Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, March 24, 1990 TAG: 9003242573
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: A3 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: LESLIE TAYLOR STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Tests conducted by the GSA - which maintains all federal buildings - to determine the structural soundness of the Poff building revealed last month that the brick facade should be better anchored to concrete walls behind it.
Jim Gillern, executive director of Public Building Service for the GSA, said the facade "was not attached as it was supposed to."
"We have decided that to ensure that the facade is stable, we're going to remove it and put it back using a standard method, whatever that may be," he said. "And we don't know if it will be brick we put back on."
Gillern said builders used a tieback system to attach the facade to concrete walls.
The walls apparently had grooves cut into them in which were placed metal pieces that stuck out an inch or two from wall, he said.
The ends of the metal pieces were then laid between the bricks, to tie in with mortar, Gillern said.
"When we did testing we discovered there weren't as many tiebacks as there should have been," he said.
Tests were conducted between October 1989 and last month after workers replacing a brick facade on a concrete wall discovered plastic foam pieces in the concrete portion of the building's mechanical tower that houses equipment and elevator machinery for the 13-story building.
While those tests concluded that the presence of plastic foam was isolated, the tests did reveal problems with the brick facade as well as small hairline cracks in the outer wall of the building.
Construction to remove and replace the facade is expected to begin in late May or early June, Gillern said. Construction should be completed within two months.
The GSA has not yet determined who will pay the cost of replacing the facade, Gillern said.
It may be that J.W. Bateson Inc., the Dallas-based construction company that built the Poff Building in 1975, will have to foot the bill.
"That's going to be looked into by the inspector general's office and also our legal staff," Gillern said. "Whether we have a case or what action can be taken, hasn't been decided. [The inspector general's office] may find that there isn't enough information or that it happened too long ago and they can't do anything about it."
J.W. Bateson is one of the largest construction companies in the nation.
Three years ago, a jury in San Antonio, Texas, federal court found Bateson liable for defrauding a subcontractor on construction of a medical center at Lackland Air Force Base. The jury awarded the subcontractor more than $7.4 million, including $4 million in punitive damages.
The subcontractor had leveled several charges against Bateson, including the claim that Bateson had failed to notify the subcontractor of change order requests that affected time and cost of performance.
by CNB