Grant_Condition_Assessment.pdf

GRANT BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

Final Report Prepared by Greenhorne & OIMara, Inc.

Under contract to American Express Tax and Business Services, Inc.

November 22, 2005

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background 1

1.2 Building Description 1

1.3 Building Condition Assessment Team 2

1.4 Report Contents 2

SECTION 2: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

2.1 Introduction 5

2.2 Methodology 5

2.3 Property Description 6

2.4 Site Systems 7

2.4.1 Parking 7

2.4.2 Internal Streets 7

2.4.3 Sidewalks 7

2.4.4 Landscaping 7

2.4.5 Site Deficiencies 8

2.5 Building Systems 8

2.5.1 Architectural Components 8

2.5.1.1 Exterior Envelope 8

2.5.1.2 Interior Materials and Finishes 10

2.5.1.3 Architectural Deficiencies 14

2.5.2 Structural Components 15

2.5.2.1 Foundations 15

2.5.2.2 Walls and Columns 15

2.5.2.3 Roof System 15

2.5.2.4 Floor System 16

2.5.2.5 Structural System Limitations 16

2.5.2.6 Structural Deficiencies 16

2.5.3 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components 17

2.5.3.1 Mechanical and Plumbing Systems 17

2.5.3.2 Electrical System 18

2.5.3.3 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Deficiencies 19

2.6 Handicapped Accessibility and Compliance 20

\ 2.6.1 Existing Conditions 20

2.6.2 ADA Deficiencies 21

2.7 Life Safety Assessment and Compliance 21

2.7.1 Existing Conditions 21

2.7.2 Life Safety Deficiencies 22

SECTION 3: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

3.1 Asbestos-Containing Materials 23

3.2 Lead-Based/Lead-Containing Paint 25

3.3 PCB-Containing Items 26

SECTION 4: RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Site 29

4.2 Architectural Systems, ADA and Life Safety 29

4.3 Structural Systems 29

4.4 Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Systems 30

4.4.1 Mechanical 30

4.4.2 Plumbing 30

4.4.3 Fire Protection 30

4.4.4 Electrical 30

4.5 Hazardous Materials 30

4.5.1 Asbestos 30

4.5.2 Lead-Based/Lead-Containing Paint 31

4.5.3 PCB-Containing Items 31

FIGURES

Figure 1: Location Map 3

Figure 2: Site Map 4

TABLES

Table 1: Condition Definitions 6

Table 2: Bulk Sample Analysis to Determine Asbestos Content 23

Table 3: Lead-Based Paint Survey Results 25

APPENDIX

Appendix A: Photographs

ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME

WASHINGTON, DC 'section

~.1

The Anned Forces Retirement Home (AFRH) operated two federally owned facilities as the only retirement homes for military personnel. One of these facilities, the Washington, DC, campus, is located at 3700 North Capitol Street, in Washington, DC (Figure 1). The total area of the AFRH campus is approximately 272 acres and includes an assisted living and acute care facility, ancillary medical services, residences and administrative space, a well as various supporting structures, a golf course, and other recreational features. AFRH is situated on one of the highest points in the city, overlooking the White House, the Washington Monument, the Smithsonian, the Mall, the US Capitol and other Washington landmarks. The campus provides banks, chapels, convenience store, post office, laundry, barber shop and beauty salon, dining room, and 24-hour security and staffpresence.

Originally called The Soldiers' Home, it was designated a national historic landmark in 1973 as the fIrst of its kind to house disabled or retired enlisted American soldiers. In 2001, Congress offIcially renamed the US Soldiers' and Airmen's Home as the Anned Forces Retirement Home - Washington (AFRH-W).

There are many historic buildings remaining on campus, amid newer offIce and support facilities. The Grant Building (Building 18), which is the subject of this condition assessment, is one of the oldest and largest of the buildings located in the northwest section on the AFRH-W property (Figure 2). It was last used as a residence hall for disabled veterans. The building closed in 1998 and has been unoccupied since then.

g, Originally constructed in 1910, the Grant Building is a three-story masonry building built in a Renaissance Revival style, a popular type of architectural design for public buildings at the turn of the century. It has ornate columns, arches, cornices, and dentil moldings faced in marble. The building encompasses four interior courtyards that provide light to the interior rooms. In all, the building has a gross area of 169,006 square feet.

The interior of the building has been preserved and many historic architectural elements remain in decent condition. The fIrst floor includes an impressive lobby with Tuscan-style columns, an intricate mosaic and terrazzo floor, and an ornate open metal staircase. Some of the original dining rooms on the fIrst floor were

WASHINGTON, DC

later adapted for use as recreation areas including a bowling alley, and volleyball and tennis courts.

Upstairs on the second and third floors, the residents' rooms are located on both sides of a long, wide hallway. These particular rooms were designed to house individual veterans in a private space, but the bathrooms were shared, dormitory style. Each residential floor does have some full bathrooms and some toilet rooms.

The attic houses the tenninus of the building's many riser ventilation ducts, which then exit through the roof in cupolas. The building's full basement houses a steam-to-hot-water heat exchanger, hot water storage tanks, and duplex hot water circulation pumps to supply the building with heat and hot water.

1 ..3 ssessme

The condition assessment was conducted on May 31 and June I, 2005. The team consisted of the following individuals:

Architecture: Maye1a Thompson, Greenhome & O'Mara, Inc.

Reginald Clay, Greenhome & O'Mara, Inc.

Structural: SUIjit Sarkar, Greenhome & O'Mara, Inc.

Hazardous Materials: Ross Voorhees, Greenhome & O'Mara, Inc.

Alisha Durgam, Greenhome & O'Mara, Inc.

Mechanical and Plumbing: Tony Marshall, ESE Architects and Engineers

Electrical: Ramone Dominguez, ESE Architects and Engineers

1. _1"Unl"re rrnts

Section I: Introduction. Provides background on the site assessed and the team performing the assessment.

Section 2: Building Condition Assessment. Details the assessment methodology for the following areas: architectural; structural; mechanical, electrical, and plumbing components; and ADA and Life Safety compliance.

Section 3: Hazardous Materials. Provides analysis of asbestos, lead paint, and PCB items.

Section 4: Recommendations. Provides further actions for renovating the Grant Building and its systems and components.

Appendix A: Photographs. Presents the observations of the condition assessment.

3S

Figure 1: Location map

N l'

~f) Iv· 0'"v't" i7~ ~o ,;," U

Gunt 8uildinq

-'dmini3tratlor'l Buildin9

't:

o

II>

tI>..

Figure 2: Site map showing the Grant Building (circled)

WASHINGTON, DC \;:c .', ~SectiDn

IJ

The purpose of the building condition assessment was to evaluate the current condition of the Grant Building and its systems and components. The assessment encompassed the following tasks:

1) Identify deficiencies in the existing site adjacent to the Grant Building, architectural, structural, mechanical, and electrical systems of the facility;

2) Identify life safety deficiencies;

3) Identify the degree of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and recommend repairs and/or replacement to attain compliance;

4) Evaluate the ability of the existing site, architectural, structural, mechanical, and electrical systems to support future renovations;

5) Conduct a survey to identify materials that are potentially hazardous to human health as defined by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act

(CERCLA);

6) Recommend upgrades and repairs to correct existing deficiencies, as necessary; and,

7) Assess the overall suitability of the building for alternative usage.

All information in this document is based on the existing conditions of the building at the time of the evaluation. A similar condition assessment for the Grant Building was conducted by Rhodeside & Harwell, Inc. in April 1994.

The assessment is based on a visual inspection of the building and a review of available architectural, structural and mechanical, electrical and plumbing drawings provided by AFRH. Photographs of existing building component deficiencies and important architectural, structural, and mechanical/electrical features were taken (Appendix A), and rated as either poor, fair, good, excellent, or not applicable. The defmitions of these ratings can be found in Table 1.

Table 1: Condition Definitions

JRa~g

Definition

No visible defects. No action required.

No significant visible defects were observed. Typically, no action is required.

Minor defects were observed, but defects do not affect the immediate functionality and defects are typically aesthetic.

Actions may need to be taken to prevent further deterioration.

System is substandard. Action is required for functionality.

I

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

Not Applicable

No existing system to rate

The life safety analysis conducted was based on the International Building Code 2003. The provisions of the code apply to existing buildings where any of the following conditions apply: a change of use or occupancy classification occurs; a repair, renovation, modification, reconstruction, or addition is made; the building or structure relocates; and the building is considered an unsafe building or a fire hazard.

The handicapped accessibility analysis for the Grant Building is based on ADA and the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS). UFAS requires employee areas to be accessible. Exemptions are limited to elevator pits and penthouses, mechanical rooms, electrical and telephone closets, and general utility room. UFAS typically covers requirements for new construction but can also be used to identify existing features or elements in need of modifications. The survey for handicapped accessibility was conducted for existing conditions and includes recommendations for modifications to attain ADA compliance.

Building Name: Grant Building (Building 18) Year Built: 1910 Age: 95 years Gross Square Footage: 169,006 square feet Building Use: None, closed in 1998 Historic Significance: Eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places

(both interior and exterior)

The Grant Building is one of several historic buildings on the AFRH campus site in Washington, DC.

Built in 1910, it is one of the oldest and largest buildings on site and is considered Eligible for Listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The Grant Building is an impressive three-story masonry structure with exterior elements and fayade in the Renaissance Revival style. The main entrance on the south side is well defined by a monumental staircase.

c..i

The site systems evaluated for this study are limited to the areas surrounding the structure which relate directly to the function of the building.

1 h~ng (IRatii~ =F21ar~

There are two parking lots associated with the Grant Building (Figure A-I). The lot on the southwest side of the building has approximately 40 spaces, two of which are reserved for the handicapped. The lot on the southeast side of the building has approximately 26 parking spaces, none of which are reserved for the handicapped. The surface material for both parking lots is concrete. The surface is in fair condition with some cracking. Environmental elements have expedited the deterioration of the pavement. The size of the parking lots and the number of spaces, particularly handicapped spaces, is inadequate for the potential reuse of this building for business or educational occupancies.

2A..2 gll'il~e ~s~

«Ral~oi1 "!l'lrniJl!1Y S~U:s =: G«Jxoxdl ~lJlrruSJ S<e«:cm!lanf ~= ~

Within the campus, the main roads are in good condition. The Grant Building is accessed by secondary streets on three sides and a service road on the fourth. The secondary streets are in poor condition; age and environmental elements have contributed to the cracking of the paved surface (Figure A-2) and broken sections of concrete curb (Figure A-3).

The service road leads to a loading dock on the north side of the building. The ramp leading to the dock has uneven pavement with cracks, is poorly graded, and has inadequate drainage.

2.4.:31 ~a~~ «tRa1l:ii~ = lfaDtr~

The sidewalks are poured-in-place concrete and appear to be in fair condition. The exception is the sidewalk on the east side where the concrete shows areas of significant cracking (Figure A-4).

MA ~1»>5~«1Raa:a~=~»

In addition to its role in caring for retired veterans, the AFRH-W grounds were developed as a major public park in the 1870s, in a style that may have been inspired by Frederick Law Olmsted. Many these features have been preserved on the campus ground landscaping. The AFRH campus itself continues to be well maintained, and the landscape includes specimen trees, ornamental shrubs, and perennial and annual gardens. The Grant Building is surrounded by a well-maintained lawn and ornamental shrubs.

2,,4,5> sate ~

• Cracked pavement in adjacent street

• . Significant cracks and uneven surfaces on the east side sidewalks

ramp

the building

2.

The Grant Building is a three-story masonry structure with a mezzanine above the first floor and a sub-grade basement that extends the entire length of the first floor building footprint. The building measures approximately 230 feet by 286 feet and has access on its four sides. The main entrance is on the south, and is defined by a set of monumental stairs and marble columns (Figure A-5). Exterior elements of the building fayade are in the Renaissance Revival style.

II UD-Y ~'riia:t.T EI 'ope

The Grant Building is square in shape and has four interior courtyards. The building fayade has an upper cornice line with dentil molding that is faced in marble. The parapet and coping are also faced in marble and decorated with the classical architectural elements of the Renaissance Revival style (Figure A-6).

<a'}, WaMs(~=F_~

The exterior walls, including the cornice and parapet, are faced in marble. The marble veneer panel surfaces show some minor etching, while the marble panel walls on the south side show impact damage. The marble panel walls on the south, east, and west sides show discoloration, staining and chipping (Figure A-7). The mortar joints between the panels are deteriorated and discolored.

The basement foundation walls are brick and faced in granite. They show discoloration, and some mortar joints are missing (Figure A-8).

The interior courtyard walls are brick. These walls show chipping and/or impact damage, mainly due to environmental exposure. The mortar between the bricks is deteriorating.

The AFRH-W maintenance group informed the survey team that the south portion of the parapet collapsed about three years ago; the reason for the collapse is unknown. The maintenance crew restored the parapet in 2004. However, some horizontal cracks are still noticeable. It could not be confirmed whether the current cracks occurred after the restoration or whether they were left over from the original collapse. The other sides of the parapet did not show any vertical displacement, but it was noticeable that mortar joints are missing or deteriorated (Figure A-6).

b. R«1l@jj (~i&1I'Il9 =Gccdl)

The roof coverage is composed primarily of slate shingles with copper flashing. The original core of the building has a copper metal roof and show large sections of patina discoloration.

The gutter and downspouts located in the inner courtyards are also copper and show discoloration and stains. Sections of the slate roof, gutters, valleys, ridges and attic vents were replaced in 1991 and 1993, and roofleaks were repaired in 2005.

tt:. undcws (lRaftmg =lFafir)

All the windows in the Grant Building are its original: wood frame, single glazed, and non insulated. The style of the window changes at each floor level (Figure A-9). Although the majority of windows appeared to be operable, most were painted or screwed shut; the survey team was unable to open them at the time ofthe assessment (Figure A-lO).

The basement windows are casement type. They have broken glazing, are over-painted, and do not appear operable.

The first, second, and third floor windows are double hung. The first floor has double-height windows with an arch and decorative molding at the top. The windows serving the gymnasium area of the first floor have wire-mesh screen protectors on the inside face. The second floor windows are rectangular in shape with no special decorative treatment. Some of these windows are equipped with storm windows of which some were cracked and broken. The third floor windows have an arch and decorative molding at the top, but are not double height as the first floor windows.

The type of windows in the attic is awning. The window lintels are steel angles with a brick sill.

Rusting has occurred on these lintels. Considering the age of the lintels, they should all be replaced.

Exterior window sills are marble or stone, and interior sills are marble or wood. The interior courtyard sills are chipped and missing grout. The caulking on the windows is failing, and the wood jambs have excessive amounts of peeling paint. It will be necessary to replace all the windows.

Refer to Section 3.2 of this report on the fmdings regarding painted window components coated with paint containing a high concentration oflead.

• Exterior Doors and Harrdware (Rating =Poor)

The main entry on the south side has three sets of solid wood doors that are wide, panel and stile type, with a carved molding surrounding the full vision panel. The jambs of these doors are also solid wood. The bottom portions of the south side doors are rotted due to a moisture problem and are not repairable (Figure A-II). The other three entrances have solid wood doors with half size vision panels; the doors are completely rotted and are beyond repair.

The majority of the hardware is in poor condition. The panic bar on the south entrance is in fair condition. The marble sill at the front entrance is worn and has a significant crease from overuse. The other entrances have sills that are also worn and show missing mortar in the control joints.

Smull'S (Rating ::: faor)

The building has four set of stairs; one at each entrance with concrete treads. The first step on the west entry stairs has significantly eroded and all steps appear worn (Figure A-12). The south entry stairs has damaged copper railings, while the other two entry stairs (east and north side) have iron railings that are also damaged. It appears that the metal railings were damaged by abuse and are beyond repair.

ff. Exte" rom C«»UllIImm C, "ng =FaolT')

The four marble columns that define the main entrance of the building are deteriorated as shown by minor chipping on the shaft and cracks and chipping on the bases. Some of the marble plates have deep vertical cracks and chipping (Figure A-13).

~k (~~ = faDrr)

The loading dock platform on the north side of the building has a clay slab deck that shows significant chipping. The metal clad wall at the dock is delaminated.

ee

SI·

~5"11.2 Bll1lteli'iiw lMartterrilaBs al

""a8!1s ( "1fDtgj =fan,)

The walls on the basement level are mostly brick and/or painted cement plaster, and have minor cracks, chipping and discoloration. The walls of the electrical equipment vault are concrete masonry unit (eMU), and some portions are chipping.

The walls on the first floor have stone or marble, ceramic tile, and drywall finishes. The entrance hall has many classical details, which contribute to the building's historic fabric.

Eight Tuscan-style marble columns and wood molding define the vestibule in the entrance hall. The perimeter walls are brick with marble wainscot. Other interior partitions are painted cement plaster.

The west and south wing walls are full height exposed brick, whereas the east side walls are faced in brick with a marble wainscot. There are some interior plywood partitions on the south side. A racquetball partition, 20 feet by 34 feet, is located on the northwest side.

The first floor walls at the interior core are brick, which are dirty and stained. The mezzanine level walls are painted cement plaster with carved wood moldings that have been over-painted.

The walls in the individual rooms (members' rooms) on the second and third floor are plaster.

The paint on the second floor walls, specifically the southeast area, is peeling and chipping (Figure A-14). This condition appears to be related to a moisture problem. The walls throughout the third floor appear to be in good shape. The hallway walls of the second and third floor are plaster with a wood chair rail.

In the majority of the restrooms, the walls are cement plaster with a 24 inch by 24 inch porcelain tile wainscot measuring 78 inches high. These tiles are in good condition. The walls in the restrooms located in the southeast and southwest comers of the building are 4 inch by 4 inch ceramic tile. Mezzanine level restrooms also have walls of 4 inch by 4 inch ceramic tile.

Likewise, the walls in the restroom by the front entrance are 4 inch by 4 inch ceramic tile, but are cracked and beyond repair.

The walls in the attic are brick. Minor cracks and chipping were noticeable, but the walls appear to be sound and in good condition.

• IS U~ (RatiIl'8g :: fa1sr»

The basement floor is concrete slab-on-grade. Although many cracks and chips in the concrete were observed, this is more likely due to age rather than any major structural problem. Refer to Section 2.5.2.4 for a discussion on the structural findings of the basement floors (Figure A 25).

The first floor has various types of finishes. Stone mosaic is laid in geometric patterns on the entrance hall floor. Some minor cracks were observed on this floor, but overall it is in good condition. There is also mosaic ceramic tile on floor of the main entry restroom that is stained and has many cracks, but the marble baseboard is in good condition.

In the core area of the building on the first floor, the floor finishes are a mixture of concrete, terrazzo, and carpet; the concrete floor has many minor cracks, and is in fair condition; the terrazzo is stained and has many minor cracks; and the carpet is worn and in poor condition.

The abandoned bowling area on the east side has a concrete and terrazzo floor with a built-up floor of vinyl composition tile (YCT); the YCT is in poor condition (Figure A-IS). The east side vestibule floor is concrete and terrazzo. On the south side, the abandoned tennis court area has a rubberized green mat laid over the mosaic tile; the mat is in poor condition. On the west side, the abandoned fitness area has mosaic and terrazzo floors. This floor is stained, worn and shows many minor cracks (Figure A-I6).

The finishes on the second and third floors are the same as on the first floor. The floor in the lounge area has 9 inch by 9 inch VCT. On the third floor, the plywood sheathing is warped.

Both of these areas are in poor condition. The hardwood floor in the hallway has a thick plywood mat mounted on top of the high-traffic areas. The plywood mat is in poor condition (Figure A-17). The floors of the individual rooms are predominantly 9 inch by 9 inch VCT;

however, some rooms have carpet laid over. The VCT finishes are in poor condition, but the to-inch wood molding base board is in relatively good condition. Refer to Section 3.1 of this report for information on the asbestos content of the VCT.

The finished floors in the central restrooms are 24 inch by 24 inch terrazzo in good condition, with only cleaning needed. The finished floor in the restrooms located at the southeast and southwest comers is 2 inch by 2 inch ceramic tile. The floor in the mezzanine level restrooms is 2 inch by 2 inch hexagon ceramic tile.

The attic floor is concrete and in relatively good condition; a few minor hairline cracks were observed (Figure A-26).

!s (Rating =Falffirr»

The basement ceiling is exposed concrete deck with exposed piping with insulation and suspended conduit. The condition of the ceiling is good.

The foyer has a wood coffered ceiling, heavily coated with many layers of paint that is deteriorating and peeling (Figure A-I8). The crown molding is also heavily painted, chipping and peeling. The ceiling on the south, east, and west wings is primarily painted cement plaster that is chipping and peeling. A significant crack in the northwest corner of the building runs across the ceiling and down the wall. The core area ceiling is mainly painted cement plaster with some exposed concrete deck ceilings in the northeast core/central areas. Plaster ceilings in the core areas adjacent to the east court yard show significant deterioration, mainly because the building is not air conditioned. A suspended acoustical tile ceiling in the northeast area (abandoned bowling alley) is in poor condition.

Painted cement plaster ceilings are in the restrooms of the centralized and the mezzanine level areas, and in the toilets located in the southeast and southwest comers of the building. The paint is chipping and peeling throughout all the restrooms (Figure A-I9).

The attic ceiling is a combination of exposed clay tile and wood, which is in relatively good condition.

Co meriOO'Dorws all lHIamlwarre (Rating = rFalDtr}

The interior doors in both the foyer and that lead into the vestibules are solid wood with a full glass lite and transom. Many of these doors have multiple layers of paint and some dents but could be refInished. All the interior doors from the lobby/lounge area to the central portion of the building and the corridors are double wood doors, metal clad, full glass lites, and peeling paint. Although these doors may have been fire-rated at one time, they cannot be classified as such now due to the number of dents (Figure A-20). The remaining interior doors on the fIrst floor are either wood or hollow metal and are not in good working order.

The doors on the second and third floors are wood paneled with a transom either paneled and/or painted. The small toilet room doors are also paneled wood doors in a condition that varies from fair to poor.

The door hardware throughout the building varies from fair to poor due to damage and wear.

~a "1l1l SftaDITS (SCIUlttD) (Ratilnld'll = I)

Located on either side of the foyer are the main stairs made of metal with marble treads and wood risers with newel posts (Figure A-21). Their railings have metal posts with ornamental iron balusters and an unpainted, solid wood cap. The guardrails of the mezzanine level stairs are metal posts and iron balusters with a wood handrail cap; the interior of the stairs has a solid wood rail.

Ifa Rear StraOIr.Si (lNI(O}lI1tIhl} (IRiaJti~ = GoOOI~

The rear staircase is metal with marble tread and wood risers. The handrail is unpainted solid wood with iron ornamental balusters. The interior of the stairs has an unpainted, solid wood rail. The open, central well was modifIed to provide a eMU freight elevator.

• 00»eir Sta" !inl!D ::;: faJorr~

The restrooms on the mezzanine level are served by a wood staircase with a non-continuous metal handrail. This stairway was determined to be structurally unsound.

A metal spiral staircase between the second and third floors appears to have provided service access to the elevator. The staircase is in good condition with the exception of a low hanging beam addition that obstructs headroom (Figure A-22). This addition was probably added after the stairs were in place.

lhla lE!levatctrs (Ratfunlg = 1Fm»6'»

There are two sets of elevators in the building: one for passengers and one for freight. Neither was operable at the time of the survey. Both elevators appear antiquated and do not meet code (See Section 2.6.1).

2..5.1.3 hitectumO ciEm~aes ial. Exterior Envelope oEmcies

• Minor etching, cracking, and discoloration on the exterior marble panels

• Impact damage on the south fa<;;ade marble panels

• Chipped, and/or cracked base and column of the south fa<;;ade marble columns

• Discolored and stained exterior granite panels with some panels showing minor cracks and chipping

• Deteriorated and discolored mortar joints

• Vertical cracks and missing mortar joints on sections of the south parapet

• Discolored and deteriorated mortar joints on the inside brick walls of the courtyards

• Significant chipping on the clay deck platform of the north loading dock

· • Delaminated metal clad wall at loading dock

• Discolored patina of copper roof sections

• Discolored patina of copper gutters and downspouts

• Eroded first step on the west stair; all step are worn

• All metal railings beyond repair

• Single pane, non-insulated window glazing

• Broken basement-level casement windows and some storm windows

• Chipped and missing grout on the marble window sills facing the courtyards

• Multiple layers of peeling paint on wood jambs

• Inoperable or broken on some window hardware

• Rusted metal window lintels

• Failed caulking

• Rotted exterior solid wood doors

• Dated exterior hardware not in good working order

• Significant wear and a deep crease at the south entrance marble sill

• Worn and missing mortar on marble sills at other entrances

[b). !BMoOdiollTt:!ll Dlrntelli lC~iie$

problems in certain parts of the building

on the first floor, second floor, and third floor

• Worn first floor carpet

• Worn hardwood floor

• Worn and warped plywood mat mounted over existing hardwood floor

• Warped sheathing on the third floor

• Soiled, dated, and cracked ceramic tile floor in bathrooms and in the toilets located on the southeast and southwest comers

• Cracked concrete floors in basement

• Peeling, brittle paint on wood coffered ceilings

• Peeling, chipped paint on plaster ceilings

• Significant crack in ceiling and wall in northwest comer of building

• Compromising dents on fire rating of doors

• Layers of peeling paint on doors

• Damaged door hardware

• Stained, broken, or missing 2 inch by 4 inch acoustical ceiling tiles

• Non-continuous, old and unstable interior wood stair with rail

• Antiquated elevators that do not meet code s' The Grant Building's structural system consists of concrete floor planks supported by wood and concrete joists, and concrete girders and steel beams. These components are supported by load-bearing masonry walls and columns which carry the loads to the soil by means of foundations comprised of continuous and spread footings.

.2. OOtmrdJaJfdi<OllrnS {Raltilrog ~~

The load-bearing perimeter masonry walls are supported by continuous footings, and the interior colunms are supported by spread footings according to the as-built drawings. The founding depths of the footings vary from four feet to seven feet below the basement floor. In general, the foundation system appears to be functioning adequately. Given that the structure is nearly 100 years old, settlement cracks are not that widespread. Moreover, it may be safely assumed that during this period, all possible foundation movement has already taken place. There should be no concern for future foundation movement as long as the floor loading criteria does not change substantially and measures are taken to ensure consistent moisture content in the soil.

~.:Irtl'iiIIwm =: B=aor~A;522 Wa!llls a

The exterior perimeter walls are load-bearing elements. The interior walls are non-load bearing, and constructed from brick and CMU blocks; there is some cracking on the interior brick walls (Figure A-23).

There is evidence of water infiltration into the building along the perimeter walls. The loading dock at the rear of the building shows cracking throughout the structure.

The height from the basement to the flIst floor is about 11 feet; the [lIst floor to the mezzanine is 13 feet and 6 inches; the mezzanine to the second floor is 12 feet and 6 inches; the second floor to the third is 15 feet; and from the third to the attic is 14 feet and 6 inches.

The walls and the columns appear to be in fair condition and do not show any immediate signs ofdistress.

However, a detailed analysis is recommended to accurately predict future use ofthe building structure.

5.2.3 Siu'luJcNll'aD System (Ratill19l :::: fa6r)

The roof structural system appears to be in fair condition. The lower roof in the courtyard over the kitchen is pitched and supported by wood joists. These joists are supported by steel trusses, and there are no visible signs of distress.

The roof over the outer ring consists of concrete and clay tile slab. The roof slab elements are supported by clay tile encased purlins. In turn, these purlins are supported by steel trusses built from double angle members. The attic floor is supported at the bottom chord level of the trusses. There are some signs of rusting on the steel members and cracking of the concrete attic floor.

2.5.2A !oor SY!riem (Rating =Faar)

The basement floor is slab-on-grade with cracks in some locations. This cracking may have been as the result of movement due to change in the moisture content in the soils underneath. The flISt floor slab also shows some cracking. At the loading dock, there is minor cracking in the concrete and clay slab.

The elevated floors are typically constructed ofconcrete joists, topping, and terra cotta. Supporting the floor system are concrete girders that show chipping on the sides, and steel beams that show some localized rusting (Figure A-24).

In general, the floor system appears to be in fair condition. Capacity information of the floor system was not available on drawings and cannot be determined by visual inspection. Detailed evaluation is required to determine load capacity ofthe floor system for future use.

25.2.5 Stiruclum!l Sy~1 'm~

The Grant Building structure appears to be in fair condition. However, further study is needed to determine the adequacy of the building for other types of occupancy from the strength perspective. Compliance with current building codes should also be evaluated if the future utilization of the building includes a change in the type of occupancy.

2.5.2.(5 SbIuIdl CfieReDe5

• Cracks in the interior brick walls

• Water infiltration into the building along the perimeter walls

• Minor cracks in the slab at the loading dock

<E?o

WASHINGTON, DC

• Some signs of rusting on various steel members

• Minor cracks of the concrete attic floor

• Some localized chipping of concrete from the sides of the girders

• Cracks in the first floor slab eClnlanvcal, IEAectricaA and pnumlb! C4'll1l"ln'lnonerrots

2.5.3. !~ mlbiing ~ems

a. AUII" ~iltiil "ng =tNl@t ficalbBe~

No evidence of an air conditioning system was found.

lb. Ollriskllce Air Vemtii~oo« "lII'DSJ =PCOfl'}

A system of gravity ventilation ducts are installed throughout the building. These ventilation riser ducts tie together in the attic and tenninate above the roof via 48 inch cupolas. Make-up air is provided to the gravity ventilation system through operable windows located throughout the building.

~. usit SysV:em (, .~ := Mot AppDu~)

No evidence of an exhaust system was found.

ldl. ~M Systtem ~Ra\tiiinll2l ::: Poo:r~

The hot water is supplied from a heat exchanger located in an adjacent building. Duplex hot water circulation pumps are located in the basement.

The building is heated by a perimeter hot water radiation system. Each exterior space is supplied with wall mounted hot water radiators.

"ITllSJ S3fsmm « -~=P@'M»

@.il ~Iro'i}estbe CclJ~ Wcmketr A six-inch water service line enters the facility through the basement; no backflow preventor was observed. Copper piping is installed throughout the building to distribute water to the restroom areas. The individual rooms do not have lavatories or water closets.

®2 1Hl@t< Walter Hot water is generated by a single wall, steam-to-hot-water heat exchanger located in the basement whereas steam is provided from the campus steam supply. Two hot water storage tanks are also located in the basement. None of the equipment in the hot water system is in adequate enough condition to be re-used.

@n3S Sa!l'iliitaay Waste alrrucll Vent Sys1tem All fixtures (lavatories, urinals, water closets, sinks, etc.) have been removed from the sanitary system, but remain in the building at the locations where removed. Plugs have been installed in all sanitary and vent pipes to prevent sewer gas from entering the building.

11. rFtirre rressO(l)[ITl { "Irng =!PlOXQ)lI')

There is no automatic sprinkler system installed in the facility. A four-inch fire protection standpipe system is installed from the domestic supply on all floors.

25nJ.21E~CalY $ysf(em

:;;:~)al. EDedricaD IPOW~f1' (i

The electrical power into the building is located in a transformer vault in the basement and subsequent switchgear. The transformer steps down the voltage to 480 volts (V) and is distributed by the switchgear to motors and other equipment in the building and a low voltage transformer. The switchgear also provides power to Stanley Hall.

A dry type transformer steps down the power from 480V to the distribution voltage through a switchboard. The switchboard has a capacity of 800 amps at 208/120V. The transformer has a 225 kilovolt amperes (kVA) rating. These units are visually in excellent condition.

ll». IElectmicall ~tbJWOIl1l ~'

The electrical distribution system is a combination of the original system with built-in wall panels and additions of surface mounted panels to supplement the rooms' lighting, ceiling fans, and window air conditioners. The original panels are not adequate and have potentially life threatening conditions (Figures A-27 through A-31). The surface mounted panels are relatively new, and are in good condition (Figure A-32).

The wiring of the building is beyond its useful life, lacks proper ground, and should be removed before any future use of the building. The surface mounted wiring and panels, although they are in better condition, lack proper outlet spacing and quantities for some of the large rooms (Figure A-33). A complete removal of this wiring will facilitate any future building development.

A new distribution schedule will require extensive modifications of the panel boards;

therefore, a completely new wiring system should be considered to integrate the needs of a new installation. The existing new panels could be salvaged and utilized in the future (Figure

A-34). The existing low voltage transformer (225 kVA) seems to be undersized to power a building of its size.

~o 2:rgjeB1lCy ~nerator (Rating =NltOlt "cable)

The building lacks an emergency generator.

<dIo "!Ellhl~~ ( "lIll9l =Poor)

The hallways are wide and long, and have few luminaries, resulting in poor illumination (Figure A-35). Rooms have usually one ceiling fixture, but will require additional light fixtures depending on future use.

The building stairs are illuminated by a wall mounted fixture and a set of emergency lights, but the space requires larger fixtures (Figure A-36). The same condition of outdated illumination is present in the foyer (Figure A-37).

The front entry steps of the building are illuminated by two, historical cast iron lampposts.

One of the lamps is broken, and the other has been removed (Figure A-38).

@. lBevaiof/'S ( = !?1ocr)

There are two elevators in the building: one for freight and one for passengers. Neither was operable at the time of this assessment.

~5oJu3 IMleC! P~umbing 'cilenciies"a::a", au U\lDe:chanccall cie!ro~8es

All mechanical systems are either deficient or nonexistent.

• No central air conditioning system

• Outside air is not conditioned

• No central building exhaust

• No exhaust system for the toilet and shower areas

• Missing radiator covers and fin tubes

• Inadequate system, as a whole n~ ~ernc~

• Discolored patina on copper piping in basement iblo

• Abandoned sanitary mains. All plumbing fixtures (lavatories, water closets, and urinals) have been removed. The operating condition of the fixtures cannot be determined.

• Unacceptable central open showers and toilets for an office environment

~c lForre !Protecticn ci~ees

• No fire sprinkler system

«:0. IEU~caD Deftcient;8e5

Distribution panels in the walls and the basement are dangerous and should be removed Surface panels are relatively new and can be salvaged Original wiring is beyond its useful life Outlets in the rooms require a review for spacing The Guard House behind the building is presently wired to the main building by an aerial feeder. This feeder is held in place by the balcony ofthe building (Figure A-39).

Broken historic lamp on south fac;:ade beyond repair. The other lamp needs repair.

Poor hallway illumination Inoperable elevators

CompHiarrnceC2llP)ped AccessibnBiity

:cnQ]ition~

There are several conditions in which the Grant Building does not meet current federal regulations for handicapped accessibility. The building is not equipped with a handicapped ramp and/or elevator at ground level to provide access to the building. At the time of the condition assessment, the elevators were inoperable. It was noted from looking at the exterior of the elevators that the doors are too narrow for wheelchair accessibility and the button panel is mounted too high. The building's lighting fixtures and receptacles are not ADA accessible. The existing centralized bathrooms are provided with shower stalls, toilet stalls and lavatories that do not meet ADA requirements.

The interior of the building could be easily adapted for people with disabilities. The corridors on all the floors have more than the minimum clear width of 60 inches required for two wheelchairs. Door entrances to individual rooms are wide enough for a wheelchair and have the 18-inch wall return for a front approach.

The hardware on the doors are door knob style and do not have delayed closers.

The main stairs in the foyer have the same riser height and same size tread. Handrails are provided on both sides of the wall. The interior handrail is continuous, but does not extend 12 inches beyond the bottom landing. The edge surface of the tread is not provided with a gripping surface. The rear stairs are 50-inches wide, and have the same riser height and same size tread. However, the edge surface of the tread is not provided with a gripping surface. The interior handrail is continuous on both sides of the wall but does not extend 12 inches beyond the bottom landing. In the core area, the wood stair has less than the 36-inch minimum width requirement and a non-continuous handrail. But the treads and risers are within the allowable requirements of the International Building Code 2003. On the second floor, the metal spiral stair is structurally sound, but the last segment has less than 6 feet and 8 inch of headroom, which is less than the minimum required.

2.6.2 ADA IDefiicnencfies

SaNetY AssessIl'MA'mt' eria all"il e atioll1s

The following criteria and regulations were assumed for this vacant building: classification of occupancy, occupancy load factor and number and means of egress.

• Building Classification of Occupancy. Business Group B and/or Educational Group E

• Occupancy Load Factor (For Business Use). 100 gross per person; and 20 net for classroom area

• Arrangement of Means of Egress. The travel distance shall not exceed 200 feet without sprinkler and 300 feet with a sprinkler system

• Number and Means of Egress. The number of means of egress for more than 1,000 shall be not less than four. Corridors used as exit access shall be separated from other parts of the building by walls having a one-hour fire resistance rating.

Further detailed analysis will be required if occupancy assumptions differ from above.

~ (J ..2 &CstDll1lg tC@n~iil6oll'ilS

The stairs at the north and south ends of the building provide the only two means of egress from the upper floors of the building to the first floor. The stairs appear to have an adequate fire rated assembly construction. The width of the corridor is ample and, therefore, is not a constraint. Currently, the stair located on the north end lacks a door. The stair on the south end is separated by a rated wall from the main corridors of the building. The existing wall separating these areas is old and has no fire rated value. There are exit signs, but all are non-functioning.

2.7.3 l1..~fe Safety Deficiencies

• Exit signs not in good working order

• Damaged exit doors that have lost all fire-rated value

• No adequate fire-rated hardware and/or panic hardware; door frames are not rated

;Section'-. .,. - -, 'IWASHINGTON, DC , .'

This report presents methodologies and findings of the hazardous material survey, which was completed on June 8, 2005.

3., lI1liilnllm Materiaus

An asbestos survey was performed by Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) accredited asbestos inspectors. The survey procedures included a visual assessment to identify homogeneous areas of suspect asbestos-containing materials throughout accessible areas of the building. The locations and approximate quantities of suspect asbestos-containing materials were noted. In addition, an assessment of the physical condition and friability of suspect asbestos containing materials was performed.

Bulk samples of suspect materials were collected for laboratory analysis. Sampling procedures were in accordance with AHERA 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 763 protocols. Bulk samples were submitted under chain-of-custody to EMSL Analytical Laboratory in Beltsville, Maryland, for analysis by Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) to determine asbestos content. The result of the inspection and bulk sample analysis for the structure is summarized in Table 2.

~fle ~s to fDXeteummfine ~GSC@~

Sample # Location Appearance Non-Asbestos Asbestos

% Fibrous % Non-Fibrous % Type GB-Ol Lino Flooring

(lower layer) Brown/Black Fibrous Heterogeneous

85% Cellulose 30% Non-fibrous (other) 5% Ca Carbonate

None Detected

GB-02 Lino Flooring (1'1 & 2nd layer)

Various Fibrous Heterogeneous

20% Cellulose 80% Non-fibrous (other)

None Detected

GB-02A Lino Flooring (1'1 & 2nD layer) Brown/Black Fibrous Heterogeneous

70% Cellulose 25% Non-fibrous (other) 5% Ca Carbonate

None Detected

GB-03 Ceiling Plstr (2 layers;

white & beige)

White Non-Fibrous Homogeneous

35% non-fibrous (other) 65% Gypsum

None Detected

GB-03A Ceiling Plstr (2 layers;

white & beige)

Tan Non-Fibrous

5% Cellulose 30% Quartz 60% Non-fibrous

None Detected

S:illiple # Location Appearance Non-Asbestos Asbestos

% Fibrous % Non-Fibrous % Type Heterogeneous (other)

5% Mica GB-04 Pipe Insulation Tan/Gray

Fibrous Heterogeneous

75% Cellulose 10% Non-fibrous (other)

15% Chrysotile

GB-05 9X9 FT (gray with specks)

Gray Non-fibrous Heterogeneous

85% Non-fibrous (other) 15% Ca Carbonate

None Detected

GB-05A 9X9 FT (gray with specks)

Tan Non-fibrous Homogeneous

95% Non-fibrous (other) 5% Ca Carbonate

None Detected

GB-06 IXI FT (beige/gray with specks) rm 153

Gray Non-fibrous Heterogeneous

85% Non-fibrous (other) 15% Ca Carbonate

None Detected

GB-06A IXI FT (beige/gray with specks) rm 153

Blue Non-fibrous Homogeneous

90% Non-fibrous (other) 10% Ca Carbonate

None Detected

GB-07 lXl FT (beige/gray with specks) bowling alley

Blue Non-fibrous Homogeneous

60% Non-fibrous (other) 32% Ca Carbonate

8% Chrysotile

GB-07A IXI FT (beige/gray with specks) bowling alley

Black Non-fibrous Homogeneous

5% Cellulose 95% Non-fibrous (other)

None Detected

GB-08 IXI FT (beige/gray with specks) bowling alley

Blue Non-fibrous Heterogeneous

60% Non-fibrous (other) 40% Ca Carbonate

None Detected

GB-08A IX I FT (beige/gray with specks) bowling alley

Black Non-fibrous Homogeneous

5% Cellulose 95% Non-fibrous (other)

None Detected

GB-09 9X9 FT (green with white specks) stairwelVfoyer

Green Non-fibrous Heterogeneous

60% Non-fibrous (other) 28% Ca Carbonate

12% Chrysotile

GB-09A 9X9 FT (green with white specks) stairwelVfover

Black Non-fibrous Homogeneous

10% Cellulose 90% Non-fibrous (other)

None Detected

Identified asbestos-containing materials (ACM) include; thennal system insulation on domestic water piping, on a hot water storage tank, on the heating system plumbing; and as insulation on duct work.

Miscellaneous asbestos containing applications include in floor tiles and associated mastics (glue).

The majority of friable asbestos-containing materials are found in the attic and in the basement level of the building. The floor tile and mastics identified on the third floor lobby is in poor condition and could be considered friable. Any major renovation involving the heating system or the domestic water plumbing will require asbestos abatement. The floor tile in the lobby areas of the second and third floor should be removed.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) regulations (40 CFR 61) require the removal of friable asbestos prior to renovation or demolition activities that could disturb such material. Included in the NESHAP definition of regulated asbestos-containing materials (RACM) are friable asbestos materials and non friable materials that may become friable as the result of the renovation or demolition activities.

~a·

The lead based paint survey was performed by a District of Columbia licensed lead based paint inspector using a Niton Model XL 309 Lead Paint Analyzer manufactured by Niton Corporation of Bedford, Massachusetts. The XL-309 is an X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) spectrum analyzer, which is the current state-of-the-art in portable direct reading instrumentation for measuring the level of lead in paint. The radiation source is 10 mCi Cadmium-109.

Based on EPA, District of Columbia regulations and US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) guidelines, lead-based paint is defined as containing 0.5 percent or greater lead by weight (when calculated as lead metal in a dried solid form), or 1.0 milligrams per square centimeter (mg/cm2

) or greater using an X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF)…