New Greeley Hill library has structural problems

2009-12-03 / Front Page

BY JILL BALLINGER GAZETTE EDITOR

Just a short time after it opened, the new Red Cloud Library in Greeley Hill has probems.

The building, which was officially opened in November, has some structural problems that must be corrected. The building is not, however, considered unsafe.

The whole thing came about after local engineer Thor Matteson reviewed the library’s plans which were drawn by another

ocal engineer Floyd Davis. Matteson told building officials that Davis’ calculations were wrong, and therefore, the building was unsafe.

Mariposa County subsequently hired an independent engineer to look at the issues, and that individual agreed with Matteson. County Administrative Officer Rick Benson was understandably concerned.

“I asked them point blank, ‘should I close it?’” Benson said last week. Building and public works officials determined that safety is not an issue. “The building is structurally sound,” the CAO explained.

“It’s not going to fall down, but there are problems. But it’s out of the realm of safety issues.” Benson said the original allegations about the building’s safety were “pretty serious.”

Benson said the issues appear to be code-related and could cost the County in terms of long-term maintenance. The County is working to determine the best course of action. Whatever that action is, the CAO believes Davis should be held responsible.

“It’s going to bode poorly for Mr. Davis,” Benson said. The costs of repair will be sought through Davis’ insurance.

Return to top

The admission by the County

Submitted by Dave Barrowcliffe (not verified) on Sat, 2009-12-05 15:51.

The admission by the County Administration Officer, Ric Benson, that Mariposa County caused a public building to be built that does not comply with the California Building Code which it has to administer should be a cause for much concern. If the county is unable to correctly apply the code to their own public gbuildings, what confidence can a house builder have that the county ensures that a home, on inspection is built in accordance with the code. The additional maintenance building costs, and possible litigation costs which will ultimately be borne by the county tax payers demonstrates the CAO and the Board of Supervisors have failed to discharge their duties and obligations. Surely someone in Sacramento should be informed of this situation.

Public Works is studying the

Submitted by Thor Matteson, Structural Engineer (not verified) on Fri, 2009-12-04 12:36.

Public Works is studying the severity of the structural problems. I spoke with Rick Benson and Public Works Director Dana Hertfelder this morning. If the original design had met the building code requirements there would be no issue. Since the design does not meet the structural requirements in the code, the question becomes one of determining the severity of the problems--that is what Public Works is doing now.

The biggest problems I saw in the library design related to wind and earthquake forces. Portions of the structure were designed for only about two-thirds of the loads that the California Building Code requires. Other flaws that are present in the design could compound those problems.

No building can be 100% "safe". The building code requirements are intended to reduce the risk of failure to an acceptable level. In my professional opinion (based only on reviewing the plans for the building, and not the actual construction) the library is not dangerous unless there are high wind conditions or significant snow on the roof. Over the life of the building either of these conditions is reasonable to expect; that is why the building code requires designing to resist those loads, even if they are not present all the time.

Excuse me for being

Submitted by J. Andy Crandall, P.E. C32934 (not verified) on Fri, 2009-12-04 11:45.

Excuse me for being confused. First we have an engineer, who I personally know to be both competent and reasonable, reporting a building is unsafe. Then we have a second, independent engineer concur with that report. Then we are told that the building is "structurally sound" and the problems relate to "long term maintenance". I have never seen the plans or the building in question so I cannot comment on the technical aspects of this matter. But on the matter of the above report, I find nothing but contradictions and confusion.

The purpose of the California

Submitted by Thor Matteson, Structural Engineer (not verified) on Thu, 2009-12-03 19:57.

The purpose of the California Building Code is "to establish the minimum requirements to safeguard the public health, safety and general welfare through structural strength.... (etc.)" (Section 111.2, Calif. Building Code).

If the design or construction of a building does not meet the minimum structural requirements of the building code then it is unsafe by definition. The severity of design flaws affects just how unsafe such a building is. At this time I have left a message for the County Administrative Officer to discuss in more detail with him the condition of the Red Cloud Library, and I hope that he will clarify what the County's position is on the "safety" of the building. It is very misleading to say that there are no safety problems; the building design does not meet all of the current code requirements for structural integrity.

Correction: CBC section 101.2

Submitted by Thor Matteson, Structural Engineer (not verified) on Sat, 2009-12-05 17:17.

Correction: CBC section 101.2 states the intent of the Calif. Bldg. Code, not section 111.2

The Gazette (or anyone) can

Submitted by Paul Guthrie, PE C36513 (not verified) on Fri, 2009-12-04 07:54.

The Gazette (or anyone) can verify California licensed professional engineers by going to http://www.pels.ca.gov/consumers/lic_lookup.shtml and clicking on "Click here to look up Professional Engineers and Professional Land Surveyors." I am not familiar with the plans or the structure, so I cannot comment. However, I understand that reporting incompetence in another licensed engineer is a very difficult decision. I would only consider doing so if there is serious indication of incompetence. I worked with Thor Matteson for several years in a structural engineering office. I definitely can attest to his competence and professionalism.