IKM Architects: Case Study Higher Education Renovation-2012

1,300 views

Published on

IKM Architects presentation of a Case Study for the design, renovation and addition of an historic building on the Grove City College Campus for new use as an Alumni Center.

Published in: Design, Business, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,300
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
17
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

IKM Architects: Case Study Higher Education Renovation-2012

  1. 1. Adaptive Reuse of Historic Structures: Transforming Assets to Support Your Mission architecture planning interior design For more information visit: www.ikminc.com Connect with us:
  2. 2. A Case StudyTHE GROVE CITY COLLEGECARNEGIE ALUMNI CENTER
  3. 3. Presenters• John Schrott, AIA IKM Incorporated Architects• Michael McDonnell, AIA IKM Incorporated Architects• Thomas Gregg Grove City College, Vice President Operations
  4. 4. Presentation Objectives• Explore the significance of historic buildings to a campus• Explore some typical challenges/opportunities facing reusing or upgrading an historic building• Explore a process of transformation• Explore the outcomes of the process
  5. 5. THE HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
  6. 6. 1912 Library
  7. 7. • Corner of Main & Broad Streets• Oldest publicly used building on campusProminent lower campus location
  8. 8. • Recreation – lower level • Library – main level • Auditorium – sloped floor & stage – upper levelCarnegie Library
  9. 9. 1930s – Upper Campus Starts to Develop
  10. 10. Focal Point of Lower Campus
  11. 11. Focal Point of Lower Campus
  12. 12. Focal Point of Lower Campus
  13. 13. • 1950s – Library moves: building becomes Carnegie Music Hall • 1970s – Music moves: building becomes AFROTC home until late 1980s • Early 1990s – Alumni & Career Services office move in • Late 1990s – Institutional Advancement offices expandCampus migrates east – Building Use Changes
  14. 14. Building Use Evolves
  15. 15. Carnegie Building 1990s
  16. 16. Grove City College Lower Campus - Today
  17. 17. • Appropriate venue for alumni needed• Alumni & Institutional Advancement Offices identify with location plus no other space available for relocation• Need to address building accessibility & restroom capacity problemsLower Campus Vacated – Opportunities for SiteDevelopment Exist
  18. 18. • Create a better ‘front door’ to the campus • Strengthen the connection between Alumni and Campus • Next step in revitalizing the lower campus creating a focal point • Improve the work environment for all usersProject Goals and Objectives
  19. 19. CHALLENGES/OPPORTUNITIES
  20. 20. Egress /Code Issues
  21. 21. Accessibility
  22. 22. Building envelop
  23. 23. Work Environment
  24. 24. Abandoned/Deteriorating Areas
  25. 25. HVAC
  26. 26. Plumbing/ Fire Protection
  27. 27. Electrical – Lighting/Power/Data
  28. 28. PROCESS – CONCEPT
  29. 29. • Grove City College initial project direction with Goals and Objectives• Stakeholder meetings to explore opportunities• Smaller Focus Groups/Charettes to develop concepts/refine options• Reconvene for validation by Administration Core TeamConsensus Building
  30. 30. Program Development
  31. 31. • Iterative/Interactive process• Stakeholder engagement• Program Monitor• Administrative Core Team Validation• Cost Estimate• Value Engineering ProcessConceptual Design
  32. 32. Conceptual Design
  33. 33. Conceptual Design
  34. 34. Conceptual Design
  35. 35. Conceptual Design
  36. 36. Conceptual Design
  37. 37. Conceptual Design
  38. 38. Conceptual Design
  39. 39. PROCESS – FUNDRAISING PERIOD
  40. 40. • Need to complete fundraising for Change and Commitment Campaign• Original program called for $8-$10 million building – Campaign & alumni do not support this amount – Scope & resultant cost reductions needed – Work with IKM & Construction Manager (Tedco) to achieve reductions – Final Project Cost $7.3 millionFundraising
  41. 41. Fundraising
  42. 42. Fundraising
  43. 43. PROCESS – DESIGN TRANSFORMATION
  44. 44. Design – Functional Program – Lower Level
  45. 45. Design – Functional Program – Lower Level
  46. 46. Design – Functional Program – Lower Level
  47. 47. Design – Functional Program – Lower Level
  48. 48. Design – Functional Program – Main Level
  49. 49. Design – Functional Program – Main Level
  50. 50. Design – Functional Program – Second Level
  51. 51. Design – Functional Program – Second Level
  52. 52. Design – Functional Program – Second Level
  53. 53. Design – Functional Program – Exterior Space
  54. 54. Design – Accessibility
  55. 55. Design – Accessibility
  56. 56. Design – Flexibility
  57. 57. Design – Flexibility
  58. 58. Design – Exterior Envelop
  59. 59. • Bring systems up to code• Energy efficiency• Minimize impact to architecture• Provide sophisticated A/V• Support an efficient work environment Design – MEP Imperatives
  60. 60. Design – Building Appearance
  61. 61. Design – Building Appearance
  62. 62. • Early Estimate• Value Modifications• CM analyses throughout design• Consistent teamwork to identify opportunitiesDesign Cost Controls
  63. 63. OUTCOME
  64. 64. • New (34 ton) Air cooled chilled water generation• New High Efficiency condensing boilers• New High Efficiency Hot water heaters• Architectural Wall Heaters• Quiet air distribution systems• Snow melt systemFinal Product – MEP Infrastructure HVAC
  65. 65. Outcome– MEP Infrastructure HVAC
  66. 66. Outcome– MEP Infrastructure
  67. 67. • New toilet rooms• Kitchen/Food preparation area• All new sprinkler systemOutcome – Plumbing/Fire Protection Infrastructure
  68. 68. Outcome– Plumbing/Fire Protection Infrastructure
  69. 69. • New Electrical Service• Efficient lighting for offices• Specialty lights for Ballroom• New telephone system• Cable for Data/Voice and specialty requirements• Transformer and generator housed in adjacent student housing and were sized to support Carnegie Renovation/Addition Outcome – Electrical/Data
  70. 70. Outcome – Electrical/Data
  71. 71. Outcome
  72. 72. Outcome
  73. 73. Outcome
  74. 74. Outcome
  75. 75. Outcome
  76. 76. Outcome
  77. 77. Outcome
  78. 78. Outcome
  79. 79. Outcome
  80. 80. Outcome
  81. 81. Outcome
  82. 82. Outcome
  83. 83. • Wonderful venue at the front door to the community & campus • Modern, professional office for Institutional Advancement – Fully functional building for hosting campus & community events – Easy to access – Great for receptions – nice décor & amenities – Comfortable HVAC system – Full multi-media presentation capabilitiesOutcome – Impact to GCC
  84. 84. • Historical Buildings are a valuable asset to any institution • Transformation can be achieved through clear, direct goals and objectives • Cost effective solutions are available • Adaptive Reuse can be a tool to leverage the asset to new and better purpose.Summary
  85. 85. QUESTIONS
  86. 86. architecture planning interior designFor more information visit: www.ikminc.comConnect with us:

×