Design flaws lead to renovations
Construction set to end in winter
BRIAN MINK
Issue date: 10/24/07 Section: News
- Page 1 of 1
| |
|
The project aims to rework the building's masonry and replace 60 windows, University officials said.
The external overhaul of the 11-year-old law school annex is a long time coming, said Don Tadlock, construction director.
"We've been chasing water issues for the better part of three to four years now," he said.
Construction began in mid-June and is scheduled to finish by December, Tadlock said. The noisy work of tearing away at the building's mortar has the contractor working virtually around the clock, he said, with the loudest work taking place at night.
Corrective measures of this scale are a relatively rare occurrence, he said, though the University's Physical Plant conducts routine maintenance on a number of buildings.
Rusk Hall's problems began with ineffective design and worsened due to shoddy construction, he said.
"Mistakes happen probably on every construction site," said Danny Sniff, associate vice president for facilities planning. "It's kind of like, how do you plan for something that's unforeseen like that? We have a 24/7 response."
Sniff said the rupture of a city water main by a construction worker in East Campus is one such incident that had unfortunate repercussions.
"The guy was digging where he was supposed to be, but the line was out of place," he said. "He just nicked it."
Dexter Adams, grounds director, said University officials took measures to improve pedestrian and vehicle traffic on Carlton Street near Aderhold Hall.
Construction crews made use of a stretch of away games to rehabilitate the street's pavement and create more effectively placed sidewalks, he said.
"There really was an opportunity to redevelop that corridor," he said. "The bus stop there in front of Aderhold has always been hairy."
2008 Woodie Awards
Viewing Comments 1 - 7 of 10
Andrew
posted 10/24/07 @ 5:57 PM EST
An 11-year old building in need of renovation: hmmm. The story here is "shoddy construction" and "ineffective design" indeed. Would it not be like journalism to discover what construction firm built this colossal waste of funds, what architecture team design this poorly conceived building? Are there any other buildings on campus these firms have ruined? Please offer some journalism on this. (Continued…)
Nick
posted 10/24/07 @ 8:27 PM EST
that's exactly what I was thinking. why do we have to pay for this obvious failure of design? what a waste of money... almost a million bucks for shoddy windows on a relatively new building. (Continued…)
sam
posted 10/25/07 @ 1:44 PM EST
I agree. Flashing was invented a long time ago and it would be negligent to not include such a basic element. Why wasn't it inspected during construction. (Continued…)
sam
posted 10/25/07 @ 1:48 PM EST
I agree. Flashing was invented a long time ago and it would be negligent to not include such a basic element. Why wasn't it inspected during construction. (Continued…)
CaveMan
posted 10/25/07 @ 5:07 PM EST
Maybe someone will step up and explain whether any compensation will be sought from the contractors. Surely someone in UGA's legal office has looked into this. (Continued…)
CaveMan
posted 10/26/07 @ 3:33 PM EST
Anon,
Sure. Nice beaver, by the way.
Ron
posted 10/28/07 @ 1:52 AM EST
This building was designed by the University Architect Office. So UGA designed this building and supervised its overall construction. This building sticks out like a sore thumb from the rest of campus and was the last building built under the previous president. (Continued…)
Post a Comment