Fort Smith School District seeks more info in Peak Center flooding investigation

Fort Smith Public Schools has reached out to those who had a professional role in the Peak Innovation Center design and construction allowing them to respond to an investigation of frequent flooding at the facility.

An independent investigation into flooding issues at Peak Innovation Center, completed last month, found that a lack of detailed plans for the building and multiple code violations caused problems with the rainwater drainage system that led to flooding.

Envista Forensics, the investigator hired to find out the cause of multiple instances of flooding at Peak, presented a report on their more than five-month investigation, at a special called meeting of the FSPS school board March 26. At that meeting, Envista confirmed it did not contact any company associated with the project other than the school district.

FSPS has invested more than $20.363 million, including millage funds, public and private grants, and other sources of funding, in Peak, “a place where career and college-bound students develop real-world skills and earn industry-specific certifications to create a future workforce that will drive success across industry and beyond.”

The school board voted Sept. 25 to hire Envista. The initial proposal by Envista called for a $10,000 retainer and an hourly consulting fee of $275 an hour. The total cost, as of Thursday, April 4, was $34,326.33, according to School Board President Dalton Person.

The subject of an independent investigation into the flooding issues was broached after two companies involved with the construction of the center – Fort Smith-based Turn Key Construction, the construction manager at risk for the Peak project, and Halff Associates (formerly Morrison-Shipley Engineers, Inc.), engineers for the project – wrote letters to the school board raising concerns about the building and water issues. A June 1, 2023, letter from Halff to the school district noted that because of a “loss of trust with FSPS staff” they would no longer provide design services on the Peak project.

The investigation report listed many issues with the project including uncoordinated civil, architectural and engineering drawings, inappropriately sized pipes and poor connections. It also noted several code violations. The report also mentioned many times that there was missing information. Envista said they had asked the district for that information, but it was never delivered.

Danny Haynal with Turn Key, told Talk Business & Politics that Turn Key was never asked to provide any information or to elaborate on anything by Envista before the investigation was completed and the report was submitted. Turn Key was the construction manager at risk for the project. Haynal said Turn Key has correspondence with the school district that shows numerous but failed attempts to communicate with the district, HPM and others.

Envista said they did not reach out to any of the principals involved with the project but did not say why. Person said they were “certainly not told not to talk to them.” Marshal Ney, the FSPS attorney, advised the school board to reach out to the architect, engineers, contractors, project managers and more to see if missing information was available and if it had been given to the school district. The board agreed that should be done before the next school board meeting in April.

On Tuesday (April 2), Ney sent a letter via certified mail and email to all those connect with The Peak Innovation Center design and construction (The “Project”).

“As you know, multiple defects have manifested in the Project, and for this reason, the District hired Envista Forensics (“Envista”) to determine the cause(s) of the defects. A copy of Envista’s report is enclosed. Envista offers opinions regarding the causes of the defects, code violations and missing documents. You are invited to respond to any of these issues, including by providing documents that Envista was unable to locate in the document set provided to the District,” the letter states.

The letter also notes that responses received by April 15 “will be considered by the District.”

“In the event you do not respond, the District will conclude that you agree with the Envista report,” it said.

At the meeting March 26, school board members asked if it was anyone’s responsibility to make certain the school district had all the documents related to the project. George Feathers, senior project consultant with Envista Forensics, told the board the general contractor or construction manager at risk would be responsible for doing that.

“Everything was given to the school,” Haynal said of documents for the project. “What they are missing is information which was never on the drawings and/or only landed in emails.”

Haynal said emails regarding the project also show that Turn Key asked repeatedly for the missing information.