Image provided by: Clackamas Community College; Oregon City, OR
About The print. (Oregon City, Oregon) 1977-1989 | View Entire Issue (June 3, 1981)
“I don’t see why a public entity should accept anything less than A-l work from anyone.” — Wayne Daigle Science Center construction quality questioned Cont. from page 1 Rice suggests that some of the joints were cut from one to three weeks after the pouring of the concrete. All four men—Fisher, Rice, Lee and Singleton—agree that sandblasting the concrete worsened the appearance of the cracks. Singleton pointed out, “It (the cracking) is a little more noticeable than some areas because it is sandblasted, and when you sandblast, it kind of beads the crack out.. .but if there was any error at all, it was in sandblasting the concrete, I would tiiink.” Fisher, Rice and Lee also agree that the cracks in the courtyard are not a structural problem, but rather, “an aesthetic problem.” Foundation Cracks Further cracking problems have also developed in the above-ground foundation footings of the Pauling Center buildings. The vertical cracks run from the base of the footing to the top, and often complete ly through from one side to the other.” T; ■ Wayne Daigle, a profes sional engineer for the city, of West Linn, observes, “There’s Page 6 something amiss here, there’s just no consistency.” Daigle continues, “Within this 30 foot section of footing there are nine cracks. It’s evident to me that the fracturing that runs through the footings is not in the least acceptable,” Asked about the footing cracks, Fisher replied, “The footing cracks are not a struc tural problem, nor are they all that uncommon. I can show you several places around Barlow (Hail) that have similar cracks.” Considering possible causes of the cracking, Daigle and Jim Harris, an employee of a Portland engineering firm, sug gested that the concrete mix might have been too wet, or that the concrete was over worked, or a combination erf -both. If the concrete were too wet it could cause a large amount of shrinkage. If the concrete were overworked, it could break down the adhesion of the concrete as it set up. “You can screw up concrete just as much by overworking it as you can by putting in too much water,” Daigle explain ed. Both Daigle > and Harris believe a functional problem may develop in the building in the future. If water were to run into the cracks and freeze, it could enlarge the cracks through erosive chipping, possibly causing water to seep into the building. Harris" said' this problem could occur “a year to two down the road.” Workmanship In all of the deficiencies in the Pauling Center pointed out by Fisher, Rice, Lee, Daigle, and Harris, a common factor alluded to has been substan dard workmanship by the con tractor. “Basically the work does not show any acceptable level of skill, in my opinion,” stated Two principal problems in- Rice. the landscaping workmanship Daigle reiterates, “I jdon’t have come to the attention of landscape architect, Andy see why a public entity should accept anything less than A-l Rice. Rice cites improper prepara work from anyone.” tion of the grass seed bed and An example, according to uneven distribution of the grass Rice, of less than adequate seed. “The plans»called for an workmanship, is the sandblast even and dense growth of finish on the courtyard. “If you lawn,” Rice commented, “and judging by the patchwork look at the work out there. growth of grass, this standard you’ll see that there’s a great .was not attained,1’. deal of variation in the intensity Rice also points out that the of the sandblasting which contractor p’rovided some would indicate that the atten wrong~types of plant materials, tion given to the work was in which had to be replaced. adequate. A person who was “Basically,” Rice elaborates, really sensitive and careful with “the landscape problems keep the work would have been coming up over and over more careful when he came to again: inadequate plant those saw-cut joints,” Rice material, improper grading of said: seed beds (lawns), which they In fact, • the workmanship proceeded to finish in the same improper way.” was of low enough standards Landscape Work that a deficiency report w ed with Contractors, Inc the College through the of Don Fisher. In order to acquire a pie equipment or service ce over $1,000, the College quired by state law to seek ten bids. Then, unless thè der is unable to fulfill the lege’s needs, or the Cc chooses to turn down alia is required to accept the 1 bid offered. “It’s getting very diffidi get quality work on public jeCts,” mentioned Rice.] difficulty is that with p works contracts, you md thing competitively to and who, without reason doubt, will be able to ped the work,” Rice explained you can prove that the con tor failed to do the work if past, you can eliminate his otherwise you have to at it.” College President <1 Hakanson replies, “The] tractor has to respond specifications. All of the < tractors bid on the same d specs, and if the chosen! tractor doesn’t adhere to I specs, he can be held lej responsible.” Clackamas Community Colle?