Anonymous wrote:Small footprints/acreage = underground parking, creative fields/playgrounds

+1

My architect family members say that underground parking costs out at $20K per spot.

Corruption

Small footprints/acreage = underground parking, creative fields/playgrounds

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And sometimes because our school buildings are fancier (see our high schools vs theirs). Many (all?) are aiming for a LEED certification, dictating materials cost.

DC also has requirements on buildings, e.g. using a percentage of unionized labor as well as a percentage of DC-headquartered businesses. These things add cost too.

Some of these new DCPS buildings have terrible carbon footprints, not withstanding that they have all the LEED plaques
and certifications to boast about.

Which ones?

Neighbors also factor in this. The ANC approval process can make adjustments based on community needs more expensive. Also the costs to operate swing space during renovation is almost always included in the construction price. See the cost of Duke Ellington, for example, which had not only one but two swing space renovations embedded in the overall cost.

Good question. I would suppose the people who approve the contract proposals without competitive bids from other contractors would know the answer.

Anonymous wrote:OP: Some of these firms who have achieved cost overruns continue to be hired by the city.
The name Perkins Eastman comes up as one of these. Why isn't there more pushback from
the public, city council when these same firms are selected over the years?

Because the city council members are part of the same good old boy network as the developers.

Single party rule (with a closed primary) inhibits the ability for outsiders/new voices to enter the system and way too many of us (myself included) don't pay enough attention to local matters.

Anonymous wrote:And sometimes because our school buildings are fancier (see our high schools vs theirs). Many (all?) are aiming for a LEED certification, dictating materials cost.

DC also has requirements on buildings, e.g. using a percentage of unionized labor as well as a percentage of DC-headquartered businesses. These things add cost too.

Some of these new DCPS buildings have terrible carbon footprints, not withstanding that they have all the LEED plaques
and certifications to boast about.

Anonymous wrote:OP: Some of these firms who have achieved cost overruns continue to be hired by the city.
The name Perkins Eastman comes up as one of these. Why isn't there more pushback from
the public, city council when these same firms are selected over the years?

Because often the cost overruns are the fault of DGS/DCPS which changed requirements along the way for whatever reason, including community demands.

Just like when you renovate your kitchen, anytime you make a change midway, the price will go up.

OP: Some of these firms who have achieved cost overruns continue to be hired by the city.
The name Perkins Eastman comes up as one of these. Why isn't there more pushback from
the public, city council when these same firms are selected over the years?

And sometimes because our school buildings are fancier (see our high schools vs theirs). Many (all?) are aiming for a LEED certification, dictating materials cost.

DC also has requirements on buildings, e.g. using a percentage of unionized labor as well as a percentage of DC-headquartered businesses. These things add cost too.

Sometimes due to historic buildings. Sometimes due to corruption.

Some, but not all, of the extra cost has been due to decades of deferred repairs

Everything is done differently in DC.

I've been comparing school construction specs for Arlington county
compared with DCPS and find such a dramatic difference. The costs in NOVO for
recent expansion/modernization seem to be capped at a much lower level and
are sometimes under budget at the end, at the scale of half the cost of the Murch
and Bancroft projects. Any insights on why DC hasn't cleaned this up?