Bob Vint’s May 4, 2021 Email to Mayor and City Council

Dear Mayor and Council,

Some thoughts to share prior to your meeting this afternoon. I've just learned that the manager's office is still recommending Option D.

I have completed my review of Option D and find that it has several major problems:

  1. Takes away 4.3 acres of park land. (G-minor preserves this existing park land)

  2. Eliminates 50+ parking spaces along Lake Shore west of the therapeutic pool. (G-minor maintains existing parking and solar collectors @ west)

  3. Cuts off service access from the west side of the pool—you can't be driving service trucks across the zoo! (G-minor maintains this service access)

  4. Cuts off the natural pedestrian and bicycle circulation from Randolph Way through to the ponds and Lake Shore Dr. (G-minor maintains through circulation)

The cost differential between D and G-minor is in fact negligible, for the following reasons:

a. Both alternatives would require the same amount of re-design (no difference there—and it's not a full redesign, so the City should not expect to pay a full redesign fee).

b. There's also no difference in the time delay occasioned by either D or G-minor (no difference there—either approach would leave contractors waiting while plan revisions are made).

c. Cost estimates for alternatives from the City Manager’s office have been consistently overstated, up to a factor of 5 times true market costs.

d. The true cost differential between D and G-minor should account for the value of 4.3A of lost park land elsewhere (which offsets the cost of our proposed bridge).

Here is an accurate cost estimate of the differential cost of G-minor vs. D:

$1.4M for design revisions (the same for either D or G-minor); relocate storage sheds: $ 750K (if we recycle/relocate, instead of demolish and replace)

Total delta (relative to D) = $2.15M

(pedestrian bridge @ $500K = cost to replace 4.3A parkland displaced by D = a wash)

I understand the total cost of the Zoo expansion contract is $23M.

For less than a 10% change in cost, you can adopt an approach that makes sense and solves a lot of problems.

Thank you for your attention.

Bob Vint, Architect
Assistant Professor of Practice
University of Arizona
School of Architecture
rvint@email.arizona.edu

For more details on G-minor, see also Bob Vint’s A Path Forward on this website.