P o n d & C o m p a n y N e w s l e tte r | S p r i n g 2 0 1 5

THE HIGHLIGHTER

50 YEARS OF

What an exciting time for Pond &

Company! This year marks our 50th

Anniversary as a successful A/E firm.

What grew from humble beginnings

in Pat Armour’s basement is now #4

of Atlanta’s Top Engineering Firms and

#311 of ENR’s Top 500 Design Firms

nationwide. It is exciting to see the growth

and development of our company, and I

would like to thank everyone who has

contributed to our success over 50

years.

In reflecting on our past, I have to give

credit to Pat Armour who started the firm

(structural engineering) in his basement.

He had no staff, and went out to convince

clients to give him a chance with their

projects. Then he had to do the work

which started the challenging cycle—

“get work, do work, collect money

and get more work”. It takes a unique

individual that will take the risk to start an

engineering company with his personal

assets, and also have the interpersonal

skills (both technical and people) to grow

the business successfully.

I also would be remiss without giving

credit to three other individuals who

made enormous contributions to our

success in the earlier years. Jim Cape

was Pat’s first employee and later

became President. Pat and Jim were a

great team, with Pat leading our design

services and Jim focusing on marketing

Al Pond, CEO

CONTENTSEXECUTIVE CORNER

Pat Armour: Hard Work and Dedication Laid a Strong Foundation for Today’s Pond & Company

The story of Pond & Company’s humble beginnings.

More Award-Winning Projects Added to Our Portfolio Read about Pond’s recent ACEC Award-winning projects.

Executive Corner

Design-Build Trends and Pitfalls

More Award-Winning Projects Added to Our Portfolio

Spring Forward With Safety

Being Your Customer’s First Choice

Commissioning 101: Basic Applications of Energy Savings

ICM Group Proves It’s an Industry Thought Leader

Hartsfield-Jackson Runway Project Makes Headlines

Pat Armour: Hard Work and Dedication Laid A Strong Foundation For Today’s Pond & Company

Pond Ingenuity

EXECUTIVE CORNERand corporate administration. The firm’s

entire business was providing structural

engineering to architects for commercial,

retail and institutional projects. Jim was

very entrepreneurial. He had the vision to

become a full service engineering firm,

with continual growth. He hired me to start

our civil engineering practice, and was my

mentor when I joined the firm, helping me

learn the business aspects of running a

design firm.

John Fumbanks later joined our firm to

work with Pat and head up our structural

engineering department. In his role

as Director of Engineering, John was

instrumental in many of our landmark

projects over the years, but more

importantly was my business partner when

we together purchased Armour Cape &

Pond after Pat retired. At the time, our

backlog was severely down and several

major clients could not pay their bills. In

fact, we had to sue our three largest clients

to survive. I am not sure I would have had

the courage to buy the firm without John

by my side.

Tony Parker joined us right before John

and I purchased the firm; he made an

immediate impact. Starting as the head of

our Civil Department, Tony has contributed

in numerous ways to help grow the firm

successfully. He was the obvious choice

to be named President in 2011. Tony has

been a great business partner as well as a

huge part of where we are today.

It’s truly a rewarding experience to see our

firm grow from a small structural engineering

firm working for architects, to a full service

architectural, engineering and construction

firm of nearly 300 people, with offices in 13

locations, and projects throughout the USA,

Europe and Asia. While we enjoy these

good times, it’s important to remember

when times were not always so bright.

Right after I joined the firm, we experienced

in the mid-70s recession and dropped to 8

people. Along the way, there have been a

number of challenges, all requiring difficult

decisions, but we have been fortunate to

have a number of dedicated individuals

that made coming to work fun and exciting.

Looking forward, our future is bright. It

is rewarding to sit in our management

meetings and observe the continued

commitment of our leadership team.

Our vision for 520 people by 2020 is an

ambitious goal, but our leadership is in

place to achieve this vision—and we will!n

1965 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2015

1965Armour & Associates founded by Pat Armour – Structural Engineering

1975Added Civil Engineering Services (Al Pond)

1980Added M/E/P services

1985Name changed to Armour, Cape & Pond

1992Added Architecture services

2006Acquired Junck & Walker Associates (Jacksonville, FL)

2010Acquired ECOS Environmental, (Atlanta, GA)

2013

2014Acquired Corrosion Integrity Solutions (Grayson, GA)

2015Opened office in Denver, CO

2011• Acquired CEGG Associates

(Norfolk, Virginia)

• Opened office in St. Louis

• Tony Parker named President, Al Pond named CEO

2012Opened offices in Dallas/Ft. Worth, TX; Phoenix, AZ;Huntsville, AL;New Orleans, LA

1995Acquired Nash Love & Associates (Washington, DC)

1998Name changed to Pond & Company

1999Added Construction services

1988Al Pond named President

1970Name changed to Armour & Cape

…To Pond & Company

From Armour & Associates…

Opened office in Charleston, SC

3

297Employees

Mike Magahey - USACE Program Director

The Design-Build Institute of America recently reported

that in 2014, more than half of projects over $10M were

Design-Build (D-B), with military projects having the highest

market share at (81%) of projects delivered utilizing the D-B

Methodology. That is a staggering number. Compare that to our

Corps of Engineers Program last year, where 75% of our revenue

was generated by DB projects. In the last two years, the Corps

Program has been awarded three D-B projects with over $1M

each. It is a large part of our business and something we execute

successfully.

The Future of Design-Build in the Federal Market

Design-Build is part of the owner’s toolbox of delivery methods. It

is a proven and efficient way to deliver the end product, saving both

time and money for the owner. But recent rumblings have noted the

federal government’s intention to move away from the D-B delivery

method – and by move away, we mean work back towards the

historical standard 60-70% of all projects over $10M.

Know Your Partner

The D-B relationship, by nature, can be filled with friction. D-B

projects are a slippery slope of risk-reward for the team, but

understand while the goal is the same, the risks are not. You must

know your scope, your role, your liability and, most importantly,

your partner. We have a great D-B partner in-house with Pond

Constructors. I encourage everyone to know their capabilities

and open a dialogue with Tim Crosby or Greg Swinks regarding

Vertical D-B opportunities. For opportunities not a good fit for

Pond Constructors, make sure you perform due diligence on your

teaming partner. Conduct your own research such as checking

the company’s financials, performing a Google search, and asking

around the industry – your contacts and other persons in similar

positions.

Importance of Open Communication

Communication with your potential partner is key throughout the

D-B process. Dialogue concerning contract vehicle and how the

team will execute a competitive Design-Build proposal are critical

before you enter into a pursuit. It is the contractor’s goal to build the

project, including the means and methods to do so. The designer

is responsible for the technical elements of the design of the

project. While we are teammates, there are regular disagreements

between what is to be designed and what the contractor agreed

to build (and the price at which to build it). Often, this is the point

where communication becomes one-way and the performance

on the project breaks down. Open and effective communication

between a knowledgeable Design PM and Contractor PM can

often work through these issues efficiently and keep the project

moving towards successful completion. If one side buries its

head in the sand, it’s a big problem that tends to generate bigger

problems as the project progresses.

We have an official D-B policy and guide documents for the different

stages, including the award competition through project execution.

So, before committing to any D-B relationships, please contact me

at x 4871. n

Design-Build Trends and Pitfalls

As a subconsultant to The Clement Group, Pond provided comprehensive A/E services for the renovation of six dormitory buildings at Fort Gordon, Georgia. This was a D-B project for USACE, Savannah District.

Design-Build Trends and Pitfalls

Phoenix Trail - City of College Park

Located near Har tsfield-Jackson International Airport and nestled within “Georgia’s Global City,” Phoenix Trail has helped to connect the community by providing an easily accessible and healthy alternative mode of transportation. Pond, along with the City of College Park, CSX Railroad, and the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT), worked to bring this essential trail to this bustling city.

During planning, Pond discovered an abandoned CSX rail spur that provided 40 to 50 feet of right-of-way directly through the heart of

the City, including an existing 400+ foot long tunnel under Interstate 85. This finding saved the City money and gave end users a safe a l t e r n a t i v e

away from high-speed vehicular traffic. After the Pond Team performed a thorough environmental analysis and worked with the Trust for Public Land, the City of College Park was able to purchase the existing rail corridor.

“College Park residents have embraced the Phoenix Trail. Its smart design and efficient use of land is a big hit with local fitness groups and enhances the connectivity for the airport region,” said Gerald Walker, City of College Park’s Director of Communications. “The inherent beauty of the trail is enhanced by the creative genius of Pond, blending the right amount of greenspace, technology and commercial interest to provide the backdrop for this great environmental enhancement to the College Park community.”

The partnership that Pond helped to facilitate between CSX Railroad, GDOT, College Park and the Trust for Public Land showed that the result can be cost effective and impactful to the growth and success of a city. n

The project to resurface the northernmost runway at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (H-JAIA) was completed in a remarkable 29 days, thanks to the combined efforts of the Aviation Infrastructure Solutions (AIS) Joint Venture. The

AIS Joint Venture is comprised of Pond & Company, Michael Baker International, Corporate Environmental Risk Management (C.E.R.M), Key Engineering, and Long Engineering.

Runway 8L-26R was originally constructed in 1983, after which over 500 domestic, international, and cargo flights landed on it daily. Needless to say, it had begun to show significant wear. The first step the AIS team took was to evaluate the entire runway. Tests revealed that the center (or “keel”) portion need to be replaced, but the less trafficked outer panels were still in good shape. Only replacing the keel portion greatly reduced the cost and quantity of materials and reduced the amount of construction waste. Additionally, the time required to take the runway out of service lessened, thanks to the significantly shortened schedule.

The standard Runway Edge lights were replaced with LED lights, which require between 50% and 60% less energy. This runway is one of the first in the United States to be completely LED.

The contractors experienced several unanticipated delays; however, they maintained the project’s rigorous schedule. Such commitment was rewarded when the project finished ahead of schedule, despite a large work crew that included, on average, 350 personnel per shift, working over 210,000 man-hours in 29 days, demolishing and replacing 95,040 square yards of concrete pavement. n

More Award-winning Projects

Added to Our Portfolio

Ashley Horne - Senior Marketing CoordinatorSusan Johnson - Marketing Coordinator

At the 2015 Georgia Engineering Excellence Awards Gala hosted by the Georgia Society of Professional Engineers this past February, Pond was the proud recipient of not one, but two Honor Awards.

Runway 8L/26R - Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport

Spring Forward with SafetyAshley Farrow, CHST, LEED AP BD+C – Safety Manager | Jim Davis - Corporate Health and Safety Director

Emerging seasons are a time of recognized change, and this fact is not lost on this spring. New growth is emerging, pollen is in the air, and signs of emerging life are all around us. Change is also one of the most common factors associated with injuries and accidents. Our ability to recognize changing site conditions and take the appropriate immediate actions to eliminate and/or control the associated hazards can often mean the difference between a successful project or a visit to the hospital. (and from OSHA)!

The hazards associated with changing conditions also impact our safety at home. Below are some excellent suggestions to consider in an effort to keep your family safe:

A. Prepare Your Home for Spring. Spring is a perfect time to clean out your home. Follow these steps to keep you and your family safe when cleaning this season:

• Keep your back straight and lift with your legs when moving furniture for spring cleaning.

• Follow cleaning product safety instructions and labels. Inhaling or ingesting bleach is NOT fun.

• Clean up spills immediately and use caution while walking on wet and slippery surfaces.

• Be sure to wear a mask while cleaning dusty areas of your home. Have you ever heard of histoplasmosis or hanta virus?

Additional home safety tips can be found at http://www.household-management-101.com/spring-cleaning-safety.html

B. Time to Check the Smoke Alarms. When you change your clocks, check the batteries in your smoke alarms and carbon monoxide detectors. Batteries in smoke detectors should be replaced yearly.

C. Window Safety. With warmer temperatures arriving, it’s important to practice window safety - especially in homes with young children:

• Keep windows closed and locked when children are around

• When opening windows for ventilation, open windows that children cannot reach

• Don’t rely on insect screens to prevent a fall• Keep furniture away from windows• Determine your family’s emergency escape plan and

practice it regularly• Make sure nothing is blocking or preventing a window

from being opened in the case of an emergencyAdditional window safety tips can be found at http://www.nsc.org/learn/safety-knowledge/Pages/about-national-window-safety-week.aspx

Much like spring, Pond is experiencing significant organizational growth and meaningful change, which includes the way we think about safety and how it will be integrated throughout the organization. As we grow and evolve as a firm, one of the most important responsibilities that each of us have is to remain vigilant in protecting ourselves and those we work with from injury, both at work and at home. n

Becoming Your Customer’s First ChoicePond’s Marketing Director, Erik Grandowski, CPSM, is a contributor in February 2015’s issue of MARKETER, the journal of the Society for Marketing Professional Services (SMPS). In his feature article, Erik shares four ways to become your client’s “First Choice.” He explains that clients are not looking just for an off-the-shelf solution but rather a vested partner that will help them achieve their mission.

To read the article in its entirety please visit http://www.pondco.com/2015/03/4-ways-to-become-your-clients-first-choice/. n

I walked into my neighborhood home improvement store a few weeks ago and was intrigued at the choice selection that was available for low energy light bulbs. There were T-5s, T-8s, T12s, CFLs, LEDs, all with different wattages, different illumination levels. There is a market for these devices because facility operators are concerned about the cost of energy. In early February 2015 Apple Inc. announced that its new data facility, to be built in 2016, will be powered by a solar farm on the facility. While saving energy is good, commissioning, however, is an equally important pathway to achieving energy savings and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

Energy savings by themselves are valued more than the cost of the commissioning process, with associated reductions in greenhouse gas emissions coming at a “negative” cost. The median cost of conserved carbon is negative:

-$110 per tonne for existing buildings and -$25 per tonne for new construction. This is quite phenomenal when compared with market prices for carbon trading and offsets in the +$10 to +$30 range.

The non-energy benefits, however, surpass the benefits from energy-management practices. Significant first-cost savings (e.g. through right-sizing of heating and cooling equipment) routinely offset the cost of commissioning. Worker comfort is improved, indoor air quality issues are mitigated, and the competence of in-house staff is improved, among other non-energy benefits. When taken together, the net median commissioning project cost was reduced by 49%.

Smallest Common DenominatorThe smallest common denominator in commissioning is that the quality each task of the project is measured, and an issue is raised when the quality is low. In a more formal sense, building systems commissioning is an owner’s quality process that measures, verifies, and documents that the Owner’s Project Requirements (OPR) are being met.

The commissioning process can only be successful if the owner’s needs are defined and well understood. This is the first order of business for the CxA on any project. The OPR should be carefully defined then used as the benchmark against which all commissioning reviews is measured. Any violation of the OPR is viewed as poor quality, which constitutes a Cx issue.

The quality of the project delivery is continually evaluated throughout its lifecycle via commissioning reviews, which occur during all phases

of the project lifecycle. The issues that arise from these reviews are placed on a Cx issues log and are addressed during recurring. meetings.

Different Applications of CommissioningMuch of the information so far is related to new building commissioning but the Cx process has developed a few sub-categories within the discipline. The main four categories within commissioning are new building commissioning, retro-commissioning, re-commissioning, and ongoing commissioning.

Retro-commissioningRetro-commissioning responds to an owner’s desire to improve building performance, solve comfort and operational problems and reduce operating costs.

The commissioning process as applied to existing buildings has a slightly different vocabulary; however, the concept is the same. The client’s requirements are defined into a CFR document, with which the building’s current operation is measured. If the building’s operation does not meet the CFR, it becomes an opportunity to improve the facility, or a Facility Improvement Measure (FIM). An improvement measure that is specific to conserving energy is termed an Energy Conservation Measure (ECM).

Re-commissioning (Re-Cx)There are times when a building that has been previously commissioned has the need to be commissioned again. This need can arise due to a change in the building’s use and/or ownership, an onset of problems, complaints by occupants, and excessive energy bills are a few scenarios that can warrant the need for Re-Cx. This type of exercise can be more of a forensic exercise, since the building would likely be built already. The scope of work on such a project would resemble a hybrid between new building commissioning and RCx.

Continuous Commissioning (CCx)Continuous commissioning, sometimes referred to as ongoing commissioning, is a systematic approach to identifying and correcting system problems and optimizing performance in existing buildings. Its primary focus is on ensuring the persistence of building systems optimization. CCx can be viewed as a continuous program of retro-commissioning, the main difference being that data analysis is continually being done via data loggers which remain in place and continually tracking consumption and performance. Trend analysis during CCx allows building operators to compare energy consumption at different systems and make load shedding decisions in real time. n

COMMISSIONING 101:

Nigel Gray, CxP, LEED AP – Commissioning Manager

Basic Applications of Energy Savings

Brian Lunsford, Senior Project Manager,

was featured in Tank Storage Magazine’s

March/April issue for his article on internal

storage tank inspections. This is the

second article Brian has contributed to the

industry publication in the last year.

In this article, Brian discusses the

appropriate time line for terminal operators

to perform tank inspections, as well as ways

to prolong tank integrity. He also provides

specific case studies that highlight both his

own as well as Pond’s expertise in the ICM

field. To read the entire article please visit

http://www.tankstoragemag.com/content_

item_details.php?item_id=878#. n

ICM Group Proves It’s An Industry Thought Leader

86 March/April 2015 • TANK STORAGE

tank inspection

API 653 provides storage tank owners and operators with maximum inspection intervals to establish initial and ongoing tank integrity. To this end,

designed and provided to prolong tank integrity with a reasonable amount of risk. Based on those safeguards, an owner/operator has the option to delay the initial inspection for as many as 30 years. But, there are instances where the precautions may not be enough to ensure integrity, allowing issues to develop beneath the surface, and go undetected for decades. Is waiting for that maximum interval always the best course of action? Two case studies may suggest otherwise.

barrel aboveground tank

petroleum product is located at a coastal tank farm. The tank was built in 2006 in accordance with API 650, 10th edition. In addition, the tank was built on a concrete ring wall foundation and possessed an under-tank liner for containment with a sand bedding and galvanic cathodic protection (CP) system. Upon completion of tank erection, the tank was commissioned and placed into service.

The owner of the tank implemented an aggressive programme requiring inspections at a maximum 10 year interval, regardless of age. The initial API 653 out-of-service tank

inspection was performed in 2014, approximately eight years after tank erection. A

to identify topside and soil-side corrosion and pitting. As a result of this inspection, multiple soil-side indications were found. Due to the number of indications, the

and scanned with ultrasonic

thickness testing (UTT) to quantify remaining plate thickness. The results were staggering -- while the original

inches, widespread corrosion degradation was found with numerous remaining thicknesses measuring less than 0.100 inches. Corrosion rates as high as 15 mils per year (MPY) were discovered, affecting approximately 75% of the tank bottom.

The owner of the tank provided extensive construction records and test reports to an engineering team to determine the cause of the accelerated corrosion. The owner had other tanks constructed in the same manner, and was understandably concerned

about them. Still, from the owner’s perspective, all necessary precautions had been taken: he had contracted with a professional

would result in a quality product. He had secured on-site supervision throughout the construction process. Material submittals required approval by the construction manager

prior to installation. Such careful safeguards should have resulted in a sound tank – so what had occurred?

A review of the records revealed that in the design plans, the sand bedding was

quality material with low chlorides, low moisture, low

Material records indicated that the sand met all of these qualities; however, the material submittal was dated 12 months prior to the arrival of the material on-site. It followed, then, that the batch sampled for the material submittal was not the same batch that was actually provided. Moreover, photos taken during construction showed that, once on-site, the sand was

placed in a pile near the tank for several months. In the high humidity coastal environment where the tank was located, the sand became wet and contaminated over the period of time it was exposed.

The engineer did not

CP systems. As a result, he provided a cookie-cutter CP system design which was not suited for the environment. To this end, the engineering documents indicated that the CP system was designed as a galvanic anode system; these type of systems, however, have very limited applications in aboveground storage tanks, as they supply low amounts of protective

In a perfect environment of dry, high resistivity, chemically neutral sand, they can provide corrosion protection; in an aggressive environment, by contrast, standards point to the use of the more robust impressed current type of system. Further, while the owner contracted with a ‘corrosion expert’ to perform annual inspections of the CP system, examination of those surveys, along with the initial survey, revealed that the system never met the NACE International established criteria for effective CP. In other words, the CP system was not providing adequate corrosion protection. And, while the owner reasonably thought he had taken the necessary safeguards to protect his investment, in

Initial storage tank internal inspections

Terminal operators should include a baseline inspection assessment within 5-10 years of tank construction

Chrissy Colquitt – Marketing Coordinator

Terminal operators should include a

baseline inspection assessment within 5-10 years of tank

construction.

“

“

Pond has made another appearance in the industry publication Aviation Improvement Magazine. This issue featured the pavement design done on the 8L-26R Runway Pavement Replacement project at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport. With interviews and quotes from Quintin Watkins, Assistant Vice President with Baker International; Joseph Snyder, Baker’s Project Engineer; and our very own Tim Fredlund, Principal/Senior Project Manager, the article is a great way to show Pond’s impressive portfolio with industry readers.

“Executives at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL) recently became official fans of “not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.” By replacing the workhorse center strip of Runway 8L-26R and leaving its seldom-used outer edges undisturbed, the bustling hub not only saved time and money on construction, it also minimized operational disruptions and related costs for ATL’s carriers.

Last fall, crews replaced the center strip of the 9,000-foot Category III arrival runway in 29 days, at an estimated cost of $35 million. In contrast, a 2006 full-width replacement of the the adjacent Runway 8R-26L cost $91 million and took 59 days. (Both projects also included replacing associated taxiways.)

With the recent partial replacement complete, ATL’s baby is, indeed, safe and dry. And with more than 2,500 flights per day and 900,000 aircraft movements per year, the world’s busiest passenger airport can’t have it any other way. Last year, more than 96 million passengers passed through ATL’s terminals, with carriers serving more than 150 U.S. destinations and 60 international cities.”

To read the entire article, visit www.airportimprovement.com/article/partial-runway-replacement-saves-time-money-atlanta-intl n

Hartsfield-Jackson Runway Project Makes Headlines

In addition to minimizing construction costs for the airport and reducing disruption to passengers, the abbreviated schedule translated directly into cost savings for the airport’s carriers. And such costs add up quickly. Airport officials estimate that every day a runway is out of service at ATL, it costs airlines $1.5 million in increased fuel costs due to increased queuing and taxiing.

Tim Fredlund, principal/senior project manager with Pond & Company, explains that full-width pavement replacements have become the norm due to airports’ operational reliability needs. “However, as we evaluated the actual conditions (at ATL), we concluded that the keel-

section approach would allow for a significant time savings and a significant reduction in construction materials,” Fredlund relates. “Additionally, the city of Atlanta would recognize significant cost savings, reducing the total construction area by 37%, from 150,000 square yards to 95,000 square yards of concrete, including the two high-speed taxiways that needed replacement.”

New Design, Shorter ScheduleAviation Infrastructure Solutions and ATL engineers saved additional time and cost by redesigning the various layers of the pavement being replaced. Previously, the section was composed of 16 inches of Portland Cement Concrete on 6 inches of cement treated base and 6 inches of soil cement. By converting the pavement to 20 inches of Portland Cement Concrete on 2 inches of an asphalt leveling base (after milling the base material to allow for the added depth), the design team was able to offer the same level of structural support but reduce the time required to replace the runway. With the new design set, the design team established an aggressive 29-day construction schedule to meet ATL’s operational needs. Another innovative project strategy was the use of a two-step paving train that allowed crews to insert reinforcements between the two layers of concrete. Welded wire reinforcement were used to strengthen the 25-by-50 foot panels designers specified to match the dimensions of panels used when the runway was built in 1984. Although 25-by-25-foot panels are now standard at ATL, the reinforcements elevated the longer panels to the current square panels’ performance level.

Tim Fredlund

Chrissy Colquitt - Marketing Coordinator

PAT ARMOUR: Ha rd Work a nd Dedi ca t ion La id a St rong Founda tion fo r Today’s Pond & Compa ny

When Pat Armour founded Armour & Associates in 1965, the firm’s success was not a foregone conclusion. However, what started as a one-man shop in his house

50 years ago would grow to eventually become Pond & Company.

Pat was already a successful structural engineer when he decided to start his own firm. He was aided by his hard work, passion for the industry, and not a small amount of good timing. He was in the right place (Atlanta) at the right time, when the city was embarking on a building boom. The firm grew along with the city.

“He laid the foundation for the reason we’re sitting here now,” recalls Greg Swinks, Pat’s grandson.

That foundation began after World War II, when the young Navy veteran graduated from Georgia Tech in 1951 with a degree in Architectural Engineering with a structural emphasis. Charles Rudolph Armour, Jr., was nicknamed “Pat” in honor of his birthday—he was born on St. Patrick’s Day.

He was also a born engineer. Greg describes him as “a true structural engineering nerd.” He was a big time tinkerer and loved technology and computers. That engineer had a musical side—he played trumpet in a jazz band at

clubs around Atlanta during college to pay for school. Greg recalls that he was good, and he still played occasionally for his family in later years.

In the 1970s and ‘80s, Pat threw everything he had into making the company succeed—financially and personally. “It was a substantial commitment,” said Greg. The company faced its share of growing pains, but Pat was determined to see it succeed. His hard work eventually paid off.

Al Pond agrees. “He laid the foundation for everything we are today. He was the consummate professional and a respected structural engineer in the Atlanta community.”

Al joined the firm 10 years after it started, and Pat was someone he looked up to and respected. “To run a successful business you need two types of people—someone to get the work and someone to do the work. Pat’s forte was his technical ability in how he did the work.

“Integrity. When I think of him I think of integrity. A business starts with integrity,” says Al. “He was a great role model for myself and others.”

Pat’s projects read like a Who’s Who of Atlanta landmarks— they include the Georgia

World Congress Center Phases 1 and 2, Underground Atlanta, Scottish Rite Hospital, Perimeter Center and Southlake Mall.

John Fumbanks recalls that when Pat was working on the first phase of the Georgia World Congress Center (which was the biggest project at the time for the firm) he worked with a developer who insisted that everything be done as economically as possible.

Pat’s innovation was to come up with an economical system for the design of the exhibit hall roof that would be repeated on successive phases of the GWCC. John says the roof framing scheme he developed, an “alternate panel loading system” spread the weight equally throughout the roof. John recalls that Pat made the structural elements consistent so there was an economy of scale for the steel fabricator to purchase materials.

John met Pat through professional associations, before he even joined the firm. He recalls that around 1980 he attended a GSPE meeting at which Pat and Jim Cape were also present. John had recently changed jobs and the partners asked him how he liked his new employer. “They told me that if I ever decided to make another change, to let them know first.”

He did, and in 1981 John joined what was then known as Armour & Cape. In those days the firm’s work was primarily commercial development. “Pat had a knack for knowing how to design a 4-10-floor structure economically,” says John.

Pat trained a lot of the young engineers, passing on knowledge he had gained from his own mentors. Was Pat a mentor for John as well? “Yes, very much so. He was extremely willing to teach people in the firm.”

Despite his portfolio of high profile projects, the main outward sign of Pat’s success was

He laid the foundation for everything we are today. He was the consummate professional and a

respected structural engineer in the

Atlanta community.

“

“

PAT ARMOUR: Ha rd Work a nd Dedi ca t ion La id a St rong Founda tion fo r Today’s Pond & Compa ny

in the car he drove. He loved sports cars, especially Mercedes, Jaguar and Miata convertibles. Greg recalls that Pat and his wife Jean had several garages in their homes over the years that served to showcases his sports cars.

John also remembers Pat’s love of sports cars, especially a green Mercedes convertible. “He was not a small man - he was about 6’4” and my wife said it was amusing watching him unfold out of that car.”

“He had three loves—family, work and cars,” says Greg. “He was a true workaholic. He put his whole body into his company. But if he didn’t do what he did, this company wouldn’t be the company it is today.”

Pat retired in 1991; however, retirement didn’t keep him out of engineering entirely. He remained active in the Georgia Society of Professional Engineers (GSPE), of which he served as President. He also served on the Georgia State Board for Engineers and Land Surveyors for eight years, as well as the Board of the National Council of Engineering Examiners (NCEE), where he participated in development of the questions on engineering exams.

He was active in his community and church. He helped develop a program in DeKalb County to encourage kids to study math and

engineering, and he donated his engineering expertise for various building projects. For many years he drove a bus for the senior citizens at his church, the First Baptist Church of Avondale, where he also sang in the choir.

He was close to his family, particularly in the later years. He had two sons and one daughter, and Greg’s favorite memory is of seeing them hang out on the back deck drinking martinis, talking and laughing.

Pat stayed in touch with Al after retirement, occasionally meeting him for lunch. Al recalls Pat visiting the office in 2007. As he walked around and saw how much it had changed since he left, there was a twinkle in his eye.

Greg says, “He was in awe of what Al did with the company during and after his time at the firm. He knew when Pond was added to the company name that it was a ‘complete package’.”

John has been with the firm long enough to see the growth and changes that Pat set in motion. The firm expanded into civil engineering, and later mechanical and electrical, because they knew that was where it needed to go to become a full service firm. They also started focusing more on the government market. When John joined the firm, there were 15 to 20 people, primarily structural and civil engineers.

The biggest difference John sees now is the increased use of technology. An early goal of the firm was to put a computer on everyone’s desk. Pat was one of the first to have his own PC.

He retained his lifelong love of technology. Even after retirement, he stayed up on the latest gadgets. The preacher at their church said that Pat and Jean were the first people he saw with an iPad. Even in his 80s and retired, he still ran AutoCad Lite on his iPad, just for fun and to double check on the

various building projects he was involved in at his church. “He made sure the contractors were doing a good job,” says Greg.

Pat is buried in historic Oakland Cemetery, where he and Jean, his surviving spouse, have adjacent plots. He loved studying Civil War History and grew up in the Decatur/Avondale Estates area. Not everyone would describe their grandparents as “very cool people” but Greg does, and he is inspired by his memories of Pat’s hard work to make this company great. n

1951

1975

1965

1981

1966

1985

1998

1970

1991

2014

Pat graduated from Georgia Tech

Pat founded Armour & Associates

Pat hired Jim Cape

Firm renamed Armour & Cape

Al Pond joined firm

John Fumbanks joined firm

Firm renamed Armour Cape & Pond

Pat retired, founded STEAM Program for DeKalb County

Firm renamed Pond & Company

Pat Armour passed away at age 85

T i m e l i n e

He was a true workaholic. He put his whole body into his company. But if he didn’t do what he

did this company wouldn’t be the

company it is today.

““

Susan Johnson - Marketing Coordinator

Predator LRE Beddown HangarArizona Air National Guard, Ft. Huachuca Arizona

A r c h i t e c t s E n g i n e e r s P l a n n e r s

Pond designed the facility to support maintenance for the MQ-1B Predator unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). The facility consists of a single general maintenance hangar bay sized to accommodate four (4) MQ-1B Predator aircraft or three (3) MQ-9 Reaper aircraft.

Also provided in the building is a general purpose / maintenance shop, engine maintenance shop, avionics shop, battery charging room, administrative offices, conference room / break room, storage, mechanical, electrical,

communications, fire protection, restrooms and break room.

Ingenuity

Chris Jenkins, PE, LEED AP