Loading...
LTC 220-2002 CITY OF MIAMI BEACH C I V D Office of the City Manager m 02 SFP ? 6 PML?eft~r to Commission No. O?~ - ~COd- : ~ ! T' I-"'! [-'I''' 5 8 r" I e r '.of , ~ ~,.!' L ',_ " ~, \ i Ii_ From: Mayor David Dermer and Members of the City Commission Jorge M. Gonzalez \ ,~' City Manager 0 ,.;.r 0 2001 Collins Avenue - Sasson Hotel Emergency Demolition Order Status Report pate: September 20,2002 To: Subject: On October 10, 1995, the former Joint Design Review/Historic Preservation Board (Joint Board) approved the Setai development project (ORB File No. 6647 J), which consisted of a 36 story condominium tower and the restoration of the Sasson Hotel (formerly Dempsey's Vanderbilt Hotel). The project was approved with a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 3.93 and a maximum building height of approximately 400 feet. The project was eventually permitted and construction began. The project became legal non-conforming in 1998 when the City Commission adopted comprehensive revisions to the City Code that substantially lowered maximum allowable densities and height throughout the City. Under the current code, the maximum allowable FAR for the project would be 2.0 and the maximum height would be 13 stories/120 feet. Although the project experienced a temporary suspension of construction during a change in ownership, the developer was able to maintain the original Building Permit and construction of the project has resumed. As work on the restoration of the existing Sasson Hotel progressed, the Building Official received three (3) structural reports delineating the severe structural deterioration of the Sasson building. Such reports also identified the significant risk that would be created during the process of removing and rebuilding the deteriorated structural components of the building's exterior facade. Additionally, neither the Engineer of record nor the remedial work Engineer of record would guarantp.e the life expectancy of the restored existing structure. All of the engineer~ concluded that the structure is an imminent danger to the public safety and that the building should be demolished. The Building Official and the City's Chief Structural Engineer reviewed the reports and inspected the structure and concurred with the findings of the professional Engineers. Pursuant to the requirements of the Florida Building Code, the Building Official issued an Emergency Demolition Order on September 12, 2002 for the total demolition of the building. The Historic Preservation Board held an emergency meeting on September 17, 2002 to discuss the demolition order. The matter will be coming back before the Historic Preservation Board on October 8, 2002 as a formal application for an "after-the-fact Page: 2 Date: September 20, 2002 LTC - Sasson Hotel Emergency Demolition - Status Report Certificate of Appropriateness for Demolition, as well as a modification to the project to reconstruct the building. JMG:i1t~M F:\PLAN\$ALLICM_RESPlSASOONDEMO.L TC.DOC c: Murray Dubbin, City Attorney Gary Held, First Assistant City Attorney Rhonda Montoya, First Assistant City Attorney Bob Parcher,CltyCterk Phil Azan, Building Official Jorge G. Gomez, Planning Director William Cary, Director of Design, Preservation and Neighborhood Planning Thomas R. Mooney, Design and Preservation Manager City of Miami Beach Memo To: Philip Azan Building OfficiaV Director From: Mohammed Partovi, P.E. Chief Structural Engineer cc: Richard McConachie Chief Building Inspector Date: 09/12102 Re: Setai Hotel Based on the Structural observation of the above project on Friday August 23, 2002, as well as reports by: 1. Robert H. Schuler, P.E. of Wingerter Laboratories Inc. dated July 17, 2002. 2. Eric L. Edelson, P.E. of Tadjer-Cohen-Edelson Associates, Inc. dated September 6,2002 (Engineer of record for the exterior wall, delegated by Raul Puig, P.E.). 3. Raul A. Puig, P.E. of The Raul Puig Group, P.A. dated September 11, 2002 (Engineer of record). My opinion is that the structure located at 2009 Collins Avenue is a major threat to public as well as the workers safety and could collapse at any time without a waming. With a continued possibility of structural failure, my recommendation is to demolish , the entire structure under a supervision of Special Inspector holding a Professional Engineering license as soon as possible. . Page 1 . . ..' .' / /' ~1]E!J (9. THE RAUL PUIG GROUP, P.A./CONSULTING ENGINEERS 9200 SOUTH DADELAND BLVD. · SUITE 710 · MIAMI, FLORIDA 33156 TELEPHONE (305) 670-9858 · FAX (305) 670-9862 - September 11, 2002 Mr. Philip Azan Building Director/ Official City of Miami Beach Building Department 1700 Convention Center Drive, 200 Floor , Miami Beach, FL 33139 RE: The Setai Hotel Dear Mr. Azan, The Raul Puig Group as the Engineer of Record has been involved in the Setai Hotel project for the past 5 years. We performed the original inspection of the Sasson Hotel existing structural condition in 1998. Our report based on visual observations indicated that the structural components of the building had signs of concrete deterioration and delamin~tion. Even though a significant repair scope was required at that time, it was our belief that the building was in acceptable condition as a restoration project. In 1998 Wingerter Laboratories Inc. inspected the building and performed Swiss Hammer testing as well as Subsurface Interface Radar survey, and gave their recommendations on the repair procedures required to restore the building. The Setai Owners retained Tadjer-Cohen-Edelson Associates, Inc. (TCE) who specializes in the project reStorations and developed the repair design required to restore the Setai Hotel. TeE acting as a specialty engineer on the project performed a number of site visits in order to evaluate the building structural condition, and developed the facade restoration scope including the required ~ade bracing. However it was impossible for TCE to predict the exact extent of deterioration prior to the beginning of the repair process. Since the commencement of repairs parts of the fa~e separated from the building and fell down on the ground without warning, creating an imminent danger and threat to public safety. At the same time Wmgerter Laboratories performed structural re-inspection of the project to determine the magnitude of the building deterioration at the present time. The report dated July 17, 2002 prepared by Wmgerter Laboratories concluded that,the present extent of the building deterioration will require virtually the entire replacement of the building structural elements including the fayade framing. Based on the existing condition of the Setai Hotel building, the report prepared by the W..!l!B~~~~~~~ben-~eIsonAssociat~we beti~e::tlii:, e:,.entiie.'exig~~jhJmd~.J;t~o1isli@~Our mam concern, which I . ;-.-, B]E!J "'H~~E" RAU L PlJlG GROUP, P.A.I CONSULT'Ne ENe'NEEAS ~... 9200 SOUTH DADELAND BLVD.'.Sl.IITE 710'. MIAMI, FLORIDA 33156 ~ TELEPHONE (305) 670-9858 · FAX (305) 670-9862 ~ .' am sure we all agree o~~"e"~~t4jf.f~t<rp.u1iIi~..s.!Ls~~f6'y the Setai Hotel existing condition. ' ; 7 /L :7 " :44 rrcm-ridJ.r Ceh.n Edllsen Asseclitls 301-588-186& T-711 P.DDZ/DDZ F-745 I. /0'. "\ '- September 6, 2002 Tadjer.cohen-Ede/son Associates. Inc. Consulting Structural Engineers www.radjcrco.com 01l('r Four [)~cad~J OfSupn-ior Scrr,i(;! Mr. Phil Azan Building Official City of Miami Beach 1700 Convention Center Drive Miami Beach, FL 33139 Re: The Setai Hotel 2009 Collins Avc. Dear Dan: Pursuant to our meeting with the City of Miami Beach Official5 on August 26. let me share my concerns. An entirely new facade will have numerous advantages over a re:.tored facadc; · All materials will be new. Although the stroctuTal integrity would be restored and in the repaired facade with all columns being replaced and more than 50% of lhe bt.cun reinforcement either cleaned of rust or replaced, some cars with the potential for future corrosion damage will remain. Thus in the repaired facade. future repairs will be necessary_ · The repaired facade must always be monitored for possible damage and deterioration. As future damage occurs it must be corrected before safety is compromised and the facade poses an imminent danger to the public. A repaired tacade can be safely maintained and even though a new facade still requires so.me maintenanc:, the advantage of a new facade , is an increase in public safety with less uncertainty. · SiJ::oce commencement of the repairs, at least one piece of the facade weighing several hundred pounds dislodged and fell to the ground without warning. Currently; the facade poses an imminent danger to the public. Until repair of the facade is completed, there is a continued possibility of imminent danger and a threat to public safety. I believe this requires you immediate attention. If needed, please do not hesitate to call me. SLnCu ~ Eric L. Edelson, P .E. Vice President Ke . t:;\Word Oocs\Sc1lli Jolotd\Setai Cil)' ofMiomi resporue rt".doc livan Con en. P.E. Eric L Edel,on. P.E. Varinder M. Abn:J1. P.E. Mit:.....cl T.,Wssi. P.E. J, Ketley Whice AJi R, Tah/:Jal. P.E. Sanjay Khanna. P.E. Yenudet NorrJmi.fn. P.E.. S.E. Oipalt M. Shan. P.E. 1109 Spring SUeer. Silver Spring. Maryli'nd 709\ 0-4087 Phone 3011587-1820 Fax 3011588-1966 . ,. ~/ /' , . : WINGERTER LABORATORIES INC. Engineering Testing and InspecIion Service Established 1949 . \ July 17,2002 Setai Owners L.L.C. Attention: Mr. Daniel R. Koffsky 2009 Collins Avenue Miami Beach, Florida 33139 Project: Setai Resort & Residences 2009 Collins Avenue Miami Beach, Florida ~~@JmITWIDJ~ JUL 29 2002 THE RAUL PUIG GROUP. PA FC, '~,} '......,., Gentlemen: 1.0 BACKGROUND In August, 1998, Robert H. Schuler, P .E., P .G., performed a stnictural inspection of the above referenced hotel, then identified as Sasson on the Ocean Hotel. This nine story hotel was built in an Art Deco style and is considered historically significant. City of Miami Beach Building Department records indicate the original hotel building was constructed in 1936, with the south wing added in 1938. At the time of our 1998 inspection, the then-vacant building was undergoing interior demolition and contained large amounts of structural debris. In July, 2002, we conducted structural re-inspections of the project, now identified as Setai Resort, to determine the locations of the delaminated and deteriorated concrete in the floor slabs, beams, columns and exterior walls. The building's interior finishes and windows have been removed. 2.0 STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION The building is constructed on spread footings with a concrete frame and block in-fill construction. Within the original building, which is the wing located north of column line Q, are reinforced concrete columns, beams and floor slabs from the second floor up to the penthouse for a total of seven full floors. There are also a penthouse floor, an elevator and a roof tower which contains a o water tower. 18:!0 N.E. 144th St. . P.O. BOX 611450 . North Miami, FL 33261-1450 . (305) 944-3401 . 1-800-345-SOIL . Fax: (305) 949-8698 Broward: (954) 764-0472 . Dispatch Fax: (305) 949-1328 STEEL. CEMENT .. CONCRETE. PAVEMENT INSPECTIONS. TEST BORINGS. SPECIFICATIONS. CONSULTATIONS Florid" Certificate # F-614 ".J /'''''\ -' l':'~ '<:...) ':'~'~/. "':' ~ .....-. . ~ &. .- " ~ ~I . Win~erter Laboratories, Incorporated Pa~e 2 The south wing of the building was added several years later and consists of concrete and steel columns on the first floor and large riveted steel beams to create a large open room on the first floor. The floors in the south wing are constructed with steel open web joist system and metal decking with concrete topping. A center line of concrete columns are supported by the steel beam above the first floor. Exterior walls are concrete frame with cement block and stucco finish. Interior walls have been removed in order to provide access to the columns for repair and to decrease the dead load on the building floors. The new design calls for the removal of all existing stairs and elevators, and the replacement of two staircases and two areas of elevators. In general, interior demolition has been completed. Interior steel bracing has been installed to assist in building stabilization. 3.0 STRUCTURAL INSPECTION 3.1 Foundation An exterior inspection of the foundation did not reveal indications of deterioration or significant settlement. The interior of the foundation is not accessible. However, since the building is over sixty years old, the footings will not be used for the renovated building. The new design calls for a mat foundation slab to replace the footings. 3.2 Columns The columns appear to be in uniformly deteriorated condition. Many columns have indications of significant spalling which will require repair or replacement. The removal of the wall plaster during the demolition uncovered spalling on almost all of the columns. J This situation was anticipated. Drawings have been prepared with notations of the identified deterioration. In general, the interior columns in the north end of the building have comers spalled in those columns which were adjacent to the pipe chases. Significantly, the exterior columns were found to have over ninety percent of the columns affected, with a minimum of partial spalling on the comers. Inspections utilizing the Subsurface Interface Radar (SIR) revealed that the spalling is also present on the exterior columns and beams of the building. Columns with square reinforcing steel appear to be more susceptible to corrosion damage, at least partially due to the fact the corrosion products create a wedge which permits more significant deterioration to continue. The columns on the "T" line, particularly T -6, T -8 and T -10, are severely deteriorated with the full face of the columns spalled off on the lower floors. Column T -6 on the second floor is showing some bowing of the reinforcing steel and breaking of the column ties. The comer columns appear to be extremely corroded. These columns have been shored by the erection of a steel framework installed on the north wall and on the east wall. '~,. ,; ,.} -.-. ,-"f'" '_J ,..:', ') ~""- ,;,;, ~~;~:"'~\/;. . , > , k' Win~erter Laboratories, Incorporated Page 3 During the construction of the south wing portion of the building, it appears that the floor slabs were installed and poured as the colwnns were being erected. Unfortunately, it appears that they failed to cut the slab to remove the interfering decking from the columns. lIDs situation has resulted in a two to three inch gap on the interior half of the columns, causing considerable weakening of these columns and subsequent deterioration. 3.3 Tie Beams The tie beams around the entire perimeter of all floors were found to be over seventy-five percent corroded on the bottom two reinforcing steel bars and about twenty percent corroded on the top reinforcing steel. Also, many diagonal bars were also exposed and often found to be corroded away. The tie beams are very deep and combine the function of the tie beam and the window lintel. Due to this extra dep~ none of the beams have broken under the load and are being repaired. However, the tie beams at the corner windows are more significantly deteriorated and will require replacement along with the corner columns. With the previous SIR surveys, we were able to determine that visible interior fractures within the window lintels and tie beams extend to the exterior of the beams. Although the stucco has minor cracks or no cracks, the concrete beam is fractured. Since that time, repairs have started on the lintel, which consists of removing a one foot high section of the wall for the full length of the lintels. Most beam stirrups are so deteriorated, they are no longer functional. The depth of the beams may make this problem less significant than if these were the usual small tie beams. The columns have ties at twenty-four inch spacing. These ties are severely corroded in many columns. The columns will need to be removed and replaced. 3.4 Floor Slabs with Concrete Joists The floor slabs are supported by eight inch wide joists spaced about three feet apart. Many of these joists have severe corrosion with approximately forty percent of the joists showing spalling. Many of these joists have been repaired. However. the reinforcing steel was not properly cleaned during the last repair and the repaired joists did not achieve full size. All floor slabs, joists and beams will need to be replaced. 3.5 Floor Slabs with Steel Joists The south half of the building has open web steel joists with metal deck and about a two and one-half inch concrete topping. Most of the steel decking is under the concrete slab. There is no reinforcing in the concrete except in some bathrooms and the stair areas. The steel joists are corroded and in poor condition. There is a single row of columns and concrete beams on the south side of the corridor. . OJ Win2erter Laboratories, Incorporated Pa2e 4 The reinforcement for this slab continues to function. There are numerous areas where the deck is corroded and several areas where the deck has corroded away. The cracks at the south and west comers do indicate some movement of the comer columns. Current plans include replacement of the columns and slabs. 3.6 Swiss Hammer Testing The Swiss hammer was used to test the strength of the existing concrete to determine the location of the four proposed concrete cores. Our findings were that in the areas where concrete was significantly damaged, the concrete strength was similar to the areas which did not have significant damage. The columns and beams are damaged by the corrosion of the reinforcing steel and by a lack of concrete strength. We were not able to locate areas for concrete cores that would provide significant additional information beyond what is already availabl~ based on the previous reports. We examined the results. The test results provided by Law Engineering indicate that the concrete strength in the building is generally less than 2,500 psi. (".' "'~ !' ":J .......... The Swiss hammer tests only the top surface of the concrete, and therefore frequently underestimates the strength of the concrete. Since the results of the Swiss hammer tests performed indicated concrete strengths from 2,800 to 4,000 psi, we do not believe that there is a significant problem with low strength concrete. However, there is a problem with some columns due to the loss of cross sectional area. The attached table indicates column sizes on the second floor and some of the reinforcing as determined by field measurements. 3.7 Subsurface Interface Radar (SIR) The SIR was originally used to determine the condition of floor slabs and to locate reinforcing steel in some columns. During this inspection, much of the steel has been exposed. Some of the column steel findings are also presented on the attached table. The determination of all the reinforcing steel is beyond the scope of this inspection. The SIR survey found that the floor slabs were not delaminated. However, the reinforcing mesh in the north wing is on the bottom of the slab with little or no concrete cover. Subsequent removal of the slab in areas where diagonal bracing was installed has found that the welded wire fabric is significantly corroded. 3.8 Roof During our inspection, we were able to access the roof area and inspect the multiple roof areas. Visual inspections indicate that the roofs are completely deteriorated, Ponding stormwater is f) accumulated on and under the roof. . ' r ~' ,--- , ) J rt'?\ ":-.:7 Wingerter Laboratories, Incorporated Page 5 4.0 CONCLUSIONS Our re-inspection found that most of our recommendations proposed in our 1998 report have been performed or are underway. Based on the condition of the reinforcing steel which has been exposed on the exterior of the building, we can see that virtually all of the steel in the lintels and the columns has a coating of corrosion which prevents bonding between'the reinforcing steel and the concrete. We believe that it will be necessary to chip out and treat the existing reinforcing steel and.~d additional reinforcing to prevent continued deterioration of the facade. We anticipate that the footings will have similar deterioration which will require replacement of the ,foundation. The interior columns would need to be replaced or resupported. Considering the poor condition of the columns and beams as well as the deterioration of the steel joists and metal decking, it is our opinion that the interior of the building ,will need to be replaced. The penthouse structure for the north wing is supported by two beams which are completely spalled and, at the present time, two columns on the north face which, on some floors, have significant deterioration. Currently the lintel between the two north columns has been removed on the sixth and seventh floors. Shores are in place on the interior of the lintel. However, these loads still are transferred to the deteriorated columns. This situation creates a significant risk during the process of removing and replacing all the structural components of the building's exterior facade. The facade will then need to be supported during the demolition of the interior slabs and columns. We understand the desire to maintain the penthouse structures, but it is evident that besides the east and west facades, the remainder of the walls will need to be essentially rebuilt since they were found to be cracking at this time, and the stucco is loose in many areas. Much of the architectural detail is deteriorated and will need to be reconstructed. The comer details consisting of three eyebrows have been removed in one location. In the other two locations, they are deteriorated to the extent that they will need to be removed and rebuilt. The risks associated with attempting to retain the penthouses when the entire roof of the building needs to be replaced is, in our opinion, not justified. Based on a past survey of the building stucco, the areas to be removed have been marked. In addition, we believe that the columns and beams will need to be removed from the facades. We anticipate that twenty-five to forty percent of the facade will need to be reconstructed and restuccoed. The loss of the penthouse original walls would not be significant. Since the restoration process will essentially cut the facade into sections, we questions whether or not it would be more appropriate to use moldings and selective removal of significant architectural elements which could be reinstalled on a new structure. This method would still preserve those . . , I ,,~ ~3 , Wingerter Laboratories, Incorporated Page 6 sections and the original appearance of the building without the risks and costs associated with supporting the structure, removing and replacing the existing structural frame. The attached photographs are examples of only a few of the deteriorated conditions we found, ,including reinforcement splices which have no strength on a first floor column and a failed column on the second floor where the north and east facades intersect. Whichever method of preservation is utilized, it is obvious that the cost of restoration and preservation will be significantly higher than the cost of building a new structure. The only question is the extent of reliance which can be placed in the existing strength of this sixty year old structure, considering its deteriorated state. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. If you have questions regarding this report, or if we can be of further assistance to you, please contact our office. Respectfully submitted, () Wingerter Laboratories Incorporated o rt H. Schuler, P.E., P.G. Florida Professional Engineer No. 34715 Florida Professional Geologist No. 1030 Florida Special (Threshold) Inspector No. 0400 .("'1\ ~~