Newspaper Page Text
Page
Jlagpolc iHiganinc
October 30, 1991
W. M. Overend looks for...
Answers to the Polshek problem — part 1
The past few months have seen a lot of controversy over
the proposed Athens/Clarke County civic center. The
original design scheme, provided by the New York firm of
Polshek and Partners, has been attacked for a lot of
reasons. Many people feel that the facade doesn’t fit in with
other downtown structures. There are questions as to the
utility of the design as a civic/convention center. A lot of
people wonder if the community even needs such a facility.
What it all boils to is a bunch of questions. Questions
about the Classic Center Authority, questions about Pol
shek and partners, questions about alternate designs, lots
of questions and very little in the way of answers.
Client-firm relationship
Several reputable Atlanta firms nofassoci-
ated with this project stressed the importance
of communication in a client-firm relationship
as one of "give and take’ If an architect or firm
under contract designs something that the
client is not happy with, it is the firm's respon
sibility to alter that design until the client is
happy. Does the Authority know this? They
say they do. Chairman and spokesman(other
Authority members will not answer
questions)Larry Blount has repeatedly made
allusions to modifications in the original Pol
shek design. Apparently some minor revi
sions have been made.
Tim Hartung, a spokesman for the Polshek
firm, claims that there was no discussion
between the authority and the firm about
Polshek II. No questions asked, nothing
Sources at Kresscox indicate nearly the same “silent treat
ment" — unreturned phone calls, unanswered letters, etc.
When representatives from Kresscox came to Athens with
extensive plans and a model, all at their own expense, the
only member of the Authority to come and talk to them was
Larry Blount.
According to Blount, the solicitation of additional de
signs was, “an unauthorized action of Gwen O’Looney and
John Barrow," and that those alternate plans were, “never
formally, legally submitted to the commission." However,
the commission voted that the Authority should examine all
four designs and recommend (m a meeting on May 7).
The Authority was charged with reviewi ng plans submit
ted by Chapman Coyle Chapman, Kresscox Associates,
and a new Polshek plan and compare them with each other
and the original Polshek design. Polshek I was selected in
the end.
Blount asserts that the charge of the Authority was to
pick a design within a certain budget, and that the only one
of the four which met that budget was Polshek I. That
answer makes sense, but the facts undermine the logic.
Cost Analysis
Hardin Management company was called in to do a
cost analysis of each of the three newschemes, but not the
original Polshek. Why not? Hardin is a construction firm.
According to John O’Hara, the Hardin executive in charge
of the project, the job was done for “almost nothing"
because they want to have a chance to bid on the construc
tion contracts once it’s time to build. They felt that for them
to look at all the information that had already been gathered
on Polshek I, which includes two previous cost estimates
would give them an unfair advantage over other construc
tion firms that might wish to bid.
If there is already such ample cost information on
Polshek I, and there does seem to be, submitting limited
information to Hardin would give the Authority a control
element to gage the results of Hardin’s evaluation of the
other plans. Even O’Hara agrees that it would have been a
prudent evaluation tool for the Authority to help with judging
the effectiveness of the Hardin estimates and in making it’s
final decisions. He also pointed out that it might be a good
idea to update the figures on Polshek I, considering that the
last evaluation was done almost three years ago.
And yet... it wasn't done. Blount claims The Authority felt
that the additional cost of having Polshek I re-estimated
was not warranted. But if O’Hara’s implication was that the
Authority got a deal on the job, what extra expense would
there be? Blount claims that it was contracted at full price,
and only the three new designs were evaluated. Then all
four were compared. In these evaluations, cost was a key
•ssue. In an Athens Banner-Herald article dated May 12,
Blount explained the three angles from which these plans
would be looked at. The first wold be cost — could it be
done for $17 million?
Blount now asserts that that was why Polshek I was re
chosen. It was the only design that fell within the budget
Two problems: One, by my figures, Polshek I doesn’t fall
within the budget. Let’s examine(get out your calculators,
folks). Polshek I calls for 140,000 square feet at a cost of
$124 per square foot. Do the math and that comes to
$17,360,000.
That’s a bit over. It’s also more expensive than Kresscox
(Hardin estimate: $17,352,427) Chapman Coyle
Chapman(Hardin estimate: $17,155,668). Two, Polshek II
was estimated at $16.4 million. That definitely falls under
the $17 million budget.
Suppose the above figures are mistaken and
the Polshek I scheme does come in at $ 17 million
Will it actually get built for that amount? Nothing
speaks better than past experience.
The Jacob K. Javits Convention Center is
located in New York City. Polshek did all the
major dt^qn work for this facility in 1979. They
(the Polshek firm) like to talk about this project
because it’s very similar to the proposed Civic
Center. I called the man in charge of this facility
Ben Larroza, and asked him about the costs and
such. He said it had been a long time since it had
been built and that he doubted if anybody even
remembered any detailed information on the
construction. When I asked him if he knew if the
project went over-budget, he laughed so hard he
nearly dropped the phone and managed one
word,
"Definitely. Way over budget"
Stone slabs and fill dirt
One of the reasons Authority chairman Larry Blount
gave for retaining The Polshek firm was their understanding
of the restrictions the site of the proposed civic center
poses to any design. These restrictions basically consist
of a sharp downward slope from Thomas St. to Foundry St
and a huge slab of granite that supposedly lies just under
the topsoil on a major part of the site. Construction of the
new Banner-Herald building adjacent to the proposed site
exposed this problem. According to Blount, the Polshek
firm has the best knowledge of this "slab" and this was one
reason to stick with Polshek and not explore options from
other firms. That’s all well and good, except for the fact that
the Polshek plans (both I and II) are the only designs that
would require dealing with this "slab problem." Both the
other leading designs submitted this summer would utilize
fill dirt which would eliminate this problem.
The presence of this "slab" also raises the question of
whether this site is even appropriate for such a building,
and whether Polshek knows what it’s doing by having the
structure conform to the slope of the land. These questions
HAPPY HOUR
and
SPECIALS
Mon. thru Thurs.
12 Flavors
of Margaritas
— or —
Invent Your Own!
364 E. Broad Street
Athens, Georgia
When you Need
A Drink
Across from the C&S Bank on n. Lumpkin
Call Your Commissioners
and let them know how you feel!
THE GOVERNMENT IS YOURS
Tal DuVall *549-1349 Charles Carter • 543-9 755
Miriam Moore * 548-0329 Lmny Bailey • 546-9C13
John Barrow • 353-6584 Hugh Logan ♦ 543-4873
Marilyn Farmer • 548-2385 Cardee Kilpatrick • 548-2023
Ken Jordan • 549-5435 Tom Chasteen • 549-2655