HomeMy WebLinkAboutDCI Bozeman Deaconess Hospital East Wall Site Visit 02.11.2022
February 11, 2022
Ben Abbey
Chief Building Official
City of Bozeman
20 East Olive St, PO Box 1230
Bozeman, MT 59715
Re: Field Visit –Bozeman Deaconess Hospital – East Wall
15 West Lamme Street, Bozeman, MT
Ben:
Andy Holloran contacted me and asked that I visit the above site to investigate the east wall of the
original Bozeman Deaconess Hospital (BDH) following the demolition of the Mountain View Care
Center. Matthew Hubbard (DCI), Andy Holloran (Home Base Partners), and Bryon (Omdahl
Excavation) were present on site at approximately 8:30am on February 11, 2022. Our visit was
requested due to concerns about the stability and integrity of the newly exposed portion of the east
wall of the original BDH building.
As noted in our Structural Conditions Assessment in 2020 as well as our Supplement to that report
in August of 2021: “The Mountain View Care Center (MVCC) was an addition to the original hospital
building and originally served as the extended care facility. When constructed, it appears the new
addition was built directly adjacent to the existing building with its own structure, creating a double
wall at the interface. Openings in the original building exterior wall were created to tie the spaces
together and presumably mechanical, electrical, and plumbing services pass between the buildings.
While we have not been able to observe this condition, we assume these buildings also bear on
separate foundation systems given the timing of their construction.”
Observations
· With the MVCC addition demolished, we observed that the addition was built adjacent to
BDH and there was a double wall condition with very little interconnectivity. The foundation
system, however, does not appear to be completely separate. Concrete foundation walls
appear to be integral to a large footing or slab system as noted at grade.
· Wall construction – We observed the newly exposed east wall consists of an exterior brick
wythe and interior hollow clay tile wythe. There does not appear to be any reinforcing,
grout, or other structural connectivity between the wythes or to the primary concrete
building frame.
· Different Brickwork – We immediately noticed that the newly exposed east wall is of a
completely different brick material than the rest of the hospital building. Our best
explanation is that when the hospital was originally built, an expansion was anticipated. In
construction of this period, cheaper brick material was often used where it would be
covered up or modified at a later date. Oddly, the south end has a straight vertical seam
between the two brick types with no brick interlock, inter-coursing, or tie courses for
stability and integrity. The north interface is tied in at a corner with typical brick coursing
interlock.
· Openings – None of the major openings at the main level or second level appear to have any
structure to them. Openings of this size would require steel angles or other header elements
coupled with some type of jamb structure. As noted in the photos, the edges of the brick
and hollow clay tile are jagged and exposed and no header elements are present to support
the brick above.
· Southeast Corner BDH – It was noted that some settlement appears to have occurred at the
southeast corner of the hospital building. The interface condition is also complex at this
location with multiple corners and materials. A portion of the MVCC walls and floor slab
concrete was left in place. Byron shared that careful attempts at demolishing this material
resulted in stress and displacements in the brick wall behind it.
· Water Damage – The low roof interface to the existing concrete wall appears to have
allowed water infiltration between the double wall assembly. Rust staining of the brick,
metal attachments, and what appears to be deterioration of the brick and mortar itself are
present.
Conclusion
It is our understanding that the original Bozeman Deaconess Hospital building was determined to be
“an unsafe structure and poses a dangerous condition to the public” in your report dated October 6,
2021. With the Mountain View Care Center addition demolished, we were able to observe the
actual building conditions at the interface. Based on our observations above, this wall furthers the
overall unsafe condition of the building and poses a significant threat to the local area around the
wall. The two large unreinforced openings at the ground level create a large, weakened zone and
inadequate support of the weight of the brick above. Additionally, this wall is very minimally tied
into the rest of the building over its three-story height. With no inter-coursing of the bricks on the
south end over the full height of the wall, significant unreinforced opens, brick deterioration, and
limited, to no structural attachment into the concrete frame structure, any excess forces on this wall
from a wind or seismic event could result in the wall collapsing. Shoring this wall would be
significant both in terms of effort and cost. Given the “unsafe structure” designation and planned
demolition of the building in the near term, it is our recommendation that demolition continue into
the hospital building. In the interim, the area surrounding the hospital building should be fully
secured and the public should not be within one building height horizontally of the newly exposed
portion of the east wall. Considering the partially demolished condition and the potential for
damage to have occurred during demolition, this façade will likely shed bricks and debris,
particularly during and following high wind events.
At this time, no further demolition should be performed in this area and no demolition to the
existing foundation system in this area should occur. The rubble and debris already on the ground in
the vicinity may be cleaned up by the contractor. However, work should proceed very carefully and
if high winds are forecasted, no work should be performed.
Sincerely,
DCI Engineers
Matthew Hubbard, PE, Principal
M O N TANA
HUBBARD
MATTHEW M.
No. 15864PEP
AION LOFES
SR S
REGI
E N G INEERR E DTE