Las Vegas Tower Issues

• Aug 31, 2011

• #2

MiketheEngineer

Structural

Sep 7, 2005

4,654

I don't know the facts - but have heard rumors of uneven settlement, poor joints, cracks, etc.

I am sure that will all come out in the lawsuit....

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 31, 2011

• #3

Teguci

Structural

May 14, 2008

1,011

http://construction.about.com/b/2011/08/16/las-vegas-harmon-hotel-implosion-or-correction.htm

This link includes a partial list.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 31, 2011

• #4

a2mfk

Structural

Sep 21, 2010

1,314

From what I have read so far, something smells very bad here. It sounds like for economic reasons MGM would rather wipe this building off the strip then deal with it anymore. Las Vegas is way overbuilt, and this seems to be MGM's white elephant. If a brand new building can be fixed, and the owner is pushing for demo, that just strikes me as very odd.

But on a technical side of things, I would have to read more about it...

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 31, 2011

• #5

Teguci

Structural

May 14, 2008

1,011

http://photos.8newsnow.com/thumbnails.php?album=380

Found some photos. Not always sure what I'm looking at but, for seismic detailing, seems to have missing ties and stirrups (from the hip).

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 31, 2011

• #6

Teguci

Structural

May 14, 2008

1,011

OK - big file from Walter P Moore can be found at:

http://www.8newsnow.com/story/15078270/conflicting-reports-on-harmon-towers-stability

with the attached "new pictures" document being the report PDF with details etc...

Try -

http://www.8newsnow.com/docs/HarmonReport.pdf

Couldn't upload because its too big.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 31, 2011

• #7

Teguci

Structural

May 14, 2008

1,011

OK - try -

http://www2.8newsnow.com/docs/HarmonReport.pdf

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 31, 2011

• #8

a2mfk

Structural

Sep 21, 2010

1,314

That article posted by Teguci makes things clear as mud. Seems like all three firms, two of which I recognize as well-respected in our industry, don't even agree on some basics like the design was ok, but construction was bad, or vice-versa.

You'd think if it was originally designed for 48 stories and now its only 28 stories that the reduction in mass and thus seismic loading would make most of the modifications/repairs a lot simpler. This will be an interesting one to follow, hope the truth or some semblance comes out of the whole thing.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 31, 2011

• #9

Teguci

Structural

May 14, 2008

1,011

oh well nevermind - just go through the 8newsnow story and download the "new pictures" file.

Here's my fav photo from the report.

 

 http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=8f73a620-514c-4133-a788-1258c429a665&file=Harmonreport.jpg

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 31, 2011

• #10

a2mfk

Structural

Sep 21, 2010

1,314

Well of course you have a problem Walter P Moore, you removed all the concrete from the column!

What I did not like is that it seemed like all three companies, and maybe I misread that, offered to take over as EOR and do the repairs?

I hate to say this, but a neutral 4th party who will not be doing anything other than evaluating the 3 reports needs to be brought in. I never fully trust the opinion of someone who has a horse in the race.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 31, 2011

• #11

Teguci

Structural

May 14, 2008

1,011

Don't worry a2mfk, the lawyers will sort out all the problems and come to a clean easy to understand reason for the problems with the help of expert engineering testimony.

Maybe the drawings were in metric and the contractor was using imperial (klingon)?

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 31, 2011

• #12

JedClampett

Structural

Aug 13, 2002

4,031

I think that they started building this monstrosity, then put the condos up for sale right when the market crashed. Meanwhile, the contractor is pouring concrete like gangbusters. So the owner needed a way to bail, preferably without losing his/her shirt. So they magnified some design and construction errors, had some experts say the building is a danger, and they have a case to get out without paying for the construction.
I've read that the building is not salvageable. But I know that seismic retrofits have been done in buildings that don't meet code all the time. I can't comprehend that for a lot less money than starting over, even if there are errors, the building couldn't be made safe.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 31, 2011

• #13

hokie66

Structural

Jul 19, 2006

23,116

Earlier thread about this building:

thread507-286468

It seems none of the three firms mentioned in the current reports was involved in the original construction.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 31, 2011

• #14

TXStructural

Structural

Jan 10, 2007

1,033

There have been third (fourth?) party engineering evaluations. There are apparently defects which make retrofit very expensive, and when you lose half of your lease space, a project quickly loses economy.

I do not have special information about this project, but have done a bit of repair work, and retrofit can easily surpass the cost of original construction. Imagine removing every bit of cover on every column, one at a time, custom fitting new ties, then forming and pumping special mix around each column, increasing column dimensions in the process. And still not gaining any additional lease space.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote