File Ref. #059
c.r ff- (J~r-v<<NC~"",1 t f, U
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CITY HALL 1700 CONVENTION CENTER DRIVE MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA 33139
http:\\ci.miami-beach.fl.us
L.T.e. No.88-1998
LETTER TO COMMISSION
, "
June 16, 1998
TO:
Mayor Neisen O. Kasdin and
Members of the City Commission
Sergio Rodriguez /11 ,
.-
City Manager "
FROM:
SUBJECT:
UPDATE ON LOEWS STRUCTURAL PEER REVIEW
Both the City's independent peer review structural engineer, Herbert Gopman, and Loews peer
review structural engineer, Y srael Seinuk, are proceeding toward concluding their evaluations.
This afternoon, Herbert Gopman faxed to the City a draft preliminary letter. The document is
unsigned and unsealed. It is attached for your information. A meeting was already scheduled (prior
to receipt of the Gopman letter) for all engineers to meet and discuss their conclusions on Friday,
June 19, 1998. The purpose of the meeting is to review the various reports and to arrive at collective
recommendations for corrective work on deficiencies so that remedial action can begin as soon as
possible.
There is no direct liability to the City or RDA. The developer is responsible for all development cost
overruns.
SR:HSM:jph
Attachment
F:\CMGR\$ALL\L TC98\LOEWS.WPD
J
I
,
I
i
'I
'I
j
1
t
i
I
!
I
i
1
j
~
!
I
~
I
This is the conclusion to our investiga . on of; wind resisting system of the
~
Our investigation was based on curr requirfents of the South Florida Building code which
adopts the wind load criteria of AS.C E. 7-93, The actual values used came from e 6.na.1
dctcrminatioDS as arrived from the . tunnel tests r~ ofRowan-Wlmams-D .s and Irwin
ofOuclph, Ontario.
CaJcuIaUOJ1S made for our detcrmin~ ns cam~ nom two different sources, one fr a consultant
we retained. using a three dimeosionJ analysi 'different uom our use, and an in ho se analysi!t .
Wlin& the commonly used three dimen~onal ysis known as E-tabs. In both cas the final 1
results asreod that the wind frame~solumn net 3, 4 and 6 were significantly un erdesigned. in j
some cases greater than four times allow' e d~sign values when comidering e allowable i
capacities of the pilei under the tram . The ' es themselves below the fourth I el were' ~
significantly underdeai.gned to the t of e their allowable values. The strn a1 wind' :
syitem does wode above the tburth l~! d, thcr is a very large decrease in building tiflhess below i
the fourth Jevel. The comparison mad Wag as onows: ' :
I
. i
The top habitable floor bas a drift;lti of UI 8. or a drift in inches of11.03". Th 4lh tloor h8.s a i
drift ratio ofUl96 or a drift in in of 4.8" . ough these exceed the comfort el of the: ;
bwldiI1&. and in aIllikelibood the bu' ing will evacuated. it is likely that the b . cladding II
will be affected prior to any structu failure. 'normal design comfort level (n a code
requirement) is from WOO to U400,repend' g,on the feeling of me design engin i
Additionally, we checked tbewind re~stance ;t wind forces of75 miles per hour ( onsidered !
I
maximwn $Ul!Uller winds), the wind' es e found to be capable of sustaining these forces.
however some of the pile caps were '11 susp as there appeared to be a lack of cient piles
JUN-16-1998 15:24
..::.
Mr. Phil Azan
City of Miami Beach
Building Department
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, FL 33139
RE: Loews Hotel
Dear Mr. Azan:
P.01
hotel.
I I
JUN-16-1998 15:25
I I
c- I I
in some of the smaller caps of the tr~1 er ~s.
Since our analysis was based on inter ion. at is to say there would be a load di
thin frames of the building, there still 'sts th' probability that these thinner tram
the distribution since they have not' pro Iy reinforced. The distnbuted fore
to the stUJer frames, imposing even ore 10 than our analysis shows.
In concluding our repon, the investi a lack of design for frames locat at lines 3, 4
and 6 from the 4* level down. these' elude t Columns, beams, piles and pile ca .
I
In order to more equally distribute th~ forces . n by the building and not allow
distribution to other framc:s and thus hverloa1dthem, it is suggested that the conee
rcpw-s be made within the vicinity o~frame Ii :s 3, 4 and 6.
To further expand on this last commit, our '. a1ysis shows that the Shearwalls re aining at the
lower levels defined as Shearwalls I, f and 3 ~n the West side near the retail area, arc also : :
deficient in reinforcing. This conditio-p is probjbly correctable by t'!lim1n~ting the cesSvc ' j
torsional forcca thrown into the stru e &0 the defective wind frames 3, 4 and . If a . i
correction can be focused in the .East a, an ther analysis would probably show e West si4C to!
be sufficient. 1 : !
I
I
GOPMAN CONSULTING ENT' I'
I 1
~
I
I
!
I
1
I
Respectfully Submitted.
Herbert L. Gopman, P.E.
June 16, 1998
c-JotWIIIoWIlZlIII6II&I.l<<
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
l
i
i
,\
TOTAL P. 02