Ryan Stanton
mlive.com
(TNS)
ANN ARBOR, MI — Ann Arbor’s big undertaking to build the city’s first net-zero, carbon-neutral fire station is off to a rocky start.
Due to a significant surveying error made during the foundation layout, the city’s contractor for the project had to start removing the incorrectly laid out building foundation in late November to avoid further problems, Fire Chief Mike Kennedy said.
“We are continuing to assess the impacts,” he said. “Currently, we anticipate a delay of at least several weeks, though the exact duration is still being determined.”
Granger Construction Co. has acknowledged full responsibility, Kennedy said.
Paul Roller, a project manager at Granger, said the foundation layout error was discovered when a survey was done to prepare for steel erection.
“The foundation removal and replacement is ongoing to correct the work and we’re really looking forward to a successful project,” he said, deferring to Kennedy for further comment.
City Council in March approved a $10.6 million construction contract with Granger and to appropriate $12.4 million overall for the project to build a new Station 4 at Huron Parkway and Platt Road, where the old station has been demolished.
City officials gathered for a groundbreaking ceremony May 20, saying the new facility would be the first net-zero fire station in Michigan, meaning it would generate as much energy as it uses, and the first carbon-neutral city building.
Plans include geothermal heating and cooling, solar panels and other energy-efficiency measures.
As of Friday, Nov. 28, there were piles of crumbled concrete on the site and part of the foundation already was ripped out, though some of it remained intact. Kennedy said a large portion had been removed on the east side of the site, but some of the bay floor where fire trucks will park is savable — the city is just waiting on a survey to know how much.
“Some of that is going to go, some of it’s going to come out,” he said.
Explaining the mistake with the layout, Kennedy said there was a rotation error that alone was likely manageable, but the primary problem was a scaling error that caused the foundation footprint to shift and contract by about one to four inches in various locations. By the time the problem was discovered, the foundation had been poured, he said.
Structural steel installation was scheduled for the week of Nov. 17, which did not happen, he said.
“None of the steel would have lined up for what that foundation would have been,” he said. “And it would have just been this cascade of consequences to not just get that foundation right.”
It’s an active and evolving situation, so there aren’t definitive answers to every question yet, but the cost to remove and repour the foundation is Granger’s responsibility, Kennedy said.
City officials didn’t immediately have any information on the carbon impacts of having to redo foundation work.
Addressing the issue has required involvement from the city’s project architect and mechanical engineer. If that results in additional costs beyond their contract, the city will evaluate steps to recover costs from Granger, Kennedy said.
Given the contractual implications, the city attorney’s office will be engaged as well, he said.
The city’s contract with Granger includes a 428-day construction timeline with a substantial completion date of Aug. 7, 2026. Whether Granger will be able to recover the schedule impacts is still to be determined, Kennedy said.
He gives Granger credit for being forthright and owni