Laura Burke
in Connect on LinkedIn
Laura Burke brings a process engineer’s insight to one of the most vital aspects of food and beverage manufacturing: sanitary design. For Laura, there are certain basic principles that are fundamental to protecting public health, preserving brand reputation and maintaining operational efficiency. She considers it a vital part of her job to help companies approach the practice of microbiological safety with intention, adaptability and a focus on long-term value.
As food categories expand and consumer expectations grow, designing for microbiological safety remains essential. Facilities built with hygienic integrity not only minimize contamination risks and improve cleanability but also advance sustainability goals. We spoke with Laura about cleanability and facility design, and actionable ways engineering and construction partners can make an impact by protecting people, products and profits in the food and beverage space.
Q: What are ways sanitary design can become a positive competitive investment?
A: Sanitary design decisions make the most sense when viewed through the risks they’re intended to avoid. Their value is largely preventive: reducing contamination issues, recalls and extended downtime that can threaten both public safety and brand trust. For organizations that rely heavily on return on investment, there are tangible benefits: Better cleanability can reduce cleaning time and chemical use, extend equipment life, and improve overall operational efficiency.
Q: What are the fundamentals of an optimal hygienic food facility?
A: A hygienic facility isn’t defined by how polished it looks; it’s defined by how easily it can be cleaned, accessed and inspected. The fundamentals start with intentional design: eliminate harborage points, provide visibility of product contact surfaces, and make maintenance safe and straightforward. Regulations like the Food Safety Modernization Act have raised the industry’s minimum expectations, but strong sanitary design goes beyond compliance. The goal is to build environments where sanitation is efficient, verifiable and integrated into the facility itself. Standards from organizations like 3-A and the European Hygienic Engineering & Design Group provide helpful frameworks. But the foundational principle is simple: Cleanability and accessibility need to be designed into every project from the start, not added later.
Q: How can facility design and hygienic zoning work together to prevent contamination risks?
A: Effective hygienic zoning starts with understanding the specific microbiological risks associated with a product and process. Once those risks are clear, facility design can support zoning by controlling how people, materials, air and equipment move through the space. Tools like directional airflow, physical separation, dedicated equipment and controlled traffic patterns are well-understood methods for reducing cross-contamination, but how they’re applied should always match the level of risk.
Q: Do most food manufacturers understand their microbiological risks?
A: Established brands often have strong food safety and quality teams that understand microbiological risks and provide invaluable insights on how to uphold hygienic design standards. However, gaps often appear in emerging product categories, such as alternative dairy-based products. Substituting nut milk into products like yogurt or cheese can introduce environmental and microbial challenges that differ from traditional dairy processing. In these cases, collaboration with a trusted partner can help translate those risks into a more effective design.
Q: How can food manufacturers optimize critical clean-in-place systems?
A: Optimizing a clean-in-place system starts with understanding what you are working with. Review piping and instrumentation diagrams and walk the system; small changes like rerouted lines or added valves can quietly undermine performance. Next, check piping layout for dead legs, mismatched line sizes or missing clean-in-place jumpers, which could explain why cleaning is inconsistent. Observing a full clean-in-place cycle may reveal issues such as unexpected valve sequencing, low flow or incomplete temperature ramps. Examining trend data on flow, temperature, conductivity and chemical use could also help spot inefficiencies. If internal resources are limited, experienced consultants with fresh eyes can quickly identify problems that have become normal.
Q: How are digital tools and AI changing sanitary food processing design?
A: Digital tools help teams make better use of the environmental monitoring data they already collect. Mapping and trending swab results can reveal patterns such as recurring hotspots tied to airflow, moisture or traffic flow, patterns that may not be obvious in daily operations. These insights help prioritize improvements and confirm whether sanitary design and procedures are working. As these tools mature, AI-driven alerts and trend recognition capabilities could support more proactive decision-making and help production teams target improvements where they’ll have the greatest impact.
Q: How would you define the current and future states of sanitary food processing design?
A: It ultimately comes back to the same goal: protecting people, products and brands. The fundamentals haven’t changed; it’s important to understand risks, design for cleanability and accessibility, and keep improving as operations evolve. When these principles guide decisions involving layout, equipment, zoning and clean-in-place systems, the result is facilities that are safer, more efficient and easier to maintain. Manufacturers who stay informed and proactive will be prepared for today’s challenges and tomorrow’s innovations and will be able to contribute to a safer global food supply.
