There's an old joke that inflation allows you to live in a more expensive neigbourhood without moving. According to budget numbers being used to support the demolition of Paul Rudolph's Chorley Elementary, that actually is happening in Middletown, NY.
Heather Yakin, a local reporter who writes the blog 'The Middletown Report' notes that Someone wants to save Chorley:
What is the economic and cultural value of Rudolph's school - which has been deemed eligible for the State and National Historic Register. How much is history worth? First, a little history...
As reported in the July 26, 1964 edition of the Times Herald Record, Peter Barbone - a local architect who met Rudolph when he was a visiting critic at the University of Pennsylvania in 1950 - asked Rudolph to join him in the design of the Orange County Government Center three years previously. As noted in the article,
As illustrated in a letter from Peter Barbone to Rudolph's project manager William Bedford, the original 1964 proposal for Chorley Elementary was estimated to be $1650 per student. A letter from the Chairman of the Building & Grounds Committee addressed to Mr. Barbone reiterated that the building not 'exceed in cost the state reimbursable figure' and the school be 'functional, practical and economical.'
Barbone and Rudolph figured the student population was to be 500 minimum, with the school eventually to accomodate 'close to 1000'. At that rate, the estimated cost to build the school was $1,650,000.00 and was to cover the 'building, site, surveys, architectural and engineering fees, attorney's fees, furniture and equipment, clerk of the works salary, and all miscellaneous expenses.' 'In other words,' notes Barbone in the letter to Rudolph's office, 'it includes everything.' According to records, the price of the 27-acre site was $100,000.
Paul Rudolph supplied a preliminary area and cost estimate in December, 1964 listing the school population as 918 students, with a total project cost of $1,330,000.00.
In a February 4, 1965 presentation (page1, page2) to the Board of Education, Rudolph estimated the cost of the building to be $1,985,321.00.
When completed July 18 1968, the school cost $1,939,690.00 - and included 'site work, construction, mechanicals, carpet, furnishings and equipment for the building including a 27 acre site.' Chorley Elementary was completed on time and under budget according to the Architectural Record at the time.
Rudolph's design, worth $11,155,596.00 in today's dollars (using an adjusted consumer price index at http://www.measuringworth.com/) cannot possibly justify the district's estimate of $35 million dollars to glibly "fix the place up."
The school board's chosen architect - Robertson Strong Apgar Architects - should provide detailed and itemized estimates to the public that justify the cost, using industry-approved (AIA) methods.
The school principal's December, 2008 newsletter stated - before the referendum vote - that "the cost of upgrading the present structure will be comparable to the same amount of money to construct a new building." Later the cost to build a new school was revealed to be $63.5 million dollars. A far cry from what it would cost to renovate Chorley Elementary - let alone rebuild it today from scratch.
According to a 09/26/08 article in the Times Herald-Record, Superintendent Eastwood claimed the building needed $10 million dollars to bring it to current state code. Who's keeping track of this? "This is public money," he (Mr. Eastwood) said. "We wanted to make sure we were spending it properly." In the same article Mr. Eastwood stated "the new building would be less expensive than trying to salvage Chorley." That is some rate of inflation!
How much is history worth? Oscar Wilde observed that a cynic "is a man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing" - which goes a long way to explain Middletown's justification for tearing down Chorley Elementary.
Heather Yakin, a local reporter who writes the blog 'The Middletown Report' notes that Someone wants to save Chorley:
Renovations to fix the place up would cost an estimated $35 million, according to the district. That cost, on top of expansions that would be needed to accommodate an expected boom in the elementary population in the next few years, would be throwing good money after bad, the district believes.Yakin repeats the district's estimate of $35 million to fix the existing school. This number has been used by local School Superintendent Kenneth Eastwood for shock value to justify the demolition of Chorley to build a new facility - but has anyone seen (let alone published) a detailed estimate to back this claim up?
What is the economic and cultural value of Rudolph's school - which has been deemed eligible for the State and National Historic Register. How much is history worth? First, a little history...
As reported in the July 26, 1964 edition of the Times Herald Record, Peter Barbone - a local architect who met Rudolph when he was a visiting critic at the University of Pennsylvania in 1950 - asked Rudolph to join him in the design of the Orange County Government Center three years previously. As noted in the article,
When Barbone decided to to apply in competition with several other architects for the Clemson Park school, he called Rudolph. Rudolph was interested and they applied as associates.Barbone, himself a Middletown resident and graduate of the Middletown school system, was chosen with Rudolph to design the school on July 1, 1964.
As illustrated in a letter from Peter Barbone to Rudolph's project manager William Bedford, the original 1964 proposal for Chorley Elementary was estimated to be $1650 per student. A letter from the Chairman of the Building & Grounds Committee addressed to Mr. Barbone reiterated that the building not 'exceed in cost the state reimbursable figure' and the school be 'functional, practical and economical.'
Barbone and Rudolph figured the student population was to be 500 minimum, with the school eventually to accomodate 'close to 1000'. At that rate, the estimated cost to build the school was $1,650,000.00 and was to cover the 'building, site, surveys, architectural and engineering fees, attorney's fees, furniture and equipment, clerk of the works salary, and all miscellaneous expenses.' 'In other words,' notes Barbone in the letter to Rudolph's office, 'it includes everything.' According to records, the price of the 27-acre site was $100,000.
Paul Rudolph supplied a preliminary area and cost estimate in December, 1964 listing the school population as 918 students, with a total project cost of $1,330,000.00.
In a February 4, 1965 presentation (page1, page2) to the Board of Education, Rudolph estimated the cost of the building to be $1,985,321.00.
When completed July 18 1968, the school cost $1,939,690.00 - and included 'site work, construction, mechanicals, carpet, furnishings and equipment for the building including a 27 acre site.' Chorley Elementary was completed on time and under budget according to the Architectural Record at the time.
Rudolph's design, worth $11,155,596.00 in today's dollars (using an adjusted consumer price index at http://www.measuringworth.com/) cannot possibly justify the district's estimate of $35 million dollars to glibly "fix the place up."
The school board's chosen architect - Robertson Strong Apgar Architects - should provide detailed and itemized estimates to the public that justify the cost, using industry-approved (AIA) methods.
The school principal's December, 2008 newsletter stated - before the referendum vote - that "the cost of upgrading the present structure will be comparable to the same amount of money to construct a new building." Later the cost to build a new school was revealed to be $63.5 million dollars. A far cry from what it would cost to renovate Chorley Elementary - let alone rebuild it today from scratch.
According to a 09/26/08 article in the Times Herald-Record, Superintendent Eastwood claimed the building needed $10 million dollars to bring it to current state code. Who's keeping track of this? "This is public money," he (Mr. Eastwood) said. "We wanted to make sure we were spending it properly." In the same article Mr. Eastwood stated "the new building would be less expensive than trying to salvage Chorley." That is some rate of inflation!
How much is history worth? Oscar Wilde observed that a cynic "is a man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing" - which goes a long way to explain Middletown's justification for tearing down Chorley Elementary.
Posts
3 comments:
While I appreciate the dedication of the foundation to the legacy of Paul Rudolph, I would beg your understanding for the Middletown School community. The primary purpose of the schools is the education of our children. The district cannot afford the additional burden of preserving this building. As someone whose husband and children all attended elementary school in this building, I can provide a first hand report that the roof has leaked consistently throughout it's history, in spite of a continual process of patching and a series of "permanent" fixes. The open classrooms are not the best environment for learning. They can be noisy and with too many distractions from the classroom across the hall for our youngest students to focus. The descriptions here are bit romanticized. They do not reflect the reality that our community and students have endured in this building. With all due respect for your cause, I would beg you to free our children and our school community of this burden. Please allow this building to go.
While I admire preservation of days gone by, where was all the support when my children attended Chorley and BUCKETS of rainwater where scattered throughout the hallways? Open duct work and cement block walls-UGLY!!! I loved my family's experience in this building... but that has more to do with the people rather than the structure. I was PTA president in this building for 2 years and experienced many issues, including the impracticality of open classrooms (NOISE) and the multi-level cafetorium in which many children tripped and fell. While I love the feel of small, intimate schools of days gone by, it is not practical. To make this present building structurally sound and "technilogically" competative with our surrounding school districts, would be close to impossible. While I personally have nothing to gain by this new building as my kids are older, I would not want future families to deal with this eyesore.
I attended JW Chorley from Kindergarten through grade 6 (1974-1981). I was taught art by Ms. Graziano, music by Mr. Brigham and Penelope Chachis was our principle. The open floor plans, retractable walls, multiple levels, carpeted floors, exposed duct work, grooved concrete walls are all burned into my mind. The sense of community and learning experience were amazing, I remember it fondly. Yes, the ceilings leaked and there were buckets, yes, we tripped on the levels at lunch, much as I tripped up the stairs in the more traditional Junior high school building in grade 7, but to go to a place like that every day was amazing. It's a shame that it might be over, and the building can't be re-purposed. Has no one thought to build a separate structure on the other end of the 27 acre property?
Post a Comment