be most efficient especially given budget challenges. But yes, I would expect 1-2 shared tissue culture room(s) on this floor. Will need to see what equipment budget can support. May need 1 with option to fit out second later. 6. Are there any expectations for other specific Lab Support research activity or equipment on this floor? Deb to respond with feedback as required. a. Histology Lab? b. Radiology Lab? c. A lab with exceptionally clean conditions? There is no budget for any type of clean room/space in this 3rd floor project. d. Microscopy Lab (for Optical Microscopes)? If a microscopy suite is required on the 3rd Floor, please describe the level of magnification. e. Analytical Equipment such as Mass Specs? f. Is a Glasswash required? Yes – required g. Is an Ice Machine required? Yes – required h. Other? 7. With the building-standard one-fume-hood per two open-lab bays, which was the basis-of-design standard for the building, we’ll plan to provide that layout. A lesser cost assumption would be ½ this ratio; 4 total fume hoods, which would still be more than CAP/MM has on the 2nd floor. See the attached which illustrates the one-fume-hood per two open-lab bay pattern. Please confirm this assumption. I have some concerns about lessening number of hoods to benches as we have received some complaints already about lack of accessible and/or dedicated hoods. While we hope that most hoods will be shared and researchers indicate a willingness to share, in reality we are most often told the many reasons why sharing is not practical. When the building was designed, there was brief conversation about whether this facility could accommodate organic/synthetic chemistry and it was determined that PPEA budget did not support systems that would support those sciences. That said, we have several biochemists in there now that are heavy chemical and fume hood users (Robin Couch, Barney Bishop and Mikell Paige). The issue of number and space of fume hoods is something need to answer quickly. a. Note that in our meeting Joe Popp indicated that frequency as being pretty fume-hood “rich”, and different than what we usually see in most Biological Science research labs. b. Using that interval 8 Chemical Fume Hoods will be provided in this 3rd Floor fitout. c. All will be located in the Open Labs, support spaces will only show Bio-Safety Cabinets. Matches building standard – Deb to confirm. Not every support space will be fit out with BSCs at this time. d. We discussed adding capped-off ductwork tees for easy installation of additional fume hoods. We could do so for every single lab aisle, at a relatively low cost. Without a specific need, given point #7a, above, and due to the high cost of everything upstream of such a fume hood (the stainless steel ductwork, the control box, controls, and the fume hood itself) we do not recommend installing any more than the tee at this point in time. I think no matter what we decide on immediate spacing of hoods, that we do provide the capped-off ductwork tees at every aisle. This will give us the flexibility to relocate hoods in the future if required (and if funded). 8. A cold room for providing a Cold Lab environment is shown on the second floor. We suggest no Cold Lab environment be shown on the third floor. Our reasoning: If for storage only, greater efficiency can be obtained on the same footprint with standing +4 Ref. or Deli Fridges, in addition to greater security control over the biological products, and easier governance. A variety of storage levels can also be achieved in the same footprint (-80's, -20's, and Incubators). I do not believe the budget for the 3rd floor project includes funds for a cold room so I would agree that one will not be provided. However, similar to the comment above about researchers taking over shared equipment spaces and offices, I see some evidence of researchers buying more equipment than fits in assigned space and often they say much of it cannot be shared based on specific research activities. Not sure how one manages individual equipment to shared vs. dedicated equipment spaces. Refrigerators and freezers are among the items we are already having some trouble accommodating. 9. Regarding the expected uses of Hazardous Chemicals per each PI: As a single Chemical Control Area, the use of Hazardous Chemicals on the 3rd Floor shall not exceed the maximum quantities per the IBC, those limits are shown on the attached sheet for the third floor. We would normally ask for a list of expected Hazardous Chemicals, but in this case with no assigned users we identify the attached list as the MAXIMUM, and GMU needs to police this. A

150 GMU Facilities and EH&S question: In the meeting GMU noted BCOM was taking a different approach on this these days. The attached sheet is the approved sheet from the LSLB project, and I suggest we stay with that (it was already approved) unless there is fresh information that we need to approach this differently? I agree, we should stay with this approved chemical control areas sheet. We can invite EHS to attend the meeting with BCOM reviewers to discuss how we manage to these limits. Without specific space assignments to PIs, not sure any other way to do this AND, even if we had PIs, they may change over time so managing to limits will be long-term solution. 10. Please review the mix of offices vs workstations in the office zone. a. We are currently showing as a total (including the two offices already built-out) on the floor: i. 1 large office ii. 19 typical offices iii. 14 “L” shaped workstations iv. 20 straight (short) workstations b. This assumes several changes to the typical layout from the 2nd floor: i. The conference room at the elbow has been made a little bit larger to accommodate 10-12 people in lieu of the original 2nd floor design (which was good for 6 – 8 people). The location still makes the most sense to us; across from the pantry. Stakeholders specifically asked for a meeting room for 10- 12 since there is not one to support meetings of this size in the building currently. ii. The three rooms at the far left have been combined to become the potential “visualization” space. A +/- 20 x 25 foot room with blackout capabilities plus an adjacent equipment room. Please let us know If anyone at GMU has a model they are trying to match, I’ve done everything from simple meeting room-like spaces to CAVE’s (Computer Aided Visualization Environments) which are complex 3 story assemblages, and in my experience visualization environments are quite user/function specific. There are no funds in this project for a visualization lab, but we have asked the design team to make a room an appropriate size and to provide basic infrastructure in walls to support the addition of some future technology. Building and budgets will not likely support anything too elaborate or large; however I would imagine that researchers will want computer aided visualization in the future if funds are found. My biggest concern with location proposed are the windows. Typically, I have seen this type of space as an inner space with no windows. That said, if we do not want to lose any shared equipment space, then we can always use black-out shades in the future if this becomes visualization. Please confirm if location is OK. c. The layout mimics the 2nd floor, and can be changed relatively easily as long as we do that soon. 10.b.i. and ii, above, deletes 2 “L” workstations, 2 typical offices and 5 straight workstations from the counts achieved on the 2nd floor. I have heard positive feedback on the office/work areas on floors 1 and 2. Researchers always want more private offices but I would recommend that we stay with this mix of work spaces. 11. Any other comments relative to the attached plan. Some changes we’ve made that differ from the plan we had on Monday: a. Lab entrance corridors have been made narrower so they cannot accommodate equipment, which we heard has been challenged by the Fire Marshall and/or BCOM and/or GMU EH&S. All equipment will now be within Lab Equipment rooms. b. All walls removed in open lab zone (see #4, above) c. We’ve shown a mix of lab support spaces; equipment rooms, tissue culture (only two are currently shown). Please consider in particular how many tissue culture rooms seem appropriate. This mix may be best discussed in person because there are so many possible mixes. I do not think we can accommodate any more than 1-2 and I have some concerns about equipment budget for 2 at this time. State funding for the Institute may be required for some equipment purchases.

--Dave

David W. Esch, AIA Vice President

151 1560 Wilson Blvd, Suite 200 Arlington, VA 22209 [email protected] M: 202.236.5524 O: 703.907.2303

Joe Popp, AIA / LEED AP BD+C Associate Vice President Architecture

T 703.907.2355 • M 703 201 7345

152 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 5:45 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

153 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Deborah Boehm-Davis Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 5:10 PM To: Laura K Manno;McNay, Gary Cc: Leach, Katlyn;Jill Bowen;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Nancy S Pickens;Joy Staulcup;Elizabeth D Long;Harney, Paul Subject: RE: CHHS faculty data from Mason fact book.xlsx

Sorry. Having trouble staying on top of email. YES, I agree with Laura’s perspective below. Any full-time faculty member should be able to have a private workspace. To the definitions (FYI):

Tenure track/tenured faculty member: Is responsible for teaching, research and service and, if their research is rated of sufficient quality, will eventually have a contract with no term (that is, they have a job as long as they maintain the quality of their work) Term faculty members:: Typically, they are responsible for teaching and service only; some serve in administrative capacities as well. They are full time faculty, but will always serve for a fixed “term” (contract period, of no more than 5 years) Adjunct faculty: Individuals who are hired to teach one to three courses; only responsibility is for teaching Administrative staff: May be term or tenured, but will have administrative responsibilities; typically required to be in the office 8:30-5, 5 days/week Classified staff: Required to be in the office 5 days a week, 8:30-5 typically Wages personnel: Part time support to programs; they work on an hourly basis; cannot work more than 29 hours/week (but typically it is much less). Students may be paid on wages

In terms of departments with natural affinities, it is a bit hard to say, but let me suggest some overlaps:

English lit faculty and faculty in Modern and Classical Languages (MCL) who study literature (in a language other than English) Global Affairs: This is an interdisciplinary program with faculty overlap across sociology, anthropology, modern and classical languages, cultural studies, history Cultural Studies: sociology, anthropology, history, English, Global affairs Criminology, Law & Society: best affinity is with Psychology, but they are in a different building Philosophy & Religious Studies: currently share staff and were one department at one time; philosophers are connected to a PPE (politics, philosophy and economics program), but neither politics nor econ will be in this building Communication: they do health communications and science communications plus PR & media; some overlap with English Women and gender studies: overlap with almost all departments, but particular affinities to MCL and African American Studies Cultural studies and African & African American studies programs currently share a staff member History & Art History: some overlap with philosophy (ancient history/Greeks), cultural studies, english; they have a center for history and new media, which is focused on digital humanities (so all humanities disciplines connected) School of Interdisciplinary Studies: Biggest program is in preparation for becoming a teacher; they also do sustainability work, but not connected to other CHSS departments – more connected to the college of science

Hope this helps. Deb From: Laura K Manno Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 12:37 PM To: McNay, Gary Cc: Leach, Katlyn; Jill Bowen; Deborah Boehm-Davis; Cathy M Wolfe; Nancy S Pickens; Joy Staulcup; Elizabeth D Long;

154 Harney, Paul Subject: RE: CHHS faculty data from Mason fact book.xlsx

I think CHSS would need to answer question 2 below. CHSS may also be able to provide more information on cultural opportunities and challenges. Jill/Debbie can you weigh in?

We do know that our term faculty who can often feel disenfranchised due to hierarchies are often some of our hardest working faculty and often spend large amounts of time on campus.

Also, if we want the building to be most flexible over time, we need to be careful about designing to any specific and current hierarchies or we will lose flexibility. If work spaces are designed differently between term, tenure track and tenure, then we could find ourselves locked into standards that cannot stand the test of time or changes mix within hierarchical categories.

As far as general and physical workplace assumptions, full time faculty whether term/tenure track/ or tenured would generally all qualify for private work spaces (not shared) by our current space standards. I say work spaces b/c I think this is something the university wants us to at least investigate further before we come to any conclusions. what kinds of workspaces are there to consider? Variety, community, shared, private, etc.

Adjuncts are located in shared adjunct suites. We have often used a 25% ratio regarding total number of adjuncts to stations provided. Every suite typically has shared workstations and a healthy number of shared, small private rooms for individual conference, etc. They should also have access to basic items such as shared copy/print/fax/mail rooms/pantry.

We do the same for GRA/GTA spaces. In each of those cases we sometimes adjust the % of stations within minor tolerances.

Classified, admin staff and wage employees have open workstations or shared space. They would not qualify for private offices. You can see current size guidelines in the space standards on the Facilities website. http://facilities.gmu.edu/CampusPlanning/Space/usgs.cfm

I would say however that the current space guidelines are subject to change over time.

Hope this helps, Laura

From: McNay, Gary [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 12:00 PM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Leach, Katlyn ; Jill Bowen ; Deborah Boehm-Davis ; Cathy M Wolfe ; Nancy S Pickens ; Joy Staulcup ; Elizabeth D Long ; Harney, Paul Subject: RE: CHHS faculty data from Mason fact book.xlsx

Laura,

Great info- immensely helpful.

155 A couple of questions 1. To make sure we don’t make incorrect assumptions…For Mason and with CHSS- What are the functional/cultural/ workplace distinctions between term and adjunct faculty, wage personnel and, classified and admin staff - perhaps a one or two sentence definition for each would help.

2. What departments have natural affinities that would encourage combining of staff/ support?

Gary McNay, LEED AP BD+C Practice Leader, Principal t 404.443.7629 m 678.596.4414 Perkins+Will

Honored to be ranked among Fast Company’s “Top 10 Most Innovative Companies in Architecture”

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 10:45 AM To: McNay, Gary Cc: Leach, Katlyn ; Jill Bowen ; Deborah Boehm-Davis ; Cathy M Wolfe ; Nancy S Pickens ; Joy Staulcup ; Elizabeth D Long Subject: RE: CHHS faculty data from Mason fact book.xlsx Importance: High

Gary:

Please find attached the revised CHSS program information. CHSS has provided these numbers (both historical and current). I have highlighted in yellow, those program items that were listed as being in the new Robinson in the pre- planning study program. Those should be vetted again. I have highlighted in green a few line items that we may want to consider for Robinson (though they were not included in the pre-planning study program).

I have also included current locations as well as comments for consideration.

Of note the Public and International Affairs Dept. is no longer a part of CHSS and will not go into the new Robinson. That is a change since the pre-planning study was done.

As far as other program items that need consideration, confirmation and right-sizing, I would list the following (also found in the pre-planning study program):

 Shared conference spaces  DoIT Classroom Technology Support  University Classrooms  Community / informal learning spaces  Building Support spaces  Mason Innovation Exchange (MIX)

Please let us know of you have question.

Laura

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 9:42 AM

156 To: McNay, Gary ; Laura K Manno Cc: Leach, Katlyn Subject: RE: CHHS faculty data from Mason fact book.xlsx

We are collecting this information for you – it’s almost done -

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: McNay, Gary [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 9:33 AM To: Cathy M Wolfe; Laura K Manno Cc: Leach, Katlyn Subject: CHHS faculty data from Mason fact book.xlsx

Cathy and Laura,

How do we get the admin and staff to go with this count. We are using this as the placeholder for now s we need to go ahead on the conceptual development of neighborhoods.

Is it true that Economics, Criminology and Psychology will not be in the new building? Please confirm which academic units we should include.

Thanks! gm

157 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Margaret Lo Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 2:33 PM To: Crystal L Clemons;Cathy Wolfe-Pinskey;Martha Sansaver;Tim Murphy;Bill Miller;Laura K Manno Cc: Heidi R Wolff Subject: RE: Update re: Occupancy Sensor Project: Attachments: PGF_ProjectPlan classroom tech.pdf

Dear colleagues,

I just wanted to send a friendly reminder that we are scheduled to talk about the strategic direction of the classroom technologies project approved for funding by the Patriot Green Fund tomorrow, Wed 11th at 11am in Facilities Management conference room 6. I would like to make sure we are all on the same page and Tim, if we can speak about how we can encumber these funds before the end of the month, I would greatly appreciate that.

I have attached John Donohue’s, who was the applicant for the PGF funds, project report as a reference for our discussions.

Thanks Margaret

Margaret Lo University Sustainability Director George Mason University 703.993.5315 [email protected] http://green.gmu.edu

From: Zane Phipps Sent: Friday, May 06, 2016 1:09 PM To: John Donohue ; Heidi R Wolff ; Margaret Lo ; Craig S Bullock ; Crystal L Clemons ; Chris A Galvan Cc: Thomas H Olund ; Laura K Manno ; Christine Bartlett ; Tim Murphy Subject: Update re: Occupancy Sensor Project: RE: Classroom refresh summer project

All,

CaLT’s Summer refresh projects are now in execution, and we’ve had a bit more time to look at our other efforts.

The project to install occupancy sensors that tie into classroom AV systems in order to turn them off when nobody’s using them is now more in-focus for us. Crystal Clemons, Manager of Learning Space Design, is going to lead the effort from the Project Management perspective, and will be the ITS POC from here out. She indicated that September looks like a viable time to start the technical and walkthrough work. If the offer to carry over the funds is still open, CaLT will be ready to start moving on this at the end of the Summer.

158

Thanks very much,

Zane

Zane Phipps Manager, Fairfax Classroom and Lab Support Information Technology Services George Mason University 703-993-2205 [email protected] its.gmu.edu

159 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Edmund T Daniels Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2016 11:44 AM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: RE: DM Attachments: Design Manager candidates.pdf

Hey there, Here is a pdf with cover letter, resume, application (133 pages). We are printing off a set with cover letter and resume (75 pages). They will be in your box. Ed

-----Original Message----- From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 11:21 AM To: Edmund T Daniels Subject: DM

Ed - could you have someone print out the documents for all the DM applicants - I would like to take them with me when I leave at COB today so I can review over the weekend.

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

160 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2016 9:33 AM To: Cathy M Wolfe;Laura K Manno Cc: Leach, Katlyn Subject: CHHS faculty data from Mason fact book.xlsx Attachments: CHHS faculty data from Mason fact book.xlsx

Cathy and Laura,

How do we get the admin and staff to go with this count. We are using this as the placeholder for now s we need to go ahead on the conceptual development of neighborhoods.

Is it true that Economics, Criminology and Psychology will not be in the new building? Please confirm which academic units we should include.

Thanks! gm

161 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Sunday, May 1, 2016 8:56 AM To: Cathy M Wolfe;Laura K Manno Subject: faculty authored article on office space Attachments: 9-21-2012FacultyPerspectivesonOfficeSpaceAllocation.pdf; ATT00001.txt not sure what this means, but it seems to be an interesting pricy for how faculty view office space

http://www.fgcu.edu/FacultySenate/files/9-21-2012FacultyPerspectivesonOfficeSpaceAllocation.pdf

162 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:46 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Fwd: Topic poll closing: Share your input by Tuesday, March 29 Attachments: DRAFT Corporate-Inspired Offices and Administrative Spaces_April 2016.pdf; ATT00001.htm

Another resource

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Thomas G Calhoun" To: "Cathy M Wolfe" Subject: FW: Topic poll closing: Share your input by Tuesday, March 29

Input from EAB on offices. Faculty office discussion starts on page 18. Not a whole lot new that you haven’t heard from others. But may have more credibility coming from EAB than from facilities-types.

Tom

From: Forman, Ann [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:20 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: RE: Topic poll closing: Share your input by Tuesday, March 29

Hi Tom,

Sorry about the delay here. As you know, we looked at offices for our Campus 2025 research. I’m attaching a draft version of the brief that we’ve written up on that research. It provides a good overview of administrative offices, and touches briefly on faculty offices in the last couple of pages.

I’ve also reached out to my team to see what else we can send you.

Best, Ann

From: Thomas G Calhoun [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 12:07 PM To: Forman, Ann Subject: RE: Topic poll closing: Share your input by Tuesday, March 29

Ann – were you ever able to respond to the second question? If you did, my apologies, but I can’t find it.

163

Thanks Tom

From: Forman, Ann [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 9:38 AM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: Re: Topic poll closing: Share your input by Tuesday, March 29

Hi Tom,

Thanks for following up! I'm away from the office, but I believe John decided to extend the deadline by 2 days. If you're interested, you can still take the poll here: http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/2627015/2016FFMPOC

I'll respond to the second question by the end of the week.

Best, Ann

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 30, 2016, at 08:56, Thomas G Calhoun wrote:

Ann – I apologize for missing the deadline on the poll. Let me know if it opens again and I’ll endeavor to do it.

Separate topic: We are about to undertake design and construction of a $100M academic building. A large portion of the building is currently set aside for faculty offices. We are interested in trying to push the envelope in the area of office use and assignment. Do you have examples of universities that have successfully moved forward with innovative office use? We’d be interested in discussing with them or visiting as part of our planning and design process.

Thanks Tom

From: Ann Forman [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 11:45 AM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: Topic poll closing: Share your input by Tuesday, March 29

164

Dear Tom,

Our topic poll is the primary way we determine what research, publications, and tools to invest in across the year, and we don’t want to establish this year’s research agenda before you’ve had the chance to share your thoughts.

Please take a few minutes to complete our brief poll to ensure that our research is relevant and focused on your top priorities. The survey closes on Tuesday, March 29 at midnight.

Take the topic poll.

Thank you in advance for your participation.

Best, Ann

Ann Forman, Consultant Facilities Forum EAB

<~WRD000.jpg>

165 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Thomas G Calhoun Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:41 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: Topic poll closing: Share your input by Tuesday, March 29 Attachments: DRAFT Corporate-Inspired Offices and Administrative Spaces_April 2016.pdf

Tom

From: Forman, Ann [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:20 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: RE: Topic poll closing: Share your input by Tuesday, March 29

Hi Tom,

I’ve also reached out to my team to see what else we can send you.

Best, Ann

From: Thomas G Calhoun [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 12:07 PM To: Forman, Ann Subject: RE: Topic poll closing: Share your input by Tuesday, March 29

Ann – were you ever able to respond to the second question? If you did, my apologies, but I can’t find it.

Thanks Tom

From: Forman, Ann [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 9:38 AM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: Re: Topic poll closing: Share your input by Tuesday, March 29

Hi Tom,

I'll respond to the second question by the end of the week. 166

Best, Ann

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 30, 2016, at 08:56, Thomas G Calhoun wrote:

Ann – I apologize for missing the deadline on the poll. Let me know if it opens again and I’ll endeavor to do it.

Thanks Tom

From: Ann Forman [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 11:45 AM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: Topic poll closing: Share your input by Tuesday, March 29

167

Dear Tom,

Please take a few minutes to complete our brief poll to ensure that our research is relevant and focused on your top priorities. The survey closes on Tuesday, March 29 at midnight.

Take the topic poll.

Thank you in advance for your participation.

Best, Ann

Ann Forman, Consultant Facilities Forum EAB

<~WRD000.jpg>

168 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Mills Kelly Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:02 PM To: Deborah Boehm-Davis;McNay, Gary;Cathy M Wolfe Subject: My comments for tomorrow Attachments: Kickoff meeting.docx

Hi all:

Since I can't be there tomorrow, I've attached my comments in response to Gary's prompts. I look forward to hearing how it goes!

Mills

-- Mills Kelly Professor of History George Mason University http://edwired.org @EdwiredMills

169

services based on feedback from facilities managers and snow Ventus Lux, an air and light distribution system contractors at the SIMA 2015 Think Tank meeting.

Ventus Lux artfully combines air, Read more . . . water and light. This high performance integrated air and light-distribution system fills a void in the U.S. manufacturing Legrand announces technology partnership and integration with and interior tenant market. Lumenetix araya5 Platform and Wattstopper DLMColor Control Units are available in a variety of sizes and styles to accommodate various projects. Legrand, North America introduces the Wattstopper Digital They are equipped with hydronic cooled air technology (or "chilled Lighting Management (DLM) Color Control, the industry's first beam" in industry parlance), linear lighting fixtures (from our own code-compliant circadian rhythm lighting system. As a controls manufacturer), and a carriage structure of recycled materials (which partner for Lumenetix, the DLM Color Control will be interoperable serves as the housing). with Lumenetix's cutting edge araya5® LED light engine.

Operation requires only a primary air and hydronic cooling source; DLM Color Control marks a significant expansion in Wattstopper no mechanical fan components are needed and the use of primary DLM capabilities. With increased market adoption of LED lighting air ducts is 20% of that used by conventional systems. While a unit and growing interest in functionalities like color control and is integrated, the air-cooling and distribution carriage may be circadian lighting, this system helps accelerate advanced lighting installed separately from the lighting fixture. This addresses by solving the challenges around cost and complexities of the regional labor concerns and duties. control system involved.

Read more . . . The system comprises of an in-fixture control module integrated into the DLM platform with wall box mounted astronomical clock and timer. DLM Color Control is ideal in all areas where high quality LED lighting and features are McMorrow Recruitment: Connecting you to your next best job needed. Read more . . .

Eileen McMorrow, the founder April 24-28: LIGHTFAIR, in San Diego with 140 speakers of McMorrow Recruitment, has 25+years reporting on the facilities management industry and networking with the universe of firms that provide Stellar industry experts shine light on the future of lighting and direct or ancillary services to corporate, healthcare, higher design as LIGHTFAIR International 2016 presents the largest education, and government workplaces and facilities. Conference offering in its 27-year history. The Conference's lineup of more than 140 speakers will share the latest knowledge with industry professionals from across the globe in the San Diego Facilities and real estate management executives and industry Convention Center April 24-28 (Pre-Conference LIGHTFAIR service providers are interacting with McMorrow Recruitment Institute: April 24-25; Trade Show & Conference: April 26-28). to reach our 44,000 subscribers. There are thousands of positions open in FM and related fields; we are the ideal connector on both sides. Read more . . .

Advancing wellness in the built environment: Delos & CBRE

Delos, a wellness real estate and technology firm, has announced a strategic alliance with CBRE Group, Inc. that will advance Delos' mission to transform indoor environments into spaces that help nurture, sustain and promote human health and well-being. In 2013, CBRE became the first company in the world to achieve WELL Certification for a commercial office space through the

175 WELL Building Standard™ (WELL) pilot program with the opening of its Global Corporate Headquarters in Los Angeles. Garland Co. secures building envelope

As a continuation of its leadership in the wellness space, CBRE Garland's line of high-performance metal will pursue WELL Certification for at least 100 buildings, sites or options provide not only beautiful building offices managed by or associated with CBRE worldwide. finishes, but also total satisfaction that the building envelope will be secure for Read more . . . decades to come. By providing quality solutions from the roof to the walls, Garland metal products let buildings owners focus on running their business instead of worrying about keeping it dry. Talent is leading driver of real estate decisions, say execs

Read more . . . A survey of corporate executives underscores a major shift in how companies are making real estate decisions today, with more than half saying that talent now trumps cost as the top strategic consideration. Of the 229 executives surveyed by CBRE Group, Inc., May 3-4: High-Performance Buildings & Workplaces 50 percent named talent availability as the foremost consideration in real estate decision-making, while only 31 percent named real High-Performance estate cost as a top factor. Buildings & Workplaces will be held May 3-4 at Read more . . . the Austin Convention Center in Texas. The conference will unite facility professionals

from every corner of the industry (government, education, commercial office, healthcare, retail and hospitality) to learn the latest in the move toward sustainable, efficient, occupant-focused facilities.It follows on the debut of High Performance Buildings in Ft. Worth last June.

HPB+W, produced by NFMT, will be offering 45 education sessions in six tracks including Get Smart, Get Connected, Get Comfortable, Get Sustainable, Get Compliant and Get Efficient.

Read more . . .

June 13-15: The Mart Chicago

The premier platform for connecting, learning and conducting business in commercial interiors, NeoCon will ring in its 48th year this June 13-15 at the Merchandise Mart in Chicago. The three-day trade show and conference highlights hundreds of leading

176 exhibitors across key vertical markets including workplace, healthcare, hospitality, retail, education, public spaces, and government.

For facilities and design professionals, the NeoCon 2016 edition will feature product launches for commercial interiors, educational programming including over 100 accredited seminars led by industry experts, and networking events

Education programs are anchored by three keynotes led by Paul Scialla, founder/CEO of Delos, and founder of the International WELL Building Institute (IWBI) (sponsored by Groupe Lacasse and ASID), David Rockwell, founder and president of award-winning architecture and design firm Rockwell Group (sponsored by Knoll and IIDA), and Oana Stanescu, partner of Family, the visionary architecture studio behind buzzed-about projects including + POOL (sponsored By OFS Brands and AIA Chicago).

Read more . . .

Total Acoustics ceiling panels block sound

Armstrong Ceiling Systems has introduced Total Acoustics ceiling panels, a generation of ceiling panels that feature the ideal combination of both sound absorption and sound blocking in one ceiling panel.

By providing the ability to both absorb unwanted sound and block noise from traveling into adjacent spaces, Total Acoustics ceiling panels are an ideal choice for today's flexible workspaces where a mix of private offices, quiet concentration areas, and collaborative teaming areas often share the same floor space. By meeting the acoustical needs of each type of workspace in a single panel, Total Acoustics ceilings also provide the ability to reconfigure the workspaces without changing the ceiling while still meeting the acoustical requirements of each space.

Read more . . .

177 McMorrowReports.com, 572 Valley Rd., Suite 43008, Upper Montclair, NJ 07043

SafeUnsubscribe™ [email protected] Forward email | Update Profile | About our service provider Sent by [email protected] in collaboration with

Try it free today

178 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Nancy S Pickens Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2016 3:28 PM To: Annmarie Irwin Cc: Cathy M Wolfe;Frank Strike;Laura K Manno;Jeffrey L. Counts;Donald R Phillip Subject: FW: Project Tracking Attachments: Project Tracking_NancysTeam - 3.31.xlsx

Thank you – These are located on the shared drive – under Robinson, E.3. in a subfolder RFP scoresheets in RFP evaluation criteria and scores. Thanks! Nancy

Nancy S. Pickens, R.A. Senior Project Manager George Mason University 703-993-2644

From: Annmarie Irwin Sent: Friday, April 01, 2016 9:24 AM To: Nancy S Pickens Subject: Project Tracking

In case you see any errors and want to re-print.

Annmarie Irwin Project Engineer Facilities Project Management & Construction George Mason University Office: 571-455-3678

179 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: McNay, Gary Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 4:22 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: CHHS faculty data from Mason fact book.xlsx Attachments: CHHS faculty data from Mason fact book.xlsx

I’m sure this This came from the Mason fact book.

180 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Knoll Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 2:49 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Workplace Design News from Knoll

VIEW WEB VERSION | EDIT YOUR PREFERENCES | SHARE WITH A FRIEND

SHOP & BROWSE DESIGN & PLAN DISCOVER KNOLL

Planning Products Resources Market Focus

m m

m m m m

V V

Product Spotlight 2016 Salone Internazionale del Mobile

DIVIDENDS HORIZON® JOIN US IN MILAN

Dividends Horizon has the versatility to provide thoughtful Knoll presents new collections and iconic products primary workspaces, inspiring Activity Spaces, and at the 55th annual Salone Internazionale del Mobile distinctive private offices. in Milan, April 12 - 17.

LEARN MORE VIEW THE INVITATION

SALONE 2016 ONLINE

You are receiving this advertisement at your request. This is a recurring mailing. We want to make sure that you only receive the messages that pertain to your specific interests.

EDIT YOUR PREFERENCES | UNSUBSCRIBE FROM ALL EMAILS

Knoll respects your privacy, Please review our privacy policy.

181 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 12:29 PM To: Sarah E. Nutter Cc: Diane Vermaaten;Melanie S Pflugshaupt;Kevin W Rockmann;Anne M Magro;Caroline Sonner;Alexis Brearley Iszard;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe Subject: RE: Project Request - 2nd Floor Office - Direction Needed plus another concern

All:

Thought of a few more things I should have included or clarified in the last email.

1) I spoke mostly about the Fairfax space needs when discussing the integrated space request; however, realized after sending that to date we only have a draft strategic plan and no space request for Arlington. There will need to be a space request for space there too; therefore you may use the integrated space request to identify needs in both locations. As discussed with Kevin and team during a meeting several weeks ago, we need a better understanding of timeline for both Fairfax and Arlington so we can study solutions over time. Without massive blocks of empty space, requests will likely need be addressed in some sort of phased model. Per conversations with the Provost, Planning will begin some big picture space studies soon based on “opportunity areas” (similar to what we did at SciTech) but if there are immediate needs, then they need to be incorporated into a formal space request. I understand from your team that the highest priority items from your strategic plan would be a second lounge with break-out space and access to classrooms. 2) We know from your team that some migration to Arlington has already occurred and will continue to occur. We also know from conversations with Diane that you are working on ways to increase the number of shared offices. It would be valuable to include that information with any new space request that you submit. 3) Regarding office sizes: as noted in my earlier emails about the requested build-out of a new 2nd floor office space, we do not build new offices less than 90 SF. I think per conversations with Sarah and team, we have a good way forward with that particular project request (though we need confirmation of Option 2 ASAP). What needs to be clarified is that the 90 SF rule cannot be applied to all existing office space on campus. We have many faculty from most if not all colleges that are in offices that are smaller than space standards, including some in offices smaller than 90 SF. That is the product of existing space and often older buildings. For this reason I want to make sure that my comments about the build-out of new office space are not interpreted to mean that all offices must be right-sized or replaced – that is just not possible. 4) As noted, you may identify areas where you have taken storage closets or similar and internally repurposed them to be offices if you have questions about whether they are suitable for office space. Again, for those spaces, we would confirming that ventilation and code/safety required items are met and are suitable for use as an office. If those things check out then spaces may be able to continue as office use. We would not simply replace in kind those spaces just because they are small.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 10:22 AM To: Sarah E. Nutter

182 Cc: Diane Vermaaten ; Melanie S Pflugshaupt ; Kevin W Rockmann ; Anne M Magro ; Caroline Sonner ; Alexis Brearley Iszard ; Joy Staulcup ; Cathy M Wolfe Subject: RE: Project Request - 2nd Floor Office - Direction Needed plus another concern

Yes, I think an integrated request makes most sense vs. a number of individual ones. It will also give you the opportunity to provide more consolidated and detailed information. Please include in this request information about the expected growth in Fairfax and timing of growth. I would also include a bit about what shifts to Arlington have already occurred and how you have backfilled those Fairfax spaces vacated when folks made that move to Arlington.

As far as closet space to office space. Please do let us know where your College has backfilled people internally so that we can compare to our database. Sometimes spaces initially listed as “storage” or similar were actually designed in such a way that they can be repurposed with no issues, but per my last email that is not always the case. I think step 1 on this issue would be to know what initially non-office spaces you have repurposed to be office space. Then we can check against database as well as check to see how those spaces were designed. If we find that any of the spaces you are using as office space cannot by code or safety issues be used as office space, then we can talk about solutions. I would not yet assume that every space you have repurposed can no longer be an office and that we need a 1:1 replacement. Only assessment can verify.

We will look for both sets of information from you and it would be most helpful if we received them simultaneously so we can assess more holistically.

I agree with your thoughts on the added office on the 2nd floor. Can your team verify that Option 2 makes most sense so we can move this forward quickly?

Thanks, Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Sarah E. Nutter Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 10:01 AM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Diane Vermaaten ; Melanie S Pflugshaupt ; Kevin W Rockmann ; Anne M Magro ; Caroline Sonner Subject: Re: Project Request - 2nd Floor Office - Direction Needed plus another concern

Laura - Thanks for your quick feedback. I agree on the office size of at least 104. I will leave the decision as to the which one way to configure I will leave to my colleagues. Seems most reasonable would be to put in the corner adjacent to the existing office.

On the repurposed closet issue we will take these spaces out of our office inventory. Thanks for bring us to our attention. And, will put into a space request for Fairfax campus. We expect increases in student services and career services staff as early as mid fall semester.

I will ask our team to prepare a integrated space request similar to our plan for Arlington assuming this makes sense to you. We expect growth at the school across the board and an expanding footprint on Arlington and Fairfax campus. Does this make sense?

183 Sarah

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 30, 2016, at 10:58, Laura K Manno wrote:

Given my knowledge of the existing reception desk and how tight the space already is, both options presented for your review hold the line of the current workstation partition (i.e. sketches do not intrude upon reception area). New office wall would align with exiting workstation “wall”.

I agree that many units re-purpose space to make office space and often spaces repurposed do not meet minimum standards. To some extent, we can’t do much about that as Facilities is very often not involved when units do this. We do not however build out any offices that are less than the standard. When we are making an office, we design per all codes and standards.

One other issue that can arise when units repurpose space is a change in use which can be a code issue so not all spaces are designed equally and not all spaces can be repurposed to other uses without review and confirmation that old and new uses are compatible. Therefore, it is often wise for those considering repurposing to verify with us that the proposed is allowable from code and safety perspective.

I think as always, with growth you can submit space requests.

If we have any chance of rolling this office into the 1st floor work, we really need an answer ASAP on option. I think either option can work. I would recommend that either be designed to hit the 104-105 SF shown in option 2 (option 1 can be adjusted to match this size). Goal is not to move reception desk.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Sarah E. Nutter Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 3:18 PM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Diane Vermaaten ; Melanie S Pflugshaupt ; Kevin W Rockmann ; Anne M Magro Subject: Project Request - 2nd Floor Office - Direction Needed plus another concern Importance: High

Hi Laura,

Thank you for the proposals for our 2nd Floor Office. Diane and Melanie forwarded to me for review as well. Our first question is regarding the dimension of the buildout space for each option. The concern, is that we have a reception desk in the open space of ENT 249, as well as an access door to ENT 204 (not

184 represented on the drawings) that need to be considered. How far out from the exterior wall will the space extend?

Because of the space restrictions in our reception area, neither option is ideal. But knowing how far out the new office would extend; in relation to the reception desk/traffic flow for entrances to the new office/workstation configuration, and the entrance to the suite and conference room, need to be considered. We cannot afford to lose the workstation or reception desk.

Also, you raise an important issue with your comment about building out offices smaller that minimum standards. The School of Business has been proactive in maximizing the space in Enterprise Hall, by doubling and tripling faculty and staff into offices and converting storage space and copy rooms into office space. We have senior staff, including an Associate Dean, working in “offices" that are 75 and 78 square feet, well below the minimum standards. With an additional 3 “offices” that are 84-88 square feet. All of these “offices” were formerly computer printer rooms or storage closets. It has struck me that it is really misleading to even be marking these spaces on our space plan as “offices.” With this in mind, I am especially concerned about our lack of space/appropriate space for new faculty and staff hires starting this Fall. The school cannot attract and retain qualified hires without appropriate office space to nurture their growth and potential. I’ve attached our post-construction Fairfax footprint and highlighted in yellow all of the doubling/tripling up of faculty/staff in spaces and in pick highlighted the closets/storage rooms that we have inappropriately put faculty and staff in and called them “offices” - they really should not be labeled so. I have apprised the Provost of our space crunch here on Fairfax – but will also provide him with an additional update as well.

Very appreciative of your help in moving us forward. We expect that our Fairfax footprint will grow as our student population grows.

Sarah

Sarah E. Nutter Dean and Professor of Accounting School of Business George Mason University Fairfax, VA 22030 Ph 703.993.1860

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 9:49 PM

To: Diane Vermaaten; Melanie S Pflugshaupt Cc: Caroline Sonner; Martha Sansaver

185 Subject: Project Request - 2nd Floor Office - Direction Needed Importance: High

Diane:

I have taken a look at your request to build out an office within the 2nd floor dean’s suite and what I have found is that in order to meet the minimum office size by space standards which is 90 SF we will need to take up much more of that 2nd floor open space than first expected. This means systems for both workstations areas will be impacted. We will not build out offices smaller than minimum standards and 90 SF offices are very hard to furnish as they barely provide enough space to furniture and required clearances.

Both options can tweak the wall between the office and work station to increase or decrease office SF though I would recommend that whichever option you choose that you hit at least 100 SF. Most of the offices down the hall are 102- 104 SF.

Option 1 tries to align the wall with the column bump-out along exterior wall (just a cleaner relationship but not required). That could get you a 94 SF office. Of course we could shift wall beyond that column to get larger office size. This option as drawn gives a more regular shaped office with less jogging of walls.

Option 2 puts the option in the original location discussed and pushes wall to get us 105 SF which is more in line with the other offices in the suite. It is a little odd with all the jogs but manageable.

Both options will require additional costs to take down and reconfigure workstation systems furniture. I see no way we can meet minimum office standards and keep even 1 full workstation in place as- is. Based on your option selection, we will need to work with interiors to see how we can rework the workstation to accommodate office.

Can you take a look and let Caroline know which option you prefer? Caroline will be the project manager that fully designs and coordinates this project so at this point, she will start to take the lead. I am out of the office until March 29, so I need you to decide what you want and to let Carline know ASAP. We are still trying to see if we can squeeze this into the construction contract with the lower floor (for efficiencies), but that means we need a decision and Caroline needs to see if she can coordinate and draw in time to meet bid date. Once we know option, Caroline can take a look and start to get a feel for coordination needs, scope and cost.

186 Thanks,

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA

Architect / Planner

George Mason University

(703) 993-5148

187 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, March 8, 2016 9:41 AM To: Elizabeth D Long Subject: Re: meeting this am

Yes

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 8, 2016, at 9:06 AM, Elizabeth D Long wrote:

Mark F. is coming in to discuss George’s. Can we discuss with him why Steve’s original request and his revised request would not be advisable?

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 6:36 AM To: Elizabeth D Long Subject: Re: meeting this am

Let's review this morning

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 7, 2016, at 5:45 PM, Elizabeth D Long wrote:

Steve-

Based on the list of positions, there would be very few if any that warrant a private office based on our space standards. Joy will confirm that and provide direction.

Regardless of the program, I don’t think converting the locker rooms to work space would be advisable at this time. The wall separating the lockers from the event space is a 12” concrete wall that would be expensive to penetrate – original drawings state that it supports a girder but I have not investigated further. We are also beginning design on the Phase II dining and I expect the reconfiguration of the venues may reduce the back of house support space especially since we are hoping to access the new exterior patio wherever possible. My recommendation would be to explore how to maximize the event space within its current boundaries and keep the option of converting the locker rooms to Sodexo food storage as it is adjacent to the service elevator that serves the food venues. Attached is the beginning of a plan showing 6’ x 6’ work stations and work tables in the events space as well as G10. Since space is at a premium, I would think they could they use one of the meeting rooms upstairs for large staff and customer meetings so I have prioritized desks over conference space.

188

The preliminary layout suggests that the existing space could accommodate 2 people in each office (three if necessary), six 6’x6’ workstations and four 6’ tables (8 drop in stations) – if dedicated to work space only - meaning lockers and other storage use move elsewhere. That would max out at 20. (18 if only put 2 in each office or one private and one three person). The folks moving from upstairs could move into G10 which could accommodate five 6’x6’ stations and one 6’ table plus the existing workroom for a total of 8 more seats.

The furniture to accomplish this would probably be in the $50K range. The drawing also looks at adding double doors into the locker rooms and removing select interior partitions. I assume this work would be part of the Phase II dining.

Do you want to schedule another meeting to discuss the next step or would you like me to?

Beth

From: Stephen Morehouse Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 2:59 PM To: Elizabeth D Long Cc: Joy Staulcup Subject: RE: meeting this am

Generally no. However, for meetings with employees, yes. They use the big table in the main area for that.

Stephen Morehouse Director of AE Renovations and Student Centers

George Mason University Johnson Center Room 324 4400 University Drive MSN 5A3 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 703-993-3610 (o) 703-993-2919 (f)

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 2:54 PM To: Stephen Morehouse Cc: Joy Staulcup Subject: RE: meeting this am

189 Beth Service Concierge for Events (25) Max on one shift 3. Student Event Technicians (20) Max on one shift 4. Student Rental Technicians (16) Max on one shift 4. Beth

From: Stephen Morehouse Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 12:46 PM To: Elizabeth D Long ; Joy Staulcup Subject: meeting this am

Beth/Joy

This is a follow up to our walkthrough this am regarding the locker room space we discussed and the possibility of this area NOT becoming storage since we now got the library storage. Not saying that all our storage needs are met, but because of the proximity to the Event staff offices, our thought was we would be better served by expanding the Event office as opposed to turning that space into storage.

Beth told me to even begin that thought, I needed to tell you who would be “housed” in this space to see if it is proper use of the space. Below is that list. Please keep in mind that we do NOT have all student employees in the space at one time, but I show the max student personnel at any one time next to the overall number of student staff we employ. The numbers swell in the spring/summer/fall due to outside event spaces, but below I list the average of those numbers.

Permanent Staff

Production Supervisor (1) Operations Supervisor (1) Assistant Director of Events (1) Service Concierge for Events (25) Max on one shift 3. Can be up to 4 shifts in a day Student Event Technicians (20) Max on one shift 4. Can be up to 4 shifts in a day Student Rental Technicians (16) Max on one shift 4. Can be up to 4 shifts per day A/V Technician (1). He is currently housed elsewhere. We also have the Assistant Director at PW come to campus 2 days a week to assist and teach a class. He would house out of the Event Office while he is here. So 15-20 employees in that space is not uncommon. Sometimes more/sometimes less

Lastly, we meet customers that are scheduling events in this space so we can make sure all needs are met. That can be an addition 3 people per event for meetings.

As explained, we are trying to get all Events personnel in one space to help with coordination of events as well as to make a one stop shop for events. Beth has a diagram of roughly what we though the space could look like. I will be happy to explain more if needed. We will take the space as storage if we cannot convert the space to this office area, we will take it as storage and rethink our process.

Thanks

Stephen Morehouse Director of AE Renovations and Student Centers

190

George Mason University Johnson Center Room 324 4400 University Drive MSN 5A3 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 703-993-3610 (o) 703-993-2919 (f)

191 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Monday, March 7, 2016 11:19 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe;Joy Staulcup Subject: Fw: meeting this am

Cathy, Joy- Can we just say no? I can't support cutting through a 12" concrete wall that's supporting a girder so that events has contiguous office space. I doubt that his staff even justifies three enclosed offices. Need some help with this one. Beth

From: Stephen Morehouse Sent: Monday, March 7, 2016 7:06 PM To: Elizabeth D Long Cc: Joy Staulcup; Mark Kraner; Marc Fournier; Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Re: meeting this am

Beth

Please note I do not have money to spend to give Sodexo storage. I was giving them one of ours in exchange so no money would need to be spent on storage

That said, then I will amend the project to either add a third office to the existing two and then see if we can punch an opening through the wall and make a work space w furniture with no offices. Just need to know how to proceed with that

Thanks

Stephen Morehouse Director of AE Renovations and Student Centers

George Mason University Johnson Center Room 324 4400 University Drive MSN 5A3 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 703-993-3610 (O) 703-993-2919 (F)

On Mar 7, 2016, at 5:45 PM, Elizabeth D Long wrote:

Steve-

192 Based on the list of positions, there would be very few if any that warrant a private office based on our space standards. Joy will confirm that and provide direction.

Do you want to schedule another meeting to discuss the next step or would you like me to?

Beth

From: Stephen Morehouse Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 2:59 PM To: Elizabeth D Long Cc: Joy Staulcup Subject: RE: meeting this am

Generally no. However, for meetings with employees, yes. They use the big table in the main area for that.

Stephen Morehouse Director of AE Renovations and Student Centers

George Mason University Johnson Center Room 324 4400 University Drive MSN 5A3 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 703-993-3610 (o) 703-993-2919 (f)

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 2:54 PM To: Stephen Morehouse

193 Cc: Joy Staulcup Subject: RE: meeting this am

One more question. How many of the people listed below need to be sitting at a work space (desk) at the same time? Are they at the event site for set up and take down, service, etc. or are they sitting at a desk working? In other words, do you really need 11 desks to accommodate them or are some actually working elsewhere. The furniture alone is going to be a huge cost. Beth Service Concierge for Events (25) Max on one shift 3. Student Event Technicians (20) Max on one shift 4. Student Rental Technicians (16) Max on one shift 4. Beth

From: Stephen Morehouse Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 12:46 PM To: Elizabeth D Long ; Joy Staulcup Subject: meeting this am

Beth/Joy

Permanent Staff

Lastly, we meet customers that are scheduling events in this space so we can make sure all needs are met. That can be an addition 3 people per event for meetings.

Thanks

194

Stephen Morehouse Director of AE Renovations and Student Centers

George Mason University Johnson Center Room 324 4400 University Drive MSN 5A3 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 703-993-3610 (o) 703-993-2919 (f)

195 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Monday, March 7, 2016 5:46 PM To: Stephen Morehouse Cc: Joy Staulcup;Mark Kraner;Marc Fournier;Cathy M Wolfe Subject: RE: meeting this am Attachments: Events Management Model (1).pdf

Steve-

Based on the list of positions, there would be very few if any that warrant a private office based on our space standards. Joy will confirm that and provide direction.

Attached is the beginning of a plan showing 6’ x 6’ work stations and work tables in the events space as well as G10. Since space is at a premium, I would think they could they use one of the meeting rooms upstairs for large staff and customer meetings so I have prioritized desks over conference space.

Do you want to schedule another meeting to discuss the next step or would you like me to?

Beth

From: Stephen Morehouse Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 2:59 PM To: Elizabeth D Long Cc: Joy Staulcup Subject: RE: meeting this am

Generally no. However, for meetings with employees, yes. They use the big table in the main area for that.

196 Stephen Morehouse Director of AE Renovations and Student Centers

George Mason University Johnson Center Room 324 4400 University Drive MSN 5A3 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 703-993-3610 (o) 703-993-2919 (f)

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 2:54 PM To: Stephen Morehouse Cc: Joy Staulcup Subject: RE: meeting this am

From: Stephen Morehouse Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 12:46 PM To: Elizabeth D Long ; Joy Staulcup Subject: meeting this am

Beth/Joy

Permanent Staff

197 A/V Technician (1). He is currently housed elsewhere. We also have the Assistant Director at PW come to campus 2 days a week to assist and teach a class. He would house out of the Event Office while he is here. So 15-20 employees in that space is not uncommon. Sometimes more/sometimes less

Lastly, we meet customers that are scheduling events in this space so we can make sure all needs are met. That can be an addition 3 people per event for meetings.

Thanks

Stephen Morehouse Director of AE Renovations and Student Centers

George Mason University Johnson Center Room 324 4400 University Drive MSN 5A3 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 703-993-3610 (o) 703-993-2919 (f)

198 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 5:19 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

199 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 12:13 PM To: Kirk E Hiles Subject: Planning Update Attachments: 2016 February 26 Final.xls

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

200 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Caroline Sonner Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 5:14 PM To: Martha Sansaver;Elizabeth D Long;Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Mason Global II and III - GAA Submission Documents Attachments: 69008-Elec Evaluation.pdf; 69008-Mech evaluation-current.pdf; 69008-Mech evaluation- recommendation.pdf; Architectural Facility Evaluation.pdf; Architectural sheets.pdf

Hello All,

I am attaching the documents submitted by Krista from Gauthier for Phase II and III of Mason Global on Friday evening. I will have a hard copy of these current documents available at the meeting tomorrow.

Thanks, Caroline

201 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 11:06 AM To: Joy Staulcup;Laura K Manno;Elizabeth D Long;Aurora M Roque;Debbie L. Brady;John S Forgy;Kathleen A Mccormack;Courtney Fronce Subject: Friday Planning Review - Final Spreadsheet Attachments: 2016 February 26 Final.xls

Here is the final spreadsheet for Friday’s planning review – hopefully everyone was able to update – I will bring copies to the meeting on Friday so no more changes unless something big is missing. Thanks for your efforts on making sure this was updated –

John – there is a new one on there for you that was from Friday WIB – no need to update that one for this meeting – thanks Cathy

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

202 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 5:21 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

203 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 5:15 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

204 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 5:51 PM To: Laura K Manno Subject: Fwd: How incentives can encourage faculty to vacate private offices voluntarily

FYI

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Thomas G Calhoun Date: February 11, 2016 at 4:44:57 PM EST To: Joy Staulcup , Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: How incentives can encourage faculty to vacate private offices voluntarily

Provided FYI. I’ve copied below the article included in the EAB link below. No response required – just sharing. Tom

Incentivizing faculty to voluntarily vacate private

offices Expert Insight|February 11, 2016

By Ann Forman

As Facilities leaders seek to improve space utilization on campus, private faculty offices remain an area of opportunity and frustration. On one hand, technology advances and simple faculty preference result in faculty members increasingly working from locations across campus or from home. On the other hand, faculty’s right to private offices is a long-standing tradition, and few campus leaders are willing to mandate any changes.

Luckily, a few institutions have had early success incentivizing faculty to voluntarily vacate their private offices.

205 Incentive option #1: Provide an annual stipend for faculty who move to shared offices The University of San Francisco (USF) offers a straightforward incentive program for any full-time faculty member willing to move to a shared office. Faculty receive an annual $3,000 lump-sum bonus for voluntarily vacating their private office in favor of a shared one.

Elements of the University of San Francisco's Faculty Office Withdrawal Program

The program has been successful from a participation and savings standpoint. Fourteen percent of full-time faculty at USF participate in the office withdrawal program. And their Facilities leader reports that every avoided new office saves the school $50,000 in construction costs—significant savings compared to the $3,000 per faculty incentive.

Incentive option #2: Establish scaled incentives to motivate faculty to use shared or hoteling space Parsons School of Design is another school that has experimented with incentives to encourage faculty to give up their private offices. Parsons takes the incentives one step further, offering incentives scaled to the size of the workstation faculty ultimately move into. The first option is a shared office, like USF offers. The second is a “hotseat,” more commonly called a touchdown or hoteling workstation. The shared office option provides a permanently assigned desk, whereas hotseats can be reserved for up to a month at a time.

Learn 5 imperatives for improving space utilization on campus

Faculty who enroll in either program receive a monthly stipend. To make the smaller workstation more compelling, Parsons set the stipend for the hotseat option nearly 50% higher than the stipend for the shared office option. In total, the monthly stipends for the hotseat option sum to $4,180 annually, compared to $2,990 annually for the shared office option. Both options provide faculty a one-time $500 sign-up bonus to outfit their home office.

206 The office withdrawal program at Parsons has been highly successful. Almost 75% of faculty are enrolled in one of the two office withdrawal options.

From: Ann Forman [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 4:11 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: How incentives can encourage faculty to vacate private offices voluntarily

Learn how two institutions saw success incentivizing shared office space.

207

209 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Thomas G Calhoun Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 4:45 PM To: Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: How incentives can encourage faculty to vacate private offices voluntarily

Provided FYI. I’ve copied below the article included in the EAB link below. No response required – just sharing. Tom

Incentivizing faculty to voluntarily vacate private offices Expert Insight|February 11, 2016

By Ann Forman

Luckily, a few institutions have had early success incentivizing faculty to voluntarily vacate their private offices.

Incentive option #1: Provide an annual stipend for faculty who move to shared offices The University of San Francisco (USF) offers a straightforward incentive program for any full-time faculty member willing to move to a shared office. Faculty receive an annual $3,000 lump-sum bonus for voluntarily vacating their private office in favor of a shared one.

Elements of the University of San Francisco's Faculty Office Withdrawal Program

210 The program has been successful from a participation and savings standpoint. Fourteen percent of full-time faculty at USF participate in the office withdrawal program. And their Facilities leader reports that every avoided new office saves the school $50,000 in construction costs—significant savings compared to the $3,000 per faculty incentive.

Learn 5 imperatives for improving space utilization on campus

211 The office withdrawal program at Parsons has been highly successful. Almost 75% of faculty are enrolled in one of the two office withdrawal options.

From: Ann Forman [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 4:11 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: How incentives can encourage faculty to vacate private offices voluntarily

Learn how two institutions saw success incentivizing shared office space.

212

Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, February 8, 2016 5:15 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

214 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 11:58 AM To: Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe;Thomas G Calhoun Subject: RE: Zofia Burr

I would say that if the request is supported and submitted as a formal project request, we need to set expectations that their project will need to get in the queue and we will move as quickly as we can to address. If this is a conversation at the JJ level, I’d hate to see this jump in front of everything else. We are currently working to get through a backlog of project requests for similar items requested by others months ago who have patiently waited their turn.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 10:53 AM To: Cathy M Wolfe ; Thomas G Calhoun ; Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Zofia Burr

All,

Marilyn Clark (Honors office mgr) emailed me to ask about the process they needed to use to request adding glass to their suite entry door and their Honors lounge space door, and to enclose one of their suite open areas to create an additional office for a new faculty member. I told her the process to use to submit a project request form, and that we would need to evaluate whether the glass can be added to the suite and honors lounge doors since there are fire code issues with the atrium that might prevent us from making that change at this time. I was told by Alex that we may not be able to change the doors or BCOM would make us redo the smoke evac system for the atrium. For the office, I indicated we would need to evaluate the reasons for this add since Honors was given growth offices already in their Mason Hall relocation plan. In addition, when I first met to review their space assignment plan for their new suite, I notified them that they were not in compliance with our space guidelines since they have many of their non-teaching staff in private offices. They also chose to make one of the private offices into a conference room in their suite even though we indicated CHSS had several conf rooms on the 2nd floor of Mason that CHSS had indicated Honors could use when needed. I said they may choose to put staff in private offices now, but as they added full-time, teaching faculty, they would need to consider having staff share offices to free up office space for those new faculty.

I would imagine that Zofia Burr may not agree with this proposed solution, but it is consistent with what I ask of all depts. when they indicate they want to spend dept resources to add offices, etc. I try to suggest ways to meet their need without spending money, but if Honors has the money to pay for the additional office build out, and J.J. wants us to proceed, we can move the into planning/execution once we receive the project request form from Honors.

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management

215 Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 5:53 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun; Laura K Manno Cc: Joy Staulcup Subject: Re: Zofia Burr

Not sure

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 20, 2016, at 5:38 PM, Thomas G Calhoun wrote:

Ladies – what can you tell me about a space/renovation request from Honors to create an office from one of their open spaces? Something about faculty advising, etc. Apparently she mentioned it to JJ today. Thanks Tom

Thomas G. Calhoun, P.E. VP, Facilities George Mason University

216 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2016 3:42 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: Business School Development Office Door

Don’t let Sarah Nutter say we don’t help them. This is the 2nd thank you from School of Business this month.

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Diane Vermaaten Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 8:09 AM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Eleanor C Weis Subject: RE: Business School Development Office Door

Thanks Laura! We appreciate all that you are doing for us on this and all our other projects.

Best, Diane

Diane Vermaaten, PhD Assistant Dean of Finance & Operations School of Business Phone: (703) 993-3725

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 5:09 PM To: Diane Vermaaten Cc: Eleanor C Weis Subject: RE: Business School Development Office Door

Thanks. Sorry you didn’t get my sketch earlier. As you suggested, I stopped in the 1st floor space to see how it was being used today. As you noted, I was very impressed with what they have done with the space, especially given the limitations. Stopping by also gave me the opportunity to speak directly with them about the proposed plan and the door so that they would be familiar with this subject when you asked them. Anyways, my visit there bumped me up against other meetings so I am just now sitting back down at my desk.

Even with the decision made about the door, I still owe you a clean plan (zoomed back to include the office). I hope to be setting up a meeting to discuss furniture and interiors soon. I updated the plan to remove the 4th (student) desk and to show potential storage area near the entry door (dashed rectangles). Based on the dimensions shown, you could likely get (2) 4’ storage cabinets in that location. I have also noted the need for electric and data near the private office entry so we can look at ways to create a shared print station there.

217 Please do share with your team. I know they too wanted a clean copy for reference. Once our interior designer is done with the major move into the new library I will work to set up meetings with you. That will determine both furniture options and arrangements among other finishes.

Thanks again! Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Diane Vermaaten Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 2:11 PM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Eleanor C Weis Subject: Business School Development Office Door

Hi Laura, Thanks for visiting us this morning. Eleanor and her team have decided to move forward with the glass door. Please let us know if you need anything else from us and we look forward to receiving the diagram.

Thanks, Diane

Diane Vermaaten, PhD Assistant Dean of Finance & Operations School of Business Phone: (703) 993-3725

218 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 1:19 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: Accent Walls in Private Offices

Tom – Jose came in and asked me about painting accent walls this morning for Health Clinic – I told him that typically we would not have accent walls in private offices – he must have told Carol Filak I was the reason she could not have accent walls in the clinic offices in the Health Clinic – she then called me and said she is paying and she said she wants accent walls and wants to know why they can’t have them - it’s going to raise their moral she said – I said because that is a general policy – it costs more, takes longer etc. – she said she is paying and she wants to know why – I told her it would be better to talk to you about it if she disagrees – I don’t know what else to do in these situations since my “style” is the problem.

The guys in the paint shop are telling everyone that I am the reason they can’t have accent walls. I don’t think they should be doing that – we either have a policy that they enforce or we don’t – I don’t care if every wall is a different color.

Cathy M. Pinskey, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

219 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2015 10:39 AM To: Monica Michaud Cc: Anne Gentry;Cathy M Wolfe;Thomas G Calhoun Subject: FW: INTO Mason Space Use Agreement Meeting Attachments: GMU_Mason Inn_Ground Floor_Office Floor Plans_09-21-15-With JV Mason Employee Highlighted.pdf

TimeMattersID: M3D42A543EE27228 TM Contact: Julia Pfaff TM Matter Reference: INTO - Space Usage Agreement

Monica,

Since Anne has indicated that the space use agreement for INTO JV should include only the offices/spaces assigned to employees paid by the JV per the attached color-coded floor plans that Julia sent to her, and you’ve indicated that you need to get the private use information to bond council for Mason Global Center, you will need to know a SF amount to do the PBU calculation and those numbers are not included on Julia’s floor plans. I took the color-coded plans that Julia sent and got the SF for each of the private offices and conf room 1313 from our space database SF information for those rooms, and then applied our typical SF for a staff workstation for all the workstations that are in shared office or large open areas so that I could determine an overall ASF number for you to use for the calculation. That overall ASF total is 1,513 ASF assigned on floor 1 of the Mason Global Center for spaces that INTO JV paid employees are using.

Hope this helps,

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

From: Anne Gentry Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2015 4:24 PM To: Monica Michaud Cc: Joy Staulcup Subject: FW: INTO Mason Space Use Agreement Meeting

Monica,

The Attached shows the INTO offices that would be considered private use per our office’s conversations with bond counsel for they are the rooms that house INTO Mason LLC employees.

Anne

-- K. Anne Gambrill Gentry 220 Associate University Counsel George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 2A3 Merten Hall, Suite 5400 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 Phone: 703.993.2619 Fax: 703.993.2340

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication and any accompanying document(s) are or may be confidential and privileged and protected by the attorney-client and/or attorney work product privileges. They are intended for the sole use of the addressee. If you receive this transmission in error, you are advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance upon the communication is strictly prohibited. Moreover, any such inadvertent disclosure shall not compromise or waive the attorney-client or attorney work product privilege as to this communication or otherwise. If you have received this communication in error, please delete the original message from your system and immediately contact me at the above telephone number or email address. Thank you.

From: Julia L Ellegood Pfaff Sent: Friday, October 02, 2015 6:50 PM To: Anne Gentry Cc: Andrian Pawluk ; Todd S Rose ; Yamen R Shalaby Subject: RE: INTO Mason Space Use Agreement Meeting

Greetings Anne,

So for the delay in getting this back to you. Attached you will find the highlighted desks. Green is a Mason paid employee, Yellow is a JV paid employee, no color is an unassigned space, Blue is a drop-in space for Adjuncts.

Attached you will also find the current Org chart for the INTO Mason. Again the green boxes are Mason paid employees.

How long to do you think it will take you to draft the INTO Mason Space Use Agreement?

Thank you,

Julia

From: Anne Gentry Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 9:39 AM To: Julia L Ellegood Pfaff Subject: RE: INTO Mason Space Use Agreement Meeting

Julia,

It was nice to meet with you last week.

Just a reminder that you were supposed to supply a floor plan and a list of the offices occupied by employees of the LLC.

Thanks Anne

-- K. Anne Gambrill Gentry 221 Associate University Counsel George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 2A3 Merten Hall, Suite 5400 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 Phone: 703.993.2619 Fax: 703.993.2340

222 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 3:43 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: Lock core storage relocation needed

FYI – Jim called me about his below response. I told him that I didn’t have any other storage space to provide to him, and that Derick should not be in a private office. I told him the cabinets with old files could be put into Nottoway 108 along with the desk that Derick is using as well as whatever other storage could be placed in that room. I did indicate it would be best for them to see what could be sent to surplus if it hasn’t been used/needed in several years because we often provide storage space for end users to hold onto items that are no longer needed/used and we don’t have enough space to continue that practice. There should be enough space in Nottoway to meet this need – it’s just like with most end users, they don’t want to go through the effort to weed out what’s not needed so they just continue to say that they need the space.

He indicated he would need at least two weeks to try to clear out the space, so I told him that was fine, and if he needed longer, just to let me know. Since I’m not sure when Fac will need to move functions into the space, I want to be flexible with his deadline for getting the space cleared out since I know David Lee is still out and he’s down additional locksmiths.

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

From: James L Mccarthy Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 2:46 PM To: Joy Staulcup Subject: RE: Lock core storage relocation needed

Joy, That room is now occupied by O’Connors replacement Derick, putting Derick in the same office as Joe will not work it is too small. David Lee is out on injury for at least another three weeks and I am short two people in his office so moving the equipment may be an issue. There is a lot more than cores in the storage areas, there are locksets files with actual records etc, due to the lack of space here. Is there somewhere else in the University to store the items, if not we may just put it all in surplus and buy new. Jim

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 2:25 PM To: James L Mccarthy Cc: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Lock core storage relocation needed

Jim,

223 I need to ask that Lock Shop/Physical Security work to relocate stored cores that are now in Northeast Module II, room 128 to the Lock Shop/Key Control assigned space in Nottoway Annex. Several years ago, room 128 in NEM II was assigned to Lock Shop/Phys Security to meet a special accommodate office need for O’Connor McBride when we were relocating Lock Shop/Key Control to Nottoway Annex. About a year after, I learned that instead of using that space as an office for O’Connor (he eventually began to work in space in Nottoway) it had been used to store lock cores for several large capital project needs. I agreed to let that use continue, but had indicated several times to you and David Lee that I would need the cores to be moved to Nottoway because the NEM II space would eventually be needed to meet office space growth needs.

I am emailing to ask that you work on getting those lock cores moved to Nottoway because I need to use NEM II 128 to meet new office space needs. I have attached floor plans that show the location of NEM II 128 and the potential room in Nottoway that should be able to accommodate this additional storage need. In past surveys of the Nottoway Annex space, I had discovered that O’Connor was using room 108 as an office, so this room should be available to meet any core storage needs. We do not assign private offices for trades staff, so if someone else has moved into that office, it is not an approved use by our space guidelines, so I would like to ask that you work with the Lock Shop staff to make sure this space can be cleared so that the stored cores from NEM II 128 can be moved and co-located with other Lock Shop functions. I cannot access room 128 since it has a special core on it, so if the cores have already been moved, please have a staff person from the Lock Shop put a normal core in the hardware for room 128 so that a key can be issued. If the stored cores are still in that space, please let me know a timeline for when NEM II 128 will be cleared out.

Thanks for your assistance,

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

224 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 2:25 PM To: James L Mccarthy Cc: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Lock core storage relocation needed Attachments: Lock Core Storage Relocation.pdf

Jim,

I need to ask that Lock Shop/Physical Security work to relocate stored cores that are now in Northeast Module II, room 128 to the Lock Shop/Key Control assigned space in Nottoway Annex. Several years ago, room 128 in NEM II was assigned to Lock Shop/Phys Security to meet a special accommodate office need for O’Connor McBride when we were relocating Lock Shop/Key Control to Nottoway Annex. About a year after, I learned that instead of using that space as an office for O’Connor (he eventually began to work in space in Nottoway) it had been used to store lock cores for several large capital project needs. I agreed to let that use continue, but had indicated several times to you and David Lee that I would need the cores to be moved to Nottoway because the NEM II space would eventually be needed to meet office space growth needs.

Thanks for your assistance,

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

225 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 3:40 PM To: Melissa Burns;Brian Tucker;Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Debbie L. Brady;Thomas H Olund Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

I agree and I like your pricing strategy. We can confirm that with the Dean.

I will start working on a meeting with him for early next week.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Melissa Burns [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 3:31 PM To: Laura K Manno ; Brian Tucker ; Cathy M Wolfe Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Hi all, Just catching up on the discussion from earlier this week with the plans actually in front of me 

I really like the reception desk location in Strategy 1A and 3, as well as the plan layouts. If it makes sense from a pricing strategy of “good, better, best,” we could price 1A in the “good category” and Strategy 3 in the “best category”, in addition to the level of build out and finishes.

Either way, I do think the character sketches will be important to convey the feel of the space upon entry for the Dean. We are working on that now.

Laura, I think you can start working to set up a meeting with the Dean for next week. Just looking ahead at the calendar, I think Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday are pretty open for Brian and me.

Thanks! Melissa

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 10:39 AM To: Brian Tucker; Cathy M Wolfe; Melissa Burns Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

I think we can tell the dean we looked at moving both technical services and reference up but that in our opinion, the damage it did to the 2nd floor space made it not worth pursuing. I also think that there seem to be some efficiencies gained by having circulation and reference together. Could they do things differently – sure. But the combination of the impacts to upper floors and the loss of efficiency make option 4 not likely where we should go. IF he still seems interested we can show him these studies. 226

I think the argument to move technical services up to the 3rd floor makes total sense. Therefore I think strategy A would be our recommendation. For that strategy we can provide a higher and a lower cost estimate based on level of build-out and finishes.

If all are in agreement, then I can start working to set up a meeting with Dean Butler for next week.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 9:44 AM To: Cathy M Wolfe ; Laura K Manno ; Melissa Burns Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Strategy 4 will compromise some of the upper floors – likely the prized 2nd floor.

Strategy 2, 3 & 4 assume that Technical Services moves from the 1st floor to the 3rd floor (same location in the plan). They currently occupy 900 SF and assuming they are right sized per the program provided by Laura, they only require (2) Offices, a workstation, and a work room (not sized) – approx. 500 SF.

Strategy 4 would require the reference section and librarian offices to move to the 2nd floor. They currently occupy about 1500 SF (Offices – 530 SF; rest is shelving). Right sized per program for offices only – 735 SF (some existing offices are undersized). Since we’re visual, I’ve shown the area of office space required. The shelving would fill about 1.5 of the grey shelving blocks assuming full height shelving. I don’t think this fits with the Dean’s vision of this floor.

Thoughts???

227

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

228

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Cathy M Wolfe [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 12:21 PM To: Laura K Manno; Melissa Burns; Brian Tucker Subject: Re: Law Feasibility

I agree I like 3 or 4 but if 4 compromises upstairs then 3 is best but also agree we need some character sketches.

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 20, 2015, at 10:05 AM, Laura K Manno wrote:

Here they are again…

Lorenzo is home sick. I came in to get computer and to take care of a few things. I will be working from home rest of day. I will edit Fenwick SOW and then I plan to focus on econ program today.

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 10:02 AM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Brian Tucker ; Melissa Burns ; Thomas H Olund ; Debbie L. Brady Subject: Re: Law Feasibility

Can someone send me the sketches?

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 20, 2015, at 9:58 AM, Laura K Manno wrote:

All:

This is great work – thanks Brian! Since we are using this email with sketches as a way to communicate with Melissa and Cathy I will provide comments here as well vs. phone call. That way we are all communicating together.

In my opinion, Strategies 1A and 3 are the strongest. I think option 4 would appeal to the Dean in some ways because everyone always wants more space and there are more closed offices, but I think the impacts to the upper floors to find new locations for both reference and technical services will not likely be a tradeoff we can make. Dean loves the 2nd floor and has explicitly said he does not want to see that eroded. I also think that there is some relationship between circulation and reference and while I am sure 229 things can be done differently, it sounds like we might lose some efficiency if we separate the two.

I think strategy 2 reception desk location and work station placement doesn’t match with dean’s vision. He doesn’t want open space to seem chopped up and he wants the desk visible for the front door.

I think the difference between strategies 1A and 3 really is elbow room and 1 additional office. Both open up the central area and some views along the perimeter wall and both introduce some workstations instead of private offices only. I also think the number of workstations proposed is do-able, especially given proposed placement of them. I believe you had said that your original program was short an office/work area so strategy 3 appears to balance concept with required spaces. I also think the position of workstations and an open meeting/collaboration area does a nice job of opening up the center of that back space so it does not suddenly feel crowded. I think technical services is the function that could most easily be relocated and I think we can propose the 3rd floor area you had noted as being meeting room/seminar room + group study room as part of that fix.

We still will need a computer lab and a seminar (existing items) room but I think you could make a nice seminar room/meeting room along atrium wall of 2nd floor. With some executive looking finishes, that may be as nice a view as anything else. You had suggest that be meeting space so I think we say it is meeting/seminar to address program. Then I think you can show the computer lab with microfiche on the 3rd floor as you have already done.

I think the thing that will seal the deal on this will be the sketch that shows the character of the 1st floor space. I think it needs to show a view upon entry with reception, very open waiting area with mixed seating. I think key to this sketch will be to show that the built spaces such as meeting rooms do not crowd the space but instead provide some opportunities for some variety of spaces and “zones”. I also think the few solid walls may be used for branding opportunities or similar. Scale will be important. I don’t think Dean can assess how much open space this really shows – which is quite a large amount. It may be helpful to know total ASF of reception + open area up to meeting rooms (including that portion that extends to exterior wall). If we have that total SF it may be easy for us to provide comparisons of how this open space matches up against others to show how open this really is.

As far as next steps, I think that once we hear our internal group thoughts on this and we see your interior sketch, it may be in our best interest to meet with the Dean personally one last time to discuss and get sign-off. I am thinking we keep meeting small and maybe dean only. If we get his approval, then I/we can present a follow-up to the full group. I think we need to get aligned with the higher vision (Dean) first to make sure we are on track. Getting into the weeds with multiple end users at this time is a bit counter-productive. As Brian and I discussed yesterday between shape of space, fixed objects like stairs and program considerations, there are probably only a handful of concept diagrams that are strong given parameters. If program leads the solution, then we end up with as Brian said “wonky” solutions. If we step back to creating a strong concept diagram then I think program can be massaged to work so long as we are close.

Laura

230

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 5:59 PM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Melissa Burns Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

I made some headway on a revised strategy for the original diagram…I’m calling this 1A. We lose (1) workstation and downsized (2) of the other workstations. It converts (3) workstations to offices. This provides for a more open area up front. I’ve attached all the strategies so Melissa can have a peak as well.

I also am showing (2) new reference librarian offices/workstations as we lost (2) when we shifted the line over. We had neglected to provide for those in the original diagram. To accommodate I had to shorten up the reference shelving.

I think we’ve reached a good point where we can get a nice sketch image of the entrance and open seating area that will give the Dean the ‘wow’ factor he is looking forward.

Look forward to discussing tomorrow morning.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Brian Tucker Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:21 PM To: 'Laura K Manno' Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Some food for thought…if all of library but circulation moved out. Just wanted to see what that could like.

I have to go out to a job site tomorrow, but I am free from 9:00-10:15am. Are you free right at 9am?

I’m still struggling with the original diagram. I think that original diagram was a little deceiving in that it did not leave enough space for the Reference Section and the Reference Librarians. I send along something if I have a breakthrough in the next couple hours.

Look forward to speaking with you tomorrow.

231

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:12 PM To: Brian Tucker Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

I have to run out of the office but upon a quick look at these I think Strategy 3 looks best as it put reception right as you walk in. Dean had previously mentioned not being able to clearly see the reception from front door. I also think doing this prevents “cluttering” the open space up with workstation or reception desk. The shift and offices back behind the stair are really nice as well.

So this nice diagram works well assuming we can move technical services which I think we can negotiate with the Dean however, if that would not be possible, were there ways to improve your original diagram to look more open like this one?

Can we talk first thin in the morning? I am already late to next meeting 

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 3:55 PM To: Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Give me a call to discuss.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 3:10 PM To: Melissa Burns; Brian Tucker Subject: Law Feasibility 232

Just got off the phone with the Dean. He has confirmed the following:  We should assume that Admissions will be on the 1st floor  He also wants CAAS on the 1st floor but if in a pinch we need to put some back- of-house operations for CAAS elsewhere then we can consider that  He agrees with the logic that we come up with a solid concept plan that while it attempst to fit everything in isn’t totally ruled by that program. Therefore don’t try to force the square peg in the round hole if the outcome holistically isn’t the right level of professional / inviting space.  He likes the idea of a simple sketch that shows feel of the interior space – right now hard to visualize in plan only  He likes the idea of a quick look at moving reference to the 2nd floor with only the circulation desk to remain on floor 1 o It is OK to consider moving additional half-height shelving up to floor 3 to open up space on floor 2 for reference o He loves the 2nd floor so while reference can move up, the openness is something he wants to maintain o We can sacrifice the proposed 2nd floor meeting room along the atrium glass if that is needed for other items  He also though the idea of a low-end vs. high end version of your current concept assuming higher and lower levels of build-out sounded good.  Regarding the atrium, I have reminded him that is not in your scope but that we have talked and you would be willing to provide some recommendations and a range of costs at order of magnitude level for future consideration o He wants a concierge desk in the lobby – somewhere near the front door but out of main space so it does not impede events – again you do not need to design, just provide thoughts on where one might work and order of magnitude range for costs.

We are going to forego you speaking with end users at this time. I may or may not. I will correspond with them Monday about where we are, process going forward on this and process for future design (which is where they will really be heavily engaged)

Think this covers everything….I am in Monday if you have questions.

Have a nice weekend, Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

233

234 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Debbie L. Brady Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 11:47 AM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: Law Feasibility Attachments: HAZEL HALL - LEVEL 1 - STRATEGY 1A.pdf; HAZEL HALL - LEVEL 1 - STRATEGY 2.pdf; HAZEL HALL - LEVEL 1 - STRATEGY 3.pdf; Hazell Hall - Strategy 4.pdf

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 9:58 AM To: Brian Tucker; Melissa Burns; Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Thomas H Olund; Debbie L. Brady Subject: FW: Law Feasibility

All:

In my opinion, Strategies 1A and 3 are the strongest. I think option 4 would appeal to the Dean in some ways because everyone always wants more space and there are more closed offices, but I think the impacts to the upper floors to find new locations for both reference and technical services will not likely be a tradeoff we can make. Dean loves the 2nd floor and has explicitly said he does not want to see that eroded. I also think that there is some relationship between circulation and reference and while I am sure things can be done differently, it sounds like we might lose some efficiency if we separate the two.

235 opportunities or similar. Scale will be important. I don’t think Dean can assess how much open space this really shows – which is quite a large amount. It may be helpful to know total ASF of reception + open area up to meeting rooms (including that portion that extends to exterior wall). If we have that total SF it may be easy for us to provide comparisons of how this open space matches up against others to show how open this really is.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 5:59 PM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Melissa Burns Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

I think we’ve reached a good point where we can get a nice sketch image of the entrance and open seating area that will give the Dean the ‘wow’ factor he is looking forward.

Look forward to discussing tomorrow morning.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Brian Tucker Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:21 PM To: 'Laura K Manno' Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

236

Some food for thought…if all of library but circulation moved out. Just wanted to see what that could like.

I have to go out to a job site tomorrow, but I am free from 9:00-10:15am. Are you free right at 9am?

Look forward to speaking with you tomorrow.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:12 PM To: Brian Tucker Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Can we talk first thin in the morning? I am already late to next meeting 

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 3:55 PM To: Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Give me a call to discuss.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

237 EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 3:10 PM To: Melissa Burns; Brian Tucker Subject: Law Feasibility

Just got off the phone with the Dean. He has confirmed the following: st  We should assume that Admissions will be on the 1 floor st  He also wants CAAS on the 1 floor but if in a pinch we need to put some back-of-house operations for CAAS elsewhere then we can consider that  He agrees with the logic that we come up with a solid concept plan that while it attempst to fit everything in isn’t totally ruled by that program. Therefore don’t try to force the square peg in the round hole if the outcome holistically isn’t the right level of professional / inviting space.  He likes the idea of a simple sketch that shows feel of the interior space – right now hard to visualize in plan only nd  He likes the idea of a quick look at moving reference to the 2 floor with only the circulation desk to remain on floor 1 o It is OK to consider moving additional half-height shelving up to floor 3 to open up space on floor 2 for reference nd o He loves the 2 floor so while reference can move up, the openness is something he wants to maintain nd o We can sacrifice the proposed 2 floor meeting room along the atrium glass if that is needed for other items  He also though the idea of a low-end vs. high end version of your current concept assuming higher and lower levels of build-out sounded good.  Regarding the atrium, I have reminded him that is not in your scope but that we have talked and you would be willing to provide some recommendations and a range of costs at order of magnitude level for future consideration o He wants a concierge desk in the lobby – somewhere near the front door but out of main space so it does not impede events – again you do not need to design, just provide thoughts on where one might work and order of magnitude range for costs.

Think this covers everything….I am in Monday if you have questions.

Have a nice weekend, Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

238 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Melissa Burns Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 11:37 AM To: Cathy M Wolfe;Laura K Manno Cc: Brian Tucker;Thomas H Olund;Debbie L. Brady Subject: Re: Law Feasibility

Cathy,

I think the sketches were attached to the previous email, but I can't open them on my phone, not sure if you can. We could meet up at lunch and review them on my laptop if you'd like.

Melissa

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 10:02:09 AM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Brian Tucker; Melissa Burns; Thomas H Olund; Debbie L. Brady Subject: Re: Law Feasibility

Can someone send me the sketches?

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 20, 2015, at 9:58 AM, Laura K Manno wrote:

All:

In my opinion, Strategies 1A and 3 are the strongest. I think option 4 would appeal to the Dean in some ways because everyone always wants more space and there are more closed offices, but I think the impacts to the upper floors to find new locations for both reference and technical services will not likely be a tradeoff we can make. Dean loves the 2nd floor and has explicitly said he does not want to see that eroded. I also think that there is some relationship between circulation and reference and while I am sure things can be done differently, it sounds like we might lose some efficiency if we separate the two.

239 was short an office/work area so strategy 3 appears to balance concept with required spaces. I also think the position of workstations and an open meeting/collaboration area does a nice job of opening up the center of that back space so it does not suddenly feel crowded. I think technical services is the function that could most easily be relocated and I think we can propose the 3rd floor area you had noted as being meeting room/seminar room + group study room as part of that fix.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 5:59 PM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Melissa Burns Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

240 I also am showing (2) new reference librarian offices/workstations as we lost (2) when we shifted the line over. We had neglected to provide for those in the original diagram. To accommodate I had to shorten up the reference shelving.

I think we’ve reached a good point where we can get a nice sketch image of the entrance and open seating area that will give the Dean the ‘wow’ factor he is looking forward.

Look forward to discussing tomorrow morning.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Brian Tucker Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:21 PM To: 'Laura K Manno' Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Some food for thought…if all of library but circulation moved out. Just wanted to see what that could like.

I have to go out to a job site tomorrow, but I am free from 9:00-10:15am. Are you free right at 9am?

Look forward to speaking with you tomorrow.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:12 PM To: Brian Tucker Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

241 So this nice diagram works well assuming we can move technical services which I think we can negotiate with the Dean however, if that would not be possible, were there ways to improve your original diagram to look more open like this one?

Can we talk first thin in the morning? I am already late to next meeting 

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 3:55 PM To: Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Give me a call to discuss.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 3:10 PM To: Melissa Burns; Brian Tucker Subject: Law Feasibility

Just got off the phone with the Dean. He has confirmed the following:  We should assume that Admissions will be on the 1st floor  He also wants CAAS on the 1st floor but if in a pinch we need to put some back-of-house operations for CAAS elsewhere then we can consider that  He agrees with the logic that we come up with a solid concept plan that while it attempst to fit everything in isn’t totally ruled by that program. Therefore don’t try to force the square peg in the round hole if the outcome holistically isn’t the right level of professional / inviting space.  He likes the idea of a simple sketch that shows feel of the interior space – right now hard to visualize in plan only  He likes the idea of a quick look at moving reference to the 2nd floor with only the circulation desk to remain on floor 1 o It is OK to consider moving additional half-height shelving up to floor 3 to open up space on floor 2 for reference o He loves the 2nd floor so while reference can move up, the openness is something he wants to maintain o We can sacrifice the proposed 2nd floor meeting room along the atrium glass if that is needed for other items  He also though the idea of a low-end vs. high end version of your current concept assuming higher and lower levels of build-out sounded good.

242  Regarding the atrium, I have reminded him that is not in your scope but that we have talked and you would be willing to provide some recommendations and a range of costs at order of magnitude level for future consideration o He wants a concierge desk in the lobby – somewhere near the front door but out of main space so it does not impede events – again you do not need to design, just provide thoughts on where one might work and order of magnitude range for costs.

Think this covers everything….I am in Monday if you have questions.

Have a nice weekend, Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

243 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 10:13 AM To: Laura K Manno Subject: Re: Law Feasibility

Thanks they didn't come through the first time - got them this time

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 20, 2015, at 10:05 AM, Laura K Manno wrote:

Here they are again…

Lorenzo is home sick. I came in to get computer and to take care of a few things. I will be working from home rest of day. I will edit Fenwick SOW and then I plan to focus on econ program today.

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 10:02 AM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Brian Tucker ; Melissa Burns ; Thomas H Olund ; Debbie L. Brady Subject: Re: Law Feasibility

Can someone send me the sketches?

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 20, 2015, at 9:58 AM, Laura K Manno wrote:

All:

244 the 2nd floor and has explicitly said he does not want to see that eroded. I also think that there is some relationship between circulation and reference and while I am sure things can be done differently, it sounds like we might lose some efficiency if we separate the two.

245 Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 5:59 PM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Melissa Burns Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

I think we’ve reached a good point where we can get a nice sketch image of the entrance and open seating area that will give the Dean the ‘wow’ factor he is looking forward.

Look forward to discussing tomorrow morning.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Brian Tucker Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:21 PM To: 'Laura K Manno' Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Some food for thought…if all of library but circulation moved out. Just wanted to see what that could like.

I have to go out to a job site tomorrow, but I am free from 9:00-10:15am. Are you free right at 9am?

246

Look forward to speaking with you tomorrow.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:12 PM To: Brian Tucker Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Can we talk first thin in the morning? I am already late to next meeting 

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 3:55 PM To: Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Give me a call to discuss.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 3:10 PM 247 To: Melissa Burns; Brian Tucker Subject: Law Feasibility

Think this covers everything….I am in Monday if you have questions.

Have a nice weekend, Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

248

249 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 10:05 AM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: RE: Law Feasibility Attachments: HAZEL HALL - LEVEL 1 - STRATEGY 1A.pdf; HAZEL HALL - LEVEL 1 - STRATEGY 2.pdf; HAZEL HALL - LEVEL 1 - STRATEGY 3.pdf; Hazell Hall - Strategy 4.pdf

Here they are again…

Lorenzo is home sick. I came in to get computer and to take care of a few things. I will be working from home rest of day. I will edit Fenwick SOW and then I plan to focus on econ program today.

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 10:02 AM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Brian Tucker ; Melissa Burns ; Thomas H Olund ; Debbie L. Brady Subject: Re: Law Feasibility

Can someone send me the sketches?

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 20, 2015, at 9:58 AM, Laura K Manno wrote:

All:

In my opinion, Strategies 1A and 3 are the strongest. I think option 4 would appeal to the Dean in some ways because everyone always wants more space and there are more closed offices, but I think the impacts to the upper floors to find new locations for both reference and technical services will not likely be a tradeoff we can make. Dean loves the 2nd floor and has explicitly said he does not want to see that eroded. I also think that there is some relationship between circulation and reference and while I am sure things can be done differently, it sounds like we might lose some efficiency if we separate the two.

250

I think the difference between strategies 1A and 3 really is elbow room and 1 additional office. Both open up the central area and some views along the perimeter wall and both introduce some workstations instead of private offices only. I also think the number of workstations proposed is do- able, especially given proposed placement of them. I believe you had said that your original program was short an office/work area so strategy 3 appears to balance concept with required spaces. I also think the position of workstations and an open meeting/collaboration area does a nice job of opening up the center of that back space so it does not suddenly feel crowded. I think technical services is the function that could most easily be relocated and I think we can propose the 3rd floor area you had noted as being meeting room/seminar room + group study room as part of that fix.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 5:59 PM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Melissa Burns Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

251 I made some headway on a revised strategy for the original diagram…I’m calling this 1A. We lose (1) workstation and downsized (2) of the other workstations. It converts (3) workstations to offices. This provides for a more open area up front. I’ve attached all the strategies so Melissa can have a peak as well.

I think we’ve reached a good point where we can get a nice sketch image of the entrance and open seating area that will give the Dean the ‘wow’ factor he is looking forward.

Look forward to discussing tomorrow morning.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Brian Tucker Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:21 PM To: 'Laura K Manno' Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Some food for thought…if all of library but circulation moved out. Just wanted to see what that could like.

I have to go out to a job site tomorrow, but I am free from 9:00-10:15am. Are you free right at 9am?

Look forward to speaking with you tomorrow.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:12 PM To: Brian Tucker Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

252 I have to run out of the office but upon a quick look at these I think Strategy 3 looks best as it put reception right as you walk in. Dean had previously mentioned not being able to clearly see the reception from front door. I also think doing this prevents “cluttering” the open space up with workstation or reception desk. The shift and offices back behind the stair are really nice as well.

Can we talk first thin in the morning? I am already late to next meeting 

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 3:55 PM To: Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Give me a call to discuss.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 3:10 PM To: Melissa Burns; Brian Tucker Subject: Law Feasibility

253 o He loves the 2nd floor so while reference can move up, the openness is something he wants to maintain o We can sacrifice the proposed 2nd floor meeting room along the atrium glass if that is needed for other items  He also though the idea of a low-end vs. high end version of your current concept assuming higher and lower levels of build-out sounded good.  Regarding the atrium, I have reminded him that is not in your scope but that we have talked and you would be willing to provide some recommendations and a range of costs at order of magnitude level for future consideration o He wants a concierge desk in the lobby – somewhere near the front door but out of main space so it does not impede events – again you do not need to design, just provide thoughts on where one might work and order of magnitude range for costs.

Think this covers everything….I am in Monday if you have questions.

Have a nice weekend, Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

254 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 10:04 AM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

They were attached – did you not get them?

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 10:02 AM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Brian Tucker ; Melissa Burns ; Thomas H Olund ; Debbie L. Brady Subject: Re: Law Feasibility

Can someone send me the sketches?

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 20, 2015, at 9:58 AM, Laura K Manno wrote:

All:

In my opinion, Strategies 1A and 3 are the strongest. I think option 4 would appeal to the Dean in some ways because everyone always wants more space and there are more closed offices, but I think the impacts to the upper floors to find new locations for both reference and technical services will not likely be a tradeoff we can make. Dean loves the 2nd floor and has explicitly said he does not want to see that eroded. I also think that there is some relationship between circulation and reference and while I am sure things can be done differently, it sounds like we might lose some efficiency if we separate the two.

255 was short an office/work area so strategy 3 appears to balance concept with required spaces. I also think the position of workstations and an open meeting/collaboration area does a nice job of opening up the center of that back space so it does not suddenly feel crowded. I think technical services is the function that could most easily be relocated and I think we can propose the 3rd floor area you had noted as being meeting room/seminar room + group study room as part of that fix.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 5:59 PM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Melissa Burns Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

256 I also am showing (2) new reference librarian offices/workstations as we lost (2) when we shifted the line over. We had neglected to provide for those in the original diagram. To accommodate I had to shorten up the reference shelving.

I think we’ve reached a good point where we can get a nice sketch image of the entrance and open seating area that will give the Dean the ‘wow’ factor he is looking forward.

Look forward to discussing tomorrow morning.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Brian Tucker Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:21 PM To: 'Laura K Manno' Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Some food for thought…if all of library but circulation moved out. Just wanted to see what that could like.

I have to go out to a job site tomorrow, but I am free from 9:00-10:15am. Are you free right at 9am?

Look forward to speaking with you tomorrow.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:12 PM To: Brian Tucker Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

257 So this nice diagram works well assuming we can move technical services which I think we can negotiate with the Dean however, if that would not be possible, were there ways to improve your original diagram to look more open like this one?

Can we talk first thin in the morning? I am already late to next meeting 

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 3:55 PM To: Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Give me a call to discuss.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 3:10 PM To: Melissa Burns; Brian Tucker Subject: Law Feasibility

Just got off the phone with the Dean. He has confirmed the following:  We should assume that Admissions will be on the 1st floor  He also wants CAAS on the 1st floor but if in a pinch we need to put some back-of-house operations for CAAS elsewhere then we can consider that  He agrees with the logic that we come up with a solid concept plan that while it attempst to fit everything in isn’t totally ruled by that program. Therefore don’t try to force the square peg in the round hole if the outcome holistically isn’t the right level of professional / inviting space.  He likes the idea of a simple sketch that shows feel of the interior space – right now hard to visualize in plan only  He likes the idea of a quick look at moving reference to the 2nd floor with only the circulation desk to remain on floor 1 o It is OK to consider moving additional half-height shelving up to floor 3 to open up space on floor 2 for reference o He loves the 2nd floor so while reference can move up, the openness is something he wants to maintain o We can sacrifice the proposed 2nd floor meeting room along the atrium glass if that is needed for other items  He also though the idea of a low-end vs. high end version of your current concept assuming higher and lower levels of build-out sounded good.

258  Regarding the atrium, I have reminded him that is not in your scope but that we have talked and you would be willing to provide some recommendations and a range of costs at order of magnitude level for future consideration o He wants a concierge desk in the lobby – somewhere near the front door but out of main space so it does not impede events – again you do not need to design, just provide thoughts on where one might work and order of magnitude range for costs.

Think this covers everything….I am in Monday if you have questions.

Have a nice weekend, Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

259 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 9:58 AM To: Brian Tucker;Melissa Burns;Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Thomas H Olund;Debbie L. Brady Subject: FW: Law Feasibility Attachments: HAZEL HALL - LEVEL 1 - STRATEGY 1A.pdf; HAZEL HALL - LEVEL 1 - STRATEGY 2.pdf; HAZEL HALL - LEVEL 1 - STRATEGY 3.pdf; Hazell Hall - Strategy 4.pdf

All:

In my opinion, Strategies 1A and 3 are the strongest. I think option 4 would appeal to the Dean in some ways because everyone always wants more space and there are more closed offices, but I think the impacts to the upper floors to find new locations for both reference and technical services will not likely be a tradeoff we can make. Dean loves the 2nd floor and has explicitly said he does not want to see that eroded. I also think that there is some relationship between circulation and reference and while I am sure things can be done differently, it sounds like we might lose some efficiency if we separate the two.

260 meeting small and maybe dean only. If we get his approval, then I/we can present a follow-up to the full group. I think we need to get aligned with the higher vision (Dean) first to make sure we are on track. Getting into the weeds with multiple end users at this time is a bit counter-productive. As Brian and I discussed yesterday between shape of space, fixed objects like stairs and program considerations, there are probably only a handful of concept diagrams that are strong given parameters. If program leads the solution, then we end up with as Brian said “wonky” solutions. If we step back to creating a strong concept diagram then I think program can be massaged to work so long as we are close.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 5:59 PM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Melissa Burns Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

I think we’ve reached a good point where we can get a nice sketch image of the entrance and open seating area that will give the Dean the ‘wow’ factor he is looking forward.

Look forward to discussing tomorrow morning.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Brian Tucker Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:21 PM To: 'Laura K Manno' Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Some food for thought…if all of library but circulation moved out. Just wanted to see what that could like.

I have to go out to a job site tomorrow, but I am free from 9:00-10:15am. Are you free right at 9am?

261 I’m still struggling with the original diagram. I think that original diagram was a little deceiving in that it did not leave enough space for the Reference Section and the Reference Librarians. I send along something if I have a breakthrough in the next couple hours.

Look forward to speaking with you tomorrow.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:12 PM To: Brian Tucker Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Can we talk first thin in the morning? I am already late to next meeting 

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 3:55 PM To: Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Law Feasibility

Give me a call to discuss.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

262 From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 3:10 PM To: Melissa Burns; Brian Tucker Subject: Law Feasibility

Just got off the phone with the Dean. He has confirmed the following:  We should assume that Admissions will be on the 1st floor  He also wants CAAS on the 1st floor but if in a pinch we need to put some back-of-house operations for CAAS elsewhere then we can consider that  He agrees with the logic that we come up with a solid concept plan that while it attempst to fit everything in isn’t totally ruled by that program. Therefore don’t try to force the square peg in the round hole if the outcome holistically isn’t the right level of professional / inviting space.  He likes the idea of a simple sketch that shows feel of the interior space – right now hard to visualize in plan only  He likes the idea of a quick look at moving reference to the 2nd floor with only the circulation desk to remain on floor 1 o It is OK to consider moving additional half-height shelving up to floor 3 to open up space on floor 2 for reference o He loves the 2nd floor so while reference can move up, the openness is something he wants to maintain o We can sacrifice the proposed 2nd floor meeting room along the atrium glass if that is needed for other items  He also though the idea of a low-end vs. high end version of your current concept assuming higher and lower levels of build-out sounded good.  Regarding the atrium, I have reminded him that is not in your scope but that we have talked and you would be willing to provide some recommendations and a range of costs at order of magnitude level for future consideration o He wants a concierge desk in the lobby – somewhere near the front door but out of main space so it does not impede events – again you do not need to design, just provide thoughts on where one might work and order of magnitude range for costs.

Think this covers everything….I am in Monday if you have questions.

Have a nice weekend, Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

263 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Henry N Butler Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 6:42 AM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Melissa Burns;Brian Tucker;Cathy M Wolfe;Alison Price;Victoria Huber;Deborah Keene Subject: FW: Hazel Hall Feasibility Study Attachments: 151009_HAZEL HALL_1st Floor Concept Plan - LKM Notes2.pdf

Laura,

Thank you. I am still uncomfortable and concerned that we are not achieving what we had in mind when we started. I think it is essential for the design team to meet with Victoria Huber and Alison Price to discuss what those folks actually do.

Re the location of the reception desk, you have now moved it so it solves the visibility problem when entering the administrative area. However, the atrium is still an issue about where folks should go when they come into the building from Fairfax Drive. If we have a reception area out front (we can internally figure how to staff it), we may not even need another reception area inside the administrative space.

Making the building make sense to strangers walking into the building was the starting point for all of this discussion.

Also, there is no room for growth.

I think we need to get together again, soon.

Onward and Upward!

Henry

Henry N. Butler Dean and Professor George Mason University School of Law 3301 Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22201 703.993.8644 (direct) 224.330.0540 (mobile) [email protected] www.MasonLEC.org

Notice: The Commonwealth of Virginia claims the right to monitor messages sent to and from this address at any time, without notice, and without my permission. In addition, messages sent to and from this address may be subject to disclosure under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act.

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 4:13 PM To: Henry N Butler; Cathy M Wolfe

264 Cc: Melissa Burns; Brian Tucker Subject: RE: Hazel Hall Feasibility Study

Henry:

The areas shown out in the open area are workstations so no offices or walls with the exception of the 2 meeting rooms which could have glass walls on 2 sides and which have been shown to align with an already solid area of the plan (caused by vertical shafts). While the blue boxes for workstations start to look like walled offices they are not. 9 people between CAAS and Admissions would be in open workstations as shown on these plans.

I have marked up another plan – not sure if this helps or muddies the water more.  The round circle/oval represents open space with nothing more than a mix of lounge seating, workstations, etc.  The red lines at meeting rooms represent the 3 solid walls. The fronts and backs would be glass.  The area outlined in blue starts to imply that maybe that is where we brand Admissions. The 4 offices in this area would address the Associate Dean of Admissions + 4 directors. 2 Counselors and office manager would be in workstations. Counselors would use the adjacent meeting rooms when meeting with perspective students for privacy.

If I look at the CAAS program and if we can potential reduce by 1 office (development) that you referenced in an earlier email, then the 6 offices would meet Associate Dean + Directors’ needs. Again, counselors would be in workstations and would use the shared meeting space for meetings with guests.

The plan is to move the glass entry doors to both library and CAAS/Admission suite back to the line where the color begins – no longer out along that dashed line. This could allow for some branding and helps to give a sense of arrival vs. 2 random doors side-by-side directly on the curve.

This means the reception desk I show would be immediately to your right as you enter the suite – not hidden in any way. Waiting could be within the large open space designated by the oval.

Sure we can think about a reception desk (in that case more of a concierge desk) in the lobby but I see a few issues with that:  Who will staff that since it is outside the entries to both libraries and CAAS/Admissions?  I feel like you would still need someone to greet you and tell you where to go after entering the CAAS/Admissions suite so not sure reception outside doors addresses reception fully  We don’t want reception desk to impede visibility/access to entry points of library and CAAS/Admissions or to be in the way of events further out.

I think the amount of space shown is too much for just CAAS – if only they were located there and everything in the middle were completely open, then we are not using space efficiently. Way too much open & underutilized space in that scenario.

We can price a continuous glass wall from entry all the way back to stairs – this will just add costs. If cost is an issue, design team had proposed the option of glass view to highlight stairs vs. full glass.

Hopefully I haven’t confused things here, but want to make sure that we are aligned on the reading of plans and what is open vs. closed.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University

265 (703) 993-5148

From: Henry N Butler Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 3:24 PM To: Laura K Manno ; Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Melissa Burns ; Brian Tucker Subject: RE: Hazel Hall Feasibility Study

Laura,

Thanks for keeping this process moving.

I’m fine with the Zoning Plan. I suggest a glass wall between the areas from the entry doors and around the stairs.

Re your Notes: 1. I prefer to not have any of the interior offices (except for the three workstations at 12 o’clock). Frankly, I think they ruin the look I had in mind when we started this project. I see this as two options if we can’t fit everything from CAAS and Admissions on the first floor: nd a. Move additional library space upstairs (but must not put the awesome 2 floor at risk); or b. we don’t put everything from CAAS and Admissions on the first floor (it has to go somewhere else in Hazel Hall); 2. I’m fine with a Shared Reception Desk. Your suggested placement might be hidden to folks walking in from the main entrance. How about a shared reception desk outside doors? Really a welcome desk to the law school. I really like that idea. 3. Re the seminar room on the third floor, I made a mistake when I raised that issue. I was trying to find space for some technical services activities, and I was confused. So, nevermind! On that point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3FnpaWQJO0

Thank you.

Onward and Upward!

Henry

Henry N. Butler Dean and Professor of Law George Mason University School of Law 3301 Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22201 703.993.8644 (office) 224.330.0540 (mobile) [email protected]

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 2:55 PM To: Henry N Butler ; Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Melissa Burns ; Brian Tucker Subject: Hazel Hall Feasibility Study

Henry and Cathy:

266 Our design team has taken a stab at a revised sketch for how we might be able to organize the 1st floor of Hazel differently. I have attached their concept sketch as well as their zoning plan which is useful to show the line of demarcation between libraries and CAAS/Admission. This will show the loss of 2 offices currently assigned to the libraries. I have also included a mark-up with comments. I think as currently drawn, we are missing an opportunity to connect inside & outside visually and to make that area a dynamic space where guests to these office are received and wait. With waiting area pushed closer to the front door, we totally miss the opportunity to engage the view of the stair and views outside.

The revised concept requires a program shift to approximately 9 workstations from offices; I think we need to consider offices vs. workstations to open things up. That said, if push comes to shove there may be some room to negotiate specific number of closed offices and workstations. I also think offices are oversized. While the radiating walls are a bit fixed due to mullion location, we can pull the front walls back a bit to right-size.

I think we may need your help (Henry) on the issue of rethinking private offices and workstations and on how we can be more efficient with reference and technology services space.

While there was talk about not needing the 3rd floor meeting/seminar room, we need to know if the existing seminar room and computer lab both need to remain. While I agree maybe we do not need the additional meeting room on the 3rd floor, that space may still be needed to provide seminar space if that activity cannot occur in classrooms elsewhere in the building or in the 2nd floor proposed meeting room. If the latter could work, then we could free up that corner of the 3rd floor to help with technology services.

If the two of you generally think this concept looks good, then I can have conversations with Alison, Victoria and Deborah.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

267 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 4:13 PM To: Henry N Butler;Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Melissa Burns;Brian Tucker Subject: RE: Hazel Hall Feasibility Study Attachments: 151009_HAZEL HALL_1st Floor Concept Plan - LKM Notes2.pdf

Henry:

This means the reception desk I show would be immediately to your right as you enter the suite – not hidden in any way. Waiting could be within the large open space designated by the oval.

268 Hopefully I haven’t confused things here, but want to make sure that we are aligned on the reading of plans and what is open vs. closed.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Henry N Butler Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 3:24 PM To: Laura K Manno ; Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Melissa Burns ; Brian Tucker Subject: RE: Hazel Hall Feasibility Study

Laura,

Thanks for keeping this process moving.

I’m fine with the Zoning Plan. I suggest a glass wall between the areas from the entry doors and around the stairs.

Re your Notes: 1. I prefer to not have any of the interior offices (except for the three workstations at 12 o’clock). Frankly, I think they ruin the look I had in mind when we started this project. I see this as two options if we can’t fit everything from CAAS and Admissions on the first floor: a. Move additional library space upstairs (but must not put the awesome 2nd floor at risk); or b. we don’t put everything from CAAS and Admissions on the first floor (it has to go somewhere else in Hazel Hall); 2. I’m fine with a Shared Reception Desk. Your suggested placement might be hidden to folks walking in from the main entrance. How about a shared reception desk outside doors? Really a welcome desk to the law school. I really like that idea. 3. Re the seminar room on the third floor, I made a mistake when I raised that issue. I was trying to find space for some technical services activities, and I was confused. So, nevermind! On that point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3FnpaWQJO0

Thank you.

Onward and Upward!

Henry

Henry N. Butler Dean and Professor of Law George Mason University School of Law 3301 Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22201 703.993.8644 (office) 224.330.0540 (mobile) [email protected]

269 From: Laura K Manno Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 2:55 PM To: Henry N Butler ; Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Melissa Burns ; Brian Tucker Subject: Hazel Hall Feasibility Study

Henry and Cathy:

Our design team has taken a stab at a revised sketch for how we might be able to organize the 1st floor of Hazel differently. I have attached their concept sketch as well as their zoning plan which is useful to show the line of demarcation between libraries and CAAS/Admission. This will show the loss of 2 offices currently assigned to the libraries. I have also included a mark-up with comments. I think as currently drawn, we are missing an opportunity to connect inside & outside visually and to make that area a dynamic space where guests to these office are received and wait. With waiting area pushed closer to the front door, we totally miss the opportunity to engage the view of the stair and views outside.

I think we may need your help (Henry) on the issue of rethinking private offices and workstations and on how we can be more efficient with reference and technology services space.

If the two of you generally think this concept looks good, then I can have conversations with Alison, Victoria and Deborah.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

270 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 2:55 PM To: Henry N Butler;Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Melissa Burns;Brian Tucker Subject: Hazel Hall Feasibility Study Attachments: 151009_HAZEL HALL_ Zoning Plan.pdf; 151009_HAZEL HALL_1st Floor Concept Plan.pdf; 151009_HAZEL HALL_1st Floor Concept Plan - LKM Notes.pdf

Henry and Cathy:

I think we may need your help (Henry) on the issue of rethinking private offices and workstations and on how we can be more efficient with reference and technology services space.

If the two of you generally think this concept looks good, then I can have conversations with Alison, Victoria and Deborah.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

271 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 11:13 AM To: Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Thomas G Calhoun;Joy Staulcup Subject: CDC expansion Attachments: 2-20-13 Program.pdf; diagrams.pdf; opt 1 phase 1.pdf; opt 1 phase 2.pdf; opt 2 phase 1.pdf; opt 2 phase 2.pdf

Cathy, Tom- The original CDC was designed and sited to accommodate an additional 4 classrooms. When we planned the playground, we looked at options that would have allowed the future addition to be built without relocating the play area but the direction given was that we would not be adding on to the Center so the existing playground was regraded and resurfaced. Drawings showing the expansion options are attached along with a preliminary program. Beth

Elizabeth D. Long, AIA Architect/Planner Office of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703.993.6184

272 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Brian Tucker Sent: Friday, October 9, 2015 9:54 AM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Cathy M Wolfe;Melissa Burns;Charles Kirby;John Baxter;Suzanne Klein Subject: RE: GMU Task Order #4 - Hazel Hall Plans Attachments: HAZEL HALL - LEVEL 1 - FUNCTION PLAN.pdf; 2015_10_09_HAZEL HALL - PLANS.pdf

Laura –

We felt Wednesday’s meeting was very productive with great feedback and discussion. Based on the outcome of the meeting, it does not sound like an additional meeting with the users is necessary at this point. If this changes, please let us know and we would be happy to come back in.

I am attached a revised first floor plan with an strategy for an office layout for CAAS and Admission which incorporates comments from the discussion, eliminates a number of closed offices and replaces them with open offices. There are (3) smaller workstations and (6) large workstation (very large for an open workstation). (3) of the large workstation could easily be enclosed offices or some form of closed workstation. This strategy maintains a high level of openness to the exterior in the front half of the space (allows views/daylight into library as well) and more closed spaces you work your way to the back. Please let me know if you have any final thoughts before we send to the cost estimator.

Additionally, we will work on preparing the following items for the final report: 1. High-level engineering review to understand alterations/additions to existing systems and implications on budget 2. First pass at a design & construction schedule 3. First pass at a phasing plan 4. Pricing for (3) variations of cost

Per the discussion, you will follow-up with the Librarian regarding the relocation of technical services to another floor. I believe if the desired location is Level 2, it might be possible to move those Level 2 people up to Level 3 and nix the meeting/seminar room.

I’m out of pocket the rest of today and our office is closed Monday. Feel free to give me a call on Tuesday if you would like to discuss, I’ll be around all day.

Thank you.

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

From: Laura K Manno [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:57 PM To: Brian Tucker Cc: Cathy M Wolfe; Melissa Burns; Charles Kirby; John Baxter

273 Subject: RE: GMU Task Order #4 - Hazel Hall Plans Importance: High

Brian:

Thanks for the preview. I think for tomorrow the first objective is to show that we can fit CAAS, Admission and Library on that floor. We do need to identify clearly what (if anything) does not fit from the CAAS & Admissions programs and what (if anything) from the libraries needs to move elsewhere (particularly if you have not specifically identified potential new location). Much of the shelving on the 1st floor has already been removed. See the attached sketch. So I think understanding the impacts to the reference area will be most key as far as library is concerned on the 1st floor. It doesn’t look like you have proposed changes to the existing offices on that level so focus will likely be on stacks and reference desk/support.

Have you confirmed that microfiche can be located on upper floor as proposed based on weight? I think this is a nice solution if feasible and 1st floor area should not be wasted on microfiche.

Overall, I think even at this concept level we need to think carefully about arrival and entry. When we met with Melissa we talked about perhaps removing some of the existing glass storefront to create a vestibule directly off of the main lobby that then leads to 2 branded entrances – one for the library and one for CAAS & Admissions. Doing so starts to give a sense of approach and arrival off of the lobby and may give us better opportunities for entry to each. Before tomorrow can you assess feasibility of this just to verify no code issues, etc.? Shouldn’t be if we are just moving entry back with proper enclosure provided.

I think you need to adjust graphics so that it doesn’t look like library has the major entrance and the other is a secondary cattle shoot. That is how it reads to us as currently drawn and it is clear that CAAS and Admissions really are the Dean’s priorities. I have marked up the PDF to try and show concept (sorry really crude attempt using PDF tools).

The existing circulation desk seems too big me (and the Dean said as much) so I wonder if there may be opportunities to propose a shared circulation/reference desk that is smaller and that greets you in a different way upon arrival. Pulling that back a bit and rethinking size and shape may open up site lines to the elevator and may also offer opportunities to let the curved dividing wall be a bit more exaggerated if that helps open up a bit more room for reception/waiting for CAAS on the other side. We can discuss whether 2 reception desks make sense or whether with a slightly improved reception waiting whether we can have shared reception waiting which includes branding for each. A good discussion topic.

While I know this is concept study only, I think this will go a long way if you are able to verbally describe a vision and sense of presence for each. For those who are not used to reading abstract plans like these, the description and/or visuals may go a long way. While we have shown that things fit, we need to provide a level of comfort that we can also achieve quality of space they desire.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Brian Tucker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 05, 2015 9:02 PM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Cathy M Wolfe ; Melissa Burns ; Charles Kirby ;

274 John Baxter Subject: GMU Task Order #4 - Hazel Hall Plans

Laura –

Attached are plans that incorporate comments from your discussion with Melissa last week. I understand that you wanted a preview before Wednesday. I hope that I’ve interpreted the comments correctly, as Melissa and I did not have a chance to connect face to face due to our back to back vacations. There is still a little cleanup I would like to due on the plans (especially the office layout plan), but the internet service in the office went out this afternoon, so I will have to touch them up Wednesday morning.

I am out of the office Tuesday, but could be available for a quick discussion between 9-10am and then again later in the afternoon (time tbd based on my availability). Please feel free to call my cell (571-482-0438) and leave a message if you can’t reach me.

Look forward to seeing you on Wednesday!

Brian Tucker AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C Project Architect

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5049 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Sustainability

275 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 4:12 PM To: Joy Staulcup;Thomas G Calhoun Subject: Re: Merten Hall Accent Walls

Laura has also said that Rose's office has an accent color but I don't know that for sure - Cathy

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 3:54 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Cc: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: RE: Merten Hall Accent Walls

Tom – room #5145 is the pantry/kitchette in the President’s office suite. All other pantry/breakrooms in Merten have an accent wall so that was probably continued on this floor with the renovation plan. Room #5112 is the small corridor that runs between the President’s office and Sharon’s adjacent office so I doubt there’s an accent wall in that room. I think he must have meant room 5114 which is President Cabrerra’s office since more than likely we did do an accent color wall(s) in the President’s office with the renovation project. Room 5402 is the University Counsel’s conference room. That was the previous Internal Audit conf room so they may have added an accent wall in the past, or it might have been added as part of our renovation project scope.

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

From: Thomas G Calhoun Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 3:44 PM To: Joy Staulcup Cc: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: Merten Hall Accent Walls

Joy – can you tell me who is in these offices?

Thanks Tom

From: Jose A. Vasquez Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 1:58 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun

276 Cc: Frank Strike Subject: RE: Merten Hall Accent Walls

Tom,

I checked the entire Building offices and there is only 3 Offices with accent walls, 5145, 5112, 5402 and the Kitchen, Common areas, Receptionist walls and on the Main Hallways. And in the 1st ,2nd ,3rd, and 4th floors there is none offices with accent walls, only common areas, receptionist walls and main Hallways and Lobbies.

I hope this information will help you.

Jose’ Vasquez

From: Thomas G Calhoun Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:56 AM To: Jose A. Vasquez Subject: RE: Merten Hall Accent Walls

Thanks

From: Jose A. Vasquez Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:55 AM To: Thomas G Calhoun Cc: Frank Strike Subject: RE: Merten Hall Accent Walls

Tom,

Good morning, The 5th Floor it just got painted by Contractors when The President move to the Building. I will look what I have in my records and send to you as soon I put it together today.

Jose’ Vasquez

From: Thomas G Calhoun Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 3:32 PM To: Jose A. Vasquez Cc: Frank Strike Subject: Merten Hall Accent Walls

Jose – there’s a bit of a dispute going on relative to accent colored walls in Merten Hall. That’s a building that shouldn’t have any and we’re telling new requesters they can have them. The push back we’re getting is that may already exist, particularly on the 5th floor. Are you able to tell me which private offices have accent colored walls in Merten Hall – with first priority knowing about the 5th floor?

Thanks Tom

Thomas G. Calhoun, P.E. VP, Facilities George Mason University

277 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Thomas G Calhoun Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 6:26 PM To: Laura K Manno;Cathy M Wolfe;Christine Bartlett Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

I asked Jose to tell me what private offices on that floor have accent colored walls.

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 6:23 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe; Christine Bartlett; Thomas G Calhoun Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Not fighting for it but there are multiple offices on that floor with accent colors in them including Rose’s office (I hear) just 2 doors down from the requested space.

Just give Christine the final yay or nay so she knows whether or not to schedule. If needed, I can reach out to Provost’s office but at the moment I am not involved directly in this one.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 1:34 PM To: Christine Bartlett ; Thomas G Calhoun ; Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

This is not standard in this building to paint accent walls in private offices so I am not sure why we would do this at all.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Christine Bartlett Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 1:30 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Hi Cathy,

278

Has there been a decision made on this issue. I have received 3 calls and 3 emails in the last two days for this request. The latest email was a request to add an accent wall in another office (Room 5206).

They would like Room 5205 for Burke done this week and 5206 for Marks next week.

Thank You,

Christine Bartlett Construction Superintendent Facilities Management Department, GMU (703) 993-5869 Office (571) 331-9169 Cell

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 9:12 AM To: Thomas G Calhoun; Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Christine Bartlett Subject: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Tom and Cathy:

I need a memory refresher….a while back some in Provost’s Office asked for painting of an accent color on one wall of some 5th floor. We said no per standards. The issue then got raised to the level of you (Tom) and David Wu. While David nixed any bigger project for renovations on that floor I am not sure he weighed in on painting standards. Provost’s senior staff felt that precedent had already been set by Offices on JJ’s side and President having accent color on office walls.

Christine has a new request to paint an accent color on one wall of a 5th floor Assoc. Provost Office and she has asked if that is allowed. Can you let us know if we have decided to say no to all requests or have an exception for 5th floor Senior Administration? The precedent on the other side of that floor makes this trickier. Christine would paint as soon as Friday if she gets the green light form us…..

Can you copy both Christine and me on your response so she has direction if I am not around.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

279 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 3:07 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun;Christine Bartlett;Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Thanks Tom

Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Thomas G Calhoun Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 3:01 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe; Christine Bartlett; Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

I am. I sent a note to JJ alerting her to the issue and warning her that she may be approached by provost staff. She’s supportive of our interpretation but did state she was willing to open the issue for larger discussion if we ever do a larger renovation. For now, no accents. Tom

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 2:47 PM To: Christine Bartlett; Thomas G Calhoun; Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

First let’s make sure Tom is on board with that interpretation.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Christine Bartlett Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 2:46 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe; Thomas G Calhoun; Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Thank you, I will let them know.

280 From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 1:34 PM To: Christine Bartlett; Thomas G Calhoun; Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

This is not standard in this building to paint accent walls in private offices so I am not sure why we would do this at all.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Christine Bartlett Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 1:30 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Hi Cathy,

They would like Room 5205 for Burke done this week and 5206 for Marks next week.

Thank You,

Christine Bartlett Construction Superintendent Facilities Management Department, GMU (703) 993-5869 Office (571) 331-9169 Cell

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 9:12 AM To: Thomas G Calhoun; Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Christine Bartlett Subject: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Tom and Cathy:

281 standards. Provost’s senior staff felt that precedent had already been set by Offices on JJ’s side and President having accent color on office walls.

Can you copy both Christine and me on your response so she has direction if I am not around.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

282 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Christine Bartlett Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 3:01 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun;Cathy M Wolfe;Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Thank you very much, Christine

From: Thomas G Calhoun Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 3:01 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe; Christine Bartlett; Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 2:47 PM To: Christine Bartlett; Thomas G Calhoun; Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

First let’s make sure Tom is on board with that interpretation.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Christine Bartlett Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 2:46 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe; Thomas G Calhoun; Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Thank you, I will let them know.

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 1:34 PM To: Christine Bartlett; Thomas G Calhoun; Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

This is not standard in this building to paint accent walls in private offices so I am not sure why we would do this at all.

Thanks, 283 Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Christine Bartlett Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 1:30 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Hi Cathy,

They would like Room 5205 for Burke done this week and 5206 for Marks next week.

Thank You,

Christine Bartlett Construction Superintendent Facilities Management Department, GMU (703) 993-5869 Office (571) 331-9169 Cell

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 9:12 AM To: Thomas G Calhoun; Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Christine Bartlett Subject: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Tom and Cathy:

284 Can you copy both Christine and me on your response so she has direction if I am not around.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

285 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Christine Bartlett Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 2:54 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Will Do

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 2:47 PM To: Christine Bartlett; Thomas G Calhoun; Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

First let’s make sure Tom is on board with that interpretation.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Christine Bartlett Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 2:46 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe; Thomas G Calhoun; Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Thank you, I will let them know.

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 1:34 PM To: Christine Bartlett; Thomas G Calhoun; Laura K Manno Subject: RE: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

This is not standard in this building to paint accent walls in private offices so I am not sure why we would do this at all.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Christine Bartlett Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 1:30 PM

286 To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Hi Cathy,

They would like Room 5205 for Burke done this week and 5206 for Marks next week.

Thank You,

Christine Bartlett Construction Superintendent Facilities Management Department, GMU (703) 993-5869 Office (571) 331-9169 Cell

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 9:12 AM To: Thomas G Calhoun; Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Christine Bartlett Subject: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Tom and Cathy:

Can you copy both Christine and me on your response so she has direction if I am not around.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

287 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 1:33 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: FW: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Why do they keep asking this – we don’t paint accent walls in private offices.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Christine Bartlett Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 1:30 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Hi Cathy,

They would like Room 5205 for Burke done this week and 5206 for Marks next week.

Thank You,

Christine Bartlett Construction Superintendent Facilities Management Department, GMU (703) 993-5869 Office (571) 331-9169 Cell

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 9:12 AM To: Thomas G Calhoun; Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Christine Bartlett Subject: Accent Color Paint on Senior Administration Office Walls

Tom and Cathy:

288

Can you copy both Christine and me on your response so she has direction if I am not around.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

289 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Friday, September 25, 2015 9:45 AM To: Daniel Houser Cc: Debbie L. Brady;Cathy M Wolfe;Deborah Boehm-Davis Subject: RE: Project Requests

Thank you so much Dan for understanding and working with us on this. With changes in personnel in process you are in a unique place where you can make some workplace assignment changes before people arrive vs. trying to take private offices away from people who already have them. The latter is never fun for anyone 

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Daniel Houser Sent: Friday, September 25, 2015 9:35 AM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Debbie L. Brady ; Cathy M Wolfe ; Deborah Boehm-Davis Subject: RE: Project Requests

Dear Laura:

I understand our requests have changed and appreciate your willingness to consider. I am sincerely grateful, and I'm sure we'll be able to construct a solution from existing resources. Please proceed to terminate or delay our requests as you indicated in your previous email.

Thank you again and all best, -Dan

On Sep 25, 2015 9:16 AM, "Laura K Manno" wrote: Thanks for being willing to hold for 6 months on the copy/print request. We will close that request for now and can revisit later if required.

Joy has already communicated with PPE about the conference room. Figured I would just share the response to that one with you and Debbie given the relationships.

We have no issues with Mary being located with Econ staff. There just is no support to immediately converting the 2-person office back to a 1-person office given that we ran around at the 11th hour making a change for you to convert that to a 2-person office because Econ said it absolutely had to be that way. As noted, it isn't as simple as just moving a desk out of there and it sets you up to already be down 1 workspace as you go forward.

290 was just completed and specified per your request, we would have to make sure you do not have folks in offices that should not be in offices per standards. If I were to look for a compromise solution here, I would look to put Dana's replacement and/or the new assistant for Walter Williams in workstation(s) or in the 2- person office. This would free up a private office for Mary or others and would be very much in line with the George Mason University space standards.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Daniel Houser Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 8:46 PM To: Laura K Manno Cc: Deborah Boehm-Davis ; Cathy M Wolfe ; Debbie L. Brady Subject: Re: Project Requests

Dear Laura:

Thank you for this message, and I have no problem waiting six months on the printer relocation. Regarding the PPE work order, I was not involved in placing that order nor was I aware of it. I'm happy to forward along your comments to the right person; do you know who placed the order?

Regarding the office for Mary Jackson, the circumstances at the time of our initial request have recently dramatically changed recently. Further, it is clear that Mary needs to be together with the rest of the Econ staff. As an issue of work-flow, it is highly inefficient to have her separate from us. Consequently, we would like the room we noted to be shifted to a one-person room. If this cannot be done, and if we are not allowed to move the furniture, then Mary has offered to "make it work" somehow. We will need help moving in files and so forth.

Regarding any suggestion that we have offices available, to my knowledge this is not the case. Office 153 is for our office coordinator, a position which has been filled as of tomorrow (our previous office coordinator, Dana Vogel, recently resigned). The position has been taken by Julie Roberts, who previously acted as Walter Williams' assistant. While Julie will move out of the assistant's office, we are in the process of hiring a new assistant for Walter, and that space will again be occupied. Again, I am not aware of any open space in Econ.

We don't actually need help with the office, just permission. As long as we have some flexibility to restructure that office, we can take care of the rest with existing furniture.

Thank you Laura! I'm grateful as always for your assistance!

Best, - Dan

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Laura K Manno wrote:

291 > Dan: > > > > I have seen several project requests coming in from your group and I > wanted to touch base with you on those. The following is the list of > the ones I am aware of with comments: > > > > Work Order # 330619 - Office D151 Change office from a 2-person office > to a 1-person office > > > > This is not a work order that Facilities can support at this time. > The office was previously a 1-person office and at the request of your > department, it was changed to a 2-person office late in the design phase. > Office furniture provided in the office does not lend itself to simply > removing once station, nor would we immediately disregard brand new > furniture purchased in that manner – especially since the arrangement > was at Econ’s request and approved by your team. Additionally, we > believe there is at least one 1-person office that is available for > assignment for the individual identified. Our interiors group can > assist if you need help fitting additional files in the available 1—person office. > > > > Work Order # 330620 – Relocate Copy machine in Econ Suite > > > > This is not a work order that Facilities can support at this time. > The layout provided was based direction from Econ and stated needs > including workstation areas (that could be lost if we go this route). > Design was signed-off by Econ. While we understand that at times once > users actually get into new space it can become clear some > arrangements may work better than others (paper vs. reality), we ask that users new to a space live in > the space for at least 6 months before we consider re-organization. If > after 6 months this is still an issue we can revisit the conversation > > > > Work Order #330939 – Add blinds to PPE Conference Room D135 > > > > Since PPE is interested I adding technology to that meeting room, I > would ask that we have the AV conversation first and then address glass walls. > Our plan is to engage our colleagues in ITS to suggest the best AV for > that space based on a number of factors including proposed use of

292 > technology, desired features, natural lighting, electrical lighting, > etc. Goal would be to provide most appropriate technology and then to > determine levels of transparency that work best with that technology. > When we do get to that stage, we would not add blinds. Blinds are not > within our standards. When it comes time to talk product and > location, we would likely be looking at either window shades or film > that provides some level of translucency / privacy. > > > > Based on the information provided above, our plan would be to close > work orders 330619 and 330620 for now and then hold on glass wall > coverings until we know what technology will go in that room. We can > always re-open a work order later if after 6 months these items are still an issue. > > > > Laura > > > > > > > > Laura K. Manno, AIA > > Architect / Planner > > George Mason University > > (703) 993-5148 > >

293 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Friday, September 25, 2015 9:16 AM To: Daniel Houser Cc: Deborah Boehm-Davis;Cathy M Wolfe;Debbie L. Brady Subject: RE: Project Requests

Thanks for being willing to hold for 6 months on the copy/print request. We will close that request for now and can revisit later if required.

Joy has already communicated with PPE about the conference room. Figured I would just share the response to that one with you and Debbie given the relationships.

We have no issues with Mary being located with Econ staff. There just is no support to immediately converting the 2- person office back to a 1-person office given that we ran around at the 11th hour making a change for you to convert that to a 2-person office because Econ said it absolutely had to be that way. As noted, it isn't as simple as just moving a desk out of there and it sets you up to already be down 1 workspace as you go forward.

One of the issues is that coordinators and assistants are not provided private offices per our space standards and with the hiring of Dana's replacement you have an excellent opportunity to assign the new coordinator into a workstation or into the shared 2-person office. Before we start spending time and money undoing work that was just completed and specified per your request, we would have to make sure you do not have folks in offices that should not be in offices per standards. If I were to look for a compromise solution here, I would look to put Dana's replacement and/or the new assistant for Walter Williams in workstation(s) or in the 2-person office. This would free up a private office for Mary or others and would be very much in line with the George Mason University space standards.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

Dear Laura:

294 Regarding the office for Mary Jackson, the circumstances at the time of our initial request have recently dramatically changed recently. Further, it is clear that Mary needs to be together with the rest of the Econ staff. As an issue of work-flow, it is highly inefficient to have her separate from us. Consequently, we would like the room we noted to be shifted to a one-person room. If this cannot be done, and if we are not allowed to move the furniture, then Mary has offered to "make it work" somehow. We will need help moving in files and so forth.

We don't actually need help with the office, just permission. As long as we have some flexibility to restructure that office, we can take care of the rest with existing furniture.

Thank you Laura! I'm grateful as always for your assistance!

Best, - Dan

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Laura K Manno wrote: > Dan: > > > > I have seen several project requests coming in from your group and I > wanted to touch base with you on those. The following is the list of > the ones I am aware of with comments: > > > > Work Order # 330619 - Office D151 Change office from a 2-person office > to a 1-person office > > > > This is not a work order that Facilities can support at this time. > The office was previously a 1-person office and at the request of your > department, it was changed to a 2-person office late in the design phase. > Office furniture provided in the office does not lend itself to simply > removing once station, nor would we immediately disregard brand new > furniture purchased in that manner – especially since the arrangement > was at Econ’s request and approved by your team. Additionally, we > believe there is at least one 1-person office that is available for > assignment for the individual identified. Our interiors group can > assist if you need help fitting additional files in the available 1—person office. > > > > Work Order # 330620 – Relocate Copy machine in Econ Suite >

295 > > > This is not a work order that Facilities can support at this time. > The layout provided was based direction from Econ and stated needs > including workstation areas (that could be lost if we go this route). > Design was signed-off by Econ. While we understand that at times once > users actually get into new space it can become clear some > arrangements may work better than others (paper vs. reality), we ask that users new to a space live in > the space for at least 6 months before we consider re-organization. If > after 6 months this is still an issue we can revisit the conversation > > > > Work Order #330939 – Add blinds to PPE Conference Room D135 > > > > Since PPE is interested I adding technology to that meeting room, I > would ask that we have the AV conversation first and then address glass walls. > Our plan is to engage our colleagues in ITS to suggest the best AV for > that space based on a number of factors including proposed use of > technology, desired features, natural lighting, electrical lighting, > etc. Goal would be to provide most appropriate technology and then to > determine levels of transparency that work best with that technology. > When we do get to that stage, we would not add blinds. Blinds are not > within our standards. When it comes time to talk product and > location, we would likely be looking at either window shades or film > that provides some level of translucency / privacy. > > > > Based on the information provided above, our plan would be to close > work orders 330619 and 330620 for now and then hold on glass wall > coverings until we know what technology will go in that room. We can > always re-open a work order later if after 6 months these items are still an issue. > > > > Laura > > > > > > > > Laura K. Manno, AIA > > Architect / Planner > > George Mason University >

296 > (703) 993-5148 > >

297 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 8:53 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

298 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 3:15 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun;Frank Strike;James Riddle;'[email protected]' Cc: Cathy M Wolfe;Alexis Brearley Iszard Subject: IABRL 3rd Floor Fit-out Attachments: 150917_LSLB 3rd Floor Fit-out - Notes.pdf

All:

Please find notes from our IABRL 3rd Floor fit-out kick-off meeting held last Thursday 9/17. To expedite, I simply used the agenda and typed my notes under appropriate agenda items. Two items that did not come up in the meeting but I do think need to be stated are:

1. Regarding the direction to include the building work (minor electrical) and procurement of lab casework for the 1st floor Tissue Culture room as part of this project, I realized after we parted that we cannot wait until 2017 to get a tissue culture room on floor 1. Given the fact that the study has shown base building lab support room 1203 is in good shape to support this, we really need to do our best to try and open up this Tissue Culture room as closely as possible to the opening of the clean room. Many folks who will use a clean room will need a TC room in close proximity. I have already spoken with Alex and Jim about this and they are brainstorming. I do have 1-2 bioengineering researchers ready to move to SciTech once we have the clean room but they will need access to a shared TC room to move. 2. One of the meeting discussions about outfitting one area of the 3rd floor lab to support the addition of more fume hoods in the future should also consider best location. During the meeting, Cannon seemed to be gravitating to the center of the lab area as possible location as that area would be accessible from either side. At times, increased fume hood work can be tied to increased chemicals or activities that may require some physical separation from other research activities. Please include that in the thought process when studying options and making recommendations. If preferable we do not want future subdivision of the open lab area, but careful thought should be given during this planning period as to where some separation could occur if required and if required how it can be done with reduced impact to overall open lab plan. Hope that makes sense…happy to discuss further if required.

If I left anything out or if my notes do not match your recollection, please let me know. Dave – I didn’t have email addresses for Joe and Susan – can you please forward?

Thanks! Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

299 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 5:11 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

300 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 5:11 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

301 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Friday, September 4, 2015 3:22 PM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: FW: Efficiencies and Cost Control - Space Usage Attachments: UHall to Merten Hall Space Count by Floor.xlsx

FYI – the remaining information.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Friday, September 04, 2015 3:18 PM To: Beth Eriks Cc: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: RE: Efficiencies and Cost Control - Space Usage

Beth,

I’ve attached a list of the number of spaces available on each floor of University Hall to accommodate staff/administrators (i.e private offices, workstations, or seats in a shared office) and the number that now exists in Merten after the renovations and relocations were completed. There was no change on floor 4 since we didn’t make any updates on that floor, but I’ve included it so that we have the total capacity count for all of the office floors. As I mentioned in our conversation, we don’t keep a count of the actual number of staff that may be using these spaces, so all I can provide is the number of spaces that are available to accommodate staff. For instance, there may be two part- time staff sharing a workstation or private office, but they have different schedules, so I am only counting (1) space towards my total count, but the total number of staff for that space would be (2). Hope that makes sense.

As you can see from the spreadsheet, we have a net increase of six spaces with the renovation and relocation plan, but that doesn’t really tell the whole story of what we gained in efficiency by making those decisions. We had several suites in the original University Hall plan (OSP, ITU Project Mgmt & Security Team as two examples) that had vacant workstations/offices in their suite, so by using those vacant spaces on the 3rd floor we were able to relocate more of the Provost Office Administration staff into Merten Hall with minimal renovations needed on floor 3. Therefore it was the combination of some of the additional spaces that were created to accommodate more staff in the bldg., plus the reassignment of space that was not being used that allowed us to move more staff into the bldg. that contributes to the efficiencies we gained by doing that renovation/relocation project.

Hope this is the information you needed, but please let me know if you have any additional questions or need anything else.

Joy

302 Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

From: Beth Eriks Sent: Friday, September 04, 2015 1:46 PM To: Joy Staulcup Cc: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Re: Efficiencies and Cost Control - Space Usage

This is great, thank you for all the detail and explanation. I will work on creating a "whiz-bang" slide for the board meeting on the 24th. They want to know how we are cutting costs and being efficient...this will help!

On Sep 4, 2015, at 10:29 AM, Joy Staulcup wrote:

Beth,

Per our conversation, I am working on the information that we will be able to provide for question #1, but as I indicated, we can only provide the total number of offices and workstations that were on floors 2 – 5 (floor 4 didn’t change) before the relocation project and what the count is now. Since we don’t keep information about staff counts, we can only provide the number of potential spaces that could accommodate staff/administrators in the original Univ Hall layout, and the number that can be accommodated in the existing Merten Hall layout plan to determine the difference on floors 2, 3, and 5. It’s going to take me a bit longer to get that information together since it involves doing a count from previous drawings vs. the existing drawing, so I at least wanted to provide the answers to question #2 so that you can start getting that information together in your draft. That way, you will only need to add in the additional info I send later this afternoon to your draft.

Here is the information you requested in question #2:

Phase I of Mason Hall – included the conversion of meeting rooms to classrooms on the ground floor, and the 1st floor renovation project to convert former administrative use space to accommodate academic space for Econ/PPE depts.  30,000 gross SF of space was converted for academic use  $250/SF is average cost per SF for office and support spaces added with those renovations, so the cost avoidance for that phase was $7.5 million

Phase II of Mason Hall – included the updates to convert former administrative use space into academic space for College of Humanities and Social Sciences academic departments and Dean’s office  21,000 gross SF of space was converted for academic use  $250/SF is average cost per SF for office and support space, so the cost avoidance for that phase was $5.25 million

Will get the additional information to you as soon as possible,

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management 303 Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

From: Beth Eriks Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 4:57 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe; Joy Staulcup Subject: RE: Efficiencies and Cost Control - Space Usage

Need to have a rough draft for JJ by Friday if possible? When you can though…hope you feel better soon!

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 1:54 PM To: Beth Eriks ; Joy Staulcup Subject: Fwd: Efficiencies and Cost Control - Space Usage

Joy - can you assist with answering this?

Beth - Joy is out sick this afternoon but I'll touch base on this with her in the morning. What is your timeline for this request?

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Beth Eriks Date: September 2, 2015 at 4:38:34 PM EDT To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Efficiencies and Cost Control - Space Usage

Hi Cathy!

I am capturing data on our current efficiencies and cost control practices, and need some help, please.

Mason Hall Move to Merten Hall Phase 1 (Jan – August 2014): 1. How many people did we add to Merten Hall after the administrative office consolidation of Mason Hall and University Hall? Net change added in administrators and staff. 2. How much academic space did we convert in Mason Hall (square feet) in the first move? How much did we avoid in construction costs? I have that it would have cost $7-8M to build that much (??) space for academic use.

Mason Hall Phase II (Currently): 1. How much space are we now converting to academic use? Cost avoidance?

Any other cost savings you can think of that I should highlight?

Thank you!

304 Beth Eriks Special Projects Manager Office of the Senior Vice President | George Mason University 703-993-4575 | 757-870-7156 | www.gmu.edu

305 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Friday, September 4, 2015 3:18 PM To: Beth Eriks Cc: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: RE: Efficiencies and Cost Control - Space Usage Attachments: UHall to Merten Hall Space Count by Floor.xlsx

Beth,

Hope this is the information you needed, but please let me know if you have any additional questions or need anything else.

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

From: Beth Eriks Sent: Friday, September 04, 2015 1:46 PM To: Joy Staulcup Cc: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Re: Efficiencies and Cost Control - Space Usage

306

On Sep 4, 2015, at 10:29 AM, Joy Staulcup wrote:

Beth,

Here is the information you requested in question #2:

Will get the additional information to you as soon as possible,

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

From: Beth Eriks Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 4:57 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe; Joy Staulcup Subject: RE: Efficiencies and Cost Control - Space Usage

Need to have a rough draft for JJ by Friday if possible? When you can though…hope you feel better soon!

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 1:54 PM

307 To: Beth Eriks ; Joy Staulcup Subject: Fwd: Efficiencies and Cost Control - Space Usage

Joy - can you assist with answering this?

Beth - Joy is out sick this afternoon but I'll touch base on this with her in the morning. What is your timeline for this request?

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Beth Eriks Date: September 2, 2015 at 4:38:34 PM EDT To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Efficiencies and Cost Control - Space Usage

Hi Cathy!

I am capturing data on our current efficiencies and cost control practices, and need some help, please.

Mason Hall Phase II (Currently): 1. How much space are we now converting to academic use? Cost avoidance?

Any other cost savings you can think of that I should highlight?

Thank you!

Beth Eriks Special Projects Manager Office of the Senior Vice President | George Mason University 703-993-4575 | 757-870-7156 | www.gmu.edu

308 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 31, 2015 5:13 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

309 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Thomas A Drerenberger Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 4:38 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: RE: Sorry to ask again Attachments: planning 826.xls

Cathy, Sorry I didn’t get this to you sooner Tad

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 12:36 PM To: Thomas A Drerenberger Subject: Sorry to ask again

Tad – could you print me out a current planning project report like the ones I get sent automatically on Monday mornings – thanks Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

310 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 5:11 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

311 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 11:10 AM To: Joy Staulcup;Laura K Manno;Elizabeth D Long;Debbie L. Brady;John S Forgy Subject: Planning Review Spreadsheet Attachments: 08_19_2015 Projects in Planning.xls

This is what we will review tomorrow morning – please make your updates in School Dude before Friday. Thanks Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

312 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 5:11 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe;Robert P Donahue Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

313 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Marshall Wilson Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 2:57 PM To: Robert P Donahue Cc: Donald R Phillip;Joy Staulcup;Martha Sansaver;Christine Bartlett;Cathy M Wolfe;Frank Strike Subject: FW: WIB 8/14/15 Attachments: WIB Aug 14 2015.xls

Robert,

When you enter these into the Project Tracking sheet, please include the phase with the entry.

To help with this consider the following:

 All items assigned to Joy Stalcup or Planning are in the Planning Phase  All items assigned to a PM, DM or Martha Sansaver’s team is in the Design Phase  All items assigned directly to Christine Bartlette in the Construction Phase

Assigning these helps us sort projects for the teams and complete the other aspects of the assignments. Further adjustments will be made as needed.

Also, please create a new tab for projects that are Complete and Cancelled and move them off of the primary tracking tab. In this way, all projects are available but are not in the active list.

Let me know if you have questions. I have spoken with Don (copied with this email) to make sure this assignment is ok.

Thanks for your help.

Marshall

From: Kelly Hayward Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 1:37 PM To: Robert P Donahue; Martha Sansaver; Marshall Wilson Subject: WIB 8/14/15

Attached are the assignments from the WIB this morning.

Have a great weekend!

314

315 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 3:44 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: Arlington Space Planning and Enterprise Hall Attachments: 150804 Reference Plans - Founders 4th Floor growth Opportunities - B School.pdf

Cathy:

Since Sarah was going to potentially use my email to talk with David about 1 or 2 unresolved items, I said I would send the summary to her only. That said, I want you to see the summary and what we have told them...see below.

I am now going to reach out to Eve and others to start study of the priority classroom scheduling request and request for improvements.

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 3:41 PM To: Sarah E. Nutter Subject: Arlington Space Planning and Enterprise Hall

Sarah:

Thanks for a great call today; I am glad we got to connect and coordinate conversations. I think most items discussed seem well aligned with a few items still needing additional conversation or resolution.

As far as long-range planning and timelines…

I am aware that you are working on a 5 year, 3 phase plan. While we are very interested to see the results of that full and final plan, Facilities is aware the process and planning for that effort will take time on your end, so we do not want to hold up progress in the meantime. As you and I discussed, Phase I of the Business School growth in Arlington really began about a year ago with the creation of the Business School suite and student lounge/break-out area which allowed for the start of program movement. Based on your feedback, it would seem that over this next year, you may be completing Phase I with the relocation of the MSIS and MSTM program along with some grad services.

In line with that goal, I want to review the responses to your recent space requests targeted at relocation of these items to Arlington. This would be what we will present to SAC at the next available meeting:  Request for 3 faculty offices and 2 staff offices to support MSIS and MSTM programs in Arlington – We feel we can accommodate this request in the 4th floor Founders Hall space held for B School Growth directly adjacent to current Arlington B School Offices (see attached plan). We do need to look at whether the 2 staff offices requested are dedicated or shared based on university standards but a solution can be found.

316  Request for 3 offices to support Graduate Programs team (Admissions, recruiting, etc.) - We feel we can accommodate this request in the 4th floor Founders Hall space held for B School Growth directly adjacent to current Arlington B School Offices (see attached plan).  Request for an “exclusive lounge dedicated to restricted use of executive degree program students” – We do not feel we can meet this request at this time. o Given space constraints and growing demand, there is a shift away from dedicated space; this is a position supported by both Facilities and the Provost’s Office. It is believed that via the dedicated student lounge, break-out rooms and conference space already assigned/dedicated to the School of Business along with priority scheduling opportunities in classroom and perhaps event spaces, a solution can be found. I would suggest that given some of the problems that you have encountered to date with scheduling spaces for executive student lounge/dining space in the past, we get a group of appropriate parties together to discuss operational issues and scheduling opportunities. If after exploration and actual trial we find this does not work, then the request for dedicated space can be resubmitted and reconsidered in the future. o You have offered to have your team prepare by end of August a list of detailed needs that can be used in the scheduling/solutions discussion  Request for priority scheduling of classrooms 477 and 481 in Founders Hall along with upgrades to this room – as discussed, this request will need further study. o Based on our conversation, you would move the new cohorts in the MSIS and MSTM programs to Arlington with current cohorts remaining in Fairfax until they complete their work in the June 2016 timeframe. o I will work with the registrar’s office to model what spring 2016 and fall 2017 might look like with these moves. We will need to verify that priority scheduling of these rooms does not cause issues with overall Arlington classroom scheduling o I can work with interiors to study how improved (more professional and comfortable) furniture may impact seat counts. Loss of seats (if any) would need to be studied and approved by Registrar’s Office as well. o I will also need to speak with ITS and others here in Facilities to assess if upgrades to interiors and technology can be done over winter break in time for Spring 2016 use by proposed programs. Currently there are no plans to upgrade technology in 477 or 481 until summer 2017 which means there could be cost and scheduling issues. . Additionally, the technology being request is not in line with the baseline technology scheduled for those rooms. Therefore assessment of request would be required by ITS to evaluate supportability as university classrooms. o It is assume by Provost’s office that upgrades to improve appearance and comfort for executive education students would need to be covered by the School of Business with a business model to recover costs. o As discussed, these 2 classrooms would remain university classrooms therefore if we determine it is feasible to upgrade and B School identifies funds, it should be noted that these rooms are university classrooms and may be used by others when not scheduled by the School of Business.

Your unit has also submitted space request for offices and workstations to support the Center for Infrastructure Protection and Homeland Security (CIP/HS) – we feel we can accommodate this request in the 4th floor Founders Hall space held for B School Growth directly adjacent to current Arlington B School Offices (see attached plan).

Returning back to long-range planning, you will provide proposal for program moves, growth and timing for phases 2 and 3 of the 5 year plan as information becomes available. We will need this information in order to help you with future space needs and classroom modeling. Goal is to move away from single, more spur of the moment requests and to instead look at space needs more holistically based on the phased growth approach. We would not expect to see random space requests for these future phases prior to review of the phased plans when available.

317 Lastly, your request for approval to move forward with requested renovations in Enterprise Hall has received partial approval by the Provost’s Office. The scope of work and estimated costs ($80,000 - $90,000) to improve student services is approved. The proposed scope of work and estimated costs ($60,000 - $70,000) for the creation of the development private office and open work area has not been approved as of yet. It was noted that further conversation was needed – perhaps to study most appropriate location for the Development Office within the larger phased growth plan. I think it would be in our best interest to finalize resolution to this issue if possible before I pull the trigger on the student services work. While the 2 projects are not programmatically related and can be separated, there are similar code issues and cost savings that would come if we do all work on the lower level of Enterprise Hall at one time. Perhaps you can discuss with David and then provide feedback on whether I should move all work or student services area only forward.

Hope this covers everything and is useful to you. Please let me know if you need anything else. I will wait to hear back from you about the Enterprise Hall work. I need to know scope of work before I can write the proposal to hire the architecture firm.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

318 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 11:23 AM To: Joy Staulcup Subject: FW: ? on Office Hoteling in Higher Ed

FYI

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

From: John Baxter [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 10:50 AM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: FW: ? on Office Hoteling in Higher Ed

Cathy, Here is another example: Sam Houston State University’s Satellite campus, the Woodlands Center has a shared office suite for faculty. It is an academic classroom building for mainly upper level classes with a few other student service functions. The Executive Director for the building was commenting how well the suite was working for them. Her contact information is:

Janet L. Mullings, Ph.D. Executive Director Professor of Criminal Justice SHSU-The Woodlands Center 3380 College Park Drive The Woodlands, TX 77384 936-202-5005 [email protected]

319

John

John Baxter AIA, LEED AP Principal, Education Sector Leader

EYP Architecture & Engineering 1000 Potomac Street NW / Washington / DC 20007 T 202 471 5005 / C 202-253-1284 / eypae.com

Ranked #1 in Energy & Sustainability

From: Cathy M Wolfe [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, August 10, 2015 3:29 PM To: Elliot Felix ([email protected]); [email protected]; Matthew Bell ([email protected]); John Baxter Cc: Joy Staulcup Subject: ? on Office Hoteling in Higher Ed

Hi All – I am wondering if any of your firms have been working with any Higher Ed clients that are actually in the process of either implementing or studying the implementation of office hoteling for either administrative units or academic units (Elliot I know you have done work in this regard for administrative unit at Minnesota – I do have that information 320 from a past SCUP session) – or if you have any colleagues who are doing something like this – we have an academic unit here at Mason that is interested in understanding whether there are other university’s looking at this as a space efficiency option.

Thanks in advance for any assistance you may be able to provide. Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

321 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Monday, August 10, 2015 5:08 PM To: Joy Staulcup Subject: Re: ? on Office Hoteling in Higher Ed

I agree - if we are innovators then we innovate if we are followers we copy what others are doing - no one is doing this from faculty perspective.

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 10, 2015, at 4:59 PM, Joy Staulcup wrote:

Thanks. Unfortunately all of the examples I know of and those that you’ve received or passed along are for staff or other types of employees, not faculty. That’s the issue we will face - unless we can give some examples of other universities that have done hoteling/shared office models for faculty offices, it’s hard to get any movement here. I will keep looking and making contact with some other universities to see if anyone is aware of faculty office hoteling/sharing models, but this is an area in which we may have to be the pioneers for this model – and that would be a good thing for Mason. We are always saying we want to be innovators and do things differently to be more efficient, so if we were to be on the forefront of developing some type of faculty hoteling/shared office model, we could be the university that others are trying to emulate for once. Maybe that is the discussion that we should have with Sarah Nutter as Laura continues to work on their phased growth needs – don’t look for others to show us how to do something that makes sense – have the Business school work with us to be the leader on this movement, not a follower of whatever other universities are doing, or have done. As we know there can’t be any “one size fits all” solution for our space assignment models, we should surely be able to work with units to determine some type of hoteling/shared faculty office model that could work for some of their faculty office needs.

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Monday, August 10, 2015 4:49 PM To: Joy Staulcup Subject: Fwd: ? on Office Hoteling in Higher Ed

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone 322

I did a study for Washington University in St. Louis a couple of years ago focused on workplace strategies for admin staff at several universities. Stanford is in the process of implementing a hoteling plan for their admin staff. I tried to interview them for an IFMA study last spring, but they did not feel they were quite ready to publish results yet. And might not for a few years, but I’m sure she would be happy to chat with Cathy.

Here is her contact info:

Kathleen Kavanaugh Associate Director, Redwood City Planning Stanford University

3160 Porter Drive, Suite 200 Palo Alto, CA 94304 [email protected] cell 650-445-8394

Hi All – I am wondering if any of your firms have been working with any Higher Ed clients that are actually in the process of either implementing or studying the implementation of office hoteling for either administrative units or academic units (Elliot I know you have done work in this regard for administrative unit at Minnesota – I do have that information from a past SCUP session) – or if you have any colleagues who are doing something like this – we have an academic unit here at Mason that is interested in understanding whether there are other university’s looking at this as a space efficiency option.

Thanks in advance for any assistance you may be able to provide. Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

324 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2015 9:43 AM To: Thomas G Calhoun Subject: Fwd: Mercatus staff moving to Mason Hall

Tom - I was going to discuss this with you next week. It can wait - Joy is out next week.

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Joy Staulcup Date: June 25, 2015 at 9:38:47 AM EDT To: Thomas G Calhoun Cc: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Mercatus staff moving to Mason Hall

Tom,

I mentioned this to Cathy, but also wanted to pass along to you in case this is something that needs more discussion with senior level administrators. At yesterday’s Mason Hall 1st floor move meeting, I learned from the PPE move coordinator that there will be 10-15 Mercatus staff moving from Metropolitan 4th floor spaces into the renovated Mason Hall 1st floor space. I have not yet seen the “from-to” final plan (move coordinator is working on that info and will send to Debbie and she’ll pass along to me), so I don’t know if these are lower level Mercatus staff that may be occupying some of the workstations, or that will be occupying the private office spaces. At any rate, I mentioned to Gary Leff (participated via phone) that I need to notify Anne Gentry if we have Mercatus staff moving into Mason Hall because we are required to have a Space Use Agreement that outlines the terms of that use given that Mercatus is an affiliate organization. She may choose to just do an amendment to our existing SUA to include the additional space occupied in Mason, or do a new one, but that will be up to legal. I will forward the info to her with room numbers and SF totals once I have the assignments and will copy you/Cathy so that you are aware.

The question that I had about this new information is whether this relocation of so many Mercatus staff from Arlington to Mason was part of the original agreement discussion. If so, I guess it has to be allowed, but if not, I think it’s worth asking the question whether the university wants to allow this given so many other space priorities. For instance, if there was really enough space in the 1st floor of Mason to accommodate Econ/PPE and 10-15 Mercatus staff, then we should have pushed more to have them vacate some of the Carrow bldg. and move those Econ/Ctr for Public Choice faculty into Mason as well (there are 16 faculty offices in Carrow Hall). That would have allowed us (Facilities) to have access to some of the Carrow office spaces to use for our continued growth needs. This also has an impact on the discussions of the future 2nd floor of Mason Hall discussions. If there really isn’t a space need to provide all of it to ECON (only to have more Mercatus staff move to occupy that space), then should the “deal” with Econ for the future assignment of 2nd floor Mason Hall space only include a portion of the space so that we can retain some of it for other university space needs? Just wanted to pass this along in case there is a need to revisit any of the current/future space assignment decisions.

325 Once I know who from Mercatus is moving and how much space they are being assigned in Mason Hall, someone needs to follow up with Gary Leff to determine how the Metropolitan 4th floor spaces that those staff vacate will be reassigned. If they are going to be reassigned for IHS staff use, wouldn’t that additional SF need to be added to the IHS lease? I’m sure he will say that they will be backfilled with Mercatus staff, but there really is no way for me to know or question that since the staff is so intertwined, but I think if they are assigning this space at Fairfax, someone should be asking whether or not we need to be charging IHS for the space in Metro that Mercatus is vacating by moving staff to FX.

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

326

Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Johnny H Trejos Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 11:45 AM To: Elizabeth D Long;Cathy M Wolfe;Marshall Wilson;Patrick T Buchanan Cc: James Riddle Subject: Fwd: Potomac Science Center - Lighting Controls Meeting (RFI-0055) Attachments: LEEDV4_EAprereq_.pdf; 20150420_Combined.pdf

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® 4, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone

------Original message ------From: "Hanson, Elizabeth" Date: 04/20/2015 8:12 PM (GMT-05:00) To: James Riddle , "Adam Demnati ([email protected])" , [email protected], "shannon Kualii ([email protected])" , "Jason James ([email protected])" , "Greg Masters ([email protected])" , "Don Bowers ([email protected])" , Joseph Shields , Johnny H Trejos Cc: "Wirth, Amber" , "Woosley, Jeffrey" , "McCrory, Owen" Subject: Potomac Science Center - Lighting Controls Meeting (RFI-0055)

Thanks to everyone who participated in today’s lighting control meeting. Attached are my messy notes from the meeting (sorry B/W is my only scan option at this hour). Also included is the LEED prerequisite for your information.

Jim, Please take a look at the marked up sheets and:

1. Write a description of any space that needs a specific lighting function. I’ve given some brief examples on the markups. If no description is given we will move forward with on/off/dim controls to meet LEED with no extra level of control/switching.

2. Exterior - Please confirm

a. if we can utilize a reduced number of zones in the exterior lighting

b. if lights can be controlled on a timer that has Chrono tracking (I’ve noted this as syncing with day lighting which is not a completely accurate description). Lights can come on at dusk and be programed to turn off at a specified time. Controlled per zone.

336 3. Please confirm that Graphic Eye can be eliminated in each space shown. Please cross it out where not needed. Multi-Purpose Room is the only room we see functionality per our meeting today.

4. SLV fixture – Looking to switch to maestro control - Please confirm that the restrooms and interior spaces (no daylight) can be removed from the control system and be controlled by occupancy sensors (ceiling or wall as appropriate). Examples are electrical/mechanical rooms, rooms on level 4 that should only be occupied on as needed basis, interior offices, SCIF. It is recommended that restrooms be on occupancy sensor so if someone stays late the light comes on when they walk in – not only on/off late at night.

5. Please confirm if we can use the PICO style control for SLV fixture at exterior spaces with daylight, such as a private office, that may not need extensive zoned control in the space.

Team, Please remember:

 We are going for LEED silver. Lighting 2 points.

 As a LEED prerequisite/baseline for LEED we must be on Centralized controls (Smitty/Adam correct me if I’m wrong).

 We must meet ASHRAE 90.1 2010 with dimming or bi-level dimming

o (bi-level = on, 50%, off and is not appropriate for all areas dimming is used such as the lab spaces – bi-level switching/control can affect our ability to achieve the 2 LEED points)

 No lighting related but related to the controls - we also must have 50% of all receptacles in a space/room on controls to turn off when the room is not occupied

I will be out the rest of this week so please share all responses with everyone on this list. Lincoln/Reed/HKS will review prior to any drawing changes.

Thanks again,

Elizabeth

ELIZABETH HANSON

LEED BD+C

ASSOCIATE

HKS | Creating places that enhance the human experience

337 1250 I STREET NW

SUITE 600

WASHINGTON DC 20005

D +1 202-315-1132 P +1 202-682-6289

338

toolbox for negotiating with furniture manufacturers. If you're working in the corporate sector, the NeoCon education program is here to help.

CAN ONE CUBE FIT ALL? Lullen Pajor & Linda Mracek, interior designers, Aviar Commercial Space Planning & Design, Tucson, Arizona.

Do you know your work personality? Everyone learns and works uniquely, and we know how much the physical work environment can help or hinder productivity. Review the best ways to determine your culture and work personality, so you can bring best solutions to workspaces. Identify what drives worker behavior, and leverage that knowledge to provide more efficient, productive work environments.

HOW TO CREATE A MORE EFFECTIVE WORKSPACE Doug Mockett, CEO and founder, Doug Mockett & Company, Inc., Manhattan Beach, California.

Learn firsthand about the evolution from simple cable management to sophisticated workplace power and communication systems. Discover the future and direction of workplace technologies and the implications for contemporary furniture design. Get the critical skills to add value to every workplace project by bringing up to date knowledge and skills. Satisfy clients by addressing effective technology integration into their furniture and workplace designs.

For more picks for Corporate sessions click here...

For picks for Healthcare sessions click here ...

For picks for Education sessions click here ...

For picks for regulation and compliance sessions click here ...

Forward email

This email was sent to [email protected] by [email protected] | Update Profile/Email Address | Rapid removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy.

347 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Laura K Manno Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2015 1:10 PM To: Alka Rastogi Cc: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Institute for Advanced Biomed Research - Original Scope of Work Attachments: 100701_Project Summary-Issued.pdf; Lab - Concept Plans - Architectural 1st Floor (September 29, 2010).pdf; LSLB Key Stakeholders.pdf; 2011-07-21_SD BOD_FINAL TO BCOM.pdf

Alka:

I hope today’s meeting was helpful. As promised, I did an additional search to see if I could find the original project description that was published with the RFP. Attached you will find that document for your reference. As you will see, it always had the loading dock being relocated for the reasons discussed today.

If you need the full/ official RFP package that would have included this document as part of the solicitation, Keith Hamilton should be able to provide that for you.

I have also included here the 3 other documents I left with you so you have everything from me in one place…

Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Laura

Laura K. Manno, AIA Architect / Planner George Mason University (703) 993-5148

348 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 12:55 PM To: Renate Guilford Cc: Cathy M Wolfe;Debbie L. Brady Subject: FYI - GMURF Space Complaint

Renate,

I met a week and a half ago with Veronica Kayne and Carolyn Klenner from GMURF/OTT to review the plan to relocate their office to Research Hall 3rd floor and move Internal Audit to Rsch 4th floor suite that they now occupy based upon our discussions with Dr. Wu and JJ about this space swap. This swap helps to locate GMURF/OTT adjacent to the future space that will be used to meet the space needs of the new Entrepreneurship/Innovation division within the Provost’s organization, of which GMURF/OTT are now a part. At that meeting, we reviewed the 3rd floor plan, and I asked some questions to help me better understand how they would need to function in the space. I indicated we’d replace the (4) private offices they now have, and create a reception area by removing some of the former GRA stations in that large open area of 3rd floor. In that discussion, I mentioned that the space would not be a private, enclosed suite any longer, and she voiced concerns over confidential files and conversations that the staff have that cannot be done in an open area setting. Based upon that feedback, I assigned two additional offices to help meet these needs – one to be used as a small meeting room for private conversations with faculty about their patents, etc. and one to use for secure file storage. In this plan, any student workers, or other staff that aren’t in private offices, would need to be in workstations in the open office area. Veronica indicated she understood the decisions to relocate them, and would work with me (Facilities) on the remaining details and be ready for the move on May 29th which is our set move date for them and Internal Audit.

Today, Debbie Brady and I took Veronica and the rest of the GMURF/OTT staff down to 3rd floor to show them the offices and workstation areas that would be reconfigured to meet their needs so that Debbie could provide new layout drawings for them to approve. At that meeting Veronica indicated that there was “no way” her students could sit at workstations in that open area since they work on confidential information. She wanted to know what we could do to address these issues and make a private space for them since they can’t function in a shared office area. I indicated that we couldn’t do any renovations, so making an enclosed suite for them to have privacy on that floor was not possible. She said she knew I was just working off the plan that I have, but she wanted to know who made these decisions because she would be reaching out to discuss this issue. I indicated this was a decision the Provost and other senior administrators made to support new initiatives and meet overall space needs for multiple depts. at the university.

I wanted you to be aware of this complaint and maybe pass along a heads up to Dr. Wu that he may receive a call/email from her. Given the tight timeline that we are working on to accomplish their relocation and meet other deadlines for subsequent summer relocations, we need to be able to remain on track with finalizing their new space layout so any help with getting this issue resolved so that those efforts aren’t derailed is much appreciated. I understand that the new space isn’t going to be exactly what they have now, but I also need to ask that she step back and see what business processes she may need to make in order to function in the new space. Since space and resources are minimal these days, I believe we are all being asked to be as efficient as possible to minimize unnecessary renovations, and many private/confidential conversations and work happen each day in open/shared office spaces, including the Provost’s Admin suite. I think it’s possible to maintain the confidential nature of the GMURF/OTT work even in this new location with changes in business practices (i.e. using the private meeting room I’ve assigned if there are conversations that need confidentiality).

349 We are proceeding with our plan and Debbie will be providing new layout concept plans to them by end of next week so that they can respond, so I’m hoping once Veronica sees the layout in the new format that she will work with us to get the plan finalized so that Debbie can get this move coordinated since we only have a few weeks to do so. I will keep you posted if she or I have any issues with meeting this goal so that I can ask for assistance.

Thanks,

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

350 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Eric Celler Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2015 1:25 PM To: Debbie L. Brady Cc: Alexis Brearley Iszard;Laura K Manno;Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Re: PPE Mason Hall office allocation MAOSN BACK FILL

Debbie,

Thanks for the quick response!

Best, Eric

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Debbie L. Brady wrote:

Eric,

They are 12” Deep and 36” wide with 6 shelves.

Debbie

From: Eric Celler [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2015 1:05 PM To: Debbie L. Brady Cc: Alexis Brearley Iszard; Laura K Manno; Cathy M Wolfe

Subject: Re: PPE Mason Hall office allocation MAOSN BACK FILL

Hi Debbie,

Would you be able to provide the dimensions for the bookshelves that will be set up in the new offices?

Best,

Eric

351 On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Debbie L. Brady wrote:

Eric,

Thank you for offering to take the few boxes to Arlington for the movers. That would be helpful.

I need any communication for this project to be communicated directly with Alex Iszard and myself(move and furniture related items) . Please do not email the movers directly.

They take direction on this project from me.

As far as items to be relocated, there is no furniture relocating to the new space other than contents and computers.

New furniture will be supplied to your department by the university..

Thanks

Debbie L. Brady

From: Eric Celler [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 2:20 PM To: Aubrey Surface Cc: Debbie L. Brady Subject: Re: PPE Mason Hall office allocation MAOSN BACK FILL

Hi Aubrey,

If it is easier for you, you can leave the Arlington boxes with me and I'll be glad to make sure they get them. Additionally, though not everyone is moving an entire office from Arlington, there are some folks moving non-personal items from their office. In case it's helpful, here's the plan for what the folks in Arlington plan to move:

1 shared office (2 people)

9 bookshelves worth of books and materials

352 3 cubicles worth of materials

I hope that is helpful. Please let me know if there is any additional information that I need to provide.

Best,

Eric

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Aubrey Surface wrote:

When del the boxes will we need to take boxes to arlington off as well

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 16, 2015, at 5:15 PM, Eric Celler wrote:

Hi Debbie,

I've updated the document with a slight change for office 128, which now just reads "Reading Room," in case it is helpful to have a more accurate title.

Thanks again for your help. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Best,

Eric

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Eric Celler wrote:

Hi Debbie,

Thank you for your quick response. 353

Aubrey, I can be reached either at my desk or on my cell at the following numbers:

o: 703-993-1147 c: 678-697-0356

Thanks again, and, please feel free to let me know if you have any questions.

Best,

Eric

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Debbie L. Brady wrote:

Aubrey,

For Mason back fill delivery of boxes , please add this list to your group of folks that need boxes/bags/ and tags delivered next Wednesday . The locations are listed as from- to .

There are some that are in Arlington . If the name does not have a from location and just lists Mason then I would assume that they are not in need of boxes and are not a current employee but I will clarify.

Eric Celler is the contact for this group . He is cc’d on this email .

Eric- Please provide a phone number for any questions or contact information. Also, Please clarify that the names with just a Mason Hall location do not need to be relocated or receive boxes.

Thanks

Debbie L. Brady

354

From: Eric Celler [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 4:08 PM To: Debbie L. Brady Cc: Gary Leff; Peter J Boettke Subject: PPE Mason Hall office allocation

Good afternoon Debbie,

I hope this email finds you well. I just wanted to write to follow up to provide information regarding office assignments for PPE in the new space. I have attached a document here including that information. If there are additional people I should plan to share this with, please let me know and I will be happy to do so.

My apologies for the delay in remitting this to you. If you have any questions or if I can provide any additional information, please do not hesitate to let me know.

Best,

Eric

Eric Celler

Program Coordinator

F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

------

Mercatus Center at George Mason University

355 703-993-1147 (o) | 678-697-0356 (c) www.mercatus.org | www.ppe.mercatus.org

Eric Celler

Program Coordinator

F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

------

Mercatus Center at George Mason University

703-993-1147 (o) | 678-697-0356 (c) www.mercatus.org | www.ppe.mercatus.org

Eric Celler

Program Coordinator

F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

------

Mercatus Center at George Mason University

703-993-1147 (o) | 678-697-0356 (c) www.mercatus.org | www.ppe.mercatus.org 356

Eric Celler

Program Coordinator

F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

------

Mercatus Center at George Mason University

703-993-1147 (o) | 678-697-0356 (c) www.mercatus.org | www.ppe.mercatus.org

Eric Celler

Program Coordinator

F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

------

Mercatus Center at George Mason University

703-993-1147 (o) | 678-697-0356 (c) www.mercatus.org | www.ppe.mercatus.org

357

Eric Celler Program Coordinator F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics ------Mercatus Center at George Mason University 703-993-1147 (o) | 678-697-0356 (c) www.mercatus.org | www.ppe.mercatus.org

358 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Eric Celler Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 5:23 PM To: Debbie L. Brady Cc: Alexis Brearley Iszard;Laura K Manno;[email protected];Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Re: PPE Mason Hall office allocation MAOSN BACK FILL

Debbie,

My apologies, and, I hope it isn't too late, but if we could include one additional office worth of boxes to be dropped off tomorrow, I would be grateful. I neglected to include one of our folks moving from Arlington.

Thanks again for all of your help. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Best, Eric

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Eric Celler wrote: Debbie,

Happy to do what I can to help make this process smooth all around. And, thanks for the information regarding who should be kept in the loop re. plans for the space. I'll be sure to move forward accordingly.

Best, Eric

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Debbie L. Brady wrote:

Eric,

Thank you for offering to take the few boxes to Arlington for the movers. That would be helpful.

I need any communication for this project to be communicated directly with Alex Iszard and myself(move and furniture related items) . Please do not email the movers directly.

They take direction on this project from me.

As far as items to be relocated, there is no furniture relocating to the new space other than contents and computers.

New furniture will be supplied to your department by the university..

Thanks

359 Debbie L. Brady

From: Eric Celler [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 2:20 PM To: Aubrey Surface Cc: Debbie L. Brady Subject: Re: PPE Mason Hall office allocation MAOSN BACK FILL

Hi Aubrey,

1 shared office (2 people)

9 bookshelves worth of books and materials

3 cubicles worth of materials

I hope that is helpful. Please let me know if there is any additional information that I need to provide.

Best,

Eric

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Aubrey Surface wrote:

When del the boxes will we need to take boxes to arlington off as well

Sent from my iPhone

360

On Apr 16, 2015, at 5:15 PM, Eric Celler wrote:

Hi Debbie,

I've updated the document with a slight change for office 128, which now just reads "Reading Room," in case it is helpful to have a more accurate title.

Thanks again for your help. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Best,

Eric

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Eric Celler wrote:

Hi Debbie,

Thank you for your quick response.

Aubrey, I can be reached either at my desk or on my cell at the following numbers:

o: 703-993-1147

c: 678-697-0356

Thanks again, and, please feel free to let me know if you have any questions.

Best,

Eric

361 On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Debbie L. Brady wrote:

Aubrey,

For Mason back fill delivery of boxes , please add this list to your group of folks that need boxes/bags/ and tags delivered next Wednesday . The locations are listed as from- to .

Eric Celler is the contact for this group . He is cc’d on this email .

Eric- Please provide a phone number for any questions or contact information. Also, Please clarify that the names with just a Mason Hall location do not need to be relocated or receive boxes.

Thanks

Debbie L. Brady

From: Eric Celler [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 4:08 PM To: Debbie L. Brady Cc: Gary Leff; Peter J Boettke Subject: PPE Mason Hall office allocation

Good afternoon Debbie,

My apologies for the delay in remitting this to you. If you have any questions or if I can provide any additional information, please do not hesitate to let me know.

Best,

Eric

Eric Celler

Program Coordinator

F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

------

Mercatus Center at George Mason University

703-993-1147 (o) | 678-697-0356 (c) www.mercatus.org | www.ppe.mercatus.org

Eric Celler

Program Coordinator

F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

------

Mercatus Center at George Mason University 363 703-993-1147 (o) | 678-697-0356 (c)

www.mercatus.org | www.ppe.mercatus.org

Eric Celler

Program Coordinator

F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

------

Mercatus Center at George Mason University

703-993-1147 (o) | 678-697-0356 (c)

www.mercatus.org | www.ppe.mercatus.org

Eric Celler

Program Coordinator

F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

------

Mercatus Center at George Mason University

703-993-1147 (o) | 678-697-0356 (c) 364 www.mercatus.org | www.ppe.mercatus.org

365 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 9:52 AM To: Joy Staulcup Cc: Thomas G Calhoun;Laura K Manno Subject: Re: Faculty Offices Needed for Fairfax

We can discuss but I think this is no going to fly based on discussions with Provost last week.

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 16, 2015, at 9:18 AM, Joy Staulcup wrote:

Cathy and Tom,

Just wanted to make you aware of the below space request email from School of Business. I will ask that they submit a formal space request form once they’ve identified exactly how many offices they need, if necessary. However, if the information that the Provost provided last week in our meeting (i.e. there is to be no additional space assigned for S-Bus at Fairfax) is correct, is there going to be some communication from senior leadership to Sarah at some point to reinforce that decision? I continue to get communication from School of Business staff about the upcoming faculty needs for next FY and future years, so if there really is a decision to provide no additional space, I would prefer if someone notifies Sarah so that they understand they need to resolve any FX growth needs by relocating Faculty/Staff to the space they’ve been assigned in Arlington, or by looking at being more efficient with space they already have assigned to them. For example, they have a great number of staff assigned to private offices and there may be opportunities to relocate those staff to shared offices or workstations in order to free up private offices for new faculty if that is needed. They have their space and floors assigned by areas so when they have new faculty, they want them in the same area, but they may need to do some all around space shifts in order to accomplish that goal.

Please advise so that I will know how to respond to Diane’s email.

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

From: Diane Vermaaten Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 8:22 AM To: Joy Staulcup Cc: Kevin W Rockmann; Melanie S Pflugshaupt Subject: Faculty Offices Needed for Fairfax

Good morning Joy, 366 As a result of a redesign in our undergraduate curriculum, we will be onboarding 7 new full-time faculty members this fall. In addition, we will be adding another full-time faculty member in the ISOM area. Unfortunately, I do not have offices in which to place these 8 faculty members.

Sarah will assess whether some faculty members are interested in sharing offices or relocating permanently to Arlington. Kevin is also evaluating if some of his staff members can be permanently reassigned to Arlington as well however, he cannot say at this time how many (if any) will move. So while we are asking for 8 offices, if any of our outreach efforts are successful we may need fewer. That said, we wanted to get this issue on your radar at this point, since even if we are successful, we will still most likely need at least 4 additional offices.

Best, Diane

Diane Vermaaten, PhD Assistant Dean, Finance & Operations George Mason University School of Business Phone: 703-993-3725 E-mail: [email protected]

367 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Knoll Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 1:21 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Workplace Design News from Knoll

VIEW WEB VERSION | EDIT YOUR PREFERENCES | SHARE WITH A FRIEND

SHOP & BROWSE DESIGN & PLAN DISCOVER KNOLL

Planning Products Resources Market Focus

m m

Knoll Essentials 2015

ESSENTIALS TO INSPIRE YOUR BEST WORK

A workplace that conforms to your fast-paced needs—rather than the other way around—can make a real difference in performance. From open plan and private offices to Activity Spaces, we provide the essentials to support your greatest investments—your people and your space.

Even better, most of these easy-to-order products can be in your hands in just four weeks.

EXPLORE THE INTERACTIVE CATALOG

m m

m m m m

V V

Product Spotlight Project Profile

ANTENNA® TELESCOPE™ 1776

Combining the healthful ergonomics of adjustable height 1776 is an incubator space in Washington, D.C., workspaces with the planning efficiency of benching. that aims "to reinvent the world by connecting the hottest startups with the resources they need to excel." LEARN MORE

VIEW THE SPACE

368

You are receiving this advertisement at your request. This is a recurring mailing. We want to make sure that you only receive the messages that pertain to your specific interests.

EDIT YOUR PREFERENCES | UNSUBSCRIBE FROM ALL EMAILS

Knoll respects your privacy, Please review our privacy policy.

369 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Monday, February 9, 2015 4:31 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe;Thomas G Calhoun Subject: Update - Mtg with Ruth

Cathy and Tom,

The meeting with Ruth went well. Even though she’s not happy about returning to their space in Mason Hall, she understood the reasons behind making these alternate space assignment plans and is supportive of the concept behind it. There are just a few items regarding some furniture issues that I need to discuss with Cathy but think I have a solution that will work, but other than that I think we are set. She is going to hold off telling the rest of the C,D,E staff where the location is since she knows some of them will be tempted (or just will) go over to look at the Aquia suite. I’ve let her know that we hope to have had the other individual meeting by end of next week, and I’ll set up a time at that point to take her over to the space so that she can get a visual of the layout, etc. once I know that the CHSS dept Chairs have been informed by Debbie Boehm-Davis that they are relocating. She understands that as a professional courtesy she is not to discuss these new plans with the other Research Hall swing users so that we can be the one to inform them, but I think the sooner we can have the meeting with Internal Audit to let them know their new location (once we confirm location), the better.

We also need to set up a meeting with director of distance educ to let them know they are staying in Research Hall for now so that I can make arrangements to have the few items they still have stored in Mason Hall moved over to Research Hall. I would like Renate to be at that meeting so that we can resolve any issues about their furniture that remains in Mason Hall (i.e. that it doesn’t matter if Provost paid for it, it is staying in Mason Hall to be used by new end users of that suite). Other conversation we need to have is with the few Reg Campus staff that are in Research Hall to let them know that they are not moving until we know more about what their space needs are. I will need them to vacate one of the private offices I had assigned to them so that I can assign that for use by the Distance Education staff as a storage room to move their remaining items from Mason Hall over to Rsch Hall. Those two private offices RC had were just drop-in anyway since Kathleen never used her office, so they can use the one remaining office as their drop-in space. Let me know if you want me to set up those meetings for early next week and I can start working on getting something set up.

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

370 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Frank Strike Sent: Monday, February 2, 2015 5:03 PM To: Gail Sutton;Gregg Black;Keith Hamilton;Ralph C Lewis;Steve Vollmer Cc: Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe;Thomas A Drerenberger;Gary A Powell;Stephen Morehouse;Thomas G Calhoun;Nancy S Pickens Subject: RE: Johnson Center room 130

Nancy, I would like to attend as well. V/r Frank

From: Gail Sutton Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 4:34 PM To: Frank Strike; Gregg Black; Keith Hamilton; Ralph C Lewis; Steve Vollmer Cc: Joy Staulcup; Cathy M Wolfe; Thomas A Drerenberger; Gary A Powell; Stephen Morehouse; Thomas G Calhoun; Nancy S Pickens Subject: RE: Johnson Center room 130

Nancy Pickens has organized a meeting on Monday, Feb. 9 at 9:00 am in Fac. 102 to discuss the fire alarm project.

Invited Attendees:

1. Gail Sutton 2. Gary Powell 3. Keith Hamilton 4. Mike Herman 5. Mike Whittington 6. Nancy Pickens (Organizer) 7. Steve Morehouse

Please let Nancy know if you have an interest in attending this meeting, in case she is making any photocopies, etc.

Gail

From: Frank Strike Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 4:01 PM To: Gail Sutton; Gregg Black; Keith Hamilton; Ralph C Lewis; Steve Vollmer Cc: Joy Staulcup; Cathy M Wolfe; Thomas A Drerenberger; Gary A Powell; Stephen Morehouse; Thomas G Calhoun Subject: RE: Johnson Center room 130

Gail, absolutely, we should meet. Keith/Ralph, recommend we meet with Gail and review our recommendations for repairs to the Johnson Center. As you know, Fire Alarm design and construction are tentatively planned for FY-17 in our MR budget to pay the one third that is an E&G cost. Gail, we are also in the process of developing a rough draft major maintenance deficiency list of all auxiliary buildings.

V/r Frank

371

From: Gail Sutton Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 2:39 PM To: Gregg Black Cc: Joy Staulcup; Cathy M Wolfe; Thomas A Drerenberger; Gary A Powell; Stephen Morehouse; Frank Strike Subject: RE: Johnson Center room 130

Understood. We should get a meeting set up to talk about the concerns/issues with the current fire alarm system and the needed upgrades soon though so that we can begin planning for it financially and operationally.

Gail

From: Gregg Black Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 2:28 PM To: Gail Sutton; Frank Strike Cc: Joy Staulcup; Cathy M Wolfe; Thomas A Drerenberger; Gary A Powell; Stephen Morehouse Subject: RE: Johnson Center room 130

Gail-

I do not have any knowledge of specific conversations on the placement of the new system or its funding status. Any system to cover a building as large as the JC is going to take a good amount of real estate in order to house all the components. My comments to Joy were simply an idea of how to utilize that space (when the time comes to make the decision) and make it better for everyone involved.

Gregg Black Fire Safety Manager George Mason University P: (703) 993-2795 F: (703) 993-8996 C: (571) 220-2487

From: Gail Sutton Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 2:20 PM To: Frank Strike Cc: Gregg Black; Joy Staulcup; Cathy M Wolfe; Thomas A Drerenberger; Gary A Powell; Stephen Morehouse Subject: RE: Johnson Center room 130

NOTE: The Keith that is housed in this office is KEITH EPPS – not Keith Ellis.

If SC staff is concerned about secure storage of files in this office, we will provide locking file cabinets so that this is not an issue. Student Centers will need to have some internal conversation about best placement for this particular staff member and necessary use of this room.

At the time of agreement for this move, it was understood by all parties that the fire alarm panel was to remain in the space and that appropriate staff would need to access the panel on an as needed basis. I do understand that advance notice is not always possible for personnel that need to enter this room.

Gregg – to my knowledge, the fire alarm upgrade project has not been funded (at least from the Student Centers side) so I am surprised to hear that it has proceeded to design stage, including wall placement. Perhaps we should have a meeting with all involved about the fire alarm project sooner rather than later? If there are alternatives to consider as

372 far as placement of the panel, I would like to at least hear what the options are and then we can consider the affordability of them.

Gail L. Sutton Director, Student Centers

Direct: 703-993-3610 Admin Office: 703-993-2921 Fax: 703-993-2919

George Mason University Johnson Center, 3rd Floor, Room 324 4400 University Drive, MSN 5A3 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 studentcenters.gmu.edu [email protected]

From: Frank Strike Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 2:01 PM To: Gail Sutton; Gary A Powell Cc: Gregg Black; Joy Staulcup; Cathy M Wolfe; Thomas A Drerenberger Subject: FW: Johnson Center room 130

Gail/Gary, based on the below e-mails and based on my discussion with Joy, there was an understanding that prior notice before entering this space (Room 130) by the Fire Alarm Shop or EHS was not going to work. Please see below e- mails and the following statement by Mr. Black: “In addition Student Centers has requested that we notify the occupant before we enter the space due to files that are kept in his office, this is not going to work for the Fire Alarm shop or my office.” Gail/Gary: happy to discuss at your convenience. V/r frank

From: Joy Staulcup Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 11:20 AM To: Gregg Black Subject: RE: Johnson Center room 130

Gregg,

The police/security office was already using room 130 as office space for staff and for cadets, so having that space be used by Keith Ellis wasn’t a change from its original use. Gail Sutton worked on this space reassignment with the Police so that she could have Keith Ellis in a more central location since he is now in charge of operations in all of the student centers so having him located in SUB I was becoming a logistical problem. When the request was made, Gail indicated that she was aware that Facilities and other personnel would need to enter the room whenever needed to address issues or monitor/do maintenance on equipment in the room. If you are encountering issues with access, please let me know and I’ll address that with Gail. There was never the assumption that this would be a “private” office space for Keith, and Gail understood that while Keith may be housed in the space, access by other support staff across the university would be needed. I can address any access issues you are having with her and they will need to figure out where to move/house any secure files if that is a problem.

As far as code issues with occupying a space with fire alarm panels, I assumed since we had security staff and cadets occupying that space previously that there wouldn’t be any issues with having Keith occupy the space. If that is an issue, 373 we will need to eventually address the office space need elsewhere since I don’t think it would be cost-effective to have to relocate the fire alarm panels as part of the overall fire alarm upgrades. My suggestion would be to discuss your concerns about access/disruption during the construction phase of the fire alarm upgrade project with Gail Sutton so that she is aware of those issues. If I need to work with her to find some other space in which Keith can have office space, I will do so.

Joy

Joy Staulcup Associate Director, Space Management Campus Planning George Mason University 703-993-2468 [email protected]

From: Gregg Black Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 8:43 AM To: Joy Staulcup Subject: Johnson Center room 130

Joy-

I wanted to ask you about the conversion of Johnson Center 130 to an office space. I believe that it was previously a security room for the police, however it is also the fire alarm room the rest of the security equipment has been removed, however the alarm system is still there. Utilizing a fire alarm room as an office space it something that we have not traditionally done at Mason, and there are some code implications with that. Looking at other rooms that have fire alarm equipment, they are all labeled in the space database as mechanical rooms. As I understand the Student Center staff has already moved someone into that space, and I am not asking that they be removed from that space, however there will have to be a long-term solution created to house that staff member.

In addition Student Centers has requested that we notify the occupant before we enter the space due to files that are kept in his office, this is not going to work for the Fire Alarm shop or my office. We need to get into that space when we need to without having to notify the occupant. As for the future of that room, when the Fire Alarm upgrade enters into the construction phase, the current plan is for the new system to be installed on the opposite wall of the current system. Right now that is where the desk is. There is going to be a lot of work that will be happening in that room, and at that point there will not be room for student centers to use that space as an office.

With that said, I understand that 130 is a large room, and see the Student Centers point about utilizing space in their building in an efficient manner. This might be the opportunity to have a conversation about the location of the fire alarm panel, and see if the new fire alarm project can relocate the panel somewhere else in the building so that room can be an office.

Please let me know if there is any further information that you need to know about the space, or if there is anything I can do.

I would be happy to meet over there to show you what I am talking about.

Thanks.

Gregg Black Fire Safety Manager

374 George Mason University P: (703) 993-2795 F: (703) 993-8996 C: (571) 220-2487

375 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Ruth J Townsend Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 3:25 PM To: Cathy M Wolfe;Joy Staulcup Subject: Compliance, Diversity & Ethics space Attachments: Space.docx

Good afternoon all, Frank asked me to share this with you. Let me know what our next steps are. Thanks, Ruth

Ruth J. Townsend Associate Director, Compliance, Diversity & Ethics George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 2C2 703 993 8730 [email protected]

376 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Elizabeth D Long Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 11:38 AM To: Cathy M Wolfe Cc: Joy Staulcup;Martha Sansaver Subject: Arlington Police Attachments: Option 1.pdf; Option 2.pdf; Requested Plan.pdf; Revised Budget Summary.pdf; Project Agreement and Authorization to Proceed - Founder's Police Relocaton.docx

Cathy- Attached are the options for the Arlington Police. Opt. 1 is the closest to what they currently have and even though it is the least costly, it is still twice the amount identified as Funds Available on their Project Request Form ($29K vs $15K) Option 3 is the one they asked for and Option 2 is a more efficient version of what they want.

If anyone has comments on the draft of the MOU, please let me know. I will make revisions but will not send it to Eric Heath until I hear back from you Cathy.]

Beth

Elizabeth D. Long, AIA Architect/Planner Office of Campus Planning George Mason University 4400 University Drive, MS 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 703.993.6184

377 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 5:19 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

378 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 2:27 PM To: Joy Staulcup;Laura K Manno Subject: Fwd: This week: Shared, Open Offices Arrive in Academic Medicine; Profile: UWashington, School of Medicine, South Lake Union 3.1

FYI

Thanks Cathy

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Tradeline, Inc." Date: January 14, 2015 at 2:16:22 PM EST To: [email protected] Subject: This week: Shared, Open Offices Arrive in Academic Medicine; Profile: UWashington, School of Medicine, South Lake Union 3.1 Reply-To: [email protected]

m m m m V

Shared Office Space for Physicians and Clinicians Beth Israel Deaconess is Among the First Hospitals to Introduce the Concept for Academic Medical Offices

The renovated OB-GYN academic offices at Boston’s Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) eliminate private offices in favor of shared desks and open concept space, to accommodate a planned 20 percent staff increase while decreasing total

departmental square footage. The department, which previously housed about 80 people in 14,000 sf, can now accommodate 106 people in 13,000 sf. The gut-and- rebuild also improves ADA compliance for the 1950s building and provides more natural light and collaborative space.

University of Washington, School of Medicine, South Lake Union 3.1

The seven-story “3.1” research building on the University of Washington Medical Partner Lev School’s South Lake Union campus adds 160,000 nsf of research and research support

379 space for more than 300 occupants to a seven-building master plan totaling 1.2 m m m m V million gsf.

Recently Published:

 International Vaccine Centre (InterVac)  Optimizing Facility Operations Without Building New Spaces

 Health Sciences Biomedical Research Facility II  A Facility Renovation Strategy to Accommodate Clinical Cell and Vaccine Production m m m m V  Getting BSL-3 Labs to Pass Failure Scenario Requirements

Principal Lev  Strategic Facility and Space Planning for Science and Research April 20-21 Scottsdale, AZ  Core Facilities 2015 May 4-5 St. Petersburg, FL  Research Facilities 2015 May 7-8 St. Petersburg, FL  Facility Strategies for Animal Research and Biocontainment October 5-6 Boston, MA  College and University Science Facilities 2015 October 19-20 Boston, MA  Space Strategies 2015 November 16-17 San Diego, CA

Associate Le Join your peers in the newly formed open discussion forum and networking groups!

 Strategic Planning for Healthcare Systems: Business Models to Real Estate  Research & Science Facilities: Planning, Construction, Operations, Management  Facility Space Planning & Space Management

 Academic Medical & Health Science Center Planning  College & University Science Facilities: Planning, Construction, Operations, Management

 Colorado State University Plans Institute for Biologic Translational Therapies

380  University of Houston Builds Multidisciplinary Research and Engineering Building  Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica Expands Iowa Research Facilities  College of William & Mary Constructs Integrated Science Center Phase Three  Norton Women's and Kosair Children's Hospital Opens in Louisville

Tradeline, Inc. provides leading-edge tools and resources to facilities professionals

enabling them to make the critical decisions that shape their organizations.

m m

381 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Angeline Anteola Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 2:23 PM To: Angeline Anteola;Alexis Brearley Iszard;Bill Miller;Cathy M Wolfe;Christine Bartlett;Christine Hogan;Crystal L Clemons;Elizabeth D Long;Erich A Miller;Frank Salvatierra;Gregg Black;Habtewold Mesfen;Jean E Callahan;Jennifer Massie;John H Cameron;Joy Staulcup;Keith Hamilton;Laura K Manno;LeAnn Pittman;Marshall Wilson;Martha Sansaver;Michael W Cross;Nathan Smith;Paul C Didier;Robert M Herman;Ralph C Lewis;Thomas A Drerenberger;Thomas H Olund;Katherine L Seidnitzer;Anthony Lamanna Subject: NON-CAP 1.14.15 Attachments: Non-Cap Report 1.14.15.xls

Good Afternoon,

Please see the attached report for your use.

Angeline

Angeline Anteola Project Manager George Mason University Facilities Project Management & Construction 4400 University Drive, MSN 1E4 Fairfax, VA 22030 (703) 993-2784 Office (703) 789-7751 Cell

382 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 5:19 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

383 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: Cathy M Wolfe Sent: Thursday, January 8, 2015 10:16 AM To: John S Forgy;Beth Long;Joy Staulcup;Laura K Manno;Debbie L. Brady Subject: FW: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Please updates your projects for tomorrow's planning review on this sheet. This is the non-cap list. We will talk about capital projects during the PM's review of projects.

Thanks, Cathy

Cathy M. Wolfe, AIA Director of Campus Planning 703-993-2610 Facilities.gmu.edu

-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, January 05, 2015 5:20 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger; Joy Staulcup; Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Open in SM and P)

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

384 Elizabeth I Woodley

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, January 5, 2015 5:20 AM To: Thomas A Drerenberger;Joy Staulcup;Cathy M Wolfe Subject: Open in SM and P) Attachments: Open in SM and P).xls

Attached are the results from the scheduled generation of Open in SM and P). This is a recurring schedule. This recurring schedule is set to generate weekly on Monday.

385