PROBLEM 99

THE COST OF SCHOOL BUILDINGS

Problem: The architect for the new high school in Thomasville, N. K., has presented to the Board of Education his estimate of costs of the school building which he is planning. The figures show a cost of $750 per pupil of building capacity and a cubic foot cost of 42 cents. The costs appear extravagant to the Board and the superintendent. It is evident that the Board will proceed with drastic cuts in the educational provisions to be included in this building rather than purchase a building at these figures.

Superintendent Acker has been requested to present comparative figures on these two units of cost. He recalled that at the recent meeting of the Department of Superintendents, a pamphlet had been distributed among the members showing unit costs of recently erected school buildings of various kinds. These figures were tabulated by him as shown in Table 1 and mimeographed for the use of the Board of Education at its next meeting.

Various members of the Board were severely critical of the architect on seeing these comparisons as the cost figures submitted by the local architect were in excess of the majority presented in the table. The architect's defense was:

1. That no single unit of school building cost is reliable. 2. That variations in estimating cubature vitiate the cubicfoot cost figures.

3. That variations in estimating "number of pupils accommodated" invalidate comparisons.

4. That without knowing the type of construction of these buildings, the unit cost figures have almost no value.

5. That the character of the site, the kind of ventilating plant, the kind of roof and the like add to the cost of buildings beyond any control of the architect.

R. J. Condon, Report on the School Building Exhibits of 1922 and 1923. Department of Superintendence, N. E. A.

6. That an architect's work should not be judged on the basis of unit costs but in terms of the approach which he has made to securing a proper solution of the commission set him.

The discussion during the remainder of the meeting centered about the utilization of these cost figures as a basis for the next step in the construction of this building.

Assignment

1. In what respects do you maintain that the architect's defense is sound? Unsound?

2. How highly correlated are the costs per cubic foot and per pupil accommodated, as shown in Table 1?

3. Do you find any marked inconsistencies in the figures of Table 1 which would bear out any of the architect's contentions?

4. What are the methods which may be employed in estimating the cubature of a school building?

5. What variations may occur in estimating the number of pupils accommodated?

6. What happens to cost figures when the large rooms, like auditoriums, cafeteria, and gymnasium, are built with the first unit of classrooms but in terms to meet the needs of the ultimate building capacity?

7. Where should the criticism fall for the high cost figures for Thomasville?

8. Does it appear that the educational program may at such a time be relegated to a position of secondary consideration? 9. What is the optimum size of a school enrollment from the standpoint of economy in building?

10. What step should now be taken by the Thomasville Board of Education?

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOSTON FINANCE COMMISSION. Report of a Study of Certain Phases of the Public School System of Boston, Mass. City of Boston Printing Department, Mass., 1916.

COOPER, F. I. The Next Step in the Standard Tests for Schoolhouse Design and Construction. American School Board Journal 61:36-37, August, 1920.

Standard Test for Schoolhouse Design and Construction. American Architect, 118:9-10, 13-14, July 7, 1920.

Documents of the American Institute of Architects. The Octagon, Washington, D. C.