HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2009-01-26 #QAGENDA STAFF REPORT
DATE: January 26, 2009
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: David Carmany, City Manager
FROM: Vince Mastrosimone, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: PIER SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT -
RECEIVEAND FILE
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The proposed City Council action will receive and file the Structural Safety
Assessment Inspection of the Seal Beach Municipal Pier CIP No. BP0904.
BACKGROUND:
The Seal Beach Municipal Pier is approximately 1800-feet long consisting mostly
of poly-wrapped timber piles, timber support members and a timber deck. The
Pier was severely damaged by the winter storms in 1982/1983 and it was
partially rebuilt after the damage. The pier also experienced significant fire
damage in 1992 and 1994 that required extensive repairs. In April 2008, the Pier
suffered damage to the boat launch due to high surf which was later repaired.
Regular monitoring and inspections of the structural safety of the pier is needed
approximately every five years. Lifeguards and Public Works crews have
regularly inspected and monitored various components of the Pier. The fender
piles, which are the outermost piles adjacent to the boat ramps were
professionally inspected and evaluated by a consultant in 1993. The concrete
portion of the pier was professionally inspected and evaluated by a consultant in
1999. In 2003, Han-Padron Associates inspected and evaluated the Pier and
provided the Ciry with a detailed assessment of the Pier's condition. Overall, the
Pier was in fair condition.
On October 13, 2008, Council awarded a professional services contract to
Moffatt & Nichol to inspect and evaluate the City's timber Pier.
Inspections and testing were conducted in November of 2008. The inspection
included a visual and tactile examination of all accessible components of the
structure, above and below the waterline. The report concludes that the Pier is in
Agenda Item Q
Page 2
fair condition according to the standards set by the American Society of Civil
Engineers (ASCE) Standard Practice Manual on Underwater Investigations.
However, at this time, several elements of the pier are in need of repair and
replacement including minor structural components, utilities connections,
preservation components and aesthetic features,
Several significant findings identified in the report include repairing the wraps to
avoid infestation of marine borers, repair broken bracing to provide full lateral
capacity, and termite treatment. Several significantly damaged railings should be
replaced with treated lumber. Loose utilities should be reattached, even if the
element is no longer operational. Loose, uneven, or gapping deck boards should
be repaired.
The Public Works Department will be reviewing the associated costs and studies,
investigate grant opportunities and will bring back information regarding the Pier
improvements to City Council for consideration at a future meeting during the
budget sessions.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The cost of the inspection report is $61,300 and was budgeted for in the City's
2008/2009 Budget. The report identifies approximately $230,000 of
improvements to the pier which will be programmed in the 5 year Capital
Improvement Program.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that City Council action receive and file the presented
information on the Pier.
U MITTED B NOTED AND APPROVED:
~'~~a
Vi a Mastrosimone David Carma y, City Manager
Director of Public Works
Attachments:
A. Pier Safety Assessment Inspection Report
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT
INSPECTION OF THE
SEAL BEACH MUNICIPAL PIER
CIP No. BP0904
November 20, 2008
Prepared for:
~ seat
~~
THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH
211 EIGHT STREET
SEAL BEACH, CA 90740
by:
®®~ MOFFATT & 1VICHOL
3780 Kilroy Airport Way, Suite 600
Long Beach, CA, 90806
M&N JN: 3874-24
1
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paae No.
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................... 3
2 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 4
3 FACILITY DESCRIPTION ............................................................... ............... 5
3.1 LOCATION .................................................................................... ...............5
3.2 EXISTING PIER .......................................................................... 5
.. ...............
4 INSPECTION ................................................... 6
............................... ...............
4.1 OBSERVED CONDITIONS ........................................................... ............... 7
4.1.1 Topside Inspection -Deck Area .......................................... ............... 7
4.1.2 Substructure Inspection ...................................................... ...............8
4.1.3 Pile Inspection ............................................ 9
........................ ...............
4.1.4 Utilities ................................................................................ ............... 9
4.2 COMPARISON OF PREVIOUS INSPECTION RESULTS ............ ............. 13
4.3 Structural Condition Assessment .................................................. ............. 13
4.4 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. .............15
5 STRUCTURAL CAPACITY RATING ............................................... ............ 16
Appendix A -Plans and Sections .......................................................... .............. 1
Appendix B -Photographs ...................................................................... .............. 2
Appendix C -Inspection Data .............................................................................. 3
Appendix D -Inspection Procedures ..................................................... .............. 4
Above-Water Inspection -Topside ................................................. ..............4
Above-Water Inspection -Underside ............................................................ 4
Underwater Inspection .................................. 5
.................................. ..............
Appendix E -Cost Estimates Summary .................................................. .............. 6
Appendix F -List of Key Personnel ........................................................ .............. 7
Appendix G -References ...................................................................... .............. 7
2
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PEER 2008
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As part of the City of Seal Beach's Pier Inspection Program, Moffatt &
Nichol performed a routine structural safety inspection of the Pier between
October 17 -October 20, 2008. The inspection and this subsequent report were
based on the recommendations of the American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE) Underwater Investigations Standard Practice Manual (No. 101) and
included a visual and tactile examination of all accessible components of the
structure, above and below the waterline.
The Pier is a timber framed structure typically supported on wrapped
timber piles. The majority of the structure is approximately 25-years old, with the
exception of the first 400 feet, generally over the beach, and end platform.
Various repairs have been made to the structure over its lifetime.
The most recent prior inspection was performed in 2002. Repairs were
made as a result of that inspection, which appear to have been all completed.
Several of the issues identified in the prior inspection are similar to this 2008
inspection.
The Pier is assessed to be in Fair to Satisfactory condition with some
minor to moderate deterioration in structural elements.
Several concerns which should be addressed include repairs to
approximately a dozen pile wraps and treatment of railings and benches infested
with termites. Other priority repairs include replacement of broken bracing and
attachment of loose utilities. These repairs are estimated at $200,000 to
complete.
Other repairs are recommended to be completed within the next five years
including replacement of the non-critical termite damaged rails and benches,
replacement of corroded connection hardware, and rehabilitation/repairs of
elements noted as marginal in the inspection report. Inspection of the buildings
was not part of the Scope, but should be considered as termite damage was
observed.
3
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
2 INTRODUCTION
This report was prepared as part of the City of Seal Beach Routine
Inspection Program. This report provides inspection results, structural analysis,
repair recommendations, and estimates of repair costs for waterfront facilities.
All of these services, including this report, were provided by Moffatt & Nichol,
under the responsible charge of Elizabeth Greer P.E., in accordance with The
City CIP No. BP0904.
The inspection was performed from October 16 through October 20, 2008.
The scope included visual and tactile inspection of the top side, underside, and
undewwater elements of the Municipal Pier
This project provided the engineering services necessary to perform a
routine inspection and to assess the apparent general condition of the structural
members of the Seal Beach Pier in accordance with the standards set by the
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Underwater Investigations Standard
Practice Manual (No. 101). "The repair recommendations contained herein are
preliminary and are to be used for general costing purposes. A design level
inspection may be warranted if more accurate quantities are required. The actual
method of repair must be left to the discretion of the Engineer of Record."
In accordance with ASCE Underwater Investigations Standard Practice
Manual the objectives of a routine inspection include:
• Assessing the overall condition of the [undenroater] portions of the
structure
• Assigning an [underwater] condition assessment rating
Developing recommendations for follow-up action
• Determining the recommended interval to the next routine inspection
The above water inspection was conducted using a similar approach.
4
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
3 FACILITY DESCRIPTION
3.1 LOCATION
3.2 EXISTING PIER
The Seal Beach Municipal Pier,
originally constructed in 1906, is
approximately 1800-feet long making it
one of the longest on the coast (4). It
consists mostly of polyethylene-wrapped
timber piles, timber support members and
a timber deck. The Fender piles are the
outermost piles adjacent to the boat
ramps. There is a concrete approach
structure at the entrance.
The Pier weathered both the '33 earthquake and the '39 hurricane
undamaged (4); however; it was severely damaged by the winter storms in
1982/1983 and was partially rebuilt after the damage. The pier also experienced
two significant fires in 1992 and 1994. Repairs made to these areas included
replacement of a significant portion of the deck and several elements of the
substructure.
Figure 1 in Appendix A provides a plan and elevation of the overall
structure.
Currently, the City is performing a deck replacement program. This
included replacement of the older Douglas Fir (DF) decking with a more durable
hardwood, Greenheart. The replacement is being completed in phases based on
need and funding availability. To date, the decking has been replaced from the
beginning of the Pier to approximately Bent 37.
5
Imaoe No. 1- Pier Arial Maa
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
The Pier deck is typically a 20' wide structure, supported on four piles: two
vertical and two outside battered. There are several platform areas at which the
pier widens to 30'. These are typically supported by five piles per bent. Most of
the bents have some type of transverse bracing (typically 4x10), and longitudinal
bracing at approximately every other span. Photo A shows a typical pier area.
The superstructure consists of timber decking and stringers supported by
pile bents generally spaced at 20 feet on centers. The piles are approximately
16" in diameter. Most of the piles, Bents 20-75, were replaced after the 1983
storm damage repair. A total of 83 bents and approximately 414 piles make up
the substructure. Figure 2 in Appendix A provides detail of the pile bents.
The City periodically performs assessment inspections, and the Lifeguards
and Public Works crews regularly inspect and monitor various components of the
Pier.
4 INSPECTION
The inspection was performed by a team of six engineer inspectors
including three engineer divers. Appendix G provides a list of the inspection
team. Inspection generally included visual, tactile and limited probing on the
pier structural elements and appurtenances. Buildings were not included in the
inspection; however, some notes are included in the inspection summary.
6
Photo A - Tvoical Pier Area
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
Appendix E -Inspection Procedures provides a detailed description of the
methods implemented.
The results of the inspections were documented and summarized in table
format. This is included in Appendix C -Inspection Data. Figures 3 through 5 in
Appendix A show the location of ident~ed concerns.
4.1 OBSERVED CONDITIONS
4.1.1 Topside Inspection -Deck Area
Photo B -Deck Wear
Handrails -There are some loose rails and loose/damaged posts. There
is a significant amount of termite damage that appears active at several
locations along the pier. The worst termite infestation is at the end of the
pier.
• Appurtenances -Several benches have termite damage. The worst case
being the far south facing bench.
Boat Landings -The gangways appeared structurally in fair condition.
Lifts were not operated as part of the inspection; however, operation of the
gangway on Boat Landing Number 1 was observed during a routine
landing.
• Other Structures -The buildings were not specifically included in the
inspection; however signs of termites were identifies in several end
7
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
buildings and the life guard tower. Potential dry rot and some exposed
rebar was also observed at the Ruby's Dinner.
4.1.2 Substructure Inspection
The substructure was inspected by boat at a relatively high tide (+6.0), by
free divers (in the surf zone), and by land. The results are summarized below:
• Stringers - No noticeable damage to the stringers was recorded. Several
of the stringers were replaced as part of the recently completed deck
replacement, Phase 1.
• Pile Caps -Prior inspection (HPA 2002) noted "the pile caps exhibited
some light to moderate checking". This is consistent with M8~N findings;
however, no additional concerns were noted. Pile caps are often subject
to dry rot; however, this is often difficult to identify by observation alone. It
is recommended that when decking replacement is performed, cores be
taken at a random interval or where any concems, such as dark stains or
"fuzz", are observed.
Cross Bracing -Most cross bracing was in satisfactory condition. A few
braces are marginal and should be replaced as construction allows.
There is one location in the surf
zone with broken longitudinal
braces.
• Connecting Hardware -Several of
the connections show signs of
wear and rust. This is most.
pronounced in the surf zone.
Photo C shows an example of a
cross bracing bolt with significant
corrosion.
• Boat Landings -The tops of several fender and guide piles have signs of
dry rot. Two guide piles at Boat Landing No. 1 have had a sealant
material applied to the top of the pile. The top of these piles, below the
8
Photo C -Corroded Bolts
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
seal, has lost the majority of its section apparently from dry-rot. This is
consistent with the findings of the previous report. These piles were
drilled to determine the extent of the rot. The most northerly pile was
observed to have extensive core damage; however, the exterior is still
relatively sound. The metal guide plates were in fair condition, with minor
chaffing. The most northerly plate on Landing No. 1 has some chaffing
damage as well.
4.7.3 Pier Pile Inspection
The piles in the dry were inspected from the beach. Ocean piles were
inspected by scuba divers supported by a boat crew. The diving conditions were
generally favorable. Most diving was performed a relatively high tide (+6.0) with
surf zone piles being inspected from the shore at a low tide (+0.0). The results
are summarized below:
• Underwater Pier Piles -The timber piles in the tide zone have a protective
wrap of polyethylene which generally extends to a few feet above the high
tide line (Elev. 9.0 to 11.0). The piles are in serviceable condition and
without indications of loss of capacity. However, damaged, loose, missing
or short wraps were observed in approximately a dozen piles.
• Shoreward Piles -Shoreward piles were in generally satisfactory to good
condition. There is one pile at Bent 15 that is questionable. It appears the
City has also had concerns on this pile and had placed red ribbon around
it. There is evidence of prior coring on this pile. Another identified
concern is a short pile wrap in a potential surf zone (Bent 24).
It is noted that the inspection was completed in early fall, prior to winter
sand erosion. Elevation from top of deck to beach at Bent 24 is 21'-6"
4.1.4 Utilities
The utilities are predominately supported under the deck in the utility
corridor on the north side of the Pier. Their general condition was assessed by
visual inspection. No testing of any of the utilities was performed.
9
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
• Fire Water -Fire water is supplied to the pier by a 6-in. steel pipe with
services to stand pipes along the pier. Overall, the pipe itself is in fair
shape, but moderate to significant corrosion exists at many points, with
the worst conditions being observed in the surf zone and shoreward.
The backflow preventer/fire riser at Bent 1 exhibits light to moderate
corrosion (see Photo D). Downstream of the riser, the pipe is concealed
by planking, with cutaways at low points in the pipe where there would
otherwise be interference with the planks
At these locations where it is possible to see the flanged joints, significant
corrosion is visible (see Photo E, Bent 14 between grid lines G & I).
Further downstream, the planking ends and the line are easily seen.
Again, the piping itself appears to be in fair condition for the most part, but
moderate to significant corrosion exists at or near the flanged joints (see
Photos F and G).
10
Photo D -Backflow Preventer Photo E -Flange
Photo G -Flanoe Con'osion
Photo F -Flanoe Corrosion
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
Piping supports for the 6" fire water line show moderate corrosion in most
cases (see Photo G, and there is evidence of repairs to the line, assumed
to have been made after the
Domestic Water -Domestic water is supplied by a 2" PVC line.
appears to be in good
condition, with light
corrosion observed at
The line
some hangers and
supports. At the fish
cleaning sink at Bent 62,
the 3/4" combination
' galvanized steel/PVC
water line to the sink is
unsupported (see Photo
J).
• Sewage - A 4" PVC line provides for wastewater discharge. The line
appears to be in good condition, with light corrosion observed at some
hangers and supports.
• Power/Communication -Electrical and service conduits are located in the
pier including a 4" PVC power distribution line. Several electrical conduits
and loose lines were observed, predominately at the end of the Pier (see
photos 10 & 14. What appears to be a broken light fixture is dangling from
its cable between fender piles at Bent 78 under the southeast corner of
11
Photo J - Unsuoaorted Waterline
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
the old bait and tackle building (see Photo K). Light to medium corrosion
was observed on hangers and supports. A loose support was observed
between Bents 25 & 26 (see Photo L).
~r
(~
P.
• Gas - A steel gas line is located outside the pier, on the north face. It
supported by uni-strut connections attached to the north edge girders.
This facility was constructed in the late 1990's as part of the pier fire
repairs. It is generally in good condition with the exception of a few
locations where it has lost support, as in this location at Bent 21 (see
Photo M). In some areas the wrapping is moderately worn and frayed
(see Photo N at Bent 62).
Photo N - Pioe Wrap
• Lighting -Lighting fixtures on the topside of the pier appear to be in good
' condition. One of the caps on a power receptacle mounted on a light pole
on the north side of the pier at Bent 76 was missing at the time of the
inspection.
12
Photo L - Suoaort
Photo K -Cable
Photo M -Gas Lost Suooort
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
4.2 COMPARISON OF PREVIOUS INSPECTION RESULTS
The plans developed in this previous inspection were used during this
inspection for comparison. The follow (partial) list of repair recommendations is
taken from the 2002 inspection:
• replace the six broken stringers
• encapsulate the bottom of Pile 42-J with concrete
• repair broken cross braces
repair leaking utility
• replace damaged utility hangers
• replace approximately five firewater line "Ts"
replace approximately four waterline valves
• repair pile wraps
• deck and guard railing repairs
• connecting hardware repair
boat landing pile chafing plate repairs
• installation of pile top caps
termite treatment & replace damaged timber
Through the results of this inspection, it appears virtually all of the major
recommended repairs are shown in the 2002 report were completed. This
' includes bracing repairs and pile wrap repairs. Some 2002 identified items
including rusted connections and railing repair may not have been addressed
and may have progressed further.
It should be noted the 2002 inspection report ident~ed several similar
issues as identified by this inspection. While most of these were completed, it is
likely these will be continuing issues that should be addressed during future
inspections.
4.3 Structural Condition Assessment
The Pier is assessed with a Fair to Satisfactory rating based on ASCE
recommendations. This overall condition rating based on the observed
conditions including the completion of the majority of repairs identified in the
2002 inspection report. This rating indicates the condition of the entire structure
13
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
and its ability to perform its intended function; not every element making up the
structure may meet the requirements of the overall rating.
The following table describes the criteria for determining ratings.
TABLE 2-4 Routine Underwater Condition Assessment Ratings'
ROUTINE CONDITION ASSESSMENT RATINGS
Rating
Description
6 Good No visible damage or minor damage is noted.
Structural elements may show very minor deterioration, but no
overstressing is observed.
No repairs are required.
5 Limited minor to moderate defects or deterioration are observed, but no
Satisfactory overstressing is observed.
No repairs are required.
4 Fair All primary structural elements are sound, but minor to moderate defects or
deterioration is observed.
Localized areas of moderate to advanced deterioration may be present but
do not significantly reduce the load-bearing capacity of the structure.
Repairs are recommended, but the priority of the recommended repairs is
low.
3 Poor Advanced deterioration or overstressing is observed on widespread portions
of the structure but does not significantly reduce the load-bearing capacity
of the structure.
Repairs may need to be carried out with moderate urgency.
2 Serious Advanced deterioration, overstressing, or breakage may have significantly
affected the load-bearing capacity of primary structural components.
Local failures are possible and loading restrictions may be necessary.
Repairs may need to be carried out on ahigh-priority basis with urgency.
1 Critical Very advanced deterioration, overstressing, or breakage has resulted in
localized failure(s) of primary structural components.
More widespread failures are possible or likely to occur, and load
restrictions should be implemented as necessary.
Repairs may need to be carried out on a very high priority basis with strong
urgency.
'ASCE Underwater Investigations Standard Practice Manual
14
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
4.4 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on this inspection, the Seal Beach Pier has some concems that
need to be addressed. Following is a summary of the recommended actions,
listed by priorities. Several of these concerns are not critical and can be
scheduled as future repairs.
Immediate Repairs -Repairs that should be completed as soon as
possible include repairs to'the wraps to avoid infestation of marine borers, broken
bracing to provide full lateral capacity, and termite treatment. Several
significantly damaged railings should be replaced with treated lumber. Loose
utilities should be reattached, even if the element is no longer operational.
Loose, uneven, or gapping deck boards should be repaired. Figures 6 and
Figure 7 in the Appendix - A show concept repair details.
Priority Repairs -Several repairs can be scheduled within the next five
years as budgetary constraints allow. These include replacement of the non-
critical termite damaged rails and benches, replacement of corroded connection
hardware, and rehabilitation/repairs of elements noted as marginal in the
inspection report. Some of these repairs may also be deferred to a later date is
closely monitored.
Additional Inspection -Inspection of the caps and stringers should be
incorporated into the deck replacement program. This can be completed with an
inspector working with the contractor's removal operations. In addition,
inspection of the pier building should be performed.
Future Pier Inspection - Assuming the recommended repairs are
completed, a future inspection should be performed in approximately five years.
This is consistent with the ASCE Standards of Practice which recommends a
maximum interval of five years between underwater inspections for wrapped
timber piles in an aggressive environment. It is recommended that future
inspections are performed in the early spring, when sand erosion is greatest.
15
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
5 STRUCTURAL CAPACITY RATING
Previous analysis by Moffatt & Nichol concluded the pier has the capacity
to for H10 loading. (ASSTHO 20 kip vehicle with max rear axle load = 16 kips)
This was approximately the same result estimated by HPA in the 2002
assessment report (Appendix E) which indicates an axle load capacity of 18.5
kips = H11.5. The deck upgrade under the current program provides a stiffer
and stronger decking than the historic Douglas Fir decking; however, code
distribution of loads would not be affected, hence the rating would be the same.
Based on the inspection results, we do not believe any change in capacity rating
is warranted and rating should be limited to H10 or equivalent vehicles.
16
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
Appendix A-Plans and Sections
I ~
_._ __. _
. _ -
I
--- . __. _
PLAN
19 24 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
III
,~,/ 80 82
~ i i
ELEVATION
Figure 1
NOTE:
•NOVEMBER 13, 2006
100 0 100 200
-, 25'
Figure 2
TYPICAL PIER SECTION ~Al
1/7'-1'-C
TYPICAL SECTION AT PLATFORM AREAS /B1
T-- ~---r-- -rt----t --- -- --- --- -- - -
G -- - --- - - -- --- -_- _--- --- ---- -_- --
-- - --- -- -- --- --- - -
1 ~ ____-
CX~1 (M)
MW YISSSYO OI SNM
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 xw~xa 21
2° 22 23 ~ 24 4
NMYIXNL POST IEO flAp X.IMIIAI POST w
9LT Ym 9PIli
- - _ - - - - - C 6 C
~_ - - - _ - - ~~ - G~ - - -
--~--- --~-- _.--.~-_-i ~
-
- E E __
-
-_~
_ -_
+~4 ! ~ ~-
-- -- -- ---
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - --
_ _ _ -- --- -
_ _ _ _ -- c
H _
_ c
-_ -
_
Y ~
1 i _ _
__ _ i
11lE CORY09OI1 `YMONK i1MF
LEGEND:
4 Q Brakan a4Ngar T lada8m wlw
6mnagN crm Woe• v mbeing • PO• Cancem
Q PO• wop domoged n mleeing 4 FFe IN• Cwroalm
0 LavN II NryPelNn ParhXmad 4 prli hoard
O Low dedun9 D FdIN ewMN soppcrt
g Nand raY eanneellon / Photo NumEer
Figure 3 ~' - °' 2" '°'
SCALC: 1"=20~
WOID 9adQ Blip¢X
-T_-_T_-_T_-_~-_T_~_-_T_-_T-_7-_-~_-_T__T_!?__T-_-
Figure 4
LEGEND.
Q Brekan elrnya T ledolbn vdr.
Oamog.d avv brace a mledng • Pil. Canc.m
Q PII..rap damaged a ma.Fg p Fk. Iln. CaraNm
0 L.vA 1 N.p.ellan PerlarmM 4 O.d~ board
O l...e elacklny n Faled candurt .appal
g Xond roY cann.cllon 1 Plwla Nun$.r
20' 0' 20' 10'
s~~~: ,~~=ZO'
BOl1T IANDIND N0.1
60
~___~_~
MY pOT (YNDID
r--_-r---i-
1. M
Figure 5
LEGEND:
Q Brakvn vlrNgr J Ivdelbn rdve
Damaged ciao brae r mlealn9 • Pdv Cacrn
Q Ple wop damopad r mlannp 4 ikv Ihv Corroela
0 LM II Fvpvclla prlamad 4 Deck bmtl
O Leee Notldnp D Folad anduli vupprl 2U' lP 20~ ~D'
g hand rel eonneclia i Phole Numbr
~I ~IDDII pEIX Ylglp XNL ~ ~ I I L1Rl~PPMipE M.Tf110XE ~ TDiYNE DINAfE /]2
1{141f M¢ MM p 1V
T a1a Al aC W R+*1
¢ao ¢ao
® ®
xio pploie xla auao
RTpI RTA
nus ® ¢ua
IY 9RT YY B¢T
In*I lTM
Y- r e•-Ir I - r r-lo Ip' I r-lo I/!' I v-w IR' r-lo In'
C E G I B D F H J
TRANSVERSE CROSS BRACING DETAIL 1 TRANSVERSE CRO33 BRACING DETAIL 2
IA'•1'-C 1/r-1'-C
¢+ao
wo RAYa¢ aAaR iM m
6 pal Qg1Y paa aFI
6 +a!
6+Ip0 WYTflZ aeaa ITP1
p
/~ C _--o
C~F.~
~~
~
C
W{
/
~ SE/IL EAOI PFR
RgI11RE RFA rISPEf.'110N
'~ OCTOBER S00!
~~ •' , .. "' ,~ MOFFATTAMCHOL REPAIR OETAL9 NO 1
Figure 6
LONGITUDINAL CROSS BRACING 3
1O1°~~.~7w c.~s 1°®°
"'° ° ~"~°d,~v~ ~°
"+-'+
--
ale'-Y-O• ~.. A lue~
x. rauRE e
' _
. . a
,xae !!! [ MMil1 Y!
OIIIiM ILLI[111M{(
I ,x~1 !u r
uwn
u
~
1 a
f
r
IWGMWL. YIM
• LxIMIMMI xM W Ml
!x[I PLLIEMIIOE KI IA•. l1T IIR1
I OIGYIFIOIYIL XYItl . I / f0lDliroE
~ NIIMY Iw! • ~ -
6110 YW ~~
-~r. ,
a
M ]I. Q BMO ~ .1 ,• MMNY xM. L Y.T.IL•/_!' IMM
• ieW om InM - Glr K Mi o roar
i L scar lr rr~ as
YJy I¢W MK IMi L e G ®! 6lmr
w[ ua¢r m s i 01xL IMM.to Ml I Ir ImxM! wow
YR.Wm I !YY YM~ Y$'
e611NFYlYE 10.11 1.
sa YML ee l1.1® T
~1w11M1 Y u not L Y.Y . 1!-Y Mx uxcw
NL OIG:S IILI !M6 m •f Iµrt01LO e.11M~ M
IMY SF4 EIIFMI
I !!C NM IGEY IIO
I e[I!@I LOlao Ll -
OH16M! Gx!!CI MM b1Y
SECTION A rr• ro!r • r-Y m wlxxu aLr xYS
I
1 1ry•-1•-s aim wna11
IMI
- I r• MYiYY
I F
~ -_ ~_
Y.1!•
auwrz wrzwn Mo 1 b
- k•. Mxr IrR)
elMUU lrlm Y!
axn xY eml melMa -_ __ _
~'~ I eMle11
I
I
i
0
4
r
I o
~
~~
I
1y 11
rm o
O~ii ms: oMn w
t le-r wxux 1
YI OIx o
PILE WMP DETAIL 7
IAA-ea
e W W DRAIL DETAIL
r-re
1 Crfl
.~ ~enQ~eccQ,
~
~ _~~~
~ ROYIINE PRII NeiPEC11011
1 OCIOfiFIf 400!
+t
1 ®® MORRATT&MCIIOL uYMn cerMLa xo!
py
•1 1 I U ~G /
~ e~ i¢. iu m ! i°° air-x.
'1 n,
,
rim Muunei
_
,
,,, _
~ ... i . i
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
Appendix B -Photographs
Y
V
d
C
V
O
a
Y
Q
L
a
Y
U
d
C
O
3
v
0
L
a
N
a
V
d
C
Y
u
v
D
C
W
a
0
..
0
r
a
N
a
z
m
d
c
Y
u
d
0
C
W
d
i
a
0
0
L
a
N
V
.~
Y
N
a
c
_c
N
d
f0
n
.~.
O
L
a
Y
u
v
0
C
O
3
Y
L
d
a
N
Y
u
v
O
d
z
.~
n
0
L
d
~+
a
Y
u
d
D
LL
0
N
a
Y
O
L
d
~Q_ ra uo~ ~~e
~~ ~~ ~°~ ~-~-GAL---- -~~: ~ =~: ~ ~ ~a~ ~o
m
E
m
0
v
Y_
E
L
d
Y
3
L
V
C
m
L
Y
0
fn
m
0
O
L
d
a
m
m
E
m
D
m
Y
~~
d
L
3
z
U
c
m
m
r
r
N
N
T
a~+
t
a
v
m
m
E
d
E
L
L
a+
~3
L
u
C
d
m
L
Y
H
I
en
O
r
O
L
a
v
m
m
E
m
0
v
E
L
d
F
L
Y
3
L
u
c
m
m
L
Y
7
N
V
M
Y
0
t
a
~~~~ ~ ~ ~ a ~°~ ~~'~
a
m
E
m
0
m
~..
E
9
C
N
C
r
LL
M
Y
t
d
Y
d
0
a
m
Y
0
«~.
O
L
a
.~
z
rn
M
y
L
a
.~
C
.~
m
10
E
m
0
m
..
.~
L
d
m
air
O
L
a
N
T
L
7
C
Y
f~
E
.`
v
N
f0
LO
a
0
O
L
a
r
u
c
m
m
v°
Y
0
t
a
d
tl0
R
E
f0
0
d
Y
E
v
~"~
b
ui
a~+
O
L
a
.~
z
t
v
c
m
m
I
m
y
O
r
a
Y
N
d
N
~O
Y
Q
t
a
.~
v
c
m
x
t
a
v
Y
l0
e'I
Q
~..
m
C_
C
f~
J
Of
Y
L
a
v
m
C7
0
z
v
c
m
J
M
r
a
~, ~, ~ ~ y ~ ~~~~
a
N
.~
Q
Q
L
d
a.+
d
N
.~
m
ate.
0
L
a
a
.~
z
a
0
r
a
y
a
N
G
Y
L
a
r'
1i h
~: ~~ ,4 l
. ~ j`'~
e.; :\ y .
N
d
.~
~.
n
ate.
Q
t
a
a+
N
d
fh
n
O
0
L
d
.q
L
N
n
r
t
d
o- i ~ C• ! - ~ ~ a ~
N
i+
LL
N
r
N
7
M
a
Y
L
a
N
V
m
C
.`
d
L
L
A
L
U
.ti
~V
V
t
a
d
V
N
m
C
d
Y
O
m
I
~+
O
L
a
N
C
0
Y
d
C
C
V
d
Y
N
7
OC
I
rn
a
Y
Q
L
a
u
m
m
c
Y
O
to
0
a~+
0
L
a
v
v
m
L
m
C
d
Y
O
V
CO
O1
Y
Q
L
a
~~ v
~r,A i
m
C
Y
m
N
0
0
..
0
r
a
d
u
A
L
m
d
Y
V
[O
ei
Y
O
L
a
.Q ~ ~~ O. I ~EY `
~JI~fW° ~JISUl:fl.~L~~ :a ° ~ ~ ~ ~ 'a ' ~ o.
N
i+
0
m
v
N
Y
Q
L
a
d
u
A
m
3
m
Z
O
O
O
L
a
m
'u
m
V
LG
'O
d
u
m
n
d
0
Y
L
a
N
6/
O
[L
'O
m
N
7
C
O
y
O
t
a
o- ~ ~ O ` i j~
m
Y
u
0
m
m
N
0
J
a~+
O
L
a
m
u
m
m
3
d
2
O
Y
t
d
N
N
O
O
L
a
Y
L
a
a ~ a ~IX
Cllx.tL:.IC~J~5V l.:~R.5W17 ~ E ~ B ~ ®~ ` + 0;
v
d
.~
a
v
z
a
m
c
.`
Y
N
a
v
m
m
a
m
s
d
m
c
.`
..
N
W
a~.
0
L
a
00
C
Y
u
O
iO
io
C
.~
10
O
ate.
O
L
a
C
Y
u
0
m
N
0
0
J
N
.~
a
~~
N
Y
0
m
d
V
N
7
C
M
01
a
Y
0
t
a
N
d
00
C
.`
Y
H
d
L
L
_~
U
ti
a
.~.
O
t
4
d
V
f0
V
m
C
a
Y
O
fL
a
0
0
L
a
N
C
O
i:+
u
N
C
C
d
N
7
2'
I
rn
a
a~+
O
L
a
00. ~ ! ~ : ~ o-
d
u
m
m
c
Y
O
O7
O
O
L
a
v
m
m
c
m
Y
t0
rn
a
0
t
a
V
3 ~
f0
C
Y
O
fn
I
N
0
0
Y
Q
t
a
W
u
m
m`
c
d
Y
O
m
I
.i
Y
r
a
o• `~`
:E; ~ e
N
Y
m
v
d
Y
N
7
C
O
O
O
L
a
w
V
10
m
3
a~
Z
O
N
O
O
t
a
m
"u
10
L
m
a
m
u
10
a
d
C
O
N
a~•
O
L
a
N
V
m
m
i+
N
7
K
I
O
a~+
0
z
a
t.:J~v.n.f 'C. lm ~ a
m
Y
u
O
fG
W
N
s
N
O
O
O
t
a
a
u
m
m
3
v
a
0
0
0
t
a
N
~~-.
O
L
a
V
L
a
.a- IQ ~
a
.~
a
L
d
00
C
.~
a+
a0
ate.
O
L
d
V
d
.~
d
d
K
d
Oq
C
.`
a+
H
O
O
L
d
00
C
Y
u
0
m
m
c
.~
m
0
.~.
0
L
d
C
Y
V
O
fL
d
N
O
O
J
„i
O1
O
a+
O
L
d
^ fi~ i +y'05Y 6 _ ~ ~~ ~~~
a
..
3
m
v
c
a
m
3
m
0
0
J
~D
Y
0
L
a
a
m
3
v
N
J
M
N
O
O
L
a
a
m
3
d
N
Q
s
L
d
L
3
0
C7
v
C
.~
n
C
0
..
0
L
a
v
m
m
m
d
a
Y
L
a
0
z
a
v
'a
a
M
L
a
a
v
a
c
m
d
U
n
C
Y
t
d
t
Y
3
0
L
l9
v
c
.y
m
v
N
0
L
a
d
'a
d
C
io
L
U
a
0
..
0
r
a
v
a
v
w
c
m
v
u
i
a°a
a
M
Q
L
a
Y
C
m
F
J
N
N
y
O
L
a
v
a
u
0
a
0
r
a
on
c
Y
V
d
3
v
c
m
m
a
'a
a
v
.~.
0
L
a
Y
N
a
J
L
d
++
3
0
0
L
a
v
a
'a
a
a
a
a
c
to
O
0
L
a
N
d
3
d
N
J
ate.
O
L
a
m
N
0
J
d
Q
'a
a
w
c
0
Q
M
t
a
yN
0
a
a
N
d
a
'a
N
~-/
w
O
L
a
a
3
d
N
0
J
r
a
~~ ~. .e ~ i ,. Fc L`t~L'1
N
Ol
L
3
v
N
0
J
N
.~
O
d
N
d
V
3
d
N
0
v
0
«.
0
r
a
N
L
3
m
N
O
m
0
Y
L
a
W
u
L
00
J
d
N
0
J
n
N
Y
0
L
a
w
a
'a
v
c
m
Y
0
L
a
I _~ • .
~~~a ~°~ ~ ~~ ~~
N
C
0
V
u
v
c
c
a
U
N
d
7
f0
N
Q.
a
«.
0
r
a
N
C
O
Y
u
v
c
c
a
u
N
v
7
f~
L
d
N_
N
Q
r
O
t
a
.~
d
Y
f0
3
m
0
a
a
N
C
N
N
N
L
a
C
'a+
u
a
c
c
0
U
N
f0
L
d
N_
0
N
O
Y
L
d
ema ~ Y ~~~
d
a
'a
v
v
Y
N
N
Y
L
a
L
a
a
N
a
N
a~+
L
a
v
a
'a
v
C
10
H
O
Q
L
a
v
m
c
0
v
_~
0
N
a
N
7
G
N
M
O
L
a
'+Oi n~L7VJL7
d
a
.a
c
c
m
..
H
O
y
O
L
a
w
a
.a
v
c
m
M
H
V
0
t
a
v
a
'a
f0
H
Y
O
L
a
w
u
N
a~+
m
LL
n
N
L
a
d
N
O
O
J
N
.~
C
'a
a
m
3
N
N
Q
L
a
V V~VYJ~ ~'Q~~ Y~ ti } E k0.
r: ~ ` Lam' ''-~L'e ~ - ®_ .: •p~ :.~.::a
d
0
..
L
N
a~+
7
a
m
ao
n
0
L
a
m
m
O
..
7
t
N
O
Y
Q
N
n
0
t
a
d
u
2
d
N
v
r
m
3
v
I
b
n
O
L
a
a
LL
N
W
N
0
L
a
m
u
.2
W
H
L
d
N
3
d
LL
0
Y+
0
L
a
v
M
C
W
a
3
0
Y
u
m
m
n
0
L
a
w
m
c
m
LL
lD
Y
t
a
v
a
a
c
m
Y
N
O
a+
O
L
a
m
a
a
v
m
0
a
a
c
N
O
L
a
N
++
O
d
a
w
a
a
m
0
+r
O
L
a
d
d
.a
C
m
Y
H
fh
0
Y
L
a
0~0
C
m
LL
00
00
a
41
t
a
w
a
a
v
c
m
n
O
L
a
d
m
C
10
LL
v
v
r
N
7
C
V1
01
O
Y
L
a
Y
N
O
J
Q
a
a
N
A
rn
Y
L
d
N
C
O
'a+
u
d
c
c
O
U
01
O
M
t
a
N
C
O
.y
u
d
c
c
u°
~D
Y
d
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
Appendix C -Inspection Data
Seal Beach Pier Inspection Summary October 2008
Location Issue Recommendation Comment
Bent 1
Span 1
Deck 1
Misc 1
Bent 2
Span 2
Deck 2
Misc 2
Bent 3
Span 3 Previous damage to stringers
from below
OK
Deck 3
Misc 3
Bent 4
Span 4
Deck 4
Misc 4
Bent 5
S an 5
Deck 5
Misc 5
Bent 6
S an 6 Previous damage to stringers
from below (Repaired)
OK
Deck 6
Misc 6
Bent 7
S an 7
Deck 7
Misc 7
Bent 8
S an 8
Deck 8
Misc 8
Bent 9
S an 9
Deck 9
Misc 9
Bent 10
San 10
Deck 10
Misc 10
Bent 11
San 11
Deck 11
Misc 11
Bent 12
San 12
Deck 12
Misc 12
Bent 13
S n 13
Deck 13
Misc 13
Bent 14
Inspactlon Summary-Finalxls 1 Of 8
Seal Beach Pier Inspection Summary October 2008
Location Issue Recommendation Comment
Span 14
Partial Split in Rail Post Monitor. Replace at next
o portuni
M
Deck 14
Misc 14
Bent 15 Marginal Transverse Brace Re lace at next o portuni R2
ent 15
Span 15
Deck 15 Pile 15C appears marginal.
South side appear to have dry
rot. There is evidence of
previous cores.
Missin Nails on Center Raii
iscuss core findin s with Ci
Add nails
2
R1
Misc 15
Bent 16
San 16
Deck 16
Misc 16
Bent 17
San 17
Deck 17
Misc 17
Bent 18
San 18
Loose Blockin
Toenail in
R1
Deck 18
Misc 18
Bent 19
San 19
Deck 19
Misc 19 _
Bent 20
San 20
Loose Gas line.
Reconnect to su orts
R1
Deck 20
Misc 20
Bent 21
Span 21
Ma final two span brace.
Re lace at next o portunit
R2
Deck 21
Misc 21
Bent 22
Span 22
Deck 22
Misc 22
Bent 23
San 23
Deck 23
Misc 23
Bent 24 Pile 24B -Wrap is short appears
below hi h waterline
Extend Wra
R1
San 24
Deck 24
Misc 24
Bent 24a Piles E & G -Missing nails in
wra
Add nails
R1
Span 24a
Deck 24a
Misc 24a Loose bottom rail north side Renail R1
Inspection Summery-Finel.xla 2 of g
Seal Beach Pier Inspection Summary October 2008
Location Issue Recommendation Comment
Bent 25 Pile 25 C Wrap missing at cross
brace
Extend Wrap
R1
San 25
Deck 25
Deck Boards checkin !s lit Monitor. Replace at next
op ortuni
M
Misc 25
Bent 26
San 26
Deck 26
Misc 26
Bent 27
Span 27
Deck 27
Misc 27
Bent 28
Bent 28 Bents 28-38 Corrosion on Bolts
(Onion)
Monitor. Repair at op ortuni
R2/M
Span 28
Deck 28 Slit Board Sand/fill if needed R1
Misc 28
Bent 29 Bents 28-38 Corrosion on Bolts
(Onion)
Monitor. Re air at opportuni
R2/M
Span 29
Deck 29
Misc 29
Bent 30 Bents 28-38 Corrosion on Bolts
(Onion)
Monitor. Repair at o portuni
R2/M
Span 30
Deck 30
Misc 30 North Rail 30-33 Termites Treat R1
Bent 31 Bents 28-38 Corosion on Bolts
(Onion)
Monitor. Re air at o porluni
RZ/M
S an 31
Deck 31
Misc 31 North Rail 30-33 Termites Treat Ri
Bent 32 Bents 28-38 Corrosion on Bolts
(Onion)
Monitor. Repair at op rtuni
R2/M
Span 32
Deck 32
Misc 32 North Rail 30-33 Termites Treat R1
Bent 33 Bents 28-38 Corrosion on Bolts
Onion
Monitor. Repair at o ortuni
R2/M
S an 33
Deck 33
Misc 33 North Rail 30-33 Termites Treat R1
Bent 34
Bents 28-38 Corosion on Bolts
Onion)
Monitor. Repair at o ortuni
R2/M
Span 34
Deck 34
Misc 34
Bent 35 Bents 28-38 Corrosion on Bolts
(Onion)
Monitor. Re air at opportuni
R2/M
S an 35
Inapeclion Summery-Finalxls 3 of 8
Seal Beach Pier Inspection Summary October 2008
Location
Deck 35 Issue Recommendation Comment
Misc 35
Bent 36
S an 36 Bents 28-38 Corroslon on Bolts
(Onion)
Broken Lon itudinal Brace
Monitor. Repair at o portuni
Replace
R2/M
R1
Deck 36
Misc 36
Bent 37
Span 37 Bents 28-38 Corrosion on Bolts
(Onion)
Monitor. Re air at o portuni
R2/M
Deck 37
Misc 37
Bent 38
Span 38 Bents 28-38 Corrosion on Bolts
Onion)
Monitor. Repair at opportuni
R2/M
Deck 38
Misc 38
Bent 39 Pile 39D -Top Wrap Lose above
waterline
Repair
R1
Pile 39B -Top 18' of wrap
missing
Re lace/Re air
R1
Span 39
Deck 39
Misc 39
Bent 40
San 40
Termites in Life uard tower Pertorm full inspection of
building
O
Deck 40
Misc 40
Bent 41
San 41
Deck 41
Misc 41 Charred south rail Monitor M
ent 42
Span 42 Previous - 2'
crack in
wrap42:8 -NOT
OBSERVED
NOBS)
Deck 42
Misc 42
Bent 43
S n 43
Deck 43
Misc 43
Bent 44
San 44
Deck 44
Misc 44 Charted south rail Monitor M
Bent 45 Pile 45E Missin Wre Re lace/Repair R1
San 45
Deck 45
Misc 45
Inspectlon Summery-Final.xls 4 Of 6
Seal Beach Pier Inspection Summary October 2008
Location Issue Recommendation Comment
ent 46 Previous Pile
46E Wrap start
1' above mudline
(ML) NOBS
S an 46
Deck 46
Misc 46 Isolation Valve Monitor M
Bent 47
San 47
Deck 47
Misc 47
Bent 48
Span 48
Deck 48
Misc 48
Bent 49
Span 49
Deck 49
Misc 49
Bent 50
San 50
Deck 50
Misc 50
Bent 51 Pile 51E Damaged Wra Replace/Repair R1
S n 51
Deck 51
Misc 51
Bent 52
San 52
Deck 52
Misc 52
Bent 53
San 53
Deck 53
Misc 53 North Rail 30-33 Termites Treat R1
Bent 54
San 54
Deck 54
Misc 54
Bent 55 Pile 55E tom wrap above
waterline
R1
Bent 55 Blockin Slit? M
S n 55
Deck 55 Loose deck boards over utilities Replaces ikes R1
Misc 55
Bent 56 Pile 56G -Loose Wra Re airwra R1
Span 56
Deck 56
Misc 56
Split in Rail Post Monitor. Replace at next
opportuni
M
Bent 57
San 57
Deck 57
Mlsc 57
Bent 58
Inspection Summery-Fnal.xla 5 of 8
Seal Beach Pier Inspection Summary October 2008
Location
Span 58 Issue Recommendation Comment
Deck 58
Misc 58
Bent 59
San 59
Deck 59
Misc 59
Bent 60
Span 60
Deck 60
Misc 60
Bent 61 Plate at Fender Chaffed Monitor M
S an 61
Deck 61
Misc 61
Bent 62
Span 62
Deck 62
Misc 62 Unsup orted Waterline Provide Support R1
Bent 63 Gangway Pile (north) dry rot
undersea)
Monitor extent of rot.
M
Wrap on furthest fender pile
dams ed from ram
Monitor
M
San 63
Deck 63
Misc 63
Bent 64 Gangway Pile (north) dry rot
under seal
Monitor extent of rot.
M
Span 64
Deck 64
Misc 64
Bent 65
San 65
Deck 65
Misc 65
Bent 66
S n 66
Deck 66
Misc 66
Bent 67
Span 67
Deck 67
Misc 67
Bent 68
San 68
Deck 68
Misc 68
Bent 69
Span 69
Deck 69
Misc 69
Bent 70
San 70
Deck 70
Inapechan Summery-Final.xla 6 of 8
Seal Beach Pier Inspection Summary October 2008
Location Issue Recommendation Comment
Misc 70 Bents 70-82 evidence of termite
infestation in many locations of
rail and benches.
Treat all locations repair
damages.
R1
Bent 71
San 71
Deck 71
Misc 71 Bents 70-82 evidence of termite
infestation in many locations of
rail and benches.
Treat all locations repair
dama es.
R1
Bent 72 Discoloration at cap and stringer
near ile 72E. Could bed rot. Suggest remove deck to check.
Else monitor close)
M
Span 72
Deck 72
Misc 72 Bents 70-82 evidence of termite
infestation in many locations of
rail and benches.
Treat all locations repair
dama es.
R1
Bent 73
Span 73
Deck 73
Misc 73 Bents 70-82 evidence of termite
infestation in many locations of
rail and benches.
Treat all locations repair
dama es.
R1
Bent 74
San 74
Deck 74 Gap in Deck boards is about 1"
at trensition Fill with board or other to
narrow gap.
R1
Misc 74 Bents 70-82 evidence of termite
infestation in many locations of
rail and benches.
Treat all locations repair
dama es.
R1
Bent 75
San 75
Deck 75
Misc 75 Bents 70-82 evidence of termite
infestation in many locations of
rail and benches.
Treat all locations repair
dama es.
R1
Bent 76
San 78
Deck 76 Several loose bcards Re air R1
Misc 76 Rece tacle is missin cover Re lace Cover R1
Bents 70-82 evidence of termite
infestation in many locations of
rail and benches.
Treat all locations repair
dama es.
R1
Bent 77 Shoreward fender pile damaged
wre
Monitor
M
S an 77
Loose wires below deck Remove inactive or attached to
ier.
R1
No blockin Install blockin R2
Deck 77
Misc 77
Bent 78
Span 78 No blockin Install blockin R2
Active Water Leak Re it
Deck 78 Varying deck levels at utility
access
Level out
R1
InspeNon Summary-Finalxls 7 Of 8
Seal Beach Pier Inspection Summary October 2008
Location Issue Recommendation Comment
Bents 70-82 evidence of termite
infestation in many locations of Treat all locations repair
Misc 78 rail and benches. damages. R1
Ruby's appears to have termite Perform full inspection of
dama a and some d rot building O
Bent 79
Remove inactive or attached to
S an 79 Loose wires below deck pier. R1
Deck 79
Bents 70-82 evidence of termite
infestation in many locations of Treat all locations repair
Misc 79 rail and benches. dama es. R1
Bent 80
San 80 North Bracing S lit Re lace R1
Deck 80
Bents 70-82 evidence of termite
infestation in many locations of Treat all locations repair
Misc 80 rail and benches. damages. R1
Bent 81
Span 81 Loose and missing Blockin Toenail and re lace missin R1
Deck 81
Bents 70-82 evidence of termite
infestation in many locations of Treat all locations repair
Misc 81 rail and benches. dama es. R1
Fishing Platform Pile -Top dry
Bent 82 rot M
S an 82
Deck 82
Bents 70-82 evidence of termite
infestation in many locations of Treat all locations repair
Misc 82 rail and benches. dama es. R1
Inapecfion Summary-Fnaixls 8 of 8
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
Appendix D -Inspection Procedures
The purpose of the Pier Evaluation Survey and Assessment was to
determine the condition of the Pier and identify any needed restoration or
potential improvements. This assessment included the inspection of all pier
components, both above- and below-water, to develop information needed to
prepare construction documents. A field Work Plan was prepared for each aspect
of the site inspection based on available information and on Moffatt & Nichol's
general inspection reporting standards.
• Topside inspection included the pier decking, curbs, railings, and
appurtenances. It is anticipated that the City building officials will conduct
any necessary inspection of the building structures above the pier.
Underside inspection included inspection of the stringers, caps, bracing,
connections, concrete approach structures, piles above-water, utility
housings and supports, recessed platforms, and floating facilities.
• Underwater inspection included inspection of the submerged portion of the
Pier including bracing and piles. Underwater inspection was done in
accordance with the ASCE Standard Practice Manual for Underwater
Investigations. Diving practices were regulated by the Moffatt & Nichol
Diving Manual.
Above-Water Inspection -Topside
The topside inspection included inspections/observations of the entire
length of the Pier. The topside inspection was performed on awalk-through
reviewing structural elements, accessible facilities and utilities, including lighting.
Buildings were not included in the Scope of Work; however, termite damage was
observed in the buildings.
Above-Water Inspection -Underside
The above-water inspection involved all pier utilities, structural members
and appurtenances. The underside inspection included structural components,
appurtenances, and utilities below the deck.
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PEER 2008
The above-water inspection of the substructure was performed similar to a
routine inspection in accordance with ASCE Standard Practice Manual for
Underwater Investigations. Inspection was preformed from ground and water
level from a boat at a relatively high tide (+6.0) for bents 41-82. Bents within the
surf zone (29-41) were observed from the water by free divers. Shoreward Bents
(1-29) were observed from land. The focus was on visible signs of deterioration
or damage. If the team had found any areas of critical concern, the City would
have been immediately contacted to discuss options for a more extensive
inspection. However, no critical issues wen: observed. The inspection was
documented with field notes and digital photography.
Underwater Inspection
Prior to mobilizing dive operations, the Dive Supervisor completed a Job
Safety Analysis (JSA) in addition to technical preparation. The JSA assesses
diving objectives/operations and the project's physical environment to determine
potential hazards and mitigation measures.
The underwater inspection was performed as a Routine Inspection
(Condition Assessment) based on the ASCE's Underwater Investigations
Standard Practice Manual. The underwater inspection was performed from the
mudline to the high tide line and included the following three levels of effort:
• Level I - On 100% of the piles. Visual and/or tactile examination of all
surfaces, without removing marine growth. Tactile examination will
provide an indication of the integrity of the exterior of the piles.
• Level II - On 10% of the piles. Removal of marine growth at three levels
(mudline, low tide zone, and mid-height), and detailed examination of the
exposed substrate. For piles in less than 15-feet of water, only the mudline
and low tide zone levels will be examined.
Based on the generally favorable conditions observed, coring of the timber
piles (Level II I effort) was not performed.
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
Appendix E -Cost Estimates Summary
2ooa
Project: 3874-24 Seal Beach Pier Phase Inspec8on
Pre aced B Greer/O'Donnell
Date : 11/1512008
ITEM QUANTITY UNIT REM DESCRIPTION UNIT
PRICE TOTAL COST
1 '3; LS 20000 $20,000.00
Mob/Demob
2 ~ 800 $0.00
Timber Strin ers
Y
3 ~r 5$
SF
50
$2,500.00
Timber Deckin
4 8 E'0` 500 $3,000.00
Timber Cross Bracin
5 ~ 2000 $24,000.00
Re air Pile Wra
8 ~~ : LF furnish Pile (2 -Tentative) 30 $3,600.00
7 ~ ,,.2• EA Drive Pile (2 -Tentative) 5000 $10,000.00
Appurtenance
Re air
8 -'.' A1: ~.
~
°4 LS 5000 $5,000.00
-
-
• Miscellaneous hardware
9 ~1.' LS 10000 $10,000.00
,^if i.rs Termite Treatment
`~
10 LF 100 $30,000.00
~ Re lace Handrail
11 ~ LF Re lace Bench 150 $15,000.00
12 !. ~ LS 5000 $5,000.00
Leakin Water line re air
13 LS 5000 $5,000.00
~ U81i8es Re airs
14 LS 5000 $5,000.00
Misc re alr
SUB-TOTAL $138,100.00
Contingencies 20% $27,820.00
Construction Management 10% $13,810.00
TOTAL $179,530.00
Inflation/Area Factors (5 years) 3% $28,594.47
Miscellaneous 10% $17,953.00
SUB-TOTAL $226,077.47
PROJECT TOTAL COST $230,000.00
STRUCTURAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT INSPECTION REPORT
SEAL BEACH PIER 2008
Appendix F -List of Key Personnel
Citv of Seal Beach
David Spitz, Project Manager
Tel: 562-431-2577 x1331
Moffatt & Nichol. Lon4 Beach
Elizabeth Greer, PE, SE
Tom Spencer, PE, SE
James Crumpley, PE, SE
Michael Breitenstein, PE
Michael O'Donnell
Julia Hornby, PE
Off: 562-426-9551
Project Manager
Principal in Charge
Quality Control
Dive Coordinator
Cost Estimates
Mechanical Engineer
Moffatt & Nichol Inspection Team
Rod Whitsel, PE
Bob Sherwood, PE
Rob Sloop, PE
AJ Lee
Elizabeth Greer, PE, SE
Dan Martin
Diver/Tender
Diver/Tender/ Substructure
Diver/Tender
DiverlTender/Substructure
Super/Substructure
Super/Substructure/Utilities
Appendix G -References
ASCE (2001) ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice No. 101.
"Underwater Investigations Standard Practice Manual.
2. Don Hellmers Engineering (1983) "Seal Beach Municipal Pier
Restoration"
3. Han-Padron Associates (Jan. 2003). "Condition Assessment Report of
the Seal Beach Municipal Pier for the City of Seal Beach, CA.
4. Great Piers of Cal'dornia; Jean Fleming. Capra Press 1984.