2023_Payne_Avenue_Condition_Assessment_Report.pdf

Finley Consulting Group, LLC

7783 Creekside Parkway

Macedonia, OH 44056 www.finleycg.com

High Performance Building Enclosure Solutions

July 28, 2023

Jen Kalin, RA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C

Director of Business Development

Senior Project Manager

R.E. Warner & Associates, Inc.

25777 Detroit Road, Suite 200

Westlake, OH 44145

Facade Condition Assessment

Central Public Safety, Cleveland, Ohio

FCG No.: 2023.0024

Dear Ms. Kalin:

Finley Consulting Group, LLC (FCG) has performed a limited condition assessment of the City of Cleveland

Central Public Safety building located at 2001 Payne Avenue in downtown Cleveland, Ohio. The assessment was performed to document locations and patterns of distress, notable conditions of concern, or conditions that warrant maintenance or enhancement. This letter includes a description of our understanding of the project, summarizes our visual observations, and provides discussion and conceptual recommendations for review and consideration by R.E. Warner (REW) and the City of Cleveland (City).

Project Background

The Central Public Safety Building was opened in 1926 as the Central Police Station for the City of Cleveland. The five-story building (Figure 1) houses several functions of Cleveland’s Police and Public Safety Departments. The building is primarily clad with limestone masonry on the east, west, and south facades with the north

(back) facade utilizing brick masonry. Punched metal framed windows are regularly spaced throughout the facades. Limestone-clad retaining walls encircle the main structure creating an area well around most of the building. These walls have been referred to as

“moat” walls, so that nomenclature will be used herein for clarity.

The steep-sloped roofs are covered with standing seam metal roofing (SSMR); gravel surfaced built-up roofing is used on the low-sloped roofs.

It is our understanding based on discussions with REW and the City that a future building enclosure restoration project is being developed for the facility. As such, the focus of our evaluation is reserved to the exterior facades (including the moat walls) and roofing of the building.

Figure 1. Overall view of Central Public Safety from the southwest.

Central Public Safety

Limited Condition Assessment

July 28, 2023

Limited Condition Assessment

On July 10, 2023, Mr. Finley of FCG visited the building to review the existing condition of the building’s facades and roofing. During the site visit, access to the interior and exterior of the building was provided.

In addition to visual observations from the ground using binoculars, an unmanned aerial vehicle, or drone, was used to assess the upper portions of the facades and steep-sloped roofing at a closer range. The following is summary of the observations:

Main Building Facade

▪ The fourth-floor parapet wall consists of ornamental limestone units on the exterior with brick masonry back-up facing the small low roof trough extending from the west to east facade along the south of the building (Figures 2 and 3).

▪ In several locations along the parapet there is corrosion staining, exfoliated stone, cracked units, and open joints between coping units (Figures 4 and 5).

Figure 2. A low roof trough area is confined by an ornamental parapet on the fourth floor (yellow dashed box).

Figure 3. View looking east down the fourth-floor low roof trough area seen in Figure 2.

Figure 4. Missing mortar or sealant (yellow arrows) within joints between units, exfoliated units (blue arrows) and corrosion staining (black arrow) were noted.

Figure 5. Vertical cracks within units immediately below the dentils exist at a few locations (black arrows).

▪ The mortar joints of the back-up brick masonry exhibit spalling and delamination in many locations

(Figure 6). At one location at the southwest corner, a vertical crack is present (Figure 7).

▪ At the southwest corner of the fifth floor, a limestone unit is displaced (Figure 8).

July 28, 2023

▪ A couple rounded limestone units at the southeast corner are displaced (Figure 9).

Figure 6. Missing and delaminated mortar throughout the back-up masonry was noted (yellow arrows).

Figure 7. A vertical crack through mortar and brick units exists at the southwest corner (yellow arrow).

Figure 8. A limestone unit is displaced at the southwest corner (yellow arrow).

Figure 9. A couple rounded corner units are displaced at the southeast corner (yellow arrows).

▪ The field of the limestone masonry is generally in good condition with minor instances of chipping, spalling, exfoliation, and delaminated mortar (Figures 10 through 13).

Figure 10. Chipping (black arrow), spalling (yellow arrow), and delaminated mortar (blue arrow) was noted.

Figure 11. Some exfoliation was noted on the limestone units (black arrows).

Figure 12. Small areas of delaminated mortar are present in the field of the limestone masonry (yellow arrow).

Figure 13. Scallop-shaped spalls are present in a few locations (yellow arrows).

▪ Water staining is present on the stone soffit condition above the vertical ribbon windows (Figure 14).

▪ In areas on the north facade, the joint between the limestone and brick masonry is open (Figure 15).

Figure 14. Water staining is present at the soffit condition above the windows (yellow arrow).

Figure 15. The joint between the limestone and brick masonry is open in several locations (yellow arrow).

▪ The brick masonry on the north facade is in good condition with a few areas exhibiting previous repairs.

▪ The steel lintels are flashed (Figure 16); however, no end dams are apparent, and a few lintels are showing evidence of displacement and/or distress to the surrounding masonry (Figures 17 and 18).

Figure 16. Flashing and weeps are present along the steel lintels (yellow arrow).

Figure 17. The lintel is downwardly deflected and causing two courses of brick to bow as well (yellow arrow).

Figure 18. The steel lintel is significantly deflected and causing distress to the surrounding masonry (yellow arrow).

Figure 19. Vegetation is growing on the north facing masonry.

▪ Vegetation is growing on the brick masonry toward the east end of the building (Figure 19).

▪ At the top of the central stairwell tower, the ornamental brick masonry has many joints missing mortar

(Figure 20). The interior paint and plaster within the stairwell exhibit moisture damage in several locations (Figure 21).

▪ In a few locations, the cores of the brick units are fully exposed (Figure 22).

Figure 20. Missing mortar is prevalent along the top masonry courses of the stairwell tower (yellow arrows).

Figure 21. Peeling paint and deteriorated plaster is present on the exterior walls within the stairwell.

Figure 22. Exposed brick cores were noted (yellow arrows). Figure 23. A light fixture was hanging over the side of the north facade.

July 28, 2023

▪ On the north facade, a light fixture was hanging from its wiring and lightning protection clamp

(Figure 23) and was removed by City personnel.

▪ The north entrance vestibule consists of an aluminum framed, glazed assembly (Figure 24).

▪ One skylight IGU is broken (Figure 25).

▪ There are a few locations that exhibit water staining or efflorescence on the interior of the vestibule

(Figures 26 and 27).

Figure 24. A glazed, aluminum framed vestibule exists at the north entrance.

Figure 25. A skylight IGU is broken (yellow arrow).

Figure 26. Water staining (yellow arrow) of the floor finishes is present below the interface of the vestibule to brick masonry.

Figure 27. Efflorescence (yellow arrow) on the brick masonry below the interface of the vestibule to brick masonry is present.

▪ Sloped glazing at a projection on the north facade has a few insulated glass units (IGUs) that are either internally fogged or externally stained (Figure 28).

▪ The gutter below the projection is damaged and displaced and has vegetation growing at the west end where the downspout is located (Figure 29).

▪ Many windows are held up in the closed position with lengths of wood (Figure 30); other windows are askew and ajar with displaced gasketing and trim (Figure 31).

▪ The ornamental sheet metal window surrounds are displaced and dented in several locations

(Figures 32 and 33).

Figure 28. A few IGUs that are either internally fogged or externally stained.

Figure 29. The gutter is displaced at the east end (blue arrow) and vegetation is growing at the west end (yellow arrow).

Figure 30. Lengths of wood are used to hold the upper sash in the closed position.

Figure 31. A few windows are ajar with their components displaced.

Figure 32. The ornamental metal surrounds have open gaps where it meets the window frames (yellow arrows).

Figure 33. The ornamental metal surrounds are dented and have several open joints.

July 28, 2023

▪ The perimeter sealant around the windows is weathered and failed in many locations (Figure 34).

▪ Glazing gaskets are shrinking in several locations (Figure 35).

Figure 34. Perimeter sealant is weathered and failed in many locations.

Figure 35. Glazing gaskets are shrinking in the corners of the frames.

Moat and Basement Walls and Site Stairs

▪ Missing or delaminated mortar was noted in many locations throughout the limestone masonry within the moat (Figures 36 through 38). Flashing is not apparent under the coping units.

Figure 36. Missing or delaminated mortar is present throughout the moat walls (yellow arrows).

Figure 37. Most of the mortar is gone within this joint.

Daylight is visible through the joint (yellow arrow).

Figure 38. Spalling mortar was noted in a few locations

(yellow arrows).

Figure 39. Staining on the skyward faces is prevalent

(yellow arrows).

July 28, 2023

▪ Moss growth and bird droppings are prevalent on the skyward facing units on the moat and basement walls (Figure 39).

▪ Ferrous metal anchors embedded into the stone masonry are present in several locations and are causing varying degrees of distress to the surrounding masonry (Figures 40 and 41).

Figure 40. Stair railings are directly anchored into the stone resulting in distress.

Figure 41. Unused ferrous anchors embedded into the stone has caused distress to the stone.

▪ A couple stone units are displaced (Figure 42).

▪ There are a few unsealed penetrations through the basement wall (Figure 43).

Figure 42. Some limestone units atop the moat wall are displaced (yellow arrow).

Figure 43. Unsealed penetrations are present in a few locations.

▪ Vegetation is growing in several locations throughout the moat area (Figure 44).

▪ The stair units are displaced and exhibit some settlement (Figure 45).

▪ Some of the stair side wall units have experienced settlement (Figure 46).

▪ At the main entrance on the south facade, evidence of water infiltration through the concrete structure of the stairs was noted (Figure 47).

▪ The stairs on the west end leading down into the moat are significantly deteriorated and present a tripping hazard.

▪ Water staining and exfoliation was noted at the soffit condition above windows (Figure 48) with one location requiring stanchion posts (Figure 49).

▪ The concrete back-up retaining wall is in good condition.

Figure 44. Vegetation is growing within the moat is several locations.

Figure 45. The stone tread units are displaced and appear to have settled in some locations.

Figure 46. The stone units of the stair side walls have settled and separated from the coping stone. Daylight is visible through the void between units (yellow arrow).

Figure 47. Water staining and stalactites are present below the concrete stair structure.

Figure 48. Water staining and stone exfoliation exists at window soffit conditions.

Figure 49. At one location, stanchion posts are in place supporting the window soffit unit.

July 28, 2023

▪ Several spalled units exist throughout the moat and basement walls (Figures 50 and 51).

▪ Cracking of the stone units at the southeast corner was noted (Figures 52 and 53).

▪ The stone units flanking the entrance doors exhibit significant exfoliation and damage (Figure 54). The ornamental metal door frames also have evidence of corrosion (Figure 55).

Figure 50. Significant spalls due to embedded steel were noted.

Figure 51. Spalls of varying sizes were documented throughout the moat masonry (yellow arrows).

Figure 52. Unit cracks are present at the southeast corner. Figure 53. Unit cracks are present at the southeast corner.

Figure 54. Stone units flanking the entrance doors exhibit significant exfoliation, erosion, and damage.

Figure 55. The decorative metal door frames have evidence of corrosion along the base of the frames.

July 28, 2023

Roofing

▪ Where the asphalt of the low-sloped roofing is exposed on the fourth floor low roof and the main fifth floor roof, the fiber reinforcing mesh is exposed, and the asphalt is blistered primarily around drains

(Figure 56).

▪ Roofing flashings exhibit similar conditions to the field of the membrane and have a few breaches along the length of the parapet walls (Figures 57 and 58).

▪ The sheet metal counterflashings and termination sealant appears new and in good condition.

▪ The sealant and/or mortar within the joints between the stone coping units are deteriorated (Figure 59).

Figure 56. The exposed asphalt is blistered especially around drains.

Figure 57. Flashing laps and seams are pulled apart in some locations (yellow arrows).

Figure 58. The reinforcing fabric at flashing laps is exposed in some locations (yellow arrow).

Figure 59. Most of the sealant within the coping unit joints is failed (yellow arrows).

▪ Some panels within the SSMR have been replaced (Figure 60) and have evidence of corrosion staining.

▪ The SSMR panels are dented in some locations (Figure 61) and at one location a patch in the middle of a panel is present (Figure 62).

▪ The step flashing for the SSMR is open and not flush with the adjacent brick masonry (Figure 63).

▪ The ornamental sheet metal fascia that forms the front wall of the internal gutter below the SSMR is in fair condition with areas exhibiting heavy soiling (Figure 64).

▪ At the northeast end, vegetation is growing within the gutter (Figure 65).

Figure 60. Several of the SSMR panels appear to have been replaced. Corrosion staining is also present on the panels

Figure 61. Dents are present along the length of the panels in areas of the roofing.

Figure 62. A sealed patch was noted in the middle of a panel

(black arrow).

Figure 63. The ends of the step flashings are open (black arrows).

Figure 64. The ornamental sheet metal fascia is heavily soiled in some locations.

Figure 65. Vegetation is growing from within the internal gutter in a couple locations (yellow arrow).

July 28, 2023

Discussion and Conclusions

All masonry wall assemblies, regardless of quality of construction and design, will absorb rainwater due to the inherent porosity of the masonry. The amount of water entering the exterior enclosure and the ultimate disposition of the water within the wall is influenced by the as-built configuration and condition of the wall system.

Preventing the migration of water through a wall system to interior spaces can be achieved by either of three fundamental concepts: barrier walls, drainage walls, or mass walls. Barrier walls do not allow rainwater to be absorbed by or enter the wall assembly. All rainwater is repelled at the exterior face of barrier walls.

As such, barrier walls typically do not utilize flashings to evacuate water from within the wall system as water is not expected to enter the wall.

Drainage walls are designed to allow moisture that enters the wall to drain down through a continuous and unobstructed cavity (i.e., an air space) within the wall assembly. A masonry drainage wall functions by preventing water leakage to the interior by establishing a continuous clear cavity or air space between the inboard face of the masonry veneer and the back-up framing system. Water that can migrate through the masonry veneer is ultimately able to reach the clear cavity at the inboard face of the masonry veneer. At this point, the only path of travel for the water should be down the inboard face of the masonry veneer.

Continuous impermeable materials (flashings) installed across the cavity at all interruptions in the cavity are intended to collect and drain water from the wall assembly.

Mass walls, like the ones used at the Central Public Safety Building, are constructed of several wythes of brick backup masonry with facing stone on the outboard face of the wall. Traditionally mass walls do not utilize flashing to evacuate water from within the wall system. Instead, mass walls resist water leakage to the interior by relying on the bulk of the wall system to absorb the water that does enter the outboard face.

The absorbed water is redistributed within the pores of the masonry via capillary action, surface diffusion, and vapor diffusion. The water, in liquid and vapor form, moves within the porous masonry with most of the water volume evaporating from the exterior face, and the remainder stored in the masonry or slowly diffused to the interior. If the amount of water introduced into the mass wall is greater than the wall’s absorptive capacity, then water leakage to the interior may occur.

The amount of water entering the outer wythe of stone is highly dependent on the condition of the stone and mortar joints. Systemic cracking, spalled units and mortar, bond line separations, and incomplete joints can dramatically increase the volume of water taken in by an exterior wall. All of which were observed from the ground and via drone, but most prevalent was incomplete joints and bond line separations.

The intimate bond between stone and mortar is created near the outboard face of the stone by final tooling of the mortar joint during construction or repointing. Tooling the mortar to a slightly concave profile compresses the mortar into the joint, thus enhancing contact and bond between the stone and mortar. If this stone-to-mortar bond fails, a thin planar void is created, promoting the migration of water through the wall by capillary action. The same occurs at cracks within the stone units.

Cracks and bond line separations permit water infiltration which may lead to surface distress, such as spalling or delamination, due to freeze-thaw cycling. Spalled or delaminated mortar joints and stone units observed throughout the facades reduce the mass of material available to resist water entry into the outer wythe.

July 28, 2023

In addition to distressed areas, skyward mortar joints and stone units will absorb more rainwater than other areas of the wall, especially if deteriorated. Skyward joints and units occur in many locations on the main building and the moat walls. On the main building, the style of architecture inherently has projected and ornamental units that result in skyward facing surfaces. The most prominent are the fourth-floor parapet wall and the base of wall. These surfaces as well as the condition of the joints between units allow a significant increase in water volume into the wall assemblies. This is evidenced by the water and corrosion staining on and below these areas. Projected stone masonry requires internal steel anchors to support the units and anchor them back to the structure. Embedded steel in mass masonry subject to continued wetting creates a deleterious environment for both the steel and masonry.

Over time, the embedded anchors can cause advanced states of distress generally caused by the expansive corrosion of embedded steel reinforcing. Corrosion is an electrochemical process requiring an anode, cathode, and electrolyte. In this case, moisture absorbed by the masonry acts as the electrolyte with the embedded steel behaving as both the anode and cathode. When combined, the reaction results in a significant increase in the base metal volume, as the ferrous component of the steel oxidizes into iron oxide, or rust, which places pressure on the adjacent masonry, leading to distress. This phenomenon is also referred to as rust jacking. When rust is present, the increased porosity of the steel surface tends to trap moisture and further accelerate corrosion. The rate of oxidation and deterioration of the steel will accelerate if it is not arrested. While significant distress of stone units was not noted, the corrosion staining below the dentils along the fourth floor parapet suggests that the anchors might be experiencing corrosion. The extent of which should be further investigated during the facade repairs.

Luckily, the steel lintels supporting brick masonry over the windows at the penthouse and north facade are generally protected by flashing. However, the apparent lack of end dams and the terminal ends of the lintels not covered with flashing provides exposure of the steel to moisture. In some locations, distress and lintel displacement associated with rust jacking was noted.

Overall, providing protection to skyward surfaces and repointing open joints will significantly reduce the amount absorbed rainwater; however, water shedding on the surface of the stone can still cause the observed staining, erosion, and exfoliation as most of the horizontal planes do not incorporate drips within the stone units.

Moat Walls

Like the exterior walls of main building, the moat walls also act as mass walls; however, their mass is exposed to moisture on three sides. It is unknown if the overburden side has dampproofing or waterproofing to enhance the water control of the wall; however, based on the condition on the exposed side of the wall, it is likely that some sort of water control layer is present. The water related issues observed appear to be primarily associated with deteriorated mortar joints.

As previously mentioned, the quantity of water entering the outer wythe of masonry is highly dependent on the condition and type of the masonry units and mortar joints. A joint pointed with mortar allows moisture to slowly drain from the exterior wall; however, where a skim coat of mortar is used, there is insufficient thickness to promote bond such that freeze thaw cycling can cause delamination of the mortar skim. Additionally systemic cracking, bond line failures, incompletely filled joints or missing units, and unsealed penetrations can dramatically increase the volume of water that infiltrates the moat walls.

July 28, 2023

Similar to the main building, skyward joints can impact performance significantly. Often the skyward joints can be installed or replaced with sealant to better resist water infiltration. Flashing membranes or corrosion resistant flashing should be installed below coping units to manage water infiltration through the coping units and redirect the water to the exterior. There is no evidence of flashing beneath the coping units at the moat walls. However, open and deteriorated mortar joints between the stone coping units were observed in several locations along the moat walls. Flaws in the joints of the coping units coupled with missing flashing can also overwhelm the moat wall’s capacity to mitigate water infiltration. Further, with the lack of flashing, moisture trapped in the wall that is held in contact with the steel (e.g., lintels and penetrations) for extended periods of time can lead to ongoing corrosion.

While some minor displacement primarily at the stairways was noted, most of the moat walls do not exhibit significant movement or displacement. The displacement at the stairways is likely attributed to the reduced mass of the stairs as well as the separate structure immediately below the stairways.

Fenestration and Vestibule

With exception to the vestibule and projected windows, the IGUs of the remaining windows do not exhibit fogging or other indications of deterioration; however, the functionality and alignment of the frames (e.g., lengths of wood holding the sash in the closed position), and shrinkage of glazing gaskets suggest that replacement may be warranted.

While the perimeter sealant around the windows is beyond its useful life and should be replaced, the ornamental sheet metal around the frames can be removed, restored, and reinstalled as it does not appear to be integral with the window frames.

The vestibule enclosure is not adequately integrated with the surrounding brick masonry walls as evidence of bulk water entry as well as water absorption into the interior masonry was noted. Further, the glazing and potentially non-thermally broken frames cause condensation events as well as thermal comfort issues within the vestibule.

Roofing

The low-slope roofing within the fourth floor trough and at the main roof has lost portions of its mineral surfacing and has vegetation growing on or within the assembly. As such, these roofs should be replaced.

The steep sloped SSMR does not exhibit significant issues; however, the minor items discussed above indicate that replacement should be accounted for in future capital expenditures. Further, the vegetation growth within the internal gutter substantiates planned replacement especially if water infiltration into the interior at the gutter or below the SSMR begins to become problematic.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of our limited assessment and experience with similar projects, FCG offers the following repair recommendations to rectify moisture related issues and distress observed at the Central

Public Safety Building. An approximated repair quantity is provided for budgetary purposes only.

Stone Masonry Repairs

▪ Repointing (5,500 square feet):

▪ Repoint the stone masonry within the moat and up to the first floor should be repointed on all facades.

July 28, 2023

▪ Partial repointing of all eroded or open joints should be performed.

▪ Repointing should consist of removing mortar to a uniform depth of 3/4-inches, twice the joint width, or until sound mortar is encountered, whichever is greatest, and installing new mortar in three (3) 1/4-inch lifts.

▪ Miscellaneous Stone Repairs:

▪ Provide dutchman or adhesive repairs at spalled or chipped units (10 units).

▪ Rout and seal or mortar cracks within stone units (40 linear feet).

▪ Remove exfoliated areas and provide a dutchman repair or consider replacing the unit (25 units).

▪ Remove all vegetation from the facades (75 square feet).

▪ Remove and replace all sealant and backer rod (100 linear feet).

▪ Parapet Investigation (1 location):

▪ Deconstruct two of each stone unit type from the top four courses to expose steel anchors and underlying construction to determine the extent of deterioration and requisite repairs.

▪ Add Drips (450 linear feet)

▪ At all horizontal planes, saw cut a drip into the limestone unit.

▪ Facade Cleaning (45,000 square feet)

▪ After repairs are completed, consider cleaning the facade to remove existing staining. A small discrete area should be used to determine the best and least aggressive method for cleaning prior to implementing the cleaning regimen to the rest of the facades.

Brick Masonry Repairs

▪ Repointing (325 square feet):

▪ Repoint the top 15 courses of brick masonry at the stairwell and elevator tower.

▪ Partial repointing of all eroded or open joints should be performed.

▪ Lintel Repairs (10 lintels)

▪ Remove brick masonry above lintel as well as all distressed brick units.

▪ Inspect exposed brick headers. If cracked, install helical anchors adjacent to the cracked header.

Install helical anchors at stacked bond masonry areas.

▪ Remove all corrosion, scaling, and surface rust from the steel angles. Evaluate the extent of steel corrosion and section loss to determine the need for steel angle replacement.

▪ Install new self-adhering membrane flashing over the entire length of the steel angle and terminate vertically on the inner masonry wythe with a termination bar and sealant. Lap the membrane flashing on a stainless steel drip edge and form end dams at the terminal end of the flashings.

▪ Replace brick masonry above the steel lintel. Install weep vents spaced 24 inches on center with a minimum of two weeps per window.

▪ Vegetation Removal (100 square feet)

Moat Wall Repairs

▪ The moat walls should be fully repointed. Repointing should consist of removing mortar to a uniform depth of 3/4-inches, twice the joint width, or until sound mortar is encountered, whichever is greatest, and installing new mortar in three (3) 1/4-inch lifts (3,000 square feet).

▪ Remove all unused penetrations and anchors and seal the penetration opening. Remaining penetrations should be sealed (25 locations).

▪ All existing ferrous fasteners should be removed and replaced with stainless steel (100 locations).

July 28, 2023

▪ Consider lifting the coping units and installing stainless steel flashing (400 linear feet).

▪ Remove and replace the spalled stone units (25 units).

▪ Consider resetting displaced stair tread units (2,000 square feet).

▪ At the south entrance, consider waterproofing the underlying concrete structure prior to resetting the stair tread units (1,000 square feet).

▪ Consider removing and replacing the concrete stairs serving the moat area on the west end (100 square feet).

▪ Remove vegetation within the moat area (15 square feet).

Fenestration and Vestibule Repairs

▪ Remove and replace the operable windows (207 windows). Replacement windows should match the existing profile and aesthetic with upgraded glazing and thermal performance.

▪ Consideration of full window replacement may be warranted to increase energy efficiency and to match the new operable windows.

▪ Remove the decorative sheet metal surrounds where windows are replaced. Strip the surrounds down to bare metal, prep and repaint. Reinstall the surrounds with the new windows (5,500 square feet).

▪ Remove and replace all perimeter sealant and backer rod (6,000 linear feet).

▪ Remove and replace the broken IGU at the north entrance vestibule.

▪ Reglaze the vestibule IGUs and reconfigure the skylight apron and step flashings (450 linear feet).

▪ Consider removing and replacing the vestibule with upgraded glazing and thermal performance.

▪ At the projected window, remove and replace the gutter (40 linear feet).

▪ Reconnect the new gutter with the existing downspout. Consider snaking the downspout to review the integrity of the concealed plumbing.

Roofing Repairs

▪ Remove and replace all low-sloped roofing (14,000 square feet).

▪ Remove and replace the sealant and backer rod at all coping stone joints (625 linear feet).

▪ Consider providing lead tees to provide further joint protection.

▪ Consider removing and replacing the SSMR, associated flashings, and internal gutter within 5 to 10 years (6,000 square feet).

▪ The decorative sheet metal fascia can be removed and restored similar to the window surrounds when the SSMR and internal gutter are replaced.

Potential Enhancements

▪ To increase the energy efficiency of the building and the thermal comfort of occupants, consider insulating the interior face of the masonry walls.

▪ If this is pursued, a hygrothermal analysis of the walls should be performed to determine the risk for freeze-thaw distress associated with insulating mass masonry walls.

July 28, 2023

Closing

FCG appreciates the opportunity to assist you with this limited condition assessment and to provide repair recommendations for your consideration to address the facade distress, roofing, and moisture issues at the

Central Public Safety Building located at 2001 Payne Avenue in downtown Cleveland. All the recommended repairs and enhancements can be further designed and evaluated by FCG, if desired. Should you have any questions or comments regarding this information, please contact me at your convenience.

Sincerely, Finley Consulting Group, LLC

David S. Finley

Principal