Fight over new court will go to old court

[Guest guest]

Fight over new court will go to old court

Middlesex County and a Lynchburg architect are suing each other over

mold in the building.

Daily Press - Newport News,VA

BY JON CAWLEY

757-247-4635

http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/middlepeninsula/dp-

64637sy0nov05,0,2458444.story?coll=dp-news-local-mp

November 5, 2006

MIDDLESEX -- Seven years after three Middlesex County judges

successfully sued for a new courthouse, a gavel has yet to call

court to order in the $7.4 million building completed more than a

year ago.

The long-running squabble between Middlesex and the building's

architect and construction contractor over water damage and mold

that mired the building in limbo, now looks to be decided in court.

The county has filed a $500,000 lawsuit against Wiley & ,

Inc. - the Lynchburg architecture firm that designed the courthouse -

for repair costs. The firm responded with a counter suit seeking

$200,000 in damages and a court order to move proceedings to

Lynchburg Circuit Court for trial.

Middlesex's lawsuit accused Wiley & of producing defective

plans, failing to properly manage the building process and allowing

defective construction that resulted in the water damage.

" There are design issues with the building's construction that we

think could be long-term issues, " said Culley, Middlesex

County administrator. He declined to elaborate, citing the pending

lawsuit.

Jane Glenn, a Roanoke attorney representing Wiley & , called

the lawsuit unfortunate.

" The problems encountered are attributable to construction problems

rather than design problems, " she said.

In a response filed Wednesday to the county's lawsuit, Glenn blamed

problems on project mismanagement by Middlesex County's

administration and CTI Consultants Inc., a Richmond-based firm the

county hired as the " clerk of the works, " or as an administrative

supervisor. It also cited faulty construction by Newport News

contractor, Ritchie-Curbow Construction Company, Inc.

Carl Beale, a Ritchie-Curbow vice president and courthouse project

manager, said the courthouse's problems had no relation to the

contractor's job performance. " We're not responsible to correct

design deficiencies, " Beale said. " We completed the project in

accordance with their (Wiley & 's) documents. "

Spencer Morgenthau, a spokesman for CTI Consultants, Inc. also

disputed Wiley & 's statements as incorrect.

" Construction management was not part of our scope of work as clerk

of the works, " he said.

Wiley & 's countersuit also claims a fair trial in Middlesex

would be hindered by " derogatory and false public statements about

the defendant made by members of the Board of Supervisors " and

because the outcome directly affects Middlesex residents who would

decide the case as jurors. Wiley & is seeking a $200,000

judgement against the county, claiming the firm fulfilled its

obligations and was not fully compensated.

Middlesex County Administrator Culley said the building was

completed in September 2005 but has not been used because of

recurring leaks and water damage in the basement and first floor.

The contractor removed mold, but Culley said he fears it will return

if problems aren't fixed.

A November 2004 report by Baskervill, a Richmond architecture firm

hired by Middlesex to determine the source of the courthouse damage

and make repair recommendations, found water leakage at column

bases, under first floor windows and along the foundation.

Baskervill cited design and construction flaws that allowed water to

seep into the structure especially during wind-driven rains - a

problem that would likely increase with time. Steel components

hidden in the exterior wall could rust and cause structural elements

to fail, the report stated. The Richmond firm recommended removing

the building's brick veneer to correctly install water barriers and

drainage systems.

Culley was unable to say how long repairs could take once the issue

is decided. Meanwhile, the county's court system is forced to

continue operating in the building at the center of the original

lawsuit that resulted in the new building's construction.

A musty smell permeates the old courthouse building. Cracked plaster

and what appears to be mold scars the walls surrounding court files

and other public documents in the clerk of courts office. Culley

said the building was tested a year ago and maintenance department

inspections found no mold and determined plaster walls were flaking

from age. He said he was unaware of any related health complaints

from workers in the building. After visiting the offices again last

week, he conceded damage had worsened. He brought in a firm

Wednesday to conduct environmental checks in the building. Culley

said he expected mold and air quality test results within two weeks.

The county would adhere to any recommendations from those results,

he said.