Georgia State Capitol interior, Atlanta

September 5, 2003

Then the ceiling fell in. Literally.
A large piece of plaster came down outside a major office, redirecting efforts toward repairing and rehabilitating the public spaces of the building.
Since 1997, the public areas of the structure have undergone a substantial amount of work, including the cleaning and reinstalling of 48,000 ft² of marble floor tiles. More recently, the focus moved to the exterior of the limestone structure for cleaning and repairs.
Now, some $65 million later, Georgia officials are pleased with the work, but they’re also eyeing going back to that master-planning process to guarantee a centuries-long future for their seat of government.

FALLING INTO PLACE
Susan Turner, AIA, head of the Historic Preservation studio for the Atlanta-based architectural firm of Lord, Aeck & Sargent, explains that the governor established a commission on the preservation of the state capitol in 1993 in response to a state senate initiative – action sparked by concern about the structure.
“It was at the point where it had suffered a number of alterations and it was really losing its integrity as an historic building,” says Turner, who’s been involved with the project since the inception of the master-planning process, and with the building before that. “The commission was established to set a course for the building’s preservation.”
One of the first acts of the new commission was to document the existing condition of the building. Because the National Park Service’s Historic American Building Survey was interested in adding the Georgia capitol to its archives, it agreed to provide photographic documentation of the building.
At the time, Lord, Aeck & Sargent was working for the Georgia Building Authority installing fire protection in the building, and the firm took on the field work of measuring the building and creating an accurate set of plans and elevations. (A third component of the survey, a written history of the building, is being published as a book.)
Work was going along well on the documentation process when reality intruded in the form of that falling plaster. Both Turner and Gena Abraham, former project engineer for the Georgia Building Authority – the agency responsible for the public portions of the structure – say it took the process away from the theoretical realm and into the practical one.
“This was right outside the office of the Clerk of the House, and if he or anyone else had been standing there, it would have been a serious issue,” says Abraham. “That started the examination of plaster throughout the facility; once we did that, we realized we had some significant problems, not only with it, but with other areas that were just as bad off, if not worse.”
Inspections showed that approximately 90 percent of the plaster ceilings were in danger of failing; work began on removing the material, and the capitol’s rotunda was closed to the public. Meanwhile, after a public-bid process, Lord, Aeck & Sargent was hired to help deal with the issue.
“They hired us to develop a strategy for dealing with the plaster, and at the same time to think about the ultimate restoration of the public spaces,” says Turner. “It was a matter of if we were to repair the plaster, what made sense to also include with the project, for instance the lighting hanging from the ceiling.”
A phased plan for restoring the public areas of the capitol went to the governor and legislators. However, they opted to go ahead and fund restoring the public space in its entirety.

MATCHING THE MARBLE
The restoration of interior components included the building’s marble tile floors. Scott Thompson, an architect with Lord, Aeck & Sargent, says that while the floor problems were nowhere as dramatic as the falling ceiling plaster, the 19th-century tiles were a concern.
“From the testing we did, it seems the tiles never bonded in the first place,” says Thompson, who supervised the interior masonry restoration. “Over the years, just through wear and tear, they started to move a little, to the point where you could tell they were loose when you were walking on them. Sometimes they’d pop up, and in one case there was a tripping accident.”
Another problem was spalling. And, while the tiles were all supposed to be 12” X 12” X ¾”, measurements showed they varied in all three dimensions.
Faced with completing a project that had increased significantly in scope, the architects began in 1996 with what Turner describes as a series of demonstration projects where mock-ups of different components were tested.
For the tile restoration, the demo involved removing of a 9’ section of the tiles, installing a new mortar bed, and testing three different options for affixing the tiles.
“We looked at a thick-set option,” Thompson says. “We tried thin set as another method, and we also tried epoxy. Initially, we thought the epoxy would be the way to do this, although we eventually settled on a thin-set method, and that decision had to do with the unknown quality of the epoxy and the need to get back under the floor in the future.”
While the architects determined what processes would work best on the restoration, the Georgia Building Authority hired Atlanta-based Winter Construction Co., to serve as construction managers on the job.
Winter began work on the project in early 1997, and is currently under the direction of project superintendent Reggie Parker. Jeremy Colbaugh, a Winter project engineer, says a significant part of the contractor’s job was to oversee the day-to-day activities of the trade contractors, facilitating the architects’ involvement with the project, and keeping the owners up-to-date.
A major part of that also included scheduling. While the funds were available to complete the project in a much-shorter time than the architects originally anticipated, the building remained occupied during the renovation and no work was allowed during the legislature’s annual 40-day winter sessions.
When it came time to do the interior floors in 2002, Colbaugh says Lord, Aeck & Sargent issued a complete set of specifications and drawings, and then the architects and construction manager worked together in prequalifying several different contractors.
From a list of seven tile contractors in the Atlanta area, the successful bid came from Doyle Dickerson Co. of Stone Mountain, Ga. Company owner Doyle Dickerson says his company doesn’t specialize in rehabilitation work, although it’s a type of job previously done by the firm.
Dickerson agrees with Thompson that the tiles weren’t particular difficult to get up because probably close to 40 percent of them were just lying on the pugging (mud) bed. However, keeping track of the pieces was a challenge.
“Probably the hardest part was labeling it because, being a historical job, everything had to go back where it came from,” he says. “We ran duct tape in two directions on each tile, then labeled them by number in one direction and letter in the other. Then we put arrows on them so when we put it down it went down exactly like it came up. We also photographed it, so we had pictures to go back and see where the crooks in the floor were.”
Once the pieces were up, the material was put on pallets, then taken to a cleaning area where the old cement was removed
“We’d take it up one night and then the next night we’d grind the area,” Dickerson says. “We’d use a dustless machine and take off about 1/4” off the old bed. Then, (on) the third night, we’d put the tiles back down.”
It sounds like a demanding schedule, but the contract required the company to start work July 15, and be finished by Dec. 1. Dickerson had a 16-person crew working four 10-hour days, starting at 6 p.m. to minimize disruptions to the capitol staff. To further improve the workflow, Thompson would prepare a punch list immediately after each day’s work was completed.
“If we were running behind, we’d use the weekend as a makeup day, but we only worked four or five weekends of that,” Dickerson says. “Most of what caused us to work on weekends was when we’d get into areas where they were putting in electrical conduit, and we would have to take out the old pugging bed.”
Although the pugging bed was the same lime mixture used when the building was constructed, the actual installation utilized a latex-modified thin set. Dickerson attributes some of that to the cure speed of the product.
“It was also important that it was a fast job,” he says. “This seemed to set up in two or three hours so people could get back to work.”
One of the biggest problems finishing the job came from the appearance of the 800-1,000 new tiles that were used. Although the Georgia white marble came from the same quarry, and despite a honed finish, after 112 years the appearance wasn’t quite the same.
“We went through all kinds of concoctions – coffee, tea, different mixtures of stuff – to make the new look old,” he says. “We finally went through a mixture of sand and cleaning chemicals that cleaned up the old and dulled down the new so it met in the middle, and everyone was satisfied with it.”
Dickerson says the job was a good one for his company. Besides the opportunity to do a 48,000-ft² restoration job, he says things went well because everyone did their jobs and worked well together.
“The architect was a great guy to work with, and he knew what he wanted,” Dickerson says. “The general contractor was really good to work with and the state gave us no problems. Everybody understood it was a hell of a challenge.”

Client: Georgia Building Authority, Atlanta
Architect: Lord, Aeck & Sargent, Atlanta
Construction Manager: The Winter Construction Co., Atlanta
Masonry Subcontractors: Doyle Dickerson Co., Stone Mountain, Ga.; Southern Preservation Systems, Snellville, Ga.