Loading...
4B - Handouts - Consideration of initiaiting individual landmark designation of 955 Broadway St JVA, Incorporated 1319 Spruce Street ~ ~ ~ Boulder, CO 80302 ~ Ph: 303.444.1951 Fax: 303.444.1957 January 6, 2009 Toll Free: 877.444.1951 Web site: Dave Carson vdww.jvajva.com Oz Architecture E-mail: 1805 29`" St., Suite 2054 into@jvajva.com Boulder, CO 80301 RE: Structural Observations for 955 Broadway Boulder, CO 80302 . JVA Project #13887 Dear Dave, I met with Ron Mitchell at the above address on January 6, 2009 for the express purpose of assessing the overall condition of the building structure. The building consists of a two-story structure built in 1904 (original building) with a I940's addition to its north end, which includes a full basement. This report assumes these elements to be one entity (building) when referencing specific locations, e.g. northwest corner of the building. The building appears to be founded on concrete footings under stemwalls supporting multi-wythe brick masonry exterior and interior bearing walls. The remainder of the superstructure is composed of wood framed bearing walls, floor and roofs. Based on anecdotal information from Ron, there have been several additions and modifications since 1940, including a pitched roof over the entire 1940 addition and a 2nd floor bathroom addition above the east interior stair of the 1940's addition. There have also been modifications to the porches and a bay window installation. Two boiler room access modifications include the addition of an exterior stair on grade and retaining wall. Window well and exterior grade modif cations have also been made for better drainage away from the building. Anew treated wood floor was installed at the second floor porch above the north entry of the building following a fire. My observations are as follows: 1. 'Thy exterior face of the exterior brick wall near the nothwest corner of the building is sloughing away, flaking the paint, and exposing the brick to the weather. This doesn't appear to be an issue of bond between the paint and the brick as these areas are deteriorating with a noticeable loss of brick material. This was especially evident at the base of the second floor covered porch columns. The face of the brick masonry is sloughing and there is deterioration of the mortar. 2. The west knee wall of the front entry porch shows evidence of local settlement with numerous cracks and a loss of material in the brick as described above. BOULDER I FORT COLLINS I WINTER PARK ~ BOZEMAN e~i~~:~~ ~~~~~~r~ 3. Significant cracks, varying in width from 1/16`'' to greater than 3/8`~'s of an inch, in the exterior brick masonry walls were visible at the following locations: • The heads of doors and windows near the interface between the original building and 1940's addition. • The south .jamb /head intersection of a second story window in the central portion of the building of the west elevation. • Base of the wall near the gas meter at the southwest corner of the building. • Near the easternmost main level window of the south elevation. Extensive distress is notable at the west jamb, including large cracking and horizontal displacement of the veneer on either side of the cracks. • Main level of the southeast corner of building. The severely cracked veneer is displaced up to an inch horizontally across the crack. • Main level near south east corner of the building opposite the large tree. • The north face of the small return at the main level of the original building, east elevation. • The east chimney, particularly above the roofline. Extensive deterioration of mortar also noted here. • The south jamb /head intersection of a second story window north of the stucco enclosed bathroom. 4. There is extensive cracking and sloughing of the concrete foundation walls of the boiler room at the south end of the building. The concrete sloughs to the touch, with large amounts of deterioration occurring along the numerous cold joints evident in the wails. 5. There is water damage to roof eave elements of the original building immediately south of the west chimney. 6. The downspout is missing at the southeast corner of the building. 7. The root system of a large tree at the southeast corner of the building seems to have contributed to the masonry damage in this area mentioned above. 8. There is improper drainage of a small, shallow well leading to an exterior door at the west elevation of the building, allowing runoff to accumulate near the building foundations. 9. The shallow concrete footing foundation at a window well near the interface between the original building and 1940 addition, east elevation, is exposed. 10. Cracks or distress were noted in the plaster finish of the interior at the following locations: Water damage to a section of the north wall of the central east-west hall, 1940's addition, 2"d level. • South rooms of the original building, lower level • Vl-'alls of rooms at the central portion of the building; both main and 2"d floor. • Ceilings of walls in the 2"d floor rooms of the centra( portion of the building. BOULDER I FORT COLLINS I WINTER PARK ~ BOZEMAN • The interior wall that was the north exterior wall to the original building • Slab on grade in the basement at the east end of the 1940's addition • Approx. t/4" wide vertical crack near in the concrete foundation wall near the transition between the-original building and 1940's addition. 11. A section of the south wythe of the interior east-west masonry brick bearing wall centrally located in the original building collapsed. "Phis wall becomes the small return in the exterior wall of the building at the east elevation. Ron explained a section of the south wythe was discovered to have collapsed. "The void was "plastered in" and a recessed bookshelf was built, approximately 5'x5' square. No structural remediation was performed on the area at that time. 12. Section of floor in the main level room at the southeast corner of the building has settled. The south 4 feet of the floor appears a couple inches higher than the noz-th section of the room, with the transition occurring fairly rapidly. 13. The floor of the main level of the original building in general slopes down to the north. 14. 'There were various locations within the building that Ron described as having long-term water infiltration issues. This was especially the case before the pitched roof was added to the 1940's wing, but water problems still remain. The ceiling of the large west room at the main level of the 1940's addition below the transition between interior rooms and the balcony of the 2nd floor require annual repair. In addition, a porch was added to the second level at the southwest corner of the building. The slab~of the porch doesn't drain properly and water damage is a continual issue with the rooms directly below the porch. 15. The overbuild roof gable south of the interface between the original building and the 1940's addition was bouncing as I walked on it, indicating inadequate fi•aming members in this area. Conclusions As a whole, the building foundations do not appear to suffer from major differential soil movements; the 1940's addition in particular seems to have performed adequately. However, cracks in both the interior and exterior walls near the interface between the original building and the 1940 addition indicate foundation movement, which may or may not be ongoing. Possible catalysts for such movement include the exposed foundation of the original building on the east side that allows for seasonal movements resulting from freeze-thaw cycles. Poor drainage of the well on the west side of the building may also add to the problem. It is also probable that the excavation of the 1940's basement addition undermined portions of the foundation of the original building. It appears attempts were made to bolster the bearing of the shallow foundations with rock material near the transition. Placing material under an existing foundation in this manner is an ineffective way to stabilize the element and movements likely occurred shortly after the addition was constructed. BOULDER I FORT COLLINS I WINTER PARK ! BOZEMAN i~q~~~:~ s, , ~ . The most distressed area of the foundation is the southeast corner of the building, where the main level floor slopes severely and where substantial cracking in the exterior masonry wall can be observed. Evidently, the south portion of the east wall began bowing so much that steel channels were bolted to each side of the \vindow directly opposite the tree to prevent the \vall from n10\'lilg out further. The cracks at the southeast corner and east portion of the south wall are, in my opinion, past the point \vhere in-situ repair is feasible, and the wall should be removed and replaced. The root system ofthe large tree has likely contributed to the wall damage in this area. A geotechnical engineer should be commissioned to study this situation to recommend remedial actions. Removal of the tree may be required. "I'he missing downspout is definitely contributing to the concentration of runoff at this corner. Water intrusion into structural systems can have a significant impact on their performance and integrity, and is a concern with this building. In particular, the interfaces beriveen additions as well as the second floor porches over the main level rooms are areas that exhibit distress both at the interior and exterior of the building. Ron. noted that he paints the exterior of the building yearly and routinely patches and repairs cracks in the finishes of the building, some of which re- appear with regular frequency. With this regular care, at first glance the building appears to be in relatively good shape. However many cracks reappear after being repaired, indicating urtderlying foundation movements and water intrusion still occurs. Givcn the age of the building and its wood construction, water intrusion could be causing serious decay in areas behind the finishes. For example, the sloping of the floors could be caused by the deterioration of wood sill plates and floor joists. Further investigation, including local demolition of finishes, is required to fully assess the extent of the water damage to the strucritral systems. Respectfully, JVA, Inc. . !-_1`{.jq:/i I efFi-'~~.+~~'^-'tea.--~~v,M By. ~ Derek M. Pedersen, P.E. Associate ~'".r.''G~[X~. Reviewed: - Tom Soell, P.E., President L,EED Accredited Professional `fhe opinions stated in this report are based on limited visual observations only. No physical testing was performed and no calculations have been made to determine the adequacy of the structural system or its compliance with accepted building code requirements. Architectural, mechanical, electrical and plumbing conditions are not included in this report BOULDER I FORT COLLINS I WINTER PARK 1 BOZEMAN