Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 4745-02-2017 A Resolution NO. 4745-02-2017 WAIVING FEES FOR STABILIZATION OF HISTORIC SWIFT WALL ON NORTHEAST 23RD STREET WHEREAS, on April 5, 2016, the City Council. designated the Swift staircase and wall on the north. side of Northeast 23 d Street as a Historic and Cultural Landmark (ZC- 16-066) in the Historic Stockyards; and WHEREAS the stlircase and a portion of the wall are within City right-of-way for Northeast 23rd Street, and the remainder of the wall is on private property owned by Fort Worth Heritage Development; and WHEREAS the wall is in deteriorated condition and poses a public safety concern. due to the proximity of the all to the public sidewalk; and WHEREAS Fort Worth Heritage Development desires to perform immediate repairs including temporary bracing for the wall at an estimated cost of $145,000; and WHEREAS the repair work requires temporary closure of the public sidewalk, and the required teinporary encroachment fee is estimated at $20,200 for 180 days; and WHEREAS City staff reconimends waiving all fees associated with the repairs to address the public safety concern and to support the stabilization of this historic resource; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT WORTH, TEXAS: That the City Manager is authorized to waive all fees for Fort Worth Heritage Development to perform immediate repairs and stabilize the Swift all in order to protect the members of the public from the deteriorated wall that is in proximity to the public sidewalk along Northeast 23°d Street. Current City ordinances provide sufficient controls to ensure that the waiver of fees will achieve the public purposes. Adopted this 14c.h day of FebrUary 2017. 4�f f OR 40 0M 11 1'�40 ATTEST: I " '*6& 10 '40 8:c By: 000, 00 ........... Q**Q**01*0 Mary Sys °r City Secretary ORT VSO NORTH Contractors Name:Commerce Construction Co,LP Q Q Point of Contact: David Berry ��--_ Phone Number:979--26-1&58 e�KN BlNdmg Permit No.: W `^ CONC ONE STORY � J BUILDING Purpose for Closure: Temporary Shoring installation O = for adjacent Swift Wall m FORT WORTH HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT,LLC ❑ Begin Date:02 1312017 I <Q 2 ` W INSTRUMENT NO.D215200243 rr OPRTCT End Date: 0811512017 co STOMULTILDING i Q U BUILDING o rc O x m I = 0 0 T z �o co l O co I o,--K � - -- NLE © -4-11/1 SEE DETAIL'" .. 1du 11.-n!E 161 YhHC P.wEMEHT NE TWENTY THIRD STREET C—EMENT s— STEPHEN MURRIN JR..GRANDCHILDREN'S TRUST INSTRUMENT NO.D214168302 O.P.R.T.C.T. �� --- -----= Chain link fence _ Total sidewalk encroachment=7,469 SF 7,469 SF x 0.015/day x 180 days®$20,166.30 SWIFT WALL AND N.E.TWENTY STAIRCASE EXHIBIT THIRD STREET APRIL 2016 KpIgpo Horn DETAIL"A" 1"=20' L7 PKAE IQENG.(7E 4 08LOL 16 Mr. Gilbert Mota Vice President, District Manager Commerce Construction, LP 131 East Exchange Avenue, Suite 212 Fort Worth,Texas 76164 [1e Swift Masonry Wall Assessment Fort Worth Stockyards, Fort Worth,Texas JQ Project No. 3060211 Dear Gilbert: JQ Engineering, LLP (JQ) performed a limited, structural review of the masonry wall located along the southern edge of the Swift and Company property on NE 23rd Street in Fort Worth, Texas within the historic Fort Worth Stockyards on June 30, 2016. The purpose of the review was to assess the structural condition of the wall for the purpose of providing recommendations for repair. At the east end,the wall that turns to the north along the east property line is not included in this review. No construction documents were available for review at the time of our site visit. Our findings are as follows: Wall Description The south side of the wall, facing NE 23rd Street, is approximately 18 feet high and 435 feet in length (Photograph 1). The bottom section of the wall consists of 4-inch brick veneer placed on a concrete ledge, backed by an 9-inch thick reinforced concrete wall which serves to retain the earth on the north side of the wall (Photograph 2). Soldier courses and stacked bond courses with cast stone corner elements create a rectangular pattern at each panel (Photograph 3). 18-inch wide concrete pilasters spaced approximately 12'-4" on center separate the brick veneer into distinct panels. The upper section of the wall consists of a single wythe of 4-inch brick placed between reinforced concrete columns that align with the pilasters below (Photograph 4). The brick extends approximately 1-inch into a keyway cast into each side of the concrete columns (Photograph 5) and has a reinforced concrete cap which spans horizontally between the columns (Photograph 6). Rough-cut brick units project from the south face in a rectangular pattern at each panel (Photograph 4). The upper and lower wall sections are separated by two horizontal bands of reinforced concrete (Photograph 4). Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 2 of 32 On the north side of the wall, reinforced concrete pilasters on the lower section of the wall align with the pilasters on the south side of the wall (Photograph 7). A reinforced concrete grand stairway leads from NE 23rd Street up to the Swift and Company property (Photograph 8). Several bays of the upper section east of the grand stairway are equipped with iron fence sections in lieu of the single wythe brick masonry(Photograph 9). A section of the wall east of the grand stairway has been removed to provide vehicular access to the site from NE 23rd Street(Photograph 10). Observations Several sections of the wall were observed to be leaning toward the south (Photograph 11). The plumbness of the wall was measured at each pilaster using a digital level, and measurements ranged from 0.1 to 6.1 degrees out-of-plumb (Photograph 12). Observations at the edge of the lower wall where a section has been removed, #4 horizontal twisted reinforcing steel was exposed and observed to be spaced approximately 8 inches on center (Photograph 13). Two test pits were excavated, one on each side of the wall between the grand stairway and the Fertilizer Building. On the south side of the wall, at 2'-9" below the brick ledge, the foundation steps out approximately 16 inches. The bottom of the concrete foundation wall was observed to be 6'-3" below the brick ledge (Photograph 14), approximately 4 feet 6 inches below grade. Attempts to locate embedded reinforcing steel in the foundation using an Elcometer 331 Covermeter were not successful, possibly due to the depth detection limitation of the equipment (0.6 inches to 3.75 inches). Using the covermeter on the north side of the wall, four vertical steel reinforcing bars randomly spaced were detected in the pilaster. Horizontal bars in the pilaster were detected at approximately 8 inches on center (Photograph 15). In the concrete wall between the pilasters, the covermeter detected vertical bars spaced 16 inches on center and 8 inches on center horizontally(Photograph 16). Removal of a section of concrete cover on the back side of the wall revealed #4 twisted bars both horizontally and vertically. Numerous spalled sections of concrete were observed on the pilasters, many with exposed "twisted" reinforcing bars (Photographs 17 and 18). Many other pilasters and columns were observed to be spalled and/or cracked with hollow-sounding concrete (Photographs 19 and 20). On the south side at a location where the concrete cover over the reinforcing steel has spalled away, the lower portion of the pilasters were observed to be reinforced with #8 vertical corner bars, with #3 ties at approximately 12 inches on center (Photograph 18). Minor vertical cracks were observed in several of the beams between the pilasters (Photographs 21 and 22). The covermeter could not detect embedded reinforcing steel in the beam sections. Tie-backs were observed at several of the pilasters east of the grand stairway (Photograph 22). The configuration and embedded depth of the observed tiebacks is unknown. The majority of the concrete columns at the upper sections of the wall are 12 inches square reinforced with four #4 corner bars and #3 horizontal ties spaced 12 inches on center (Photograph 23). One-inch- deep reveals are cast into the face of each column and on all four sides where there is iron fencing (Photograph 22 and 24). Vertical cracks and delaminated and spalled sections of concrete were observed Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 3 of 32 at several of the columns (Photographs 21 and 25). Steel dowels were observed extending up into the columns from the concrete pilaster in the wall below (Photograph 26). Concrete capitals are broken or missing on several of the columns (Photographs 25 and 27). Larger columns were observed at the upper wall on each side of the grand stairway and at the bays east of the stairway (Photograph 28). Vertical cracks, spalled and hollow-sounding sections of concrete were observed at two of these columns (Photograph 29). Cracked and open mortar joints in the brick veneer on the lower section of the wall were observed in a few locations (Photographs 30 and 31). A significant vertical gap between the masonry and the concrete pilaster/column was observed at the far southeast corner adjacent to the radiused section of wall (Photographs 32, 33 and 34). Diagonal cracks were observed in a few of the single wythe brick panels, typically in the locations that are significantly out-of-plumb (Photograph 35 and 36). The covermeter detected no horizontal reinforcing in the joints of the single wythe wall, and no joint steel reinforcing was observed in any open brick joints. The reinforced concrete cap on top of the single wythe brick wall was observed to be severely deteriorated with exposed reinforcing steel at many of wall sections, and completely missing in a few locations (Photographs 17 and 27). The reinforced concrete grand stairway was observed to be in fair condition. Cracks in the steps and risers paralleling the sidewalls (Photograph 37), and spalled, cracked and delaminated sections of topping were observed (Photograph 38). Spalled concrete and brick were observed on the east side of the grand stairway (Photograph 39). A large void was observed under the stairs (Photographs 40 and 41). A significant amount of vegetation has grown up on both sides of the wall (Photographs 1, 7, 8, 27,42,43, 44 and 45). Graffiti on the south side of the wall has been painted over (Photographs 3, 8, 35, and 36), while some graffiti on the north side of the wall remains visible (Photographs 7, 25 and 27). Discussion Based on the conditions observed in the test pits,the existing wall consists of a vertical structural element which relies on the embedment of the below grade wall to resist the lateral forces generated by the retained earth. Given the absence of typical retaining wall foundations such as footings, the stability of the existing wall depends on the cantilevered wall much like sheet piling. This is a highly unusual structural system for this wall type. For the retained height of soil, the observed wall embedment below grade and assuming reasonable lateral earth pressures, a structural analysis of the concrete portion of the lower section of the wall revealed that it is under-designed to act as a retaining wall. This deficiency is highlighted in the measured rotational movement of the walls and the prior attempts to restrain the wall movement through the use of tie-backs. However, tiebacks potentially increase the lateral earth pressures on the wall by restraining additional wall movement and also alter the structural behavior of the wall and the size and location of needed steel reinforcing in the concrete. Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 4 of 32 The lack of reinforcement in the joints of the single wythe brick wall and the significant deterioration, and absence,of the concrete cap poses a safety concern for the upper portions of the masonry wall,especially at the east end of the wall due to the proximity of the wall to the sidewalk. In our opinion, the entire length of the wall fronting NE 23rd Street should be temporarily braced to prevent any further rotational movement. The temporary bracing would need to be attached to both the top and bottom sections of the wall. The reactions and loads are shown in Figure A. Consideration should be given to the permanent stabilization method to minimize the conflict between the temporary and permanent systems. Absent a temporary or permanent stabilization system for the wall, heavy loads should not be placed adjacent to the backside of the wall. Typically, a permanent stabilization system for an out-of-plumb retaining wall consists of drilling and grouting tie-back anchors through the face of the wall into the ground behind the wall. This method leaves an exposed anchor device on the exterior face of the wall, which would significantly diminish the historical appearance of the wall. However, as stated above, the use of tiebacks will alter the structural behavior of the wall. Therefore, if the use of temporary or permanent tiebacks is incorporated widely in the wall, their use will also necessitate the installation of supplemental reinforcing of much of the below grade wall. The masonry wall, by itself, does not have a historical designation, but is a contributing element to the Swift and Company property and the Fort Worth Stockyards Historic District. Therefore, repairs should be made in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. It is anticipated that a temporary bracing system placed on the south side of the wall will encroach upon the NE 23rd Street right-of-way, and the sidewalk adjacent to the wall. Installation of the bracing on the south side would need to be coordinated with the City of Fort Worth, and secure fencing should be provided to enclose the temporary bracing system. An alternative method would be to provide a temporary bracing system on the north, or backside, of the wall. Bracing would be attached to the backside of the wall at the top of the lower section and connected to a stabilizing element, such as a pier or a grade beam, installed some distance from the back of the wall (See Figure SSK-1). This temporary bracing system would be a precursor to a permanent stabilization system that would include excavating the fill from the backside of the wall, installing a French drain system along the base of the wall and tied into the storm drain system, and installing stepped sections of "Geofoam" Lightweight Fill Material to reduce the surcharged loads imposed upon the backside of the wall (See Figure C). The temporary bracing would be covered or encapsulated in concrete placed over the "Geofoam"to become a part of the permanent stabilization system (See Figure SSK-2). Once the permanent stabilization system is in place,the existing through-wall tie-back anchors would not be needed. They should be removed, and the holes patched. The upper section of the wall also should be braced to resist wind loads by providing angled braces to ground-mounted anchors(See Figure SSK-1). Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 5 of 32 The roots of trees located in close proximity to structures can cause seasonal movement of the soils due to variation in the moisture content of the soils. This movement is manifest as shrinkage during dry conditions and heave during wet conditions. Given the existing wall is soil supported and thus subject to this seasonal movement, it is likely that the trees adjacent to the wall are a contributing factor to the wall movement observed and measured. While the graffiti does not affect the structural integrity of the wall, it is unsightly and detracts from the historical integrity of the wall. Often times, graffiti left in place invites additional, responsive "tagging," and,therefore,should be removed as quickly as possible. The Standards(noted above) recommend using the "gentlest method possible" to clean historic masonry surfaces. Recommendations We recommend the following measures be completed as soon as possible: • Remove vegetation from both sides of wall; • Remove backfill from backside of wall; provide foundation drainage system; • Provide temporary bracing on the north (backside) of the wall for lower and upper sections of the masonry wall (See Figure SSK-1). Our opinion of probable construction cost to perform these repairs is $144,300.00. A summary of these costs is shown in Table 1, attached. The following will provide a permanent bracing solution for the masonry wall: • Provide stepped "Geofoam" blocks to backfill behind wall; • Cover or encapsulate lateral bracing in a concrete slab cast over the "Geofoam" (See Figure SSK- 2); • Provide a compacted impervious clay cap and topsoil. Our opinion of probable construction cost to perform these repairs is $119,500.00. A summary of these costs is shown in Table 2, attached. We recommend the following repairs be completed within the next 1-3 years: • Repair concrete beams, pilasters, columns, capitals and cap on top of upper masonry wall; • Repair cracks and open joints in masonry; • Fill void under grand stairway; • Remove existing tie-back anchors, and patch the holes; • Remove graffiti and painted-over graffiti from both sides of wall. Our opinion of probable construction cost to perform these repairs is $294,500.00. A summary of these costs is shown in Table 3, attached. Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 6 of 32 If the removed section of wall along NE 23rd Street will be rebuilt, our opinion of probable construction cost for this item is$75,000.00. Disclaimer The opinions and comments provided in this report are based upon field observations as part of our scope of services. JQ has ascertained to the best of our ability the visually apparent defects in the wall structure. However, as field observations were conducted on a structure in which the majority of the structural elements are concealed, JQ cannot be responsible for failing to ascertain deficiencies which were not visible due to the existing conditions in the structure. No warranty, expressed or implied, regarding the condition of the wall structure is intended. In addition, no representation as to the expected useful life of the wall structure or other components identified in this report is made. If you have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please contact us. Sincerely yours, JQ Engineering, LLP Texas Registered Engineering Firm: 1294 Julie Bolding, P.E. Mark D. LeMay, AIA, LEED AP Project Engineer Principal Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 7 of 32 TABLE 1 Swift & Company Masonry Wall NE 23rd Street, Fort Worth, Texas Preliminary Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Immediate Repairs Parts Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost STRUCTURAL Division 2 Sitework Remove vegetation from both sides of wall 1 LS $10,000.00 $ 7,500.00 Excavate backfill from back side of wall 1200 CY $ 10.00 $ 12,000.00 Provide French drain, coarse aggregate and filter fabric 400 LF $ 30.00 $ 12,000.00 Subtotal $ 31,500.00 Division 3- Concrete Provide reinforced concrete dead-man piers 30 each $ 1,300.00 $ 39,000.00 Subtotal $ 39,000.00 Division 5-Steel Provide 6" steel bracing for lower wall section 30 each $ 600.00 $ 18,000.00 Provide 4" steel bracing for upper wall 30 each $ 350.00 $ 10,500.00 Subtotal $ 28,500.00 Total $ 99,400.04 MOBILIZATION (5%) $ 4,950.00 OVERHEAD AND PROFIT 15% $ 15,592.50 CONTINGENCY(25%) $ 24,750.00 Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 8 of 32 TABLE 2 Swift & Company Masonry Wall NE 23rd Street, Fort Worth, Texas Preliminary Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Permanent Stabilization Parts Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost STRUCTURAL Division 2-Sitework Provide Geofoam backfill 600 CY $ 70.00 $ 42,000.00 Provide impervious clay cap and topsoil 500 CY $ 20.00 $ 10,000.00 Subtotal $ 52,000.00 bivision 3- Concrete Encapsulate bracing in concrete 30 CY $ 1,000.00 $ 30,000.00 Subtotal $ 30,000.00 Total $ 82,000.04 MOBILIZATION (5%) $ 4,100.00 OVERHEAD AND PROFIT(15%) $ 12,915.00 CONTINGENCY 25% $ 20,500.00 Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 9 of 32 TABLE 3 Swift & Company Masonry Wall NE 23rd Street, Fort Worth, Texas Preliminary Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Repairs Within 1-3 years Parts Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost STRUCTURAL Division 3- Concrete Repair concrete columns & pilasters 30 each $ 2,000.00 $ 60,000.00 Repair concrete beams 400 LF $ 100.00 $ 40,000.00 Repair concrete cap 400 LF $ 60.00 $ 24,000.00 Repair concrete capitals 30 each $ 500.00 $ 15,000.00 Fill void under grand stairway 1 LS $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 Remove tie-back anchors, patch holes 20 each $ 200.00 $ 4,000.00 Subtotal $ 12.00 $ 146,000.00 Division 4 Mason Repair cracks and open joints in masonry 7200 SF $ 5.00 $ 36,000.00 Remove graffiti 5000 SF $ 4.00 $ 20,000.00 Subtotal $ 56,000.00 Total $ 202,400.00; MOBILIZATION (5%) $ 10,100.00 OVERHEAD AND PROFIT 15% $ 31,815.00 CONTINGENCY(25%) $ 50,500.00 Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 10 of 32 l x 1%f°�1p9�� I@I1�ti1��� �H � ���� "x���y��,/ rpuI%r%�l Jr➢��'���,: �l;` a e, r, 1 i�iii� r ray �i� lira 1� o Photograph 1—Swift masonry wall, looking west Photograph 2—Brick veneer on reinforced concrete backup wall Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 11 of 32 II III uuuuui 16 ��� III' V ' Photograph 3—Rectangular pattern at lower wall section f { //tri/�' ,/%%//' ����° '/%/' %/i/a"//// fiiila �✓! ���/// >! a i II III r r✓//,/i Photograph 4—Concrete pilasters separate the brick panels on lower section of wall; concrete columns separate brick panels on upper section Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 12 of 32 i HU Photograph 5—Spalled concrete at pilaster shows brick keyway �i V v O.h Photograph 6—Reinforced concrete cap on top of single wythe upper masonry wall Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 13 of 32 1 sol %'i ' I r I Photograph 7—Concrete pilasters on backside of wall align with pilasters on front side I � U° mcw 6+ 14' Yi V 1 l 1 i f i t l I Photograph 8—Grand stairway Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 14 of 32 ns v ri r'r ji r i G I�l,rri i a lr/ 1 j l /, I f%i f/ ori Photograph 9—Iron fence section in lieu of single wythe brick masonry at upper section of wall �v��BNV94ANr / D ✓,.�-Uma ,, in,.r✓ Gr�4� �& ✓ororri, ,/ rir✓vDirii/iiiaooii/ //////i�//irk//i0/j'IlrriJl1111lll!!rlillJlrrrrr/riri/,lli/ii�rltl ri//�/✓r„ JlIl1JJlJlooflllllnlow/llJ///1lld�my, /�/iii//%/iii ./li r ///r/rri//���%/ii��,/%///rii//% iii/////iO/// pro,,, ��,;,ii/%✓„ ,ri//U/, ri,/r fi/��////��// r///,,vijj/�///�//� .... ;, V111 6, , ri i r i / �/,/i, r ,iorr i✓/iii„ „ // //lir r/// rl// // ✓. ✓. 1 ., ✓ r/r///, ✓/fir /,/r t/ii ,l/,....,.i irr// r / �/ �F✓ lac, r,rr//r%/,/,/, ��/, ,,,/ ,✓�.,//,.✓ i ,/ l i D l / w/��/i/�/i /i�/ii�///l�/�/r/�✓i//��/r rir/r /////�r�G�;:rir//�//of.✓,....-,�/ �.,�/i//:.r.������,��i�,��f�..�/il.���1 r/,,,, ,:. ,,„ r y„�i/! �„ ,r%//%l%°,/,.w/r%it/��% r i/;rr/%r/%%�r//��r�/%��i�/�� /��i/��%�,�✓ �/ r r r//11�1,/�/1 r//i,r//� %�i/i//ri�� �„ %ii r r%///////i//r��✓� ri/Il/�!/rihVr�i/ii//i/�����/%�1j�////�/�%/r%��ri// rii// i✓rdfdJlOi�IRSIK�,��i,,,,, ,; v /.,, ,�, ,o�,.,,,,.,,,%li/Gollhi✓vi i ,,,, ,✓ '9 u,�l��l'.i//„ r � � �/e„ :' Photograph 10—Wall section removed providing site access from NE 23rd Street Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 15 of 32 i% �i r � Photograph 11—Wall leans to the south (right) r iJo „ j 1, / yrrJJJ, i l � o Photograph 11—Lower pilaster 5 degrees out of plumb Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 16 of 32 i �a�I I � I ,1,1,1,1 iwu �" Ylv`��u{i4"���1 /�� ii �➢'Y rill//%%//������/// / r//4Y H�V''NN""GG�'�!y �1,f'�%/�j'�, r ✓r r i//��ri 0 /%l � ,%l� �n/�Vi�l /✓J J% I WN/1" Photograph 13—Twisted reinforcing steel in lower backup wall 11 i/ tii��oi�r��/ �J✓% � i�� rQ�(��>jigW° r Photograph 14—Bottom of concrete foundation on street side of wall Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 17 of 32 i.ui T / r � , b Photograph 15—Horizontal steel detected in pilaster on back side of lower section of wall �('r✓ � �nJ,.Yq'�, i "� �a ,T f�G/l//��r�iH r %>r Ji// r �' a o i / J llr f r 0 it r � r i J ��i G%✓� J %'� � � llr , r 11' 1 , �I^ ��1,(''/ /✓r >i � ���i �/ar� fin// r r / ri�y a, r,�ff�� r/'rrrl�✓ i� a r / � f � °%/' E i/��/�r/1/!'lj�i�jJ/r' ji///r� J� fpi �rr% 1//// ' qi �/� /I� � �>l�ll IJP � �;� ��/%G ✓ �a J r' �%� !lig r✓'//l If'� r/(��%✓fir rr�i�//��i, i�� ri%� 1!/ PlrJ " �� ���� l//:: r �� � ,11/UrIJ� �;D I (�// jib//�r�i� /rt✓� ���iJX t /i �,, ,�/Si� n//ri // i i///l/ ,Jr/✓ �rJ r�9�y Jir f °r �/ �r f� � r %/��a� �1 /;W . rYl�1 / r//���/i ��%%/�/✓/Jrir/iriruootfiri,/i� � r /rr //Y %�ri o t r ��/r,/�� %/Ji/rr 1����pirr�� �r�ili%la�`i��� r� r,%/r�'�r�ir/�y�f�k✓� ��I✓or, %iri/a//r� ff �r �/i r%/i"/ ,�/////�/r✓/�/'� >��/rilr, ,lira /r��r�°`/ r�/ si��i ii.,%fr�f r ,,� ( t'�/f�r r 6�F �� �s��� ,,,✓ err/,%r r/�": r r�iYlf/q/U��AYI Ii�i✓ Y'v�iy�Ji/ Yfi��i 1 ° Ji%i° rr err/ � i Photograph 16—Twisted steel reinforcing in lower section of backup wall Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 18 of 32 u I I✓� a �Q//�/ �� ��U' IMYA' Ar � IyJY� �4 ✓/ �dW � jp Tr/ /J(eMfJ � II n�r rI. / Photograph 17—Spalled concrete and exposed reinforcing on south face at upper column; note missing concrete cap on top of wall Vz / t NO IR 41, x - `w�`�"��J111� Photograph 18—Cracked, delaminated and spalled concrete at pilaster, lower wall Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 19 of 32 / f/ „f,, u' I fUI R Photograph 19—Cracked and hollow-sounding concrete on pilaster, lower wall / � � �' II i'dtir���i➢Jf�I' S„ ' f Photograph 20—Spalled face of pilaster, lower wall Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 20 of 32 GI 111 s e �J' 4 0 � r 1wAMNYU)i'7�1�1V�➢1�J �� �IV , r i rT r rW ! Photograph 21—Cracks in concrete beams between upper and lower sections of wall; note cracks and delaminated concrete in upper column U ,r1 y r P err ''r All, Photograph 22—Tie-back anchor; note reveal in face of column at upper wall Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 21 of 32 i i,(Kr71��1I l�lL' ` Vii, r fly✓�/����i� flll��. ��, k Ji IA Photograph 23—Spalled concrete and exposed reinforcing steel on back side of upper column Oft9, IVPnar ' , � l va , III Photograph 24—1-inch deep reveal cast into each face of upper columns Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 22 of 32 i Photograph 25—Vertical cracks, spalls, and hollow sounding concrete on columns at upper wall ,1 H drd � m N Photograph 26—Reinforcing steel extending into upper column from pilaster below Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 23 of 32 1. aJ / I I h, �j�, Illl Photograph 27—Broken column capital and severely deteriorated coping on top of brick wall � a � I ;h Photograph 28—Larger columns on upper wall east of grand stairway Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 24 of 32 tk , r i; ATG p! Photograph 29—Cracked, spalled and hollow-sounding concrete on large column, upper wall 1 l ' Photograph 30—Cracked and open mortar joint at brick veneer, lower wall Swift Masonry Wall Assessment JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 25 of 32 r Pu ' i l� 1 Photograph 31—Crack in mortar joint at brick veneer, lower wall A i J �r r 1 t Y! Photograph 32—Significant vertical gap in wall, southeast corner Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 26 of 32 d �`0 l,•lays o ` 1, i lr. l r Photograph 33—Significant vertical gap in wall, southeast corner r 1 m i ii r' Photograph 34—Significant vertical gap in wall, southeast corner Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 27 of 32 1 Photograph 35—Diagonal crack in upper masonry wall i% o � r% 6��✓NUi��iNly'�mN 4 a ,m��u�f ! !d�)," ui r ✓ l��E��� !i r r � �� u�/ �"ul& Tl Ifl�v�,� � .� �s�lu�� �ur��� / IIIA �ay hal�JU'°/� IVIImVVI I�IU� � �IIINIV4�I�J ��, Photograph 36—Diagonal crack in upper masonry wall Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 28 of 32 r u r V ! tl Yui ^ Photograph 37—Cracks in concrete steps and risers parallel to sidewalls V Kiri� l � r 11 i �f h Photograph 38—Cracked and spalled concrete topping at grand stairway Swift Masonry Wall Assessment JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 29 of 32 l �a f04 �Er- r f m ,v kff �J 4 i s yr rt Photograph 39—Cracked and spalled concrete and brick, east side of grand stairway Y Ipp ��i�f d r r�lu; x � ` ViD � f � D y ; f�IryF Y. J fl %f Photograph 40—Large void under grand stairway Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 30 of 32 i i u uppi � i Photograph 41—Large void under grand stairway m l �Yw o- toy r, t aye, i �t ��: Mfr o � "�✓r li�/1���� �'1 �l / 9 �� "t � i Photograph 42—Vegetation along south side of wall Swift Masonry Wall Assessment did.0:1..1 JQ Project No. 3060211 Page 31 of 32 % o� �` i' /„ / I I, li 0 J 1 I � � F Photograph 43—Large tree at base of wall, south side 'I a Sulu r�„ 1 I r' k r I n ,�{ if Photograph 44—Large tree at base of wall, south side Swift Masonry Wall Assessment 0&0 t' ]R Project No. 3060211 Page 32wa2 � a 3 y � \\� \�\ .<�•"�� y \ / . � � . } , » � < 2 > . � ± w � d �~ Photograph 45—Large tree at base o wall, north side TEMPORARY PIPE BRACE AT EXIST. EXIST.CONC. CONC.PILASTER BEAM BEYOND 5 PLF —(TENSION& 4"-6"(VARIES) COMPRESSION) TEMPORARY PIPE BRACEAT 41/2' 2' EA.EXIST.CONC. 4� 3' PILASTER BEYOND EXIST.SOIL--- 250 PLF III= (TENSION& IOI COMPRESSION) T.O.PIER OR III FOOTING 1 =III=III= =III= ,q•. 41/2" DEAD MAN PIER OR FOOTING BY OTHERS G.C.COORDL III W/DEAD MAN =_ DESIGN = _ _ _ _ 1-4 III NEW GEOTEXTILE FILTER FABRIC III EXIST.SOIL/ NEW COURSE I I — SIDEWALK STREET AGGREGATE BEYOND ASTM C33,1'• III _=III= 4"@ UPPER LEVEL MAX SIZE III—III—III IIII I i 61/2"LOWER LEVEL NEW COLLECTOR PIPE- SLOPED&CONNECTED EXIST.CONC. TO STORM SYSTEM OR WALL _ II �• ^ ^ THRU WALL DRAINS p �EXIST.BRICK A V I - EXIST.CONC.PILASTER — i 6 10 — SECTION"A" EXIST.CONC.FOOTING PLAN INTERIM REVIEW aRoiEa DOCUMENTS SWIFT MASONRY WALL-PROPOSED TEMPORARY REPAIR iuoT luTEuoEO F auoviou6' CLI INT vosN,l �Q ENGINEERING,EEV COMMERCE CONSTRUCTION CO.LP. ii surti us iovrsw w REF. REV. DATE SHEET 11TE—11. uuo.�ossar iavr�i�no 3isaui RI SSK-1 7/28/16 -- TEMPORARY BRACE REPAIRED CONC.BEAM TO BE REMOVED EXIST.BRICK 4"16"(VARIES) ENCASE TEMPORARY PIPE BRACE IN CONCRETE 1'-0'MAX SURFACE TREATMENT 41/2 2' (TOP SOIL,PAVING,ETC.) 4' 3' NEW 2'-0"COMPACTED II IMPERVIOUS CLAY CAP .0 SLOPE ORI — BENCH CUT . .PIER OR_ n EXIST.CONC.WALL TO FOOTING — — --- ---- -- --- ----- --- --- --- --- -- 41/2" 0 III—IIIIII—III III -- _-- _-- -_-- ------ ----------------------------- DEAD MAN PIER -- -- ------------------------------ OR FOOTING -III- --------- ------------------------- BYOTHERS ----------------------------- —----------------------------- NEW COMPOSITE G.C.COORD. __----------------------------- GE SYNTHETIC VV/DEAD MAN —----------------------------- DRAINAGE MEDIUM DESIGN -------------- � NEW GEOTEXTILE III 114 g FILTER FABRIC "'III- "'III"'III--III EXIST. SOI USIDE WALK NOTES: NEW GEOFOAM STREET BACKFILL - — - - BEYOND 1. Not intended for bidding,permit,or construction purposes. — Detail for nformaton only. SLOPE OR BENCH CUT NEW GEOTEXTILE — — — — — FILTER FABRIC 2. All dimensions and conditions of existing construction should — — — beverifedatthe job site . EXIST.ON-SITE SOIL NEW COURSEAGGREGATE - ASTM C33,1"MAX SIZE 3. Contractor should comply with all Occupational Safely and Health Administration standards and all other regulatory agency NEW COLLECTOR PIPE- - standards regard ng excavat on safety and Iayback or bench SLOPED&CONNECTED excavation shall be at a 1 vert cal to 1 horizontal minimum to TO STORM SYSTEM OR T-0'MIN reduce the pressure on the wall THRU WALL DRAINS 4. Geotechnical engineer should be consulted priorto commencing work. — 5. Expanded Polystyrene(EPS)Geofoam: a. Lightweight expanded polystyrene with a minimum compressive strength of 2.2 pounds per square inch(psi)at a 1 h deformation. SECTION"A" EXIST.CONC.FOOTING b. Geofoam shall be in compliance with ASTM D 6817. c. All Geofoam blocks shall be treated by the manufacturer with a tested and proven termite treatment for below grade applications, 3 year minimum field exposure.The treatment shall be EPA registered, meet the requirements of ICC ES AC 238,and be recognized in an ICC ES report. INTERIM d. Available Products: REVIEW aRolEa i. Foam-Control EPS Geofoam,AFM Corporation. DOCUMENTS ii. InsulFoam GF,Insulfoam,LLC. SWIFT MASONRY WALL-PROPOSED PERMANENT REPAIR INOTiNTENOEo wa 1'T12NI CLI ENT vosEsi�ous.auoiox Ip ENGINEERING,IIV COMMERCE CONSTRUCTION CO.LP. ii,surti us iovrsw w REF. REV. DATE SHEET N N.mrrei iavwoiKT no�31sau1 RI SSK-2 07/28/16 -