John Stroud:
"“When you first came before us, we were unanimous is saying that we wanted to see a historic design for this building,” Councilman Todd Leahy said of the library project. “Unfortunately, I don't see it here...."
(Read more? Click title)
The commentary on this one will be very interesting.
Gamba and Leahy are correct. But then again, it should be no surprise given the architects on the project. The end results we've seen all along are their style. And they have the rep in the industry of pretty fiercely protecting that style, regardless of what the client wants. That statement can be backed up simply by doing a project check on them.
Mayor Steckler is correct. The folks are fed up with these kinds of delays. Especially over the library. What's noteworthy is that the Mayor somehow left out the two years worth of delays that council put the library district through when the library first came to the city and expressed their desire for partnership. He also quickly forgot the uncalled for and highly inappropriate reprimanding done by old council, especially former Mayor Christensen and Councilman Sturges when the library showed the backbone via Charlie Wilman to stand up to our council and point out that they would be just as happy in The Meadows. Now that, is what they folks are most likely to get up in arms about now. Not the delays that Leahy and Gamba are rightfully taking now.
It does look like a warehouse and the design stands out like a sore thumb. We may be forced by the city's lack of design foresight to live with the look of The Ghettos development in West Glenwood, but there is no way we should be stuck with similar style in the heart of downtown.
Besides, Gamba is correct. Anyone in design or construction can see the easy fixes. The real problem is obvious. The city has not told the architects who's really in charge.
And that is probably the direction that at least the construction set is going to follow in commentary. This conversation of direction to architects should have been done a few years ago in due diligence. This should never have gotten this far and that is not a city problem or fault.
It is a construction management issue.
The issue of 'why' we have these kinds of delays happening so often in our city process is another bit of angst that has been around for many a year. The problem is how the council forces these projects to go through their twice per month meetings. None of our codes coordinate with each other, building and planning is not in tune with city council and never has been. To jam these kinds of detail oriented discussions into a free-for-all and 'mandatory' performance in front of council twice per month, on an already filled agenda is inadequate. There's a reason that the professional and reputable construction industry spends more time in pre-build and planning stages than in the actual building itself.
That is where all the problems are dealt with and all decisions are made. That end result is what goes out to public scrutiny. Not the cart before the horse.
With that said, a special thank you goes out to Todd Leahy and Mike Gamba for doing their jobs. Which is to speak up for the folks. The buzz around has been that the design of both buildings is 'ugly'. How nice it is to finally have 'construction guys' who know what they're seeing, what they're doing and what it takes to build sitting up on that council dais.
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
5 comments:
Personally, watching Leahy and Gamba the other night, I felt a sense of being reassured and secure that we'll never be burdened again with things like back-in parking, "calming" and car-killers on Midland Ave and developments like the Ghettos ever again.
If they would fix their process we'd just think never again waste $200,000 on architects like the ones that gave us 7th and Cooper aka SeaWorld. So, how much are all the redo's costing us on the library and parking structure? Wouldn't just letting go of an ages old system of command performances in front of council and putting some smarter review processes in place be a lot cheaper?
Get some more like Leahy and Gamba and we'll never see a small business like Gran Farnum have to be forced to pay $100K for a simple tenant buildout.
Exactly, Nanny.
This happens way too often in construction. Usually, as you've pointed out in comments before, it comes from an owner of a custom build that thinks nothing of running over the top of the project making diva demands and then not paying for them.
There's no difference in a public build than a private build.
The job of the owner, the architects and engineers, the builder and trades is to bid the project according to the specs that are going to be as final. Anytime you let any of those individuals out of the gate with some vague notion of where they're supposed to go, you've just sunk your project into back charging and over budget. The guarantee at that point is that somebody, if not many, are going to be disappointed.
The problem Leahy and Gamba bucked the other night is obvious. It's management and administration. Those architects work for the library district, the library district must adhere to development codes and under oversight of the entity that issues the permits and approvals.
How can we expect the library district, after the ridiculous hoops city council put them through for years on location and funding, to know after the fact what the city wants to see? The building done now fits in at the Meadows. As unfortunate in design as the Meadows is. Let's not forget that debacle under city council oversight.
How can we expect the library district to wait around for years and not be putting the architect and design team to work?
How can we expect the architect and design team to draw to a non-existing design plan because they don't know where they are going to be building, codes that are all over the map and strangled by the politics in this town being city admin'd by a manager and attorney that never are seen walking among the people and no direction for final budget or owner desires?
Remember Tresi's $80,000 "well, I didn't know the architects would charge us for their time" on South Bridge? In the same year we had to not give food and shelter to the homeless because the tourism grant fund was run dry? That may have been county but the point is the same.
Steckler is right. Council looks bad on this one. The question is why is that such a surprise to him?
Watching Gamba Leahy the other night told me that they shouldn't be subjected to the displeasure pulpit of Bershyni or the anger of Steckler. Both of those esteemed leaders were big factors in the whole circus this library expansion has been from a city admin point.
Say no to anybody who tries to get term limit extensions for Dave. Especially say it to Dave. This schmooze lately trying to court everybody over here on the dark side is transparent. Headed toward a decade of not getting the infrastructure of our local government fixed is enough time.
The good news is that we only have a little less than a year before we see a run on city chambers with more stepping up that know the people like Leahy and Gamba do.
Plenty of time for Mayor Matt to flip the switch and let the light in that what he really needs to be focused on is what's wrong in the heart and core of his city.
There's nothing wrong with Leahy and Gamba.
Post a Comment