Author |
Message |
Tracy Van Niel Senior Member Username: tracy_van_niel
Post Number: 119 Registered: 04-2002
| Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 08:37 am: | |
Does anyone include text regarding mold abatement in existing buildings in their documents or is this considered similar to asbestos and lead where the Owner hires a separate abatement firm to take care of it as a separate contract? Thanks for the input. |
(Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest
| Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 10:50 am: | |
The "mold thing" has diminished from hysteria to concern. I would suggest that if your concern is remediation of existing conditions, you should direct the Owner to hire a specialized consultant, and do the remediation as a separate contract. Note that usually, mold is a problem where there is some type of water problem which needs to be taken care of at the same time. Water infiltration failures in the building envelope come immediately to mind, but humid air infiltration through the building envelope, poorly maintained HVAC system, faulty operation of HVAC system, condensation on uninsulated domestic wate piping; all of these can be 1 factor in creating a benign environment for mold. You should also be aware that if the facility is used for making bread, wine, beer, or cheese, removing all of the mold may be counterproductive. |
George A. Everding, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: geverding
Post Number: 46 Registered: 11-2004
| Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 02:54 pm: | |
I have recent experience with a moderate rehab of previously renovated (1970s) housing, originally built in the 1890s. The project went on hold for a year or two between our preparation of bidding documents and the owner’s putting the project out to bid. Mold was discovered at the pre-construction walk through. Yes, there were roof leaks, no HVAC, and closed tight buildings during hot humid summer. The owner contracted with their environmental engineer to evaluate the extent of mold, and to write a scope of work for remediation. This was included by addendum as part of the renovation work. Visible mold was identified in plans and write ups prepared by the engineer, and we included quantity allowances and asked for unit prices for various concealed conditions: mold behind drywall, on furring studs, on floor joists, and so forth. The environmental engineer was hired to observe and quantify. The change orders mounted to the point where a gut rehab would have been cheaper. So much concealed mold was discovered that not much was left of the 1970s materials. The moldy materials needed to be removed under similar to hazardous abatement conditions: more controls than standard demolition, but less than asbestos. The only good thing, if you can call it good, is that once the demolished materials are out of the building, they become regular demolition waste and can be disposed of with everything else – no hazardous material landfill required. I agree with the above post, the best way is to have the owner remove prior to construction. But it can be done as part of the project. Even if the work is assigned to the general contract, I’d still have an environmental engineer on board to figure it all out and provide the criteria for removal, as well as monitor the removal from the building. |
Tracy Van Niel Senior Member Username: tracy_van_niel
Post Number: 120 Registered: 04-2002
| Posted on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - 07:56 am: | |
Thanks, George. You gave me exactly the kind of information that I needed to pass on to the project team! |
|