Perspectives on a science center

Editor's Note: This is a different type of Showcase Project. Rather than focusing on “how to,” it may remind you of how you felt about a project and perhaps how users of the product of your project might have felt. This Showcase also focuses on Pittsburgh, the Golden Triangle, and places you may see when you attend the ’92 PMI Seminar/Symposium.

It was a cold, wintery, January night of 1988 in Hockessin, Delaware, and I sat tapping away at the computer that belonged to my newly established family, The Barnes—Patty, David, Bryan and Gretchen—had taken me in while I attended the Delaware University's lnstitutional Management Course at the Ashland Nature Center. lt was early evening when the phone rang. “Carol, it's for you” Patty called out. I hurried to the phone to find it was my boss, Dr. Al DeSena, on the other end of the line. We talked for a short time and then he explained the details of a meeting he had with some folks to discuss the project management of our new science center. As he ended, he asked me what I thought.

Was it a set up? That was the day it all began…when I answered, “I think we can learn project management easier than they (project management folks) could learn what we are all about.” He remarked, “I was hoping you would say that.”

That conversation remains focused in my mind; especially when I look back, reliving the thought of the tremendous job ahead of us, and how lucky I am to have the opportunity to be a part of it all!

Back in 1983, Josh Whetzel (then president of the Buhl Science Center) interviewed me for the position of development department secretary. He explained to me that “we are now ready to move ahead with this project,” and, upon being hired, I became part of the “Buhl Family.” Well, it was several years and two promotions later before I felt the “move ahead” had begun. Over those years, I began to question in my mind if this project could possibly be this one man's (Josh Whetzel's) dream.

On the shores where the Monongahela, the Ohio and the Allegheny Rivers meet, a wonderful experiment is being conducted — The Carnegie Science Center. You won't be quite the same after a visit to this major new entertainment and education facility. Challenging you to find/do/see/experience some of the dynamic activities at the Carnegie Science Center is an interactive exercise in itself!

This project had more than the usual number of perspectives—not just owner/builder/developer, but a whole staff of scientists, exhibit designers and educators, all with their own viewpoints and needs. Major communication gaps were solved by numerous weekly meetings at all levels and use of project management software for both the construction phase and for the exhibits/programs. The general contractor also used the project management software and a “Request for Information” system to accommodate the numerous questions/answers and unexpected construction demands occasioned by complicated, ever-evolving exhibit designs.

A dream it may have been, but a dream come true!…for Josh Whetzel and many others—myself included!

Although Mr. Whetzel was looking to retire at this point in his life, this project was obviously his first concern. The search began for his replacement, but during the search another avenue became a very viable option. Mr. Whetzel began discussions with The Carnegie about a possible merger. The Buhl Science Center had been approved to receive $13.6 million in matching funds from the state to build a new science center with an OMNIMAX^® Theater. The Carnegie was a well established cultural institute with a strong administrative staff, and so the merger was a natural. Dr. Alphonse (Al) DeSena, then our director of planning and program development, was the obvious person to become director of the Buhl Science Center (soon to be The Carnegie Science Center).

On March 5,1987, after unanimous approval by the Board of Trustees, Dr. DeSena accepted the position as director and charged ahead on the plans that had been initiated. There was much planning and development to be done. He pulled together the management team and laid down the plan.

It is rather fascinating to entertain the thought that a major project was just under way when a merger took place for this organization consisting of forty staff members. There were feelings and emotions zipping, growing, zapping, and changing for most staffers. It was a tremendous adjustment for many—responsibilities were both added and changed, and there were more people to get input from and more people to report to.

At the same time these changes were taking place, the staff needed to pull together the information to facilitate the plans for the building in Pittsburgh that would house our new state-of-the-art (Carnegie) science center. Inside the Buhl Science Center walls planning went on and information was gathered and organized to present to the construction management team to ensure that the functional needs for our educational science center facility would be archived.

Buhl Science Center's management team actively and ambitiously identified these needs and then planned separately for the development of the building spaces under their realm as well as other areas such as exhibits and interior needs not covered by the architectural plans. in order to facilitate the wide gap, the management team underwent a brief introduction to project management and plowed ahead with the help of a volunteer, Bob Schorr, from the Pittsburgh Chapter of PMI. He helped each manager to lay out their identified tasks, set durations and tied them together in a network. Next, Bob and I worked to put the data into the project management system.*

This was a most difficult task…with delays and frequent shutdowns of the system.

While all of this was going on, we were also in the process of bringing a submarine to Pittsburgh to be the first exhibit of the new Carnegie Science Center. This was to be accomplished in a cost efficient and timely manner “while you are at it, don't forget to keep things moving on the Buhl programming, the new building plans, our image…and produce that schedule to fill the new building with exhibits and programs that will please the average everyone!” Yes, the staff was called upon to spread out in every direction and a team was formed comprised of current staff, new staff, and many volunteers…a team that just could not be beat.

One of the interesting things about The Carnegie Science Center project is that it had areas headed up and served by volunteers as well as by staff; and the staff volunteered many hours as well. For example, Bob Schorr(retired engineer from U.S. Steel) dedicated many months to the project teaching me about project management and helping to work through the project management software system. While this System was elaborate, it had been decided to go with it in order to have the ability to tie into the construction management team's and contractor's networks. While a gallant effort was put forth to achieve this integration, it never became a reality.

However, we were able to generate networks on the project management software system that served internal purposes and acquainted us with the schedules produced by the contractor. One major problem for our staff was working with such an elaborate software package with very little training and a shortage of time. There was no one in-house with Primavera experience, and we had problems. It took many months of calls to the Primavera folks and numerous shipments of the computer for repair before it was finally confirmed that the problem was indeed a hardware one. Life at work on the computer was quite trying for longer than I wish to remember. But, with a little endurance and a lot of encouragement from Bob Schorr, the network layouts were produced in spite of these continuous hardware obstacles.

As Bob finished with his part, and began to phaseout, the hardware systern began to fail once again. lt was impossible to produce updated schedules and the network information planetarium and graphic arts theater, capable of transmitting images from the rooftop observatory to its video wall and planetarium dome.

OTHER EXHIBITS AND PROGRAMS

Highly interactive exhibits and programs will involve visitors in experiences which demonstrate how science and technology affect everyday human activities.

Some of the key exhibits include:

• Aquabatics: a three-level, interactive, laminar flow fountain in the main lobby
• Ports of Discovery: Early Learners’ Landing (ages 3- 6); Science Pier (ages 7- 13); Living Aquarium
• The Works: the first electronic exhibits theater of its kind in the country, featuring a working foundry; the Tesla Coil; the Van de Graaff generator; robotics; cryogenics; lasers
• Science Way: a unique science neighborhood containing thirty-five of the best exhibits from science centers around the world, showing some of the processes by which scientific principles are discovered behind seemingly ordinary objects and events.
• The Miniature Railroad and Village: an all new railroad, greatly expanded both physically and conceptually, will open in November 1992. It will include a replica of a steel mill and a 6-foot-high, walk-through coal mine.
• Eating: an exhibit involving many savory experiences, acquainting the visitor with advances in biology, chemistry, nutrition, food science, and the technology that affects what and how we eat.
• “Sport”: a unique, hands-on exhibition from Ontario Science Centre which invites the visitor to become a bobsled champ, a professional baseball player or an Olympic sprinter. Visitors can test their skills against the pros or simply be spectators. (October 5,1991- May 10, 1992)
• “Super Heroes: A High-Tech Adventure”: discover how technology empowers mere mortals to become super heroes like Batman and Superman and how science helps people live better lives.
  (June 15- December 31, 1992)

Allegheny Square Annex

• The Buhl building (which closed to the public August 31, will reopen to the public on October 5) will become an educational annex housing classes, professional development workshops, the outreach program, high school sciences apprenticeships, The Carnegie Science Center's more specialized science programs, and more.

served a limited use. Just when it appeared hopeless, we were blessed with two new volunteer project managers who came to the rescue Dave Mueller and Rick Henninger. They are employed by Westinghouse Electric Corporation and are members of the Pittsburgh PMI chapter. They worked diligently to bring information up to date with the current phase of the project. Rick also offered computer input and…a hardware system “that worked!”

The management team was now able to keep to the schedules they had worked through and we were able to identify gaps in the project and “fill them in. ” Each team member charged ahead with their respective areas of responsibility and we continued to pull together to support each others needs. In spite of the early computer problems, I must say that this has been one of the most challenging and exciting projects ever worked on, and the team—consisting of the entire staff— had to be one of the best teams ever!

Jo Mckee
Marketing Director, The Carnegie Science Center

Well, off I go to the outside group on the project management avenue…the architect, construction management team, on-site project manager and the general contractor.

Tasso Katselas Architects was the firm that designed our building. Tasso Katselas was a most interesting man to work with. His creativity enhanced our plans for the spaces throughout the building. While our focus remained on the functional, Tasso and his team created and interpreted the aesthetics of the building. Both Dan Stefanovich and Jeff Molter were key developers in the architectural drama that we now admire in our Carnegie Science Center building. There were times when I had wished I could teach them a little about “organizational planning skills,” but these were probably the very same days that they would have liked to teach me a thing or two as well. I do feel that we have an aesthetically pleasing building and, thanks to these architects, a lot of interesting touches have been added. However, we did have our problems.

Jo McKee has had a long history with Buhl. As a high schooler, she played Athena in Buhl's Latin Festival. She went through college on a Buhl Foundation scholarship. Her first job out of college was public relations manager at Buhl. Jo joined the staff of Buhl Plantarium and Institute of Popular Science and headed Public Relations when it became Buhl Science Center. Following the merger of Carnegie and Buhl, she became marketing manager of The Carnegie Science Center.

Jo is a graduate of Carnegie-Mellon University, author of local history “Merrie Olde Middlesex,” and president of Windermere Development Co., residential builders and developers.

My opinion is that most of the problems arose from the fact that this was a design-build project. While it has been claimed time and time again that design-build projects save the owner dollars, I have often wondered if the compromises necessitated by such a style counteracts its benefits. Being new in this area, I am obviously not the person to give the answer, but perhaps this is an issue for review by project managers with expertise in both types of build projects.

As for the construction management team from NADCO ( National Development Corporation), one of the most evident problems was the lack of a schedule to facilitate the input from CSC staff in a timely fashion in order to meet the building's functional needs. This project was unique in that it was very necessary to involve a large number of people from our staff who were experts in the various areas that needed to be addressed for the development of the plans for our science center building. The need to keep this building within the guaranteed maximum price (GMP),took precedence over the speciality items and unusual utility needs identified for a science center. Staff needed to face the unpleasant fact that we were sometimes unable to get what was perceived as necessary. When it's all said and done, the project has come in at the GMP, which was the construction management team's responsibility.

We had an on-site project management consultant, Hal Raber, who helped us through the many details of the building, ensuring that the agreed upon work was indeed delivered. He had come highly recommended by NADCO, and we have found out why he received such a high recommendation. The need to have someone on site and on top of the building development is quite evident with a project of this caliber. I can only imagine what a difficult chore this must have been for Hal as he worked through the compromises between our staff, the con-struction management team, the architect and the contractors.

Bob Schorr

Dave Mueller

Rick Henninger

The general contracting firm for this project was Mellon Stuart with Marty Marra as the key person. When the subcontractors were hired, Marty held weekly meetings to keep the group abreast of the needs and changes, as well as to provide details for all of the specialty areas. This building is unique in many ways, and had requirements far above your standard building. Marty was most impressive as he handled the wide range of things we called on him to do.

As our goal at The Carnegie is to offer an educational experience to everyone, we had to pay particular attention to the needs of the young, the old, and the disabled as well. Our staff sought out a committee to address human accessibility needs for our building. Also, our top management agreed that we would do as much as we possibly could, even beyond code, to ensure access for all, Our entire staff has worked very hard to-ward this end and, while our budget has set limits on us, we are proud of our efforts for our disabled visitors.

In summary, The Carnegie Science Center project has been both challenging and rewarding. It has involved people from all walks of life. Project management was birthed for our staff and was used in every aspect of our project. In identifying responsibilities, breaking them down into manageable tasks, setting durations and tieing them together into networks, we were able to meet our goal—bringing new light to Pittsburgh… The Carnegie Science Center.

Tasso Katselas of Tasso Katselas Architects

The design mandate for The Carnegie Science Center was to provide superior exhibition space, a state-of-the-art planetarium, an OMNIMAX^® Theater component, an auditorium and all necessary ancillary spaces to support these functions. These had to be expressed in an intriguing architectural statement which respected the site and recognized established budget constraints.

After visiting several science centers, where the exhibit space is described as a black box, two factors began to influence our design of this extreme environ-ment:Need for a sense of orientation for the user and a focal point that allows one to take advantage of available natural vistas.

The black box was preserved, however it was modified by window openings which slanted inward and took on a dynamic triangular shape. These became suggestions rather than overpowering views. They became an exhibit unto themselves. The intent was not to impact on the main event, but instead to offer an alternative once the scientific exhibit had been realized. Viewers were able to look upon their city date it to their science center, and move with confidence to the next event.

The building is not a strict application of form following function. There is no doubt that the uses influenced and helped generate the ultimate expression. It is important, however, to recognize the variety of shapes employed to express the final form; and the difference between shape and form is most easily understood if one realizes that the dancer has shape, the dance has form. In architecture, the component parts have shapes, but the entire composition is a dynamic form where form and content occur simultaneously.

An intriguing element of the design is the cautious way it is married to the landscape. This visual and physical extension of building is accomplished in several rather dramatic ways. At the entry level, a bridge reaches out to a circular plaza, which acts as a ceremonial gathering place as one makes the transition from outside to inside.

Once inside the building, open areas make available the river, the city, and the terraces below. The restaurant extends out beyond its full-height glass walls to a dining terrace which, in turn, opens onto a broad, gently sloping lawn. The lawn is designed to accommodate periodic summer exhibitions, which extend the space out to the park area. Entries at the lowest level which permit control, and allow these exhibits to function independently, are also used for the submarine exhibit.

In addition to this manipulation of contoured and developed land, there existed on the site an underground tunnel below the perimeter street. This links the adjacent supplementary parking to a pedestrian spine from the Three Rivers Stadium so that one can walk uninterrupted onto a walk system and into the science center. The building is not only visually enticing, but also has tentacles that subtly embrace the perimeter and extend its pervasive influence.

One of the most intriguing solutions is the first level of exhibits, where the planetarium, the Railroad Exhibit, the Food Exhibit, and access to the auditorium all occur. This very active floor will easily handle large crowds since the opportunity for movement can be diversified. As people wait to enter the planetarium, the exhibits act as a modifier and absorber; likewise, when the Railroad Exhibit has a huge impact during the holiday season, the adjacent exhibits and the entry to the planetarium act as supplementary elements. Programs that interact with the exhibits may require lecture space in the auditorium which can be approached from either stair or ramp off this same floor. This design problem adressed the program and required. intense interaction with staff.

The three major components, the OMNIMAX^®Theater, the planetarium, auditorium space and the exhibit space are juxtaposed and linked—a strong circulation element which repeats and overlaps, establishing a relationship with these various building parts. The most dominant element in the design is the circulating ramp which offers the user several opportunities. You can choose to take the elevator to the top floor and descend the ramp, exhibit level by exhibit level, or start from the lowest exhibit and by circulating floor to ramp to floor, experiencing the entire ambiance. Interrupting the ramp area is a lounge and viewing platform; one is enclosed, the other is an open terrace, that offers relief from the intense exhibit studies. The ramps are not only efflclent movers of people, but offer startling views of the river and the west side of the city.

A lobby overlooks the OMNIMAX^® exhibit which is approached through a circular stair platform that echoes the large circular glass areas of the ramp. These two elements act as point and counterpoint; one to the east, the other to the west, and help establish the open and dramatic quality of the exterior and interior spaces.

Also recognized within the entire composition is a process of circulation which allows one to discover special corners, niches and views. These constitute magic places and unique compositions act as cogent proof that a building of elegance may offer a statement towards the world of art; the drive was to have this building draw attention to that possibility.The idea is to create a system which is available to the user; structural, functional, aesthetic. The interpretation can be as flexible and imaginative as the users wish, limited only by their own capabilities.

Tasso Katselas’ work has been performed in nine states and five foreign countries. Individual buildings comprise an important segment of projects; however, major achievement has been in urban redevelopment projects, master planning for educational facilities, and airport and institutional facility planning, with specific emphasis on buildings within these developed complexes.

He has won numerous design awards. The most notable being acclaimed as a finalist in the National Competition for the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial in Washington, D.C.

His work has been shown in exhibits throughout the United States, and his projects and lectures have been published nationally and internationally. Most recently, he received Architectural Record's Award of Design Excellence.

Tasso Katselas began his professional education in the Engineering and Architectural Schools of Carnegie Institute of Technology. After graduation, he worked for various firms in Pittsburgh. He received a Master of Architecture degree in 1953 and then returned to Pittsburgh 1956 from the West Coast to begin his own practice.

Marty Marra
Project Manager for Mellon Stuart

The Carnegie Science Center was a very unique and diverse structure to build from the view of the general contractor. The building sits atop 45-foot-deep friction-type augercast piles drilled into the dense sand layers alongside the Allegheny River.

Three independent cast-in-place concrete stairtowers were then built to brace the structural precast columns, beams and floor plank which immediately followed. A precast framing system was designed for the middle third of the structure to accommodate possible heavy floor loads for future exhibit spaces for the Science Center.

The eastern and western portions of the building were designed of structural steel. Due to the varied types of structural members, along with non-typical sizes and uses of each floor, the erection of the structure required careful planning. The eastern third of the building houses the Ranges OMNIMAX^® Theater. A hemispherical dome of delicate perforated aluminum makes up the viewing screen, which almost completely wraps around the audience. This dome is tilted on a 30 degree angle and sits on top of a sloping, elliptical concrete wall.

The design requirements of the sound engineers (acousticians) for this theater were incredible. The acousticians needed to create an atmosphere void of all external noises and sound. The location of the building and its close proximity to Three Rivers Stadium, railroad lines and reads had to be taken into consideration.

Thus, the perimeter walls were built almost 7 feet thick with 14 alternating layers of soundbatts, plaster, steel, drywall and styrofoam. The roof had 7 inches of concrete that was cast-in-place on a 45 degree slope.

The western portion of the building includes the new Henry Buhl, Jr. Planetarium, an auditorium and gallery ramps to access all exhibit floors. The planetarium is constructed similar to the OM-NINMAX^®Theater, but instead of the view dome bearing on a supporting wall, it is suspended from the roof structure.

The construction team was made up of a large variety of people, including the owners, architects, contractors, high-tech specialty companies and exhibit design specialists. The successful synchronization of all parties has resulted in a project that is exceptionally unique, individually rewarding and will be an outstanding showplace for many years to come.

Marty M. Marra, 36, is the project manager for Mellon Stuart Company and the general contractor for the Carnegie Science Center. Marty has a civil engineering degree fron Bucknell University and has been with Mellon Stuart for six years.

Since graduating from college, Marty has worked on multi-family residential housing, a high-rise office building, parking garages, and a large regional shopping mall. Another project managed by Marty was the $37 million new chemistry building for the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor

At the beginning of this Project, I had ambivalent feelings—on one hand, I was thrilled by the opportunity to sink my teeth into such an adventure. On the other hand, though, I was quite fearful of “the monster” I had agreed to take on. I realized early on that there was much more to project management than I had imagined. While I had managed a renovation project previously, the project management style was very prima-tive — comparatively speaking. Suddenly I found myself engulfed with decisions on what project management software package to buy, who to buy it from, how to learn it, and how to quickly understand work breakdown structures, etc. Words like tasks, durations, predecessors, successors, resources, and forward and backward pass, soon became an active part of my vocabulary. Then the day-to-day management and collaboration intensified greatly before I could even get my feet wet! Looking back, I knew it was only “with the good Lord's help that I was able to do it.” He provided a team.

Carol Carmody, assistant to the director of Buhl Science Center, played a very active role in the opening of the The Carnegie Science Center. She served as project manager, coordinating the efforts of all other staff members involved in the construction of the newest addition to The Carnegie.

Carol first became affiliated with Buhl as a volunteer who helped with computer education. In 1983, she was hired as executive secretary, a position she held until becoming Al DeSena's assistant in 1987.

Carol is presently working toward a Bachelor of Arts degree and has completed graduate courses in institutional management.

Mary Hoehl
Traveling Exhibits Assist.

Wayne LaBar
Science Projects Manager

Martin Ratcliffe
Dept. Head Planetarium/Observatory

Joshua C. Whetzel, Jr.
Chairman, CSC Board of Trustees

Hal Raber
On-Site Project Manager

Maitland Peet
Science Project Manager

Mike Vojtecky
Program Dev. Scientist

Alphonse T. DeSena
Director, Buhl Science
Center and The Carnegie
Science Center

John Bernardo
Dept. Head Programs

Elizabeth Smithson
Dept. Head, OMNIMAX

Noreene Ignelzi
Science Projects Manager

*Primavera project Planner^® is a product of primavera Systems, Inc.