Correspondence (147) j a t -
(
FE8
4 2003
TORT CLAIM NOTICE RISK AGEMENT
ME
February 3, 2003
Mark C. Hoyt Timothy V. Ramis
Attorney at Law City Attorney
City of Tigard
1727 NW Hoyt St Certified Mail, Return Receipt No. 70001530000165265940
Portland, OR 97209 and First Class Mail
Loreen Mills
Risk Manager
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd. Certified Mail, Return Receipt No. 70001530000165265957
Tigard, OR 97223 and First Class Mail
RE: Tort Claim Notice on Behalf of Joseph Green and Joseph Green
Investment Company
Dear Mr. Ramis and Ms. Mills:
I represent Joe Green and the Joe Green Investment Company regarding
the office building they are constructing at 11560 SW 67 Avenue, Tigard,
Oregon.
I write to provide tort claim notice to the City of Tigard pursuant to ORS
30.275 as a result of a required design change, and a series of stop work orders
and other work stoppages on Mr. Green's project which began in late September
of 2002. At that time, an absolute stop work order was placed on the premises.
Mr. Green was initially informed the stop work order was placed as a result of
design issues regarding the building. He was later told that the stop work order
was placed as a result of concerns over the designation of the engineer of record
in this matter.
The design issues surrounded the stairwell, and their compliance with
fire safety standards. When the plans were initially submitted, they were
reviewed and approved as drawn. Accordingly, Mr. Green began construction,
poured the slab, ordered steel fabrication and otherwise configured the structure
475 Cottage St. N.E., in accordance with the approved plans. After the initial stop work order was
Suite 120 placed, Mr. Green was informed that the city no longer felt that the building met
Salem, Oregon 97301 fire codes and substantial redesign would be required before construction could
Phone: 503-364-3302 continue.
Fax: 503- 370 -4308
E -mail: Concerns over the architect and engineer of record appear to stem from
hoyt @hoytlaw.net the fact that Mr. Green changed the architect of record to an engineer of record
as allowed under the building code. The original designs were created, and
Timothy V. Ramis
Loreen Mills Page 2 February 3, 2003
submitted by architect Bayard Mentrum.
Some time after the plans were fully reviewed and approved, Mr. Mentrum withdrew as the
architect of record. He was replaced by Gary Darling of DL Engineering who became the engineer
of record. Written notice of Mr. Darling's substitution as the engineer of record was provided to the
City on December 11, 2001.
After the initial stop work order was placed on the structure, a series of partial and complete
stop work orders continued to be placed on the structure while the issue of designating the engineer
of record and fire safety design matters were resolved
My clients are asserting a claim for damages arising from the City's failure to adequately
review the initial plans, and subsequent placement of stop work orders, and for the additional
expenses, including delay damages resulting from the interruption of work caused by the stop work
orders.
Any and all correspondence regarding this matter should be directed to me at the address and
telephone number on this letterhead.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at your
convenience.
Your , -r y,
.r
/ ..4 fj 7
Mark C. Hoyt
MCH:vmp
cc: Joe Green
PJ r
October 11, 2002
Mark C. Hoyt
Attorney at Law Gary Lampella
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Darrell "Hap" Watkins
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
RE: Green Office Building Stop Work Order
Dear Gary and Hap:
I write to address the events of the last few days regarding the Green
Office Building, which resulted in the placement of the Stop Work Order.
Because Stop Work Orders were placed on the project, both Mr. Green's
insurance carrier, as well as his lender might inquire as to the nature of the
events which lead to the Stop Work Orders. Accordingly, it is important there
be a record in the file regarding the matter in which the Stop Work Orders came
about, my client's response, and the surrounding events and circumstances.
What follows is my recollection of events taken from information I
received from my client, my notes, and the meetings which I attended. I
welcome any corrections, modifications, or supplemental information you might
provide based on information you received during the last few days on this
project.
It is my understanding the first Stop Work Order was placed on the
project late on Friday, September 27, 2002. At that time, the foundation was
poured, the framing largely completed, the exterior sheathing placed on the
premises, and the application of exterior masonry was underway.
475 Cottage St. N.E., The Stop Work Order was placed as a result of information found by Mr.
Suite 120 Lampella when we pulled the plans on the project. Mr. Lampella went to the
Salem, Oregon 97301 plans to in vestigate whether they were stamped by Gary-Darling as the engineer
Phone: 503- 364 -3302 of record on the project. The plans at issue were drawn and stamped by Bayard
Fax: 503- 370 -4308 Mentrum the previous architect of record. When the plans were submitted by
E -mail: Mr. Mentrum they went through the full plan review process and were approved.
hoyt @hoytlaw.net
Some time after the plans were reviewed and approved, Mr. Mentrum
Gary Lampella and Hap Watkins Page 2 October 11, 2002
withdrew from the project as the architect of record. At the request of Mr. Lampella, Mr. Green
made arrangements for DL Engineering to replace Mr. Mentrum as the engineer of record by way
of a letter dated December 11, 2001.
When Mr. Lampella reviewed the plans the week of September 27, 2002, he discovered that
Mr. Darling did not stamp the plans when his firm came onto the project as engineer of record,
replacing Mr. Mentrum as architect of record. Mr. Darling did not stamp the plans, because they
were prepared by Mr. Mentrum and they were not Mr. Darling's plans.
Further investigation into the plans revealed that there were concerns regarding locations of
the stairwells and exits, in relation to building code requirements for fire exits.
Through communications with Joe Green and Joe Green, Jr., the. City indicated it wanted to
meet with Gary Darling, as well as Mr. Green regarding Mr. Darling stamping the plans, and the
need to address the location of the stairwells and fire exits. Until such a meeting took place the Stop
Work Order would remain in place.
Monday, September 30, 2002, I contacted Mr. Watkins, to determine the status of the project,
why a Stop Work Order had been placed, and the actions necessary to have the Stop Work Order
lifted. Mr. Watkins informed me a meeting was scheduled for 10:00 that morning at which be would
like to receive a set of stamped plans from Mr. Darling. He also wanted to address the status of the
locations of the stairwells and fire exits. Because I had a conflicting meeting scheduled, that
meeting was eventually rescheduled for 2:00.
After rescheduling the meeting, I spoke with Mr. Watkins regarding the scope of the Stop
Work Order. I indicated to Mr. Watkins it was my client's desire to have the Stop Work Order
lifted, as it related to the brick work on the front of the structure, so that the building materials that
were on the site could be enclosed, and would not be damaged by weather. When we spoke, Mr.
Watkins indicated it might be possible to narrow the scope of the Stop Work Order, however, he
needed to have a meeting to discuss the pending issues, prior to making any decision.
That afternoon the requested meeting took place. The meeting consisted of Mr. Watkins,
Albert Shields and Darrell Jciles,•on behalf of the City of Tigard: Mi Lampeila was unable to attend
the meeting, because he had left for a conference in Texas early Monday, September 30, and would
be gone through Friday, October 4, 12002. The meeting was also attended by Joe Green, Joe Green,
Jr. and I.
At that meeting we discussed the manner in which the Stop Work Order came about. The
events described above, involving Mr. Lampella's review of the plans to determine whether they had
been stamped by Mr. Darling was discussed. After some discussion on this issue, we turned to the
issue of fire safety. Mr. Jones, reviewed in detail the code compliance issues he perceived, given
the current layout of the plans and building code requirements for fire and exit locations. Several
alternative designs were discussed, including extended firewalls through each half of the building,
or placing additional fire exits at each end of the building on the outside of the structure.
At the conclusion of the meeting, Mr. Watkins requested that we have an appropriate design
professional address the concerns raised by Mr. Jones, and return a set of plans stamped by Mr.
Darling addressing the issue.
Gary Lampella and Hap Watkins Page 3 October 11, 2002
Further, after discussing the condition of the structure, and the fact that there was exposed
sheetrock on the side of the building which could not be protected because of the Stop Work Order,
it was agreed that the Stop Work Order would be lifted as a result of meeting to allow completion
of the roof, and exterior brickwork on the front of the building, and the rear facade.
At the outset of the meeting, the City indicated that the plans had been submitted and
approved as currently drawn. The plan review and approval was performed by an employee who
left the City shortly after the plans were performed. That employee did not raised the issues Mr.
Jones outlined in our meeting and approved the plans as drawn.
The next day, my client began meeting with Ankrum Moisan Associated Architects to
address the issues that were raised by Mr. Jones regarding the plans. While my client was working
With Ankrum Moisan Associated Architects he was contacted: by Mr. Watkins. - At -that -time -Joe
Green, Jr. indicated that he was working with appropriate officials to address the City's concerns,
and as soon as appropriate plans were prepared they would be provided. Mr. Green indicated that
given the schedule of the parties involved, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to provide plans
that day.
At that time, Mr. Watkins made several suggestions as to ways in which the questions
regarding fire exits could be resolved. Mr. Green indicated he would review those suggestions with
appropriate design professionals, and provide plans stamped by qualified professionals as soon as
they were available.
At approximately the same time, the revised Stop Work Order was placed on the premises,
which allowed Mr. Green to move his masonry contractor back on the site. The masonry contractor
came on site, and began placing scaffolding and otherwise preparing to perform work as authorized
by the narrowly crafted Stop Work Order.
Some time that afternoon, the narrow Stop Work Order was replaced with a complete Stop
Work Order. When I contacted Mr. Watkins to find out the status of the matter, I was informed that
he spoke with Mr. Lampella it was decided a Stop Work Order must be placed on the premises until
the issue of Mr. Darling stamping the plans was resolved. After some discussion, I asked Mr.
Watkins to provide me thc: authority_ on which he relied for placing the - Stop Work Order. In
response to our request, Mr. Watkins faxed me the portions of the code he relied upon for requiring
Mr. Darling to stamp the plans as the engineer of record.
After I had an opportunity to review the code provisions on which the City relied, I contacted
Mr. Watkins regarding the requirement Mr. Darling stamp the plans prior to the Stop Work Order
being lifted. I indicated I did not feel the code provisions required Mr. Darling to stamp the plans.
Mr. Watkins indicated he would need to review the matter with Mr. Lampella, as it was Mr.
Lampella's decision as to the requirements.
At the same time, Mr. Watkins indicated that this matter had been pending for nearly a year,
and was concerned that my clients had been unresponsive to Mr. Lampella's requests. I asked Mr.
Watkins if he could provide me copies of the correspondence or communications requesting
information from my clients on this issue, Mr. Watkins told me he could not provide the information
without the appropriate personnel being present. Because Mr. Watkins, and I were speaking after
5:00 p.m. the appropriate personnel were not available and might not be available absent a public
Gary Lampella and Hap Watkins Page 4 October 11, 2002
records request.
Accordingly, I asked Mr. Watkins to set up a conference call with Mr. Lampella to address
the issue on Wednesday, October 2, 2002. Because Mr. Watkins and I were speaking after business
hours, he indicated he would leave a note with the people who were able to reach Mr. Lampella in
Texas.
I spoke with Mr. Watkins the next morning and he referred me to the Community
Development Director's office. There, I spoke with a woman who indicated she would leave a
message for Mr. Lampella.
Early the afternoon of Wednesday, October 2, Mr. Lampella called me, leaving a message
- indicating they were researching the matter, and would let me know the status shortly thereafter.
Some time that afternoon, Mr. Watkins indicated that upon receipt of a formal letter verifying
that DL Engineering was the engineer of record, the complete Stop Work Order would be lifted, and
the limited Stop Work Order replaced, this would allow work on the exterior of the structure to
continue.
Mr. Darling provided the required letter on Friday, October 4, 2002, and the revised Stop
Work Order was posted.
Early this week Mr. Lampella contacted Joe Green, Jr. requesting a meeting on site to discuss
some possibilities to address the building code issues addressed by Mr. Jones. After some
scheduling difficulties, the meeting was held Wednesday morning at 10:30 a.m. At that time Joe
Green, Jr., Mr. Lampella and I met on the site.
Mr. Lampella reviewed the issues that were raised by Mr. Jones, and addressed some
possible means by which they could be resolved. Mr. Lampella was clear he could not aid in the
design, but could discuss possible means by which code provisions could be satisfied.
One of the factors he indicated was that the International Building Code could be used as
opposed to the Uniform .Builiing.Code, because it was a nationally recognized code. Mr. Lampella
also discussed the possibility of creating exit corridors on each floor, which would allow the existing
framing and stairwell locations to be substantially preserved and used as framed.
At the conclusion of that meeting I indicated my clients would provide a design prepared by
a qualified professional for the City's review. Mr. Lampella indicated he would prefer to meet with
the parties who prepare the design so that the plans could be review. We asked that the plans be
reviewed in an expedited manner so that future delays on the project could be avoided. As soon as
appropriate plans have been prepared, I will contact Mr. Lampella to schedule a meeting either at
the site, or in the City's offices to review the plans, and hopefully obtain approval so that the Stop
Work Order can be lifted completely.
If I have misstated or omitted anything regarding how this matter progressed, I welcome your
input. Thank you in advance for your continuing courtesies and cooperation this matter.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at your
Gary Lampella and Hap Watkins Page 5 October 11, 2002
convenience.
Yours 1 ,._.....
Y
Mark C. Hoyt
MCH:vmp