12th year running

Some - projects too - are born unlucky. And may be some - projects too - are obstructed by a thing popularly called 'kala jadoo'.

The 'under construction' Fyzee Rahmin Art Gallery and Auditorium near Karachi Arts Council could be one such project - conceived under the 'wrong stars' and simultaneously under some kind of kala jadoo.

First it was the indecisiveness about the building's design. Seven attempts at finalising the design led to the designer walking away in anger. Obviously the project just could not come off the drawing board for about 18 months. The design assignment became effective on January 9, 1991 and the contractor went into action on September 30, 1992 with Design 6 and not the final design.

The consultants (Sami-ur-Rehman & Associates) had to produce six designs to satiate (mostly) whimsical changes in the client's mood/ demand. The design effort ran into a dead end, when instructions (later described as 'typing error') were given for the seventh change.

The client then was Karachi Metropolitan Corpo-ration, now City District Government Karachi. The man heading the consulting firm - Engr. Sami ur Rehman - has in the meantime died.

Now it is the contractor, National Construction, which seems to have decided not to work any more. This keeps Karachi deprived of a keenly awaited landmark of a project for 12th year running.

After doing about 65 % of the work, NC abandoned it in 1994. They seem to be 'in no mood' to complete it. NC is stated to have found the rising prices of inputs (between September 1992 to 1994) far too uncomfortable to keep them going.

This factor is believed to have turned the project into a big loss generating venture for NC. Once the city fathers' pet, the art gallery has thus over the years become an abject lesson in how not to do a project.

Engineering Review's effort to know NC's version from 'the horses mouth' failed because the horse just wouldn't talk. This can be safely taken as a sign about NC's mood.

When ER Reporter Khalid Siraj visited NC office in Karachi for the purpose, he was not allowed beyond the Reception where some Ahmed Nabi was called over. He said, 'the project has been 'cancelled' and that no one from NC can say anything more'.

When requested to tell the project incharge's name, Ahmed Nabi refused. Neither did he do anything better, when requested to help in getting an appointment with the concerned officer.

His only advice was: keep visiting NC office. He may like to meet you some day.

District Officer City Government's Community Development Department Engr. Rasheed Jamal was more responsive. He told ER 'the present impasse was entirely due to the contractor (National Construction) which had suddenly stopped the work (1994) saying that costs of material had increased beyond their accepted bid.

According to Engr. Rash-eed NC had demanded a revision in the approved cost and wanted it improved as per their proposal. But he was quick to add that NC had not given us any proposal all these 12 years.

Karachi Metropolitan Cor-poration had awarded the project for Rs. 69.70 million and (later (1994) revised it to Rs.114 million but NC thought even the new price did not make the project feasible for them, said Engr. Rasheed.

Responding to a question he said, we have made several attempts to induce them (NC) to discuss the matter and find an optimum solution. But we have not yet succeeded. He was not sure about the likely date of what he described as 'the final meeting'.

The meeting will be chaired by City Nazim Syed Mustafa Kamal. Many City Government officials and representatives of NC and NESPAK, the project's consultants are expected to participate, he added.

The project was originally designed by Sami-ur-Rehman Associates and NESPAK was to supervise its construction. The whole project was later awarded to NESPAK. With Engr. Sami's death some years ago, the former is no longer a part of the scene.

Asked to let us have the latest on the project, NESPAK's man incharge Engr.Abdul Mateen too declined to speak because 'as a consultant we are not in a position to talk to the press, though our 'final' estimates and proposal were recently submitted to City Government's Community Development Department.

We would be able to tell you the new schedule and cost only after the client okays them.

According to Engr. Ma-teen, we have had three meetings on the matter recently. At this stage we can't share our estimates of time and costs, not even likely time of the decision to re-start or abandon the project.

When asked whether National Construction (the contractor) is willing to continue, he said 'NC is still in the project. The impression that they are out of it is incorrect. They are prepared to work on fresh terms and rates'.

Asked about major factors causing delays, Engr. Mateen said, the whole project had started on the wrong foot. There were major defects in the the design (made by Sami-ur-Rehman & Associates) of structure and architectural details.

Increase in prices of materials (steel, cement) and later funding problems at the client's end were the other big reasons for work coming to a halt.

Here are some recollections from an Engineering Review report (comprising two installments appearing in March 16-31 and April 1-15, 1995 issues) on how (according to Engr. Sami marhoom) the project's design was changed six times and what happened to each of them. Readers will find the facts interesting even now.

Design 1

Presented February 1991; Façade: Oriental, Mughal; Capacity: 1000 seats; Building size: 198' x 96'; Estimated cost: Rs. 1.5 cores; Fate: Approved but scrapped due to revision in capacity.

Design 2 (capacity and cost revised)

Presented May 1991; Façade: Same as in 1; Capacity: 1800 seats; Building size 188' x 112'-2"; Estimated cost: Rs. 3.07 crores; Fate: Approved, but scrapped.

Design 3 (foyer enlarged and roof domes changed)

September 1991; Façade: Same as in 1 and 2 but domes on roof elliptical instead of circular as in 1 and 2. Capacity: 1800 seats; Building size: 176' x 145'; Cost: Rs. 37.85 crores; Fate: Approved, but scrapped.

Design 4 (unexpectedly high tendered cost)

November 1991; Facade: Modern; Capacity: 1800 seats; Building size: 180' x 148'; Cost (tendered): Rs. 11.75 crores (against an estimate of Rs. 7.85 crores); Fate: Approved, but scrapped due to unexpectedly high tendered cost.

Design 5 (Many revisions including changing the roof from RCC to ACC and elimination of air conditioning)

January 1992; Façade: Revised, modern; Capacity: 1800 seats; Building size: 180' x 148', same as in Design 4; Cost (tendered): Rs. 6.97 crores; Fate: Work awarded to contractor.

Design 6 (auditorium length increased by 14 ft, position of stairs changed, and sans air conditioning).

February 1992; Facade: Largely same as in Designs 4 and 5 but elevation given circular corners instead of angular ones; Capacity: 1800 seats; Building size: 191' x 150'; Cost (after above mentioned changes) Rs. 6.48 crores; Fate: Construction begins and continues.

Design 7 (Revolving stage proposed)

April 1992; The consultant refuses to proceed ahead without 'firm' decisions. He also withdrew drawings of Design 6, which had been given to the contractor by the client without all formalities being gone through. However, the contractor continued building the auditorium.