An Architect’s Role in Brownfield Site Selection: What You Should Know

Brownfield sites can offer a faster, more sustainable, and cost-effective path to cGMP-compliant drug manufacturing facilities—but success depends on selecting an existing building capable of supporting current and future operational requirements.

When developing drug manufacturing facilities that are compliant with current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP), brownfield sites can offer reduced build costs and sustainability advantages over greenfield alternatives. Acquiring and adapting an existing building is often faster and less capital-intensive than ground-up construction. But that’s true only if you choose the right building.

While the bones of a building may be promising, what lies beneath the surface (structurally, environmentally, and operationally) may not be what it seems. Making that determination before contracts are signed and design dollars are spent is where an architect's expertise pays off.

Outside of the process engineering required to establish a pharmaceutical manufacturing operation, the most important question in facility selection is infrastructure: Does a building have what it takes to support regulatory requirements, now and as the program evolves?

That question has many dimensions, and most of them are the architect's domain. It’s important to make use of an architect’s expertise early, before mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP), civil, and structural engineers begin their own work.  This enables more accurate cost forecasting and lower schedule risk.

With this context, let’s take a closer look at what an architect’s job is during site selection.

Reading the building's “envelope”

The process of establishing a new facility has several known variables, such as the total square footage required, the lab types, and the general operational intent. All of those are essential data points in selecting the specific building to house the operation. The selection process, however, has responsibilities for both owners and architects. The owner will want the team to survey candidate brownfield sites, and the architect's first job is to assess what each building actually offers.

The building “envelope” (that is, its roof, slab on grade, exterior walls, windows, and doors) is the first order of business. Pharmaceutical manufacturing spaces require precise environmental control, which means the building must provide a tight seal against moisture penetration from all directions. Moisture infiltration can lead to mold in walls and roofing membranes, and mold in a cGMP facility can be an operational catastrophe.

In this part of the selection process, architects survey roofs for signs of wear, such as dry rot in rubber membranes, damaged flashing, or compromised composition. They assess exterior doors and windows for rotted frames, rusted lintels, broken seals, and any condensation between panes. The slab on grade is examined for spalling, delamination and cracking, that can be an issue for the next installation of heavy equipment and forklift travel.

These conditions tell a story about the remediation that may be required before a single piece of pharmaceutical equipment is moved in. For some buildings, that investment is manageable. For others, it can rule out the site. After all, a worn roof that fails after occupancy, or chronic moisture infiltration that creates unsafe conditions, can bring operations to a standstill.

The architect's job at site selection, therefore, is to point out those risks while there is still time to walk away, or to determine whether remediation can be a cost-effective solution.

Structure, height, and the interstitial question

Once the envelope is assessed, the architect considers the building's structural system—specifically, how well its floor-to-deck height will accommodate the program. This is an aspect that is easy to overlook, but if it’s not performed correctly there can be serious consequences.

In life science facilities, mezzanines and interstitial floors are common. These spaces sit above the manufacturing floor, housing the dense matrix of piping, ductwork, and mechanical systems that serve the rooms below. The architect must determine whether a candidate building can support that infrastructure, both in terms of the vertical clearance available and the structural capacity of the framing above. Additional rooftop air handling may be necessary for classified cleanrooms that require frequent air changes. As such, the roof’s structural capacity should be assessed, especially if the previous occupancy, like an office building, required less environmental control.

If floor-to-deck height is sufficient for a walkable pharmaceutical ceiling, the architect already knows that those ceilings impose significant loads on the structure. That load issue includes the weight of liquid-filled pipes and ductwork to be suspended from the deck above. That’s critically important, because if the framing system was designed for open office use, it would not be turn-key ready to bear that load.

Early in the process, the architect can propose modifications. This can mean strengthening the superstructure, or by opening the roof to create a new mechanical shed. It might also mean determining that the building is unsuitable before the project team invests any additional dollars.

Where floor-to-deck height is constrained, as in multi-story or high-rise buildings, the architect can propose alternatives. For example, a stainless steel plenum or a clean-box design might accomplish the environmental separation required without the vertical clearance of a full interstitial floor.

These are not simple workarounds. They require careful planning. But knowing they are available, and whether they make sense in a given structure, is exactly the kind of analysis that prevents costly redesign later.

At this stage, architects also evaluate column spacing, shear wall locations, and braced wall positions. Together with floor-to-deck height, these factors determine which mode of clean room construction is most practical for the site. That includes whether pod construction (which requires large areas of level site grading and generous access roads) might be a realistic option.

Fire protection, egress, and compliance

An architect's site analysis also extends to the building's interior fire protection and egress systems. This isn’t just a code exercise; it’s an important aspect of overall risk assessment.

cGMP pharmaceutical programs may include hazardous occupancy spaces and have short exit access travel distances that require a close proximity to the building’s existing exits at the perimeter. Here, an architect evaluates if a fire lane surrounds the building for easy access in an emergency.

Depending on the chemicals required, an architect determines whether the existing building already has adequate protection, or whether it may need significant modification to its fire protection system. An existing building with inherent fire protection capacity offers a real advantage, of course. One that requires wholesale system modification can add cost and scheduling complexity, and must be accounted for during site selection.

Egress is equally important, and the site conditions often dictate how well emergency services can access different parts of the building. An architect will survey rated stairs for issues including deteriorated fire caulk, condition of door assemblies and hardware and whether existing fire-rated rooms are actually code-compliant.

These constraints shape the concept plan. If they are not addressed at site selection, it can mean expensive redesign once engineers are already coordinating their part of the job.

Large equipment installation: Exterior elevations and conditions 

Clients will often have large pieces of equipment that will need to be installed above the ground floor where the loading dock is. This could be a 6,000L vessel, a GMP glasswasher or new boilers. Not all equipment can be turned on its side or taken apart so the exterior elevation is studied where there are no obstructions and for the most practical way of bringing equipment in at a heightened elevation. Once inside the building, the existing floor to deck height is considered to see if structural modifications are required for bringing equipment in and if there are electrical riser rooms or other core building areas that could be obstacles to bringing in equipment.

Space planning: “No-fly zones,” fixtures, and accessibility

Once a site has been selected, the architect surveys the building’s life safety elements. That means studying occupant loads, mapping primary egress routes, and beginning layout within the building's constraints.

It’s here that what practitioners call "no-fly zones" are considered. That expression refers to assets like sprinkler closets, base building utility rooms, and other landlord-designated elements that cannot be relocated or would be costly to move. Identifying these early prevents the design from going down a path that has been blocked all along by landlord constraints.

Plumbing fixtures are another practical consideration that is easy to underestimate. A new program with a significantly different occupant load may require new toilet rooms—potentially unisex, potentially multi-stall—at travel distances that satisfy accessibility requirements. Break rooms and kitchenettes may need to be carved out of the plan. In older buildings, existing toilet rooms may not meet current ADA requirements, including accessible stalls and proper turning radiuses. Most of these variable can trigger additional scope in design.

It’s also important to note that landlords typically have manuals specifying approved finishes, proprietary products, and site-specific conditions. If you don’t account for these requirements early, it can derail a design schedule in ways that can be difficult to recover from.

Brownfield key considerations

If you’re new to the process, let’s recap the key considerations that can make or break brownfield site selection.

Building site.Preferred brownfield sites for pharmaceutical manufacturing are ideally located in Light Industrial Zoning Districts designed to accommodate small-scale industrial activities, close to transportation and utilities. Brownfield sites in industrial parks often have occupancy classifications ready to support cGMP facilities, with open manufacturing areas and loading docks with room to maneuver for utilities and hazardous waste.

Current occupancy.Critical site features for high hazard occupancy include assessing whether the first floor has enough dock space for hazardous waste dispersion, and whether site topography allows high hazard areas to be positioned at exterior walls, with direct fire lane access.

Structure and construction type. Ideal features for cGMP buildings include appropriate floor-to-deck height clearance for bioreactors and reactor vessels, glasswashers, and similar large equipment. It’s also important to have robust and widely spaced structural frames. Ensuring that the facility can have the proper biosafety level for the planned facility usage is also a key aspect here.

Fire protection and architectural egress elements.It’s important to survey existing fire protection, electrical, and mechanical systems, to assess their capacity to support the client's program now and for future expansion. (In my personal experience, one client’s candidate site had deteriorated walls at egress stairs that were missed in the initial survey. The deterioration forced rehabilitation of the stairs.)

Infrastructure, thermal, and moisture protection.Thoroughly examine the roof, windows, and doors to ensure effective thermal and moisture protection. A tight seal against external elements is essential for the precise environmental control that manufacturing operations require.

Why early engagement matters

Bringing an architect into the brownfield site selection process early has both practical and financial benefits. When site selection decisions are made without architectural analysis, problems can surface later, when mechanical, civil, and structural engineers may have already begun coordinating their work. Redesign at that stage is expensive.

Additionally, scope creep from conditions that may have been visible during site survey but were never formally evaluated is one of the most common sources of budget and schedule overrun.

The architect’s role, therefore, is straightforward: Select the best existing site, with a clear understanding of what it will take to convert the site for life sciences uses. An architect's involvement and due diligence early on reduces any possible risk to timeline and budget because of undiscovered structural, envelope, or compliance issues. Completing front end work reduces risk later on and is one of the best investments a project team can make.