IN Brief:
- King’s School opened the £5m Forster Pavilion in September 2026; its construction details were reported in November.
- Modulek delivered approximately 1,000 square metres of accommodation through 24 modules, with five months of site activity.
- Holiday-period demolition and module deliveries helped coordinate a nine-month programme around an occupied school.
Modulek has provided new construction details for the £5m Forster Pavilion at The King’s School in Macclesfield, where 24 factory-built modules were used to complete a two-storey sports and events building. The school opened the pavilion in September 2026; the November project account explains how the modular design, delivery sequence, and construction compound were adapted to a live education campus.
The pavilion provides approximately 1,000 square metres of space, including changing rooms below a hospitality and function area. Rising construction costs had pushed the original conventional-build proposal beyond the school’s remaining budget, prompting a revised modular design. The school retained features including the wraparound balcony and brick appearance, while Modulek changed the building method and introduced an overhanging roof detail.
The reported programme lasted nine months, with five months of work on site. The difference between those durations does not provide a measured factory production time, because design, procurement, demolition, off-site manufacture, and site works can overlap. Existing changing rooms were demolished during the Easter holiday, and the modules were delivered in another school holiday period to limit clashes with teaching, transport, and sports activities.
Moving 24 prefabricated units onto an occupied campus requires controlled delivery routes, temporary storage and lifting areas, and a sequence that keeps components accessible as installation proceeds. The units must be placed and joined before their structure, building services, and weather protection function as one completed building. Working beside a school adds safeguarding and access restrictions that would not arise in the same form on a vacant site.
Modulek used a segregated compound, anti-climb fencing, and coordinated deliveries to separate construction traffic from pupils and other campus users. Vehicles avoided school drop-off and collection periods, while personnel working on site had completed DBS checks. Extended hours and weekend work helped fit the installation and finishing sequence around the academic timetable. These were actual project controls, rather than a claim that modular buildings can always be installed without disruption.
The ground floor provides two large and two smaller pupil changing rooms, with showers serving up to 200 pupils, alongside five individual facilities for staff and match officials. Above, a first-floor function area provides a flexible space for approximately 100 people, supported by meeting rooms, a commercial kitchen, serving facilities, and washrooms. The school’s own earlier opening account identifies a 250-square-metre hospitality suite and a wraparound balcony overlooking sports pitches.
The finished building has external brick finishes and a balcony that align it visually with the wider campus. Achieving that appearance through modular construction requires the interfaces between units to accommodate cladding, roof junctions, and building services once the sections are assembled. The public project account does not specify the individual structural connections or waterproofing details, so the completed appearance should not be treated as evidence for a particular proprietary jointing system.
Modulek’s contribution combined factory fabrication with work performed on the school grounds. The two methods were not mutually exclusive: site preparation, demolition, foundations, service connections, and finishing work remained part of delivery. Factory-made units allowed the main accommodation to be brought to site in sections, while the revised design kept the core room functions and external features the school had originally requested.
The decision to remove the former changing rooms during a school holiday reduced a period of direct disruption, but it did not eliminate construction activity during term. The five-month site programme still required barriers, agreed routes, and carefully timed vehicle movements. The school had confirmed the pavilion’s opening on 10 September, so the November information documents the completed construction process rather than a new handover or award.
Neither the school nor Modulek has published a like-for-like assessment of embodied carbon, labour hours, material waste, or the cost difference against the discarded conventional scheme. The £5m figure is the total reported building investment, not a quantified saving from off-site manufacture. The claim of faster delivery is consistent with the project’s sequence, but measuring its advantage would require an equivalent design, scope, and start date for the alternative method.
The Forster Pavilion forms the final part of the school’s wider campus development and was funded through a substantial legacy from former pupil Roy Forster. Its ground-level accommodation supports daily school sport, while the upper hospitality spaces are intended for events and community use. These different functions require coordination between access routes, changing capacity, catering equipment, and the structural arrangement of the two-storey building.
Pupils began using the building in September after a programme organised around holiday access and strict separation between school operations and construction work. Modulek retained the core rooms and external features of the earlier design while changing the manufacturing and installation approach to meet the available budget. The project’s reported nine months overall and five months on site describe that delivery sequence, although no quantified comparison with the rejected conventional option has been released.
