Salem, Oregon is a-buzz with the news that its LEED Certified Courthouse Square building and transit mall have been declared structurally unsound. The ten year old home of Cherriots bus service and hub for local government is being evacuated as we speak. City departments are scrambling to lease office space in other buildings, and quickly move before catastrophic failure of the building threatens them.
Sounds like the introduction to some horror movie, but it is true. The Courthouse Square Building in Salem has been declared structurally unsound and tenants have been given 30 days to move out so the building can be closed. The LEED Certified building has been the crown jewel of the city, until recently when major structural problems were found.
No one knows, or is saying at least, what is causing all the structural issues. Cracked walls and ceilings are the hallmark of what appears to be a buckling post-tensioned concrete slab. The concrete was recently tested and found to not meet the specified strength. Garbage was found in the slab when samples were taken. Claims against the architect and the general contractor have already been settled, but the amounts do not come near the $30 million price tag for the building.
What bothers me most about this situation is that projects like this can give LEED a bad name. Energy efficiency, recycled materials, and green roofs don’t do anyone any good unless the building is sound. LEED projects get a lot of press these days, although they are becoming more commonplace, and projects like this can leave the public wondering what designers were thinking. Are they focusing too much attention on being green and not enough on good design?
I’ve heard it said that green design is good design. It takes an integrated team approach to design a high-efficiency building. Systems have to meld seamlessly together, working with each other, as opposed to jockeying for position and space in the complicated web that is a building. Extreme high-efficiency buildings, such as those attempting LEED Platinum, require a more symbiotic relationship between the building systems, even using each other to further their efficiency.
Unfortunately, this rarely happens in the world of municipal “lowest bid wins” design. Owners want, or require, a high-efficiency building, but are unwilling or unable to pay for the work that is required to design one. I am not saying it is not possible to design a green building in this realm, just that it can be more difficult. We have to learn to look beyond the immediate cost of a design or building, to the life cycle costs of the building system as a whole. Ten years is not a long life for a commercial building, certainly not one that claims to be environmentally friendly.
Photo courtesy of Yovany Alas through a Creative Commons License.
I do not agree with the author in saying that this is a problem of low bid design, this could have just as easily occurred with design build or any other delivery. This comes down to poor quality control on the owner’s part!
The problem is a post-tensioned slab with garbage in it would miss on-site inspections, since it was manufactured off-site. I agree that the “low bid” aspect is rarely beneficial. So often you get what you pay for.
The problem is a post-tensioned slab with garbage in it would miss on-site inspections, since it was manufactured off-site. I agree that the “low bid” aspect is rarely beneficial. So often you get what you pay for.
You are right, retrorambler, low quality can occur with any project. However, I do think that cutting corners can occur more readily with a low bid project, as the contractor has more incentive to keep costs as low as possible.
You are right, retrorambler, low quality can occur with any project. However, I do think that cutting corners can occur more readily with a low bid project, as the contractor has more incentive to keep costs as low as possible.
The article does not provide enough information to determine if the structural problems are due to errors or omissions in the design, construction quality problems, or a combination of those factors. As with any project, LEED or not, the three principles of quality, cost, and schedule govern. One may optimize for two of the three, but never for all three.
The public contracting low-bid system is not inherently and automatically a problem, as evidenced by many billions of square feet of successfully constructed facilities. However, it can add significantly to the time and effort required to assure compliance with the contract and regulatory requirements during construction vigilantly. All projects are governed by contract documents that spell out who is responsible for what and the quality standards that are to be met.
In response to the comments posted by retrorambler and Bill Randall: In traditional design-bid-build contracts, the owner is typically not the party that is responsible for quality control during construction. That responsibility falls primarily to the contractor and perhaps to some extent by the design team. Post-tensioned concrete structures are cast on site and the reinforcing steel tendons within are tensioned on site after the concrete has sufficiently cured. Hence POST-tensioned as opposed to pre-tensioned which is typically used in precast factory produced structural elements.
LEED certified buildings, and buildings with similar performance goals, do sometimes require a greater degree of integration between various design disciplines. These buildings may also therefore require a greater degree of integration and cooperation between construction trades as well, which requires a savvy contractor to pull it all together while maintaining quality.
The article unsuccessfully seeks to establish that there is a nexus between new LEED certified buildings and poor construction quality due to a low-bid construction contracting method that has been used successfully for many years on many projects. I have observed that one reason problems may arise on a public construction project occurs when an owner sets building performance goals (such as LEED) that are inconsistent with the project budget and or schedule at hand. There is no inherent conflict between achieving LEED goals and building durable buildings to a budget using a traditional design/bid-/low-cost bidder project delivery method. Buildings are just buildings after all.
Municipal Architect,
I agree with you that there are many low-bid buildings that are wonderfully designed and built. They make up the great majority of government and institutional buildings. I was not trying to draw any conclusions about the cause of the structural issues at Courthouse Square. Clearly, there is a lot going on here, as there are several checks and balances in the design and construction process that usually help avoid these types of issues.
It is unfortunate that these issues arose on a LEED project, as I think there might be some guilt-by-association. However, until a full investigation is done, and we learn where the problems are, it is hard to draw any conclusions.
I also agree that budgetary concerns are always at the forefront of any owner’s mind, and they certainly need to be taken into consideration when designing for LEED.
Thanks for the input.
Municipal Architect,
I agree with you that there are many low-bid buildings that are wonderfully designed and built. They make up the great majority of government and institutional buildings. I was not trying to draw any conclusions about the cause of the structural issues at Courthouse Square. Clearly, there is a lot going on here, as there are several checks and balances in the design and construction process that usually help avoid these types of issues.
It is unfortunate that these issues arose on a LEED project, as I think there might be some guilt-by-association. However, until a full investigation is done, and we learn where the problems are, it is hard to draw any conclusions.
I also agree that budgetary concerns are always at the forefront of any owner’s mind, and they certainly need to be taken into consideration when designing for LEED.
Thanks for the input.