It is amazing how you felt that you had to point out that after owing artist and the landlord money that Joe Rowand was not sweating. This erroneous and hurtful comment was meant to futher editorialize your view: Pretty sleazy reporting. You did not say that he was there since 10am that morning and worked tirelessly getting this auction ready, only to see his important work reduced to nomore than the five and dime store.
If you knew how distraught he was and how hurt he was at being in this position with his artist and the 37 yr.old gallery, your one sided slant would be more compassionate or at least even handed.
Maybe one day you can write about the huge risk he took including putting everything he ownes, his home and art up as a guarranty so he could move to Durham and provide his artists with great gallery. Maybe you could tell about all the promises that were made by the landlord andothers to get Somerhill to Durham. What happened??? You implied it was bad luck, mismanagement or denial. Really? Do some homework.
Great hatchet job on someone that really tried to I know that make Durham work. If you have never been in a situation like Somerhill is facing now, you are lucky.
This economy has really hurt everyone and the pain is felt everywhere. Since I am veryfamilar with this situation, Joe put everything (and I mean everything)he had into this Durham move and listened to everyone about how successful he would be only to watch all the promises from landlords andlenders disappear.
Shame on you and Sanford for implying dishonesty. This has hurt everyone.
Since when is having a 4,500 sq.ft. house(a mansion????give me a break) and $75,000 of artwork, and a $18,000 corvette (given to Joe from his brothers estate)opulent?
This is sentational and slimey reporting
Get the story right. Do your homework.
Once again Matt your bias has blinded you to the facts. Just because one assigns a construction manager at risk does not mean that there is no competitive bid process. On the contrary, THe DPAC issued 52 separate bid packages that required at least 3 bidders and were contracted per state statue. One reason for going well outside the realm of a traditional public bid process is that the City of Durham wanted to make sure that disadvantaged business were allowed to bid and in fact required the project to meet a certain percentage of the total project cost to preformed by local and minority owned companies. In addition, the City also required a certain percentage of the contracts to use work force development workers that in some cases required contractors to pick up young workers, provide them with the tools, hardhats and the training to preform the required tasks.
In addition please do a little more research into construction law before you profess certain budget procedures. You are so off base its amazing. Great writing though. I really liked your sentence structure.
That what your not getting. There are no cost over runs. The GMP is meant to change as the contingency is spent. That is legally the only way to spend it...that is to increase the GMP and issue change orders (which in this case is not a bad word) for the work to be done.
Let me repeat my self. There are no cost over runs. Every single penny of the costs were accounted for either as budgeted items outside the GMP or budgeted contingencies that were reassigned as new work on top of the base contract. These are not cost over runs.
Here is a simple example. The base bid (GMP) had painted Sheet rock and concrete floors in the lobby and the hall. Because we did not use the contingencys for rock and other problems( Thanks to the City for being conservative), we had extra money. We now have carpet and wood walls. Now, how can you call this a cost over run and how in the world could anyone imply this is the responsibility of Skanska. Lets get real.
Shame on you for not doing your homework. You insinuated that the project has exceeded its projected budget by $3.7M dollars. Where did that come from. As the developer and the architect, it was my responsibility to watch over the budget and to spend the assigned monies wisely. Please see the original budget that had assigned a budget for fixtures and furniture and equipment of roughly $1.4M and additional contingencies of over $2m for construction issues, rock, etc. As these contingencies were spent and the fixture, furniture and equipment were purchased, those funds were transferred to the GMP budget which is normal and standard business practice, hence your perception of being over budget. Because of the conservative projections made early on, we were able to add back better finishes like the wood panels without adding money to the overall budget, but increased the GMP with Skanska.
Yes there were things I wish we had more funds for, but we were able to provide the citizens of Durham with a top knotch performing arts center. We had a certain amount of money and thats all we had.
You called me, but you did not report these fact. You seemed determined to throw mud.
Make sure you're signed up so we can inbox you the latest.
Login to choose your subscriptions!
Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation