This week we have had initial contact with Hannah Wright and Nigel Cunnings, collecting the information, plans, existing accommodation schedule and Registry Office Brief.
When working through the documents with Steven, brainstorming as a pair and trying to establish an initial brief it was apparent that many questions were thrown into the mix by the information we already had.
A brief for a potential Fire Station in Thame was put together in 2008 for no specific site, and the ambitions of this project were far reaching; for a joint training centre for Bucks and Milton Keynes, a 900sqm drill yard and a suitable location on the Thame ring road with possibility of future expansion.
The brief itself was really helpful, however it raised the questions of whether the site on Greyhound Lane could ever fulfill all of these requirements both in site size and location.
We drew up a rough diagram of the size of each area of the programme onto the site plan to investigate this further but it is clear that we need to establish with the stakeholder and Oxfordshire County Council which parts are still relevant on a tighter site.
The brief for the new Fire Station is for a 2 fire appliance station (Fire Engines). This needs to be combined with the existing Police Station on the site, however it is unclear what proportion of the current car park behind the Police Station can be used, and to what level the services can share accommodation.
Me and Steven have drawn up a list of questions to put to the stakeholders at the meeting on the 12/10/10 at the Police Station to try to resolve some of the issues surrounding the brief, and establish what the current needs of both services are when potentially sharing the site.
1. Does the Greyhound Lane site satisfy conditions for site to access to ring road.
2. Are the personnel no. still: 28 people, 20 car spaces, 10 cycle spaces
3. Is there a joint training provision with Bucks/Milton Keynes, still required - including the need for a covered parking facility - site is tighter than originally proposed
4. Scope for potential expansion of site (implications of this)
5. Drill yard 900sqm - still required on smaller site?
6. 3 storey tower - still needed?
7. Police station - how much of site can be taken over by fire station?
8. Is there a min provision for parking for police station?
No. using car park at present?
No. using car park at present?
9. What can be shared? – pose to client asking what their thoughts are.
Meeting rooms?
Common rooms?
Changing & shower facilities
Briefing room
10. Plans for existing structures i.e. the sheds to rear.
11. Roads - access
What can/can't work?
How many entrances & exits?
How secure does each type need to be?
12. Overlap between emergency & routine – entrances and access of vehicles
13. What do/don't they want? – Is there anything new that the scheme must require.
We look forward to having the meeting to answer some questions and allow us to embark on drafting the brief and exploring the relationship between the two co-located services.
