lishing productivity projections by type of crime, a 10-year projection of Washington State crime rates was made, related to productivity, and 10year projection for manpower was then developed. The Pivot Point In April 1974, an architect was retained for the design and planning of the new laboratory. The selection of an appropriate architect is one of the most important decisions that will be made in a laboratory construction project. Often it appears that one of two circumstances occurs when an architect is selected. Either the architect is given total and full responsibility to design the facility with very little, if any, input from the laboratory, or the architect is retained for the purpose of preparing drawings but the design is solely done by the laboratory director. We felt both approaches were unsatisfactory. The relationship established with the architect, complementing his approach, was that of a participating partner in the design of the laboratory system. Early in the discussions with him, responsibilities for each individual were established. It was agreed that the architect was retained due to his knowledge and expertise in the analysis of form, function, utility, and design, and should be used to the maximum extent in those areas. It was also recognized that the laboratory director and staff of the crime laboratory were most familiar with the unique needs, relationships. and requirements of a laboratory system. Each individual in the planning process respected each other's knowledge and responsibility in the planning process and a synergistic and catalytic relationship developed. Early in the design phase, the architect spent considerable time getting a "feel" for the operation of a crime laboratory, asking many ques tions regarding why procedures were done in certain ways, why policies were established, what was the rationale for certain policies; developing an awareness for security aspects; and developing an awareness of the interrelationship of various functions within the crime laboratory. Early in the planning phase, awareness of the relationship between policy and design became apparent. The policies regarding access, security, and evidence handling became key factors in how the eventual layout of the laboratory would take shape. Orientation of the architect to the laboratory system and vice versa was a process that took 3 months. Once the architect developed a familiarity and appreciation for the functioning of the laboratory system and became better aware what each section did, he then began to design "spheres of functional activity." These spheres were circles drawn on a sheet of paper. Each sphere represented an activity such as controlled substances/chemistry, firearms, criminalistics, questioned documents, administration, library, photography, restrooms, and lunchrooms. The larger the sphere, the greater number of people and square footage was estimated as being required. Factors influencing the size of each functional sphere included an estimation of required square footage per anticipated person within each area, nature of the function, whether the kind of activity was desk or workbench oriented, whether special instrumentation and equipment were required, an analysis of mechanical and electrical needs, and identification of specialized joint-use areas within that section. The interrelationship be tween the spheres of functional activity were considered on the basis of cross-traffic patterns, personnel safety, amount of security required, kinds and types of physical evidence that would be examined, requirement for close interrelationship to other func tions within the laboratory, and requirements for fume exhaust, waste drain, and electrical needs. Features unique to each functional area were identified which may have a potential impact on the relationship of one sphere of functional activity to another. These were identified as follows: Chemistry (drugs). Works with small amount of evidence; compact unit, therefore should have outside view; must be accessible to instrumentation; and extent of fumes in air must be considered. Firearms (bullets, guns, toolmarks). Must be secure and enclosed; test firing cannot bother the rest of the laboratory or other floors within the building; fumes must be considered; must have separate firing room of special construction to contain accidentally discharged bullets and prevent ricochet; and must have a separate examination area from the firing room. Criminalistics (hair fiber, glass, paint, biological stains, etc.). Works with all types of evidence which often involve large items; must have provisions for large exhaust due to putrid clothing and material being in the laboratory; and must provide space for specialized joint-use areas such as microscopy and serology. Instrument Room (large, permanently fixed expensive equipment). Must have common access to chemistry and criminalistics section without cross-traffic patterns; must be an enclosed area; must have special floor drains; unique electrical needs must be considered; must be physically removed as far as possible from the Seattle Police Department Communications Center to eliminate radio interfer ence; solid provisions for grounding capabilities must be considered; must be planned for expansion and acquisition of additional instrumentation. Questioned Documents and Illustration Section (handwriting, ink, printed and typed material). Not required to be proximate to instrument room; needs natural light as well as darkroom area; and open working, desk-oriented function, yet must be secure. Administration (clerical, administrative offices, library). Must be central to eliminate cross traffic; must be adjacent to evidence vault; must be adjacent to public access; must be kept open as much as possible; must have separate conference room outside of secure laboratory area; and must have a central receiving area outside of the secure area. Photography. Less stringent security; exhaust consideration; electrical needs; plumbing Schematic of the new laboratory. needs; and not a part of the Lunchroom. To be jointly Evidence Vault. Must be central to reduce cross-traffic patterns; designed as a high-security area; has exhaust needs; and must have floor-to-ceiling cement block walls with reinforced steel rods. Chemical Storage Area. Exhaust needs; personnel safety features; work area to mix batches of chemicals; and fire, explosion prevention features. While the architect was preparing spheres of functional activity, the lab oratory staff participated in the design by identifying needs for each functional activity. We found the total involvement of the laboratory staff highly beneficial. Many important design features were generated from staff involvement. The identification of needs and recommendations by the laboratory staff were given to the architect to incorporate into the spheres of functional activity. An example of staff involvement was the analysis of safety needs. A staff proposal included 13 recommendations for improved safety. Twelve were incorporated into the design. The 13th, for an inert gas fire suppression system, will be implemented within 2 years. Working Drawings The next step for the architect was to apply these spheres of functional activity to the exterior dimensions of the available facility to better analyze security aspects, cross traffic, and needed interrelationships between different functions. It was only after a complete and thorough functional analysis was performed for each area within the laboratory that the architect began the actual preliminary design of a floor plan itself. It is our evaluation in looking back at the plan "... the functional planning of the laboratory was the essence of the planning process and was the heart of the design of this laboratory facility." ning process that the functional planning of the laboratory was the essence of the planning process and was the heart of the design of this laboratory facility. It was determined there would be two levels of security within the laboratory. This was partially determined by the fact that the Seattle Police Department communications facility, as well as the photo laboratory, was on the same floor and was a part of the remodeling project. Two security areas were designed: A high-security area and a minimum-security area. It was determined that central reception, as well as a conference room and adjacent polygraph room operated by the Seattle Police Department, would be minimum security. Also included in the minimum-security areas were the crime laboratory artist-illustrator, lunchrooms, and restrooms. Included in the high-security area would be questioned documents; clerical functions; library; administrative offices; criminalistics; chemistry, firearms, and toolmarks sections; and instrument room. Once a preliminary floor plan was designed, an extensive review process was held to examine cross-traffic pat terns, total personnel which could be accommodated within each section, and the centralness of multiple-use areas such as instrument room and evidence vault. At this point, important technical functions such as exhaust needs, electrical needs, lighting, plumbing, location of fixed instruments and equipment, and arrangement of laboratory benchwork came into play for evaluation. Each section head reviewed the proposed drawings and indicated approval or modifications and suggestions. Periodically, administrative review was also held. Since we had a fixed-physical area which was not the most ideal configuration, i.e., long and narrow, many desired features had to be modified to accommodate the physical dimensions of the laboratory area. It became apparent that the desire for openness was going to present problems. The use of glass walls became a very desirable compromising feature. Construction Since the laboratory would have to be relocated temporarily while construction occurred, a search began for an alternate location that would accommodate the laboratory for the approximate 12-month construction period. A former convent college located 20 miles from Seattle at Issaquah was selected as the alternate laboratory facility since a chemistry and biology laboratory was available and not being utilized. The facility was not large enough to accommodate all the instrumentation during the period of relocation; however, basic and essential functions were made available and were provided. Since there are few vacant facilities that could be used as a crime laboratory, we were fortunate to find satisfactory temporary quarters which did not require expensive yet temporary modifications. The questioned document section and the crime laboratory artist-illustrator were able to remain in the Seattle Police Department building, and the King County Department of Public Safety generously offered temporary facilities for the police department photography laboratory. Construction began on the new laboratory in January of 1975 and was completed in December of that same year. Due to extensive planning during the design phase and close positive working relationships with the architect, the construction period presented minimal trauma to the laboratory staff. The laboratory was dedicated on January 8, 1976. Sharing in the ceremonies were representatives from the Seattle City Council, Seattle Police Department, King County Department of Public Safety, FBI, Washington State Patrol, and over 200 guests from the criminal justice sys tem. Coordination One other key feature that contributed to the successful design and com pletion of the laboratory facility was the coordination of city, State, Federal, and private agencies which were involved in various stages of the proj ect. Evaluation Evaluation is always an enjoyable part of a major project. That is the time when great wisdom, foresight, and thoroughness can be attributed to events that in reality occurred to everyone's surprise or were answers |