From: Scott Rodwin [Scott@rodwinarch.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 5:26 PM
To: davidfmiles@hotmail.com
Cc: Susan Cousins; Bennett, Martha; Apharamond@bwgarchitects.com; Tom
Blahak; Don Orr; Weber Williams, Anne
Subject: RE: Columbine Elementary
Thanks for your wonderful letter. I greatly appreciate the
thoughtfulness and concern that went into it. No worries about
contacting me directly this time. I have shared your letter with the
Design Team and the BVSD Project Manager and we have discussed your questions.
On every project there are always a number of competing concerns:
the preferences of individual stakeholders, neighbors, owners, students and
staff; there are site issues like the floodplain, open
space, traffic, and the preservation of trees and views; there are the very
substantial issues such as the budget, building code, schedule, public
safety, sustainability, and in this particular case, above all the primary
goal, to create the best school possible for Columbine students.
That said, we do take every neighbor's comments seriously and try
our best to find a solution that optimally satisfies the greatest number of the
issues above, including stakeholder preferences and individual concerns.
However, we do not let one or even a few voices over-ride the other concerns and
perspectives involved. Yes, there have been a few strong objections to
the plan (raised at the first DAT and presented by letter to the Board of
Ed.), and we have taken those objections (specifically
traffic and views) into account, but good architecture is actually borne
of the constraints we are given; the concepts we presented last
night appear to the design team to be headed in a positive direction
and did not unduly respond to any one stakeholder's issue. They meet
the overall list of criteria very well, and hopefully they can also
allay some individual neighbors' concerns.
Lastly, we do fully agree with your overall sentiment that our
primary goal is simply to create the best possible design. In that
pursuit, our job is to find balance among and inspiration from
all the competing interests. We came away from last
night's meeting feeling very encouraged because the DAT representatives
(notably those living on Repplier) offered their feedback not from narrow
self-interest, but in the overall interest of the project, the larger
neighborhood and the students.
It was a good night.
I hope that answered your questions. Please feel free to contact me further if you want to chat more.
No worries about the confusion regarding firm names. Architecture firms often partner with each other to bring together the strengths of each firm for the benefit of a client. We aren't trying to maintain visibly separate identities on your project as we are working as a single team to get the job done.
Thanks,
Scott Rodwin, AIA, LEED AP
PS - You may find some useful additional information regarding how the Project Management Team responds to stakeholder concerns in the DAT guidelines. http://bvsd.org/bondproject/schools/Documents/DAT%20Guidelines%20Approved%201%2009.pdf
· Multiple points of view are important to the
work of the team and the architect. Members are asked to bring to the
discussion their perspectives as representatives of various stakeholder
interests. In addition, members are also asked to set aside personal agendas
and participate in a collaborative way with the group.
· All input provided by DAT members will be
given respectful consideration by the architect.
· [The DAT] Serves as an informational liaison within the
school and the community by sharing information and communicating progress. The
DAT will also bring the perspectives of their stakeholder groups to the design
team, mindful of the need to advocate for the best interest of the school as a
whole.
RODWIN
ARCHITECTURE
1245 Pearl Street, Suite 202
Boulder, CO 80302
p 303 413 8556
f 303 413 8557
www.rodwinarch.com
From: David Miles
[mailto:davidfmiles@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 8:58 PM
To: Scott Rodwin
Subject: Columbine Elementary
Scott,
This
is Dave Miles from the Columbine DAT. I couldn't find the emails for any
of the crew at Bennet, Wagner, and Grody so I thought I would write you
directly and you can share it with them if you'd like. Truthfully, I
thought you all were one firm so I am a little embarrassed and confused
but I am assuming contacting you here is fine.
The
reason that I am writing is that tonight some of the other participants
commented to me on how well the Repplier St. people are handling this process.
They went on to say that others were not. It got us talking and as
I understand it there was some sort of letter written by some of the east side
residents concerning the site layout. That got me thinking how in each of
the proposals you guys pointed the view as being preserved. There are
only about 8 houses that even have that view. I am wondering if this
letter is something that needs to be discussed in an open forum i.e. the DAT? More
to the point, I am wondering if such a letter was written was it was simply
taken under advisement (politely dismissed) or if it is being taken seriously
as a constraint to building?
I
have the feeling from our meetings that the members of the DAT team trust and respect
the architecture team and the BVSD. I know that I do. That said, it
would seem to me that if people in our community are using threats or strongly
worded letters to achieve their personal
objectives rather than discussing them openly at the appropriate forum it
should be known to the DAT. Especially if one of those neighbors serves
on the DAT. At the very least I think it is appropriate that the DAT be
reassured that the design is being done with only the natural and city building
constraints in mind along with, of course, the feedback of the DAT.
It
would put my mind at ease to know that the site plan has nothing to do with a
group of people who are worried only about their investment and that the plans
are truly the BEST plans possible for the site. I was dismayed to hear
about how some of my own neighbors have handled this process and again it is my
hope is that it is not weighing in on what we are all assuming is the best and
most professional advice we are receiving for the design of our new school.
Thanks
dm