New Stand: Ongoing work (updated)

[Hearts_fan]

On 15/02/2018 at 12:14, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Thomaso I've noticed a fair amount of rust bubbling under the paint on the metal work in the new stand. Barriers and the metal supports on the aisles to help punters getting up and down the steps. Should we be concerned?

 

Fairly extensive from what I've seen (that is, I've mostly seen the fence along the walkway). 

[Hearts_fan]

On 16/02/2018 at 07:59, The Frenchman Returns said:

Thanks as always Thomaso, I also thought it was concerning that rust was already appearing at the back of row 10, section S. I took this snap at the Hibs cup game but didn't post as hate being called a pantwetter

 

 

I love still love the New Stand though

 

 

I used to have a car like that.

[Mr Brightside]

On ‎15‎/‎02‎/‎2018 at 12:40, Thomaso said:

 

Defects will be picked up by the new Architects on an on-going basis, and in around a year there will be a 'Final Defects' full inspection.

 

In the meantime if you have any concerns on any defects (particularly any that give rise to H&S issues) I suggest you forward an email to the Club, who will forward to the PM for his attention/action.

This will be harder to manage than most projects, as there will be multiple contracts with different completion dates.  You will also have disagreements with contractors over who was responsible where two or more packages of work interface.  I don't envy the Project Manager in working through this.

[Heartsofgold]

On ‎16‎/‎02‎/‎2018 at 07:59, The Frenchman Returns said:

Thanks as always Thomaso, I also thought it was concerning that rust was already appearing at the back of row 10, section S. I took this snap at the Hibs cup game but didn't post as hate being called a pantwetter

 

 

I love still love the New Stand though

 

I have to say that that is deeply worrying for such a new construction.  Get this to the club ASAP although I suspect they will already be aware of these corrosion issues.

[Thomaso]

55 minutes ago, Mr Brightside said:

This will be harder to manage than most projects, as there will be multiple contracts with different completion dates.  You will also have disagreements with contractors over who was responsible where two or more packages of work interface.  I don't envy the Project Manager in working through this.

 

Quite easy to identify the subcontractor who installed this rusting metalwork.  They will be fully responsible for rectification at their cost - the Club are holding back retention monies from all subbies until Final Defects are signed off.

[Thomaso]

55 minutes ago, Heartsofgold said:

I have to say that that is deeply worrying for such a new construction.  Get this to the club ASAP although I suspect they will already be aware of these corrosion issues.

 

Looks to me that in the rush to get this metalwork installed,  it has not been properly galvanised or pre-coated.  At this stage I think it is a relatively simple exercise to rub down and paint with a rust inhibitor coating.

[Francis Albert]

The picture of the metalwork reminds me of driving in Italy decades ago just after new motorways in the South had been built. Every barrier in the central reservation was severely rusted, I suspect because contractors used cheap inferior steel while charging for the good stuff. But Thomaso is no doubt right - pretty shoddy and short-sighted all the same.

[davemclaren]

37 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

The picture of the metalwork reminds me of driving in Italy decades ago just after new motorways in the South had been built. Every barrier in the central reservation was severely rusted, I suspect because contractors used cheap inferior steel while charging for the good stuff. But Thomaso is no doubt right - pretty shoddy and short-sighted all the same.

Symptomatic of a necessarily rushed job imo. 

[kila]

I thought the rust was part of the authentic look like reusing the old stand bricks

 

 

[Thomaso]

1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

The picture of the metalwork reminds me of driving in Italy decades ago just after new motorways in the South had been built. Every barrier in the central reservation was severely rusted, I suspect because contractors used cheap inferior steel while charging for the good stuff. But Thomaso is no doubt right - pretty shoddy and short-sighted all the same.

 

Steel does not rust because it is inferior - it rusts because it has not been properly galvanised or coated.

[Mr Brightside]

1 hour ago, Thomaso said:

 

Quite easy to identify the subcontractor who installed this rusting metalwork.  They will be fully responsible for rectification at their cost - the Club are holding back retention monies from all subbies until Final Defects are signed off.

I was meaning snagging in the stand in general. There will be certain aspects of the project with different dates for their defect liability period. It makes it more difficult to manage than doing a snagging walk round at the end of project.

[Thomaso]

2 minutes ago, Mr Brightside said:

I was meaning snagging in the stand in general. There will be certain aspects of the project with different dates for their defect liability period. It makes it more difficult to manage than doing a snagging walk round at the end of project.

 

Once the stand is fully complete I would anticipate the Club issuing a formal 'Practical Completion' certificate.  Under standard building contracts the 'defect period' kicks off for all subcontractors from the date it is issued.

[Mr Brightside]

8 minutes ago, Thomaso said:

 

Once the stand is fully complete I would anticipate the Club issuing a formal 'Practical Completion' certificate.  Under standard building contracts the 'defect period' kicks off for all subcontractors from the date it is issued.

I am not sure that this would be the case for the main stand. As there was no main contractor, I had assumed that there would have been multiple contacts for the project. If you were contracted to work on an early part of the contract say piling or steel works, then going by your previous response you would be waiting way longer than the standard 1 year for your retention. 

 

I understand that you were involved in the glass facade, was that a standalone contract (as there was no main contract). If yes, would you not want your works signed off when they are completed rather than wait for a delayed project to be completed for the defects liability period to commence and therefore delay the receipt if your rentention?

 

My main point being that managing of the snagging on the overall project could be more complicated than if there was a single main contractor and a single contract.

[Francis Albert]

39 minutes ago, Thomaso said:

 

Steel does not rust because it is inferior - it rusts because it has not been properly galvanised or coated.

If it hasn't been galvanised or coated doesn't that kind of make it inferior to steel that has been?

 

Some quality control failing?

[Thomaso]

9 minutes ago, Mr Brightside said:

I am not sure that this would be the case for the main stand. As there was no main contractor, I had assumed that there would have been multiple contacts for the project. If you were contracted to work on an early part of the contract say piling or steel works, then going by your previous response you would be waiting way longer than the standard 1 year for your retention. 

 

I understand that you were involved in the glass facade, was that a standalone contract (as there was no main contract). If yes, would you not want your works signed off when they are completed rather than wait for a delayed project to be completed for the defects liability period to commence and therefore delay the receipt if your rentention?

 

My main point being that managing of the snagging on the overall project could be more complicated than if there was a single main contractor and a single contract.

 

Delayed payment of retention happens all the time in the construction industry, regardless when you complete your works, or whether you are working direct to the Client, or to a Main Contractor. 

 

I do agree with your final point though, albeit subcontractors will have to rectify their defects.

[Thomaso]

Just now, Francis Albert said:

If it hasn't been galvanised or coated doesn't that kind of make it inferior to steel that has been?

 

Some quality control failing?

 

No it's an inferior finish to the base steel.

 

I do not believe that the metalwork did not show signs of rust when first installed.  The Club had every right to expect the steel subcontractor to quality control their product before it arrived on site.

[Francis Albert]

1 hour ago, davemclaren said:

Symptomatic of a necessarily rushed job imo. 

And of the old motto the more hurry the less speed. Or the "hasten slowly" dictum.

It is questionable whether the job need have been so rushed and whether at the end of the day rush and its impact on cost will have been justified. With the benefit of hindsight of course. Or whether the rush really explains the number of ****** ups.

[Mr Brightside]

1 minute ago, Thomaso said:

 

Delayed payment of retention happens all the time in the construction industry, regardless when you complete your works, or whether you are working direct to the Client, or to a Main Contractor. 

 

I do agree with your final point though, albeit subcontractors will have to rectify their defects.

I take it you are unable to confirm if there are multiple contracts?

 

 I am genuinely interested in the managent of the project rather than being awkward. I am involved in construction projects normally as the clients engineer/ pm and I do think that due to the way the project has been procured the PM will have had a tough time of it.

[Beast Boy]

1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

The picture of the metalwork reminds me of driving in Italy decades ago just after new motorways in the South had been built. Every barrier in the central reservation was severely rusted, I suspect because contractors used cheap inferior steel while charging for the good stuff. But Thomaso is no doubt right - pretty shoddy and short-sighted all the same.

 

He’s even using Hibs fantasy shit to troll the forum now. Seriously... how sad is that.

 

Whats next Franny? How many medals has Levein won? Did we rob the Poppy tins?

 

 

[Francis Albert]

6 minutes ago, Thomaso said:

 

No it's an inferior finish to the base steel.

 

I do not believe that the metalwork did not show signs of rust when first installed.  The Club had every right to expect the steel subcontractor to quality control their product before it arrived on site.

The first is a bit nitpicking IMO.

My reference to a quality control failure was referring to the sub-contractor not the Club, Although in a well managed projuct the main contractor or whoever is in overall control would surely get sonme paperwork to confirm that quality control had been signed off.

Edited February 19, 2018 by Francis Albert

[Francis Albert]

2 minutes ago, Ryder said:

 

He’s even using Hibs fantasy shit to troll the forum now. Seriously... how sad is that.

 

Whats next Franny? How many medals has Levein won? Did we rob the Poppy tins?

 

 

Don't be silly. I am referring to a photo posted on here not "Hibs fantasy stuff".

[Beast Boy]

Just now, Francis Albert said:

Don't be silly. I am referring to a photo posted on here not "Hibs fantasy stuff".

 

Inferior steel... aye, okay then Franny. Couldn’t resist that one could you?

[Thomaso]

3 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

The first is a bit nitpicking IMO.

My reference to a quality control failure was referring to the sub-contractor not the Club, Although in a well managed projuct the main contractor or whoever is in overall control would surely get sonme paperwork to confirm that quality control had been signed off.

 

Nitpicking???  You Franny?????

 

The subcontractor was given the required performance Spec for the metalwork by the Architect, and as experienced manufacturers they know full well that external steel must be properly protected against rust.

 

It is irrelevant whether they gave the Club a bit of paper allegedly confirming it had been quality controlled - the subcontractor is liable for this defect even without paperwork and they will need to rectify ay their cost.

[Francis Albert]

3 minutes ago, Ryder said:

 

Inferior steel... aye, okay then Franny. Couldn’t resist that one could you?

I was referring to the stuff I saw in Southern Italy  Italy and in the same post said I was sure Thomaso was right on the galvanising and coating.

[Francis Albert]

2 minutes ago, Thomaso said:

 

Nitpicking???  You Franny?????

 

The subcontractor was given the required performance Spec for the metalwork by the Architect, and as experienced manufacturers they know full well that external steel must be properly protected against rust.

 

It is irrelevant whether they gave the Club a bit of paper allegedly confirming it had been quality controlled - the subcontractor is liable for this defect even without paperwork and they will need to rectify ay their cost.

Touche!

[Beast Boy]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

I was referring to the stuff I saw in Southern Italy  Italy and in the same post said I was sure Thomaso was right on the galvanising and coating.

 

 

Inferior steel, eh... bantz

[jambofaefife]

The exposed steel should have been galavaised not painted for a long lasting finish.

 

What has been applied looks like a standard zinc phosphate primer.

 

This has probably resulted from the engineer/fabricator having a standard spec on a drawing and nobody in the architect project management team checking a fundamental thing. 

 

A bigger concern is tye is the barriers at the end of each row in the stand, there is no way they should have passed a safety test, you can bend them with your hands, would dread to think if there was a late goal and people were rushing back to there seats resulting in a crush, these would fail.

 

Again a small detail not picked up by an in experienced Project Manager

[kila]

I had assumed the grey bits would be painted maroon to match the other stands. The untreated wood holding the press desk covers should be painted maroon too.

 

[davemclaren]

42 minutes ago, jambofaefife said:

The exposed steel should have been galavaised not painted for a long lasting finish.

 

What has been applied looks like a standard zinc phosphate primer.

 

This has probably resulted from the engineer/fabricator having a standard spec on a drawing and nobody in the architect project management team checking a fundamental thing. 

 

A bigger concern is tye is the barriers at the end of each row in the stand, there is no way they should have passed a safety test, you can bend them with your hands, would dread to think if there was a late goal and people were rushing back to there seats resulting in a crush, these would fail.

 

Again a small detail not picked up by an in experienced Project Manager

Are the ‘barriers’ at the end if rows not just handrails rather than crowd control barriers?

[jambocub]

1 hour ago, Thomaso said:

 

Nitpicking???  You Franny?????

 

The subcontractor was given the required performance Spec for the metalwork by the Architect, and as experienced manufacturers they know full well that external steel must be properly protected against rust.

 

It is irrelevant whether they gave the Club a bit of paper allegedly confirming it had been quality controlled - the subcontractor is liable for this defect even without paperwork and they will need to rectify ay their cost.

Who were the contractor for this work?

[jambofaefife]

13 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

Are the ‘barriers’ at the end if rows not just handrails rather than crowd control barriers?

 

They will be looking lucky if they last a year, couple of screws at the bottom holding them down

[Francis Albert]

2 hours ago, davemclaren said:

Are the ‘barriers’ at the end if rows not just handrails rather than crowd control barriers?

Hamdrails are surely supposed to offer support not bend or move when you hold them.

 

[Don Dan]

Hope the architect and the engineers have good insurance to cover sub standard works if the items are in fact inferior.

[Governor Tarkin]

 

 

 

[davemclaren]

30 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Hamdrails are surely supposed to offer support not bend or move when you hold them.

 

They are, but failure of a handrail tends to be less catastrophic than failure of a crush barrier. Hopefully people are reporting these defects to the club. 

[Ricardo Shillyshally]

1 hour ago, Dannie Boy said:

Hope the architect and the engineers have good insurance to cover sub standard works if the items are in fact inferior.

A bona fide project manager would have, but that discussion was a few hundred pages ago

[Jambo-Fox]

Use the compensation money to fill the corners in!!!!

[Francis Albert]

2 hours ago, davemclaren said:

They are, but failure of a handrail tends to be less catastrophic than failure of a crush barrier. Hopefully people are reporting these defects to the club. 

Sorry I didn't. Almost everyone in my vicinity  leaving on my first visit to the new stand was commenting on the flexible handrails. It should not have needed to be reported.

 

At some point we will have to admit that for our £15m and counting this has not been an unqualified success. From the initial lies about the initial delay on.

 

Aren't we due an update on the revised timetable?. When will the second and third floors be open? When will the police box be trimmed back to eliminate (most) of the restricted views? (It was supposed to be during the winter break)

[Francis Albert]

7 hours ago, Thomaso said:

 

Nitpicking???  You Franny?????

 

The subcontractor was given the required performance Spec for the metalwork by the Architect, and as experienced manufacturers they know full well that external steel must be properly protected against rust.

 

It is irrelevant whether they gave the Club a bit of paper allegedly confirming it had been quality controlled - the subcontractor is liable for this defect even without paperwork and they will need to rectify ay their cost.

In this case maybe irrelevant, But if a contractor falsely confirmed their work had been quality controlled they would not only have been liable for rectifying the defect at their cost but also for any consequential costs.

[J80MBO]

Maybe time for administrators to close this thread.

[jambocub]

53 minutes ago, J80MBO said:

Maybe time for administrators to close this thread.

Why should they close the thread?

[FarmerTweedy]

15 hours ago, Thomaso said:

 

Steel does not rust because it is inferior - it rusts because it has not been properly galvanised or coated.

Nooooooo. It's not a proper Hearts stand unless it's been built with infeeriur steel paid for with money nicked from charity tins!

[davemclaren]

7 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

In this case maybe irrelevant, But if a contractor falsely confirmed their work had been quality controlled they would not only have been liable for rectifying the defect at their cost but also for any consequential costs.

I don’t think you can describe it as an unqualified success. I sit in the Wheatfield and if the handrail next to my end row seat felt unsafe I would write/email the club. Do all the handrails have this iddue?

[Jamboelite]

14 hours ago, jonnothejambo said:

 

Yep. 

 

This is just embarrassing. 

A £14m stand build in under a year embarrassing? Think it was going to be perfect ?

[sairyinthat]

15 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Don't be silly. I am referring to a photo posted on here not "Hibs fantasy stuff".

Surprised you graced him with a response FA

[Mr Brightside]

12 hours ago, Dannie Boy said:

Hope the architect and the engineers have good insurance to cover sub standard works if the items are in fact inferior.

The claim won’t be against them it will be the contractor’s insurance that would be claimed against. Unless the architect or engineer has specified sub-standard materials.

[Mid Calder Jambo]

7 hours ago, farin said:

 

Wouldn’t be surprised if these weren’t replaced with heavier grade steel versions sometime in the future Dave, they are a bit flimsy tbh. 

 

 

 

 

 

There should be a continuous rail down the middle of the stairs.  These rails  are hopeless.  Have you seen some of the old guys, including me, struggle.

[jambali]

15 hours ago, jambofaefife said:

The exposed steel should have been galavaised not painted for a long lasting finish.

 

What has been applied looks like a standard zinc phosphate primer.

 

This has probably resulted from the engineer/fabricator having a standard spec on a drawing and nobody in the architect project management team checking a fundamental thing. 

 

A bigger concern is tye is the barriers at the end of each row in the stand, there is no way they should have passed a safety test, you can bend them with your hands, would dread to think if there was a late goal and people were rushing back to there seats resulting in a crush, these would fail.

 

Again a small detail not picked up by an in experienced Project Manager

These "barriers are better with some "give" if you get pressed against them

Edited February 20, 2018 by jambali
Blank - corrected

[kila]

9 minutes ago, Mid Calder Jambo said:

 

There should be a continuous rail down the middle of the stairs.  These rails  are hopeless.  Have you seen some of the old guys, including me, struggle.

 

Is it not just the same as the other stands though?

[All roads lead to Gorgie]

I sure we will be onto the contractors to sort out the snags, we are paying more for the finished article than the estimate suggested after all and we should expect a better finish than has been delivered so far!