Below are highlights from the Feasibility Study for the CCHS Building Project.Click on image to enlarge it.
The feasibilty study began where the master plan ended. Extensive site and infrastructure including reviewing site options on the CCHS campus.
The Education Specification, the document that defines the spaces needed to delivery the educational programs and curriculum, was updated in careful collaboration with the MSBA.
10 design approaches were created based on the Education Specification. They represented a range of solutions from simply making repairs (no build) to renovation, to renovation with additions, to new construction. Each design here represents the same building square footage. Cost, phasing and construction timelines were created for each approach.
The Building Committee selected 4 options representing a range of approaches. This was further narrowed down to three options which were evaluated against criteria the building committee, the architect and the project manager deemed to be the most critical to the success of the project.
The top two scoring approaches, one that most resembled the master plan approach and a new construction option were further explored in a all day design charette.
The two preferred options were developed further, including exploration of a site for new construction.
Two sites were identified for new construction. Site 1 overlooked the lower playing fields. Site 2 was located behind the existing building. Soil testing and geological borings determined the second site to be better suited.
New construction options on the site directly behind the existing building were developed. The location of the second gymnasium was a highly considered variable in the design approach.
Upon extensive analysis, the renovation option was deemed considerably less favorable due to construction challenges, disruption to students and higher cost. The MSBA agreed that the most cost-effective lasting, solution is a newly constructed building located behind the existing building.
The preferred option, based on a variety of metrics including cost and time to completion, was selected in June 2011. This option proceeded into schematic design.
3D rendering view of preferred option from the south.
3D rendering view of preferred option from the north.