Resolution No. 4814 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Eugene City Hall R32.19.04 Rev. B. September 9, 2003 o As the upgraded structure may rely upon both ductile components (new construction) and some marginal non-ductile components (existing construction), a drift compatibility analysis is suggested. This analysis would show how the new walls would perform at PGA = 0.30g (but no less than PGA = 0.225g) while keeping existing non-ductile columns at ductility demand levels that would not be too high for their style of construction. Local overloads at PGA = 0.30 g are acceptable as long as life-safety of the complete structural system is maintained. Table 5-1 list the costs associated with the structural upgrade of the City Hall complex, plus provides for construction contingency, engineering, project management and inspection. The total dollars in Table 5-1 are considered a more accurate figure than the individual line items; as detailed engineering is completed, the costs for individual items might increase / decrease, but the overall costs should be kept within this budget. Stmcture Cost ($2003) New Shear~alls, footings, tie beams, attachments - Assume 53 cubic yards of placed concrete average - Assume 16 new wall systems - Assume $600 / cubic yard placed concrete Construction cost = $600/yd x 53 yds * 16 walls $ 508,800 Allowance for Council Chambers $ 80,000 Initial testing program $ 20,000 Repair of finishes, allowance $ 100,000 Total $ 708,800 Contingency @ 30% $ 212,640 Total Construction $ 921,440 Engineering, PM, Inspection @30% $ 276,432 Total $ 1,197,872 Table 5-1. Costs for Structural Mitigation Table 5-2 lists the costs for the mitigation of the non-structural items outlined in Section 2 of this report. The order of items listed in Table 5-2 corresponds to the order in which the non-structural weaknesses are outlined in Section 2. The last two line items, for elevations and the emergency generator, were not observed during the site visit, so the cost allowances are based on the observations provided in the 1995 Berry report (ref. 1995b). Costs are also provided for construction contingency, engineering, project management and inspection. It is assumed that only a limited amount of the non- structural mitigations will be performed by facility maintenance staff using simplified design sketches; the bulk will be performed by an outside contractor with contract documents. Engineering inspection is required for all non-structural upgrades. The contingency allowance provides for some non-structural items that might not have been listed individually in Table 5-2. The total dollars in Table 5-2 are considered a more accurate figure than the individual line items; as detailed engineering is completed, the costs for individual items might increase / decrease, but the overall costs should be kept within this budget. G&E Engineering Systems Inc. Page 28