The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1912-03-17

90. Boiler room. The hole in stack
to receive breeching is too low, and
smoke breeding is not yet erected
We find that this is true, the expla-
nation Of the contractor that the size
and place. as required by the archf-
tect and designated by the plumber, is
correct, and he is probably relieved
from responsibility.
81. Passenger elevator SHAFT Shaft
walls to be plastered. The contractor
states that this plastertng was not
done. at direction Of the architect
Page 43 Of general specifications, ele-
vator shafts are required TO be built
and constructed by the general con-
tractor. Pages "a and 25 OF same
| specifications, provides that ali the
walls. partitions and ceilings, except
| where otherwise specified shall be
plastered with an approved first class
plaster" The elevator shafts are not
specifically mentioned, any more than
| any other walls of the building. Page
| 3 OF specifications, already quoted in
our report, provides that 'specifica-
tons and accompanying drawings are
intended to be cooperative and pro
| vide for a finished piece Of work In
| our judgment contractor should do this
| work, which has been omitted.
90. Court room first floor, plat
| form unfinished.
| 81. Room east OF court room Sec
ton Of wood base to be supplied. This
work has been finished since report
was made
81. Solicitors room Easement
sash leak All similar easements on
street elevation of building leaky.
| This is true Of all easement win
| dows. However the contractor, on ex-
animation of specifications and con-
tract and plans. was not required TO
put on the outside strip. We agree
/ contraction
| his contract
Roof Not According 10 Specifications.
| SO. Roof. The roof is laid contrary
/ to specifications and OF different ma
terfals and leaks badly. The entire
roof should be relaid according TO con-
| tract, plans and specifications,
This Is language used by Geo NJ
| Hophnson, and roof leaks badly in
| different parts Of the building. We
| find on examination and inspection of
| the roof and interior Of the building.
that this roof as laid is not only not
| in conformity with specifications but
is improperly laid.
! Specifications provide as follows:
! Roof. General subject The entire
| upper surface OF the roof slab to be
| plastered with Portland cement NOR
tar, to bring 1t to perfectly smooth
graded surface. Over the foregoing
shall be laid heavy standard anchor
/
| First coat-the concrete with hot crys-
| tai Venezuela asphalt cement, mop on
| uniformly: over this coating Of cement
| lap two thicknesses of Warren's COM
posits felt Ii pounds to the square,
| manila paper side down, tapping each
sheet II inches over the preceding one.
| Over the entire surface of the COM
posits felt thus laid mop on an even
| coating OF Warren anchor brand as
| phah roofing cement; over this coat OF
[ cement lay ono thickness OF anchor
brand felt, tapping each at least 3
inches over the preceding one, making
sure TO stick the lap thoroughly with
the hot anchor brand asphalt roofing
| cement. Over this first sheet Of anchor
brand felt mop again an even coating
of cement, and over this lay a second
| sheet Of anchor brand felt, having
| the laps come In the middle of the
first sheet Of anchor brand felt be-
| meath. sticking the 2-inoh lap as be-
fore. Over the entire surface Of the
felt thus laid, spread an even coating
Of the anchor brand cement, covering
| II Immediately with a sufficient body
/ of well screened dry gravel n the
roofing Is applied In cold weather the
gravel must be heated.
This is the roof called ror and 70
qutred by the specifications to be put
on by the contractor. The architect
| acted without authority In ordering
the change of this roof from the Orig1-
nal specifications, as article 8 Of the
contract heretofore quoted, limits his
authority for changes, etc, to $4,000.
In our opinion If the original specif1-
cations mentioned had been followed
and the contractor had complied with
his contract and specifications for ce-
menttng the parapet walls, detail sheet
| s, section MN, and detail sheet No l,
ry7p
| quired him to place lead flashing. and
to cement the parapet walls; then
| there would be no occasion for his
statement contained in letter relative
to item SO Of this report
II. The structural concrete slab has
not been troWeled and floated with ce-
mont to a smooth surface az specified,
before aPplyins the water prOofns
We find this Is true This Is pro-
vided for in general specifications, as
quoted in our discussion OF item 60 in
this report. The contractor explains
| this by saying that the change was
ordered by architect. The change OF
this roof which involves this item was
without authority of the architect, and
the contractor, as we have stated, had
his contract to advise him OF this fact
70. Flag pole does not measure to
specifications and should be 45 feet
| high, as per Specifications,
The contractor should. in our tudg-
ment, comply with his contract and
| specifications, which calls for IS foot
flag pole
/ "a. undations-Ccnoreta footines
are made smaller than contract plan
shows and credit 10 due the county.
This item Is discussed at the end of
this report
70: Suspended plaster ceiling omit
ted In certain parts of the building.
We agree with Mr.. Hopkinson. who
says suspended plaster ceilings are
shown on drawings in certain portions
of the building, but same are not pro
| vided-
| ". Allowance and deduction by con-
tractor for cinder filling In partitions
omitted.
We take up this matter under head
of Deductions and allowances"
70. Carrying footings Of building to
lower depth, etc.
This item relates to the detailed
! ftemfzed statement for carrying foot
ings Of building to lower depth. and
for change Of cell block from brick
| to concrete. and contract fer railing
and woodwork in court room building,