Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEngineer Report 04.11.18Studio M Eneineers . LLC RECEIVED APR I 3 2018 GARFIELD COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Structural Engineering Consultants I nnov att o n By P er cepti on www.m ben gineering.el ementfx.com studiom.engineer@gmail.com April 11, 2018 To'Whom It May Concern: At the request of the owners, Mr. and Mrs. Carl and Carrie Buhlman my office was asked to inspect the original homestead structure located at94Ù4 Highway 325 in Garfield County, Colorado. It is my understanding that the Garfield Building Department issued the following directive regarding a proposed residential remodel of this particular building: A Colorado licensed design professional (Architect or Engineer) must perform a site visit and inspection to veffi the structure meets the requirements for structural and non- structural provisions of the adopted codes. As part of the building permit application process, the design proþssional must certify with a sealed letter that the building meets adopted codes. This letter rnust accompøny the building permit application. Depending on the complexity of the structure, building plans may also need to be drawn and submitted with the app. It should be noted that my inspection was for structural items only. The following services are not included in Studio M Engineers, LLC's scope of work: architecture, site plans, energy studies, building component assembly descriptions, land surveying, civil, geotechnical, electrical, mechanical, heating ventilating and air conditioning plumbing, site grading, or acoustical engineering. No responsibility is taken or assumed for architectural issues including, but not limited to, site location, access, egress, zoning conformance, waterproofing, ventilation, and insulation. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The building inspected was reported as being the original homestead for the property. There are a variety of other structures on the property that were not part of my scope. It is my understanding that the building we inspected is at least 88 years old (1932). The two level building is approximately 14 feet wide (north- south) by 20 feet long (east-west) and is situated on the South West corner of the property, near Rifle Creek. 25o Tripp Drive O Rifle a Colorado a 8165o .97oi66-869o . 9404 County Rd 325 Page 3 Units are stacked in a running bond layout to the bottom of a2xl2 joist system (24 spacing). The last foot of wall is stacked in a stack bond layout. The wall is unreinforced. The tile cells are hollow and ungrouted. Vintage Clay Tile FoundationWall Units The structural tile wall was built over a cast in place concrete slab of unknown thickness. No sub-grade foundation wall was visible at the time of inspection. OBSERVATIONS: Roof: The roof trusses are site constructed of recycled materials. Chords are full size 2x4 members. Webs are 1x5 siding material. Connections were nailed. The typical web-chord lapped connection was fastened with three nail fasteners of unknown diameter. A picture description is shown below: Typical4:12 Gable Roof Truss a z5o Tripp Drive o Rifle a Colorado I 8t65o .970366-869o. 9404 Counr¡t Rd, i25 Page 5 Exterior Grade: The grade around the main level on the South, East and West sides is high, with negative (pitching towards the building) drainage action occurring in spot locations. There was a considerable amount of leaf matter on the ground surrounding the building. It is my experience that vintage buildings will experience a rise in exterior grade level as a result of organic matter decomposition over time. This rate is typically in the range of about 1/8 inch to r/q inch per year, especially if the organic matter (leafs) are not removed seasonally. The original grade at 9404 County Rd 325 was probably as much as IO to 12 inches lower during the building's original installation. Water infiltration has been an issue in the past, based on the water stains on the tile units on the East, North and South interior foundation walls. The stack bond portion of the clay tile wall is in a state of disrepair. The exterior mortar beds have completely eroded and were not even visible in portions of the foundation wall near the floor. The combination of high grade, poor drainage, and poor masoffy work has created this water infiltration issue. Foundation: With the exception of the deteriorated upper coursing and widespread water infiltration issue, the foundation wall systems are in fair condition. There were no significant areas of bowing, cracking or signs of structural distress. The system is unreinforcetl antl is "borrded" through adhesive morlar bed action on the tension side (interior) and compressive action on the exterior. The wall height is approximately 8'-7. 3/¿", The tile wall spans between the floor slab below and the joists and decking at the main (2nd) floor level. Observation of the joints between framing and wall is that the joints were very tight. There was no separation of framing from foundation via membrane or air gap. RECOMMENDATIONS: Roof: The wood framed members for the trusses are acceptable based on analysis, assuming the top chord is properly braced by the roof decking system above (fasteners wcrc not observed because they were covered by metal roofing). The nailed connections at the web-chord joints and the chord-chord are undersized and inadequate. They should be improved by adding more nails, straps or bolts. A majority of the web members did not extend all the way across the chords, making the addition of more nails problematic. Pre drilled holes for nails, or a pneumatic staple product would be a good solution, as the lx webs will most likely split out otherwise. Despite the fact that the existing roof framing has existed for many years, the addition of insulation to the roof will increase the snow load retention ability, potentially adding more load and stress to the gravity support system. o z5o Tripp Drive a Rifle a Colorado o 8t65o '970366-869o . 9404 Countv Rd 325 Puge 7 Lower Level West Facing Wood Wall: Likewise, the wood framed 'wall' that exists on the lower level walkout basement area needs to be demolished and reinstalled in the proper plane, i.e. in line with the exterior wall above. The existing wood wall is completely separated on its South end and is barely attached. The goal is to eliminate horizontal surfaces that trap and collect moisture. This reinstalled and relocated wood wall should be properly attached on each end to the tile foundation wall, sealed, and properly flashed, both above the door unit and at the threshold. Foundation Wall: The upper portions of the foundation all (upper 24 inches) should be uncovered and inspected for adequate mortarbedding. Re-point and grout as necessary. In a majority of the above grade wall I inspected, the mortar was completely gone. The units should be inspected for deterioration and replaced as necessary. The structural tile units are vintage. They may be difficult, if not impossible to find. If deterioration is noted and replacement options are required, contact my office for additional recommendations. The exterior foundation is apparently not waterproofed. The signs of extensive moisture intrusion were noted on every wall, from top to bottom. It is not clear if the water is entering the top and dripping down, or if it is seeping in. Regardless, the walls can be expected to keep leaking until the moisture source is reduced and waterproofing is added. Waterproofing on modern day foundations is accomplished through a system as follows: 1. Gutter the roof. Extends downspouts well beyond the limits of the foundation. Maintain gutters by clearing them frequently of leaf matter. 2. Modify the exterior grade so that it slopes at least 12 inches in the first 10 feet on all sides. Create and maintain drainage swales by keeping them clear of organic matter. Swales should pitch between 1.5 andTVo. 3. Provide a tightly compacted 2 to 3 foot cap of fill mixed with a bentonite product to help seal out water 4. Provide a foundation drain system with a pipe to daylight at the low corner of the building. This pipe would be located at approximately the elevation of the interior slab and would be placed on the exterior of the building. The drain system is typically a system of comrgated pipe, gravel, screen netting to stop silt from plugging the system, and a proper slope, to ensure the system does not back up 5. Providing a waterproof seal on the exterior of the foundation via vertical membrane and./or liquid applied foundation membrane. 6. Limit inigation adjacent to foundation areas Installation of a waterproofing system can be more accurately recommended by a professional with experience in this line of work. Excavating the entire building perimeter for the purposes of installing a drain system etc. would obviously be a large undertaking. A waterproofing professional would be able to make recommendations if the waterproofing could be installed on the interior. a 25o Tripp Drive a Rifle a Colorado a 8t65o .97o366-869o.