.
Feedback

Architect's 'Schematic Mistakes' Led to Millions in Overrun Costs

Miscalculations in cost estimates during the schematic design stage for Southington's middle school renovation project led to $4.15 million in cost increases and threatens to force the first re-referendum in town history.

After cost overruns projected at nearly $7 million above expected put the Southington middle school renovation project in jeopardy last week, members of the committee demanded answers from architect Fletcher Thompson regarding what led to the costs.

The costs were explained Tuesday – and the answers have left members of the Middle School Building Committee angry and searching for answers.


Dan Casinelli, a principal with Fletcher Thompson, told the committee Tuesday afternoon that a miscalculation in square footage and a mistake which left required firewalls out of the calculations pushed costs up by $4.15 million on the way to increasing overrun costs from 2 percent to nearly 10 percent.

“I’m both upset and disappointed once again,” said Christopher Palmieri, member of the building committee and the Minority Leader on the Town Council. “To say that (Fletcher Thompson) didn’t know about a $1.9 million firewall that was required by code before everything.

“The code was not changed and we never heard about it. To hear it only now at this meeting, I don’t know how something that significant was not told to us ahead of time.”

Let Patch save you time. Get great local stories like this delivered right to your inbox or smartphone every day with our free newsletter. Simple, fast sign-up here.

Palmieri and committee member Vern Chanski, criticized the work by Fletcher Thompson as “incomplete” and “unprofessional” and said the mistakes, along with exponential costs for PCB remediation, have caused delays and frustrations in the attempted renovation of DePaolo Middle School and Kennedy Middle School.

Aside from simply not calculating in firewall costs, Casinelli said the schematic design called for 135,000 square feet at each school, 6,000 square feet short of the actual blueprint designs. This led to a $2.25 million increase in overrun costs.

“The firm that was telling us this could definitely be done for $85 million is now telling us they missed all these items. And today we heard it will take a third year to complete,” Palmieri said. “The issues now are completely on backs of professionals; to give us this level of misinformation is completely unacceptable and unprofessional.”

It’s been a trying last three weeks for members of the building committee, who were informed that PCBs in the school had “leeched” into other materials, requiring remediation costs of at least $6 million beyond the budgeted $2.8 million.

The remediation changes also mean at least one extra year of construction to complete the project, even if students were relocated during work at each school.

To make matters worse, this is a “best case scenario.” If the federal Environmental Protection Agency decides that a sealed vapor wall also must be removed, it would lead to $14 million in costs above anticipated.

Environmentalist Jim Twitchell, of Hygenix, Inc., believes a deal will be reached, however, for the lower cost and the town is currently working with the EPA to find a solution.

But the issue remains - where will the money for the existing problems now come from?

The projected costs provided Tuesday by Fletcher Thompson revealed that even after nearly $11 million in “value engineering savings” found through the elimination of design aspects that would not compromise educational specifications or space.

The committee is now “tapped out” on what could be value engineered and to have cut so much this early in the project, committee member and Board of Education Chairman Brian Goralski expressed frustration over having to make so many cuts this early in the project.

“We are value engineering big chunks,” Goralski said Tuesday. “We’ve done so much, it is getting to point where compromising potential quality of the project.”

“The unforeseen environmental concerns really are what we are dealing with and now it is a piece we are still addressing. In my mind, we’ve already adjusted with reasonable value engineering. My concern now is with the integrity of the project.”

Goralski said he’s also concerned that the committee isn’t just battling misinformation from Fletcher Thompson either, but from public officials through email as well.

Ed Pocock Jr., chairman of the building committee, said there are challenges left to face as the project remains at least $4.38 million over budget - $12.15 million if vapor walls have to be removed – and Casinelli told the committee Tuesday that there isn’t anything left that could be valued out of the project without affecting education specifications.

These specifications are required to get maximum state funding, otherwise the town could be responsible for a larger portion of the bill.

“There’s nothing left we could do with costs that wouldn’t affect the specs,” Casinelli said.

The project still needs to go out to bid and in the past, these have come in lower than the final development design costs, but if this does not provide the savings the town is looking for, Pocock and Southington Town Attorney Mark Sciota said the community could be facing the possibility of a re-referendum.

Sciota told members of the Town Council Tuesday night that it would be the most likely scenario right now and although the town has a sizeable contingency for the project, it’s not enough to make up the $4.38 million.

“The town of Southington has never done this, never had to go to re-referendum on a project,” Sciota said. “This would be the first.”

“What worries me is at significant overruns now and we haven’t even started this project yet,” Councilwoman Cheryl Lounsbury said.

Make sure to like Southington Patch on Facebook or follow on Twitter for breaking news, daily updates and more!

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Southington Patch? Find your Local Patch »

T Ruth Eshardtecumbay November 14, 2012 at 11:33 am
“The firm that was telling us this could definitely be done for $85 million is now telling us they missed all these items. And today we heard it will take a third year to complete,” Palmieri said. “The issues now are completely on backs of professionals; to give us this level of misinformation is completely unacceptable and unprofessional.”
No, actually they are just a convenient whippin' boy, Chris. $4 million, while a lot, pales in comparison to the unneeded frills the Committee put in the original design and ignoring toxic waste that needed to be cleaned up. And the stage for that was set by a school board years ago that ignored an oil spill, do nothing, and did it's best to cover it up. That last sheboggle is something this board is more than willing to do as well -- we haven't heard much of that one any more, have we? Smoke and mirrors, folks, and the re-referendum with this crowd will be as much a flim-flam as the last one -- guaranteed! But it will be your chance to vote it down!
Kermit J November 14, 2012 at 11:55 am
“'The town of Southington has never done this, never had to go to re-referendum on a project,' Sciota said. 'This would be the first.'”
Welp, that's what I like about Eddie and the Pocockers -- always breaking new ground! “'What worries me is at significant overruns now and we haven’t even started this project yet,' Councilwoman Cheryl Lounsbury said." Wow, now there's a nuclear physics assessment! Deeper still, Cheryl, what should worry the taxpayers is all the other bamboozles the Republicans have rammed through -- waiting quietly to explode; that's what should worry.
Batiste Zgombickq November 14, 2012 at 02:07 pm
Why isn't the architect being asked to pay for the mistakes? You hire a professional for a reason- they are SUPPOSED to know the laws surrounding these types of projects and they certainly should know how to add numbers!!! I think they should be held accountable via their check books-they should absorb the costs associated with their mistakes. Natural consequences- isn't this what we teach our kids?
S10 November 14, 2012 at 06:22 pm
I have never heaard of any such thing as "schematic mistakes" before in the design process. Schematic Design is mearly one of the initial phases in the process and during the Design Development phase the initial schema (or concept) can change quite a bit. This article is not very well written and I do not believe that it clearly explains what happened. This is what is called the "finger-pointing" part of the construction when the team should be working towards solutions rather that blaming.
S10 November 14, 2012 at 06:29 pm
It sounds as though the 85 million was an initial budget. Were any more spaces (rooms), equipment or features added to the initial building program (verbal description of what was required in the addition and renovations)? The article states that the schematic designs showed 135,000 sf for DMS and 135,000 sf for KMS on the schematics and states that after Design Development both schools had an increase of 3,000 sq ft totaling 6,000 sq ft. Additional spaces must have been added to the program for some reason. Where these added at the request of the building committee or where they a result of the architects analyses of the State DOE credits program. Sometimes adding items in this system actually results in saving a School District money if the items added are specified in accordance to the booklet which the CT State DOE issues. This is only about a 4% increase in sqft. AutoCAD systems more acuratly than ever in the past computer generate the areas of irrugular shaped spaces. A contingency of 10% is typical in all Design Estimates. And, the Estimate needs to be periodically updated as the process evolves. The initial proposed budget is not the final and often after bids come in drawings need to be modified the bring the project into budget. A Design Estimate should not be confused with a Job Estmate that a Contractor who will be doing the work for a job provided or a Bid.(Cont.)
S10 November 14, 2012 at 06:43 pm
CAD systems more acuratly than ever in the past computer generate the calculated areas of irrugular shaped spaces. A contingency of 10% is typical in all Design Estimates. And, the Estimate needs A Design Estimate is mearly an educated projection of what a project is thought may cost but it is realised that due to a number of constantly changing factors that an Architect can only provide the best educated future cost of a project based on published construction data. Also, Life Safety Codes are continually being updated and renewed. Additionally the Code is also up some extent to the Fire Official having authority over the project. Not all officials reviewing a set of construction documents will apply the CODE in exactly the same manner. The details of this typically are not ironed out until the Design Documentation phase. I hope this helps. And remember if the cost is too high then the scope or the quality need to be adjusted to bring the project into budget. Or the project can be phased or in this case since their are two separate buildings the entire project can be phased to only construct the additions and renovations to one school at a time.
Tony Casale November 15, 2012 at 02:10 am
What a joke, just for the record, the democrats on the town council voted against this firm, how's it looking now, turf, north center school, lifetime benifits for the former town manager, a middle school project that's likely to run 12 million over budget, I can't afford this can you?
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Shar Mc C June 16, 2013 at 07:43 am
Where in Southington did you see the bear?
JChar June 16, 2013 at 07:28 pm
Marion Avenue on Saturday