The Cost of a Building Error

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: The Cost of a Building Error

Post by _harmony »

Tchild wrote: Basically, the contractor is related to a senior general authority, has a fixed and healthy profit margin, and has made a mint.


Which GA?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: The Cost of a Building Error

Post by _Runtu »

It's been more than 15 years since I worked at the COB, but this issue with the concrete slabs was known back then and commonly talked about among employees. Doesn't surprise me.

If you go into the work areas of the COB (the nonpublic areas), it's a real dump. Old, threadbare carpets (ours were stitched together with what looked like fishing line), peeling vinyl on "modular" panels, much of it 1970s fake wood paneling. And it's widely considered a sick building (I had health issues that mysteriously stopped within a few weeks of my leaving there).

I walked past the Conference Center recently, and I noticed that virtually every granite tile on the outside of the building has cracked and been patched. A friend (who is a structural engineer) told me that this was a result of cutting corners and doing things in a hurry, such that the building doesn't handle heat and cold as well as it should, hence the buckling of the surface tiles.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_malkie
_Emeritus
Posts: 2663
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:03 pm

Re: The Cost of a Building Error

Post by _malkie »

Tchild wrote:
jskains wrote:It is amazing how many folks just blindly nod their head and believe what some random poster claims.

Mighty builder's claims seem consistent with the body of knowledge about past and current church budget's. I am skeptical of a 1.34 billion dollar retrofit/recladding amount for the COB. Sometimes retrofits are more expensive than new construction, but at 1.3 billion, you could build a new Taj Majal.

I am sure if they said he also got the building permits for a child rape room, you'd nod and say "I knew they were up to something".
Yeah, but no one is saying that, implied it, nor in any way referenced anything so outlandish. Goes to show the paranoid imaginations of believers that are willing to demonize any criticisms of their cherished beliefs.

Such foaming at the mouth over LDS Church dirt.
"Foaming", you mean incredulity between the contrast of the "human" church over its appearance based "holiness" facade?

The church is a man made institution and everything points to that fact. That is why we discuss its human errors and foibles. And it is fun.

I'd like to see the bill for recladding the "holiness" facade.
NOMinal member

Maksutov: "... if you give someone else the means to always push your buttons, you're lost."
_mentalgymnast

Re: The Cost of a Building Error

Post by _mentalgymnast »

The Mighty Builder wrote:The Mormon Church is currently troubled by the structural deterioration of the Church Office Building (COB).

When constructed the metal skeleton was clad with precast concrete slabs. This was done at great savings compared to other types of cladding considered by the Mormon Church. It is cheap, easy to install and was suppose to last for centuries. This cladding system was also used on the Mexico City temple when it was first built. In the correct environment it is a very suitable system. However as the Mormon Church has discovered in the wrong environment it is a disaster.

Several years ago a piece of cladding fell off the Mexico City Temple. Forensics discovered that the rebar used in the concrete had begun to deteriorate (rust) due to the hygroscopic properties (affinity for water) of unsealed concrete. Given the humid/wet environment of Mexico City the rusting of the rebar caused it to swell. This swelling puts great pressure on the concrete until it cleaves along a fracture plain and fails. The result is concrete patches falling from the sky. It became so critical at the Mexico City Temple that the Mormon Church had no choice but to close the temple and re-clad it with another material, in this case a Granite. $40 Million dollars was spent on the refurbish/remodel of the temple.

Well, the same thing is happening with the COB. Though no material has fallen off the building, it is continuing to deteriorate. It was thought at first that some sort of stabilization could be done on the material. But nothing tried so far works.

Well we got the estimation for refurbish/remodel of the COB – 1.34 Billion Dollars.


Is this your source? Language seems familiar.

http://www.salamandersociety.com/news/070211.html

Trojan Brand Veils Church Office Building During Remodeling

by The Mighty Builder and Stray Mutt - CNN - Construction News Network

Salt Lake City - Investigators and inspectors have just learned that there are major structural problems with the Church Office Building.

The outside cladding is made of concrete panels. The panels have rebar reinforcing grids throughout. The rebar is corroding (which causes swelling) due to the hygroscopic properties of concrete (affinity for water) and the concrete is separating around the rebar.


The concrete panels are becoming unstable and will eventually separate and fall off the face of the building...

The same thing has happened to the Mexico City Temple and the Mormon church is going to replace the facing with stone panels....


Interesting source.

Regards,
MG
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: The Cost of a Building Error

Post by _Runtu »

mentalgymnast wrote:Is this your source? Language seems familiar.

http://www.salamandersociety.com/news/070211.html

Trojan Brand Veils Church Office Building During Remodeling

by The Mighty Builder and Stray Mutt - CNN - Construction News Network

Salt Lake City - Investigators and inspectors have just learned that there are major structural problems with the Church Office Building.

The outside cladding is made of concrete panels. The panels have rebar reinforcing grids throughout. The rebar is corroding (which causes swelling) due to the hygroscopic properties of concrete (affinity for water) and the concrete is separating around the rebar.


The concrete panels are becoming unstable and will eventually separate and fall off the face of the building...

The same thing has happened to the Mexico City Temple and the Mormon church is going to replace the facing with stone panels....


Interesting source.

Regards,
MG


Are you suggesting that he's his own source? I have no idea what you're getting at.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_mentalgymnast

Re: The Cost of a Building Error

Post by _mentalgymnast »

Runtu wrote:Are you suggesting that he's his own source?


Looks like it.

If it is an extract from the Parody News from the Salamander Society that makes it suspect as a reliable source.

Regards,
MG
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: The Cost of a Building Error

Post by _Runtu »

mentalgymnast wrote:
Runtu wrote:Are you suggesting that he's his own source?


Looks like it.

The fact that it may be an extract from the Parody News from the Salamander Society makes it suspect as a reliable source.

Regards,
MG


To be clear:

1. This problem with the concrete slabs has been known for many years (I heard about it nearly 20 years ago).

2. Mighty Builder has posted about this before (hence, his parody post on salamandersociety).

3. The new information is the price tag.

I'm not sure how you think this earlier parody post undermines MB's information.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_mentalgymnast

Re: The Cost of a Building Error

Post by _mentalgymnast »

Runtu wrote:
To be clear:

1. This problem with the concrete slabs has been known for many years (I heard about it nearly 20 years ago).

2. Mighty Builder has posted about this before (hence, his parody post on salamandersociety).

3. The new information is the price tag.

I'm not sure how you think this earlier parody post undermines MB's information.


It makes it suspect. Parody involves exaggeration. Is the price tag an exaggeration also?

Regards,
MG
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: The Cost of a Building Error

Post by _Runtu »

mentalgymnast wrote:It makes it suspect. Parody involves exaggeration. Is the price tag an exaggeration also?

Regards,
MG


I may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but I understand the difference between parody and a serious claim. MB has a pretty good track record with his information about church construction (notably, the announcements of costs for City Creek have followed the exact pattern he said they would).

So, I'm left to decide whether to disregard something completely because, a few years back, the source engaged in a humorous parody. I figure that I can wait to see if he exaggerated or not.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_mentalgymnast

Re: The Cost of a Building Error

Post by _mentalgymnast »

Runtu wrote:So, I'm left to decide whether to disregard something completely because, a few years back, the source engaged in a humorous parody. I figure that I can wait to see if he exaggerated or not.


That's reasonable.

Regards,
MG
Post Reply