Masonry Study. Club House and Jr. Club House Pequot Yacht Club Southport, Connecticut 03-44

Transcription

1 Club House and Jr. Club House Southport, Connecticut Harbor Road Southport, Connecticut Architect: Martin A. Benassi, AIA Architect Two Broadway Hamden, CT Date:

2 Table of Contents Introduction Preamble Building History Data Collection Field Testing Format Observations General Site Masonry Metal Wood Thermal and Moisture Protection Evaluations General Design Construction Materials Maintenance Miscellaneous Recommendations / Cost Estimate General Recommendations Reasons Estimated Cost of Construction Appendix A - Photos B - Drawings C - The Southport Packet, Vol. 1 No. 4 D - Cost Estimate References ASTM C270 Standard Specification for Mortar for Unit Masonry Brick Institute of America (BIA) technical notes: 7 Water Resistance of Brick Masonry Design and Detailing Part I of III 7A 7B Water Resistance of Brick Masonry Materials Part II of III Water Resistance of Brick Masonry Construction and Workmanship Part III of III Table of Contents Page 1

3 INTRODUCTION PREAMBLE A proposal was sent to Jack Fanzen, FAIA dated December 9 th, 2003 regarding performing a masonry evaluation study of the, Harbor Road, Southport, Connecticut. The proposal was accepted and a letter authorizing us to proceed was sent by C. Wesley Dunn, Jr. dated December 17 th. An initial site visit was scheduled for January 16 th to review the general scope of work. Present at that time were Jack Franzen, FAIA of Franzen Associates, Alan Pinto and Martin Benassi, AIA of Martin A. Benassi, AIA - Architect. Additional site visits were made on January 20 th and January 29 th to gather information and photos. The intent of this study is to evaluate existing masonry conditions and prepose recommendations for repair. Toward this end, several site visits were made to document existing conditions using photographs and sketches, some of which are included in this study under the appropriate appendix. This was to be a non-destructive, visual type investigation of the buildings. For this reason, no cutting or patching was necessary. Miscellaneous samples were retained for examination back at the office. They included mortar and paint chips. BUILDING HISTORY The consists of two buildings adjacent to each other known as the Club House and Jr. Club House. The Club House was built in 1886 and was known as the Old Jelliff building. The Jr. Club House was originally known as the Simon Banks building. The Club House was originally four stories. The top two stories were removed and a new gable, roof framing system was installed, resulting in a two-story structure with an attic. The building has solid masonry exterior bearing walls made of brick with wood-framed interior partitions and floor. The building footprint is approximately 39' x 80'-6" for a total of 3,150 square feet per floor. Presently the building functions as the main dining facility with storage lockers located in the attic. The Jr. Club House is of similar construction and profile. Early photos show the building as a full three stories with a flat roof. The roof was removed and a new gable, roof framing system was installed using the third floor as attic space. The building footprint is 48'-10" by 70' for a total of 3,400 square feet per floor. Presently the building functions as Men s and Ladies room and shower along with Club Manager s office. DATA COLLECTION Introduction Page 1

4 There were no drawings available of either building. Schematic drawings attached were generated from field measurements taken during site visits. They are for presentation purposes only and are not intended to be working drawings or As-built documents. Information regarding the history of the building was provided by the Pequot Library Collection (see Appendix C). FIELD TESTING FORMAT Samples of the mortar were retained for testing back at the office. Information regarding the mortar is included in the text. No other testing was conducted in the field. The survey is organized into four sections: Introduction, Observations, Evaluations, and Recommendations with Appendixes attached. This report is not for construction and was prepared for the sole use by the Owner, The of Southport, Connecticut. Any reprints or copies of this report without the written consent of the Architect or Owner is unlawful. END OF SECTION Introduction Page 2

5 OBSERVATIONS GENERAL SITE MASONRY METAL Observations Page 1 The Club House was originally four stories as noted under the Introduction / History section of this report, the top two stories having been removed. The Jr. Club House also had major upper level and roof alterations. Signs of the renovations are most noticeable along the north elevation of the Jr. Club House where silhouettes of the original third-floor windows can be seen (see photo no. 3). There were no signs of water damage to the interior surfaces, and none were reported. The buildings are situated on the site with the front (north elevation) facing Harbor Road and the porch / balcony (south elevation) facing the Southport Harbor and docks. The grade drops off towards the water. The buildings are most likely set on fill. The buildings have a stone foundation of which only 21 inches of the south portion is exposed on the Jr. Club House and 16 inches of the north elevation on the Club House. The remainder may have been covered during renovations or regrading for the parking lot and driveway. Exterior bearing walls are constructed of solid brick, three wythe thick set in a common bond with every seventh course set header. The exterior facade had been painted white and removed during power washing. This is most noticeable along the street elevation of the Club House (see photo no. 14). Some efflorescence was observed, mostly contiguous or near deteriorated masonry. There are signs that water repellant may have been applied some time in the past to the building facade. There is extensive spalling and brick deterioration at various locations on both buildings with the most severe being along the southwest corner of the Jr. Club House (see photo nos. 1 and 4). Also, areas of masonry deterioration can be seen along the watertable, at grade line, chimneys, and where water has been allowed to penetrate (see photo nos. 4, 5, 8, 9, 18, 19, 20). Masonry repairs have been made in the past including repointing and crack repair. Cracks were noted at various locations throughout the buildings, most noticeably at the corners and around fenestration (see photo nos. 10, 15, 16, 17). There are no weeps on the entire building.

6 WOOD There are steel lintels above window heads used to support the masonry above. There are signs of rusting and exfoliation of the steel (see photo no. 24). There is a steel fire escape from the second floor located along the east elevation of the Jr. Club House. Severe ice buildup has occurred on the landing and stairs causing a potential safety hazard. The stair is attached to the building and secured with expansion type anchors. Damaged masonry and deteriorated mortar were observed near the fire escape (see photo nos. 7,8). Architectural detailing of the cornice, eaves, columns, railings, window heads and miscellaneous trim are made of wood. All wood has been painted white. Some of the trim was missing on the eave of the Jr. Club House (see photo no. 6). Some peeling paint was observed at various locations (see photo no. 6). THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION Sealant around penetrations has dried out, cracked or, in some locations, is missing (see photo no. 11). No expansion or control joints were observed anywhere on the buildings. Sheet metal flashing was observed on some of the window heads, but not all. Copper flashing was observed at the tie-in of the chimney base and balcony (see photo nos. 1, 5, 20). END OF SECTION Observations Page 2

7 EVALUATIONS GENERAL Design Evaluations Page 1 In general, the buildings appear to be in good condition for their age, with the exception of some areas where the masonry has deteriorated. There is also some settlement cracking which may be related to bad soil conditions. Damage can be traced back to water penetration. Review of the Brick Institute of America (BIA) technical notes shows that successful performance of a masonry wall depends on limiting the amount of water that enters the wall system. If water penetration can be limited, for all practical purposes, the wall will remain dry. Water resistance of a masonry wall depends on four key factors: 1. Design, including detailing 2. Construction 3. Materials 4. Maintenance All four of the above criteria must be given careful attention in order to produce a satisfactory performing masonry wall. The buildings are subjected to extreme environmental conditions, such as winddriven rain and salt air, due to their proximity to the coast. Efflorescence is a result of moisture migration into the masonry, washing the salts out of the mortar where they dry onto the surface of the brick leaving the salt stain. Efflorescence is a sign that moisture is penetrating the wall and should be corrected. There are products on the market today which help to seal masonry veneers. Care must be taken in the selection and application of such sealants. The intent is to limit the amount of wind-driven rain from penetrating the masonry, while allowing vapors to pass. If the product does not allow for proper migration of the vapor through the wall, spalling of the brick surface can occur. Silicone was a product widely used in the past. It caused staining of the building exterior and trapped vapors, causing damage to the building facade. It is nearly impossible to keep a heavy, wind-driven rain from penetrating a single wythe of brick. Therefore, control of this moisture is important. However, due to the thickness of the masonry wall, one can assume that the water hasn t penetrated completely through at this time. Water that does penetrate the exterior is absorbed by the brick. Freezing temperatures will cause spalling or cracking of the brick face. Wall flashing helps to divert water that does penetrate the brick back to the exterior of the structure. This is important with respect to window and door heads where rotting of the jamb and frame would result. Flashing also protects steel lintels from rusting. Exfolliation will push the brick out while weakening the

8 steel. Construction Control joints are not necessary in a building of this size, especially with solid masonry walls. However, there is some concern over the settlement cracking which is occurring on the southwest corner of the Club House. It is not clear if this is an ongoing condition or relatively new. Crack monitors can be placed on the building bridging the gap and can be checked periodically to see if there is any movement in the building that would warrant additional investigation. The solid masonry construction is typical of this era. Common brick coursing with every seventh course set perpendicular as a header course provides the necessary ties. Materials Maintenance Evaluations Page 2 The bricks used are Type FBS, Grade SW, in accordance with ASTM C-216 Standard Specification for Facing Brick. This type of brick is acceptable for applications above grade. However, it is not acceptable for below or at grade line. Where snow buildup and water splashes against the face of the building a more dense, less adsorbent brick should be used. Under normal conditions water will not pass completely through a brick itself - unless the original backed-on facing has become defective due to spalling or splitting. Sandblasting will also damage a brick face and should be avoided. Another avenue for water infiltration in a masonry wall is through hairline cracks between the brick and mortar. Mortar used to repair or repoint the building previously may have contributed to the brick deterioration. The mortar should not be harder than the surfaces it is bonding, in this case, the brick. Type N (750 psi) is the preferred standard for exterior above grade use according to ASTM C270. A Type S (1,800 psi) mortar is acceptable for below or at grade level. A thorough cleaning of the masonry surface is necessary prior to any work in order to better match the colors and textures. However, it is difficult to match original mortar and brick exactly. On the face of the Jr. Club House building, the brick has deteriorated leaving the mortar exposed. This would not have happened if a softer mortar were used as previously noted. In general, bond strength is more important than compression. The ability of the mortar to flex, or resist cracking, along with good workability are what is needed to maintain watertightness of the wall. Hard mortars often provide a poorer bond between materials resulting in hairline cracks and water penetration. Hardness of the mortar may also be contributing to spalling of the

9 brick face. MISCELLANEOUS Water can penetrate the building through various openings such as gaps in the sealant and voids in the wood trim. Sealant observed suffers from adhesive (failure of bond between sealant and adjacent surfaces). This may be attributed to either poor preparation, which includes cleaning of the surfaces or noncompatible materials. Either way, gaps are created that allow wind-driven rain to penetrate the wall system and should be corrected. Proper application of sealant requires a bond breaker tape or backer rod to fill any voids. Copper sheet metal flashing is acceptable for the use intended. Life expectancy of 16 ounce copper flashing is approximately 50 years. With regular maintenance, it can last much longer. END OF SECTION Evaluations Page 3

10 RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL The masonry damage observed on both the Club House and Jr. Club House is directly related to water infiltration. With proper repair and regular maintenance, the building should provide an additional 100 years of service. The following is an estimated serviceable life of various building materials and can be used as a guide in considering the need for scheduled periodic maintenance: Brick Mortar Paint on Steel Sealant 100+ years years 3-5 years 4-10 years If the results of the crack monitoring indicate active movement in the building, additional investigation into the soil conditions will be required. Our recommendations are based on the assumption that the cracks are not active at this time and are repairable. RECOMMENDATIONS Club House: $ Clean entire face of the building to allow for proper matching of brick and mortar. $ Remove all damaged and defective brick on entire building. A damaged brick is one that is cracked, spalled or chipped, thereby jeopardizing its waterproofing properties. Areas highlighted on the drawings are schematic only. $ Inspect the entire building and remove any loose or deteriorated mortar to a depth of 1" and repoint with mortar to match original. We recommend you remove previously repointed areas that either do not match in color or are not of the appropriate composition. $ Inspect all window and door perimeters for proper sealant application. Remove defective areas and replace with backer rod and sealant. Paint to match trim. $ Monitor crack on southwest corner to determine if active. If active, additional soil investigation will be required to stabilize structure. $ Prepare and paint wood trim. Jr. Club House: $ Clean entire face of the building to allow for proper matching of brick and mortar. $ Remove all damaged and defective brick on entire building. A damaged brick is one that is cracked, spalled or chipped, thereby jeopardizing its waterproofing properties. Areas highlighted on the drawings are schematic only. Recommendations Page 1

11 $ Inspect the entire building and remove any loose or deteriorated mortar to a depth of 1" and repoint with mortar to match original. We recommend you remove previously repointed areas that either do not match in color or are not of the appropriate composition. $ Inspect all window and door perimeters for proper sealant application. Remove defective areas and replace with backer rod and sealant. Paint to match trim. $ Install a canopy or enclosure around fire escape to prevent ice buildup. $ Replace missing wood trim on eave. Scrape, prime and paint all wood trim along cornice. $ Replace lintels above windows where defective. Include flashing and weeps. REASONS: Corrective work will ensure that the masonry exterior is watertight and in sound condition. Masonry has a long life expectancy when properly installed and detailed. By matching the original brick and mortar, the original character of the building will be maintained. This is important in that the buildings are located within the historic district of Southport. ESTIMATED COST OF CONSTRUCTION Some of the dollar figures used were calculated based on information obtained from the 2003 Building Construction Cost Data published by Robert Snow Means Company, Inc., Kingston, Massachusetts. Additional figures were obtained from similar active projects with inflation and geographical percentages included. The final dollar amount shown is for guidance only and is a ball park figure. An assumption is made that all repair work will be performed under one contract and not spaced out over a period of time. The amount does not include any soft costs such as Architectural / Engineering fees or contingencies. Cost estimate work sheets are included under Appendix D. Estimated Cost... $ 172, END OF SECTION Recommendations Page 2