Jump to content

Mickey Leland Federal Building At 1919 Smith St.


lockmat

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

The new exterior looks like it will be a sleek & refreshing update, however the original look was not really all that bad, similar to surrounding neighbors (also not bad).

I assume there must have been some functional need (beyond aesthetics) for the complete recladding, especially for a government building (e.g. structural deficiencies, stronger security, environmental efficiencies)

Has that been explained?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume there must have been some functional need (beyond aesthetics) for the complete recladding, especially for a government building (e.g. structural deficiencies, stronger security, environmental efficiencies)

Has that been explained?

To some extent. See my post earlier in this thread, dated Nov 9, 2010.

To summarize - The building was inefficient in many ways, leaked like a sieve, and was not designed with security in mind. The standard security measures now required at federal buildings of this size were shoehorned into insufficient space and there were significant problems.

I retired from there about 18 months ago but my old group invited me to come back for a Christmas lunch yesterday. I stopped by my old office and got the tour.

The folks I talked to weren't interested in the architectural changes so I didn't get much from them. The basics that have filtered down to the workers are sparse.

First, the building is being made "green". There's a big pipe now from the roof down right through the middle of the building. I'm told that when it rains, the sound of rushing water is pleasant for a while...then gets kinda irritating, depending on your proximity to the pipe and what's around it. I don't know if that's all a part of the "green" conversion or just a way to get the water off the roof that used to leak into the top floors like crazy.

Second, the cladding is kinda weird when viewed from the inside. It's about six inches away from the building and the workers have been told (this is hearsay and should be considered unreliable) that once it's up, the exterior walls will be moved out to meet and seal with the new cladding. Whatever the mechanics, it's clear to me that someone is making an effort to stop the water intrusion that plagued the building so badly for so many years. Back in the day, if your window faced a strong wind while it was raining, you were likely to feel some water drops that simply shouldn't have gotten inside. If they're fixing that, more power to 'em.

Third, regarding security, if you visit the building now the pedestrian entrance has been moved to the middle of the Smith street side. The temporary security portal is such a HUGE improvement over the way things were done since the OKC bombing that it clearly demonstrates that work was needed on that aspect of the building. When the final construction is finished, the main pedestrian entrance will once again move to the Louisiana side and, if the renderings I've seen are anywhere close to the final product, the final results will be well worth the money spent on them.

But was it ever in bad condition?

In my opinion - having worked all over the inside of that building for most of the last 20 years - yes, definitely, absolutely, positively.

So if a bldg owner gets a platinum LEED cert., it's a waste of money? That's news to me.

What's a "platinum LEED cert."?

Edited by benenglish
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I forgot that the government is the most efficient entity at spending money. What was I thinking.

Is the gov't going to sell the property soon? You might have a point if it was...

@benenglsh

LEED cert. = going green (i.e. improving structural and mechanical performance thereby lowering fixed costs)

Edited by infinite_jim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

You know how I know this is a federal government project? They are adding one piece of reflective glass per week. lol

Seriously though...

Its because theyre doing construction with mast climbers. which have load capacities from 2,000-8,000 lbf

(they have single mast climbers---the load capacity of those is likely less than 2000 lbf)

Window panes like that weigh about 400-600lbf.

Do the math, You can't really stage 100 window panes per mast climber :)

/edit

Edited by Purdueenginerd
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...