BOWEN ISLAND MUNICIPALITY

Transcription

1 Integrated Planning and Consulting Ltd INSPECTION REPORT MOUNT GARDNER WHARF BOWEN ISLAND, BC PREPARED FOR: PROJECT # AUGUST

2 TEL: FAX: Panorama Drive North Vancouver, BC V7G 2A4

3 Integrated Planning and Consulting Ltd 2933 Panorama Drive North Vancouver, BC V7G 2A4 INSPECTION REPORT MOUNT GARDNER WHARF BOWEN ISLAND, BC Project # August, 2013

4 Integrated Planning and Consulting Ltd 2933 Panorama Drive North Vancouver, BC V7G 2A4 Attention: Keith Wahlstrom, P.Eng. Bowen Island Municipality 597 Artisan Lane, Bowen Island BC V0N 1G0 Telephone (604) September 25, 2013 Project Number: Re: Inspection of Mount Gardner Wharf Dear Sir: Please find enclosed an inspection report of the Mount Gardner Municipal Wharf, located on the north side of Bowen Island. The scope of work of our proposal was to conduct a site visit and provide a visual inspection of the wharf to determine the general condition for planning and cost evaluation purposes. Based on above water visual inspection, the wharf is in serviceable condition subject to the immediate replacement of corbel at bent 2A and other minor repairs outlined herein. Due to the old age of the wharf, there are many items requiring coring to better assess their condition. Sincerely, Ted Appleton, P.Eng President Integrated Planning and Consulting Ltd Enclosed: Inspection Report 1 P a g e

5 1.0 INTRODUCTION Integrated Planning and Consulting Ltd. (IPc) was retained by Bowen Island Municipality (BIM) to provide assistance with planning the future use of the Mount Gardner Municipal Wharf. IPc proposed visiting the site to conduct a partial visual inspection of the wharf. The purpose of the inspection was to get an idea of the wharf s current condition; to provide background information for developing cost-efficient strategies for future use. The wharf is located on the north side of Bowen Island, at the end of Mount Gardner road. IPc created a layout drawing of the wharf showing a bent numbering system. Refer to Figure 1, below. Figure 1. Mount Gardner Wharf Bent Layout The inspection was conducted between August 8 9, Visual inspection was completed topside the wharf on deck, under the wharf on beach. 2.0 WHARF MATERIALS The wharf is a standard Small Craft Harbour design. The timber sizes are as follows: Decking: Guard: Outside Stringers: Center Stringers: Caps: Corbels: Cross Braces: Bearing Piles: 2.5 x 11.5, dressed, incised and salt treated (CCA) 7.5 x 5.5, dressed, incised and salt treated (CCA) 7.5 x 9.5, dressed, incised and creosote treated 5.5 x 9.5, dressed, incised and creosote treated 11.5 x 11.5, dressed, incised and creosote treated 11.5 x 11.5, dressed, incised and creosote treated 4 x 8 and 6 x8, rough, incised and creosote treated Dia., with the exception of C2 measuring 8.5 dia. 2 P a g e

6 3.0 DATA COLLECTION The inspection of the wharf was conducted above water without hand drilling/coring or ultrasonic testing. The purpose of the inspection was to determine the general condition of the wharf by visual inspection. The following table provides the data collected during the inspection. Table 1. Wharf Damages and Recommended Repairs Bent Location Item Description of Damages Recommended Course of Action 4A Bearing Pile Pile split full length. Coring. 6A Bearing Pile Pile split full length, 4-3/8 deep. Coring. Refer to Figure 2. 7A Bearing Pile Pile split. Coring. 8A Bearing Pile Pile split. Coring. 8B Bearing Pile Small diameter pile split. Coring. 11B Bearing Pile Pile split. Coring. 2A-C Cap Underside of cap split Coring. deep. Refer to Figure 3 & 4. 3A-B Cap Underside of cap split 2.5 deep. Coring. Refer to Figure 5. 2A Corbel Severe cavity. Refer to Figure 6. Replace corbel immediately. 2B Corbel Suspect for replacement. Replace 2C Corbel Suspect for replacement. Replace 2A 3A Stringer Mechanical damage pin Coring. installation. Refer to Figure B Stringer Side of stringer split. Coring. 8B Stringer Side of stringer split at bolt Coring. connection. 9B Stringer Mechanical damage to side of Coring. stringer, 25% CSL. Refer to Figure 8. 3A (BOTTOM) Cross Bottom bolts eroded. Refer to Replace bottom bolts. 3B (BOTTOM) Braces Figure 9. 3A (BOTTOM) Cross Brace Deterioration. Refer to Figure 10. Replace cross brace. 3B (TOP) 6A (BOTTOM) Cross Brace Split and early signs of Coring. B (TOP) deterioration damage. Refer to Figure Guard Original guard with severe fungal Replace original guard. damage. Refer to Figure 12. 2C-10B Handrail Original handrail with severe fungal damage. Refer to Figure 13. Replace original handrail. 3 P a g e

7 Bent Location Item Description of Damages Recommended Course of Action 5-10A Handrail Original handrail with severe fungal damage Decking Original decking with severe fungal damage. Some decking has been replaced, but most do not extend to meet the stinger below. Refer to Figure 14 & Gangway Timber connection loose on both sides. Refer to Figure 16. Replace original handrail. Replace decking and size to extend under guard. Replace gangway connection hardware to wharf. 4.0 DISCUSSION We conducted a visual inspection topside on deck and under the wharf on beach. No underwater inspection, coring or ultrasonic testing was carried out. Approximately 50% of the bearing piles were inspected at low tide, specifically targeting cross brace bolting and seabed areas. Many of the cross braces show signs of deterioration likely from marine decay and the cross brace at pile 3A (BOTTOM) - 3B (TOP) should be replaced. The cross brace hardware appeared to be in good shape, with the exception of piles 3A (BOTTOM) and 3B (BOTTOM) with eroded bottom bolts. The original decking, guard and handrail are in poor condition and are due to be replaced. Some of the handrail and guard has been replaced and is acceptable. Some of the decking has also been replaced, but is not acceptable (for long-term) since most were undersized and did not extend under the guard to meet the outside stringer. The stringers and caps appear to be in fair condition, but it is recommended to core a sample set of caps and stringers to verify their condition. The sample set would increase or decrease depending on the condition of the timbers (in addition to the items listed in Table 1). The bearing piles show their age, but appear to be in fair condition. The most significant deterioration was found at 2A where a corbel has a large internal cavity and is near failure. It is recommended to replace all corbels. Since the wharf is currently in service, we advise the above listed repairs be carried out immediately. Refer to the following section for photographs of major damages found during the inspection. 4 P a g e

8 5.0 PHOTOGRAPHS Figures referenced in this report are provided in the section. See below photographs showing damages found during the inspection. Figure 2. Pile Splitting at 6A 5 P a g e

9 Figure 3. Cap Splitting 2B-C Figure 4. Cap Splitting 2A-B 6 P a g e

10 Figure 5. Cap Splitting 3A-B Figure 6. Corbel with Severe Internal Cavity at 2A 7 P a g e

11 Figure 7. Mechanical Damage to Stringer at 2A 3A Figure 8. Mechanical Damage to Stringer, 25% CSL at 9B 8 P a g e

12 Figure 9. Cross Braces Bottom Bolts Eroded at 3A and 3B (BOTTOM) Figure 10. Cross Brace Deterioration at 3B (TOP) 9 P a g e

13 Figure 11. Cross Brace Split and Deterioration at 6A (BOTTOM)- 6B (TOP) 10 P a g e

14 Figure 12. Typical Guard Fungal Damage 11 P a g e

15 Figure 13. Typical Handrail Fungal Damage 12 P a g e

16 Figure 14. Typical Decking Fungal Damage Figure 15. Typical Undersized Replacement Decking 13 P a g e

17 Figure 16. Gangway Connections Loose, Hardware Bending 14 P a g e