Browse
Search
Agenda - 06-16-2015-13 (7)
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2015
>
Agenda - 06-16-2015 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 06-16-2015-13 (7)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2015 11:53:29 AM
Creation date
6/15/2015 10:08:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/16/2015
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
13-7
Document Relationships
Minutes 06-16-2015
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
7 <br /> m��u VIII L C S N, K- II p II["A].... <br /> June 9, 2015 <br /> Orange County Asset Management Services <br /> 131 West Margaret Lane <br /> Hillsborough, NC 27278 <br /> Attn: Mr. Jeff Thompson <br /> RE: CHAPEL HILL OLD TOWN HALL - STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT <br /> Dear Mr. Thompson: <br /> On June 2, 2015, LHC Structural Engineers accompanied Statler Gilfillen, Architect, of your <br /> office, to conduct a condition survey of the referenced building located at 100 West Rosemary <br /> Street in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. The purpose of the survey from our standpoint was to <br /> assess the overall structural condition of the building to aid Orange County in their decision of <br /> whether or not to purchase the building. After our site visit, we also reviewed construction <br /> documents that were provided to us for the original design and two later renovations of the <br /> building (described in more detail below), in order to determine the safe live load capacity of the <br /> first and second floors. <br /> Executive summary: <br /> It is our opinion that the overall structural condition of the original1938 building including the <br /> renovations made in 1963 and 1989, is very good. We observed very few structural concerns. <br /> There was no visible evidence of any foundation settlement, such as cracking of either the load <br /> bearing masonry walls or interior partition walls. <br /> Based on our review of the available drawings, the southwest quadrant of the first floor and a <br /> large portion of the second floor have live load capacities of 50 pounds per square feet or less, <br /> limiting the potential use of the building. (See more detailed discussion later in this report.) <br /> To allow for greater flexibility in the use of the space, it may be desired to increase the capacity <br /> of the floors to a design live load of 100 PSF. One method to accomplish this includes removal <br /> and replacement of the affected sections of the floor. We estimate the cost to replace one <br /> section of the first floor to be between $110 and $150 per square for the areas replaced. These <br /> amounts are rough estimates for planning purposes only and do not include any costs <br /> associated with removal and replacement of architectural, mechanical, electrical, or plumbing <br /> components. <br /> lr bf,i° 1 .II rb °:sir,.A 1"1 . 1lerlarw11 I Steverson, 111 . <br /> 1 ',3 1 ',Rjn ,iy Di,vr, Si °r 121 III oIghi, IVY )I fiO 1 9 0 9.8 1 a M(37 n 11rc D I 9 8,3 s927 I f nnim <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.