|
|
| October 24, 2005 | Monday | Ramzan 19, 1426 |
Report hinting threat to Towers ignored: Construction standards
ISLAMABAD, Oct 23: A report seven years ago had warned of imminent deterioration to the Margalla Towers if immediate maintenance work was not carried out to rectify visible defects in the structure.
In the preliminary report available with Dawn, a team comprising civil engineers Haris Aqil and Amir Hayat had pointed out poor workmanship and serious construction defects in the building, a section of which eventually could not sustain the massive jolts of 7.6 magnitude on October 8 and crumbled in a few seconds killing 73 occupants.
On the request of the Margalla Towers Residents Islamabad Society, a visual inspection of certain sections of the building, which was constructed in 1996, was carried out between October 13 and 15, 1998.
“The concrete work in general is poor,” the report observed in its section of general comments, adding that the inspection of several beams and slabs in the basement indicated construction defects such as segregation of concrete, appearance of honeycombing on beams, use of improper forms (shuttering) during concreting, inadequate concrete cover and porosity that showed inadequate compaction.
In a petition before the Supreme Court, the occupants of the 11-storey apartment blocks accused the CCC Associates, the builders of the Margalla Towers, and the CDA of not carrying out requisite repairs as suggested in the report. Even the original owner of the building had failed to attend to the defects that posed grave danger to the lives of the residents.
Referring to the electrical wiring, the report observed that the uncovered cable trays with clusters of wires indicated poor attention towards safety. Such sloppy electrical work could lead to serious accidents, especially due to water leakages at several locations and could result in short circuit endangering safety of the occupants.
Plumbing work in particular appeared poor but also the material used seems to be of inferior quality as evident from different pipe leakages. A good quality material cannot fail in such a short period, the report said.
Drainage of the building was not planned properly while there was inappropriate drainage at the ground level and the down spouts, use to drain water, were inadequate in size, the report pointed out.
Likewise, water ponds in different places of the building indicated improper slopes that could be associated with construction, workmanship or design. The poor drainage both due to bad design and construction was to a great extent responsible for extensive seepage seen in the basement slab and beams.
Overall, the slab and beams of the luxury apartments were very poorly finished as honeycombing was observed at different places.
The bad finishing of slab/beams indicates that shuttering used was of poor quality and had bends and uneven surfaces, it added.
Besides, there was a visible crack in the beam near apartment 107-B, while stirrups were visible because of bad workmanship near flat 312-B.
Sag (droop) in the beams because of poor shuttering at different places was visible, the report said, adding that near flat 804 a crack was visible in the basement wall.
Water seeping through the beams and slab was visible, especially during rains the water flowed through beams and slabs as if it was flowing through drains.
Near flat 512/1006, the slab has been cast at slope due to bad workmanship because of which the water from kitchen and bathroom above the basement pond at one point to seep through.
Water was also standing at different places in the parking areas and due to hairline cracks in the concrete, water seeped into the slab and the basement.
It was also noted that in order to drain off the rainwater, the traps of very small diameter were used that caused overflowing during rains, the report concluded.
|
|
