General contractor Pizzarotti has filed a suit against
developers FPG Maiden Lane and Fortis Property Group in the New York Supreme
Court last month, alleging that 161 Maiden Lane in downtown Manhattan is
leaning 3 inches to the north due to settlement of the foundation. It claims
that the settlement has caused the building’s superstructure, including the
curtainwall, to lean, making any further work on the curtainwall unsafe.
“Although the superstructure has been complete since
September of 2018, the curtainwall system has been stalled for months because
FPG and its design professionals and consultants have refused or neglected to
provide a comprehensive redesign of the curtainwall system to accommodate the
leaning and curved condition of the building, and the movement of the structure
because of the anticipated further settlement of the foundation,” reads the
complaint.
Pizzarotti claims that FPG primarily considered cost when
determining to proceed with a soil improvement foundation method rather than deep
foundation piles driven into bedrock, despite a consultant warning that the
soil improvement method would result in additional settlement of the
foundation.
In April 2018, the concrete superstructure subcontractor
advised that there were structural issues and unusual settlement up to 3
inches. The subcontractor then requested direction from FPG’s engineer or
record, according to the suit. In June 2018, Pizzarotti’s curtainwall
subcontractor, AGM Deco, advised that the curtainwall frame, already installed,
showed approximately 2 inches difference to the north from floor 11 to 21.
“After investigation and testing, it was confirmed by FPG
and its consultants, that the building was in fact leaning, as a rigid body,
outside of its vertical control,” reads the suit.
Pizzarotti claims in the suit that, based on expert
engineering information and analysis, the increased load from heavy
construction elements, such as the curtainwall, yet to be added to the
structure will cause additional settlement and movement.
The complaint lists several of Pizzarotti’s service and
safety concerns, including the “strength of the cladding attachments not only
in the static lean condition but also in a design wind storm condition. As the
change in lean has not been predicted it cannot be incorporated in the facade
panel engineering. The impacts of this can range from inoperable windows to
breaking windows and components falling to the street.”
According to the suit, Pizzarotti claims that work on the
project should not proceed any further until the expected future movement of
the building is appropriately assessed. The general contractor also says in the
suit that FPG has “failed to provide Pizzarotti with sufficient design
information, as required by the construction management agreement (CMA), for
Pizzarotti to proceed with the work in a safe and proper manner.”
The suit seeks:
A declaration that Pizzarotti’s CMA has been properly
terminated due in part to more than 120 consecutive days of stopped work;
A permanent injunction prohibiting defendants and their
agents from proceeding with work on the project, or requiring the general
contractor or its subcontractors from proceeding with work on the project,
until an adequate, safe and proper redesign is provided; and
Costs awarded.
A spokesperson for Fortis refuted the claims in a statement
provided to Commercial Observer, which originally reported on the suit.
“As two of the top engineering firms in the world—Arup and
WSP—have certified, there are no safety issues at the building and construction
can continue immediately,” said the statement. “The fact that Pizzarotti has
had more than 70 of its own employees and subcontractors working throughout the
building over the past several months (including as recently as last week)
substantiates Pizzarotti’s duplicity and underlying intent to defame the
project. This is simply a matter of a slight redesign of the building’s
curtainwall, which is already being worked on by our new general contractor,
Ray Builders.”
No comments:
Post a Comment