Mr. Sciame: Last year, the construction industry went from what was being referred to as 'white hot' to 'falling off the cliff.' The number of projects that were in the development phase had just evaporated. I don't think there were any projects I could think of in the New York metropolitan area last year. So you had all the new construction drop off the cliff. Institutional was still fairly strong, but not like it was, in terms of what happened to endowments and things like that. I think it's fair to say that the construction industry entered an extraordinary downturn in 2009.

Now we're seeing, almost exclusively, publicly funded projects.

Yeah. I mean, you know, if you were a major construction firm in 2008 or 2009, you still had a backlog, and you had a pretty good year. But you saw your new projects start to get more challenging. We actually saw this coming, and diversified. We went into the public sector. We were doing a lot of museums, and they were highly successful; so what we wanted to do is get into a sector that we had been in years ago, in terms of institutional, where we knew there would be repeat work. We sort of diversified and went not only into the institutional realm but also the public sector-EDC, DDC, CUNY, and we've been successful in landing those new projects.

What are the drawbacks, or benefits, of working on a publicly funded project?

They're not that dissimilar. The public sector understands that a construction management approach makes sense. So you're able to qualify the subcontractors and make sure that even under Wicks law you just have good contractors bidding on the project going through the pre-qualification process. We're also finding that the city is really paying attention to architecture, which is great-because I'm a graduate architect. Never practiced, but my love is for great architecture. I think it's been said that civilizations are judged in large part by the buildings they leave behind, and it's terrific this city is looking at the buildings they leave behind.

In your bio, you're described as 'a builder with the eye of a constructor but the vision of an architect.' What does that mean?

I like great architecture. I also think great architecture adds value to the development project. When an architect is hired by the owner, I believe they're hired in large part for the type of work they're going to deliver. We try to do our very best to have that architect deliver that vision in a cost-effective manner. So we look at the architecture and try to envision how we can build this cost effectively. How can we achieve that design for the right price? If you do that, you have a happy client.

Do you have a favorite architect?

It's a tough question. I learned early on that I wasn't going to be the next Frank Lloyd Wright. I was intimidated by the creativity of the students in my class. It was amazing because we were in school learning about Mies van der Rohe and Frank Lloyd Wright, and then 35 years later, to be working with the Mies van der Rohes or Frank Lloyd Wrights of the day is really an extraordinary experience. I don't have favorites, but I can tell you that most of the great architects are great people-interesting, visionary, fun to be with and just deserving of the greatness.

You did the Guggenheim Museum restorations recently. Was that a challenge?

That was a very unique, challenging project in terms of its restoration. It was really, 'How do we bring this back to the way it was when it was built?' And I think, at the end of the day, someone had commented that it's not only as good, but probably a little better than it was when it was first built. But it was really an experiment in finding out what different layers of paint were put on, what were the original colors, and then looking at new mechanical systems and how to get them into the building without disrupting the historic, landmarked facades. It was just a good challenge, and we did it while the museum was in operation.

As recently as two years ago, you were hearing a lot of people from outside the real estate and construction industries complain about 'overdevelopment.' What comes to mind when you hear that turn of phrase?

Usually, they talk about overdevelopment when it's blocking their view. I think that in certain instances, there are legitimate concerns that should be addressed, and I think the city has a great public-hearing process. I was chairman of the Landmarks Conservancy for a number of years, so we were involved with a lot of these hearings. And, there, it was always my goal and intent to try to really be objective.

Not hearing so many people complain about overdevelopment now, though, right?

No! The world has changed. Look, I knew that the market was on fire. We were reluctant to develop projects where we were depending on higher costs per square foot than we were being paid at the time. We didn't want to chase the market, but I don't think anybody anticipated a 30 or 40 percent correction, and that's what we've had.

F.J. Sciame Construction Co. has been around since 1975. What are the biggest changes you've seen in the past 35 years?

The biggest change is that we were brought up as lump-sum builders, where you would bid the jobs and you'd have to use all the contractors that were out there, and it was very difficult to control the quality and put in a good competitive lump-sum bid. We lost a lot of projects because I refused to use subcontractors that were second tier in terms of quality because I knew at the end of the day, it would bring down our level of quality. That was a real frustration. As the construction management came to be-which is something that's really changed in the past 20 years, in particular-it has allowed us to pick the right subs for the right job and really represent the owner as their agent, or their contractor, eventually.

Did you come across the mob element that we hear about so often?

Fortunately, not me. And even that has been, I think, much less than it was 35 years ago, when I started. Perhaps at the subcontractor level things like that were going on, but, you know, we were always straight as an arrow. No way to do it other than the right way. Our core values-honesty, integrity-never changed. So we didn't see it. Now, that's not to say that it may not have existed. But fortunately ... And then as you grow, it's certainly much less of a risk, if there ever was one.

jsederstrom@observer.com

Mr. Sciame: I like to say that I sleep like a baby: I sleep for two hours and I cry for two hours. Only kidding. … Any major builder in this town in 2008 is having a very good year. And we’re having a very good year.

How is that possible? It’s been incredibly unsteady; apartments are going unsold.

It has been, but as the builder, we are building that building, and the apartments that you’re trying to sell have been paid for … which is why my year has been good. But two years ago we started to really diversify. We saw this residential market on fire and I knew—anyone could predict—that there would be a downturn. Since the tulip bulbs in Holland, there will be this financial euphoria and then this fall. So we diversified and went into institutional work, not only museums, but Columbia University. … [And] we are making sure there are reserves put aside from the good years.

You’ve built the aluminum-skinned New Museum, Renzo Piano’s Morgan Library and Thom Mayne’s upcoming Cooper Union lab building—and you renovated the Guggenheim. When you walk outside, what do you see?

Just as a painter will see things very differently, because they’re thinking about painting whatever it is they’re looking at, I think that, as a builder, when I walk down the street, I can see through the street. There’s sort of an X-ray vision. What’s behind that limestone? What’s behind that curtain wall? How is that beam supported? You could really just sort of appreciate the way it comes together.

You also built Palazzo Chupi, Julian Schnabel’s amazing red-pink condos on West 11th, but sales-wise it’s done very poorly: His huge duplex and triplex are unsold, and Richard Gere put his place there back on the market.

Julian, he did it the way he wanted to do it, you’ll see no other building like that in the city, and you can either like it or dislike it. … And I think he’s willing to wait for the right price; he’s not in a rush to sell it.

The one recent, well-known building of yours that I happen to dislike is the Cooper Square Hotel, the shiny, almost sci-fi building at the Bowery. Do you take building jobs that you don’t personally approve of?

Hah! It would really have to be bad, O.K., for me to say, ‘I’m not building that building because I don’t like what it’s doing to the skyline of Manhattan,’ let me be honest with you. And beauty is in the eye of the beholder—we have people that love the Cooper Square Hotel! Look, I think I have a very good moral compass. I think I have principles. I’m not going to do something that would be socially totally unacceptable. But I wouldn’t not build a building because I don’t agree with its design, and I also wouldn’t not build a building because maybe it’s not what the preservationists want.

New Yorkers desperately wanted to save the marble-clad modernist ‘lollipop building’ at 2 Columbus Circle. But the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission held no public meetings, and the building was gutted and stripped. Your company did the work. Now it’s an entirely new building and widely loathed.

We were in a touchy situation on Columbus Circle. I mean, here was an Edward Durell Stone building that certain people thought should be landmarked and others didn’t. …

With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, it may have been better for everyone, including the LPC, had they had a hearing on it. This is only with 20/20 hindsight. … At that time, I didn’t think it was such a bad thing.

And yet you happen to be chairman of the nonprofit advocacy group New York Landmarks Conservancy. How could you be pro-landmarking if you’re a builder and even sometimes a developer?

When I was asked to be chairman of the conservancy, I said, ‘Do you really want a developer?’ And it’s a good question. But having been chairman for two and a half years now, I think it was not a problem at all. I’m passionate about good architecture; I’m passionate about preserving good landmarks, so it’s not hard for me to take that position.

Your new Cooper Union lab building, designed by Pritzker-winning Thom Mayne, will be so green that its skin will have perforated stainless steel panels that move to reduce heat or cold. Is green just a fad?

No, I think that green is here to stay, but … right now green is not cost-effective. A lot of developers are using it because they have concern for the environment. It’s also a good marketing tool, and they’ve been willing to spend a little bit more for it. … As more and more people do it, and more and more innovative ideas come, it will be good.

You tried to develop a radical, slim skyscraper of stacked townhouse cubes at 80 South Street, designed by the experimentalist Santiago Calatrava. It’s still not built. Have you given up?

I think we were ahead of our time. … We’re in a holding pattern. Now, if someone wants to do a conventional building, we’ll probably sell it.

What about Calatrava’s design?

It would have to not be built.

That’s sad!

It is sad, but I’m not going to build anything and fail, and the marketing indicated that there weren’t people willing to buy that. And the last thing I want to do is fail.

The building’s 10 residential townhouse cubes came on the market three years ago at $29 million and up. Did any come close to selling?

We had people from London who were interested, but it wasn’t enough to really make it work.

How much did you have to pay Calatrava for the plans, which won’t be used—$1 million?

It is north of $1 million. We paid a good deal of money.

Which starchitect who you’ve worked with is harder? Calatrava, Piano, Mayne—or even Schnabel at his Palazzo?

I’m going to answer this honestly: I have yet to find an architect of that caliber that’s difficult to work with. These are world-class architects—and in the case of Schnabel, he’s a world-class artist.

You lost a bid to build the World Trade Center memorial, but were eventually brought in by Pataki and Bloomberg in 2006 to shave costs there. What was something that was glaringly wrong about that that you saw?

I think the city, the state, was guilty of cooperation. Everyone tried to cooperate with each other: You had the families as a stakeholder; you had [developer Larry] Silverstein as a major stakeholder; you had the Port Authority as a stakeholder; you had the city; you had the state; you had all of the people in Lower Manhattan, all the people of the city, the country, the world, looking at ground zero and wanting this to be some great project that would answer the horrific attacks of 9/11. So I think that everyone tried to listen to as many stakeholders as possible, and it slowed down the process.

Should there have been a single authoritative voice saying, ‘This is how it’s going to be’?

That’s probably true! If you could have a Robert Moses in 2008, or 2001 when this happened, it might be a good thing. Having said that, many people would totally disagree with me—‘Who wants a Robert Moses?’ Hey, it would have been done faster. Would it have been done better? I don’t know.

What was your experience trying to trim costs there like?

When the governor and the mayor call, you say to yourself, ‘There’s no choice but to do it.’ But having gone through that? If the president calls, I’m assessing the minefields before I get involved.

You’ve been in construction for three decades. How much organized crime have you seen in the business?

Does it still exist? I guess so. … We’re large enough to not have to even think about that. We’re known to be a legitimate company, and that’s the way we’re going to do our business, and we’ve never had that as an issue, thank God.

mabelson@observer.com

Hey, if you don't like it, there is something you can do about it. See the website for submitting comments. (Deadline: June 27.)

Press release after jump.

--Matthew Schuerman

GOVERNOR AND MAYOR RELEASE SCIAME REPORT ON WTC MEMORIAL AND MUSEUM
Detail Next Steps

Governor George E. Pataki and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg today announced the release of the Sciame report on the World Trade Center Memorial and Memorial Museum for bringing the World Trade Center Memorial in line with the established $500 million budget. The analysis is the result of a month long process spearheaded by Builder Frank Sciame, CEO of FJ Sciame Construction Company and Sciame Development and informed by victims' families, the Lower Manhattan business and residential communities, members of the memorial jury, architects and others. The Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (LMDC) will begin accepting public comment immediately and the public comment period will run for seven days. Upon consideration of public input, the LMDC Board of Directors is expected to consider and adopt a final design by the end of the June. Construction on the footings and foundations can then commence as early as next month, and the memorial remains on schedule to open on September 11, 2009. Preliminary work on the memorial began March 13, 2006.

"Frank Sciame has conducted a thoughtful and thorough process that brings the Reflecting Absence vision in line with the $500 million budget and will ensure that the memorial to our nearly 3,000 lost heroes remains on schedule," Governor Pataki said. "He has done great work and we are extremely grateful. On behalf of all New Yorkers, I thank Frank Sciame for stepping up and leading this effort to ensure the creation of a fitting memorial that honors our lost heroes' lives, mourns their passing, provides solace to their loved ones, and tells their story to the world."

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said, "We are grateful to Frank Sciame for contributing his time and talent to this important project. His work allows us to retain the essential design of the memorial and memorial museum, while identifying significant cost savings. While we need to be mindful moving forward that resources are limited, Frank's work puts us on the path toward the successful completion of a memorial that will honor the memories of those we lost that terrible day in September 2001."

-more-

Builder Frank Sciame, CEO of FJ Sciame Construction Company and Sciame Development said, "It has been a privilege to work with a world-class team of architects, designers, and construction experts. I can't say enough about the assistance that the City and State have afforded us in this project. I am pleased that the month long process brought us to a point where we have identified a viable option and are in a position to move forward on schedule and on budget."

The draft analysis examines options that most closely achieved the three guiding principles of: adherence to the vision of Reflecting Absence and the Master Site Plan; maintaining the established $500 million budget, considering security implications, construction and operation costs; and opening the memorial by September 11, 2009. The draft recommended option was determined to have met all of the principles.

The option allows for preservation of signature elements of the design and master plan: a landscaped memorial plaza, the waterfalls--the sound of which will help to drown out the city noise, twin pools, all 2,979 names displayed around the two pools, a descent below-grade, and a contemplative space below-grade for families and visitors to gather. In addition, the design provides for exhibition space and a visitor's center above grade in the Snohetta-designed Visitor Orientation and Education Center (VOEC) and vast museum space below-grade with views of the slurry wall and access to bedrock and both footprints' cut-off box beam columns.

The option consolidates the entrances to the below-ground elements, which provides for a coherent visitor experience by combining the museum entry pavilion and the VOEC. All visitors would enter the below-grade memorial elements and the museum through the VOEC. After a descent, visitors come to Memorial Hall, a space to gather and reflect where the cascading waterfalls and views of both tower pools can be seen. Visitors can then travel further to the memorial museum. The option removes portions of the below-grade galleries but preserves some of the waterfall views. It also removes intermediate levels of the museum by consolidating exhibits at bedrock. It is anticipated that the option will have no impact on the schedule to open the memorial by September 11, 2009, and that work on the footing and foundation package could begin as early as next month.

The recommended option results in significant capital and operating cost savings. Approximately $285.1 million in construction and infrastructure cost savings will be realized through such steps as: eliminating the entry pavilion, portions of the below-grade galleries, the cost of relocating the river water line; modifying the bedrock museum; refining the approach to preserving the slurry wall; and value engineering. The option will result in an estimated $11.6 million annual operating cost savings due to reduced facilities and administrative expenses. With this expected reduction in operating expenses, it is anticipated that the previously anticipated annual operating deficit for the World Trade Center Memorial and Memorial Museum will be substantially reduced and, perhaps, eliminated.

As a result of the analysis, Sciame also suggested that the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey assume responsibility for the building of the memorial, with the WTC Memorial Foundation ensuring the integrity of the design and contracting for the build-out and finish work.
The Port Authority assuming responsibility provides a single point of accountability, consolidation of management, consultant and contractor staff, eliminates project redundancies and enhances project efficiencies and productivity gains resulting in significant savings of costs and expedition of schedule.

-more-

Sciame also suggested that the LMDC continue to work to minimize to the extent feasible Memorial-related mechanical equipment now located within the footprints at bedrock. The WTC Memorial Foundation, in concert with the LMDC and the architects, should make decisions as exhibits and their location at bedrock as well as decisions concerning the locations of the Contemplation Room, Family Room and their contents, and unidentified remains.

Frank Sciame, in partnership with the LMDC, WTC Memorial Foundation, Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and the Memorial and Master Plan designers, conducted a thorough analysis focused on the three guiding principles. Working with the designers Michael Arad, Peter Walker, Max Bond, Daniel Libeskind and Craig Dykers of Snohetta, along with the LMDC, WTC Memorial Foundation, Port Authority and a team of established consultants and special advisors, Sciame reviewed the budgets and cost reconciliation reports prepared by the LMDC, WTC Memorial Foundation and Port Authority, along with the Construction Manager Bovis Lend Lease and consultants Faithful and Gould and URS; worked to reduce costs through traditional value engineering methods; and explored further cost effective design refinements and options with the memorial and master plan designers that are in keeping with the Reflecting Absence and Master Plan vision.

The Sciame report is available on LMDC website at www.RenewNYC.com. LMDC will be accepting comments on the draft analysis and recommendations through June 27, 2006 by email on www.RenewNYC.com or in writing to:

Lower Manhattan Development Corporation
Attn: Memorial Analysis and Recommendations
One Liberty Plaza, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10006

The way the press release describes that task suggests how accurate Joe Hagan's description of thin men in black jackets and square glasses arguing with one another really is:

Enjoy your stay, fellas!

-Matthew Schuerman