ADDENDUM – VISIT TO SSPW ARCHITECTS – SCOTTSDALE, AZ – 1/2/2007

Joan and Glenn Grube visited with Dr. Mark Tregaskes, Superintendent of Schools in Safford, Arizona on December 27, 2006. This district is building a Fine Arts Center with a modified TDA. We were recommended to Safford by Tony Mesa of the Macton Corporation. The SSPW Architects firm designed both this facility and the one in Chandler, AZ. (I later discovered that this firm also designed the Clayton County, Georgia Arts Center.)

Mark first showed us the overview of the Center that is presently under construction and expected to open on or about March 1, 2007 (see photos). The history of the development of the final plans is most interesting as the need for a Fine Arts facility was obvious since there was not even a school auditorium in the K-12 district of 3,000 students. With limited opportunity to raise funds in the district due to a relatively low tax rate, a bond issue of five million dollars was proposed and approved by the community. An additional one million dollars was set aside from reserve funds and the initial rendering was put out to bid. Twelve contractors requested the bidding documents, but only two bids were received – the lowest at eleven million dollars surprising even the architects who had based the design on a projected cost of six million dollars. These were the reasons given for the nearly double cost:

Faced with these facts and not wishing to return the bond money to the taxpayers, the district determined to take the direction of seeking a "Construction Manager At-Risk", a procedure in which contractors are asked to guarantee what parts of modified and reduced plans could be built for seven million dollars (the district having committed an additional million dollars of reserve to the project). The district, working with SSPW Architects had already eliminated one of the two turntable pods and determined to have no raised seating structure in the remaining pod; put off all rigging and lighting for the pod until a later time; decided to go with suspended ceilings in lieu of plaster in many areas; determined to leave the pipes and lighting fixtures exposed in the main auditorium and the pod; reduced the above stage building height to forty feet with plans to use roll up scenery rather than rigged and fly scenery; narrowed the proscenium from 50 to 48 feet; reduced the seating capacity from 1,200 to 1,000; and had determined to save money by using less expensive finishes in many areas. The contractor chosen(CORE) agreed with the architect that there were three areas outside the main auditorium that could not be done at this time for the seven million dollars – dressing room complex, backstage amenities area (green room, some storage, etc.) and the set building area. These areas labeled A, B and C are scheduled to be added at a later date. All utility connections to these facilities are in place ready for the later completion of these areas.

At the same time that the reduced bidding was underway, the district sent out hundreds of letters to companies that did business in Safford seeking interest by these companies in sponsoring aspects of the building…with only one interested response received. An anonymous local resident has since donated a grand piano for use in the facility.

The facility has painted concrete block walls in the lobby, the floor of which is to be carpeted. Waterless urinals are in place in the restrooms. The single pod is designed to seat about 250 and has a sloped floor toward a small stage that at present will not have extensive rigging or lighting. The seats are not on risers, but merely set behind one another as in the main theater which also has the sloped floor. This is the first time I have seen a turntable that does not include the superstructure for tiered seats. When turned forward, there is merely a continuation of the sloping floor from the theater to the pod seats. The pod seats are being installed on the floor by a company other than Macton. ( Note: I am not certain that this configuration is practical in a two thousand seat theater as we may need the elevation in the pods due to the distance to the main stage.) Acoustical panels on the back side of the pod are designed to improve the main theater acoustics when the pod is facing away from the main stage. SSPW Architects are providing acoustical support in the design of this facility.

The ceiling in the main theater is open to the roof with ventilating ducts and lighting fixtures painted black to match the color of the interior roof. There are no catwalks in the center. Light bulbs have a ten year time span, but there will be a need to put up scaffolding or rent a special cherry picker to change light bulbs at the highest points in the audience and stage areas. Walls in the main theater are painted sheetrock as plastering was prohibitively expensive. A very interesting design for the final paint coat on the theater walls was shown to us.

There are four aisles in the main theater. Aisles will be carpeted while the seating areas will remain as painted concrete. The proscenium is 48 feet wide and about 30 feet high. The original design called for an audio pit in front of the lighting control booth separated by four rows of seats. An acoustician visiting the site convinced the district to fill in the sunken audio control area as there would be no sight line to the stage if the audience stood to applaud a performance. The audio control is now directly in front of the lighting booth at floor level.

The district recently hired a fulltime Director for the facility at a salary of $44,000 and is considering adding 1% of the increase in revenue for the facility to the Directors salary as the facility reaches full usage. This Fine Arts Center will be the finest building in the community and will be available for use by community organizations, student performing groups and traveling shows. Dr. Tregaskes was most impressed with our plans, recognizing that our Center is designed to be far more than is affordable or necessary for the Safford community.