Picture Lake Geneva, Switzerland Surrounded by the Alps 20°C mean temperature in summer Annual snow fall – 30in Site Context.

Picture

•Lake Geneva, Switzerland

•Surrounded by the Alps

•20°C mean temperature in summer

•Annual snow fall – 30in

Site Context

•10,000 sq. ft. footprint

•Flat site

•Excellent gravel

•Clear view to the lake

•Easily accessible by two roads

Site Analysis

Topsoil

Good gravel

Water table

Lake Geneva

ADesign Genesis

AArchitectural Layout

AArchitectural Layout

AArchitectural Layout

A

Reflective Glass Façade System

EIFS Cladding Exterior Cladding

3D Views

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000A

rea

(sq

. ft.

)

DesiredActual

AProgram Analysis

Structural SystemOverview

Picture

ELive loads Corridor 1st floor (classrooms) 5 kN/m2Auditorium 5 kN/m2Auditorium with fixed seating 4 kN/m2Classroom, seminar room, lab, office 3 kN/m2

Snow 0.75 kN/m2

Wind 0.9 kN/m2

Earthquake max. 0.05% of gravity loads

1k

1 kN/m2 = 20.48 lb/sf

1 m = 3.28 ft

Structural SystemFoundation

Retaining wall Waterproofing

Foundation

Groundwater Table

Picture

E

Structural SystemWalls and Columns

Picture

E

D=14mm

D=10mm

Structural SystemAuditorium

Picture

E

Structural SystemAuditorium

Picture

E

Structural SystemAuditorium

Picture

E

Structural SystemConcrete Slabs

Picture

EMax. deflection –15.7mm

Structural SystemLateral Load Resisting System

Picture

E

Structural SystemLateral Load Resisting System

Picture

E

Shearwall:

• Budget - $5.5M

• Timeline – 1 year

• Faster

• Cheaper

• Life cycle cost savings

Construction IssuesObjectives

Picture

C

• Bonus double access roads

• Can divert traffic if needed and use the other side of the road

• Mobile crane

Construction IssuesSite Plan

Picture

C

Capacity -1.54cubic meter.

Boom – 54m

Based on capacity and availability

Reach curve

Pump Truck Hauling Truck

Construction IssuesEquipment

Picture

C

Construction IssuesSequencing

C

Mar 1, 2015

Dec 13,2015

May 4, 2015Sep 27,2015

StartSubstructure

complete

End

Framing complete

Construction IssuesSchedule Milestones

Picture

C

• Project Duration – 9 months

• Resource allocation considered

• Snow season- December 15th to February 15th

• Steel procurement lead time

Construction IssuesSchedule Analysis

Picture

C

COST BREAKDOWN

3%

18%

12%

2%18%2%

3% 2%40%

Foundation

Substructure

Superstructure

Exterior Closure

Roofing

Interiors

Conveying

MEP

SpecialConstruction

Total Project Cost = $5.29 M (3.38 M in 2001)

Construction IssuesCost Estimate

Picture

C

EIFS vs Concrete Panels:

EIFS Concrete

•$ 22.5 per sf

•Fast to erect

•Good thermal insulation and immune to cracking

$25 per sf

Impacts schedule

Sturdy but is labor intensive

Construction IssuesCost Analysis

Picture

C

Concerns

• Head Room – Floor to floor heights?

• Location of MEP room

• Choice of a centralized vs distributed system

Construction IssuesMEP Issues

Picture

C

• Cores used for risers with diameter of 24”

• Distribution at center brings used air down

• Fresh air distributed through the lateral cores.

• Duct sizes

• typical rooms 14”

• auditorium 18”

Construction IssuesMEP Design

Picture

C

Raised Floor System – Benefits and Disadvantages

• Improved efficiency

• More effective

• Allows great deal of flexibility

• 1.25 times cost of conventional system

Construction IssuesFloor Systems Comparison

Picture

C

C

A

E

Case 1: Floor heights iteration

Team Dynamics

A E C

C

A

E

Case 1: Floor heights iteration

Team Dynamics

A E C

C

A

E

Case 1: Floor heights iteration

Team Dynamics

A E C

C

A

E

Case 1: Floor heights iteration

Team Dynamics

A E C

Case 2: Mechanical Room Location

Team Dynamics

A E C

Team Process

A E C

Working together, we were able to design a building that:• Closely meets the program requirements• Functions well as a learning facility• Responds to the site• Has a fairly low-life cycle cost• Is adaptable to meet changing needs

Conclusion

A E C

• Early design commitments• Early consideration of MEP and structural systems • Cross-disciplinary design contribution• Synchronous communication• Common AutoCAD drawing

Lessons Learned

A E C

Renate Fruchter, Stanford University

Mike Martin, U.C. Berkeley

Humberto Cavalli, U.C. Berkeley

David Bendet, MBT Architects

Hansjörg Baumann, BauIng AG, Switzerland

Bob Tatum, Stanford University

James Bartone, Nielsen Dillingham

Eric Horn, Webcor Builders

Acknowledgements

A E C