If trumpets, followed by shouting, brought the walls of Jericho down, could whistle-blowing, followed by shouting, bring the walls of the Justice Center down?That could have been the question of the week, as county officials, having learned from a “whistle-blower” that the Justice Center walls aren’t what they should be, met with contractors, subcontractors, engineers and the architect, trying to figure out what the heck happened, and what to do about what the heck happened, with the Justice Center walls.
At issue are the steel studs that support the walls. These studs were supposed to be constructed of 20-gauge steel in order to support plaster. Instead, 95 percent of the studs were built of 25-gauge steel, which doesn’t support plaster. (The lower number is the stronger gauge).
“The difference in the cost of the material is not really significant,” said Charlie Most, chairman of the County Board. “What’s significant is the deflection, which is the amount you can move the wall, and whether it will live up to a standard over time.”
Though the walls won’t fall down and could be braced to give the studs plaster-bearing support – the contractor’s solution for the problem, the cost of which which would be borne by the contractor – Most said the architect and contractor didn’t handle the situation correctly.
“Monetarily, it’s not a serious issue, but I think how the problem surfaced to the County Board and myself is of great concern,” Most said.
The contractor learned of the problem in January. Instead of notifying the county, it began remediating the problem, Most said.
“The county was not ever informed of the problem; the architect didn’t inform the Ad Hoc (Building Committee),” Most said. “We found out through a rumor, a whistle-blower.”
By not telling the county, the problem was compounded, Most said, because workers continued to plaster the walls even after the problem was discovered.
“On the second floor, about 75 percent is wallboarded, and of that, probably about 50-60 percent has been veneer plastered,” Most said.
If the county had been told of the problem when it was discovered, there would have been more options when it came to remediation, such as replacing the lower-gauge steel with the higher.
But now that so many of the walls have already received the final plaster stage, Most said, changing out the studs isn’t likely an option.
“If you wanted to put your foot down and wanted to go to court, you could do that,” but the project would be delayed two to three years while the case was fought out in court, Most said.
“So I would say tearing the walls out completely really isn’t a viable option,” Most said.
County officials met with the architect, the contractor, subcontractors and a private engineer this week. Now, the Ad Hoc Building Committee will meet to discuss the issue at 2 p.m. Monday, Feb. 21, in the third-floor County Board conference room at the Courthouse.
“I think what you have now, at least on my part, is a serious breach of trust between the county and the general contractor and the architect,” Most said.
A spokesman for general contractor Miron Construction Co. Inc. could not be reached for comment. Thom Miron, the architect who designed the Justice Center, and who was retained by the county to oversee the project through to completion, said he’s fully aware of the situation but didn’t want to comment until after the Ad Hoc Building Committee meets Monday.
“I don’t think it’s a big deal, but it’s up to them,” Miron said.
When asked if the county should have been informed about the problem right away, he said, “It’s a matter of opinion.”
Why is this such a big deal? Because the county remodeled the courthouse a mere 10-15 years ago. Due to changing state requirements, the county decided to update the courthouse by building a new one, in a different location, instead of remodeling the existing one, or building a new one on a vacant lot right across the street from the current courthouse. Instead of waiting for the state to require the changes and being able to reply "Show us the money," they decided that the taxpayers would foot the bill. Fast forward a bit through recall elections, heated debates, letters to the editor, and the like, and the county board got what they wanted: a new courthouse on a new parcel of land.
Now we encounter this snafu, in which the fuckups at Miron used the wrong materials and decided not to tell any one. In fact, they now have the gall to call it "a matter of opinion."
Are we looking at another remodeling project in 10-15 years, or will it be sooner?
No comments:
Post a Comment