# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1884_S33
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Fourth Delegate Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other States. 1884.   33

was bound to result in a significant increase in building costs is obvious
and needs no proof.

"But the main reason the cost overrun escaped the committee's
control was this: everyone knows that the first cost estimates for a
building are more rough approximations than exact calculations. So it
naturally was with our building as well. Had the committee, right after
the plan was adopted, immediately obtained bids for the whole building,
on the basis of which its construction could and would have proceeded,
it would have seen in time that the costs of execution exceeded the
approved sum by too much. The committee could then still have made
sweeping changes. Instead, however, we were advised by many quite
competent people not to give the whole building to a single contractor,
but to let out the various contracts separately, as is also the general
custom for all large buildings. This has the great advantage that the
building material, as well as the workers and subcontractors, can be
better supervised, and the percentage that a general contractor takes
from subcontractors is saved. This was borne out in the course of the
building as well. But the committee then faced the other unfortunate
circumstance, that it could no longer go back or make significant
changes once the later contracts showed how far the fixed sum was
being exceeded in carrying out the plan that had been adopted. The
Reverend Synod has, however, seen from the accounts of the General
Treasurer that the sums given for the contracts named there, in Number
21 of the 'Lutheraner' for the year 1882, have not been exceeded but
have in fact come in about $700 lower. — Of this the Reverend Synod
may be assured, and may obtain the judgment of any expert it likes,
that the solidity of the building, in both material and workmanship,
leaves nothing to be desired.

"But it might still be objected against the committee that it
exceeded, without necessity, the fixed 10 percent for the exterior and
interior ornamentation of the building. We answer: as regards the
stonework, we are ready to plead guilty at once, though the committee
could only properly judge, once the work stood finished, how much
could have been saved on it. As for the marble slabs in the vestibules
and in the washrooms, and the stained glass, however, these may
appear more like luxury, but are in truth, in the long run, the cheapest
because the most durable. Curtains or wooden shutters in the assembly
hall would soon require ongoing repairs and, eventually, complete
replacement. The stained glass continually serves its purpose and never
needs costly repair or renewal. Indeed, nowadays not even the smallest
church is built without better, or colored, glass in its windows."
(Report of the Building Committee.)