It's extremely difficult to believe it would cost anywhere near $374,000 to build the proposed Farmers' Market improvements shown in the above rendering, a good portion of which already exists. For that price, one could purchase a large downtown commercial building or a 4,800 square feet, two-story brick home with five bedrooms, five bathrooms, a full basement, high quality finishes, and the land on which they sit.
Yet, in conjunction with Develop New Albany, the mayor's office has asked the City Council to approve spending up to $400,000 for the proposed project. Have other imagined uses for leftover funds rocketed the estimate into unrealistic space? What justifications have been provided for such a bloated number? In general, what gives? If being asked to pay for it, the Council and the public deserve more objectivity and respect than they've yet been shown.
Despite being subjected to the usual "slap our name on it" fight for credit, the Farmers' Market has indeed been successful and does serve important economic and social functions in the community. The importance of those functions, however, is precisely the reason the market should not be used as the centerpiece of some politicized, unexplained financial scheme.
The mayor's office should get real, itemized estimates from multiple local contractors via a public process before moving forward. Until then, the Council and the public should treat the proposal with the same level of care and seriousness as has been afforded them, which is to say very little.
4 comments:
I'm not surprised. For over 3 years, this administration's favorite expression has been, "We'll get back to you". I struggle to remember a time that they had the information available at the time of a proposal. Often they couldn't even answer the most basic questions. As bad as the council has been, the executive branch has been worse.
Where was the public input that went into this design? Has anyone in this administration ever heard of a design charrette? Aside from the inflated cost of a structure that resembles a backyard patio, or tents at the county fair, there should also be questions raised concerning how we apply the principles of traditional urbanism in our city center. Small urban spaces such as the farmer's market are the true symbolic and public elements of our community. They should provide a sense of place by creating an emotional and intellectual attachment to a particular location.
As Leon Krier notes, "...a building expresses the fundamental values of its builders and designers. It is a symbol of our state of mind and our self-respect. Symbols are at once expressive and instrumental. They are not merely means of expression or mirrors; they are tools, means of safeguarding civic and personal values, of encouraging and supporting them. If a man is dressed in rags his confidence suffers, as does the confidence others have in him. He is in crisis with himself and with the world. Famously, we make buildings and then they make us."
If this design and the one proposed for the Riverview project are reflections of New Albany's self perceptions, then, sadly, Jeff's advice in the title of this blog post should be the mantra that guides local policy from now on.
Public input? Is there any such thing? 'Round here it's top down on the down low or no lowdown, downtown, dig it?
all that roof space...all that solar potential. rain-run-off? Thank God NA solved that problem already by paving the entire town. You could build a self powered farmers market, demo green building technologies, for $400,000? Farmers Market = resource protection...just one concept I toss out. I hope Timperman Arch's weren't actually paid for that drawing my son and I could create in Mac-Paint in under an hour. Maybe this preserves the max design fee for the company...it says Design in their title, didn't I read that somewhere.
Post a Comment