The URL can be used to link to this page

SR 09-26-2023 5E City Council Report City Council Meeting: September 26, 2023 Agenda Item: 5.E 1 of 6 To: Mayor and City Council From: Rick Valte, Public Works Director, Public Works, Engineering and Street Services Subject: Award RFP to Moffatt & Nichol for the Pier Capital Plan, Inspections, Condition Assessment, and Design Services for the Necessary Repairs Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Sections 15301 and 15302 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and a finding of Statutory Exemption pursuant to Section 15252 of CEQA 2. Award RFP #SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol to provide structural engineering consulting and design services to develop a capital plan for necessary structural repairs and maintenance to the Pier and to prepare construction and bidding documents for projects identified in the plan. 3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Moffatt & Nichol in an amount not to exceed $1,498,819 (including a $120,000 contingency). Summary The City of Santa Monica previously completed a Pier Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study in 2018 and subsequent studies are recommended to be conducted every five to ten years. These studies are used to identify elements of the Santa Monica Pier (Pier) in need of repair or replacement, and they help staff develop capital projects and maintenance plans. Staff recommends Moffatt & Nichol to provide structural engineering consulting and design services to conduct an inspection and assessment of the Pier, develop a Pier Capital Plan, including the design of up to seven projects for an amount not to exceed $1,498,819. 5.E Packet Pg. 240 2 of 6 Discussion The Santa Monica Pier attracts an estimated nine million visitors annually and accommodates pedestrians and vehicles along with a multitude of different businesses. These diverse and constant uses combined with the harsh marine environment make the Pier susceptible to wear and tear that is more aggressive compared to other city infrastructure. The City has proactively managed the condition of the Pier by conducting studies and assessments that have led to ongoing capital improvement and maintenance projects. In both 2008 and 2018, the City completed assessments of the Pier which included reports that catalogued each structural component of the Pier and assigned them condition ratings (Attachments A & B). City staff used the reports to prioritize upgrades and developed several projects including the Santa Monica Municipal Pier Phase 4 Improvements, Pier Railing and Lighting Improvements, Pier Deck Upgrades Areas 2 & 10 (parking lot), and other smaller-scale projects, then hired consultants to design the projects, and subsequently contracted out the construction. While enabling the City to maintain the Pier, this multi-step process is lengthy and could be improved to realize efficiencies in capital improvement budget planning. The proposed Pier Capital Plan Project would improve the capital budget planning process. The consultant would perform a complete inspection of the Pier including underwater structural elements and would prepare a report documenting all findings. The consultant would then collaborate with City staff to develop final plans, specifications, and estimates for up to seven future projects. The future projects would group repairs based on a combination of urgency and location on the Pier. Staff would seek construction funding in upcoming Capital Improvement Program funding cycles. The consultant’s scope of work is comprised of four major tasks. The first task includes conducting above-water and underwater inspections of the Pier’s structural members, decking, and other components. Divers would be utilized to inspect underwater elements. Inspectors and engineers would assess above-water features. Results of the inspections would be documented, logged, and the information would be transcribed 5.E Packet Pg. 241 3 of 6 onto a GIS map layer. Upon completion of the field work and GIS map, a condition assessment report would be prepared. Under the second task, a capital improvement plan for the Pier would be developed. This plan would categorize the repairs based on priority ranges, including short term (1- 5 years) for more urgent repairs, long-term (5-10 years) for less severe issues, and deferred improvements (10-15 years) for non-critical work. The capital plan would serve as guidance when preparing the design packages of future capital improvement projects. The capital plan would determine the sequencing, phasing, and funding required to make the repairs identified in the first task. The consultant would prepare final plans, specifications, and estimates for up to seven projects as part of the third task. This includes geotechnical investigations, topographic surveys, structural capacity modeling and calculations, and support during construction bidding. Task four focuses on the preparation of a maintenance plan for the Pier. The maintenance plan would provide recommendations and instructions regarding preventive maintenance that can be handled by City staff. Vendor Selection Bidder Recommendation Best and Only Qualified Firm Moffatt & Nichol Evaluation Criteria Credentials/experience, competence/skill, capacity/ability to perform services promptly, work plans and approach, character/reputation, ability to provide services as needed and price. Municipal Code SMMC 2.24.190 Proposals Received Moffatt & Nichol RFP Data Posted On Posted On Advertised in (City Charter & SMMC) Vendors Downloaded Date Publicly Opened 5.E Packet Pg. 242 4 of 6 04/27/2023 City’s Online Bidding Site Santa Monica Daily Press 55 05/24/2023 Additional Vendor Outreach & Justification to Award The proposal was reviewed by a selection panel consisting of staff from the Engineering & Street Services and Public Landscape Divisions. The proposal evaluation was based on experience with structural and marine engineering projects, understanding/workplan and project approach, ability to deliver, quality of product, cost, and compliance with City requirements. Staff interviewed the only proposer. In addition, staff conducted outreach to other vendors who downloaded the RFP to understand why proposals were not submitted. Responses included: 1) the scope is too specific, and expertise is not available in marine and timber engineering, 2) too busy and no capacity to perform the work 3) no expertise with inspections of marine structures and 4) other work in the market was more rewarding. Staff also conducted an estimate for this work during the CIP process, the staff estimate lines up with the proposed costs by the vendor. Based on the evaluation criteria, staff recommends Moffatt & Nichol, as the best and only qualified firm to provide engineering services for the Project based on their extensive and prior experience in developing similar projects for other California agencies, including the cities of Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach, Oceanside, Seal Beach, Newport Beach, and the City of Santa Monica. Past Council Actions Meeting Date Description 03/06/2018 (Attachment C) Staff Report – Award RFP for the Pier Infrastructure Assessment Environmental Review The award for engineering consulting and design services for the Pier is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301Section 15302 of the CEQA Guidelines and is also statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies) of the 5.E Packet Pg. 243 5 of 6 CEQA Guidelines. Section 15301exempts Class 1 projects consisting of the "operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency’s determination." This exemption includes “existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities." Section 15302 exempts Class 2 projects consisting of the “replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities.” In addition, none of the exceptions specified in Section 15300.2 of CEQA Guidelines would apply that would preclude the use of this CEQA exemption: The Pier is not located in a sensitive environment; the award contract would not have a significant effect on the environment; would not damage scenic resources; would not be located on a hazardous waste site; and would not cause a change to a historical resource including the Santa Monica Pier as all materials would be replaced with the same material type and would look exactly the same. Section 15252 exempts feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions. The award agreement would provide a capital improvement plan, geotechnical investigations, and a maintenance plan for the Pier. Therefore, the award contract is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301 and Section 15302 and statutorily exempt pursuant to Section 15262. Financial Impacts and Budget Actions Staff seeks authority to approve available funding from the Pier Fund to award a contract with Moffatt & Nichol for structural engineering and inspection services of the Pier. Funds are available in the FY 2023-24 Capital Improvement Program Budget for this project. Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval. Agreement Request FY 2023-24 Request Amount CIP Account # Total Contract Amount $1,498,819 C5306750.689000 $1,498,819 Total $1,498,819 5.E Packet Pg. 244 6 of 6 Prepared By: Curtis Castle, Principal Civil Engineer Approved Forwarded to Council Attachments: A. 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study B. 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study C. March 6, 2018 Staff Report (Web Link) D. Oaks Initiative Form - Moffatt & Nichol E. OaksInitiative-wEx-Completed-081723 5.E Packet Pg. 245 5.E.aPacket Pg. 246Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.a Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 248Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 249Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 250Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 251Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 252Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 253Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 254Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 255Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 256Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Santa Monica Pier Architectural Conditions Assessment submitted by Wallace Roberts & Todd, LLC February 8, 20088 5.E.a Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) URBAN FURNISHINGS – TABLE OF CONTENTS Subsection Page Number Assessment and Methodology………………………………………………………………………………….10 Railings………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………11 Benches…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….14 Tables………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..16 Trash Receptacles……………………………………………………………………………………………………..18 Curbs…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………21 Decking ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….22 Lighting……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..24 Features……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………27 Quantitative Assessment Chart………………………………………………………………………………..34 Pier Sector Graphic……………………………………………………………………………………………………35 Existing Site Features…………………………………………………………………………………………………36 9 5.E.a Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Assessment and Methodology The Santa Monica Pier has been an iconic element of the city since the early 1900’s. It was and still is today a space where tourists and locals congregate to enjoy sunsets, entertainment, and activities featured on the pier. Despite the step grade, narrow sidewalks and high curb, thousands of people visit the Pier, by either walking, bicycling or driving on the Pier Bridge. They are welcomed by iconic signage that displays the Santa Monica name and logo and by informational Kiosks explaining elements on the pier to enjoy; such as the historic carousel, fi shing piers, entertaining performers and Pacifi c Park. The idea of the pier and the history that surrounds it sets a whimsical background for those who visit it. However, over many years of harsh coastal weather, unforeseen vandalism problems, a mish mash of replacement furniture, and a lost sense of style standards, the elements on the pier no longer present a cohesive atmosphere that tie all of the pier’s characteristic icons together. Pier Assessment and Methodology Development on the Pier has been guided by Santa Monica Pier Design Guidelines, adopted in 1987. These Guidelines address many features found on the Pier, but give only general guidance. WRT referred to these Guidelines during its assessment of current conditions, and noted where future recommendations about specifi c features would be warranted. It is WRT’s intent in the Architectural Conditions Assessment Report to assess the public amenities for their functional- ity, appearance, durability, comfort, sustainability and maintenance condition. Information and observations about these amenities will be the basis for more detailed recommendations to be formulated in coordination with the City and with input from the Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corporation and the public. The issues raised in this Report and the results of community input, will be further expanded upon and incorporated into the Sustainability Plan, the Maintenance Plan, the Lighting Plan and the Urban Design Plan. This section looks not only at urban furnishings, but opportunities to improve specifi c areas of the Pier to enhance the public’s enjoyment of this nationally recognized community, environ- mental and cultural resource. This assessment report provides the team’s analysis of the various site elements as they ap- peared during these site visits. The following elements were addressed: 1. Railings 2. Benches 3. Picnic Tables 4. Trash Receptacles 5. Curbs 6. Decking 7. Lighting Fixtures 8. Special Features The letter designations in the text refer to the Pier Sector Graphic. 4.10 5.E.a Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Railings Rail Type 1: Blue Metal Rail Location: Primary railing, used on pier perimeter Sector Graphic: (A, B, D, E, F, G) Number: Approximately 4,500 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Materials: The railing is constructed of 3 (sometimes 4) horizontal 2” diameter steel pipe rails, with 2” diameter steel tube posts and fi ttings. All metal tubing is painted blue and appears to have been painted multiple times. Stainless steel cables have been added in the horizontal direction, centered between metal rails to create the 4” minimum clearance required by code. However, code has been updated and vertical barriers at minimum 4” O.C. have not been added. Joints vary in diff erent sections of the railing; some are welded, while others are assembled with metal tees. Maintenance: Paint has been chipped and repainted multiple times. Rust appears where paint is missing, most typically in areas of concentrated fi shing activity. Metal rails require constant repainting to prevent rust, as rust can form wherever metal is exposed.* Functionality/Placement: The railing provides a safety barrier at the edge of the pier. However, the railing no longer meets current safety requirements as there are more than 4” square openings in the rail. Durability: Painted metal is a durable option for railing if rust is prevented. Sustainability: There is no evidence that this railing uses low VOC paint or a renewable material. Recycled content material should be considered for this application in the event of replacement. Comfort: While the rail provides a fairly transparent barrier to the ocean, the steel rail is not very comfortable to lean against. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 Rail Type 1: Socket Rail Type: Steel cables The entire pedestrian area of the Pier is surrounded by a barrier rail with a minimum height of 42 inches. The predominant railing type is a painted blue metal post and railing. There is a section of this railing that is similar but with a wooden top rail. At the west end of the Pier there is also a painted wood and metal railing that separates the upper and lower decks and forms the stair railing. These varied railings do not create a cohesive design for the Pier. The 1987 Pier Design Guidelines recommends that the railings should be compatible with overall build- ing design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. No specifi c type of rail is prescribed. 5.11 5.E.a Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Rail Type 2: Blue Metal with Wooden Top Rail Location: Southeast corner of pier Sector Graphic: (G) Number: approximately 1,200 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Materials: The railing is similar to Type 1 with the addition of a 2x8 wooden top rail. The railing is made of 3 (sometimes 4) 2” diameter horizontal metal tubes, with 2” diameter tubular metal posts. The top rail is a stained and coated wooden 2x8 plank, heavily worn, and supported by a bracket underneath. All metal tubing is painted blue and appears to have been painted multiple times. Stainless steel cables run horizontally only, centered between metal tubes to reduce the opening size to 4” in one direction. Joints vary in diff erent sections of railing; some are welded while others are assembled with tees and sockets. Maintenance: In general, the paint covers the metal railing consistently. Paint is worn and chipped in limited areas of high use especially along ramps, with rust observed where metal has been exposed. Metal tubing must be painted to prevent rust as wear requires. Wood is teak and requires pressure washing and re oiling annually in the spring. * Functionality/Placement: The railing provides a safety barrier at the edge of the ramp and at the deck above the volleyball court. The railing does not meet current safety requirements as there are more than 4” square openings between members. Durability: Metal and wood are solid, durable, and appropriate materials for this railing if the metal remains painted to prevent rust and the wood is regularly refi nished. Sustainability: There is no evidence that this railing uses low VOC paint or a renewable material. Recycled content material should be considered for this application as well as a recycled composite in the event of replacement. Comfort: The rail is more comfortable to lean against because of the wide, wooden top rail. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 Rail Type 2: Wooden Railing 6.12 5.E.a Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Rail Type 3: White Rail with Green Top Rail Location: West end of pier, on deck and staircases Sector Graphic: (E) Number: approximately 400 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Materials: This metal rail is quite diff erent than the other two rails and occurs only in a limited area at the Observation Deck at the west end of pier. The rail is made of 2” diameter painted steel posts and bottom rail, with a painted green wooden top rail. Horizontal stainless steel cables and turnbuckles have been added in the horizon- tal direction to limit size of openings. Maintenance: In general, the paint covers the metal rail- ing consistently. The paint is worn and chipped in limited areas of high use but rust was not observed. The painted wood top rail is worn and raw wood is exposed in some areas. Functionality/Placement: The railing does not meet cur- rent safety requirements as there are more than 4” openings between members. Durability: Metal and wood are solid, durable, and appropriate materials for this railing if the metal remains painted to prevent rust and the wood is regularly refi nished. Sustainability: There is no evidence that this railing uses low VOC paint or any renewable materials. Recycled composite should be considered for wood substitute as well as recycled content metal. Comfort: The rail is more comfortable to lean against because of the wide, wooden top rail. Rail Type 3: Green Top Rail 7. General Observations about Railings: It was observed and confi rmed by maintenance that these railings are not holding up to the standards of the pier and require too much maintenance.* There are missing pieces, rust and failing sections that need constant upkeep and are unappeal- ing to pier users. A material/railing that does not rust and requires no painting will be considered and researched further by WRT. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 13 5.E.a Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Bench Type 1: Blue Seat with White Logo Base Location: Along promenade Sector Graphic: (A, B, D) Number: 29 Quality assessment: Materials: This bench is the “standard” Santa Monica park bench found throughout the City. The base and supports for this bench are white painted pre-cast concrete with the words “Santa Monica” stamped into the base. Seat and seatbacks are 2x4 wood slats which are been painted blue. Benches are approximately 7 feet long and accommodate 4 people. There appears to be two slightly diff erent bench types, assumed to be of diff erent eras. Maintenance: Concrete supports require painting to maintain a clean fi nish, wood slats require regular painting and sanding or replacement if damaged. Functionality/Placement: Benches are located in such a way that adjacent railings block ocean view when seated. All benches face the ocean. An option should be considered that allows benches to be oriented in other directions to take advantage of sun and people watching. These benches do not have any arm rests which makes them targets for bench sleepers. Durability: The base is heavy, not easily moved, and very durable. The wood components may be easily defaced. Sustainability: Recycled content material should be con- sidered in the event of replacement. Comfort: This bench has a straight, tall back making it more comfortable for taller users. The seat and seatback surfaces are made of wood which is more comfortable than the metal benches on the pier. However, this bench could have been more comfortable if it had more lumbar support and curve on the seating surface. The wood surface dries quickly in the marine environment. Benches Bench Type 1 Bench Type 2 There are currently three diff erent styles of benches on the Pier. The blue Seat/white base benches are custom made and most predominant bench on the Pier. The other benches are prefabricated and appear to have been added at diff erent dates than the original. The 1987 Pier Design Guidelines recommends that the benches should be compatible with overall building design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. No particular type of bench is prescribed. 8 . Bench Type 2: Blue Metal Hatch Location: West side of entrance to Pacifi c Park Sector Graphic: (C) Number: 1 Quality assessment: Materials: This bench is a modern design and approxi- mately 6 feet long and seats 3 adults. It is fabricated of blue painted or powder coated open grid metal, with one piece seat and back. Metal tubes on sides act as legs and armrests. It is bolted to the deck.14 5.E.a Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Bench Type 2: Blue Metal Hatch Continued. Maintenance: Routine repainting is required to prevent rust; removal from site is required if powder coating needs to be reap- plied, per manufacturer’s directions. The open metal seat prevents water from ponding on the surface. Functionality/Placement: This bench is less likely to attract bench sleepers as it is shorter and has arm rests. This bench was ob- served to be very well used at all times, with high demand for seating in this area. Durability: Rust was observed at base and near welds where the metal has been exposed. Sustainability: Consider recycled content and sustainable materials in the event of replacement. Comfort: Curved seat and seatback provides lumbar sup- port, however the grid open metal pattern is uncomfortable to sit on, especially in shorts. The curved shape of the seat and seatback is not conducive to sitting at any angle other than straight-ahead. Bench Type 3: Victorian Bench Location: West end of pier; Sector Graphic: (E) Number: 2 Quality assessment: Materials: Victorian style six foot bench that seats four adults. Bench is made of 3 ornate cast iron supports/arm rests with a composite slat board. Bench is bolted to wood deck. Maintenance: The benches are inside the Observation Deck and are in excellent shape. Composite boards are easily replaced if they were to become damaged. Functionality/Placement: This bench design captures the “Victorian” character of the carousel, but does not blend well with the more rustic pier aesthetics at the western end. No other benches or site furnishings found on the Pier match this style. The bench appears lighter and less solid than the exterior benches. Durability: Composite boards may be subject to scratch- ing and carving. The lightweight construction of this bench appears to be much less durable than other site furnishings. Sustainability: Composite slats could have been made of recycled content but are not identifi ed as such. Comfort: Shape, materials, and armrests make this the most comfortable bench on the pier. Bench Type 3 9 . General Observations about Benches: It was found that not only was seat- ing insuffi cient on the pier but those which were provided did not meet aesthetic, functionality or comfort expectations. Maintenance expressed a need for at least a dozen more.* In the Urban Design Plan, WRT, in consulta- tion with the City and SMPRC, will identify additional locations for public seating and will give guidance about how seating should be arranged. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 15 5.E.a Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Tables Table Type 1: 4-foot Square Orange Powder Coated Table (seats 8) Location: Entrance to the Pacifi c Park Sector Graphic: (C) Number: 10 Note: Privately owned Quality assessment: Materials: Prefabricated outdoor picnic table, with top and seats made of vinyl coated metal mesh. The seats are attached to table top with painted tubular metal legs. An umbrella opening is provided, but none of the tables have umbrellas. Maintenance: The vinyl coating on the tables allows the table to be easily wiped or hosed off for cleaning. However, it looked as if daily maintenance had not been performed; many tables were coated with a layer of dust and/or dirt. Functionality/Placement: The vinyl coating defl ects sunlight, keeping this table cooler when placed in the direct sunlight. All of the outdoor tables are located at the entrance to the amusement park. Although this arrangement is convenient for patrons who pur- chase food at adjacent stands, there are no quiet places to sit at a table. Handicap accessible tables should be made available; tables provided have permanent benches on all four sides, leaving no roll up access for persons in wheelchairs. A table with one open side or alternative table design with easy accessibility is strongly suggested. Durability: The tables all seemed to be withstanding the ocean/salty conditions. There was no observed rust and the tables ap- peared to be fairly new. Sustainability: There are no apparent sustainable aspects to these furnishings. In the event of replacement, low VOC paint, recy- cled content, and local materials should be utilized wherever possible. Comfort: This is a relatively comfortable outdoor cafete- ria table. The seats are wide enough to comfortably seat two adults on each bench. The edges are rounded and have a plastic coating which provides a level of safety and comfort. They generally experience rapid customer turnover. The Pier currently has one main outdoor eating area adjacent to the main food vendors and Pacifi c Park. There are two styles of tables and they are intermingled on either side of the amusement park entrance walkway. Table Type 1 10 .16 5.E.a Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Table Type 2: Round Metal Table Location: Entrance to Pacifi c Park Sector Graphic: (C) Number: 9 Note: Privately owned Quality assessment: Materials: Three-Foot diameter metal table with three attached bench seats. Tables seat six adults very tightly and are more appropriate for three persons. They are colorful, with bright pink and yellow seats with white tables. Fabric umbrellas are provided at each table. Maintenance: The metal fi nish is chipped and limited rust was observed. Functionality/Placement: These tables are heavily utilized because they serve all the food vendors at the Pacifi c Park entrance. It would be desirable to have more tables in this area, and designate another area on the pier where people could eat as well. Durability: The round metal tables have some rust. Sustainability: There are no apparent sustainable aspects to this piece of furniture. In the event of replacement, low VOC paint, recycled content, and local materials should be used where possible. Comfort: The seat and table top are made of painted metal. The leg room under this table is small to accommodate a group of adult users. Table Type 2 11 . General Observations about Tables: The existing tables provide insuf- fi cient seating and lack basic ADA standards. Table 1 is maintenance friendly and easy to clean, however table 2 has signifi cant imperfec- tions mainly rust, due to inappropriate material choices. Any additional tables to be maintained by Pier Maintenance would have to be easy to clean, ADA accessible, adaptable for diff erent types of users, and aes- thetically cohesive throughout the pier. New tables could possibly be an opportunity to get private owners to update their tables. Setting a standard for furniture should be enforced. 17 5.E.a Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Receptacle Type 1: “Barrel” Receptacle Location: Around Pacifi c Park Sector Graphic: (C, F) Number: 4 Note: Privately owned Quality assessment: Materials: Barrel with wood staves wrapped with metal bands and a plastic funnel lid. Wood is unfi nished. Receptacles look old. Maintenance: The wood is unfi nished and would require sealant to increase longevity. The plastic funnel lid (white) shows dirt eas- ily. Functionality/Placement: The plastic funnel lid helps to keep trash in the barrel and hidden from view; however, it is not very aes- thetically pleasing. Visually, this receptacle does not match any other site furnishings found on the pier. Durability: The metal straps around the outside of the bar- rel have small amounts of rust, and the screws holding these straps are rusted. Sustainability: No sustainable elements are obvious in this furniture. Use of renewable wood could be implemented in the event of replacement. Trash Receptacles Trash Receptacle 1: Barrel Trash Receptacle 2: Santa Monica logo Trash receptacles are a necessary and important site furnishing. They should be viewed as another opportunity to strengthen the design concept and cohesion. More recycling receptacles should be provided throughout the pier to encour- age recycling. The 1987 Pier Design Guidelines recommends that the trash re- ceptacles are compatible with overall building design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. No particular type of receptacle is prescribed. The Design Guidelines do require that dumpsters for the various concessions are screened. 12 . Receptacle Type 2: Concrete Cylinder with Santa Monica Logo Location: Present in all zones on the pier. Sector Graphic: (A-G) Number: 45, most predominant trash receptacle on the pier Quality assessment: Materials: Custom pre-cast light colored concrete cylinder with metal collar around center hole, as well as bronze City of Santa Monica Logo. These pre-cast receptacles are new. Maintenance: Requires little maintenance, weight makes it diffi cult to move or take, which is why Maintenance expressed their prefer- ence for this receptacle.* There is no rust and weathering, but on-going cleaning is necessary. Functionality/Placement: The pre-cast concrete is a good choice for marine environments since they contain no metal and painting is not necessary. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 18 5.E.a Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Receptacle Type 2: Concrete Cylinder with Santa Monica Logo Continued. Durability: The receptacle appears to be very durable concrete construction, with few signs of wear or need of for replacement. Sustainability: No sustainable factors appear to be consid- ered for development of this product in regard to materials. However, the long life span of the receptacle reduces need for replacement and thus reduces waste. Receptacle Type 3: Blue Metal Trash Receptacle Location: West end of pier (E), South edge Sector Graphic: (F, G) Number: 21, second most predominant trash receptacle on pier. Quality assessment: Materials: Fabricated blue powder coated painted metal with vertical slats and horizontal bands. A metal liner holds the trash. Maintenance: The receptacle is very rusted, faded and appears dirty. Functionality/Placement: This trash receptacle has no lid, exposing trash to seagulls and wind. Durability: Rust is forming where the paint has failed. Metal looks unsubstantial for the use and marine environment. Sustainability: No sustainable elements are associated with this product. A recycled metal alternative should be considered in the event of replacing such furnishings. Trash Receptacle 3: Blue Metal 13 . Receptacle Type 4: Blue Metal Recycling Receptacle Location: West end of pier; Sector Graphic: (E), South edge (G) Number: 4 Quality assessment: Materials: Fabricated blue powder coated painted metal with vertical slats and horizontal bands with a standard tapered formed lid, similar in style to trash can. A liner holds the recycled material. A blue and white “recycle” sign designates this bin for recycling. Maintenance: The container was worn and not clean. Regular repainting is required. Functionality/Placement: Site recycle bins do not sepa- rate any recyclable materials and are not clearly labeled as to which recyclables they accept. The Pier should include more recycling stations and they should be placed along side trash receptacles. Containers that accommodate multiple recyclable materials should also be imple- mented. Recycled materials include, but are not limited to, newspaper, plastics, glass, food, compost, etc. Durability: Rust is forming where the paint has failed, but with routine repainting this is a durable option. Sustainability: No sustainable elements are associated with this product. A recycled metal alternative should be considered in the event of a replacement. Trash Receptacle 3: Blue Metal Recycling 19 5.E.a Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 14 . General Observations of Trash Receptacles: The most functional recep- tacle was the Santa Monica custom concrete designed bin. The rest are made of corrosive materials that don’t match, are hard to maintain and are easily vandalized or stolen. WRT will look into receptacles similar to the Santa Monica concrete variety and suggest additional opportuni- ties for placement. Additional recyclable bins are also suggested that match the current receptacles. Providing adequate and appropriate receptacles will help to keep the pier clean. Receptacle Type 5: Recycled Content Receptacle Location: In enclosed observation deck (E) Number: 1 Quality assessment: Materials: Made of 100% recycled content plastic boards that match the adjacent bench with cast iron details. Maintenance: The receptacle is inside the enclosed ob- servation deck and is in excellent shape. Composite boards can easily be replaced if they were to become damaged. Functionality/Placement: This receptacle design cap- tures the “Victorian” character of the carousel, but does not blend well with the more rustic pier aesthetics at the western end. The receptacle appears lighter and less solid than the exterior receptacles. Durability: Composite boards may be subject to scratching and carving. The lightweight construction of this recep- tacle appears to be much less durable than other site furnishings located outside. Sustainability: Receptacle is made of 100% recycled content plastic boards. Trash Receptacle 5: Recycled Content Receptacle 20 5.E.a Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Curb Type 1: 6x6 Wood Timber Curb – Painted Yellow Location: Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (A, B); South Parking area (G) and used for wheel stops in parking area. Number: approximate 200 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Materials: Painted wood timber. Maintenance: Repainting required on a regular basis. Functionality/Placement: This curb defi nes the mainte- nance/fi re lane. This curb off ers no aesthetic benefi t to the pier experi- ence and could pose a tripping hazard. Durability: The timber appears durable enough to satisfy function though edges of wood are becoming worn and repainting is necessary to maintain color. Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sus- tainable forestry practices. Alternative renewable materials should be considered, such as a high recycled content composite. Curb Type 2: 8x10 Wood Timber Curb – Painted Red Location: Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (A, B) Number: approximate 200 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Comfort: N/A Materials: Painted Wood timber. Maintenance: Repainting required on a regular basis Functionality/Placement: Curb required for traffi c manage- ment and directs vehicular traffi c into parking lot. These curbs off er no aesthetic interest to pier experience and pose a tripping hazard for pedes- trians. Durability: The timber appears durable enough to satisfy function though edges of wood are becoming worn and repainting is necessary in places. Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sustain- able forestry practices. Otherwise alternative renewable materials should be considered, such as a high recycled content composite. Curbs The curbs found on The Pier are made of heavy timbers which have been bolted to the decking. These timbers serve to guide traffi c and defi ne the fi re lane. Curbs are not defi ned in the 1987 Design Guide- lines but the Guidelines do require timber wheel stops. Curb Type 1: Yellow Curb Type 2: Red 15 . General Observations about Curbs: It was concluded that the curbs’ biggest weakness was its upkeep of repainting and replacement.* They function properly, however WRT will look into opportunities to cut down on maintenance on this element of the pier.** * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 21 5.E.a Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Decking The pier’s top decking material is made up primarily of 2x12 pieces of lumber. In most places the decking runs perpendicular to the edge of the pier, however, there are areas where the planks are mounted di- agonally at a 45 degree angle to the sides of the pier. The 1987 Design Guidelines require exposed wood decking for all pier walkways, access and service drives and parking areas. Decking Type 1: Pedestrian Areas Location: All wood areas for pedestrian use; Sector Graphic: (A-G) Area: approximately 180,000 Square Feet Quality assessment: Materials: Exposed 12” wide pressure-treated wooden decking planks, unfi nished. Maintenance: The wood planks were generally in good condition. There were no signifi cant gaps identifi ed, and it appears that where gaps had occurred, they had been corrected. Wood decking requires routine washing, sealing (except for pressure treated wood), and replacement as necessary due to wear and exposure. Functionality/Placement: When well cared for wood decking makes for an enjoyable and marine oriented walking surface. Durability: The decking shows limited wear in the pe- destrian areas. Challenges for wood decking include the variability of wood products, twisting, warping, splitting, etc. Also, wear of deck can leave hazardous exposed nails. Deck boards should be replaced when nails are exposed. Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sus- tainable forestry practices. Otherwise alternative renewable materials should be considered, such as a high recycled content composite. Comfort: The wood decking is comfortable to walk on provided it has been adequately maintained. Decking Type 1: Pedestrian Decking Type 2: Asphalt 16 . Decking Type 2: Asphalt covered decking Location: Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (B) Area: approximately 5,400 Square Feet Quality assessment: Materials: Asphalt coated wood deck with corrugated metal panels Maintenance: Occasional cleaning is required, along with routine repainting of the stripes. Functionality/Placement: The metal sheets appear to cover a mechanical chase. An alternative to this design is desired as this option is inconsistent with the requirement of the Design Guide- lines. 22 5.E.a Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Decking Type 2: Asphalt covered decking continued. Durability: The asphalt was cracking and showing signs of wear. Sustainability: Materials more sustainable than asphalt and steel should be used where available. Comfort: The asphalt rises above the level of the wooden deck and creates an uneven surface. The corrugated metal sheets are uncomfortable to walk on due to their uneven surface. Pedestrians did not appear to prefer to walk on this surface unless necessary. Note: Asphalt covered decking and corrugated metal panels are scheduled to be removed and replaced with wood decking.* General Observations about Decking: We have identifi ed that there are/were signifi cant gaps in the decking. Large areas of repair have been corrected by maintenance by replacing said areas with “patches” of decking. However, over- all decking was in good shape on the main walk. And it was noted that there are plans to replace decking with 3” thick boards, instead the 2” boards that are currently used. ** Therefore, gaps and general repairs will be reduced. Sealing of decking is not necessary due to the fact that the boards are pressure washed.*** The painted parking lines wear and fl ake and need to be repainted several times each year. WRT will make recommendations to be included in the Maintenance Plan about alternative approaches to striping parking lots with more durable materials * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 ** Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 *** Todd: Gemni Forest Products Decking Type 3: Parking lot and vehicular traveled decking Location: Parking Deck; Sector Graphic: (G) Area: approximately 83,000 Square Feet Quality assessment: Materials: Pressure treated wooden decking planks, 12” wide, painted with parking lot striping. Maintenance: These areas appear to have been replaced at diff er- ent times. Decking should be replaced where cracks and gaps pose a hazard. Re-striping should also occur on a regular basis to ensure a cohesive fl ow within the lot. Functionality/Placement: The parking deck planks appear uneven and worn when compared to “pedestrian only” areas. The boards are spaced further apart and in many cases greatly exceed ¼” between fl oor boards. Durability: The vehicular decking is signifi cantly more worn than pedestrian decking due to heavy and constant use. Raised knots and nails were observed. Typical challenges of wood decking include dealing with variability of wood products, twisting, warping, splitting, etc. . Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sustainable forestry practices. Otherwise alternative renewable materials should be consid- ered, such as a high recycled content composite. Comfort: The uneven surface is bumpy while driving in a car. Decking Type 3: Parking Lot 17 .23 5.E.a Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Lighting There are fi ve diff erent lighting fi xtures existing on the Pier. They are of assorted designs and styles and various heights. Lighting is predominant on the perimeter of the pier, and less prevalent in the parking lot or central areas. The majority of the lighting fi xtures appear to be of diff erent vintages and some are in questionable or non-working condition. (Observed at nighttime, about 20% of the lights were not lit). The Pier lacks a coherent theme in lighting and a consistency in fi xtures. The Design Guidelines dictate that there is a minimum of 4 footcandles and a maximum of 8 footcandles in lighting levels. Style and fi xture type is not prescribed but recommends that the fi xtures are compatible with overall building design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. Lighting Type 1: Cobra Head Light Fixture Location: First 100 feet of Central Walkway Sector Graphic: (A) Number: 12 Quality assessment: Materials: Standard cobra head fi xture made of metal with glass lamp cover on a painted white metal pole, 18 feet high. Maintenance: Routine replacement is required for ex- pired bulbs. Painted white metal poles need annual painting and occasional cleaning, and maintenance has confi rmed that painting the tall lights is not a problem with the use of a crane.* According to Bill Bollinger, the Pier Maintenance supervisor, there was a previous desire to replace the 26” Cobra Head” lights with the other ornamental lights along the rest of the deck. Functionality/Placement: Tall overhead lighting serves to illuminate the main path; however they provide no pedestrian ambi- ance on the pier at night. Lights of this style are generally associated with vehicular traffi c and parking. This lighting arrangement is not ap- pealing for a pedestrian oriented walking space. Durability: Many of the Cobra head light poles are se- verely rusted and the bases are weakened by the corrosive environ- ment. Sustainability: Fixture should use an effi cient, low watt- age lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable, high recycled content materials. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 Lighting Type 1: Cobra Head 18 .24 5.E.a Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Lighting Type 2: Grey Arched Light Fixture Location: Succeeds the cobra head fi xture down the second half of the pier, wraps around the observation deck, and continues down the east side of the deck. Sector Graphic: (A, B, D, E, F) Number: 40 Quality assessment: Materials: Ornate metal light pole, 15 feet, is painted grey with a tear drop shaped glass lamp cover, in a “historic” style. Hanging banner or pot hooks are provided, however there were no banners or fl ower pots observed. Maintenance: The fi xtures appear relatively new and in good condition. They require routine replacement for expired bulbs. Grey poles may need occasional cleaning and repainting. Functionality/Placement: The poles are spaced at approximately 40 feet on center. Light levels felt safe and comfortable for the pedestrian, when operating. The shorter fi xture has a more human scale and seems to fi t in with the character of the Pier better. This pole is more ornate than the other fi xtures on the Pier, with curvilinear appendages and unique globes. The dark color hides dirt and blemishes better than the white poles. Durability: These light poles are durable and showed few signs of rust. Provided adequate attention is given to regular painting these poles should remain durable. Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable, high recycled content materials. Lighting Type 3: Wooden Light Fixture Location: Observation/fi shing decks. Located around the observation deck and the lower fi shing decks; Sector Graphic: (E) Number: 7 Quality assessment: Materials: 8x8 wooden pole, 15 foot tall, with wood cross arms supporting two metal light fi xtures. Fixtures appear to be sodium vapor (orange glow) at night. Maintenance: The wood is weathered and pressure treated. Maintenance is necessary to prevent the wood from becoming weathered looking. Functionality/Placement: The design of this fi xture has horizontal arms which provide bird roosts. Bird repellent measures (“bird spikes”) appear to be an after market addition. The fi xture is a box “spotlight” style that provides little aesthetic character. Durability: The wooden pole is very weathered looking. It also has a shorter lifespan than its metal counterparts and more susceptible to vandalism; concrete or fi berglass may be more desirable for durability. Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp wherever possible. Also poles should be made of renewable and high recycled content materials. Lighting Type 2: Arched Fixture Lighting Type 3: Wooden Fixture 19 .25 5.E.a Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Lighting Type 4: Box Light Fixture Location: Illuminates the perimeter of the southern parking deck; Sector Graphic: (G) Number: 7 Quality assessment: Materials: 8x8 painted wooden pole (teal green), 20-25 feet tall with a dual, box light fi xtures mounted at top. An additional light fi xture is provided shining onto beach. Conduit runs outside the pole with exposed junction boxes. Bird spikes are provided to prevent roosting. Maintenance: The wooden pole is in need of new paint, as it is noticeably peeling. Because it is wood, regular maintenance and upkeep will require the light to function at its best. Functionality/Placement: The lights illuminate the perimeter of the parking lot, but there is a lack of lighting in the middle of the deck. Durability: The wood is worn and requires regular painting to maintain fi nish. Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable and high recycled content materials. Lighting Type 5: Bell Shaped Light Fixture Location: Eastern edge of pier near Carousel; Sector Graphic: (G) Number: 8 Quality assessment: Materials: Gray/green painted round metal pole with 2 bell-shaped fi xtures on arched posts mounted at top of pole. Poles are approximately 15 feet high. Maintenance: The painted poles are well worn and scratched. The inside of fi xture is very rusted. Functionality/Placement: When observed at night, these lights provided a comfortable level of light for pedestrians. There did not appear to be “hot” bright areas or deep dark areas in this area by the carousel. The light poles are appropriately scaled to function in a human scale/promenade experience. However, these lighting fi xtures are not consistent in style with any other fi xture on Pier. They are located in only one corner of the deck instead of being integrated into the rest of the design. Durability: The metal seems to be very durable for this situation if painted surface is maintained to prevent rust. Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable and high recycled content materials. Lighting Type 4: Box Light Fixture Lighting Type 5: Bell Fixture 20 . General Observations of Lighting: Some of the lighting featured on the pier have the festive char- acter the pier desires, where others are more utilitarian in nature. Because of the many diff erent lighting styles, no overall lighting feature contributes substantially to the pier’s character. The Type 2 Arched Fixture is the most in keeping with the desired historical compatibility and pier character but its limited use does not promote a consistent image. Currently the varied fi xtures create a variety of maintenance concerns, including corrosion in the ocean environment, bird perches, and the need for repainting. WRT has noted that a comprehensive and cohesive lighting fi xture will substantially contribute to the urban design character of the pier as well as create uniform maintenance require- ments and uniform light levels. 26 5.E.a Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) While these items were not identifi ed in the scope of the Urban Design assessment and therefore not investigated to the same level as the previous items, they were observed as critical to the pier’s char- acter and environment. These items are included here to further address the additional features that make up the urban context. Features Feature Type 1: Telescopes Location: Along the northern edge of the Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (B, D) Number: 11 Quality assessment: Materials: Grey painted prefabricated metal pedestals mounted to pier decking, with a step for child’s use. Maintenance: Moderate rust was observed. Routine cleaning and occasional repainting is required for upkeep. Functionality/Placement: We noticed many of the telescopes were in use every time we visited the pier. Telescopes look out towards the beach, water, City of Santa Monica, and Santa Monica Mountains in the distance. Durability: The telescopes appear to be high grade and appropriate for this application. Sustainability: No particular sustainable elements apparent in this feature. Feature Type 2: Designated Smoking Areas Location: Four locations throughout the pier, two on the observation deck, one on the western edge and southern edge of amusement park adjacent to railing. Sector Graphic: (D, E, F, G) Number: 8 Quality assessment: Comfort: The platforms allow for a designated place to smoke. Smoking is prohibited on other parts of the pier. Materials: The grey painted plywood sheet with smoking urn sits directly on pier decking. Maintenance: The platform requires regular painting and clean up of garbage around smoking area. Functionality/Placement: Smoking will be banned from beach in the future which would eliminate the need for this element. Durability: Smoking stations appear to address a designated need but are not integrally designed as part of the pier. They appear to be a temporary solution. Sustainability: No sustainable elements in existing feature. General Observations of Smoking Areas: Recommendations for more compatible smoking receptacles and smoking areas will be identifi ed in the Urban Design Recommendations. Feature 1: Telescope Feature 2: Smoking Areas 21.27 5.E.a Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Feature Type 3: Fishing Utilities Location: Lower level fi shing decks at east end of pier Sector Graphic: (E, D) Number: 3 Sinks Quality assessment: The Design Guidelines identifi es that cutting boards, cleaning sinks and railings shall be consistent and compatible with the rest of the pier. It also suggests that “new construction at fi shing pier shall also evoke whimsy and fantasy.” There is no whimsy or fantasy in these utilitarian services. Materials: Wooden 12x24 fi sh cutting boards are located at various random intervals along the metal rail. The wood is untreated and heavily carved. Three free-standing pre-fabricated stainless steel sinks with fi sh cleaning stations. Maintenance: The wooden cutting boards are easy to detach and replace when necessary. The metal sink design is simple and easily cleaned using a hose. Functionality/Placement: Sinks and water source are easily accessible at all lower fi shing decks. Currently sinks are provided as well as wooden cutting boards attached to existing railings. There are also movable aluminum garbage bins for use by fi shermen. Durability: Perhaps more permanent trash receptacles could be designed for use by fi shermen specifi cally. Stainless steel sinks seem to be very high quality and used heavily. Amenities need to be durable due to heavy use of the pier by fi shermen. Sustainability: No sustainable elements noted in existing features. Feature Type 4: Planters (belong to restaurant-private property) Location: Near entrance to Pacifi c Park (C) and near restaurant at end of pier (E); Sector Graphic: Number: 4 Quality assessment: Design Guidelines: The Design Guidelines include a statement that landscape features shall be minimized and not compete with the architecture. Species shall be compatible with the beach environment. Materials: One wood and three plastic pots Maintenance: Maintained adequately by concession. Functionality/Placement: Planters can be a very pleasing site amenity; however this has not been executed successfully due to a lack of coherency. Durability: Wood or heavy plastic planters are appropriate and durable materials for this application. Existing planters were not in need of replacement or refurbishing. Sustainability: Wood, especially harvested using responsible forestry techniques, is a preferred alternative over plastic unless it is a recycled plastic product. Feature 3: Fishing Utilities Feature 4: Planters 22 .28 5.E.a Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Feature Type 5: Bike Racks Location: Four locations with three diff erent styles of bike racks: A row of two standard metal racks on the west side of Pacifi c Park, one metal “low profi le” rack next to the restaurant at end of pier, one “wave” rack just east of the Carousel, and one “wave” rack at beginning of the pedestrian walk; Sector Graphic: (D, E, F, G) Number: 5 racks total Quality assessment: Materials: Metal, Blue Paint Maintenance: Some rust on bike racks where not painted. Functionality/Placement: The bike rack at the entrance of the pedestrian walk has room for eight bikes and was full upon one observation; consideration should be given to adding more parking spaces at this location. The rack at the west end of the Pier has room for eight bikes; two bikes were parked at this rack. “Low profi le” racks are less desirable because they do not support the bike on its frame; bikes to fall over more easily in this style of rack. There were no bikes parked at the other three rack sites. Effi cient rack system would help encourage fi sherman and pier visitors to use bicycle transportation. Durability: With proper paint, bike racks should be able to survive the pier climate with little rust damage. Painted bike racks are easily scraped by bikes and locks. Stainless steel is more durable and will not rust but is more expensive. Sustainability: Bike racks encourage non-motorized transportation. Recycled content metals should be used wherever possible. General Observations: Bike valet stations were introduced to the Pier in 2007 during the Twilight Dance Series and were very popular. The Urban Design Study will address possible locations for bicycle valet stations. Feature 5: Bike Racks 23 . Feature Type 6: Security Barriers Location: The City installed approximately 3’x3’x3.5 boxes around the Pier. Quality assessment: Materials: Wood, and fi lled with sand Maintenance: Originally, Pier Maintenance planted plants in the boxes, but the water damaged the deck boards, so the plants were removed and plywood was placed on the tops. Functionality/Placement: Sited to create a traffi c barrier. General Observations: These security barriers are large, and block pedestrian fl ow. Bollards that require little maintenance could serve the pier better and are recommended in the pier guidelines. If planters are to be used, we suggest that they follow the design guidelines. Feature Type 6: Security Barriers 29 5.E.a Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Feature Type 7: Parking Kiosk and Pedestrian Access Location: The kiosk to the parking lot is located at the entrance to the Newcomb Deck. A pedestrian walkway, designated by chain link and raised curbs, leads pedestrians to and from the Newcomb Deck to the Municipal Pier. Quality assessment: Functionality/Placement: The pedestrian path, designated by a chain link fence, is not in character with the pier and appears temporary, but the function is appropriate for protection from vehicular activity. Options such as bollards and diff erential fl ooring material can serve the same purpose and create a safe walking space for pedestrians. The Design Guidelines state that the pier is to develop a unique, pedestrian oriented environment with ease of access and user friendliness as a prime design consideration. Improvements to the pedestrian circulation will create a better pedestrian environment. General Observations: The pedestrian walkway presents an opportunity to improve the ambiance of the Pier and create a walkway that adheres to the goals of the Design Guidelines. These goals encourage improvements that relate to the Pier and create a safe, functional and appealing circulation path and entrance to the Pier for both vehicles and pedestrians. Feature Type 7: Parking Kiosk Feature Type 8: Observation Deck Location: At the west end of the Pier Number: l General Observations: The Observation Deck at the west end of the Pier is a rarely used resource. It is an enclosed area and access is from a staircase or by an elevator. The Observation Deck is furnished with benches and a trash can and is painted red and green, which is complementary to the adjacent Mexican Restaurant, but not to the public nature of the Pier. The Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corporation Staff has indicated that they will install historic displays in this area as part of the Pier’s 100th Anniversary. Selection of paint colors, repair of windows, replacement of light fi xtures, and installation of seating and tables would add to the ambiance. Guidance about how to treat this area will be included in the Urban Design Study. Feature Type 8: Observation Deck 24 .30 5.E.a Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Feature Type 9: Display Cases Location: Display cases are located near the Police Sub-station and the elevators at the west end. Quality assessment: Maintenance: Unless display cases are cleaned regularly and the material updated, they give an appearance of neglect. Functionality/Placement: Their current location is not an ideal spot for visitors to congregate and read. The displays are right outside of the bathrooms, they are up a level of stairs and not easily accessible to everyone, and they are tucked away out of view. General Observations: Display cases create an opportunity to share important information about the Pier, businesses and current activities. When part of a regular program, they create interest and educate Pier visitors. Feature Type 9: Historic Display Cases Feature Type 10: Pier Skirting Location: Around the pilings of the pier where pedestrian accessibility is an issue Quality assessment: Materials: wood fencing General Observations: The skirting was constructed to prevent unauthorized access under the pier and security, while the existing Design Guidelines suggest whimsical treatment. Our observation is that the skirting/fencing should not compete with the festive activity on the pier and should remain ‘background’. Feature type 10: Pier Skirting 25 .31 5.E.a Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Feature Type11: Outdoor Dining Barriers Location: Outside Pacifi c Park dining areas and restaurant located on the west end of the pier. These structures are privately maintained. Quality assessment: Functionality/Placement: Serve their purpose of sectioning off and privatizing the eating spaces. General Observations: Each restaurant on the Pier provides barriers for its outdoor dining. The Design Guidelines state that development of exterior dining, lounge and vending areas is strongly encouraged. However to match the architectural standards of the guidelines they should still retain the whimsical character that matches the rest of the architecture, which the current barriers do not. Although these are privately constructed barriers around the tenants’ leasehold areas, they are highly visible feature of the Pier. The Urban Design Study will provide guidance about alternative designs for barriers that enhance the ambiance of the Pier. Feature Type 11: Restaurant barrier Feature Type 12: Gazebos Location: Newcomb Deck, at the southeast corner of the Pier. Number: 2 Quality assessment: Materials: Steel, same as railing system Maintenance: Same maintenance and material as the railings. Yearly painting and touch-ups. Functionality/Placement: Main seating for the volleyball courts is provided by the bleachers to the south of the parking lot. While the gazebos fi t in with the character of the pier, they are architectural “follies”. General Observations: The Gazebos were intended to be rest areas for visitors, but lack seating, cover and functionality. In consultation with the City the Urban Design Study, will make recommendations as to how these amenities can be enhanced. Feature Type 12: Gazebo 26 .32 5.E.a Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Feature Type 13: Signage Location: Along deck. More concentrated at west end. Quality assessment: Functionality/Placement: WRT noticed a lack of signage for bathroom locations and overall directional signs. Regulation signs were noticeable and suffi cient. The main Kiosk is large but placed off the main path. It provides visitors with useful information but seems to go unnoticed by many visitors. General Observations: Signs advising the public about acceptable rules of conduct on the Pier (e.g. no diving, no alcohol, etc.) are placed throughout the Pier. These signs are of metal, about and were installed in 2007. Consolidation of information on these signs has reduced clutter. A diff erent location for the pier’s informations kiosk should be considered as well as a more inviting display around it to attract visitors. The Urban Design Study will recommend an expansion of the signage program and kiosk display. Feature Type 13: Pier Visitor Conduct Signs Feature Type 13: Visitor Kiosk 27 .33 5.E.a Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) SANTA MONICA PIER ASSESSMENT- Quantitative Assessment ChartSECTOR OF PIER ASSESSED (Based on Graphic)SITE FEATUREABCDEFGTotal NOTESRailingBlue Metal5146 429Metal tubing, painted blue, stainless steel cable, metal socket jointsBlue Metal with Wooden Top Rail5146 429Metal tubing, painted blue, stainless steel cable, wooden 2x6 railingWhite with Green Top Rail5146 429Painted wood seat boards, painted white concrete baseBenchesBlue seat/White base5146 429Painted wood seat boards, painted white concrete baseBlue metal11Prefabricated, powdercoated, blue metalWooden/black metal22Composite board seat, painted black metal frametotal32TablesOrange/metal1010Plastic coated metal meshRound/Colored seats99Prefabricated, painted metaltotal19Trash ReceptaclesImitation "Barrel"314Wood staves, metal bandsConcrete Cylinder with SM Logo514 1365245Custom made, bare cast concrete, metal logo, "Santa Monica" letteringBlue Metal Recycling11 1 14Metal vertical slats, horizontal metal bands, painted blue,"Recycle" signBlue Metal461121Metal vertical slats, horizontal metal bands, painted bluetotal74CurbWood Timber Curb - Painted YellowBolted down timber 4x4's, painted yellowWood Timber Curb - Painted RedBolted down timber 4x4's, painted redtotalDeckingPedestrain AreasUntreated wooden decking boardsAsphalt Covered DeckingAsphalt and corrugated metal panelsParking Lot and Vehicular DeckingWooden decking boards, painted parking lot stripingtotalLightingWhite/Cobra Head27 211Standard cobra, metal pole, painted white, glass lamp, 18' highGrey/Single Curved9171440Metal pole, gray, tear drop glass lamp cover, 15' highWood/Double Head33Wooden pole, metal fixtureShoe Box/deck parking527Wooden pole, box lightGreen/Curved/ Bell88Metal pole, gray/green painttotal69FeaturesTelescopes11Grey painted prefabricated metal pedestalsSmoking Areas22228Grey painted plywood sheet with smoking urn Fishing Amenities (sinks)213Wooden fish cleaning platforms, stainless steel sinksPlanters213An assortment of wood and plastic potsBike racks1214Metal, blue paint345.E.aPacket Pg. 283Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 284Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol SANTA MONICA PIER ASSESSMENT*A-Pier Entrance -Extends from Bridge entrance to parking lot entrance*B-Pier (First Half) -Section of Asphalt topped pier*C-Amusement Park Entrance*D-Pier(Second Half) -End of ﬁ rst half of pier to the observation deck*E-Observation Deck -Bo*F-West and South deck -Deck behind and to the west of the amusement park*G-Parking DeckLegendPier Sectors355.E.aPacket Pg. 285Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 286Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol Trash ReceptacleBlue Metal-recyclable Located full length of Pier-4 TotalRailingsRailing top Located full length of PierLightingWooden pole ﬁ xtureLocated around perimeter of deck at end of pier only-3 Total BenchWooden Bench (trex)Located inside site deck -2 TotalTrash ReceptacleSanta Monica Pier CustomLocated full length of Pier-45 TotalLightingWhite overhead ﬁ xtureLocated along ﬁ rst half of pier-12 Total CurbWooden Curb (painted red) along Pier and Deck. By Amusement park.CurbWooden Curb (painted yellow) along Pier and Deck. By amusement park.BenchWooden Bench- Santa Monica CustomLocated along entire stretch of pier-29 TotalTableRound table with UmbrellaLocated by amusement park only-9 TotalTableCoated Metal TableLocated by amusement park only-10 TotalLightingGrey arched ﬁ xtureLocated along second half of pier and west deck-40 Total SANTA MONICA PIER ASSESSMENTCurbWooden Curb (painted yellow) along parking deck onlyLightingGrey Deck FixtureLocated on east deck only-8 Total RailingsWooden Railing top Located on east deck onlyRailingsWooden Railing top for ramp Located on east deck onlyDeckingDecking at transition across bridge*A-Pier Entrance -Extends from Bridge entrance to parking lot entrance*B-Pier (First Half) -Section of Asphalt topped pier*C-Amusement Park Entrance*D-Pier(Second Half) -End of ﬁ rst half of pier to the observation deck*E-Observation Deck*F-West and South deck -Deck behind and to the west of the amusement park*G-Parking DeckFact and Figures (Approx... Quantities)Trash ReceptaclesWooden Barrel-4 TotalLocated all within the amusement park entrance-4 TotalBenchMetal coated benchLocated along the west side of the deck1 TotalTrash ReceptacleBlue Metal Located south deck and parking lot-21 TotalSmoking PadDesignated smoking areas throughout pier and deck-4 TotalLightingGrey Parking Deck FixtureLocated in deck parking lot only-7 Total G F BAmusement ParkRailingsBoards designate ﬁ shing locations. RailingsStair railingsLocated at end of pier only D EDeckingWorn and separated boards on the parking deck.SignageFishing is allowed only at designated areas on the pier. A CMetal PierAccess to underside of pier.Extends length of pier.Parking Lot EntranceObservation TowerBenchesTablesDESCRIPTION QUANTITY STYLESTrash ReceptaclesLighting321974693245LegendPlantersAssorted pots-3 TotalSinksSinks and cleaning stations are provided in ﬁ shing designated areas- 3 TotalBike RacksTwo styles, many unused-4 TotalExisting Site Features365.E.aPacket Pg. 287Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 288Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol 5.E.aPacket Pg. 289Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 290Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 291Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 292Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 293Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 294Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 295Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 296Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 297Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 298Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 299Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 300Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 301Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 302Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 303Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 304Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 305Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 306Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 307Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 308Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 309Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 310Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 311Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 312Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 313Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 314Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 315Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 316Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 317Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 318Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 319Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 320Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 321Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 322Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 323Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 324Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 325Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 326Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 327Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 328Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 329Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 330Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 331Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 332Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.a Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 334Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 335Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.a Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 337Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Santa Monica Pier Infrasturcture Assessment Phase 2 – Upgrade Studies Table of Contents Subject Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………………………………… ii NEWCOMB PIER STRUCTURAL UPGRADE………………………………………….. ..1 AQUARIUM ROOF ASSESSMENT……………………………………………………... 12 MUNICIPAL PIER PHASE 4 UPGRADE………………………………………………... 14 MUNICIPAL PIER CONCRETE UPGRADE (Seaward of Bent 59) ……………………. 16 EMERGENCY GANGWAY……………………………………………………………… 18 CAROUSEL CUPOLA ONION DOME………………………………………………….. 25 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM…………………………………………………………… 29 UTILITY SYSTEMS……………………………………………………………………… 45 LIGHTING STUDY……………………………………………………………………….. 49 TEN-YEAR PLAN………………………………………………………………………… 66 URBAN DESIGN STUDY (WRT)…………………………………………...APPENDIX A i 5.E.a Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 339Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 340Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 341Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 342Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 343Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 344Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 345Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 346Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 347Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 348Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.a Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol 5.E.a Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol 5.E.a Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol 5.E.aPacket Pg. 352Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 353Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 354Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 355Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 356Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.a Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol 5.E.aPacket Pg. 358Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 359Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 360Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 361Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 362Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 363Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 364Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 365Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 366Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 367Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 368Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 369Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 370Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 371Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 372Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 373Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 374Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 375Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 376Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 377Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 378Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 379Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 380Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 381Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 382Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 383Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 384Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 385Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 386Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 387Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 388Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 389Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 390Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 391Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 392Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 393Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 394Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 395Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 396Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 397Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 398Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 399Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 400Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 401Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 402Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 403Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 404Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 405Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 406Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 67 5.E.a Packet Pg. 407 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol APPENDIX A URBAN DESIGN STUDY (WRT) 5.E.a Packet Pg. 408 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) This document is a part of the Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assess- ment Study to assist in the develop- ment of the City of Santa Monica’s multi-year Capital Improvement and Maintenance Program, led by Moffat & Nichol. Wallace Roberts & Todd, LLC Planning and Design 1133 Columbia St., #205 San Diego, CA 92101 November 17, 2008 Santa Monica Pier Assessment Recommendations Report for Urban Design Elements 5.E.a Packet Pg. 409 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.a Packet Pg. 410 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 1 Introduction 2 Methodology 3 Reccomendations 4 Site Furnishings contents 21 Carousel Building Roof 5.E.a Packet Pg. 411 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Elizabeth R. Sedat Collection 5.E.a Packet Pg. 412 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 1 The Santa Monica Pier has been an iconic element of the City and region since the early 1900’s. Unique among California piers, the Santa Monica Pier, its history and activities, are a clas- sic yet – whimsical stage welcoming tourists and locals alike. How- ever, over many years of harsh coastal weather, active urban use and the addition of an eclectic mix of site furnishings (benches, lighting, trash receptacles, etc) the Pier no longer presents a cohe- sive atmosphere worthy of Santa Monica. This set of recommen- dations, based on an assessment of current conditions, is intended to guide the choices for the selection of new and replacement furnishings. Introduction 5.E.a Packet Pg. 413 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 2 The ﬁ rst step in the process was to review the Santa Monica Pier Design Guidelines (Guidelines), adopted in 1987. The Guidelines provide a general vision for the character of the buildings and furnishings and allow ﬂ exibility in accomplishing its goals. methodology WRT then interviewed City staff from maintenance, public safety and operations. The Assessment of Ex- isting Conditions was conducted in late 2007 and presented to the Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corpora- tion (SMPRC) March 5, 2008, and is included as Attachment No. 1. WRT was then directed to prepare recom- mendations for improving the charac- ter and function of the public spaces of the Pier. Design alternatives were presented to the SMPRC Operations Committee on May 28, 2008. The alternatives in- cluded three ‘families’ of site furnish- ings representing a range from those of Palisades Park and South Beach to contemporary styles and materials. Based on this input, WRT is making the following recommendations. 5.E.a Packet Pg. 414 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 3 The Santa Monica Pier was built for the pleasure of the public in 1909. Ever since, citizens and visitors have enjoyed the amuse- ments and relaxation of the Pier. The very nature of a pier – apart from the land, above the sea and into the sky – is a place for en- joying a remarkable set of experiences. Santa Monica’s traditions of spinning around the carousel, soaring in the Ferris wheel, gath- ering for picnics, entertainment, fishing, strolling, and enjoying the view remain strongly held. The nationally recognized historic structure of the Hippodrome Building and contributing elements on the Pier, combined with the purpose – for fun, sets the founda- tional character and style of the public realm of the Pier deck. This character has been best described as ‘whimsical.’ Two fundamental opportunities were identiﬁ ed in the Assessment of Exist- ing Conditions: 1. Visual clarity, user comfort and maintenance could be improved with the selection of a complementary ‘family’ of site furnishings. 2. The placement of site furnishings could assist in directing circulation and deﬁ ning spaces for speciﬁ c use, i.e. performance. recommendations The following recommendations are organized to guide the selection of speciﬁ c items, i.e. benches, lights, etc., – Site Furnishings; and how to arrange them on the Pier. 5.E.a Packet Pg. 415 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 4 The historic Byzantine-Moorish styled Hippodrome at the base of the bridge graciously marks the entrance to the Pier. More recently constructed buildings line the eastern portion of Pier and are characterized by the bold signage for the dining and amusement attractions within. The architecture of the distant west end might be characterized as an eclectic craftsman style. The site furnishings are a mix of styles and materials and the wood decking is compromised by numerous anomalies of asphalt and metal plates. The style and character of the Pier’s site furnishings need to be simpliﬁ ed to become an integrated family of elements that is complementary of the architecture styles and contributes to a sophisticated sense of whimsy. This will reduce the visual clutter that distracts from the quality of the Pier experience and reduce efforts in maintenance and operation. site furnishings Each of the items meets basic criteria for high quality materials that will reasonably withstand the corrosive coastal environment and require minimal maintenance which con- tribute to a level of ‘sustainability.’ The manufacturers and model infor- mation illustrate the design intent. Equivalent elements may be identi- ﬁ ed through the City’s public bid process. Quantities are approximate, provided for planning purposes. Fig- ure 1 diagrammatically locates each of the site furnishing elements. 5.E.a Packet Pg. 416 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5Figure 1, Location Diagram for Site Furnishings5.E.aPacket Pg. 417Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 265.E.aPacket Pg. 418Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 7 The 6,100 linear feet of rail on the Pier is constructed of three to four horizontal two inch steel pipe rails, with two inch diameter steel tube posts and ﬁ ttings, ﬁ gure 2. Some sections have a wood top rail. Stain- less steel cables have been added in the horizontal direction, centered between metal rails to create a four inch minimum clearance. However, current code requires vertical barriers at minimum four inches on center. In addition, joints vary in different sections of the railing. There are various materials that could replace the railing that would require less maintenance and present a different aesthetic image. However, the cost to replace the railings is estimated at $2.75 million. A more economical alternative is to retroﬁ t the railing to meet current code for opening size. To achieve the require- ment, stainless steel cable at four inch on-center spacing should be added in a vertical pattern. The color of the railing should be painted Mediterranean Blue, RAL color system 5002 to match new benches, tables and lighting. railings Figure 2 Railing 5.E.a Packet Pg. 419 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 8 Figure 4 Benches by artists Figure 3 Bench 5.E.a Packet Pg. 420 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 9 The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions concluded that there were not enough seating and resting opportu- nities on the Pier. In addition, there are three types of benches on the Pier, some of which are more comfortable than others. The Condition Assess- ment Report noted that the benches on the Pier have backs and are in a ﬁ xed position, most facing the ocean. These types of benches limit the visi- tors view. A backless bench provides more ﬂ exibility for the visitor. WRT recommends a new bench standard to replace variety of existing benches. The new benches should be of a style that provides options for backless benches and benches with backs, inviting the visitor to look out to the ocean or onto the spectacle of performances and people on the Pier. This report recommends the removal of all thirty two existing benches and the addition of forty one new backed benches and twenty seven backless. They should be surface mounted to the deck and carefully located in the locations shown in ﬁ gure 1 to provide a range of seating opportunities. The recommended style of bench, ﬁ gure 3, is 48” Scarborough – hori- zontal metal strap as manufactured by Landscapeforms, ﬁ gure 3. These benches should all be powdercoated by the manufacturer in ‘Ocean Blue’ to match the railing, tables and lights. The estimated cost for each bench is $990 for backless and $1,080 for backed. benches The bench is also an opportunity to engage public art on the Pier. Intro- ducing public art into the seating is encouraged to build on the legacy of ‘whimsy’ of the Pier. Santa Monica, renowned for its programs for public art, may consider numerous options, such as: a. replace all existing benches with a ‘off-the-shelf’ benches and add a few artist-designed/ custom made benches each year, ﬁ gure 4; b. locate artist-designed/custom made benches in speciﬁ c locations, such as on the deck east of the Hippodrome; or c. engage an artist to enhance a new set of ‘off-the-shelf’ benches. WRT recommends establishing a public art program to invite qualiﬁ ed artists to create one-of-a-kind seating for speciﬁ c sites along the pier. Figure 1 illustrates the eight locations where the off-the-shelf bench might be replaced, over time, with an art- ist bench. The estimated budget for the artist benches is $12,000 each, including artist fee, materials and fabrication, installation, one year’s maintenance. 5.E.a Packet Pg. 421 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 10 The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions found that all the nineteen tables are owned and maintained by merchants and shop owners. Their locations serve the tenant’s use. How- ever, there is a need for public picnic tables. Ten of the nineteen existing tables are the square, as shown in ﬁ gure 5, with red seating and table surface. The other ten are small round tables. The style and character of the square metal tables, now used by tenants, with attached bench seating is recom- mended above other options consid- ered, ﬁ gure 5. The existing nineteen should be replaced by merchants to match the recommended blue color and nine- teen new tables should be added (to be owned and maintained by the City) in the locations, ﬁ gure 1. picnic tables Figure 5 Picnic table Six to ten of the new tables should have two or three benches to invite wheel chair users to the table. The color of the perforated metal table tops should be powder coated ‘Slate Blue’, as manufactured by Wabash Valley, for movable tables: Models SG140P - 46” Sq. Table - Perforated and SG155P - 46” 3 - Seat ADA Accessible Table; and for surface mounted tables: SG229P - 46” Sq. Table - 4 Seats - Surf. Mt - Basic Frame - Perforated, and SG234P - 46” Sq. Table - 3 Seats - Surf. Mt - Basic Frame – Perforated. 5.E.a Packet Pg. 422 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 11 Five types of trash receptacles were identiﬁ ed by the Assessment of Exist- ing Conditions. Of the seventy four existing receptacles forty ﬁ ve are the recommended concrete unit, ﬁ gure 6. They were found to require minimal maintenance and most durable of the options available. Approximately thirty new trash receptacles and twenty new receptacles for recycled materials should be placed as shown, ﬁ gure 1, for ease of use and collec- tion. The trash receptacle model QR-CAL2832W, anodized aluminum lid A-24 as manufactured by Quick- crete or approved equal, with the city name embossed and bronze logo inset to match the existing units. Mate- rial to be Ecocast, made from 70% post consumer and industrial waste, color – Erosion. The top eight inches, including the rim, should be sealed to minimize staining. Receptacles for recyclable materials need to be added to the Pier (twenty total). They should be set next to the trash receptacles. It is recommended that the twenty new receptacles for recyclable materials match the trash receptacles with the addition of sig- nage. Signage or other designations on the trash receptacle, is recom- mended to designate the speciﬁ c use of the receptacle and educate the public on the importance of recy- cling. The signage program is to be coordinated with other City agencies. trash receptacles Figure 6 Receptacle The City of Santa Monica uses the following receptacle for recyclable materials: Recycled Recycler Excel Series Model 900-X50-F 50 gal. front access 25”x 22”x 49’” 115 lbs., ‘Designer’ series, as manufactured by Midpoint International. For the Pier, brown recycled plastic lumber, is recommended. It includes a rubber bafﬂ e to discour- age inappropriate removal of materi- als.Figure 7 Recyclable Materials Receptacle 5.E.a Packet Pg. 423 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 12 decking The tradition of the wood deck is important to the distinct character of the Pier. The top decking is primar- ily two inch by twelve inch by twenty foot long lumber. Portions of the pier are covered with asphalt and metal plates. The Design Guidelines require wood decking for the whole pier. The ongoing program for repairing the wood deck is encouraged to con- tinue so that all the metal plates and asphalted areas will be removed and replaced with wood decking. 5.E.a Packet Pg. 424 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 13 Seat walls should be introduced along the curb line, at the change in surface elevation between the two decks. The seat wall should be sixteen inches tall by sixteen inches wide in various lengths with two foot wide gaps at approximately twenty foot intervals to allow pedestrians to walk between, see ﬁ gure 1. The curb seating should be constructed in recycled plastic lumber/wood composite, in a me- dium dark brown color, ﬁ gure 8. curbs The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions noted the use of heavy timbers bolted to the pier deck to guide traf- ﬁ c, deﬁ ne the ﬁ re lane and cover the transition between the different eleva- tions between the Municipal Pier from the pedestrian walkway. While the curbs could be a tripping hazard for pedestrians and visually unappeal- ing they also are used for seating. The ﬁ re lane and pedestrian areas should be deﬁ ned by other means, i.e. bol- lards – see section B. Spatial Com- position and Circulation. A wooden ramp should replace the asphalt inﬁ ll along the seam between the two piers at the amusement facility entrances. Figure 8, Seat wall 5.E.a Packet Pg. 425 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 14 Figure 9, Decorative arched pole Figure 10, Task lights to be added to the decorative poles 5.E.a Packet Pg. 426 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 15 The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions revealed that there were six styles of lights on Santa Monica Pier. The existing decorative arched poles with the acorn light ﬁ xtures are not identiﬁ ed as historic elements, but contribute to the classic character of the Pier. To create a cohesive im- age, remove clutter and improve this important visual element of the Pier, three types of lights are recom- mended. All lights must provide the Pier staff the ability to control each independently. a. Decorative arched poles with an acorn light ﬁ xture, ﬁ gure 9, are the primary character deﬁ n- ing light element of the Pier. Figure 1 illustrates the locations for ninety seven new lights on the twelve foot tall poles at thirty eight foot spacing around the entire pier perimeter. This light serves pedestrians and the light ﬁ xtures, see the Infrastructure Upgrades volume of the Santa Monica Pier Assessment. The original manu- facturer of the existing lights has not been determined. Replacement of a matching pole and ﬁ xture is feasible and should be conducted carefully to achieve the desired character. The rec- ommended manufacturer is Sitelink by Holophane. b. Task lights, ﬁ gure 10, should be placed on the decorative arched poles with three to ﬁ ve spot lights adjustable to illuminate speciﬁ c fea- tures, i.e. ﬁ shing areas, boat launch, performance areas, etc. Figure 1 recommends twenty nine locations. c. Parking lot lights should be replaced on the Newcomb Pier. The lighting study of the Infrastructure Upgrades recommends a twenty ﬁ ve foot tall pole, spaced eighty feet on center along the pier perimeter to provide maximum ﬂ exibility to program events on the Newcomb deck. It is estimated that ﬁ fteen poles , located on ﬁ gure 1, will provide suf- ﬁ cient illumination. d. Necklace Lights currently trim the edge of the pier. It was recommended that the existing lights be replaced with 750 energy efﬁ cient LED ﬁ xtures, at ﬁ ve feet on center, vandal resistant marine grade with cast housing, high impact lens and gasketed cast lens guard as manufac- tured by Cole Lighting. The esti- mated cost exceeded the budget. See the “Lighting Study” for alternatives considered. lights 5.E.a Packet Pg. 427 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 16 a. Bicycle racks are currently on the Pier, but underutilized because of their inconvenient locations. While bicycle riding is not encouraged on the Pier due to potential conﬂ icts with pedestrians, bikes are recognized as a popular and sustainable mode of transportation for locals. To encour- age bicycle access to the Pier new racks are recommended to replace the existing ﬁ ve with additional locations for new bike racks are illustrated on ﬁ gure 1. The galvanized steel ‘Wave’ rack is recommended, ﬁ gure 11, each securing up to eight bikes, as manu- factured by Bike Security Racks Co. b. Security barriers, currently sited, are large three foot by thee foot wooden boxes now serve as bollards to designate pedestrian areas and vehicle areas. It is recommended that the wooden boxes be removed and replaced with 127 ﬁ xed and 14 removable bollards. Model “San Fran- cisco”, as manufactured by Urban Accessories, ﬁ gure 12, spaced eight feet on-center and located as shown on ﬁ gure 1. These cast aluminum furnishings should be powder coated by the manufacturer in RAL color system 5002 to match other furnish- ings. special features Figure 11, Bicycle rack Figure 12, Bollard 5.E.a Packet Pg. 428 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 17 c. Gazebos have been part of the Pier for over 15 years. The two decorative gazebos are located on the south rail of the Pier. They were de- signed as performance areas, but are currently underutilized. To encour- age use, it is recommended a picnic table is installed in each with a trash receptacle nearby, and a system of colorful fabric to animate the space and discourage bird resting/dropping. d. Smoking areas are currently designated and maintained on the Pier, ﬁ gure 1. The existing eight ash urns should be replaced with eight surface mounted, powdercoated (RAL color system 5002) aluminum ash urns, model Grenadier as manufactured by Land- scapeforms, ﬁ gure 13. The deck of the smoking areas should be a solid surface to keep burning items away from the wood Pier. In- stead of the existing painted plywood, it is recommended that a four foot by eight foot deck of tightly set recycled plastic lumber, one inch thick (or less) by six inches wide, tongue and groove, a medium dark brown color, is installed directly on the wood Pier. It is recommended that the envi- ronmental graphics program direct smokers to the designated areas. Figure 13, Ash Urn 5.E.a Packet Pg. 429 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 18 e. Signage is an important interface between the public and the facilities of the Pier, as well as key to the identity of the public places, the merchants and shop owners. Signage for individual tenants and merchants are required to follow the Archi- tectural Design Guidelines. These recommendations are for the public signs. The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions found recently installed signs that provide consolidated informa- tion about rules and regulations that apply to the Pier. However other signage on the Pier is inconsistent in its character, quality, message and placement. A comprehensive environmental graphics program should be devel- oped to direct the replacement and addition of signage on the Santa Monica Pier. The graphics program should be based on what and how information is delivered. It should include an interpretive program ad- dressing cultural resources, natural history, and functions of the pier. The graphics program should coordinate the character of interpretive signage with that needed for directional and regulatory information. The solution should serve the Pier for ﬁ fteen to twenty years allowing an amount of ﬂ exibility with high quality materials located to minimize clutter and focus the message to the public. Figure 14, Interpretive Panel, by Mortar & Ink 5.E.a Packet Pg. 430 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 19 The historic information displayed near the police sub-station at the west end of the Pier may be more effectively displayed in a series of panels along the railing, see ﬁ gure 14. Porcelain enamel is recommended for interpretive signs. This technique and use of materials is proven to hold up well in the ocean climate and deliver hi-quality graphic detail. The size could vary within the system. Figure 1 identiﬁ es up to eight potential loca- tions for interpretive information. Regulatory and directional compo- nents may be aluminum to ﬁ t within the city’s signage program. The existing information kiosk is a helpful and attractive element, ﬁ gure 15. Two additional kiosks are recom- mended as located on ﬁ gure 1. Figure 15, Kiosk Centennial anniversary signage should be considered temporary, un- less it can be included in the com- prehensive environmental graphics program. To assist in the efﬁ cient and effectiveness of a temporary program the PRC should consider: • Deﬁ ning the identity of the year long event; • Building on the City’s envi- ronmental signage program and production capabilities; • Utilizing materials that can be recycled appropriately; and • Engaging local sponsors. 5.E.a Packet Pg. 431 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 20 f. Performance areas are man- aged by the SMPRC, ﬁ gure 1. These open spaces along the edge of the Pier, between the emergency vehicle access path and the railing. These sites should be marked with a painted white star on the wood deck as de- ﬁ ned by the environmental graphics program. g. Vendor carts are managed by the City of Santa Monica in locations shown on ﬁ gure 1. They are marked on the deck with a painted white “T”. 5.E.a Packet Pg. 432 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 21 The Santa Monica Looff Hippodrome building is listed National Historic Landmark, National Register Number: 87000766. Statement of Signiﬁ cance (as of designation - February 27, 1987): The principal historic element of the formerly extensive collection of amusement facilities at the Santa Monica (Looff) Amusement Pier, this is a rare, intact example of an early shelter structure built (1916) to house a carousel in an amusement park and the better preserved of the two such structures that remain on the West Coast. http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1979&ResourceType=Building carousel building roof Historic photos of the Santa Monica Looff Hippodrome (Carousel Build- ing) show the elegant curved funnel shaped roof rising to the central ‘onion dome’ on a cupola. The perimeter of the building has octagonal shaped turrets at the corners of the building. The northeast corner is wider and taller than the other three. Each of the turrets may have had a viewing deck on the ﬂ at roofs with a railing. Three dome shaped features were equally spaced along the rooﬂ ine of each façade. 5.E.a Packet Pg. 433 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 22 Currently the metal funnel roof rises out of a ﬂ at roof with the wood cupola sitting on top. Missing is the ‘onion dome’ cupola roof, the railing around the perimeter of the turret roofs and the twelve dome shaped features. The 1987 Design guidelines note that the Carousel Building was “already restored”, page 56. The graphics of the design guidelines to not indicate the reconstruction of the ‘onion dome’ or the dome shaped features around the building perimeter. Construction plans and speciﬁ cations for Rooﬁ ng and Cupola Replacement were prepared in 1997 by Pugh Scarpa Kodama. They call for the removal of the existing ﬂ at roof portion to the underlying curved sheathing. They do not address the dome shaped features around the building perimeter. The City of Santa Monica’s Land- marks Commission adheres to the National Park Service—Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treat- ment of Historic Properties. Decisions and agreement concerning the Carou- sel Building roof should be conﬁ rmed prior to further action. Recommendations: 1. Conﬁ rm speciﬁ c elements to be reconstructed to meet the Santa Monica Landmark Commission’s requirements and agreements to maintain the National Historic Landmark status of the building. 2. Update the Rooﬁ ng and Cupola Replacement Plans to meet current building and safety codes and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (including, but not limited to, the restoration of the turrets, addition of perimeter dome shaped features if necessary). 5.E.a Packet Pg. 434 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.a Packet Pg. 435 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 436Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 437Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 438Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 439Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 440Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 441Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 442Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 443Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 444Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 445Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 446Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 447Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 448Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 449Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 450Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 451Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 452Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 453Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 454Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 455Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 456Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 457Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 458Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 459Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 460Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 461Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 462Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 463Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 464Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 465Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 466Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 467Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 468Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 469Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 470Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 471Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 472Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 473Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 474Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 475Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 476Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 477Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 478Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 479Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 480Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 481Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 482Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 483Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 484Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 485Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 486Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 487Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 488Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 489Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 490Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 491Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 492Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 493Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 494Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 495Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 496Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 497Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 498Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 499Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 500Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 501Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 502Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 503Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 504Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 505Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 506Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 507Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 508Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 509Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 510Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 511Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 512Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 513Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 514Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 515Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5.E.aPacket Pg. 516Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Prepared by: Moffatt & Nichol Waterfront Inspection & Engineering 4225 E. Conant Street Long Beach, CA 90808 (562) 590-6500 FINAL - SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study - 2018 Update Submittal Date: M&N Project No.: City of Santa Monica Project No.: December 12, 2018 10225-00 SP2473 Revised: February 11, 2020 Prepared for: The City of Santa Monica Public Works Department, Civil Engineering Division 1437 4th Street, Room 300 Santa Monica, CA 90401 (310) 458-2201 Santa Monica Municipal Pier, Santa Monica, CA 5.E.b Packet Pg. 517 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Page i SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INFRASTRUCTURE INSPECTION & ASSESSMENT STUDY (2018 UPDATE) Field investigations for the Santa Monica Pier inspection and condition assessment were led by Jeremiah Holcomb, PE, between July 24th and September 7th, 2018 to assess the condition of the existing pier structural components. The inspection was conducted in accordance with the American Society of Civil Engineers- Manual 130 “Waterfront Facilities Inspection and Assessment” (ASCE Manual 130) standard practices. Repair and upgrade recommendations are intended for planning purposes only, and do not constitute engineering designs necessary to construct these necessary improvements. Jeremiah Holcomb, PE 80027 Senior Staff Engineer 5.E.b Packet Pg. 518 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page i Revision Date Reason for Issue M&N Job Number Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by 01 12-01-18 Draft Submittal 10225 02 09-24-19 Final Submittal 10225 03 02-11-2020 Final Submittal 10225 5.E.b Packet Pg. 519 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page ii Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................vi Phase 1 – Observations Summary and Repair Cost Estimate..............................................................vi Phase 2 – Pier Upgrades Summary and Cost Estimate.......................................................................xiii 1. Introduction.........................................................................................................................1 Inspection Scope of Work.............................................................................................................1 Exclusions......................................................................................................................................2 Documentation Review.................................................................................................................2 2. Background and Description of Facilities...............................................................................3 Existing Facilities Description........................................................................................................3 Pier ZONE Identification................................................................................................................4 ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier (Bent 0 – Bent 53)........................................................................6 ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier (Bent 35 – Bent 53).............................................6 ZONE 3 - Concrete West-End Approach Pier (Bent 42 – Bent 59.8).............................................7 ZONE 4 - Concrete West-End Platform Pier (Bent 60 – Bent 103)................................................8 3. Repair Recommendation Criteria........................................................................................10 Element Damage and Overall System Condition Assessment Ratings .......................................10 General Phasing of Repair Recommendations ...........................................................................10 4. Municipal Pier Inspection Observations ..............................................................................11 General Observations .................................................................................................................11 ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) ......................................................15 ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment (Bent 35 – Bent 53)............................26 ZONE 3 - Concrete West-End Approach Pier Segment (Bent 42 – Bent 59.8)............................32 ZONE 4 - Concrete West-End Platform Pier Segment (Bent 60 – Bent 103) ..............................35 Additional Defects Observed......................................................................................................39 5. Repair Observations Summary and Cost Estimate................................................................43 Geographic Information System (GIS) Database ........................................................................43 Priority Repairs (Immediate Repair/Replacement).....................................................................44 Short-Term Repairs (Within 1-5 Years).......................................................................................45 Long-Term Repairs (Within 5-10 Years)......................................................................................46 Additional Defect Repairs (Hardware and Appurtenances) .......................................................47 Repair Cost Estimates .................................................................................................................47 6. Repair Recommendations...................................................................................................50 Timber Substructure Repair Recommendations.........................................................................50 Concrete Substructure Repair Recommendations .....................................................................53 7. Upgrades Assessment and Related Studies..........................................................................58 Pier Load Rating and Upgrades Assessment...............................................................................58 Pier Load Ratings and Upgrades Summary.................................................................................65 Pier Upgrades Cost Estimate.......................................................................................................67 Sea Level Rise..............................................................................................................................70 5.E.b Packet Pg. 520 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page iii Appendices: Appendix A: Material Element & Overall System Condition Assessment Ratings Appendix B: GIS Database Inspection Summary Figures Appendix C: Detailed Pier Repair Cost Summary Appendix D: Pier Load Rating Figures Appendix E: Pier Condition Element Ratings and Identified Defects Appendix F: Reference Documents List of Tables Table E-1: Priority Repair Summary ........................................................................................................ viii Table E-2: Short-term Repair Summary .................................................................................................... ix Table E-3: Long-term Repair Summary ...................................................................................................... x Table E-4: Priority Repair Cost Estimate ................................................................................................... xi Table E-5: Short-term Repair Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. xi Table E-6: Long-term Repair Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. xii Table E-7: Deck Area Life Cycle Repair Cost Estimate .............................................................................. xiv Table E-8: Deck Area Upgrades Cost Estimate ......................................................................................... xv Table E-9: Area 14 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate ....................................................... xv Table E-10: Area 17 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate ....................................................... xv Table 5-1: Priority Repair Summary ......................................................................................................... 44 Table 5-2: Short-term Repair Summary ................................................................................................... 45 Table 5-3: Long-term Repair Summary .................................................................................................... 46 Table 5-4: Priority Repair Cost Estimate .................................................................................................. 48 Table 5-5: Short-term Repair Cost Estimate ............................................................................................. 49 Table 5-6: Long-term Repair Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. 49 Table 7-1: Deck Area Upgrades Cost Estimate ......................................................................................... 68 Table 7-2: Area 14 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate ....................................................... 69 Table 7-3: Area 17 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate ....................................................... 69 List of Figures Figure E-1: Pier Identification System / GIS Database ............................................................................... vii Figure E-2: Site Plan – Pier Load Assessment ............................................................................................xiii Figure 2-1: Project Location ......................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2-2: Aerial View of Project Site ......................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2-3: Pier ZONE Identification System................................................................................................ 5 Figure 2-4: Typical Pier Cross Section (ZONE 1: Municipal Pier & Newcomb Pier) ..................................... 6 Figure 2-5: Typical Pier Cross Section (ZONE 2: Amusement Structure) ..................................................... 7 Figure 2-6: Typical Pier Cross Section (ZONE 3: West-End Approach) ........................................................ 8 Figure 2-7: Typical Pier Cross Section (ZONE 4: West-End Platform) .......................................................... 9 5.E.b Packet Pg. 521 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page iv Figure 4-1: Pier Area Identification System ............................................................................................... 11 Figure 4-2: ZONE 1 Site Plan - Timber East-End Portion of Pier ................................................................ 15 Figure 4-3: Site Plan – Concrete Amusement Structure Portion of Pier ................................................... 26 Figure 4-4: Site Plan – Concrete West-End Approach Portion of Pier ....................................................... 32 Figure 4-5: Site Plan – Concrete West-End Platform Portion of Pier ........................................................ 35 Figure 5-1: Site Plan – GIS Map Used for Field Investigations ................................................................... 43 Figure 6-1: Timber Pile FRP Jacket Repair Method (Five Star Marine, Inc.) .............................................. 51 Figure 6-2: Concrete Corrosion and Spalling Progression ......................................................................... 54 Figure 6-3: Rebar Corrosion Without and With Sacrificial Anodes (Vector Corrosion) ............................. 54 Figure 6-4: Repair of Concrete Corrosion and Spalling ............................................................................. 56 Figure 7-1: Site Plan – Pier Load Rating Map ............................................................................................. 58 Figure 7-2: H7.5 Truck Loading .................................................................................................................. 65 Figure 7-3: California Ocean Protection Council SLR Projections and Associated Risk Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................. 70 List of Photos Photo 4-1: Overall view of the Pier as seen from Palisades Park looking to the southwest. ................... 12 Photo 4-2: Pier entrance as seen from entrance bridge structure looking west. ..................................... 12 Photo 4-3: ZONE 2 Amusement Structure transition from ZONE 1 East-End Structure as seen from the West-End Approach looking southeast. .................................................................................. 13 Photo 4-4: Transition between ZONE 3 West-End Approach, ZONE 1 East-End Structure, and ZONE 2 Amusement Structure from boat looking to the east. ............................................................ 13 Photo 4-5: ZONE 3 West-End Approach transition from ZONE 4 West-End Platform Structure .............. 14 Photo 4-6: West-End Platform portion of the Pier with concrete waffle slab. ......................................... 14 Photo 4-7: Typical timber pile condition under water (Level II inspection effort). .................................. 15 Photo 4-8: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Severe Defect, Pile 11.5q ..................................................................... 17 Photo 4-9: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Severe Defect, Pile 47i.7 ....................................................................... 17 Photo 4-10: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Major Defect, Pile 46f ........................................................................... 17 Photo 4-11: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Moderate Defect, Pile 47c .................................................................... 17 Photo 4-12: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Caps Severe Defect, ............................................................................... 19 Photo 4-13: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Caps Severe Defect, Caps 41K-41O ...................................................... 19 Photo 4-14: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Caps Major Defect, Caps 41a-41c......................................................... 19 Photo 4-15: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Caps Moderate Defect, Caps 39M-39O................................................. 19 Photo 4-16: ZONE 1 - Timber Bracing Severe Defect, Pile 42n-43n ........................................................... 21 Photo 4-17: ZONE 1 - Timber Bracing Severe Defect, Pile 41K-41M ........................................................... 21 Photo 4-18: ZONE 1 - Steel Bracing Major Defect, Pile 47c-47d ................................................................ 21 Photo 4-19: ZONE 1 - Timber Bracing Moderate Defect, Pile 43a-44a ....................................................... 21 Photo 4-20: ZONE 1 - Stringer Area Severe Defect, Pile 37k-37n-38k-38n ................................................ 23 Photo 4-21: ZONE 1 - Stringer Area Severe Defect, Pile 36l-36m-37l-37m ................................................ 23 Photo 4-22: ZONE 1 - Stringer Area Major Defect, Pile 6q-6p-7p-7o ......................................................... 23 Photo 4-23: ZONE 1 - Stringer Area Moderate Defect, Pile 23p-23r-24r-24p ............................................ 23 Photo 4-24: ZONE 1 - Decking Area Major Defect, Defect Area 2.............................................................. 25 Photo 4-25: ZONE 1 - Decking Area Major Defect, Defect Area 7 .............................................................. 25 5.E.b Packet Pg. 522 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page v Photo 4-26: ZONE 1 - Decking Area Major Defect, Defect Area 6.............................................................. 25 Photo 4-27: ZONE 1 - Decking Area Moderate Defect, Defect Area 4 ........................................................ 25 Photo 4-28: Typical Previous Concrete Pile Jacket Repair .......................................................................... 26 Photo 4-29: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Major Defect, Pile AS_24G ................................................................ 27 Photo 4-30: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Major Defect, Pile AS_24G ................................................................. 27 Photo 4-31: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Moderate Defect, Pile AS_32B .......................................................... 27 Photo 4-32: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Moderate Defect, Pile 53q_W ........................................................... 27 Photo 4-33: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Capital Moderate Defect, Pile 41s ..................................................... 28 Photo 4-34: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Capital Moderate Defect, Pile 42s..................................................... 28 Photo 4-35: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Capital Moderate Defect, Pile 43o .................................................... 28 Photo 4-36: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Severe Defect, Pile AS_19 ........................................................... 29 Photo 4-37: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Severe Defect, Pile AS_23 .......................................................... 30 Photo 4-38: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Severe Defect, Pile AS_19 .......................................................... 30 Photo 4-39: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Severe Defect, Pile AS_19 ........................................................... 30 Photo 4-40: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Major Defect, Pile AS_21 ........................................................... 31 Photo 4-41: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Moderate Defect, Pile 41w-41y ................................................. 31 Photo 4-42: ZONE 3 – Typical Concrete Pile, Pile 49K ................................................................................ 33 Photo 4-43: ZONE 3 - Typical Concrete Pile, Pile 49N ............................................................................... 33 Photo 4-44: ZONE 3 – Typical Concrete Pile Caps Moderate Defect, Pile 51K-51L..................................... 34 Photo 4-45: ZONE 3 - Typical Concrete Pile Cap, Pile 49K ......................................................................... 34 Photo 4-46: ZONE 4 – Concrete Pile Moderate Defect, Pile 93E_E ............................................................ 36 Photo 4-47: ZONE 4 - Concrete Pile Moderate Defect, Pile 95C ................................................................ 36 Photo 4-48: ZONE 4 – Concrete Waffle Slab Moderate Defect, Defect Area 13 ........................................ 37 Photo 4-49: ZONE 4 - Concrete Waffle Slab Moderate Defect, Defect Area 13 ........................................ 37 Photo 4-50: ZONE 4 – Deck Area Moderate Defect, Defect Area 14 .......................................................... 38 Photo 4-51: ZONE 4 - Deck Area Moderate Defect, Defect Area 13 .......................................................... 38 Photo 4-52: Additional Defects - Utility Supports, Corroded Hangers near Pile 89H ................................. 39 Photo 4-53: Additional Defects - Utility Supports, Corroded Hangers near Pile 29M ................................ 39 Photo 4-54: Additional Defects - Leaking Wet Utility Pipes, Leaking PVC Line near Pile 34y ..................... 40 Photo 4-55: Additional Defects - Leaking Wet Utility Pipes, Leaking Fire Line near Pile 29M .................... 40 Photo 4-56: Additional Defects - Handrail Corrosion near Pile 76P ............................................................ 41 Photo 4-57: Additional Defects - Handrail Corrosion near Pile 97A ........................................................... 41 Photo 4-58: Additional Defects - ADA Compliance near Pile 86P ............................................................... 42 Photo 4-59: Additional Defects - ADA Compliance near Pile 26c ............................................................... 42 5.E.b Packet Pg. 523 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page vi Executive Summary Moffatt & Nichol (M&N) was retained by the City of Santa Monica (City) to perform inspection, assessment, and rehabilitation engineering services for the Santa Monica Municipal Pier (Pier) facilities, in the City of Santa Monica, California. This waterfront inspection report is part of a design repair project that will identify potential Pier defects and associated rehabilitation options. This report is intended to provide updates to the previous Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study performed in 2008 (PIAS-2008), by M&N and associate subconsultants. Efforts for this updated 2018 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (PIAS-2018) are focused on providing condition assessment and rehabilitation concepts for the Pier to correct defects identified in existing structural elements. This scope of work included: existing Pier piles, pile caps, stringers, lateral and transverse bracing, and deck elements. In addition, studies were performed to evaluate the need for future recommended upgrades for a variety of reasons including: providing an allowable load rating for emergency vehicles, minimizing on-going maintenance within the offshore splash zone, and to maintain existing operations. The scope of services for this PIAS-2018 excluded some items previously considered as part of the PIAS- 2008 and/or are not included in the scope of work at the request of the City. Excluded items include existing electrical and wet utilities not limited to: Pier lighting, shore power, tie-ins to existing buildings, potable water, sewage, fire water, storm drains, and other existing landside utilities. The scope of work also excluded landside and above-deck Pier facilities (Topside Buildings and Amusement Structures, Topside Architectural Furnishings (benches, light poles, etc.), Landside Concrete Abutments and/or Bulkhead Walls, and Waterside Shore Protection & Rock Revetments. This report consists of two study phases. Phase 1 provides observations and assesses the existing condition of the various structural infrastructure systems of the Pier. Rehabilitation studies are then provided for the various deficiencies noted and construction cost estimates developed for those proposed repairs. Phase 2 presents potential upgrades and maintenance programs to be implemented into the future 10-year improvement plan. Evaluations are given on the existing load rating of the Pier, and cost estimates developed to outline construction costs for the proposed upgrades. Phase 1 – Observations Summary and Repair Cost Estimate The inspection and assessment were performed to support the development of repair recommendations for the Pier. The repair recommendations are presented below in a prioritized manner considering severity of damage, location, and impact of damage to the overall Pier structural integrity, and operational use of the facilities. An attempt has also been made to categorize the deficiencies that will allow the City to choose a maintenance or replacement program that best suits their needs and budget. The inspection report focuses on identification of deficiencies as part of a future design repair project. Providing engineering bid documents (repair plans, details, and specifications) for the recommended repairs are outside the scope of this inspection report. Due to the nature and configuration of repairs necessary, required repairs will likely entail water-based construction operations. Various techniques may be employed to conduct these repairs; however, it is recommended construction plans and details be developed prior to construction. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 524 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page vii GIS Database A GIS database was created for structural components of the pier that were inspected. Figure E-1 shows a map of inspection ‘ZONES’ used to define the assessment. The inspection observations have been uploaded to the City’s GIS database system, and additional information can also be found in Appendix B. Figure E-1: Pier Identification System / GIS Database Pier Identification System To facilitate the inspection effort and to have a common location reference, a pile numbering system was established, and reference numbers painted on piles as part of the 2008 study. To eliminate confusion with prior numbering schemes, old markings on the piles were painted out using black paint. The new numbers were painted in white. In this numbering system the pile bents are numbered consecutively starting at "1" for the first pile bent at the east or onshore end of the Pier and ending in “103” at the west or offshore end of the Pier. The piles in each bent are assigned a letter designation, starting with “a” for the first pile bent at the north end of the Pier, then continuing on to “z” and ending in “AB” at the south end of the Pier. See Figure E-1 for the numbering system. Condition Assessment Summary The following is a summary of structural defects/damages identified during the inspections, with repair directives as follows: x Priority – for “Severe” damages – Repair as soon as feasible x Short-Term – for “Major” damages – Repair within 1-5 years x Long-Term – for “Moderate” damages – Repair within 5-10 years Based upon the structural element deficiencies identified in the observation portion of this report, it is our recommendation that reparative or further extensive replacement options are necessary to prevent future potential worsening of present Pier defects. Refer to Appendix E for a full itemized list of deficiencies and damage ratings. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 525 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page viii It is recommended future Pier inspections be conducted at regular intervals according to normal industry standard, every five (5) to ten (10) years or following a significant storm wave or other significant event. Priority Repairs Summary (Immediate Repair / Replacement) Consistent with the “priority-repair” recommendations, the repairs defined in this section are recommended to be accomplished as soon as feasible. Defects included were categorized with “Severe” damage. Refer to Table E-1 below. Table E-1: Priority Repair Summary 5.E.b Packet Pg. 526 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page ix Short-term Repairs Summary (Within 1-5 Years) Consistent with the “short-term repair” recommendations, the repairs defined in this section are recommended to be accomplished as soon as feasible but may be delayed for the first 1-5 years while the City appropriates funds. Defects included were categorized with “Major” damage. Refer to Table E-2 below. Table E-2: Short-term Repair Summary 5.E.b Packet Pg. 527 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page x Long-term Repairs Summary (Within 5-10 Years) Consistent with the “long-term repair” recommendations, the repairs defined in this section are to be accomplished as soon as feasible but may be delayed until the City’s next maintenance cycle (5 to 10 years). Defects included were categorized with “Moderate” damage. Refer to Table E-3 below. Table E-3: Long-term Repair Summary 5.E.b Packet Pg. 528 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page xi Repair Cost Estimate Summary Estimates of probable construction costs have been produced for the three repair conditions “priority,” “short-term,” and “long-term.” Cost estimates assume each of these repair phases will be done under a separate contractor mobilization effort. There may be an opportunity to save costs by conducting all repairs under a single contract, by having an on-call agreement with a local marine construction contractor, or by having the City maintenance staff conduct the repairs. Refer to Table E-4, Table E-5, and Table E-6 below, also refer to Appendix C for a full itemized cost estimate for recommended repairs. Table E-4: Priority Repair Cost Estimate Table E-5: Short-term Repair Cost Estimate 5.E.b Packet Pg. 529 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page xii Table E-6: Long-term Repair Cost Estimate On-Going Life Cycle Maintenance Repairs Summary (As-Needed) At the request of the City, estimates of probable construction costs have also been provided for future life cycle replacement costs for deck members, based on various loading scenarios. This estimate is meant to provide the City with an estimate for future planning of deck replacement cycles based on a square- foot basis and includes only deck boards (excluding stringers and pile caps). It is assumed deck board members will be replaced with 3-inch x 12-inch nominal size timber members at regular intervals once they deteriorate beyond their useful life. The estimates do not consider necessary future maintenance or upgrades to meet load requirements. Cost estimates assume each of these upgrade phases will be done under a separate contractor mobilization effort. The expected useful life of deck boards under pedestrian foot traffic is 10-15 years and under vehicle traffic is 5-10 years. The opinion of probable construction cost is shown in Table E-7 below. Table E-7: Deck Area Life Cycle Repair Cost Estimate 5.E.b Packet Pg. 530 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page xiii Phase 2 – Pier Upgrades Summary and Cost Estimate Pier Load Rating Summary The results of the Pier load assessment are broken into localized ‘Areas’ corresponding to the type of construction, anticipated loading, and age of construction. Recommendations from the previous PIAS- 2008 study have been incorporated into this PIAS-2018, and recommended upgrades updated to reflect actual Pier conditions at the time of inspections. Consideration was also given to upgrades that have been completed to the Pier since the last inspection in 2008. Figure E-2 below depicts the different pier areas, and a complete map of the pier load rating can be found in Appendix D. Figure E-2: Site Plan – Pier Load Assessment Pier Upgrades Summary This assessment focuses on identification of upgrades necessary to achieve load requirements or future maintenance goals as part of the overall Pier capital improvements program. In particular, the City desires to provide upgrades to the Pier to allow occasional H-20 vehicle access for emergency response and regular H-15 access for delivery truck vehicles. Providing engineering bid documents (upgrade plans, details, and specifications) for the recommended upgrades are outside the scope of this report. Due to the nature and configuration of necessary upgrades, they will likely require water-based construction operations. Various techniques may be employed to conduct these upgrades; it is recommended construction plans and details be developed prior to construction. Estimates of probable construction costs have been produced for the recommended upgrades for the Pier deck areas to achieve necessary load requirements or future maintenance goals. Cost estimates assume each of these upgrade phases will be done under a separate contractor mobilization effort. There may be an opportunity to save costs by conducting all upgrades under a single contract, by having an on-call 5.E.b Packet Pg. 531 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page xiv agreement with a local marine construction contractor, or by having the City maintenance staff conduct the upgrades. Refer to Appendix D for a full itemized cost estimate for recommended upgrades. The opinion of probable construction cost is shown in Table E-8 through Table E-10. Table E-8: Deck Area Upgrades Cost Estimate 5.E.b Packet Pg. 532 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page xv Table E-9: Area 14 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate Table E-10: Area 17 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate 5.E.b Packet Pg. 533 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 1 1. Introduction Moffatt & Nichol (M&N) was retained by the City of Santa Monica (City) to perform inspection, assessment, and rehabilitation engineering services for the Santa Monica Municipal Pier (Pier) facilities, located at the foot of Colorado Avenue in Santa Monica, California. This waterfront inspection report is part of an assessment project that will identify potential Pier defects and associated rehabilitation options. Additional services required to produce engineering bid documents for the recommended repairs mentioned in this report for award to a marine contractor to construct are assumed to be outside the scope of this assessment but can be provided under a separate future task order. The inspections were conducted between July 24 and September 7, 2018. The effort included inspection of above water and submerged (underwater) structural components. The field investigations were performed under the staff supervision of Jerry Holcomb, PE (Above Water Team Leader) and Mike Breitenstein, PE (Underwater Team Leader). Inspection Scope of Work The Scope of Work for this effort included above water and underwater inspection of the timber, concrete, and steel structural portions of the Santa Monica Municipal Pier. The Pier extends from the concrete approach bridge to and including the end platform for an overall length of approximately 1,600 feet. This Pier forms the main thoroughfare for pedestrian and vehicular access to the commercial and recreational areas of the Pier. Most of the Pier is comprised of timber, except the furthermost westerly 600 feet, including the end platform, which is concrete with timber decking. In general, the field investigations consisted of: ¾Above Water Inspection. o Visually inspect decking, stringers, blocking, pile caps, piles, cross bracing, and structural connections between these members utilizing M&N crew directly on the beach and with small work boat for use during under-deck site investigations. ¾Underwater Inspection was performed by a 4-man surface supplied air (SSA) crew consisting of commercially trained M&N Engineer-Divers. Inspection efforts were in accordance with the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Manual No. 130, “Waterfront Facilities Inspection and Assessment” standard practices, as follows: o Level I inspectioneffort of 100% of timber and concrete piles. This effort consists of a close visual examination of the entire submerged structure to detect obvious damage or deterioration. This effort will assess the integrity of the structural members as well as the detection of undermining or exposure of normally buried elements. o Level II inspection effort of 10% of timber and concrete piles chosen at random. This effort includes removal of marine growth in three 12-inch bands (splash zone, mudline, and mid- depth), and close examination of the underlying material. o Level III inspection effort is not included in the scope of this inspection. (This more detailed level of effort to assess health of piles could include dissolved oxygen laboratory testing, timber and concrete coring, or other means to detect deterioration. The determination of the need for this effort was to be made after the initial condition had been assessed.) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 534 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 2 ¾Provide Summary Report with photographs and a description of the findings of the above and underwater inspection. The draft report is to be submitted as soon as possible after inspection. Exclusions The scope of the inspection and assessment services excluded certain landside and above-deck Pier support facilities, including but not limited to: Topside Buildings and Amusement Structures, Topside Architectural Furnishings (benches, light poles, etc.), Landside Concrete Abutments and/or Bulkhead Walls, and Waterside Shore Protection & Rock Revetments. The scope of work also excluded existing electrical and wet utilities, including but not limited to: Pier lighting, shore power, tie-ins to existing buildings, potable water, sewage, fire water, gas, storm drain, and other existing landside utilities. Documentation Review The following documents were provided by the City and reviewed by M&N prior to conducting this inspection and can be found in Appendix F: ¾Record drawings titled, “Santa Monica Municipal Pier Railing and Lighting Replacement and Deck Upgrade- Area 4, SP 2465,” Prepared by City of Santa Monica, Department of Public Works, dated May 2017 ¾Record drawings and inspection report titled, “Construction Observations of Pacific Park Concrete Pile Repairs”, Prepared by AECOM, dated July 2016 ¾Record drawings titled, “Santa Monica Phase 4 Municipal Pier Replacement, SP 2124”, prepared by URS, dated October 2012 ¾Geotechnical soils report titled, “Clean Beaches Project, Geotechnical Investigation Report,” prepared by Tetra Tech, dated February 2017 ¾Record drawings titled, “Santa Monica Municipal Pier,” Prepared by Theodore E. Anvick, dated January 1989 ¾Previous pier assessment report titled, “Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study,” prepared by Moffatt & Nichol, dated November 2008 5.E.b Packet Pg. 535 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 3 2. Background and Description of Facilities Existing Facilities Description The scope of this inspection and assessment focuses on the Pier, located within the Santa Monica Bay in Southern California. The Pier is located within the City limits of Santa Monica on the coast of the Pacific Ocean south of Malibu and north of Venice Beach, in Los Angeles County, 15 miles west of downtown Los Angeles (see Figure 2-1). Figure 2-1: Project Location The Santa Monica Bay is a naturally occurring littoral inlet cell that spans from Point Mugu to the Palos Verdes Peninsula. The Pier in its current configuration completed construction in 1996, with the official opening of the Pacific Park amusement park. The Pier is approximately 350,000 square feet in area and located at the approximate address of 200 Santa Monica Pier St., south of Colorado Ave. (see Figure 2-1). The Pier extends from the concrete approach bridge to, and including, the end platform for an overall length of approximately 1,600 feet. The width of the Pier varies from approximately 300 feet at its widest to approximately 35 feet at its narrowest, towards the west end platform approach. Mudline elevations near the Pier at the western waterside portion vary from roughly 0-feet Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) depth to -20-feet MLLW (see Figure 2-2). Beach elevations near the Pier at the eastern landside portion vary from roughly 0-feet MLLW to +10-feet MLLW. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 536 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 4 Figure 2-2: Aerial View of Project Site The Santa Monica coastline has historically seen several different pier configurations since the early 1900s. The original pier configuration was constructed in 1909 to support, and house, an ocean outfall pipeline that carried treated sewage into the ocean. This original pier was one of the first of its kind to be constructed completely from concrete; however, due to harsh ocean conditions that caused rapid deterioration, this pier was demolished, and a new pier was erected in 1916 utilizing creosote treated timber piles. With the construction of the new pier, local entrepreneurs and City Council members saw the opportunity to reimagine the facilities as a pleasure pier and recreational fishing hub. Of the notable attractions on the new pier, The Hippodrome was a large building constructed to house a Pier Carousel that later became Santa Monica’s first national Historic landmark. Later in 1933, it was envisioned that a Santa Monica Yacht Harbor would be an attraction to offer a safe destination for vessel landings, and thus an offshore rubble-mound breakwater was constructed. The pier continued to undergo several fragmented repairs over the years until 1983, when the pier and breakwater were damaged by severe storms and condemned for safety reasons. By 1990 most of the pier had been rebuilt, and in 1996 the official opening of Pacific Park amusement park completed the pier we know today. This pier incorporated the portion of the original timber “Newcomb Pier” that survived the 1983 storms. Pier ZONE Identification A naming convention for the pier was adopted for ease in identifying the variety of structural elements that were inspected. The overall pier was broken into four (4) different ZONES that correspond to the vintage of pier construction, materials of construction, and location within the existing pier footprint. A layout of the overall pier describing the designated areas is shown in Figure 2-3. In addition, a description of each area has been provided later in this section for help in understanding the structure configuration. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 537 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 5 The existing pier is constructed with approximately 103 pile bents (rows of piles). Refer to Appendix B for reference plan layouts of the existing pier. A breakdown of the different areas and description of locations is as follows: x ZONE 1: Bent 0 through Bent 53 o Composed of primarily of restaurant buildings, concession buildings, and top-side pier parking lots. o Structural composition is timber piles with timber deck support elements. x ZONE 2: Bent 35 through Bent 53 o Support the large foundations required for Pacific park amusement rides, games, and arcade areas. o Structural composition is concrete piles with concrete deck support elements. x ZONE 3: Bent 42 through Bent 59.8 o Supports an approach walkway that leads to the west-end platform and is composed of mainly open space, benches, and architectural features. o Structural composition is concrete piles with concrete deck support elements. x ZONE 4: Bent 60 through Bent 103 o Composed of the west-end platform portion of the Pier that houses fishing platforms along the outboard edge and supports additional restaurant, concession, and local police buildings with a walkway in the center of the Pier. o Structural composition is concrete piles with concrete deck support elements. Figure 2-3: Pier ZONE Identification System 5.E.b Packet Pg. 538 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 6 ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Pier ZONE 1 facilities are comprised entirely of a fixed timber pier substructure with additional appurtenances that facilitate public use for its customers. ZONE 1 has open access to the public year- round and is mostly utilized by pedestrians, tourists, and those accessing the pier-side parking lots. The pier substructure is comprised of timber piles, pile caps, stringers, lateral and transverse cross bracing, and deck planks. Loading on the top-deck of the pier is transferred through the deck boards to deck support stringer elements beneath. These elements rest on top of a pile cap member that then transfer loads to the timber piles, which are embedded deep into the ground to transfer load to surrounding soils. The piles are also supported laterally with lateral bracing to adjacent piles in both the longitudinal and transverse axis of the pier. Located along the length of the pier are single-story commercial concession buildings and restaurants that are fully enclosed and various open-air patio areas for customers with a walkway on the northern and southern edges of the Pier. A partial cross section showing the typical Pier support substructure is provided in Figure 2-4. Figure 2-4: Typical Pier Cross Section (ZONE 1: Municipal Pier & Newcomb Pier) (Moffatt & Nichol Engineers, Santa Monica Pier Assessment Report dated November 2008) ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier (Bent 35 – Bent 53) Pier ZONE 2 facilities are comprised entirely of a fixed concrete pier with additional appurtenances that facilitate public use for its customers. ZONE 2 has limited access to the public year-round and has various 5.E.b Packet Pg. 539 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 7 fences and gates to protect public safety due to amusement structures and is mostly utilized by pedestrians, tourists, and those accessing the amusement rides at Pacific Park. The pier substructure is comprised of concrete piles, capitals, pile cap strut-and-tie elements, and supports timber stringers and deck planks. Loading on the top-deck of the pier is transferred through the deck boards to deck support timber stringer elements beneath. These elements rest on top of a concrete pile cap member that then transfer loads to the concrete piles, which areembedded deep into the ground to transfer load to surrounding soils. Located along the length of the pier are an array of amusement rides, games, and commercial concession buildings. A partial cross section showing the typical pier support substructure is provided in Figure 2-5. Figure 2-5: Typical Pier Cross Section (ZONE 2: Amusement Structure) (AECOM Engineers, Pile Repair Project dated June 2016) ZONE 3 - Concrete West-End Approach Pier (Bent 42 – Bent 59.8) Pier ZONE 3 facilities are comprised entirely of a fixed concrete pier with additional appurtenances that facilitate public use for its customers. ZONE 3 has open access to the public year-round and is mostly utilized by pedestrians, tourists, and fishermen. The pier substructure is comprised of concrete piles, pile cap strut-and-tie elements, and supports timber stringers and deck planks. Loading on the top-deck of the pier is transferred through the deck boards to deck support timber stringer elements beneath. These elements rest on top of a concrete pile cap member that then transfer loads to the concrete piles, which are embedded deep into the ground to transfer load to surrounding soils. Located along the length of the pier are mainly open space, benches, and 5.E.b Packet Pg. 540 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 8 architectural features. A general cross section showing the pier support substructure is provided in Figure 2-6. Figure 2-6: Typical Pier Cross Section (ZONE 3: West-End Approach) (URS Engineers, Phase 4 Pier Upgrades Project dated September 2012) ZONE 4 - Concrete West-End Platform Pier (Bent 60 – Bent 103) Pier ZONE 4 facilities are comprised entirely of a fixed concrete pier with additional appurtenances that facilitate public use for its customers. ZONE 4 has open access to the public year-round and is mostly utilized by pedestrians, tourists, fishermen, and the local police and lifeguard. The pier substructure is comprised of concrete piles, waffle slab elements, and supports timber sleepers and deck planks. Loading on the top-deck of the pier is transferred through the deck boards to deck support timber sleeper elements beneath. These elements rest on top of a concrete waffle slab that then transfer loads to the concrete piles, which are embedded deep into the ground to transfer load to surrounding soils. Located along the length of the pier are mainly fishing platforms along the outboard edge, restaurant, concession, and local police buildings. A general cross section showing the pier support substructure is provided in Figure 2-7. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 541 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 9 Figure 2-7: Typical Pier Cross Section (ZONE 4: West-End Platform) (Theodore E. Anvick Consulting Structural Engineers, Original Construction Project dated January 1989) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 542 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 10 3. Repair Recommendation Criteria Element Damage and Overall System Condition Assessment Ratings The ASCE Manual No. 130, “Waterfront Facilities Inspection and Assessment” includes standardized element-level damage ratings for structural elements of the various materials found in waterfront structures’ components and systems. The basic terms used to rate the damage of each element are listed below and will be used in this report to describe the severity of defects observed on structural elements. ¾NI – Not Inspected ¾ND – No Defects ¾MN – Minor Damage ¾MD – Moderate Damage ¾MJ – Major Damage ¾SV – Severe Damage Individual element ratings details vary by an element’s material. Pertinent materials’ element ratings details and additional definitions and descriptions for overall system ratings can be found in Appendix A. General Phasing of Repair Recommendations Reference is made to the observations of defects and damages detailed in Section 4 of this report, and associated photos, which provide general descriptions for the findings of this inspection. Repair recommendations are divided into four (4) repair priority categories: ¾Priority Repairs – Components assigned a rating of “Severe” should be repaired or replaced immediately. ¾Short-term Repairs – Complete repairs within 1-5 years. Those defect items that have been identified as having “Major Damage” should be monitored closely until repair has been completed. ¾Long-term Repairs – A lower-priority repair is recommended for items identified as having “Moderate Damage.” It is anticipated components will require repairs or replacement within the next 5-10 years or following a significant storm wave or other significant event. ¾Deferred Maintenance Recommendations – The lowest priority is given for ongoing maintenance items for “Minor Damage.” Components should continue to be monitored with follow-on inspections every five (5) to ten (10) years or following a significant storm wave or other significant event. Due to their low-priority, these Minor deficiencies are not detailed in this report; however, they can be viewed in the GIS Database provided in Appendix B. It is recommended future Pier inspections be conducted at regular intervals according to normal industry standard, every five (5) to ten (10) years or following a significant storm wave or other significant event. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 543 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 11 4. Municipal Pier Inspection Observations General Observations Visual inspection was performed on the pile-supported substructure and related structural components. General arrangements of buildings on the top-side of the pier and additional pier appurtenances, were noted but not considered a part of this inspection. All structural elements were rated on a scale discussed in Section 3.1, “Element Damage and Overall System Condition Assessment Ratings,” and detailed in Appendix A. The results are summarized in the following observation and recommendation portions of this report. Only a summary of the observed conditions is noted in the body of this report, refer to Appendix E for a full summary of element defects and damage ratings. To achieve acceptable and safe results, M&N used two four-person teams for the Above Water (AW) and Underwater (UW) inspections. AW inspections took place between July 24 and September 7, 2018. UW inspections took place between August 27 and August 31, 2018. For the underwater portion of the inspection, inspectors used SSA (Surface Supplied Air) from our company boat, and inspectors used all necessary safety equipment and precautions when preforming the inspections. In addition, two iPads were utilized to gather digital data entry for both the UW and AW inspections. The Pier inspection went from Bent 0 though Bent 103, splitting up the inspection into four sections, as shown in Figure 4-1. The existing Pier is configured in a general rectangular shape on the larger landside portion and transitions to a narrower waterside approach and platform. Bents 0 through 53 form the larger landside abutment area while Bent 53 through 103 makeup the approach walkway that leads to the end platform and the west-end platform itself. The number of total piles that support the pier is approximately 2,180. The existing Pier has various previous repairs visible, which have been completed at various intervals in the past. This condition is typical for similar pier structures with regular maintenance cycles. Photos depicting the different Pier framing systems are provided below. Figure 4-1: Pier Area Identification System 5.E.b Packet Pg. 544 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 12 Photo 4-1: Overall view of the Pier as seen from Palisades Park looking to the southwest. Photo 4-2: Pier entrance as seen from entrance bridge structure looking west. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 545 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 13 Photo 4-3: ZONE 2 Amusement Structure transition from ZONE 1 East-End Structure as seen from the West-End Approach looking southeast. Photo 4-4: Transition between ZONE 3 West-End Approach, ZONE 1 East-End Structure, and ZONE 2 Amusement Structure from boat looking to the east. ZONE 2 Concrete Structure ZONE 1 Timber Structure ZONE 1 Timber Structure ZONE 3 Concrete Structure ZONE 2 Concrete Structure 5.E.b Packet Pg. 546 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 14 Photo 4-5: ZONE 3 West-End Approach transition from ZONE 4 West-End Platform Structure Photo 4-6: West-End Platform portion of the Pier with concrete waffle slab. ZONE 3 Concrete Structure ZONE 4 Concrete Structure 5.E.b Packet Pg. 547 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 15 ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) This area of the Pier represents the remaining timber portion of the Pier; the newer concrete portions will be addressed later in the report. The Pier substructure and structural elements within this portion of the Pier include timber piles, timber pile caps, timber stringers, timber and steel lateral and transverse bracing, and timber deck elements. This portion of the Pier extends from Bent 0 from a concrete retaining wall to Bent 53, which includes in-water portions. Refer to Figure 4-2 below. Figure 4-2: ZONE 1 Site Plan - Timber East-End Portion of Pier 4.2.1. Item 1- Timber Piles The timber piles were inspected above and below water. Below water inspection comprised a Level I effort on all piles, and Level II effort on 10% of all piles. Level I effort is defined as visual inspection only, and Level II involves the removal of marine growth in three 1-foot wide bands near the waterline, at mid- depth, and near the mudline, as seen in Photo 4-7. Photo 4-7: Typical timber pile condition under water (Level II inspection effort). 5.E.b Packet Pg. 548 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 16 The timber piles supporting the Pier were identified to be round timber piles ranging from 10 inches to 16 inches in diameter. The exposed length of each timber pile supporting the Pier, from the sea floor to the underside of the Pier, varies from approximately 10 feet at the landside end of the pier to 40 feet towards the waterside end. The pile embedment depths were not verified as part of this investigation. As observed, ZONE 1 of the Pier is supported by a total of approximately 1,580 timber piles. These piles are responsible for transferring all applicable loading from the Pier to the beach and seabed. All timber piles appear to be treated with preservative. Several of the piles observed appear to have previous jacket repairs or have a fiber wrap around the tide level. The jacket repairs and fiber wraps were likely applied to protect the piles from deterioration due to marine borers, fungal rot, insect attack, and other environmental factors. These repair methods serve to extend the service life of the piles and help to protect them from future deterioration. Observations found defects that ranged in condition from Minor to Severe. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 1, Item 1 - Timber Piles. x 18 piles from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe defects. o Deficiencies noted included deterioration resulting in greater than a 50% loss of the expected structural capacity, significant voids, missing top connection, and excessive rotting and splitting. (See Photo 4-8 and Photo 4-9). o A total of 10 of the 18 Severe piles are located beneath building structures. x 87 piles from the overall structure are categorized as having Major defects. o Deficiencies noted included deterioration resulting in a 25% to 50% loss of the expected structural capacity, significant splits, and apparent instability observed relative to some portions of the structural member. (See Photo 4-10). o A total of 31 of the 87 Major piles are located beneath building structures. x 387 piles from the overall structure are categorized as having Moderate defects. Though not as urgent as other repairs, these defects should be addressed and/or monitored for future potential worsening of the deterioration. o Note: Defects included deterioration resulting in a 5% to 25% loss of the expected structural capacity, missing or torn pile wraps, open bolt holes, and improper seating of piles at the pile cap (see Photo 4-11). o A total of 145 of the 387 Moderate piles are located beneath building structures. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 549 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 17 Photo 4-8: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Severe Defect, Pile 11.5q Photo 4-9: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Severe Defect, Pile 47i.7 Photo 4-10: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Major Defect, Pile 46f Photo 4-11: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Moderate Defect, Pile 47c 5.E.b Packet Pg. 550 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 18 4.2.2. Item 2 – Timber Pile Caps The timber pile caps that support the pier deck were identified to consist of timber members ranging in size from 12-inch x 12-inch to 12-inch x 24-inch during the site inspection. The pile caps span along the bents in a north-south direction of the Pier with lengths varying depending on the width of the Pier. As observed, ZONE 1 of the Pier is supported by a total of approximately 53 timber bents. These timber pile caps are responsible for transferring all applicable loading from the upper deck elements to the piles beneath. In some cases, previous repairs have been made to pile cap members either by splicing or with the addition of a ‘corbel’ underneath the existing pile cap where a new pile was used to make contact with the cap above. Observations found defects that ranged in condition from Minor to Severe. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 1, Item 2 - Timber Pile Caps. x 7 pile caps from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe defects. o Deficiencies noted included deterioration resulting in greater than a 50% loss of the expected structural capacity, significant voids, significant indication of ‘dry rot’, and excessive splitting. (See Photo 4-12 and Photo 4-13). o A total of 1 of the 7 Severe pile cap locations are located beneath building structures. x 25 pile caps from the overall structure are categorized as having Major defects. o Deficiencies noted included deterioration resulting in a 25% to 50% loss of the expected structural capacity, significant splits, and apparent instability observed relative to some portions of the structural member. (See Photo 4-14). o A total of 9 of the 25 Major pile cap locations are located beneath building structures. x 110 pile caps from the overall structure are categorized as having Moderate defects. Though not as urgent as other repairs, these defects should be addressed and/or monitored for future potential worsening of the deterioration. o Note: Defects included deterioration resulting in a 5% to 25% loss of the expected structural capacity, missing hardware, open bolt holes, and improper seating of piles at the pile cap (see Photo 4-15). o A total of 25 of the 110 Moderate pile cap locations are located beneath building structures. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 551 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 19 Photo 4-12: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Caps Severe Defect, Caps 31K-31O Photo 4-13: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Caps Severe Defect, Caps 41K-41O Photo 4-14: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Caps Major Defect, Caps 41a-41c Photo 4-15: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Caps Moderate Defect, Caps 39M-39O 5.E.b Packet Pg. 552 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 20 4.2.3. Item 3 – Timber/Steel Lateral and Transverse Bracing The timber lateral bracing that provides lateral support for the Pier structure was identified to consist of timber members approximately 4-inch x 8-inch in size. While the steel lateral bracing was identified to consist of steel tubular members approximately 3-inches in diameter x 1/4-inch thick. The lateral bracing spans between pile bents in both the longitudinal north-south direction and transverse east-west direction of the pier. These lateral bracing elements are responsible for transferring lateral loads between piles, allowing the Pier structure to act as a truss system. There are several types of steel connecting hardware under the structure. In the marine environment, these elements typically fail as a result of steel corrosion. Galvanizing typically delays the onset of corrosion and application of coatings can be somewhat effective in mitigating rust. Most of the connectors are galvanized. The corrosion rating for most of the connectors fall within the Minor or Moderate categories. A lesser percentage of the connectors are rated as Major or Severe with up to 100% coating loss and moderate corrosion on the hardware. Providing more detailed assessment of difficult-to-access hardware was outside of the safely allowed operational parameters of this inspection, but corrosion of steel connection hardware to some degree is typical throughout the structure. It is recommended that all hardware be inspected on a yearly basis and replaced with new hardware as needed. Observations found defects that ranged in condition from Minor to Severe. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 1, Item 3 - Timber/Steel Lateral and Transverse Bracing. x 46 brace members (38 timber / 8 steel) from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe defects. o Deficiencies noted included deterioration resulting in greater than a 50% loss of the expected structural capacity, significant voids, significant indication of ‘dry rot,’ and full depth split at ends of bracing and failure in blocking between members. These lateral braces are split at the ends or have become disconnected from their mechanical connections. This condition will no longer allow the bracing to transfer lateral loads to the applicable members (see Photo 4-16 and Photo 4-17). x 123 brace members (111 timber / 12 steel) from the overall structure are categorized as having Major defects. o Deficiencies noted included deterioration resulting in a 25% to 50% loss of the expected structural capacity, significant splits, excessive corrosion at hardware, and major rotting. (See Photo 4-18). x 475 brace members (461 timber / 14 steel) from the overall structure are categorized as having Moderate defects. Though not as urgent as other repairs, these defects should be addressed and/or monitored for future potential worsening of the deterioration. o Note: Defects included deterioration resulting in a 5% to 25% loss of the expected structural capacity, missing hardware, open bolt holes, and noticeable rotting (see Photo 4-19). 5.E.b Packet Pg. 553 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 21 Photo 4-16: ZONE 1 - Timber Bracing Severe Defect, Pile 42n-43n Photo 4-17: ZONE 1 - Timber Bracing Severe Defect, Pile 41K-41M Photo 4-18: ZONE 1 - Steel Bracing Major Defect, Pile 47c-47d Photo 4-19: ZONE 1 - Timber Bracing Moderate Defect, Pile 43a-44a 5.E.b Packet Pg. 554 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 22 4.2.4. Item 4- Timber Stringers The timber stringers that support the Pier deck were identified to consist of timber members ranging in size from 3-inch x 12-inch to 4-inch x 16-inch during the site inspection. The stringers span across the bents in the east-west direction of the Pier with lengths varying depending on the bent spacing. As observed, the stringers are spaced varies from approximately 16 inches to 22 inches on-center along the pile bents. These timber stringers are responsible for transferring loading from the deck planks to the pile bents beneath. Observations found defects that ranged in condition from Minor to Severe. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 1, Item 4 - Timber Stringers. x 2 stringer locations from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe defects. o Deficiencies noted included deterioration resulting in greater than a 50% loss of the expected structural capacity, significant splitting, significant indication of ‘dry rot’, and in some instances missing stringers were noted. This can lead to localized sagging in the pier deck and cause a structural discontinuity. (See Photo 4-20 and Photo 4-21). x 11 stringer locations from the overall structure are categorized as having Major defects. o Deficiencies noted included deterioration resulting in a 25% to 50% loss of the expected structural capacity, significant splits, and apparent instability observed relative to some portions of the structural member. (See Photo 4-22). x 25 stringer locations from the overall structure are categorized as having Moderate defects. Though not as urgent as other repairs, these defects should be addressed and/or monitored for future potential worsening of the deterioration. o Note: Defects included deterioration resulting in a 5% to 25% loss of the expected structural capacity, missing hardware, open bolt holes, and limited under deck stringer support in the vicinity of the pier entrance ramp (see Photo 4-23). In some locations stringers are spaced approximately 3 feet on-center along the length of the pier. Typical new construction would consider stringer spacing at 16 inches on-center. It is unclear if these members have sufficient structural capacity for the deck support above. Additional structural calculations could confirm the adequacy of these members. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 555 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 23 Photo 4-20: ZONE 1 - Stringer Area Severe Defect, Pile 37k-37n-38k-38n Photo 4-21: ZONE 1 - Stringer Area Severe Defect, Pile 36l-36m-37l-37m Photo 4-22: ZONE 1 - Stringer Area Major Defect, Pile 6q-6p-7p-7o Photo 4-23: ZONE 1 - Stringer Area Moderate Defect, Pile 23p-23r-24r-24p 5.E.b Packet Pg. 556 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 24 4.2.5. Item 5 - Timber Decking The timber decking that provides a walking surface for the Pier was identified to consist of timber members 3-inch x 12-inch in size, laid flat. The deck boards span across the stringers in the north-south direction of the Pier and are fastened to the stringers beneath with nails. The following is a summary of the conditions of the Pier timber decking from the recent site inspection. The timber decking was in overall fair to poor condition and its condition should be monitored and maintenance repairs made as needed. Several previous repairs to the decking were noted during the inspection. These repairs were made to replace damaged decking and gaps that may have resulted in a tripping hazard. The defects observed were not considered structural in nature but consisted of split members and holes that should be monitored and repaired during normal maintenance cycles. Observations found defects that ranged in condition from Minor to Major. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 1, Item 5 – Timber Decking. x 0 decking locations from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe defects. x 5 decking locations from the overall structure are categorized as having Major defects. o Deficiencies noted included deterioration resulting in a 25% to 50% loss of the expected structural capacity, significant splits, excessive corrosion at hardware, and major rotting. (See Photo 4-24 through Photo 4-26). x 4 decking locations from the overall structure are categorized as having Moderate defects. Though not as urgent as other repairs, these defects should be addressed and/or monitored for future potential worsening of the deterioration. o Note: Defects included deterioration resulting in a 5% to 25% loss of the expected structural capacity, missing hardware, open gaps and holes, and noticeable splitting and rotting (see Photo 4-27). 5.E.b Packet Pg. 557 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 25 Photo 4-24: ZONE 1 - Decking Area Major Defect, Defect Area 2 Photo 4-25: ZONE 1 - Decking Area Major Defect, Defect Area 7 Photo 4-26: ZONE 1 - Decking Area Major Defect, Defect Area 6 Photo 4-27: ZONE 1 - Decking Area Moderate Defect, Defect Area 4 5.E.b Packet Pg. 558 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 26 ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment (Bent 35 – Bent 53) This area of the Pier represents the concrete portion of the Pier that supports the amusement rides located within Pacific Park. The Pier substructure and structural elements within this portion of the Pier include concrete piles, concrete capitals, concrete pile caps, timber stringers, and timber deck elements. This portion of the Pier extends from approximately Bent 35 to Bent 53, which includes support structures for the amusement rides located on the Pier as well as in-water portions. Refer to Figure 4-3 below. Figure 4-3: Site Plan – Concrete Amusement Structure Portion of Pier 4.3.1. Item 6 - Concrete Piles The concrete piles supporting the Pier were identified to be round concrete piles ranging from 18 inches to 24 inches in diameter. The exposed length of each concrete pile supporting the Pier varies from approximately 20 feet at the landside end of the pier to 40 feet towards the waterside end. As observed, ZONE 2 of the Pier is supported by a total of approximately 330 concrete piles. These piles are responsible for transferring applicable loading from the Pier to the seabed. Several of the piles observed appear to have previous jacket repairs near the top connection between the pile cap. (See Photo 4-28). Photo 4-28:Typical Previous Concrete Pile Jacket Repair 5.E.b Packet Pg. 559 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 27 Observations found defects that ranged in condition from Minor to Major. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 2, Item 6 – Concrete Piles. x 0 piles from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe defects. x 1 pile from the overall structure are categorized as having Major defects. o Deficiencies noted included deterioration resulting in a 25% to 50% loss of the expected structural capacity, significant spalling, and exposed or corroded rebar in some portions of the structural member. (See Photo 4-29 and Photo 4-30). x 32 piles from the overall structure are categorized as having Moderate defects. Though not as urgent as other repairs, these defects should be addressed and/or monitored for future potential worsening of the deterioration. o Note: Defects included deterioration resulting in a 5% to 25% loss of the expected structural capacity, rust bleeds, exposed jet tube voids, and notable cracking, spalling, and corrosion of piles at the pile cap (see Photo 4-31 and Photo 4-32). Photo 4-29: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Major Defect, Pile AS_24G Photo 4-30: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Major Defect, Pile AS_24G Photo 4-31: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Moderate Defect, Pile AS_32B Photo 4-32: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Moderate Defect, Pile 53q_W 5.E.b Packet Pg. 560 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 28 4.3.2. Item 7 - Concrete Pile Capitals The concrete pile capitals are mushroom caps at the top of the pile that connect the piles to the pile caps. These members were identified to consist of concrete formed into an octagonal shape and approximately 36-inch x 36-inch in size. The pile capitals are located at the top of each pile. These concrete pile capitals are responsible for transferring all applicable loading from the pile caps to the piles beneath. The following is a summary of the conditions of the Pier pile capitals from the recent site inspection. Observations found defects that ranged in condition from Major to Minor. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 2, Item 7 – Concrete Pile Capitals. x 0 pile capitals from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe defects. x 0 pile capitals from the overall structure are categorized as having Major defects. x 4 pile capitals from the overall structure are categorized as having Moderate defects. Though not as urgent as other repairs, these defects should be addressed and/or monitored for future potential worsening of the deterioration. o Note: Defects included deterioration resulting in a 5% to 25% loss of the expected structural capacity, voids with rust bleeds, cracking and spalling, and improper forming at top of pile (see Photo 4-33 through Photo 4-35). Photo 4-33: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Capital Moderate Defect, Pile 41s Photo 4-34: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Capital Moderate Defect, Pile 42s Photo 4-35: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Capital Moderate Defect, Pile 43o 5.E.b Packet Pg. 561 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 29 4.3.3. Item 8 – Concrete Pile Caps The concrete pile caps that support the Pier deck consist of concrete beams approximately 12-inch x 24- inch in size. The pile caps span along the bents-and-rows in a grid system both in the north-south and east-west directions of the Pier. As observed, ZONE 2 of the Pier is supported by a total of approximately 18 concrete bents (Bent 35 to Bent 53). Additional amusement structure caps were identified and placed under this category. These caps consist of larger concrete caps that act as foundations for the amusement rides above. These caps range in size from 5-foot x 10-foot to 15-foot x 50-foot. These structures act independently from the main Pier support bent-and-row grid system to support amusement structures in strategically placed locations. As observed, ZONE 2 of the Pier is supported by a total of approximately 37 concrete amusement caps. Observations found defects that ranged in condition from Minor to Severe. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 2, Item 8 – Concrete Pile Caps. x 2 pile caps from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe defects. o Deficiencies noted included deterioration resulting in greater than a 50% loss of the expected structural capacity, significant cracking and spalling, and exposed or corroded rebar. (See Photo 4-36 through Photo 4-39). x 3 pile caps from the overall structure are categorized as having Major defects. o Deficiencies noted included deterioration resulting in a 25% to 50% loss of the expected structural capacity, and significant cracking and spalling. (See Photo 4-40). x 9 pile caps from the overall structure are categorized as having Moderate defects. Though not as urgent as other repairs, these defects should be addressed and/or monitored for future potential worsening of the deterioration. o Note: Defects included deterioration resulting in a 5% to 25% loss of the expected structural capacity, rust bleeds, corroded attachment plates, and notable cracking, spalling, and corrosion of piles at the pile cap (see Photo 4-41). Photo 4-36: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Severe Defect, Pile AS_19 5.E.b Packet Pg. 562 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 30 Photo 4-37: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Severe Defect, Pile AS_23 Photo 4-38: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Severe Defect, Pile AS_19 Photo 4-39: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Severe Defect, Pile AS_19 5.E.b Packet Pg. 563 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 31 Photo 4-40: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Major Defect, Pile AS_21 Photo 4-41: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Moderate Defect, Pile 41w-41y 4.3.4. Item 9 - Timber Stringers The timber stringers that support the pier deck in ZONE 2 were identified to consist of similar members as found in ZONE 1, timber ranging in size from 3-inch x 12-inch to 4-inch x 16-inch. The stringers span across the bents in the east-west direction of the pier with lengths varying depending on the bent spacing. As observed, the stringers are spaced approximately 16 inches on-center along the pile bents. These timber stringers are responsible for transferring loading from the deck planks to the pile bents beneath. Observations did not find any noticeable defects in these members. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 2, Item 9 - Timber Stringers. x 0 stringer areas from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe, Major, or Moderate defects. 4.3.5. Item 10 - Timber Decking The timber decking that provides a walking surface for the pier deck in ZONE 2 were identified to consist of similar members as found in ZONE 1, timber approximately 3-inch x 12-inch in size, laid flat. The deck boards span across the stringers in the north-south direction of the Pier and are fastened to the stringers beneath with nails. These timber decking are responsible for transferring loading from the surface of the deck planks to the stringers beneath. Observations did not find any noticeable defects in these members. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 2, Item 10 - Timber Decking. x 0 decking areas from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe, Major, or Moderate defects. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 564 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 32 ZONE 3 - Concrete West-End Approach Pier Segment (Bent 42 – Bent 59.8) This area of the pier represents the concrete portion of the pier that was recently upgraded after the 2008-PIAS from a timber pile support system to a concrete support system under the Phase 4 upgrades to provide access for H-20 emergency vehicle loading. The pier substructure and structural elements within this portion of the pier include concrete piles, concrete pile caps, timber stringers, and timber deck elements. This portion of the pier extends from approximately Bent 42 to Bent 58.9, which includes the main approach walkway to the west-end platform structure. The 2008-PIAS pier numbering system was updated to reflect the construction of this new section, hence Bent 58.9 numbering designation. Refer to Figure 4-4 below. Figure 4-4: Site Plan – Concrete West-End Approach Portion of Pier 4.4.1. Item 11 - Concrete Piles The concrete piles supporting the Pier were identified to be round concrete piles approximately 18 inches in diameter. The exposed length of each concrete pile supporting the Pier, from the sea floor to the underside of the Pier, varies from approximately 30 feet at the landside end of the Pier to 40 feet towards the waterside end. The pile embedment depths were not verified as part of this investigation. As observed, ZONE 3 of the Pier is supported by a total of approximately 80 concrete piles. These piles are responsible for transferring all applicable loading from the Pier to the seabed. All concrete piles appear to be precast and driven to depth. Plans were provided by the City titled, “Santa Monica Phase 4 Municipal Pier Replacement, SP 2124,” prepared by URS, dated October 2012. Given the recent upgrade to the pier, this portion of the structure contained fewer defects than any other portion. Observations did not find any noticeable defects in these members. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 3, Item 11 – Concrete Piles. x 0 concrete piles from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe, Major, or Moderate defects. o Since no significant deficiencies were noted, pictures are provided indicating the general configuration of these members. (See Photo 4-42 and Photo 4-43). 5.E.b Packet Pg. 565 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 33 Photo 4-42: ZONE 3 – Typical Concrete Pile, Pile 49K Photo 4-43: ZONE 3 - Typical Concrete Pile, Pile 49N 4.4.2. Item 12 - Concrete Pile Caps The concrete pile caps that support the Pier deck were identified to consist of concrete beams ranging in size from 12-inch x 24-inch in the east-west longitudinal direction and 4-feet x 3-feet pile caps in the north- south transverse direction. The pile caps span along the bents-and-rows in a grid system both in the north- south and east-west directions of the Pier. As observed, ZONE 3 of the pier is supported by a total of approximately 19 concrete bents (Bent 42 to Bent 59.8). These concrete pile caps are responsible for transferring all applicable loading from the upper deck elements to the piles beneath. Observations found only Moderate defects in condition. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 3, Item 12 – Concrete Pile Caps. x 0 pile caps from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe defects. x 0 pile caps from the overall structure are categorized as having Major defects. x 1 pile cap from the overall structure are categorized as having Moderate defects. Though not as urgent as other repairs, these defects should be addressed and/or monitored for future potential worsening of the deterioration. o Note: Defects included deterioration resulting in a 5% to 25% loss of the expected structural capacity, rust bleeds, corroded attachment plates, and notable cracking, spalling, and corrosion of piles at the pile cap (see Photo 4-44). 5.E.b Packet Pg. 566 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 34 Photo 4-44: ZONE 3 – Typical Concrete Pile Caps Moderate Defect, Pile 51K-51L Photo 4-45: ZONE 3 - Typical Concrete Pile Cap, Pile 49K 4.4.3. Item 13 - Timber Stringers The timber stringers that support the pier deck in ZONE 3 were identified to consist of similar members as found in ZONE 1, timber ranging in size from 3-inch x 12-inch to 4-inch x 16-inch. The stringers span across the bents in the east-west direction of the pier with lengths varying depending on the bent spacing. As observed, the stringers spacing varied from approximately 16 inches to 22 inches on center along the pile bents. Observations did not find any noticeable defects in these members. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 3, Item 13 - Timber Stringers. x 0 stringer areas from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe, Major, or Moderate defects. 4.4.4. Item 14 - Timber Decking The timber decking that provides a walking surface for the pier deck in ZONE 3 were identified to consist of similar members as found in ZONE 1, timber approximately 3-inch x 12-inch in size, laid flat. The deck boards span across the stringers in the north-south direction of the pier and are fastened to the stringers beneath with nails. Observations did not find any noticeable defects in these members. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 3, Item 14 - Timber Decking. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 567 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 35 x 0 decking areas from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe, Major, or Moderate defects. ZONE 4 - Concrete West-End Platform Pier Segment (Bent 60 – Bent 103) This area of the Pier represents the concrete portion of the Pier that is located furthest west over the ocean. The Pier substructure and structural elements within this portion of the Pier include concrete piles, concrete waffle slab, timber sleepers, and timber deck elements. This portion of the Pier extends from approximately Bent 60 to Bent 103, which comprises the main support system for the west-end platform structure. Refer to Figure 4-5 below. Figure 4-5: Site Plan – Concrete West-End Platform Portion of Pier 4.5.1. Item 15 - Concrete Piles The concrete piles supporting the Pier were identified to be round concrete piles approximately 18 inches in diameter. The exposed length of each concrete pile supporting the Pier, from the sea floor to the underside of the Pier, varies from approximately 40 feet at the landside end of the pier to 50 feet towards the waterside end. The pile embedment depths were not verified as part of this investigation. As observed, ZONE 4 of the Pier is supported by a total of approximately 190 concrete piles. These piles are responsible for transferring all applicable loading from the Pier to the seabed. All concrete piles appear to be precast and driven to depth. Plans were provided by the City titled, “Santa Monica Municipal Pier,” prepared by Theodore E. Anvick, dated January 1989. Given the construction method used to upgrade the Pier, concrete piles with concrete slab, this portion of the structure contained very few defects. Observations found only Moderate defects in condition. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 4, Item 15 – Concrete Piles. x 0 piles from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe defects. x 0 piles from the overall structure are categorized as having Major defects. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 568 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 36 x 2 piles from the overall structure are categorized as having Moderate defects. Though not as urgent as other repairs, these defects should be addressed and/or monitored for future potential worsening of the deterioration. o Note: Defects included deterioration resulting in a 5% to 25% loss of the expected structural capacity, rust bleeds, and notable cracking, spalling, and corrosion of piles at the waffle slab (see Photo 4-46 and Photo 4-47). Photo 4-46: ZONE 4 – Concrete Pile Moderate Defect, Pile 93E_E Photo 4-47: ZONE 4 - Concrete Pile Moderate Defect, Pile 95C 4.5.2. Item 16 - Concrete Waffle Slabs The concrete waffle slab that support the Pier deck were identified to consist of concrete beam-slabs approximately 6-inches x 16-inches spaced every 2.5-feet in a grid pattern. The waffle slab spans along the bents-and-rows in both the north-south and east-west directions then are connected directly to the top of the piles with a thickened cap. These concrete waffle slabs are responsible for transferring all applicable loading from the upper deck elements to the piles beneath. Observations found only Moderate defects in condition. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 4, Item 16 – Concrete Waffle Slab. x 0 waffle slab areas from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe defects. x 0 waffle slab areas from the overall structure are categorized as having Major defects. x 1 waffle slab areas from the overall structure are categorized as having Moderate defects. Though not as urgent as other repairs, these defects should be addressed and/or monitored for future potential worsening of the deterioration. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 569 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 37 o Note: Defects included deterioration resulting in a 5% to 25% loss of the expected structural capacity, rust bleeds, and notable cracking, spalling, and corrosion underneath the deck (see Photo 4-48 and Photo 4-49). Photo 4-48: ZONE 4 – Concrete Waffle Slab Moderate Defect, Defect Area 13 Photo 4-49: ZONE 4 - Concrete Waffle Slab Moderate Defect, Defect Area 13 4.5.3. Item 17 - Timber Sleepers The timber sleepers that support the pier deck in ZONE 4 were identified to consist of timber ranging in size from 3-inch x 4-inch to 4-inch x 6-inch. The sleepers are lain flat across the waffle slab elements in the east-west direction of the pier with lengths varying depending on the bent spacing. As observed, the sleepers are spaced approximately 16 inches on-center along the pile bents. These timber sleepers are responsible for transferring loading from the deck planks to the waffle slab beneath. Observations did not find any noticeable defects in these members. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 4, Item 17 - Timber Sleepers. x 0 stringer areas from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe, Major, or Moderate defects. 4.5.4. Item 18 – Timber Decking The timber decking that provides a walking surface for the Pier was identified to consist of timber members 3-inch x 12-inch in size, laid flat. The deck boards span across the stringers in the north-south direction of the Pier and are fastened to the stringers beneath with nails. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 570 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 38 Observations found only Moderate defects in condition. Below is a summary of the observations for the ZONE 4, Item 18 – Timber Decking. x 0 deck areas from the overall structure are categorized as having Severe defects. x 0 deck areas from the overall structure are categorized as having Major defects. x 2 deck areas from the overall structure are categorized as having Moderate defects. Though not as urgent as other repairs, these defects should be addressed and/or monitored for future potential worsening of the deterioration. o Note: Defects included deterioration resulting in a 5% to 25% loss of the expected structural capacity, sunken deck boards, and noticeable splitting (see Photo 4-50 and Photo 4-51). Photo 4-50: ZONE 4 – Deck Area Moderate Defect, Defect Area 14 Photo 4-51: ZONE 4 - Deck Area Moderate Defect, Defect Area 13 5.E.b Packet Pg. 571 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 39 Additional Defects Observed In addition to the structural components listed in earlier sections of this report, other deficiencies were noted but were not necessarily in the scope of this inspection. These deficiencies ranged from broken and corroded utility supports, leaking wet utilities, corroded handrails, and observations that may result in future deficiencies in the structure. Providing more detailed assessment of difficult-to-access hardware was outside of the safely allowed operational parameters of this inspection, but corrosion of steel hardware to some degree is typical throughout the structure. It is recommended that all hardware, utilities, and handrails be inspected on a yearly basis and replaced with new as needed. 4.6.1. Item 19 – Below-Deck Additional Defects Observed Utility Supports There are several types of steel connecting hardware under the structure. In the marine environment, these elements typically fail as a result of steel corrosion. Galvanizing typically delays the onset of corrosion and application of coatings can be somewhat effective in mitigating rust. Steel hangers are used to hang utility pipes below the Pier. As utilities were not included in the scope of this inspection, specific locations of defects were not recorded, only typical conditions. It is recommended that all utility hangers be inspected on a yearly basis and replaced with new hardware as needed. The corrosion rating for most of the connectors fall within the ‘Minor’ or ‘Moderate’ categories with up to 100% coating loss and moderate corrosion on the hardware. A lesser percentage of the connectors are rated as ‘Major’ or ‘Severe.’ Some of these areas were noted, and pictures were taken to document their condition (see Photo 4-52 and Photo 4-53). Photo 4-52: Additional Defects -Utility Supports, Corroded Hangers near Pile 89H Photo 4-53: Additional Defects -Utility Supports, Corroded Hangers near Pile 29M 5.E.b Packet Pg. 572 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 40 Leaking Wet Utility Pipes As stated, utilities were not included in the scope of this inspection. However, multiple broken water lines were noted during this inspection. The water lines were identified as approximately ¾-inch to 4-inch in diameter and were leaking water into the ocean and/or onto the beach. Leaking wet utilities were noticed in only localized areas, locations are shown in GIS database and additional info in Appendix B. Types of materials for the existing pipes varied from steel, PVC, and cast iron. It is recommended these waterlines be repaired under the “priority repair” urgency (see Photo 4-54 and Photo 4-55). Photo 4-54: Additional Defects - Leaking Wet Utility Pipes, Leaking PVC Line near Pile 34y Photo 4-55: Additional Defects - Leaking Wet Utility Pipes, Leaking Fire Line near Pile 29M 4.6.2. Item 20 – Above-Deck Additional Defects Observed Handrails Handrails were not included in the scope of this inspection. However, multiple locations with excessive corrosion were noted in the steel handrails during this inspection. The corrosion rating for most of the handrails fall within the ‘Minor’ or ‘Moderate’ categories with up to 100% coating loss and moderate corrosion. A lesser percentage of the handrails are rated as ‘Major’ or ‘Severe’. It is recommended the handrails be repaired under the “long-term repair” urgency (see Photo 4-56 and Photo 4-57). 5.E.b Packet Pg. 573 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 41 Photo 4-56: Additional Defects -Handrail Corrosion near Pile 76P Photo 4-57: Additional Defects - Handrail Corrosion near Pile 97A ADA Accessibility Providing a detailed ADA compliance assessment of the above-deck facilities was outside of the scope of this inspection. However, several locations were noted where potential upgrades are needed to meet ADA compliance. Photos were taken to document the deficiencies (see Photo 4-58 and Photo 4-59). It is recommended that a more detailed ADA assessment be done to understand full compliance requirements for the Pier. ADA upgrades may be desired to bring the Pier into current code compliance; however, specific upgrades have not been detailed at this time. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 574 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 42 Photo 4-58: Additional Defects - ADA Compliance near Pile 86P Photo 4-59: Additional Defects - ADA Compliance near Pile 26c 5.E.b Packet Pg. 575 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 43 5. Repair Observations Summary and Cost Estimate The inspection and assessment were performed to support the development of repair recommendations for the Pier. The repair recommendations are presented below in a prioritized manner considering severity of damage, location, and impact of damage to the overall Pier structural integrity and operational use of the facilities. An attempt has also been made to categorize the deficiencies that will allow the City to choose a maintenance or replacement program that best suits their needs and budget. No attempt has been made to discuss environmental permitting requirements for the recommended repairs at this time. This inspection report focuses on identification of deficiencies as part of an overall design repair project. Providing engineering bid documents (repair plans, details, and specifications) for the recommended repairs are outside the scope of this inspection report. Based on input from the City of which repairs they would like to continue forward with, M&N can develop plans, details, and specifications for the necessary repairs identified under a separate task if desired. Due to the nature and configuration of repairs necessary, required repairs will likely entail water-based construction operations. Various techniques may be employed to conduct these repairs; it is recommended construction details be developed prior to construction. Based on the structural element deficiencies identified in the observation portion of this report, it is our recommendation that reparative or further extensive replacement options are necessary to prevent future potential worsening of present Pier defects. Geographic Information System (GIS) Database The digital inspection records detailing the existing pier condition ratings and observations are provided as an ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute) file GIS geodatabase. The geodatabase contains the geometry of the Pier elements, inspection records, and inspection photographs. Relationships configured within the geodatabase link the structural elements to the inspection photographs. The ESRI file geodatabase must be viewed using ESRI software such as ArcMap and ArcGIS Pro. The inspection photosare also provided separately, as a zip file, so they can be viewed outside of the ESRI software suite. Refer to figures in Appendix B for a summary. Figure 5-1: Site Plan – GIS Map Used for Field Investigations 5.E.b Packet Pg. 576 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 44 Priority Repairs (Immediate Repair/Replacement) Following is a summary of significant findings and recommendations, itemized on a priority basis as it relates to the urgency of proposed repairs. These recommendations classify the various repairs into priority (immediate), short-term (within 1 to 5 years), and long-term (within 5 to 10 years) categories. Refer to Appendix E for a full itemized list of deficiencies and damage ratings. Consistent with the previously described “priority-repair” recommendations, the repairs defined in this section are recommended to be accomplished as soon as feasible. Refer to Table 5-1 below. Table 5-1: Priority Repair Summary 5.E.b Packet Pg. 577 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 45 Short-Term Repairs (Within 1-5 Years) Consistent with the previously described short-term repair recommendations, the repairs defined in this section are recommended to be accomplished as soon as feasible but may be delayed for the first 1-5 years while the City appropriates funds. These repairs are important in prolonging the life of the structure by preventing a potential major failure due to weakening of existing support systems. Refer to Table 5-2 below. Table 5-2: Short-term Repair Summary 5.E.b Packet Pg. 578 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 46 Long-Term Repairs (Within 5-10 Years) Consistent with the previously described long-term repair recommendations, the repairs defined in this section are defects which are not as urgent as other repairs but should be done to prevent future potential worsening of the defects. These repairs are to be accomplished as soon as feasible but may be delayed until the City’s next planned maintenance cycle (5 to 10 years). Refer to Table 5-3 below. Table 5-3: Long-term Repair Summary 5.E.b Packet Pg. 579 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 47 Additional Defect Repairs (Hardware and Appurtenances) Providing a detailed assessment of specific deficiencies in relation to utilities, utility supports, and non- structural hardware located above and below the Pier deck is outside the scope of work of this inspection. However, some observed defects that warrant further evaluation and potential action were noted previously in Section 4, including but not limited to: Utility Supports, Leaking Wet Utility Pipes, Handrails, and ADA Accessibility. It is recommended that all hardware, utilities, and handrails be inspected on a yearly basis and replaced with new as needed.A description of the location and disposition of these items is also found in the GIS database provided in Appendix B. Repair Cost Estimates Estimates of probable construction costs have been produced for the three repair conditions “Priority,” “Short-term,” and “Long-term.” Cost estimates assume each of these repair phases will be done under a separate contractor mobilization effort. There may be an opportunity to save costs by conducting all repairs under a single contract or having an on-call agreement with a local marine construction contractor or by having the City maintenance staff conduct the repairs. Below is a summary of assumptions for the cost estimate. Refer to Appendix C for a full itemized cost estimate for recommended repairs. 5.6.1. Basis of Cost Estimates The proposed repair cost estimate consists of the following basic elements: 1. General Requirements (Mobilization / Demobilization, Bonds & Insurance, and misc. allowances) 2. Demolition & Construction Waste Management (including Best Management Practices to minimize environmental impacts) 3. Pier System Repair Construction (Piles and Structural Components identified for repair, broken- down into ZONE locations) 4. Project Contingencies 1. General Requirements – This construction element includes allowances for probable cost of contractor mobilization and demobilization of construction equipment, acquiring necessary bonds and insurance, and allowances for stand-by due to foul weather or other environmental factors in order to facilitate over-water marine construction activities. The cost estimate assumes over water construction activities included in the contractor’s bid will require utilization of floating barges, land- based and/or water-based cranes, over-water construction crews, and other specialized marine construction equipment. 2. Demolition & Construction Waste Management – This construction element includes probable cost of demolition, removal, and disposal of the existing pier facilities (piles, structural framing members, decking, and appurtenances). M&N’s cost estimate assumes construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be included in the contractor’s bid and utilized in order to minimize and/or eliminate water pollution and control erosion and sediment. 3. Pier System Repair Construction – This construction element includes installation of pier system components identified for priority (immediate), short-term (within 1-5 years), and long-term (within 5-10 years) repair directives as defined in the previous sections of this report. Repair is assumed to consist of materials similar in composition and type of construction methods as utilized for installation of the existing pier structural components, and in the same location in accordance with the existing pier repair configurations shown in the GIS Database provided in Appendix B. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 580 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 48 4. Project Contingencies – A 20% contingency has been added to the overall base construction cost estimate. This contingency is intended to account for unidentified expenses, to account for discrepancies in the contractors actual bid prices, and extent of repair required to correct identified deficiencies. 5.6.2. Cost Estimates The costs have been developed based on historical and current data using in-house sources, information from previous studies, as well as budget price quotations solicited from local suppliers and contractors. A contingency amount has been included to cover undefined items of work that will have to be performed, and elements of costs that will be incurred, but are not explicitly detailed or described due to the level of investigation, engineering, and estimating completed. The opinion of probable construction cost is shown in Table 5-4 through Table 5-6. Table 5-4: Priority Repair Cost Estimate 5.E.b Packet Pg. 581 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 49 Table 5-5: Short-term Repair Cost Estimate Table 5-6: Long-term Repair Cost Estimate 5.E.b Packet Pg. 582 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 50 6. Repair Recommendations This section of the report is intended to provide guidance for recommended repairs and routine periodic inspection/maintenance of the Santa Monica Pier infrastructure. It is assumed that routine visual inspections will be carried out by City Maintenance Staff. Where specialized training or certification is required for specific inspections or testing, that requirement is stated. The frequencies of inspection given are always stated as the maximum time interval recommended. Record all repairs and field treatments of specific elements in the GIS database. Timber Substructure Repair Recommendations The timber substructure pier segment consists of timber piles, pile caps, pile to pile bracing, stringers, and decking. The majority of the timber pier segment is on the sand (onshore) and not subject to daily tidal inundation. However, some of the timber pier segment is located over water (offshore) and subject to tidal and wave action. It is recommended in the upgrade portion of this report to replace all of the offshore timber substructure with concrete substructure. Until the replacement with concrete, the recommendations in this section are applicable. A typical specification for replacement timbers required for repair is provided below. x Timber Replacement Specification: o Timber Piles: Nominal butt and tip diameter size as required and shall be clean-peeled and conform to ASTM D 25. Lengths may vary depending upon deck height and embedment requirements, a typical pile may range between 40ft to 80ft in length. When replacing piles, the Contractor shall confirm specifications for pile size and length with engineer prior to procurement of materials.Piles must be in one piece; splices will not be permitted. Provide High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) or fiberglass jacket prior to driving. After driving, the jacket should measure from a minimum depth of 3 feet below mudline to a height 10 feet above mudline to prevent against marine borers. o Timber Members: Nominal size as required and shall conform to S4S No. 1 or better, Douglas Fir, in conformance with WWPA and SPIB respective grading rules. o Preservative Treatment: Treat wood to be used in contact with saltwater or saltwater splash in accordance with AWPA P5 (Material Subject to Marine Borer Exposure) with waterborne preservative, (ACZA - Ammoniacal Copper Zinc Arsenate) to (2.5 pcf) net retention. o Steel Connection Hardware: Provide miscellaneous steel plates, straps, threaded rods, bolts, and shapes in conformance with ASTM A36. All hardware shall be zinc-coated or galvanized by the hot-dipped process in accordance with ASTM A 123 / A 153. o Steel Deck Screws: It is recommended to replace all smooth-shank deck spikes with lag screws with countersunk heads and washer to pull the planks down to reduce withdrawal. Lag screws shall be SDWS Timber SS Screw, minimum 8-inches long (Model No. SDWS27800SS) as manufactured by Simpson String-Tie or approved equal. 6.1.1. Item 1- Timber Piles Severe and Major Defects It is recommended that the repair of ‘severe’ and ‘major’ timber piles be performed by experienced and licensed marine contractors. Where practical, the preferred repair for piles with serious defects is 5.E.b Packet Pg. 583 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 51 replacement with a new pile. Due to the difficult accessibility beneath the pier, it is generally not economical to repair piles by replacing the pile with a new pile. Therefore, it is recommended that they be repaired utilizing a jacket repair system. The recommended repair method for timber piles with ‘severe’ and ‘major’ defects isto clean and remove excess material growth around existing member and install new Fiberglass Reinforced Polymer (FRP) Jacket and Backfill with High-Strength Epoxy Grout (Simpson Strong-Tie FX-70, or approved equal), refer to Figure 6-1 for details. Similar previous repairs to the pier were conducted in 2016, details of those repairs are provided in Appendix F. Figure 6-1: Timber Pile FRP Jacket Repair Method (Five Star Marine, Inc.) Moderate Defects Treated timber piles are typically wrapped with a solid barrier to prevent leaching of the preservative chemicals into the water. While a well-sealed barrier such as a polyethylene wrap can provide added protection, a poorly sealed barrier that allows exchange of water and oxygen can actually conceal damage from organisms that are able to get past the barrier. All wrapping should be replaced where indicated to minimize potential future worsening of defects. City maintenance staff would likely be able to perform most of these repairs to onshore piles, but because offshore piles are subject to tidal and wave action and have build-up of marine growth, both the inspection and maintenance of these piles requires a much greater effort and task knowledge than onshore piles. The recommended repair method for timber piles with ‘moderate’ defects is as follows: x Physical Damage: Field treat physical damage that is observed during inspection with an appropriate compound to restore the surface resistance to fungi and insects in accordance with American Wood Preservers' Association, Standard M4, Standard for the Care of Preservative- Treated Wood Products. x Fungal Damage: Treat surface damage from fungal attack with a fungicide such as Borate. Borates are available in many forms including fumigants, liquids, and solids. Significant dry rot that has more than surface depth should be cut out and the hole filled with an epoxy filler, and then the area around the hole treated. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 584 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 52 6.1.2. Item 2- Timber Pile Caps Severe and Major Defects It is recommended that the repair of ‘severe’ and ‘major’ timber pile caps be performed by experienced and licensed marine contractors. This is mostly due to the difficult accessibility to these members beneath the Pier. Work may require erecting temporary support and scaffolding for the deck above in order for a new timber pile cap member to be placed on top of the piles. The recommended repair method for timber pile caps with ‘severe’ and ‘major’ defects is to replace the pile caps that have loss of bearing strength due to rot, and caps that have significant splitting and deflection with new pressure treated members of the same or greater size. All missing hardware and components must be replaced with hot dipped galvanized elements, or a steel strap that is thru-bolted the pile on both sides is the most likely type of hardware. It is recommended that all hardware be inspected on a yearly basis and replaced with new as needed. If no connecting hardware is showing and there are no bolt holes, then the connecting hardware is likely a vertical drift pin completely embedded in the two pieces of timber. Moderate Defects Most repairs for ‘moderate’ defects may be performed by City maintenance staff. At the bearing surfaces, where the pile cap rests on the pile or where stringers rest on the cap, look for indications that one element is crushing the other element, as this is a sign that rot is taking place, and normally would occur where there is excessive moisture. Look for sources of excessive moisture. For the connecting hardware, look for signs of rust or missing elements such as nuts or entire bolts. Inspect caps for horizontal splits that are visible on both sides of the cap and for deflection (sagging) between piles. The location, width and the length of splits should be noted. Splitting and deflection of a cap may indicate a failure condition due to overloading. Caps with physical damage and/or surface fungal damage but no loss of bearing capacity should be treated in the same manner as describe under Item 1 –Timber Piles “Moderate Defects.” Clean and paint existing connecting hardware showing rust and provide new hardware where missing or damaged. 6.1.3. Item 3 – Timber/Steel Lateral and Transverse Bracing Severe and Major Defects City maintenance staff would likely be able to perform most of the ‘severe’ and ‘major’ timber/steel bracing repairs to onshore bracing, but because offshore bracing is subject to tidal and wave action, these bracing require a much greater effort and task knowledge than onshore bracing. The recommended repair method for timber/steel bracing with ‘severe’ and ‘major’ defects is to replace timber bracing with pressure treated timber at all braces that are broken or are split at the connecting bolt hole. Also, replace any brace that has over 30 percent of its cross-section lost due to physical damage, insect damage, or rot. Replace steel bracing with galvanized steel tubing of the same size or larger than existing. Clean and paint existing connecting hardware showing rust and provide new hardware where missing or damaged. It is recommended that all hardware be inspected on a yearly basis and replaced with new as needed. Moderate Defects Again, City maintenance staff would likely be able to perform most of the ‘moderate’ timber/steel bracing defects. It is recommended that timber bracing be inspected at least once every five years, and those subject to wave action after every major storm. The inspector should note overall brace condition, the specific condition at the connections, and the connecting bolts. Of all of the Pier structural elements, the 5.E.b Packet Pg. 585 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 53 bracing is the most vulnerable to physical damage due to impact. Braces are relatively small members for the length of span and are easily broken if hit from the side. The recommended repair method for timber/steel bracing with ‘moderate’ defects is to treat braces with damage or surface fungi in the same manner as described under Item 1 – Timber Piles “Moderate Defects.” 6.1.4. Item 4, 9, 13, and 17 – Timber Stringers Severe and Major Defects City maintenance staff would likely be able to perform most of the ‘severe’ and ‘major’ timber stringer repairs. However, for replacement of stringers over larger areas (> 2,000 square feet) it is recommended that repairs be performed by experienced and licensed marine contractors. These efforts will require temporary removal of the decking above and installation of clips or nailing from above. The recommended repair method for timber stringers with ‘severe’ and ‘major’ defects is replace or supplement (install new stringer next to existing) broken stringers as soon as possible. Replace stringers with loss of bearing strength due to dry rot. Moderate Defects Again, City maintenance staff would likely be able to perform most of the ‘moderate’ timber stringer defects. Treat stringers showing damage or surface fungi as described under Item 1 – Timber Piles “Moderate Defects.” 6.1.5. Item 5, 10, 14, and 18– Timber Decking Severe and Major Defects City maintenance staff would likely be able to perform most of the ‘severe’ and ‘major’ timber decking repairs. However, for replacement of decking over larger areas (> 2,000 square feet) it is recommended that repairs be performed by experienced and licensed marine contractors. These efforts will require temporary removal of the existing decking and installation of new decking using clips or nailing from above. The recommended repair method for timber decking with ‘severe’ and ‘major’ defects is to replace decking when wear has reduced the thickness to less than 2-1/4 inch, or the where uneven surface wear creates a significant tripping hazard. Replace all broken planks. Moderate Defects Again, City maintenance staff would likely be able to perform most of the ‘moderate’ timber decking defects. Where the vertical difference between planks is caused by bowing of one plank and it is no longer bearing on the stringers, replace the spikes with lag screws with countersunk heads and washer to pull the plank down to bearing. Where the vertical difference between planks is caused by a plank that is thicker than the adjacent plank and the adjacent plank is at least 2 3/8-inch-thick, grind the thicker plank to match using a slope across the entire plank. Where the vertical difference between planks is caused by a plank that is thinner than the adjacent plank and the adjacent plank is at least 2 3/8-inch-thick, replace the thinner plank with a new pressure treated 3-inch nominal (2 1/2-inch net) plank. Concrete Substructure Repair Recommendations The concrete substructure pier segments consist of concrete piles, pile capitals, pile caps, and waffle slabs. The majority of the concrete substructures are offshore and subject to daily tidal inundation. In both the 5.E.b Packet Pg. 586 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 54 ZONE 2 Pacific Park amusement area and ZONE 3 West-End Approach area, the concrete substructure consists of prestressed concrete piles with concrete pile caps and strut beams. In the ZONE 4 West-End Platform area the concrete substructure consists of prestressed concrete piles with a concrete waffle slab matrix above. Deterioration of concrete in the marine environment is most commonly caused by corrosion of the reinforcing steel or physical damage from impact. Deterioration of concrete piles can also be caused by cracking during an earthquake. Sometimes, but rarely, deterioration is caused by excessive loads other than earthquake. Deterioration takes the form of concrete cracks, spalling (loss of surface concrete), and corrosion of the reinforcing steel evidenced by rust stains. Figure 6-2 below is a graphic depicting the progression of reinforcement corrosion, which can lead to more serious defects such as spalling and cracking. Figure 6-2: Concrete Corrosion and Spalling Progression Recommendations for repairs to existing deficient concrete members focus on removing existing rust and deleterious material, splicing new steel reinforcing (if required), and patching with an epoxy grout material to prevent further corrosion. As an added level of protection, the City may want to consider the inclusion of sacrificial anodes in order to slow the rate of corrosion of reinforcement within the concrete. The anodes act as an electron current pacification system in order to draw harmful chloride ions away from the reinforcing steel, as a result instead of corroding the rebar the chloride ions will corrode the anode first. Figure 6-3 below depicts the process and shows the general location of anodes cast into the concrete. It should be noted that removal of concrete down to the reinforcing steel is required for this type of repairs, combined with the anode the cost is typically 30%-50% higher than typical concrete spall repairs. A typical specification for grout required for repair to concrete members is provided below. Figure 6-3: Rebar Corrosion Without and With Sacrificial Anodes (Vector Corrosion) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 587 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 55 x Concrete Spall and Crack Repair Specification: o Marine grade non-shrink epoxy grout: Minimum 28-day compressive strength (f’c) = 7,000 PSI. The grout shall be in accordance with ASTM C1107 (Grade C). o Five Star Fluid Grout UW or approved equal x Supplier / Manufacturer: o Five Star Products, Inc. 60 Parrott Drive Shelton, CT 06484 Tel: (203) 336-7900 6.2.1. Item 6, 11, and 15 - Concrete Piles Severe and Major Defects It is recommended that the repair of ‘severe’ and ‘major’ concrete piles be performed by experienced and licensed marine contractors. Because the offshore portions of the Pier are located high above the water, scaffolding will need to be constructed to provide access for the repair contractor. It is recommended that a detailed inspection, including sounding with a hammer or ultrasonic device be performed over all of the members, before repairs begin, and any additional damage repaired at the same time. Visual inspection will need to be performed from a combination of locations including the existing utility catwalks, the lower fishing platforms, the lower catwalk along the southern edge, and possibly by boat. The close spacing of the beams and the limited clearance between the utility catwalks and the bottom of the concrete will make the inspection of more than two or three beams beyond the catwalk difficult. The recommended repair method for concrete piles with ‘severe’ and ‘major’ defects is an FRP jacket repair system. More detail on this repair method is found in Item 1 – Timber Piles “Severe and Major Defects.” The most common location for corrosion damage in round concrete piles is at the top of the pile where the prestressing forces are reduced and possible overstress from driving is likely, and vertical cracks along the face of the pile. Existing surfaces should be cleaned of all loose material by chipping with hand tools and/or sand blasting. Splicing or new steel reinforcement may be required where corrosion of existing rebar is excessive. Additional spiral reinforcement is the most common type of steel reinforcement that would be required, and example of a previous repair project where this type of repair was conducted in provided in Appendix F. If formwork is required in the splash zone, care should be taken to provide water-tight formwork and/or pump water out of formwork or provide underwater self- consolidating concrete to displace water within the formwork. Moderate Defects It is recommended that the repair of ‘moderate’ concrete piles also be performed by an experienced concrete repair specialist. Generally, it is not economical to repair moderate damages to individual concrete piles. However, major damages should be repaired as soon as practical and all moderate to minor repairs included in the same project. Visual inspection of concrete piles is recommended at least once every five years. Note all surface damages, cracks, and rust stains on piles. Note the size and location of all observed defects. Especially note any exposed reinforcing steel. Compare noteddefects with those in the GIS database for the previous inspection. If minor defects are unchanged from the prior inspection, then immediate repair is not 5.E.b Packet Pg. 588 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 56 warranted. Major deterioration or deterioration that has significantly increased since the prior inspection should be scheduled for repair. The recommended repair method for concrete piles with ‘moderate’ defects isto clean and remove excess material growth around existing pile and install new formwork and/or fill cracks with grout. 6.2.2. Item 7, 8, and 12 - Concrete Pile Caps and Pile Capitals Severe and Major Defects It is recommended that the repair of ‘severe’ and ‘major’ concrete piles be performed by experienced and licensed marine contractors. Again, this is due to the offshore portions of the Pier being located high above the water, which will require scaffolding to provide access for the repair contractor. The recommended repair method for concrete pile caps and pile capitals with ‘severe’ to ‘major’ defects is to clean and remove excess material growth around existing member by chipping with hand tools and/or sand blasting and install new formwork, dowel rebar (if required), and cast new concrete repair section around the existing member. No portion of pile caps and capitals is anticipated to be prestressed. An alternative method of construction would be to wrap the member in an FRP composite to provide additional strength and prevent against future corrosion. The most common location for corrosion damage in beams is at the lower corners where cracking from bending is likely and the infiltration of chlorides can approach from both the bottom and the side faces. In these corners the concentration of chloride ions increases twice as fast at the reinforcing steel as it does at steel with only one close face. Figure 6-4below depicts this and areas that typically require repair. Figure 6-4: Repair of Concrete Corrosion and Spalling Moderate Defects The recommended repair method for concrete pile caps and pile capitals with ‘moderate’ defects is to clean and remove excess material growth around existing member and install new formwork, dowel rebar, and fill cracks with grout. Visual inspection of concrete caps and capitals is recommended at least once every five years. Pay close attention to the exposed corners. Note all defects observed including cracks, spalls, and rust stains. Note the location and approximate size of all defects observed, especially note cracks on both faces that form a corner. This can indicate corrosion in the corner reinforcing bar even without visible rust stains. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 589 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 57 6.2.3. Item 16- Concrete Waffle Slab Moderate Defects Defects that are ‘sever’ or ‘major’ in nature were not identified for any portion of the waffle slab structure. It is recommended that the repair of ‘moderate’ concrete waffle slabs be performed by an experienced concrete repair specialist. Scaffolding will need to be constructed to provide access for the repair contractor, it is recommended that a detailed inspection, including sounding with a hammer or ultrasonic device be performed over all of the members, before repairs begin, and any additional damage repaired at the same time. However, major damages should be repaired as soon as practical and all moderate to minor repairs included in the same project. The recommended repair method for concrete waffle slabs with ‘moderate’ defects isto clean and remove excess material growth around existing member by chipping with hand tools and/or sand blasting and install new formwork and/or fill cracks with grout. No portion of waffle slab is anticipated to be prestressed. An alternative method of construction would be to wrap the member in an FRP composite to provide additional strength and prevent against future corrosion. Since there is no redundancy in the reinforce steel of the waffle slab, any indication of corrosion in the bottom bar, such as rust stains or longitudinal cracks in the bottom face or sides near the bottom, should trigger a repair project within the following five years. Other surface defects without rust stains are not a trigger for repair but need to be watched for continued deterioration or appearance of rust stains. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 590 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 58 7. Upgrades Assessment and Related Studies This upgrades assessment was performed to support the development of future capital improvements programs for the Santa Monica Pier. This section of the report contains the findings and recommendations of potential upgrades to the Pier. However, planning for future changes to Pier specific uses, load requirements, and zoning is outside the scope of this report. Current direction given by the City has been to focus on updating load requirements to H-15 (15 ton) for delivery truck access and H-20 (20 ton) for emergency vehicle access. The current conditions that the upgrades assessment is based on include the findings of the visual inspection of the pier as part of the PIAS-2018, results of previous studies from the PIAS-2008, and subsequent upgrades that have been completed on the pier since 2008. Upgrades in most cases are beyond repairs recommended in the “observations and repairs” portion of this report. However, if upgrades are made in an area, then it is assumed the repairs would automatically be taken care of for that area. This upgrades assessment report focuses on identification of upgrades necessary to achieve necessary load requirements or future maintenance goals as part of the overall pier capital improvements program. Providing engineering bid documents (upgrade plans, details, and specifications) for the recommended upgrades are outside the scope of this report. Pier Load Rating and Upgrades Assessment The results of the pier load assessment are broken into localized Areas corresponding to the type of construction, anticipated loading, and age of construction. Recommendations from the previous PIAS- 2008 study have been incorporated into this PIAS-2018, and recommended upgrades updated to reflect actual Pier conditions at the time of inspections as well as to consider upgrades completed to the Pier since the last inspection in 2008. Figure 7-1 below depicts the different pier areas, and a complete map of the pier load rating can be found in Appendix D. Figure 7-1: Site Plan – Pier Load Rating Map 5.E.b Packet Pg. 591 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 59 7.1.1. Area 1 - Pedestrian area bounded by Piles 1h, 1o, 3h, and 3o Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 50 psf Vehicle Live Load: 2 Tons (4,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: Upgrade to 100 psf Uniform Live Load and H-5 (5 Ton) Vehicle Live Load In this zone the stringers are 3-inches x 10-inches at 18 inches on-center. The calculated capacity for this area is approximately 50 psf and a maximum vehicle weight of 4,000 pounds. This is less capacity than the adjacent aquarium roof, and less than the code capacity for pedestrian assembly areas of 100 psf. It is recommended that this area be upgraded by adding additional 3-inches x 10-inches at 18 inches on- center. These could be centered between the existing stringers or placed next to them. Either configuration would result in an allowable uniform live load of 100 psf and a vehicle weight of 5 Tons (10,000 pounds). 7.1.2. Area 2 - Parking area bounded by Bents 3 and 4 on the east, Bent 12 on the west, existing buildings on the north and the edge of the pier on the south Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 65 psf Vehicle Live Load: 2.75 Tons (5,500 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: Upgrade to allow H-15 (regularly)/H-20 (occasionally) Vehicle Live Load (Included in M&N Current Contract with City for Pier Upgrades) In this zone the stringers are 3-inches x 12-inches at 22 inches on-center, with 2-inch nominal decking. The calculated capacity for this area is 65 psf and a maximum vehicle weight of 5,500 pounds. It is recommended this area be upgrades to meet H-20 vehicle capacity for occasional occurrences and H-15 vehicle capacity for regular occurrences. To accomplish this the stringers in this area must be removed and replaced with 16-inch deep stringers. In most cases the pile caps have an additional 4-inch thick member on the top, which could be removed to maintain the same top of stringer elevation. In cases where this 4-inch member does not exist, the pile caps would need to be lowered. To accommodate the transverse aisle at the east end of the parking lot, the stringers between Bent 4 and 6 are recommended to be 6-inches x 16-inches at 16 inches on center with at least 3-inch nominal decking. For the longitudinal aisles and parking spaces from Bent 6 to Bent 12 the stringers are recommended to be 4-inches x 16- inches at 16 inches on-center with at least 3-inch nominal decking. 7.1.3. Area 3 – The walkway north of the buildings between Bent 3 and Bent 16 Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 125 psf Vehicle Live Load: 6 Tons (12,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: Upgrade to allow H-10 (10 Ton) Delivery Vehicle Live Load In this zone the stringers are 3-inches x 16-inches at 22 inches on-center. The calculated capacity for this area is approximately 125 psf and a vehicle weight of 12,000 pounds. The code requirement for a sidewalk is to allow for up-to an 8,000-pound concentrated load for occasional vehicles, which corelates to an H- 10 (10 Ton) truck. It is recommended that this area be upgraded to sidewalk standards with 3-inch x 16- inch or 4-inch x 16-inch stringers placed between the existing stringers and 3-inch decking to allow access for maintenance vehicles and possibly delivery vehicles. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 592 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 60 7.1.4. Area 4 – Parking area bounded by Bent 12 on the east, Bent 16 on the west, existing building on the north and the edge of the pier on the south Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 200 psf Vehicle Live Load (Regularly Occurring): 15 Tons (30,000 pounds) Vehicle Live Load (Occasionally Occurring): 20 Tons (40,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: No Upgrades Recommended at This Time This zone connects the east and west portions of the on-pier parking lot and was previously upgraded with supplemental stringers that were previously spaced 22 inches on-center. This deck area now has 4- inch x 16-inch stringers at 11 inches on-center and has the capacity to support H-15 (15 Ton) truck loading on a regular basis and H-20 (20 Ton) trucks on an occasional basis. 7.1.5. Area 5 – Pedestrian area bounded by Bent 15 on the east, Bent 16 on the west, Area 3 on the north and Area 4 on the south Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 150 psf Vehicle Live Load: 7 Tons (14,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: No Upgrades Recommended at This Time This zone has 3-inch x 16-inch stringers at 18 inches on center. The calculated capacity of this area is approximately 150 psf or a vehicle weight of 14,000 pounds running in the transverse direction. Since this is currently a pedestrian area within the building zone, it is not necessary to upgrade this area at this time. However, if stringers must be replaced due to damage or deterioration, they should be replaced with 4- inch x 16-inch stringers. If the use of the area is ever changed to a vehicular driveway then the stringers should be replaced with 6-inch x 16-inch stringers at 16 inches on-center. 7.1.6. Area 6 – The parking entrance and the central transverse aisle (Events Lane) between Bents 16 and 19 from the Municipal Pier to the southern edge of the pier; except an area between Bents 18 and 19 from Pile Row a to Pile Row f Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 200 psf Vehicle Live Load (Regularly Occurring): 15 Tons (30,000 pounds) Vehicle Live Load (Occasionally Occurring): 20 Tons (40,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: No Upgrades Recommended at This Time This area was previously upgraded with 6-inch x 16-inch stringers at 16 inches on-center and has the capacity to support H-15 (15 Ton) truck loading on a regular basis and H-20 (20 Ton) trucks on an occasional basis. 7.1.7. Area 7 – Portion of Entrance Lane and a parking area bounded by Piles 18a, 18f, 21a, and 21f Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 125 psf 5.E.b Packet Pg. 593 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 61 Vehicle Live Load: 6 Tons (12,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: Upgrade to allow H-15 (regularly)/H-20 (occasionally) Vehicle Live Load This area has 4-inch x 16-inch stringers at 22 inches on-center and has a calculated capacity to support a maximum vehicle weight of 12,000 pounds. It is recommended this area be upgrades to meet H-20 vehicle capacity for occasional occurrences and H-15 vehicle capacity for regular occurrences. To accomplish this, the portion of the area between Bents 18 and 19 should be upgraded to 6-inch x 16-inch stringers at 16 inches on-center to complete the Entrance Lane upgrade; or supplement the existing stringers with 6-inch x 16-inch stringers. The remainder of the area between Bent 19 and Bent 21 should be upgraded to 4-inch x 16-inch stringers at 16 inches on-center or supplement with new 3-inch x 16-inch or 4-inch x 16-inch stringers between each existing stringer. 7.1.8. Area 8 – Parking area bounded by Piles 19f, 19m, 21f and 21m Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 125 psf Vehicle Live Load: 6 Tons (12,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: Upgrade to allow H-15 (regularly)/H-20 (occasionally) Vehicle Live Load In this zone the stringers are 3-inches x 16-inches at 22 inches on-center with 3-inch nominal decking. The calculated capacity for this area is 125 psf or a vehicle weight of 12,000 pounds. It is recommended this area be upgrades to meet H-20 vehicle capacity for occasional occurrences and H-15 vehicle capacity for regular occurrences. To accomplish this, these stringers need to be supplemented. It is recommended that 4-inch x 16-inch stringers be added between the existing stringers. 7.1.9. Area 9 – Longitudinal aisle and parking area bounded by Piles 19m, 19o, 23m and 23o Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 200 psf Vehicle Live Load (Regularly Occurring): 15 Tons (30,000 pounds) Vehicle Live Load (Occasionally Occurring): 20 Tons (40,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: No Upgrades Recommended at This Time This zone connects the Events Lane to the Maintenance Building entrance and was previously upgraded with 6-inch x16-inch stringers at 16 inches on-center and has the capacity to support H-15 truck loading on a regular basis and H-20 (20 ton) trucks on an occasional basis. 7.1.10. Area 10 – Parking area bounded by Piles 19m, 35m and the southern edge of the pier, excluding Area 9 Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 150 psf Vehicle Live Load: 7 Tons (14,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: Upgrade to allow H-15 (regularly)/H-20 (occasionally) Vehicle Live Load This area has 4-inch x 16-inch stringers at 22 inches on-center. The calculated capacity for this area is 150 psf or a vehicle weight of 14,000 pounds. It is recommended this area be upgraded to meet H-20 vehicle capacity for occasional occurrences and H-15 vehicle capacity for regular occurrences. To accomplish this, these stringers should be supplemented. It is recommended that 3-inch x 16-inch or 4-inch x 16-inch 5.E.b Packet Pg. 594 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 62 stringers be added between the existing stringers from Bent 19 to Bent 29 and Bent 31 to Bent 32; and 6- inch x 16-inch stringers be added between Bent 29 and Bent 31. The area between Bent 32 and Bent 35 is within the fence of Pacific Park but is still part of the timber structure. It is recommended that this area be upgraded in a manner similar to the area from Bent 19 to Bent 32 if the use changes, or vehicles are anticipated. 7.1.11. Area 11 – Pedestrian area Bents 26 and 28, and between Area 10 and the walkway adjacent to the Municipal Pier Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 180 psf Vehicle Live Load: 7.5 Tons (15,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: No Upgrades Recommended at This Time This area has 4-inch x 12-inch stringers at 12 inches on-center. The calculated capacity for this area is 180 psf or a vehicle weight of 15,000 pounds. This area meets the required capacity for pedestrian areas but is slightly less than our recommended capacity for the building areas. However, this was determined to be adequate based on the load requirements for the lighter type of building construction used in the Central Restrooms and other building loads. Upgrades are not recommended at this time. 7.1.12. Area 12 – The walkway area between the building zone and the Municipal Pier from Bent 26 to Bent 51 Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 65 psf Vehicle Live Load: 3 Tons (6,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: Upgrade to allow H-10 (10 Ton) Delivery Vehicle Live Load This walkway has 3-inch x 12-inch and 4-inch x 12-inch stringers at spacings from 12 inches to 24 inches. The calculated capacity for this area is approximately 65 psf or a vehicle weight of 6,000 pounds. Between Bent 26 and Bent 27 the 4-inch x 12-inch stringers have been supplemented with 4-inch x 16-inch stringers to provide maintenance vehicle and vender delivery truck access to Area 11 and the current cart storage area. All of this walkway should be upgraded to 4-inch x 16-inch stringers at 16 inches on-center to allow for maintenance vehicles and vender delivery truck access. 7.1.13. Area 13 – Building area between Bents 36 and 40 and between Pile Rows c and n occupied by the Trapeze School Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 200 psf Vehicle Live Load: 9 Tons (18,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: No Upgrades Recommended at This Time This zone has 4-inch x 16-inch stingers at 18 inches on-center. The calculated capacity for this area is 200 psf or a vehicle weight of 18,000 pounds and meets our recommendations for building areas. As such, no upgrades are recommended at this time. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 595 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 63 7.1.14. Area 14 – Pedestrian and vehicular passageway from Bent 51 to Bent 48, and from the southern edge of the Municipal Pier Phase 4 Upgrade to the Expansion Joint at Pile Row n Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 200 psf Vehicle Live Load: 7.5 Tons (15,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: Upgrade from Timber Substructure to Concrete Substructure in Tidal Zone This area has 3-inch x 14-inch stringers at 12 inches on-center. The calculated capacity for this area is approximately 200 psf or a vehicle weight of 15,000 pounds. This area has timber piles that are within the tidal zone and are subject to wave action. It is recommended that this area reconstructed using concrete piles and caps within the tidal zone. In order to maintain the westernmost building of Pacific Park, the zone of reconstruction would be limited to the western twenty-seven feet of the pier between Pile Rows a and n. 7.1.15. Area 15 – Pedestrian and vehicular passageway from Bent 52 to Bent 49, and from the Expansion Joint at Pile Row n to the southern edge of the Pier Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 200 psf Vehicle Live Load: 9 Tons (18,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: Upgrade to allow H-15 (regularly)/H-20 (occasionally) Vehicle Live Load This area has 3-inch x 14-inch stringers at 12 inches on-center. The calculated capacity for this area is approximately 200 psf or a vehicle weight of 18,000 pounds. It is recommended this area be upgraded to meet H-20 vehicle capacity for occasional occurrences and H-15 vehicle capacity for regular occurrences. To accomplish this, the existing stringers should be supplemented with 6-inch x 14-inch stringers between each existing. 7.1.16. Area 16 – Pedestrian and vehicular passageway from Bent 35 to Bent 48, and from the Pacific Park fence to the southern edge of the Pier Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 200 psf Vehicle Live Load: 12 Tons (24,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: Upgrade to allow H-15 (regularly)/H-20 (occasionally) Vehicle Live Load This area has 3-inch x 16-inch stringers at 12 inches on-center. The calculated capacity for this area is approximately 200 psf or a vehicle weight of 24,000 pounds. It is recommended this area be upgraded to meet H-20 vehicle capacity for occasional occurrences and H-15 vehicle capacity for regular occurrences. To accomplish this, the existing stringers should be supplemented with 3-inch x 16-inch or 4-inch x 16- inch stringers between each existing. 7.1.17. Area 17 – Pacific Park building area from Bent 40 to Bent 51 and from Pile Row a to n Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 200 psf Vehicle Live Load: 7.5 Tons (15,000 pounds) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 596 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 64 Upgrades Recommendation: Upgrade from Timber Substructure to Concrete Substructure in Tidal Zone This area has 3-inch x 14-inch stringers at 12 inches on-center. The calculated capacity for this area is approximately 200 psf or a vehicle weight of 15,000 pounds. Just as with Area 14, it is the goal to have concrete piles in the tidal zone. However, since this is an active commercial area it is reasonable that this upgrade would not be implemented until either the buildings are scheduled for redevelopment, or there is a need for major pier structure reconstruction. The estimated cost of this upgrade using the same substructure as the Municipal Pier Phase 4 and 4-inch x 16-inch stringers at 18 inches on-center. 7.1.18. Area 18 – Pier Entrance Driveway Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 200 psf Vehicle Live Load (Regularly Occurring): 15 Tons (30,000 pounds) Vehicle Live Load (Occasionally Occurring): 20 Tons (40,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: No Upgrades Recommended at This Time This area was previously upgraded with 6-inch x 16-inch stringers at 16 inches on-center and has the capacity to support H-15 truck loading on a regular basis and H-20 (twenty ton) trucks on an occasional basis. 7.1.19. Aquarium Roof Area Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 85 psf Vehicle Live Load: 3 Tons (6,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: Upgrade to 100 psf Uniform Live Load and H-5 (5 Tons) Vehicle Live Load This area has 4-inch x 10-inch stringers at 16 inches on-center. The calculated capacity for this area is 85 psf or a vehicle weight of 6,000 pounds. It is recommended this area be upgraded to the code required capacity for pedestrian assembly areas of 100 psf. To accomplish this, the existing 4-inch x 10-inch at 16 inches on-center stringers could be supplemented with either 3-inch x 10-inch or 4-inch x 10-inch stringers. The 3-inch x 10-inch supplement would result in a live load capacity of 150 psf or a maximum vehicle weight of 12,000 pounds; while the 4-inch x 10-inch supplement would increase the live load capacity to 180 psf or a 14,000 pound vehicle. 7.1.20. Municipal Pier Phase 4 Area Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 200 psf Vehicle Live Load (Regularly Occurring): 15 Tons (30,000 pounds) Vehicle Live Load (Occasionally Occurring): 20 Tons (40,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: No Upgrades Recommended at This Time This zone connects the West-End Platform to the rest of the municipal pier and was previously upgraded with 4-inch x 16-inch stringers at 16 inches on-center and has the capacity to support H-15 (15 Ton) truck loading on a regular basis and H-20 (20 Ton) trucks on an occasional basis. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 597 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 65 7.1.21.Concrete Waffle Slab Area Current Load Rating Uniform Live Load: 180 psf Vehicle Live Load: 7.5 Tons (15,000 pounds) Upgrades Recommendation: Upgrade to allow H-15 (regularly)/H-20 (occasionally) Vehicle Live Load (Included in M&N Current Contract with City for Pier Upgrades) Figure 7-2: H7.5 Truck Loading This zone consists of the West-End Platform that houses the Harbor Patrol and LifeguardOffices and other restaurant buildings. This area is composed of a concrete waffle slab 16-inches thick overlain with 3-inch x 6-inch timber sleepers and timber decking. The City has contracted with M&N to perform a design to upgrade this area of the pier to support H-15 (15 Ton) truck loading on a regular basis and H-20 (20 Ton) trucks on an occasional basis. Pier Load Ratings and Upgrades Summary A summary has been provided that details the load rating or each area and associated upgrades required to bring area up to required load rating capacity, as shown in Table 7-1. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 598 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 66 Table 7-1: Deck Area Upgrades Summary 5.E.b Packet Pg. 599 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 67 Table 7-1: Deck Area Upgrades Summary (Continued) Pier Upgrades Cost Estimate Estimates of probable construction costs have been produced for the recommended upgrades for the pier deck areas to achieve necessary load requirements for future maintenance goals as part of the overall pier capital improvements program. Cost estimates assume each of these upgrade phases will be done under a separate contractor mobilization effort. There may be an opportunity to save costs by conducting all upgrades under a single contract, by having an on-call agreement with a local marine construction contractor, or by having the City maintenance staff conduct the upgrades. Refer to Appendix D for a full itemized cost estimate for recommended upgrades. The costs have been developed based on historical and current data using in-house sources, information from previous studies, as well as budget price quotations solicited from local suppliers and contractors. A contingency amount has been included to cover undefined items of work which will have to be performed, and elements of costs which will be incurred, but which are not explicitly detailed or described due to the level of investigation, engineering, and estimating completed. The opinion of probable construction cost is shown in Table 7-2 through Table 7-4. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 600 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 68 Table 7-2: Deck Area Upgrades Cost Estimate 5.E.b Packet Pg. 601 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 69 Table 7-3: Area 14 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate Table 7-4: Area 17 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate 5.E.b Packet Pg. 602 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 70 Sea Level Rise 7.4.1. Sea Level Rise Scenarios The 2018 update of the California Ocean Protection Council’s (OPC) Sea-Level Rise (SLR) Guidance has been identified by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) as the current best-available science on the subject. This report provides probabilistic SLR projections under high and low-emissions scenarios from 2030-2150. The 2018 OPC report lists the likely range of SLR in Santa Monica under a high emission, “business as usual” scenario as 0.3 – 0.5 feet by 2030, 0.6 – 1.1 feet by 2050, and 1.5 – 3.3 feet by 2100. These projections are identified by the CCC as being appropriate for low risk aversion activities. For medium risk aversion activities under the same scenario, the CCC recommends planning for 0.8 feet of SLR by 2030, 1.9 feet by 2050, and 6.8 feet by 2100. The range of SLR projections for each risk aversion curve are provided in Figure 7-3. These OPC projections vary slightly from projections listed in the City of Santa Monica Local Coastal Program Update - Land Use Plan (Public Draft dated February 2018) but in general remain consistent for each time horizon. Figure 7-3: California Ocean Protection Council SLR Projections and Associated Risk Recommendations 7.4.2. Potential Vulnerabilities Future vulnerabilities due to SLR primarily result from increases in coastal flood elevations, rates of erosion, and wave action. While the Santa Monica Pier itself is elevated on piles, coastal processes influenced by SLR may result in physical impacts to different elements of the pier structure. Some of the processes influenced by SLR that have the potential to result in impacts to the Pier are described below: 5.E.b Packet Pg. 603 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 71 Beach Erosion A widely accepted consequence of SLR is the landward and upward shift of the beach profile in response to the water levels and wave action reaching higher elevations. The Santa Monica shoreline in the vicinity of the Pier has been relatively stable due to historic beach nourishment activities and wave protection provided by the submerged offshore breakwater. However, SLR will result in long-term retreat of the beach profile, eventually exposing more segments of the Pier to the dynamic nearshore coastal processes. This will potentially expand the inspection and maintenance requirements as more of the piles will be subject to the harsh environmental factors that typically occur where piles are subject to fluctuations in water levels, sand levels, and wave action. Extreme Events Extreme events where large waves coincide with high water levels have been responsible for most of the damage to coastal piers in California, including the failure of the outer portion of the Santa Monica Pier in 1983. These events often occur during winter months and are associated with strong El Niño Southern Oscillation patterns, which typically result in above average water levels and larger wave events along the coast of Southern California. SLR will result in less freeboard between the Pier deck and the wave crest elevation during such extreme events. A review of the basis of design documents for the outer section of the Santa Monica Pier may provide the design freeboard, an indication of how much SLR could be accommodated before impacts to the pier deck, piles, cross-bracing, utilities or other elements would be expected. The future risk of damage from an extreme wave event also depends on the continued effectiveness of the submerged offshore breakwater at reducing wave heights and water depths in the vicinity of the Pier. A summary of the potential impacts from increased beach erosion and extreme wave events due to SLR is as follows: x Increased erosion of underlying beach and exposure of piles that were previously outside of the dynamic nearshore tidal zone (i.e. increased inspection, maintenance and repair required to maintain safety and/or functionality). x Increased wave forces on piles already suffering from deterioration due to the harsh marine environment. x Uplift and impact forces on piles and deck during some combination of extreme wave event + SLR. x Damage and potential failure of piles, bracing and under-deck utilities as a result of increased wave loading. x Loss of operational functions due to flooding of ground level parking and access locations. 7.4.3. Potential Impacts and Next Steps The Pier structure consists of a variety of materials and configurations and therefore the exposure to coastal hazards and potential impacts will vary greatly throughout the structure. For example, older timber piles that exhibit deterioration near the tidal zone would be more vulnerable to the effects of increased wave action driven by SLR than the newer reinforced concrete piles. Likewise, different locations of the Pier will experience different types of coastal processes. Extreme events, where high- water levels coincide with large wave heights, are a concern for over-water sections of the Pier, but less of a concern at the base of the Pier where storm wave energy would have dissipated across the beach 5.E.b Packet Pg. 604 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Page 72 profile. In addition to direct impacts to the Pier, there are also in-direct impacts such as flooding or erosion of ground level parking or access structures that could impact the function and usage of the Pier. The next step in understanding the Pier vulnerabilities is to identify the thresholds of SLR that would be problematic for the different segments of the Pier. This information would be useful to factor into planning and design of major improvements to the Pier and associated structures. This condition assessment provides a first step in describing the current state of the Pier and identifying areas in need of repair or improvement. The next step, outside the scope of this study, would be to compare this information against coastal hazard projections for a range of SLR increments. This effort would involve characterizing the site-specific hazards such as long-term shoreline erosion, storm-related erosion, and extreme wave crest profiles in relation to the Pier deck elevations. Each of these factors are influenced by the submerged breakwater located offshore of the Pier. SLR will reduce the effectiveness of the offshore breakwater, exposing the shoreline and Pier structures to additional wave energy that could increase the potential vulnerabilities. At this time, these site-specific details are not well resolved in regional efforts such as the Adapt LA Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment nor the coastal hazard projections published by USGS as part of the CoSMoS program. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 605 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Appendix A: Material Element & Overall System Condition Assessment Ratings 5.E.b Packet Pg. 606 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Damage Ratings for Timber Elements Damage Rating Existing Damage1 Exclusions [Defects Requiring Elevation to the Next Higher Damage Rating(s)] NI Not Inspected Not inspected, inaccessible, or passed by2 ND No Defects Sound surface material MN Minor Checks, splits, and gouges less than 0.5 in. wide Evidence of marine borers or fungal decay Minor damage not appropriate if: x Loss of cross section x Marine borer infestation x Displacements, loss of bearing, or connections MD Moderate Remaining diameter loss up to 15% Checks and splits wider than 0.5 in. Cross section area loss up to 25% Corroded hardware Evidence of marine borers or fungal decay, with loss of section Moderate damage not appropriate if: x Displacements, loss of bearing or connections MJ Major Remaining diameter loss 15 to 30% Checks and splits through full depth of cross section Cross-section area loss 25 to 50%; heavily corroded hardware Displacement and misalignments at connections Major damage not appropriate if: x Partial or complete breakage SV Severe Remaining diameter loss more than 30% Cross section area loss more than 50% Loss of connections and/ or fully nonbearing condition Partial or complete breakage 1 Any defect listed below is sufficient to identify relevant damage grade. 2 If not inspected due to inaccessibility or passed by, note as such. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 607 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Damage Ratings for Timber Elements 5.E.b Packet Pg. 608 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Damage Ratings for Steel Elements Damage Rating Existing Damage1 Exclusions [Defects Requiring Elevation to the Next Higher Damage Rating(s)] NI Not Inspected Not inspected, inaccessible, or passed by2 ND No Defects Protective coating or wrap intact Light surface rust No apparent loss of material MN Minor Protective coating or wrap damaged and loss of thickness up to 15% of nominal at any location Less than 50% of perimeter or circumference affected by corrosion at any elevation or cross section Loss of thickness up to 15% of nominal at any location Minor damage not appropriate if: x Changes in straight line configuration or local buckling x Corrosion loss exceeding fabrication tolerances (at any location) MD Moderate Protective coating or wrap damaged and loss of thickness 15 to 30% of nominal at any location More than 50% of perimeter or circumference affected by corrosion at any elevation or cross section Loss of thickness 15 to 30% of nominal at any location Moderate damage not appropriate if: x Changes in straight line configuration or local buckling x Loss of thickness exceeding 30% of nominal at any location MJ Major Protective coating or wrap damaged and loss of nominal thickness 30 to 50% at any location Partial loss of flange edges or visible reduction of wall thickness on pipe piles Loss of nominal thickness 30 to 50% at any location Major damage not appropriate if: x Changes in straight line configuration or local buckling x Perforations or loss of wall thickness exceeding 50% of nominal SV Severe Protective coating or wrap damaged and loss of wall thickness exceeding 50%of nominal at any location Structural bends or buckling, breakage and displacement at supports, lose or lost connections Loss of wall thickness exceeding 50% of nominal at any location 1 Any defect listed below is sufficient to identify relevant damage grade. 2 If not inspected due to inaccessibility or passed by, note as such. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 609 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Damage Ratings for Steel Elements 5.E.b Packet Pg. 610 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Damage Ratings for Reinforced Concrete Elements Damage Rating Existing Damage1 Exclusions [Defects Requiring Elevation to the Next Higher Damage Rating(s)] NI Not Inspected x Not inspected, inaccessible, or passed by2 ND No Defects x Good original hard surface, hard material, sound MN Minor x Mechanical abrasion or impact spalls up to 1 in. in depth x Occasional corrosion stains or small pop-out corrosion spalls x General cracks up to 1/16 in. in width Minor damage not appropriate if x Structural damage x Corrosion cracks x Chemical deterioration3 MD Moderate x Structural cracks up to 1/16 in. in width x Corrosion cracks up to 1/4 in. in width x Chemical deterioration: Random cracks up to 1/16 in. in width; "Soft" concrete and/or rounding of corners up to 1 in. deep x Mechanical abrasion or impact spalls greater than 1 in. in depth Moderate damage not appropriate if x Structural breakage and/or spalls x Exposed reinforcement x Loss of cross section due to chemical deterioration beyond rounding of corner edges MJ Major x Structural cracks 1/16 in. to 1/4 in. in width and partial breakage (through section cracking with structural spalls) x Corrosion cracks wider than 1/4 in. and open or closed corrosion spalls (excluding pop-outs) x Multiple cracks and disintegration of surface layer due to chemical deterioration x Mechanical abrasion or impact spalls exposing the reinforcing Major damage not appropriate if x Loss of cross section exceeding 30% due to any cause SV Severe x Structural cracks wider than 1/4 in. or complete breakage x Complete loss of concrete cover due to corrosion of reinforcing steel with more than 30% of diameter loss for any main reinforcing bar x Loss of bearing and displacement at connections x Loss of concrete cover (exposed steel) due to chemical deterioration x Loss of more 30% of cross section due to any cause 1 Any defect listed below is sufficient to identify relevant damage grade. 2 If not inspected due to inaccessibility or passed by, note as such. 3 Chemical deterioration: Sulfate attack, alkali-silica reaction, alkali-aggregate reaction, alkali-carbonate reaction ettringite distress, or other chemical/concrete deterioration. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 611 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Damage Ratings for Reinforced Concrete 5.E.b Packet Pg. 612 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Appendix B: GIS Database Pier Inspection Summary Figures 5.E.b Packet Pg. 613 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 614 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 615 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 616 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 617 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 618 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 619 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 620 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 621 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Appendix C: Detailed Pier Repair Cost Summary 5.E.b Packet Pg. 622 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL General Requirements Mobilization / Demobilization (including specialty equipment)1 LS $37,627.00 $37,627.00 Supervision 1 LS $18,232.00 $18,232.00 Bonds, Insurance, Overhead and Profit 1 LS $34,185.00 $34,185.00 Site Survey / Construction Survey Crew 1 DAY $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Stand-By Allowance Due to Inclement Weather / Ocean Conditions 0 DAY $0.00 $0.00 General Requirements Subtotal $92,044 Construction Waste Management and Temporary Site BMP's Waste Disposal & BMP's for Waterside Demolition 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00 Ɣ&RQVWUXFWLRQ:DVWH0DQDJHPHQW 'LVSRVDO)HHV 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000.00 Ɣ%03 V:DWHU3ROOXWLRQ&RQWURO(URVLRQ 6HGLPHQW&RQWURO 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Ɣ7HPSRUDU\)HQFLQJ6LJQDJHDQG7UDIILF&RQWURO 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000.00 Construction Waste Management Subtotal $40,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Pile Repairs 1 7 15 Timber Pile Repair (Severe)1 LS $48,650.00 $48,650.00 Ɣ6(&7,21/266255277,1*'$0$*( Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH0DULQH*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ3LOH 7 EA $500.00 $3,500.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ6LPSVRQ6WURQJ7LH);3LOH5HSDLU-DFNHW 105 LF $430.00 $45,150.00 1.1 11 2 Timber Pile Repair (Severe)1 LS $11,000.00 $11,000.00 Ɣ0,66,1*723&211(&7,21 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU&RUEHO['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO+DUGZDUH 11 EA $1,000.00 $11,000.00Timber Pile Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $59,650 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Pile Cap Repairs 2 7 10 Timber Pile Cap Repair (Severe)1 LS $28,000.00 $28,000.00 Ɣ63/,77,1*'()(&7,9(+$5':$5($1'5277,1*'$0$*( Ɣ3URYLGHWHPSRUDU\VKRULQJRISLOHFDSORFDWLRQWRIDFLOLWDWHLQVWDOODWLRQ 7 EA $1,000.00 $7,000.00 Ɣ'HPR ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU3LOH&DS['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO+DUGZDUH 70 LF $300.00 $21,000.00 Timber Pile Cap Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $28,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Bracing Repairs 3 38 15 Timber Lateral/Transverse Brace Repair (Severe)1 LS $48,450.00 $48,450.00 Ɣ63/,77,1*'()(&7,9(+$5':$5($1'5277,1*'$0$*( Ɣ'HPR ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU%UDFH['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO+DUGZDUH 570 LF $85.00 $48,450.00 Timber Bracing Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $48,450 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 1: Steel Bracing Repairs 3.1 8 10 Steel Lateral/Transverse Brace Repair (Severe)1 LS $8,800.00 $8,800.00 Ɣ&25526,21'()(&7,9(+$5':$5($1'92,'6 Ɣ'HPR ,QVWDOOQHZ6WHHO7XEH%UDFH'LDPHWHUZLWK6WHHO+DUGZDUH 80 LF $110.00 $8,800.00Steel Bracing Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $8,800 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Stringer Repairs 4 1 1000 Timber Stringer Repair (Severe)1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000.00 Ɣ%52.(163/,77,1*$1'5277,1*'$0$*( Ɣ'HPR ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 1,000 SF $25.00 $25,000.00 Timber Stringer Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $25,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Decking Repairs 5 0 0 Timber Decking Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Decking Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $0 ZONE No. 1: Timber East-End Pier Segment Subtotal $169,900 TOTAL ZONE 1: Timber East-End Pier Segment QUANTITY Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR City of Santa Monica Civil Engineering Division OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PROJECT DESCRIPTION Recommended for Immediate Repairs Santa Monica Municipal Pier Inspection (Priority Repairs) PROJECT TITLE Page 1 of 9 SM Pier Repairs (SV-Priority) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 623 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL TOTALQUANTITY Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR City of Santa Monica Civil Engineering Division OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PROJECT DESCRIPTION Recommended for Immediate Repairs Santa Monica Municipal Pier Inspection (Priority Repairs) PROJECT TITLE Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 2: Concrete Pile Repairs 6 0 0 Concrete Pile Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Concrete Pile Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 2: Concrete Capital Repairs 7 0 0 Concrete Capital Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Concrete Capital Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 2: Concrete Pile Cap Repairs 82 10 Concrete Pile Cap Repair (Severe)1 LS $16,000.00 $16,000.00 Ɣ&5$&.,1*(;326('5(%$5$1'5867%/(('6 Ɣ3URYLGHWHPSRUDU\VFDIIROGLQJWRIDFLOLWDWHLQVWDOODWLRQ 2 EA $2,000.00 $4,000.00 Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH([FHVV0DWHULDODQG*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ$UHD 2 EA $1,000.00 $2,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZIRUPZRUNGRZHOUHEDUDQGJURXW5HSDLU 20 LF $500.00 $10,000.00Concrete Pile Cap Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $16,000 Item Total Repair ZONE 2: Timber Stringer Repairs 9 0 0 Timber Stringer Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Stringer Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 2: Timber Decking Repairs 10 0 0 Timber Decking Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$Timber Decking Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $0 ZONE No. 2: Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment Subtotal $16,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 3: Concrete Pile Repairs 11 0 0 Concrete Pile Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$Concrete Pile Repairs (ZONE No. 3) Subtotal $0Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 3: Concrete Pile Cap Repairs 12 0 0 Concrete Pile Cap Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Concrete Pile Cap Repairs (ZONE No. 3) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 3: Timber Stringer Repairs 13 0 0 Timber Stringer Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Stringer Repairs (ZONE No. 3) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 3: Timber Decking Repairs 14 0 0 Timber Decking Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Decking Repairs (ZONE No. 3) Subtotal $0 ZONE 3: Concrete West-End Approach Pier Segment Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 4: Concrete Pile Repairs 15 0 0 Concrete Pile Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Concrete Pile Repairs (ZONE No. 4) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 4: Concrete Waffle Slab Repairs 16 0 0 Concrete Waffle Slab Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Concrete Waffle Slab Repairs (ZONE No. 4) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 4: Timber Sleeper Repairs 17 0 0 Timber Sleeper Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Sleeper Repairs (ZONE No. 4) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 4: Timber Decking Repairs 18 0 0 Timber Decking Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Decking Repairs (ZONE No. 4) Subtotal $0 ZONE 4: Concrete West-End Platform Pier Segment Subtotal $0 ZONE 2: Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment ZONE 3: Concrete West-End Approach Pier Segment ZONE 4: Concrete West-End Platform Pier Segment Page 2 of 9 SM Pier Repairs (SV-Priority) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 624 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL TOTALQUANTITY Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR City of Santa Monica Civil Engineering Division OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PROJECT DESCRIPTION Recommended for Immediate Repairs Santa Monica Municipal Pier Inspection (Priority Repairs) PROJECT TITLE TOTAL CONSTRUCTION (BEFORE MARKUPS)$317,940 Project Contingencies Construction Contingency 20.00% $63,588 Engineering, CA/CM & Permitting Fee (NOT INCLUDED)$0 20.00%subtotal $63,588 WATERSIDE IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL (WITH MARKUPS)$382,000 HIGH-END AND LOW-END OPC RANGE (CLASS 4 ESTIMATE) Plus 30% 30.00% $115,000 $497,000 Minus 20% 20.00% $76,000 $306,000 Notes:Price based on inspection conducted between July -September of 2018Price assumes a suitable laydown area is available on-site at no cost to the contractorPricing is in US Dollars, 3rd quarter 2019, and based on locally available resources Price is based on unencumbered contractor access to the site and assumes contractor has access along pedestrian walkway for construction equipment Price does not include environmental restrictions and assumes No weather risk included (force majeure) Escalation expense is not included Estimate class based on AACE No. 56R-08Price does not consider associated costs due to hazardous waste. Treated timber, steel ,and plastic material is assumed to be accepted as "controlled waste"Owner's costs (engineering, project management, owners overhead, third party QA/QC, etc.) are not includedWhen reviewing the above estimated costs it is important to note the following: - - - A contingency amount has been included to cover undefined items, due to the level of engineering carried out at this time. The contingency is not a reflection of the accuracy of the estimates but covers items of work which will have to be performed, and elements of costs which will be incurred, but which are not explicitly detailed or described due to the level of investigation, engineering and estimating completed today. This construction cost estimate is an 'Opinion of Probable Cost' made by a consultant. In providing opinions of construction cost, it is recognized that neither the client nor the consultant has control over the cost of labor, equipment, materials, or the contractor's means and methods of determining constructability, pricing or schedule. This opinion of construction cost is based on the consultant's reasonable professional judgement and experience and does not constitute a warranty, expressed or implied, that contractor's bids or negotiated prices for the work will not vary from The costs have been developed based on historical and current data using in-house sources, information from previous studies as well as budget price quotations solicited from local suppliers and contractors. Page 3 of 9 SM Pier Repairs (SV-Priority) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 625 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL General Requirements Mobilization / Demobilization (including specialty equipment)1 LS $157,230.25 $157,230.25 Supervision 1 LS $91,834.00 $91,834.00 Bonds, Insurance, Overhead and Profit 1 LS $172,188.75 $172,188.75 Site Survey / Construction Survey Crew 1 DAY $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Stand-By Allowance Due to Inclement Weather / Ocean Conditions 0 DAY $0.00 $0.00 General Requirements Subtotal $423,253 Construction Waste Management and Temporary Site BMP's Waste Disposal & BMP's for Waterside Demolition 1 LS $60,000.00 $60,000.00 Ɣ&RQVWUXFWLRQ:DVWH0DQDJHPHQW 'LVSRVDO)HHV 1 LS $35,000.00 $35,000.00 Ɣ%03 V:DWHU3ROOXWLRQ&RQWURO(URVLRQ 6HGLPHQW&RQWURO 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Ɣ7HPSRUDU\)HQFLQJ6LJQDJHDQG7UDIILF&RQWURO 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000.00 Construction Waste Management Subtotal $60,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Pile Repairs 1 44 10 Timber Pile Repair (Major)1 LS $211,200.00 $211,200.00 Ɣ6(&7,21/266255277,1*'$0$*( Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH0DULQH*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ3LOH 44 EA $500.00 $22,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ6LPSVRQ6WURQJ7LH);3LOH5HSDLU-DFNHW 440 LF $430.00 $189,200.00 1.1 43 2 Timber Pile Repair (Major)1 LS $38,700.00 $38,700.00 Ɣ63/,77,1*'()(&7,9(+$5':$5($1'60$//92,'6 Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH0DULQH*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ3LOH 43 EA $400.00 $17,200.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ*DOYDQL]HG6WHHO6WUDSVIW2&7RWDOHDZLWK+DUGZDUH 43 EA $500.00 $21,500.00Timber Pile Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $249,900Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Pile Cap Repairs 2 25 10 Timber Pile Cap Repair (Major)1 LS $100,000.00 $100,000.00 Ɣ63/,77,1*'()(&7,9(+$5':$5($1'5277,1*'$0$*( Ɣ3URYLGHWHPSRUDU\VKRULQJRISLOHFDSORFDWLRQWRIDFLOLWDWHLQVWDOODWLRQ 25 EA $1,000.00 $25,000.00 Ɣ'HPR ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU3LOH&DS['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO+DUGZDUH 250 LF $300.00 $75,000.00 Timber Pile Cap Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $100,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Bracing Repairs 3 111 15 Timber Lateral/Transverse Brace Repair (Major)1 LS $141,525.00 $141,525.00 Ɣ63/,77,1*'()(&7,9(+$5':$5($1'5277,1*'$0$*( Ɣ'HPR ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU%UDFH['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO+DUGZDUH 1,665 LF $85.00 $141,525.00Timber Bracing Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $141,525 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 1: Steel Bracing Repairs 3.1 12 10 Steel Lateral/Transverse Brace Repair (Severe)1 LS $13,200.00 $13,200.00 Ɣ&25526,21'()(&7,9(+$5':$5($1'92,'6 Ɣ'HPR ,QVWDOOQHZ6WHHO7XEH%UDFH'LDPHWHUZLWK6WHHO+DUGZDUH 120 LF $110.00 $13,200.00Steel Bracing Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $13,200 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Stringer Repairs 4 1 10000 Timber Stringer Repair (Major)1 LS $250,000.00 $250,000.00 Ɣ%52.(163/,77,1*$1'5277,1*'$0$*( Ɣ'HPR ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 10,000 SF $25.00 $250,000.00 Timber Stringer Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $250,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Decking Repairs 5 1 30000 Timber Decking Repair (Major)1 LS $300,000.00 $300,000.00 Ɣ%52.(163/,77,1*$1'&211(&7,21'$0$*( Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 30,000 SF $10.00 $300,000.00Timber Decking Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $300,000 ZONE No. 1: Timber East-End Pier Segment Subtotal $1,054,625 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 2: Concrete Pile Repairs 6 1 10 Concrete Pile Repair (Major)1 LS $7,300.00 $7,300.00 Ɣ&5$&.,1*(;326('5(%$5$1'5867%/(('6 Ɣ3URYLGHWHPSRUDU\VFDIIROGLQJWRIDFLOLWDWHLQVWDOODWLRQ 1 EA $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH([FHVV0DWHULDODQG*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ3LOH 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ6LPSVRQ6WURQJ7LH);3LOH5HSDLU-DFNHW 10 LF $430.00 $4,300.00 Concrete Pile Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $7,300 ZONE 1: Timber East-End Pier Segment ZONE 2: Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR PROJECT DESCRIPTION City of Santa Monica Santa Monica Municipal Pier Inspection (Short-Term Repairs) Civil Engineering Division Recommended for Repair within 1-5 Years PROJECT TITLE Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA QUANTITY TOTAL Page 4 of 9 SM Pier Repairs (MJ-Short) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 626 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR PROJECT DESCRIPTION City of Santa Monica Santa Monica Municipal Pier Inspection (Short-Term Repairs) Civil Engineering Division Recommended for Repair within 1-5 Years PROJECT TITLE Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA QUANTITY TOTAL Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 2: Concrete Capital Repairs 7 0 0 Concrete Capital Repair (Major)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Concrete Capital Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 2: Concrete Pile Cap Repairs 8 3 10 Concrete Pile Cap Repair (Major)1 LS $24,000.00 $24,000.00 Ɣ&5$&.,1*(;326('5(%$5$1'5867%/(('6 Ɣ3URYLGHWHPSRUDU\VFDIIROGLQJWRIDFLOLWDWHLQVWDOODWLRQ 3 EA $2,000.00 $6,000.00 Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH([FHVV0DWHULDODQG*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ$UHD 3 EA $1,000.00 $3,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZIRUPZRUNGRZHOUHEDUDQGJURXW5HSDLU 30 LF $500.00 $15,000.00 Concrete Pile Cap Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $24,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 2: Timber Stringer Repairs 9 0 0 Timber Stringer Repair (Major)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Stringer Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 2: Timber Decking Repairs 10 0 0 Timber Decking Repair (Major)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Decking Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $0 ZONE No. 2: Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment Subtotal $31,300 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 3: Concrete Pile Repairs 11 0 0 Concrete Pile Repair (Major)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Concrete Pile Repairs (ZONE No. 3) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 3: Concrete Pile Cap Repairs 12 0 0 Concrete Pile Cap Repair (Major)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Concrete Pile Cap Repairs (ZONE No. 3) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 3: Timber Stringer Repairs 13 0 0 Timber Stringer Repair (Major)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$Timber Stringer Repairs (ZONE No. 3) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 3: Timber Decking Repairs 14 0 0 Timber Decking Repair (Major)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$Timber Decking Repairs (ZONE No. 3) Subtotal $0 ZONE 3: Concrete West-End Approach Pier Segment Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 4: Concrete Pile Repairs 15 0 0 Concrete Pile Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Concrete Pile Repairs (ZONE No. 4) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 4: Concrete Waffle Slab Repairs 16 0 0 Concrete Waffle Slab Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Concrete Waffle Slab Repairs (ZONE No. 4) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 4: Timber Sleeper Repairs 17 0 0 Timber Sleeper Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Sleeper Repairs (ZONE No. 4) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 4: Timber Decking Repairs 18 0 0 Timber Decking Repair (Severe)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Decking Repairs (ZONE No. 4) Subtotal $0 ZONE 4: Concrete West-End Platform Pier Segment Subtotal $0 ZONE 3: Concrete West-End Approach Pier Segment ZONE 4: Concrete West-End Platform Pier Segment Page 5 of 9 SM Pier Repairs (MJ-Short) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 627 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR PROJECT DESCRIPTION City of Santa Monica Santa Monica Municipal Pier Inspection (Short-Term Repairs) Civil Engineering Division Recommended for Repair within 1-5 Years PROJECT TITLE Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA QUANTITY TOTAL TOTAL CONSTRUCTION (BEFORE MARKUPS)$1,569,180 Project Contingencies Construction Contingency 20.00% $313,836 Engineering, CA/CM & Permitting Fee (NOT INCLUDED)$0 20.00%subtotal $313,836 WATERSIDE IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL (WITH MARKUPS)$1,883,000 HIGH-END AND LOW-END OPC RANGE (CLASS 4 ESTIMATE) Plus 30% 30.00% $565,000 $2,448,000 Minus 20% 20.00% $377,000 $1,506,000 Notes:Price based on inspection conducted between July -September of 2018Price assumes a suitable laydown area is available on-site at no cost to the contractorPricing is in US Dollars, 3rd quarter 2019, and based on locally available resources Price is based on unencumbered contractor access to the site and assumes contractor has access along pedestrian walkway for construction equipment Price does not include environmental restrictions and assumes No weather risk included (force majeure) Escalation expense is not included Estimate class based on AACE No. 56R-08Price does not consider associated costs due to hazardous waste. Treated timber, steel ,and plastic material is assumed to be accepted as "controlled waste"Owner's costs (engineering, project management, owners overhead, third party QA/QC, etc.) are not includedWhen reviewing the above estimated costs it is important to note the following: - - - This construction cost estimate is an 'Opinion of Probable Cost' made by a consultant. In providing opinions of construction cost, it is recognized that neither the client nor the consultant has control over the cost of labor, equipment, materials, or the contractor's means and methods of determining constructability, pricing or schedule. This opinion of construction cost is based on the consultant's reasonable professional judgement and experience and does not constitute a warranty, expressed or implied, that contractor's bids or negotiated prices for the work will not vary from The costs have been developed based on historical and current data using in-house sources, information from previous studies as well as budget price quotations solicited from local suppliers and contractors.A contingency amount has been included to cover undefined items, due to the level of engineering carried out at this time. The contingency is not a reflection of the accuracy of the estimates but covers items of work which will have to be performed, and elements of costs which will be incurred, but which are not explicitly detailed or described due to the level of investigation, engineering and estimating completed today. Page 6 of 9 SM Pier Repairs (MJ-Short) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 628 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL General Requirements Mobilization / Demobilization (including specialty equipment)1 LS $282,920.75 $282,920.75 Supervision 1 LS $169,182.00 $169,182.00 Bonds, Insurance, Overhead and Profit 1 LS $317,216.25 $317,216.25 Site Survey / Construction Survey Crew 1 DAY $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Stand-By Allowance Due to Inclement Weather / Ocean Conditions 0 DAY $0.00 $0.00 General Requirements Subtotal $771,319 Construction Waste Management and Temporary Site BMP's Waste Disposal & BMP's for Waterside Demolition 1 LS $75,000.00 $75,000.00 Ɣ&RQVWUXFWLRQ:DVWH0DQDJHPHQW 'LVSRVDO)HHV 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00 Ɣ%03 V:DWHU3ROOXWLRQ&RQWURO(URVLRQ 6HGLPHQW&RQWURO 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Ɣ7HPSRUDU\)HQFLQJ6LJQDJHDQG7UDIILF&RQWURO 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000.00 Construction Waste Management Subtotal $75,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Pile Repairs 1 206 10 Timber Pile Repair (Moderate)1 LS $288,400.00 $288,400.00 Ɣ6(&7,21/266255277,1*'$0$*( Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH0DULQH*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ3LOH 206 EA $400.00 $82,400.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ)LEHUJODVV:UDSSLQJ3LOH5HSDLU 2,060 LF $100.00 $206,000.00 1.1 181 2 Timber Pile Repair (Moderate)1 LS $117,650.00 $117,650.00 Ɣ63/,77,1*'()(&7,9(+$5':$5($1'60$//92,'6 Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH0DULQH*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ3LOH 181 EA $400.00 $72,400.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ*ODY6WHHO6WUDSV+DUGZDUHDQGRU)LOO9RLGVZLWK(SR[\181 EA $250.00 $45,250.00Timber Pile Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $406,050Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Pile Cap Repairs 2 13 10 Timber Pile Cap Repair (Moderate)1 LS $52,000.00 $52,000.00 Ɣ5277,1*'$0$*( 6(&7,21/266 Ɣ3URYLGHWHPSRUDU\VKRULQJRISLOHFDSORFDWLRQWRIDFLOLWDWHLQVWDOODWLRQ 13 EA $1,000.00 $13,000.00 Ɣ'HPR ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU3LOH&DS['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO+DUGZDUH 130 LF $300.00 $39,000.00 2.1 97 2 Timber Pile Cap Repair (Moderate)1 LS $63,050.00 $63,050.00 Ɣ63/,77,1*'()(&7,9(+$5':$5($1'60$//92,'6 Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH0DULQH*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ&DS 97 EA $400.00 $38,800.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ*ODY6WHHO6WUDSV+DUGZDUHDQGRU)LOO9RLGVZLWK(SR[\97 EA $250.00 $24,250.00Timber Pile Cap Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $115,050 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Bracing Repairs 3 201 15 Timber Lateral/Transverse Brace Repair (Moderate)1 LS $256,275.00 $256,275.00 Ɣ5277,1*'$0$*( 6(&7,21/266 Ɣ'HPR ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU%UDFH['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO+DUGZDUH 3,015 LF $85.00 $256,275.00 3.1 260 15 Timber Lateral/Transverse Brace Repair (Moderate)1 LS $65,000.00 $65,000.00 Ɣ'()(&7,9(+$5':$5($1'60$//92,'6 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ*ODY6WHHO+DUGZDUHDQGRU)LOO9RLGVZLWK(SR[\260 EA $250.00 $65,000.00Timber Bracing Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $321,275 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 1: Steel Bracing Repairs 3.2 14 10 Steel Lateral/Transverse Brace Repair (Moderate)1 LS $15,400.00 $15,400.00 Ɣ&25526,21'()(&7,9(+$5':$5($1'92,'6 Ɣ'HPR ,QVWDOOQHZ6WHHO7XEH%UDFH'LDPHWHUZLWK6WHHO+DUGZDUH 140 LF $110.00 $15,400.00 Steel Bracing Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $15,400 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Stringer Repairs 4 1 17000 Timber Stringer Repair (Moderate)1 LS $425,000.00 $425,000.00 Ɣ%52.(163/,77,1*$1'5277,1*'$0$*( Ɣ'HPR ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 17,000 SF $25.00 $425,000.00 Timber Stringer Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $425,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 1: Timber Decking Repairs 5 1 60000 Timber Decking Repair (Moderate)1 LS $600,000.00 $600,000.00 Ɣ%52.(163/,77,1*$1'&211(&7,21'$0$*( Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 60,000 SF $10.00 $600,000.00 Timber Decking Repairs (ZONE No. 1) Subtotal $600,000 ZONE No. 1: Timber East-End Pier Segment Subtotal $1,882,775 ZONE 1: Timber East-End Pier Segment OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR PROJECT DESCRIPTION City of Santa Monica Santa Monica Municipal Pier Inspection (Long-Term Repairs) Civil Engineering Division Recommended for Repair within 5-10 Years PROJECT TITLE Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA QUANTITY TOTAL Page 7 of 9 SM Pier Repairs (MD-Long) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 629 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR PROJECT DESCRIPTION City of Santa Monica Santa Monica Municipal Pier Inspection (Long-Term Repairs) Civil Engineering Division Recommended for Repair within 5-10 Years PROJECT TITLE Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA QUANTITY TOTAL Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 2: Concrete Pile Repairs 6 32 5 Concrete Pile Repair (Moderate)1 LS $96,000.00 $96,000.00 Ɣ&5$&.,1*(;326('5(%$5$1'5867%/(('6 Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH([FHVV0DWHULDODQG*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ$UHD 32 EA $500.00 $16,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZIRUPZRUNGRZHOUHEDUDQGJURXW5HSDLU 160 LF $500.00 $80,000.00 Concrete Pile Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $96,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 2: Concrete Capital Repairs 7 4 5 Concrete Capital Repair (Moderate)1 LS $12,000.00 $12,000.00 Ɣ&5$&.,1*(;326('5(%$5$1'5867%/(('6 Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH([FHVV0DWHULDODQG*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ$UHD 4 EA $500.00 $2,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZIRUPZRUNGRZHOUHEDUDQGJURXW5HSDLU 20 LF $500.00 $10,000.00 Concrete Capital Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $12,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 2: Concrete Pile Cap Repairs 8 9 5 Concrete Pile Cap Repair (Moderate)1 LS $27,000.00 $27,000.00 Ɣ&5$&.,1*(;326('5(%$5$1'5867%/(('6 Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH([FHVV0DWHULDODQG*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ$UHD 9 EA $500.00 $4,500.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZIRUPZRUNGRZHOUHEDUDQGJURXW5HSDLU 45 LF $500.00 $22,500.00Concrete Pile Cap Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $27,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 2: Timber Stringer Repairs 9 0 0 Timber Stringer Repair (Moderate)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$Timber Stringer Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 2: Timber Decking Repairs 10 0 0 Timber Decking Repair (Moderate)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Decking Repairs (ZONE No. 2) Subtotal $0ZONE No. 2: Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment Subtotal $135,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 3: Concrete Pile Repairs 11 0 0 Concrete Pile Repair (Moderate)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$Concrete Pile Repairs (ZONE No. 3) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 3: Concrete Pile Cap Repairs 12 1 5 Concrete Pile Cap Repair (Moderate)1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 Ɣ&5$&.,1*(;326('5(%$5$1'5867%/(('6 Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH([FHVV0DWHULDODQG*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ$UHD 1 EA $500.00 $500.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZIRUPZRUNGRZHOUHEDUDQGJURXW5HSDLU 5 LF $500.00 $2,500.00 Concrete Pile Cap Repairs (ZONE No. 3) Subtotal $3,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 3: Timber Stringer Repairs 13 0 0 Timber Stringer Repair (Moderate)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Stringer Repairs (ZONE No. 3) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 3: Timber Decking Repairs 14 0 0 Timber Decking Repair (Moderate)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Decking Repairs (ZONE No. 3) Subtotal $0ZONE 3: Concrete West-End Approach Pier Segment Subtotal $3,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 4: Concrete Pile Repairs 15 2 5 Concrete Pile Repair (Moderate)1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000.00 Ɣ&5$&.,1*(;326('5(%$5$1'5867%/(('6 Ɣ3URYLGHWHPSRUDU\VFDIIROGLQJWRIDFLOLWDWHLQVWDOODWLRQ 2 EA $2,000.00 $4,000.00 Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH([FHVV0DWHULDODQG*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ$UHD 2 EA $500.00 $1,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZIRUPZRUNGRZHOUHEDUDQGJURXW5HSDLU 10 LF $500.00 $5,000.00 Concrete Pile Repairs (ZONE No. 4) Subtotal $10,000 ZONE 2: Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment ZONE 3: Concrete West-End Approach Pier Segment ZONE 4: Concrete West-End Platform Pier Segment Page 8 of 9 SM Pier Repairs (MD-Long) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 630 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR PROJECT DESCRIPTION City of Santa Monica Santa Monica Municipal Pier Inspection (Long-Term Repairs) Civil Engineering Division Recommended for Repair within 5-10 Years PROJECT TITLE Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA QUANTITY TOTAL Item No. Total (ea) Repair Len. (ft)ZONE 4: Concrete Waffle Slab Repairs 16 1 5 Concrete Waffle Slab Repair (Moderate)1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Ɣ&5$&.,1*(;326('5(%$5$1'5867%/(('6 Ɣ3URYLGHWHPSRUDU\VFDIIROGLQJWRIDFLOLWDWHLQVWDOODWLRQ 1 EA $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Ɣ&OHDQDQG5HPRYH([FHVV0DWHULDODQG*URZWK$URXQG([LVWLQJ$UHD 1 EA $500.00 $500.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZIRUPZRUNGRZHOUHEDUDQGJURXW5HSDLU 5 LF $500.00 $2,500.00 Concrete Waffle Slab Repairs (ZONE No. 4) Subtotal $5,000 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 4: Timber Sleeper Repairs 17 0 0 Timber Sleeper Repair (Moderate)1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ127$33/,&$%/(1$ Timber Sleeper Repairs (ZONE No. 4) Subtotal $0 Item No. Total (ea) Repair Area (ft)ZONE 4: Timber Decking Repairs 18 1 200 Timber Decking Repair (Moderate)1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Ɣ%52.(163/,77,1*$1'&211(&7,21'$0$*( Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 200 SF $10.00 $2,000.00 Timber Decking Repairs (ZONE No. 4) Subtotal $2,000 ZONE 4: Concrete West-End Platform Pier Segment Subtotal $17,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION (BEFORE MARKUPS)$2,884,090 Project Contingencies Construction Contingency 20.00% $576,818 Engineering, CA/CM & Permitting Fee (NOT INCLUDED)$0 20.00%subtotal $576,818 WATERSIDE IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL (WITH MARKUPS)$3,461,000 HIGH-END AND LOW-END OPC RANGE (CLASS 4 ESTIMATE) Plus 30% 30.00% $1,038,000 $4,499,000 Minus 20% 20.00% $692,000 $2,769,000 Notes: Price based on inspection conducted between July -September of 2018 Price assumes a suitable laydown area is available on-site at no cost to the contractorPricing is in US Dollars, 3rd quarter 2019, and based on locally available resourcesPrice is based on unencumbered contractor access to the site and assumes contractor has access along pedestrian walkway for construction equipment Price does not include environmental restrictions and assumes No weather risk included (force majeure) Escalation expense is not included Estimate class based on AACE No. 56R-08 Price does not consider associated costs due to hazardous waste. Treated timber, steel ,and plastic material is assumed to be accepted as "controlled waste"Owner's costs (engineering, project management, owners overhead, third party QA/QC, etc.) are not includedWhen reviewing the above estimated costs it is important to note the following: - - - This construction cost estimate is an 'Opinion of Probable Cost' made by a consultant. In providing opinions of construction cost, it is recognized that neither the client nor the consultant has control over the cost of labor, equipment, materials, or the contractor's means and methods of determining constructability, pricing or schedule. This opinion of construction cost is based on the consultant's reasonable professional judgement and experience and does not constitute a warranty, expressed or implied, that contractor's bids or negotiated prices for the work will not vary from The costs have been developed based on historical and current data using in-house sources, information from previous studies as well as budget price quotations solicited from local suppliers and contractors.A contingency amount has been included to cover undefined items, due to the level of engineering carried out at this time. The contingency is not a reflection of the accuracy of the estimates but covers items of work which will have to be performed, and elements of costs which will be incurred, but which are not explicitly detailed or described due to the level of investigation, engineering and estimating completed today. Page 9 of 9 SM Pier Repairs (MD-Long) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 631 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier Upgrades (Area 14) Recommended Upgrades for Area 14 M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL General Requirements Mobilization / Demobilization (including specialty equipment)1 LS $122,140.00 $122,140.00 Supervision 1 LS $70,240.00 $70,240.00 Bonds, Insurance, Overhead and Profit 1 LS $131,700.00 $131,700.00 Site Survey / Construction Survey Crew 1 DAY $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Stand-By Allowance Due to Inclement Weather / Ocean Conditions 0 DAY $0.00 $0.00 General Requirements Subtotal $326,080 Construction Waste Management and Temporary Site BMP's Waste Disposal & BMP's for Waterside Demolition 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00 Ɣ&RQVWUXFWLRQ:DVWH0DQDJHPHQW 'LVSRVDO)HHV 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000.00 Ɣ%03 V:DWHU3ROOXWLRQ&RQWURO(URVLRQ 6HGLPHQW&RQWURO 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Ɣ7HPSRUDU\)HQFLQJ6LJQDJHDQG7UDIILF&RQWURO 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000.00 Construction Waste Management Subtotal $40,000 Item No.Demolish Existing Structure 1 Remove and Demolish Existing Substructure and Superstructure 1 LS $102,500.00 $102,500.00 Ɣ'HPRWLPEHUSLOHVXEVWUXFWXUHDQGWLPEHUGHFNVXSHUVWUXFWXUH 4,100 SF $25.00 $102,500.00 Demolish Existing Structure Subtotal $102,500 Item No.Concrete Substructure 2 Furnish & Install Concrete Piles 1 LS $200,000.00 $200,000.00 Ɣ1HZ'LD&RQFUHWHSLOHV 1,000 LF $200.00 $200,000.00 3 Furnish & Install Concrete Caps and Struts 1 LS $225,000.00 $225,000.00 Ɣ1HZ&RQFUHWH&DSVIW[IW100 CY $1,500.00 $150,000.00 Ɣ1HZ&RQFUHWH6WUXWVIW[IW50 CY $1,500.00 $75,000.00 Concrete Substructure Subtotal $425,000 Item No.Timber Superstructure 4 Furnish & Install Timber Stringers 1 LS $102,500.00 $102,500.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 4,100 SF $25.00 $102,500.00 5 Furnish & Install Timber Decking 1 LS $41,000.00 $41,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 4,100 SF $10.00 $41,000.00 Timber Superstructure Subtotal $143,500 Item No.Appurtenances 6 Furnish & Install Steel Handrails 1 LS $45,000.00 $45,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOVWHHOKDQGUDLOIWKLJK0DWFKH[LVWLQJ 150 LF $300.00 $45,000.00 7 Furnish & Install Under Pier Catwalk System 1 LS $45,000.00 $45,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOWLPEHUFDWZDONEHORZGHFN['RXJ)LU150 LF $300.00 $45,000.00 8 Furnish & Install Pier Lighting 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOIWWDOOOLJKWSROHZLWKIL[WXUH 5 EA $5,000.00 $25,000.00 9 Furnish & Install Utilities 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZXWLOLWLHVDVVXPHUHSODFHLQNLQGRIH[LVWLQJ1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00 Appurtenances Subtotal $165,000 Area 14: Upgrade to Concrete Substructure Subtotal $836,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION (BEFORE MARKUPS)$1,202,080 Project Contingencies Construction Contingency 20.00% $240,416 Engineering, CA/CM & Permitting Fee (NOT INCLUDED)$0 20.00%subtotal $240,416 WATERSIDE IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL (WITH MARKUPS)$1,442,000 HIGH-END AND LOW-END OPC RANGE (CLASS 4 ESTIMATE) Plus 30% 30.00% $433,000 $1,875,000 Minus 20% 20.00% $288,000 $1,154,000 Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR City of Santa Monica Civil Engineering Division OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT TITLE TOTAL Area 14: Upgrade to Concrete Substructure QUANTITY Page 1 of 5 SM Pier Upgrades (Area 14) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 632 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier Upgrades (Area 17) Recommended Upgrades for Area 17 M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL General Requirements Mobilization / Demobilization (including specialty equipment)1 LS $572,070.00 $572,070.00 Supervision 1 LS $347,120.00 $347,120.00 Bonds, Insurance, Overhead and Profit 1 LS $650,850.00 $650,850.00 Site Survey / Construction Survey Crew 1 DAY $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Stand-By Allowance Due to Inclement Weather / Ocean Conditions 0 DAY $0.00 $0.00 General Requirements Subtotal $1,572,040 Construction Waste Management and Temporary Site BMP's Waste Disposal & BMP's for Waterside Demolition 1 LS $60,000.00 $60,000.00 Ɣ&RQVWUXFWLRQ:DVWH0DQDJHPHQW 'LVSRVDO)HHV 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00 Ɣ%03 V:DWHU3ROOXWLRQ&RQWURO(URVLRQ 6HGLPHQW&RQWURO 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Ɣ7HPSRUDU\)HQFLQJ6LJQDJHDQG7UDIILF&RQWURO 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000.00 Construction Waste Management Subtotal $60,000 Item No.Demolish Existing Structure 1 Remove and Demolish Existing Substructure and Superstructure 1 LS $605,000.00 $605,000.00 Ɣ'HPRWLPEHUSLOHVXEVWUXFWXUHDQGWLPEHUGHFNVXSHUVWUXFWXUH 24,200 SF $25.00 $605,000.00 Demolish Existing Structure Subtotal $605,000 Item No.Concrete Substructure 2 Furnish & Install Concrete Piles 1 LS $900,000.00 $900,000.00 Ɣ1HZ'LD&RQFUHWHSLOHV 4,500 LF $200.00 $900,000.00 3 Furnish & Install Concrete Caps and Struts 1 LS $1,500,000.00 $1,500,000.00 Ɣ1HZ&RQFUHWH&DSVIW[IW550 CY $1,500.00 $825,000.00 Ɣ1HZ&RQFUHWH6WUXWVIW[IW450 CY $1,500.00 $675,000.00 Concrete Substructure Subtotal $2,400,000 Item No.Timber Superstructure 4 Furnish & Install Timber Stringers 1 LS $605,000.00 $605,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 24,200 SF $25.00 $605,000.00 5 Furnish & Install Timber Decking 1 LS $242,000.00 $242,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 24,200 SF $10.00 $242,000.00 Timber Superstructure Subtotal $847,000 Item No.Appurtenances 6 Furnish & Install Steel Handrails 1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOVWHHOKDQGUDLOIWKLJK0DWFKH[LVWLQJ 0 LF $300.00 $0.00 7 Furnish & Install Under Pier Catwalk System 1 LS $225,000.00 $225,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOWLPEHUFDWZDONEHORZGHFN['RXJ)LU750 LF $300.00 $225,000.00 8 Furnish & Install Pier Lighting 1 LS $0.00 $0.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOIWWDOOOLJKWSROHZLWKIL[WXUH 0 EA $5,000.00 $0.00 9 Furnish & Install Utilities 1 LS $200,000.00 $200,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZXWLOLWLHVDVVXPHUHSODFHLQNLQGRIH[LVWLQJ1 LS $200,000.00 $200,000.00 Appurtenances Subtotal $425,000 Area 17: Upgrade to Concrete Substructure Subtotal $4,277,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION (BEFORE MARKUPS)$5,909,040 Project Contingencies Construction Contingency 20.00% $1,181,808 Engineering, CA/CM & Permitting Fee (NOT INCLUDED)$0 20.00%subtotal $1,181,808 WATERSIDE IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL (WITH MARKUPS)$7,091,000 HIGH-END AND LOW-END OPC RANGE (CLASS 4 ESTIMATE) Plus 30% 30.00% $2,127,000 $9,218,000 Minus 20% 20.00% $1,418,000 $5,673,000 PROJECT TITLE Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA QUANTITY TOTAL Area 17: Upgrade to Concrete Substructure OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR PROJECT DESCRIPTION City of Santa Monica Civil Engineering Division Page 2 of 5 SM Pier Upgrades (Area 17) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 633 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier Upgrades (Deck Area Upgrades) Recommended Upgrades for (Area 1-Area18 and Aquarium Roof) M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL General Requirements Mobilization / Demobilization (including specialty equipment)1 LS $569,335.00 $569,335.00 Supervision 1 LS $350,360.00 $350,360.00 Bonds, Insurance, Overhead and Profit 1 LS $656,925.00 $656,925.00 Site Survey / Construction Survey Crew 2 DAY $2,000.00 $4,000.00 Stand-By Allowance Due to Inclement Weather / Ocean Conditions 0 DAY $0.00 $0.00 General Requirements Subtotal $1,580,620 Construction Waste Management and Temporary Site BMP's Waste Disposal & BMP's for Waterside Demolition 1 LS $80,000.00 $80,000.00 Ɣ&RQVWUXFWLRQ:DVWH0DQDJHPHQW 'LVSRVDO)HHV 1 LS $60,000.00 $60,000.00 Ɣ%03 V:DWHU3ROOXWLRQ&RQWURO(URVLRQ 6HGLPHQW&RQWURO 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Ɣ7HPSRUDU\)HQFLQJ6LJQDJHDQG7UDIILF&RQWURO 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000.00 Construction Waste Management Subtotal $80,000 Item No.Demolish Existing Structure 1 Remove and Demolish Existing Superstructure 1 LS $85,000.00 $85,000.00 Ɣ'HPRWLPEHUGHFNLQJRQO\8,500 SF $10.00 $85,000.00 Demolish Existing Structure Subtotal $85,000Item No.Timber Superstructure 2 Furnish & Install Timber Stringers 1 LS $212,500.00 $212,500.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 8,500 SF $25.00 $212,500.00 3 Furnish & Install Timber Decking 1 LS $85,000.00 $85,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 8,500 SF $10.00 $85,000.00Timber Superstructure Subtotal $297,500 Area 1: Deck Upgrade Subtotal $382,500 Area 2: To Be Completed As Part of Current Upgrade Design Project $0 Item No.Demolish Existing Structure 4 Remove and Demolish Existing Superstructure 1 LS $120,000.00 $120,000.00 Ɣ'HPRWLPEHUGHFNLQJDQGWLPEHUVWULQJHUV 6,000 SF $20.00 $120,000.00 Demolish Existing Structure Subtotal $120,000 Item No.Timber Superstructure 5 Furnish & Install Timber Stringers 1 LS $150,000.00 $150,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 6,000 SF $25.00 $150,000.00 6 Furnish & Install Timber Decking 1 LS $60,000.00 $60,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 6,000 SF $10.00 $60,000.00 Timber Superstructure Subtotal $210,000 Area 3: Deck Upgrade Subtotal $330,000 Area 4: Upgrade Not Recommended At This Time $0 Area 5: Upgrade Not Recommended At This Time $0 Area 6: Upgrade Not Recommended At This Time $0 Item No.Demolish Existing Structure 10 Remove and Demolish Existing Superstructure 1 LS $14,000.00 $14,000.00 Ɣ'HPRWLPEHUGHFNLQJRQO\1,400 SF $10.00 $14,000.00 Demolish Existing Structure Subtotal $14,000 Item No.Timber Superstructure 11 Furnish & Install Timber Stringers 1 LS $35,000.00 $35,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 1,400 SF $25.00 $35,000.00 12 Furnish & Install Timber Decking 1 LS $14,000.00 $14,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 1,400 SF $10.00 $14,000.00 Timber Superstructure Subtotal $49,000 Area 7: Deck Upgrade Subtotal $63,000 Item No.Demolish Existing Structure 13 Remove and Demolish Existing Superstructure 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00 Ɣ'HPRWLPEHUGHFNLQJRQO\4,000 SF $10.00 $40,000.00 OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR PROJECT DESCRIPTION City of Santa Monica Civil Engineering Division PROJECT TITLE Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA QUANTITY TOTAL Area 1: Deck Upgrade Area 2: Deck Upgrade Area 3: Deck Upgrade Area 4: Deck Upgrade Area 5: Deck Upgrade Area 6: Deck Upgrade Area 7: Deck Upgrade Area 8: Deck Upgrade Page 3 of 5 SM Pier Upgrades (Area1-Area18) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 634 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier Upgrades (Deck Area Upgrades) Recommended Upgrades for (Area 1-Area18 and Aquarium Roof) M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR PROJECT DESCRIPTION City of Santa Monica Civil Engineering Division PROJECT TITLE Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA QUANTITY TOTAL Demolish Existing Structure Subtotal $40,000 Item No.Timber Superstructure 14 Furnish & Install Timber Stringers 1 LS $100,000.00 $100,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 4,000 SF $25.00 $100,000.00 15 Furnish & Install Timber Decking 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 4,000 SF $10.00 $40,000.00 Timber Superstructure Subtotal $140,000 Area 8: Deck Upgrade Subtotal $180,000 Area 9: Upgrade Not Recommended At This Time $0 Item No.Demolish Existing Structure 16 Remove and Demolish Existing Superstructure 1 LS $361,000.00 $361,000.00 Ɣ'HPRWLPEHUGHFNLQJRQO\36,100 SF $10.00 $361,000.00 Demolish Existing Structure Subtotal $361,000 Item No.Timber Superstructure 17 Furnish & Install Timber Stringers 1 LS $902,500.00 $902,500.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 36,100 SF $25.00 $902,500.00 18 Furnish & Install Timber Decking 1 LS $361,000.00 $361,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 36,100 SF $10.00 $361,000.00 Timber Superstructure Subtotal $1,263,500 Area 10: Deck Upgrade Subtotal $1,624,500 Area 11: Upgrade Not Recommended At This Time $0 Item No.Demolish Existing Structure 19 Remove and Demolish Existing Superstructure 1 LS $270,000.00 $270,000.00 Ɣ'HPRWLPEHUGHFNLQJDQGWLPEHUVWULQJHUV 13,500 SF $20.00 $270,000.00 Demolish Existing Structure Subtotal $270,000 Item No.Timber Superstructure 20 Furnish & Install Timber Stringers 1 LS $337,500.00 $337,500.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 13,500 SF $25.00 $337,500.00 21 Furnish & Install Timber Decking 1 LS $135,000.00 $135,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 13,500 SF $10.00 $135,000.00 Timber Superstructure Subtotal $472,500 Area 12: Deck Upgrade Subtotal $742,500 Area 13: Upgrade Not Recommended At This Time $0 Area 14: Refer to Attached Area 14 Concrete Substructure Upgrade $0 Item No.Demolish Existing Structure 22 Remove and Demolish Existing Superstructure 1 LS $96,000.00 $96,000.00 Ɣ'HPRWLPEHUGHFNLQJDQGWLPEHUVWULQJHUV 4,800 SF $20.00 $96,000.00 Demolish Existing Structure Subtotal $96,000 Item No.Timber Superstructure 23 Furnish & Install Timber Stringers 1 LS $120,000.00 $120,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 4,800 SF $25.00 $120,000.00 24 Furnish & Install Timber Decking 1 LS $48,000.00 $48,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 4,800 SF $10.00 $48,000.00 Timber Superstructure Subtotal $168,000 Area 15: Deck Upgrade Subtotal $264,000 Item No.Demolish Existing Structure 25 Remove and Demolish Existing Superstructure 1 LS $107,000.00 $107,000.00 Ɣ'HPRWLPEHUGHFNLQJRQO\10,700 SF $10.00 $107,000.00 Demolish Existing Structure Subtotal $107,000 Item No.Timber Superstructure 26 Furnish & Install Timber Stringers 1 LS $267,500.00 $267,500.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 10,700 SF $25.00 $267,500.00 27 Furnish & Install Timber Decking 1 LS $107,000.00 $107,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 10,700 SF $10.00 $107,000.00 Timber Superstructure Subtotal $374,500 Area 16: Deck Upgrade Subtotal $481,500 Area 9: Deck Upgrade Area 10: Deck Upgrade Area 11: Deck Upgrade Area 12: Deck Upgrade Area 13: Deck Upgrade Area 14: Deck Upgrade Area 15: Deck Upgrade Area 16: Deck Upgrade Page 4 of 5 SM Pier Upgrades (Area1-Area18) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 635 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier Upgrades (Deck Area Upgrades) Recommended Upgrades for (Area 1-Area18 and Aquarium Roof) M&N JOB ORDER NUMBER DATE PREPARED 10225-00 15-Nov-18 ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST SUBTOTAL TOTAL OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (OPC) PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR PROJECT DESCRIPTION City of Santa Monica Civil Engineering Division PROJECT TITLE Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment and Upgrades - Santa Monica, CA QUANTITY TOTAL Area 17: Refer to Attached Area 17 Concrete Substructure Upgrade $0 Area 18: Upgrade Not Recommended At This Time $0 Item No.Demolish Existing Structure 28 Remove and Demolish Existing Superstructure 1 LS $70,000.00 $70,000.00 Ɣ'HPRWLPEHUGHFNLQJDQGZDWHUSURRILQJ 3,500 SF $20.00 $70,000.00 Demolish Existing Structure Subtotal $70,000 Item No.Timber Superstructure 29 Furnish & Install Timber Stringers 1 LS $87,500.00 $87,500.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6WULQJHUV['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 3,500 SF $25.00 $87,500.00 30 Furnish & Install Sheathing and Waterproofing 1 LS $35,000.00 $35,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU6KHDWKLQJ SO\ZRRGZLWKZDWHUSURRILQJ 3,500 SF $10.00 $35,000.00 31 Furnish & Install Timber Decking 1 LS $35,000.00 $35,000.00 Ɣ,QVWDOOQHZ7LPEHU'HFNLQJ['RXJ)LUZLWK6WHHO6SLNHV 3,500 SF $10.00 $35,000.00 Timber Superstructure Subtotal $157,500 Aquarium Roof Area: Deck Upgrade Subtotal $227,500 Municipal Pier Phase 4 Area: Upgrade Not Recommended At This Time $0 Concrete Waffle Slab Area: To Be Completed As Part of Current Upgrade Design Project $0 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION (BEFORE MARKUPS)$5,956,120 Project Contingencies Construction Contingency 20.00% $1,191,224 Engineering, CA/CM & Permitting Fee (NOT INCLUDED)$0 20.00%subtotal $1,191,224 WATERSIDE IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL (WITH MARKUPS)$7,147,000 HIGH-END AND LOW-END OPC RANGE (CLASS 4 ESTIMATE) Plus 30% 30.00% $2,144,000 $9,291,000 Minus 20% 20.00% $1,429,000 $5,718,000 Aquarium Room Area: Deck Upgrade Municipal Pier Phase 4 Area: Deck Upgrade Concrete Waffle Slab Area: Deck Upgrade Area 17: Deck Upgrade Area 18: Deck Upgrade Page 5 of 5 SM Pier Upgrades (Area1-Area18) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 636 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Appendix D: Pier Load Rating Figures 5.E.b Packet Pg. 637 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier $5($$48$5Ζ80 522) $5($ $5($ $5($$5($ $5($$5($ $5($ $5($ 081Ζ&Ζ3$/3Ζ(53+$6(&21&5(7(:$))/(6/$%$5($$5($$5($$5($$5($$5($ $5($ $5($SVI 7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI 7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI 5HJXODUO\7RQ9HKLFOH 2FFDVLRQDOO\7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI 7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI5HJXODUO\ 7RQ9HKLFOH2FFDVLRQDOO\ 7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI 7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI 7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI 7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI5HJXODUO\ 7RQ9HKLFOH2FFDVLRQDOO\ 7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI 7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI 7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI7RQ9HKLFOH $5($SVI 5HJXODUO\7RQ9HKLFOH 2FFDVLRQDOO\7RQ9HKLFOH $48$5Ζ80522) SVI7RQ9HKLFOH 081Ζ&Ζ3$/3Ζ(53+$6(SVI 5HJXODUO\7RQ9HKLFOH2FFDVLRQDOO\7RQ9HKLFOH &RQFUHWH:DIIOH6ODE 7%'SVI7%'7RQ9HKLFOH 3Ζ(5Ζ1)5$6758&785(/2$'5$7Ζ1* $5($ $5($ 7KH&LW\RI6DQWD0RQLFDKDVFRQWUDFWHG0 1WRSHUIRUPHQJLQHHULQJVHUYLFHVWRSURYLGHGHVLJQVIRUXSJUDGHVWRWKLVDUHDWRDFFRPPRGDWH+9HKLFOH/RDGLQJUHJXODUO\DQG+9HKLFOHORDGLQJRFFDVLRQDOO\ 2QFHWKLVSURMHFWLVFRPSOHWHGWKLVWDEOHFDQEHXSGDWHG ΖWLVUHFRPPHQGHGGHVLJQVIRUXSJUDGHVWRWKLVDUHDEHSHUIRUPHGWRDFFRPPRGDWH+9HKLFOHORDGLQJUHJXODUO\DQG+9HKLFOHORDGLQJRFFDVLRQDOO\2QFHWKHVHFDSLWDOLPSURYHPHQWSURMHFWVFDQEH FRPSOHWHGWKLVWDEOHFDQEHXSGDWHG ΖWLVUHFRPPHQGHGGHVLJQVIRUXSJUDGHVWRWKLVDUHDEHSHUIRUPHGWRDFFRPPRGDWHPDLQWHQDQFHYHKLFOHVSHGHVWULDQDFFHVVDQGRUHTXLSPHQWVWRUDJH2QFHWKHVHFDSLWDOLPSURYHPHQWSURMHFWVFDQEH FRPSOHWHGWKLVWDEOHFDQEHXSGDWHG 5HSUHVHQWVDUHDWKDWFXUUHQWO\PHHWVYHKLFOHDFFHVVORDGUDWLQJIRU+UHJXODUO\DQG +RFFDVLRQDOO\ /(*(1' )HHW(((((( 5.E.b Packet Pg. 638 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Appendix E: Pier Condition Element Ratings and Identified Defects 5.E.b Packet Pg. 639 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO. ND MN MD MJ SV 11.5q X 100% section loss 12.5h X Missing top connection 22.5a.5 X Not connected 22.5c X Not connected 28c.3 X No connection 28d.5 X Not connected 28x X 25% section loss 29c.5 X Not connected 29d.5 X Not connected 29j.8 X Not connected 30c.5 X Not connected 31aa.8 X Section loss 31k X Not connected 33k X Connection 3k X 50% end bearing, 50-75% section loss 47i.7 NE X Section loss, Minor Fungal rot 7c X Dry rot and splitting 7h X Fungal rot greater than 50% TOTAL = N/A N/A N/A N/A 18 SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY PILE CONDITION RATING ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 1 - Timber Piles (Severe)Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 640 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV 12q X Dry rot, 25% section loss 13j X Fungal rot 14aa X Fungal rot 14f X >1/2" split full length 14o X Splitting 15aa X Out of plumb, fungal rot, 50%end bearing 15l X >1/2"split, 50% end bearing 15m X Fungal rot and splitting 15t X 50%end bearing, splitting 16aa X 1" split at top 16z X Dry rot 17aa X Dry rot 17h X Split 17i X Split 17s X Dry rot 17t X Fungal rot 17v X Fungal rot 17y X Splitting 18r X Dry rot 18t X Dry rot 18x X Dry rot 18z X Dry rot 19ab X Dry rot 19g X 50% end bearing, major split at top 19h X Splitting at top, 50% end bearing 19i X 50% end bearing, major splitting at top 19m X Major split at top, minor dry rot 19v X Dry rot, minor splitting 20k X Splitting 21j X Split middle 22g X Dry rot 23h X Splitting 23p X Dry rot 23u X Splitting 24ab X Splitting, fungal rot 24p X Splitting 24t X Splitting 24z X Splitting 25f X Splitting , dry rot 25L X Splitting 25p X Splitting, dry rot 26c X Splitting 26g X Splitting , dry rot 26y X Splitting, dry rot SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 1 - Timber Piles (Major) PILE CONDITION RATING Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 641 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 1 - Timber Piles (Major) PILE CONDITION RATING 27s X Dry rot 28a X Dry rot at top 28v X Dry rot 29aa X Splitting, minor dry rot 29d X Dry rot, splitting 29f X Splitting, minor Dry rot 29l X Splitting, epoxy coming off, minor dry rot 3.2q X 25% section loss 4d X 1 inch crack full length 30aa X Splitting, minor dry rot 32e X Fungal rot and splits 32g X Dry rot 32u X Fungal rot 33aa X Dry rot and splits 33o X Split 33q X Fungal rot 33y X Dry rot and splits 35t X Section loss 36m X Fungal rot and splits 37j X Dry rot / 25% section loss 38K X Splitting, dry rot 39b X Dry rot/ 1inch splits 39e X Dry rot 39f X Dry rot/ splits 40b X Dry rot 41K X Splitting, minor dry rot 46f X Jacket is gone, section loss 48i X Section loss and splintering 4y X Dry rot, 50% section loss 6m X 2/4"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ͕ϮϱйƐĞĐƚŝŽŶůŽƐƐ 6o X Dry rot 7p X >1/2"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 7w X Fungal rot 11.5c X 1"ƐƉůŝƚƚŽƉĞŶĚ 7.5j X 3/4"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 8.5f X Square, 3/4"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 8.5e X 3/4"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ͕ƐƋƵĂƌĞ͕ϱϬй ĞŶĚbearing 7.5d.5 X 25% section loss 8.1d X 3/4"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ͕ϱϬйĞŶĚďĞĂƌŝŶŐ͕ dry rot 7.5k X Dry rot and splitting 7.5l X Split in half, 50% end bearing 6.5f X Cut out section of pile at top, dry rot 22.8d X Splitting TOTAL =N/A N/A N/A 87 N/A Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 642 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV 10n X 15% section loss 10o X 15% section loss 10p X 15% section loss 10q X Dry rot 10w X 1/2"ĐƌĂĐŬĨƵůůŚĞŝŐŚƚ 11a X Fungal decay 11d X Fungal decay 11g X Dry rot 11j X Fungal rot 11n X 15% section loss, dry rot 11p X 15% section loss 11q X 1/2"ĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚƐƉůŝƚ 11t X Dry rot 11x X 1"ƐƉŝůƚƚŽƉ 11y X 1/2"ĐƌĂĐŬƐĂƚƚŽƉ 11z X Dry rot 12ab X Dry rot 12e X Dry rot 12g X Dry rot 12j X Dry rot 12v X Dry rot, 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚƐ 13a X 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 13aa X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 13ab X Dry rot, splitting 13i X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 13k X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 13l X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 13n X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 13p X 25% section loss 13q X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 13t X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ͕ŽƵƚŽĨƉůƵŵď 14a X Split 14b X Split, 50% end bearing 14g X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 14i X Section loss 14l X Split 14s X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 14v X Splitting 14w X Split, out of plumb 14x X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ͕ĚƌǇƌŽƚ 15ab X Dry rot and splitting 15c X Split at top 15d X Fungal rot 15K X 15m X 4 steel wraps, splits, epoxy to fill? 15q X 50% end bearing, splitting SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 1 - Timber Piles (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 643 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 1 - Timber Piles (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING 15r X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 15s X Splitting 15z X Split 16b X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 16i X Dry rot 16K X Dry rot 16N X Dry rot 16p X Dry rot 16s X 1ΗƐƉůŝƚĂƚƚŽƉ 16u X Dry rot 16v X Dry rot 16x X Dry rot 17b X Section loss and splitting 17c X Splitting 17f X Split 17M X Split 17n X Splitting 17o X Dry rot, splitting 17p X Section loss 17q X Dry rot and splitting 17x X Dry rot 17z X Splitting 18c X Dry rot w/ 5% section loss 18f X Splits 18g X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĂƚƚŽƉ 18j X Dry rot 18k X Dry rot 18l X Dry rot 18o X 18q X Dry rot 18u X 10% section loss 18w X Dry rot 18y X Dry rot 19a X Splitting 19aa X Splitting 19b X Splitting, minor dry rot 19d X Splitting and dry rot 19j X Splitting, 2 metal small wraps, 50% end bearing 19k X Dry rot, minor splitting 19n X Dry rot 19o X Split 19O X Splitting 19q X Fungal rot, minor splitting 19r X Splitting, minor dry rot 19s X Dry rot Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 644 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 1 - Timber Piles (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING 19t X Dry rot 19u X Splitting 1m X 1"ǀŽŝĚĂƉƉƌŽǆŝŵĂƚĞůǇϭĨƚĨƌŽŵďŽƚƚŽŵ 20aa X Dry rot, minor splitting 20c X Dry rot 20d X Dry rot 20g X Splitting 20h X Splitting 20j X Splitting 20l X Splitting, minor dry rot 20N X Splitting 20p X Splitting, fungal rot 20r X Dry rot, fungal rot 20t X Minor Splitting, moderate dry rot 20u X Splitting, dry rot 21a X Dry rot 21aa X Dry rot 21b X Split at top 21e X Dry rot 21h X Dry rot 22ab X Splitting 22o X 22p X Dry rot 22q X Dry rot 22v X Dry rot 22w X Dry rot 22x X 22z X Split 23d X Splitting 23i X Splitting 23K X Splitting, minor Dry rot 23l X Splitting 23m X Splitting 23o X Splitting 23s X Splitting, dry rot 23v X Splitting, dry rot 23w X Splitting 23x X Dry rot, minor splitting 23y X Dry rot, splitting 24d X Splitting, minor Fungal rot 24e X Splitting 24i X Section loss 24k X Splitting 24m X Splitting 24o X Dry rot, splitting Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 645 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 1 - Timber Piles (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING 24q X Splitting 24w X Splitting 24y X Minor Splitting, moderate dry rot 25a X Splitting 25aa X Splitting, dry rot 25b X Dry rot, splitting 25g X Splitting , minor dry rot 25i X Splitting, dry rot 25k X Splitting 25K X Fungal rot 25q X Splitting 25t X Splitting, fungal rot 25w X Dry rot, minor Splitting 26e X Splitting, 50% end bearing 26i X Splitting, dry rot 26j X Splitting, dry rot 26K X Splitting, minor dry rot 26l X Splitting 26n X Splitting 26o X Splitting, dry rot 26p X Splitting, dry rot 26q X Splitting 26s X Splitting 26t X Splitting, dry rot 26x X Splitting 26z X Splitting 27ab X Dry rot 27h X Split at top 27i X Fungal rot 27k X Dry rot 27M X 5% section loss 27n X Dry rot 27N X 5% section loss 27O X Dry rot 27x X Splitting 28aa X Splitting 28ab X Dry rot 28d X Full length split 28g X Thru holes 28i X Dry rot 28m X Splits 28M X 10% section loss 28N X 28p X Dry rot 28s X Dry rot 28y X Dry rot Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 646 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 1 - Timber Piles (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING 28z X Dry rot 29c X Splitting, Wet at top, dry rot 29g X Splitting, minor dry rot 29k X Splitting, dry rot 29N X Splitting, dry rot 29O X Splitting, dry rot 29a X Splitting, treated with some epoxy 29r X Splitting, minor Dry rot 29t X Splitting, minor dry rot 29u X Splitting, dry rot 29x X Splitting, warped, dry rot 3.2b X 1/2 inch crack full length 3.2h X 1/2 inch crack full length 3.2n X 1/2 inch crack full height, out of plumb 5- 10 degrees 4b X 1/2 inch crack full length 30ab X Splitting, minor Dry rot 30q X Out of plumb, splitting, minor dry rot 30v X Splitting, minor dry rot 30y X Jacketed, splitting, minor dry rot 31q X Splitting 32a X Split 32d X Splits 32l X Split 32L X Split 32q X Fungal rot and splits 32r X Split 32t X Splits 32z X Splits and dry rot 33ab X Splits 33c X Fungal rot and splits 33j X Split 33l X Fungal rot and splits 33N X Dry rot 33p X Dry rot and splits 34i X Splitting 34j X Splitting 34L X Section loss 34z X Dry rot, minor splitting 35.5b X Dry rot 35.5l X Splitting 35K X Splitting, minor dry rot, wet 35l X Fungal rot 35m X Fungal rot, minor Splitting 35n X Fungal rot, splitting 35q X Fungal rot Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 647 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 1 - Timber Piles (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING 35v X Splitting 36c X Fungal rot and splits 36j X Fungal rot and splits 36K X Splitting 36M X Split 36N X Dry rot 37a X Dry rot 37b X Dry rot 37c X Splits and corrosion 37e X Splits 37f X Dry rot 37g X Dry rot 37h X Dry rot 37i X Full length splits 37k X Splits 37l X Dry rot 37L X Full length splits 37m X Dry rot 37M X Full length splits / 10% section loss 37O X Dry rot 38b X Dry rot / splits 38c X Dry rot/ 5% section loss 38e X Dry rot / 5% section loss 38f X Dry rot 38i X Dry rot and splits 38k X Dry rot/ blocking at bracing 38l X Dry rot 38M X 10% section loss / connection corrosion 38n X Splits and dry rot 38N X 10% section loss / splits 38O X Full length splits 39a X Dry rot and splits 39c X Dry rot 39d X Dry rot 39g X Dry rot 39h X Dry rot 39i X Dry rot 39L X Dry rot 39m X Dry rot 39M X Splits and 10% section loss 39n X Dry rot 39N X Dry rot / 5% section loss 39O X Dry rot Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 648 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 1 - Timber Piles (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING 3i X 50% end bearing, but may not be supporting any load, 1/2 inch crack full height 40c X Dry rot 40d X Dry rot / 10% section loss 40e X Dry rot 40f X Dry rot 40h X Dry rot / 15% section loss 40i X Dry rot 40j X Dry rot 40K X Splitting 40n X Dry rot/ splits 41g X Dry rot 41h X Dry rot 42c X Fungal rot 42e X Splits at bottom 42f X Dry rot 43e X Jacketed below sand, splitting 44b X Jacketed, section loss greater than 1/2" minor splitting 47c X Jacketed, section loss, fungal rot, splitting 46j X Fiberglass wrap on top of jacket, splitting, minor fungal rot 46e X Jacketed high, fungal rot 47m X No jacket, section loss, fungal rot 48j X Splintering under jacket and fungal rot 49e X Wrap missing / 10% section loss 49k X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 4u X Dry rot 10% section loss 4w X Dry rot 5% section loss 50c X 1-2 inch scour / Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50e X Previous repair/ corrosion at hardware / fungal rot 50g X Section loss 10% / Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50i X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware / loose wrap 50j X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware major 50m X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 51b X Wrap tear/ Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 649 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 1 - Timber Piles (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING 51e X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 51g X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 51h X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 51i X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, moderate 52a X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52b X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52e X New hardware on wrap/ Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52f X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, severe 52h X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52l X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52m X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52n X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 53b X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 53e X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 53g X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 53h X Loose wrap, missing hardware / Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 53k X Missing hardware at wrap / Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 53l X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 53m X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 53n X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 6d X Minor dry rot, 1/4"ƐƉůŝƚ 6f X 50% end bearing, dry rot, 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůů length 6g X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 6n X Dry rot, 50% end bearingNot IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 650 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 1 - Timber Piles (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING 6r X 6s X 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚĂƚƚŽƉ͕ďĂŶĚĞĚ 6u X Dry rot 6y X 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚ͕ĚƌǇƌŽƚ 7b X 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 7e X Dry rot, 59% end bearing 7r X Dry rot 7s X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 7t X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 7y X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 8ab X 8s X 8x X Fungal rot 9i X Dry rot 9K X 9r X Dry rot 9s X Dry rot 9u X Dry rot 9v X Dry rot 9z X Dry rot 37f.5 X Dry rot 7.5i X Square, 50% end bearing, >1/2"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůů length 7.5h X Square, 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 7.5f X 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ͕ƐƋƵĂƌĞ 8.5g X Square, 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚϭͬϮůĞŶŐƚŚƚǁŽƐŝĚĞƐ 32l.9 X Dry rot and splits 51.7h X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52d.5 X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, moderate 28j.5 X 8aa.1 X Dry rot 30L.8 X Splitting, minor dry rot 11.5p X 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚƐĂƚƚŽƉ 11.5o X Fungal rot at top 8N.8 X Dry rot 8L.9 X Dry rot 8K.5 X Dry rot 8.1f X 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 8.1j X 15% section loss 6.1e.1 X Dry rot 4.5u X 1/2 inch crack full length 7c.1 X 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ͕ϱϬйĞŶĚďĞĂƌŝŶŐNot IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 651 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 1 - Timber Piles (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING 8c.1 X Splitting all the way around 51.7i X Loose wrap / Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 51.9k X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 50.9j X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 50.9l X 50.9m X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 29u.2 X Splitting, dry rot 23.8b X Splitting 2j.3 X 1/2 inch crack full height 2.8j.3 X 1/2 inch crack full height 2.8k.3 X 1/2 inch crack full height 2.8m.3 X 3/4 inch crack full length 2.6n.7 X 1/2 inch crack full height 52c.8 X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 47g.7 SW X No jacket, section loss, fungal rot 3c X 1/2 inch crack full length 3d2 X 1/2 inch crack full length, 15% section loss 3.5c X 50% end bearing 4.2e X Fungal rot, 1/2 inch crack full length TOTAL =N/A N/A 387 N/A N/ANot IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 652 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV 41K 41O X Split in half 38K 38N X Split in half 37K 37O X Split in half 36K 36M X Split in half 31K 31O X Splitting 29K 29O X Splitting 30K 30O X Splitting N/A N/A N/A N/A 7TOTAL = SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 2 - Timber Pile Caps (Severe) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 653 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV 46a 46b X Splitting 41a 41c X Full height splits 33K 33M X Splitting outside 26e 26f X Splitting 29t 29w X Splitting 28K 28M X Splits 25x 25z X Splitting 25n 25p X Splitting 25b 25c X Splitting 23w 23z X Splitting 23t 23w X Splitting 23j 23l X Splitting, dry rot 17J 17L X >1/2"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 17z 17ab X Splitting on bottom 17o 17q X Split 17m 17o X Splits 15K 15O X >1/2"ƐƉůŝƚďŽƚƚŽŵ 14r 14s X 3/4"ƐƉůŝƚďŽƚƚŽŵ 14d 14e X Fungal rot 12e 12g X 50% in-bearing & leaning w/ fungal rot 11.5o 11.5q X Not connected to stringers at top 8.1d 8.1f X 3/4"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 8.1c.1 8.1d X Dry rot, 3/4"ƐƉůŝƚƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 7r 7u X 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚƐŝĚĞĂŶĚďŽƚƚŽŵ 20m 20o X End split, splitting N/A N/A N/A 25 N/ANot Included Not Included Not Included Not Included Total= SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 2 - Timber Pile Caps (Major) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 5.E.b Packet Pg. 654 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV 53j 53l X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 53h 53j X Fungal rot / splits 53f 53h X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52b 52c.8 X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 47l 47n X Splitting 47h 47j X Splitting, minor fungal rot 41k 41n X Dry rot 40l 40n X Splits 40g 40i X Splits 39M 39O X 50% end bearing 39K 39M X Splitting 36M 36O X Split 36f 36i X Split 35n 35o X Splitting 35i 35l X Splitting 34u 34v X Splitting 34g 34l X Splitting 34K 34O X Splitting 32K 32M X Splitting outside and underneath 32u 32x X Split 32p 32r X Split 26K 26N X Splitting 26w 26z X Splitting 26p 26q X Splitting 16a 16b X 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚƐĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 9K 9O X 1/2ΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 9y 9ab X 1ͬϰΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 30t 30w X Splitting 30r 30t X Splitting 29p 29q X Splitting 29a 29c X Splitting 28l 28m X 10% section loss 28i 28j X Section loss 10% 27w 27z X Splitting 27q 27t X Full length splits 27g 27h X Fungal rot 25K 25N X Splitting 25z 25ab X Splitting 25k 25m X Splitting 25h 25j X Splitting 25d 25f X Splitting 25a 25b X Splitting 24w 24z X Splitting 24o 24q X Splitting 24k 24m X Splitting SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 2 - Timber Pile Caps (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 655 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 2 - Timber Pile Caps (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 24f 24g X Splitting 23q 23t X Splitting 23f 23g X Splitting 23d 23f X Splitting 22q 22t X Full length split 21q 21t X Full length split 21g 21k X Fungal rot 20K 20M X Splitting 20t 20w X Splitting 20m 20o X Splitting 20g 20i X Splitting 20f 20g X Bore holes 19t 19w X 19q 19t X Splitting 19n 19p X Splitting 18o 18q X Splitting at ends 17t 17w X Splitting 17a 17c X Splitting 15v 15w X Split 15n 15p X Split on bottom 15i 15k X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 15c 15e X Split at bottom 15a 15b X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 15J 15K X Split on bottom 14p 14r X Splitting 13K 13O X 1ͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 13a 13b X 1ͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 12s 12t X End connection splits 11g 11i X Fungal rot, 50% in-bearing 8t 8w X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 8r 8t X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 8.1g 8.1i X 1ͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 8.1f 8.1g X 1ͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 8a 8c.1 X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 7w 7y X 1ͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ͕ĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 7u 7w X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 7l 7m X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 7e 7g X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 7c.1 7d X 1ͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 7a 7c.1 X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 6v 6x X ϭͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 5y 5z X 1/2 inch crack full length 36d 36f X Split 8.5d 8.5e X 1ͬϮΗƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ͕ŽŶďŽƚƚŽŵ 3.2o 3.2p X 1/2 inch crack full length 3s.2 3.3s.9 X 1/2 inch crack full length 2.8m.3 2.8n.3 X 1/2 inch crack full length 2.8l.3 2.8m.3 X 1/2 inch crack full length 2.8k.3 2.8l.3 X 1/2 inch crack full lengthNot Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 656 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 2 - Timber Pile Caps (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 2.8i.3 2.8j.3 X 1/2 inch crack full length 2.8h.7 2.8i.3 X 1/2 inch crack full length 2l.3 2m.3 X 1/2 inch crack full length 2k.3 2l.3 X 1/2 inch crack full length 2j.3 2k.3 X 1/2 inch crack full length 2i.3 2j.3 X 1/2 inch crack full length 2h.7 2i.3 X 1/2 inch crack full length 1l.3 1m X 1"ĐƌĂĐŬ͕ĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 7.5e 7.5g X 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚĨƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 3d1 3d3 X 1/2 inch crack full length 11.5h 11h X Fungal rot 26L 26N X Splitting 36b 36d X Split 0i.3 1i.3 X Full length splits 0.5 in 4u.5 3.3v X Moderate dry rot 4v 3.3v X Moderate dry rot N/A N/A 110 N/A N/ANot Included Not Included Not Included Not Included Total = 5.E.b Packet Pg. 657 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV 11d 12d X 100% section loss 12d 13d X Broken off 12y 13y X Missing end connection 13k 14k X Missing connection 15ab 16ab X Split in half 21d 22d X Not connected 21q 22q X Not connected 21w 22w X Full height split 21y 22y X Full height split 25q 26q X Not connected 26x 27x X Broken end connection 31e 32e X 38a 39a X End connection failure/ missing hardware 42c 43c X Fungal rot and splits 42d 43d X Fungal rot 42e 43e X Fungal rot 42f 43f X Fungal rot 42g 43g X Fungal rot 42n 43n X Fungal rot 4a 5a X Split in half 4j 5j X End bearing failure of k brace 52n 53n X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 31c.5 32c.5 X Insufficient connection hardware, minor splitting 11z 12z X Failed end connection 12z 13z X Failed end connection N/A N/A N/A N/A 25Total = SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Lateral Timber Bracing (Severe) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 658 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV 16e 16g X Termite damage 24x 24z X Missing connections 26u 26v X No end connection 26z 26ab X Broken end connection 27m 27n X Split ends 33n 33o X Connection 34b 34c X Not connected 34c 34d X Not connected 38K 38O X End connection damage 41K 41M X Dry rot / splits at ends 51a 51d X Severe fracture in member at 51b 53k 53l X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 36o 37o X Fungal rot and splits N/A N/A N/A N/A 13Total = SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Transerse Timber Bracing (Severe) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 659 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV 12O 13O X End connection split 20i 21i X Dry rot, connection failure 21o 22o X Split ends 21r 22r X Split ends 22a 22.5a.5 X Split 24N 25N X End split 25n 26n X Splitting, connection damage 27w 28w X Split ends 27x 28x X Hardware deteriorated 28y 29y X 29x 30x X Connection damage and missing, dry rot 30a 31a X Splitting at connections 31j 32j X Insufficient connection 33a 34a X Dry rot and splits 33N 33N X Splits 34r 35r X Splitting 35K 36K X Not connected 36a 37a X Connection dry rot 36K 37K X Missing bolt, people sitting on brace 37m 38m X Dry rot 37n 38n X Dry rot 38m 39m X Split at ends and corrosion 39c 40c X Dry rot and end splits 39d 40d X Dry rot 39O 40O X Dry rot 41b 42b X Dry rot 41c 42c X Dry rot 41h 42h X Dry rot 41n 42n X Fungal rot 42a 43a X Fungal rot 42h 43h X Fungal rot 42i 43i X Fungal rot 42j 43j X Fungal rot 43b 44b X Fungal rot, corrosion at connection 43c 44c X Fungal rot, corrosion at connections 43d 44d X Fungal rot 43e 44e X Fungal rot 43f 44f N and 44f S X Fungal rot 43g 44g X Fungal rot 43h 44h X Fungal rot, corrosion at connections 44c 45c X Fungal rot 44k 45k X Splitting 45d 46d X Fungal rot 45i 46i X Fungal rot Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedSANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Lateral Timber Bracing (Major) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 5.E.b Packet Pg. 660 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Lateral Timber Bracing (Major) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 46e 47e X Fungal rot 4w 5w X End split into four 52f 53f X corrosion at hardware, major 52g 53g X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 5m 6m X 44f S 45f X Fungal rot 33g 34h X Splitting,fungal rot 44f N 44f X Fungal rot, section loss N/A N/A N/A 52 N/ATOTAL =Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 661 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV 11s 11t X Split at ends 11t 11v X Splits at ends 11z 11ab X Full length split 12k 12l X End connection split 14d 14f X Fungal rot, end split, connection damage 14l 14n X >1/2"ƐƉůŝƚƵůůůĞŶŐƚŚ 14r 14t X End split 14z 14aa X End split 20K 20O X End split 22n 22p X Split ends 23u 23v X Splitting, connection damage 25a 25b X End split 27i 27k X Split ends 27L 27O X 27z 27ab X Split ends 28j 28k X 28z 28ab X 29a 29c X Splitting, missing connection 29e 29g X End split at connection 29g 29i X End split 29n 29p X Insufficient connections, minor splitting 29r 29s.8 X Minor Splitting, missing hardware 30h 30j X Connection damage, insufficient connection 30j 30l X Connection damage, insufficient connection 30n 30p X Insufficient connections, connection damage 31i 31l X Insufficient connection, minor splitting 31x 31z X End split and connection damage 32a 32b X Section loss 34i 34k X Connection damage, splitting, fungal rot 37b 37c X Corrosion at connection 39b 39d X Dry rot 39d 39f X Dry rot / splits at ends 39f 39g X Dry rot 39K 39O X Dry rot 41c 41e X Dry rot / splits at ends 41f 41h X Dry rot 41l 41m X Dry rot 42a 42b X Splits at ends 42c 42e X Fungal rot 42e 42g X Dry rot SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Transverse Timber Bracing (Major) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 662 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Transverse Timber Bracing (Major) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 42j 42l X Fungal rot 42l 42m X Fungal rot 42m 42n X Fungal rot 53l 53n X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 6b 6c.1 X Dry rot 7b 7c.1 X Dry rot and splitting 7k 7m X Splitting 7p 7q X End split 50.1a 50.1b X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 3m 3l X 1 inch full section split at end 10v 10w X Connection rotted 10w 10x X Connection rotted 20a 20c X End split, missing connection 20k 20l X End split 20x 20z X Split in half 21k 21l X Split ends 24.8c 25b.5 X Splitting 33x 33z X Split 47a 47b X Corrosion N/A N/A N/A 59 N/A Not Included Total =Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 663 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV 11g 11i X Split at ends 11w 11x X Split at ends 11x 11y X Split at ends 12a 12c X Split at ends 12c 12e X Dry rot 12g 12i X End connection splits 12i 12k X Split at ends 12l 12m X End splits 12r 12t X Split ends 13a 13c X Split at connections 13l 13n X End splits, splitting 13n 13p X Damage around connections 13p 13r X Connection damage 13r 13t X End split 13x 13z X Splitting at connections 14a 14b X Split end connection 14b 14d X Connections and fungal rot 14f 14h X Missing connection 14h 14j X Connection damage 14K 14M X Dry rot, missing hardware 14M 14O X Dry rot and missing hardware 14n 14p X Connection damage 14p 14r X Connection damage 15g 15i X Connections and end split 15i 15k X Connection damage and end split 15k 15l X Connection damage and end splits 15l 15n X Connection damage end split 15n 15p X Nd splits and connection damage 15p 15r X End splits connections 15r 15t X End plots and connection damage 15z 15ab X Nd splits and connection damage 16a 16c X Split ends 16c 16e X Fungal rot, split at ends 16g 16i X Dry rot 16i 16k X Dry rot, split ends 16k 16l X Dry rot 16l 16n X Dry rot 16M 16N X Split at ends 16n 16o X Dry rot 16p 16r X Dry rot 16z 16ab X Split at ends 17K 17O X End split 19K 19N X Split and deteriorating conditions SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Transverse Timber Bracing (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 664 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Transverse Timber Bracing (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 19M 19N X Splitting 21M 21N X Split ends 22a 22b X Split ends 22e 22g X 22g 22i X 22i 22k X Split ends 22k 22l X 22K 22O X 22l 22m X 22M 22N X Splits 22p 22r X 22r 22t X 22t 22v X 22v 22w X 22x 22z X 22z 22ab X Split ends 23d 23f X Splitting 23l 23n X Splitting, connection damage 23n 23p X Splitting, connection damage 23x 23z X End split, connection damage 24f 24h X End split, connection damage 24h 24j X End split, connection damage 24j 24l X Connection damage 24r 24s X End split, connection damage 24t 24v X Splitting, connection damage 24v 24x X End split, connection damage 25n 25p X Splitting, connection damage 25p 25r X Connection damage 25r 25t X Splitting, connection damage 25t 25v X Splitting, connection damage 25v 25x X Splitting, connection damage 25x 25z X Splitting, connection damage 26m 26n X Splitting, connection damage 26r 26t X Splitting, connection damage 26x 26z X Splitting, connection damage 27a 27c X 27c 27e X Split ends 27g 27i X Split ends 27k 27m X Split ends 27n 27p X 27r 27t X Split ends 27v 27w X Dry rot 27x 27z X Dry rot 28a 28c X 28c 28e X 28k 28m X 28M 28N X 28q 28r X 28r 28t XNot Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 665 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Transverse Timber Bracing (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 28t 28v X 28v 28x X Split 28x 28z X 29c 29e X End split 29k 29l X Splitting, connection damage 29p 29r X Connection damage, splitting, dry rot 29t 29v X Splitting, connection damage 30x 30z X Connection damage 30y 30aa X Splitting, dry rot 31l 31m X Connection damage, minor Splitting 31m 31n X Connection damage 31n 31o X Connection damage, end split 31v 31x X Connection 32e 32f X Splits 32L 32N X Rot fungal 32s 32t X Connection and splits at end 32t 32u X Splits and connection 32v 32x X Splitting and connection 33g 33i X Fungal rot and connection damage 33i 33l X Fungal rot and connection damage 33l 33n X Fungal rot and connection damage 33t 33u X Split 33u 33v X Dry rot and splits 34K 34O X Splitting 34t 34v X Splitting 35a 35b X Fungal rot, minor Splitting 35n 35p X Fungal rot, minor splitting 35r 35t X Splitting, fungal rot 36b 36d X Split 36l 36m X Split 36m 36n.6 X Splits 37K 37O X Dry rot and splits at ends 37m 37n X End hardware 38k 38m X Dry rot 39a 39b X Splits at ends 39h 39j X Dry rot / splits at ends 39j 39l X Dry rot 40a 40b X Dry rot 40c 40e X Dry rot 40g 40l X Dry rot 41a 41b X Dry rot 41b 41c X Corrosion 41h 41j X Dry rot 42g 42i X Fungal rot Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 666 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Transverse Timber Bracing (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 43i 43h X Fungal rot, corrosion at connections, rot at connections 43k 43m X Fungal rot, corrosion at connections 43m 43n X Connection damage 45a 45c X Fungal rot. 46e 46f X Connection damage 48g 48h X Fungal rot 48g 48i X Fungal rot 48i 48j X Fungal rot 49d 49e X Fungal rot 49g 49i X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 49k 49l X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50a 50c X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50b 50c X Corrosion on steel 50c 50d X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50g 50i X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50i 50j X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50j 50l X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major corrosion 50l 50m X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 51d 51e X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 51e 51f X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52c 52c.8 X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 52f 52g X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52g 52h X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52l 52n X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 53a 53b X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, moderate 53b 53c.8 X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 53f 53g X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 53g 53i X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 5j 5k XNot Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 667 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Transverse Timber Bracing (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 5x 5y X 1/2 - 1 inch crack full length 6a 6b X Split end 6l 6m X End split on both ends 7i 7j X Missing nut 7w 7x X End splits 7x 7y X End split both ends 8K 8M X 8M 8N X 8N 8O X 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚƐ 52d.5 52f X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 51i 51j X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 27p.4 27r X Splits 51.7i 51.8j X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 51.8j 51.9l X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 50.9j 50.9k X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 50.9k 50.9l X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 50.9l 50.9m X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 9y 9z X Split at ends 8q 8r X End split 12e 12g X Split at ends 20i 20k X Connection damage 20l 20n X End split, connection damage 20p 20r X End split, connection damage 22.5a.5 22.5c X End split 21a 21c X Split ends 21g 21h X Split ends 29L 29N X Connection damage, dry rot 30aa 30ab X Splitting at connection 34l 34m X Fungal rot 35l 35n X Fungal rot 36m 36n X Split 40i 40k X Splits 41j 41l X Splits 46b 46c X Connection damage 48g 48h X Fungal rot 52d 52d.5 X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major N/A N/A 201 N/A N/ATotal = Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 668 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV 10K 11K X Split ends 10L 11L X Split ends 10M 11M X Split ends 10N 11N X Split ends 10x 11x X Ends split 11f 12f X Dry rot 11g 12g X Fungal decay 11h 12h X Dry rot 11i 12i X Dry rot 11j 12j X Dry rot 11k 12k X Dry rot 11m 12m X Dry rot 11q 12q X Dry rot 11w 12w X Dry rot 12a 13a X Dry rot 12b 13b X Dry rot 12c 13c X Dry rot 12e 13e X Dry rot 12f 13f X Dry rot 12g 13g X Dry rot 12h 13h X Dry rot 12i 13i X Dry rot 12j 13j X Dry rot 12k 13k X Dry rot 12r 13r X Dry rot 12s 13s X Dry rot 12v 13v X Dry rot 12w 13w X Dry rot 13a 14a X End split 13c 14c X Moderate end splits and dry rot 13g 14g X End split 13K 14K X double braces, Dry rot, end splits 13L 14L X double braces, Dry rot, end splits 13N 14N X double braces, Dry rot, end splits 13O 14O X double braces, Dry rot, end splits 13r 14r X End split 13v 14v X End split 14ab 15ab X End split both ends 14m 15m X End split both sides 14q 15q X End split 14r 15r X End split 14w 15w X Connection damage 14z 15z X Connection damage 15N 16N X Splitting 19M 20M X Splitting 20a 21a X End split 20b 21b X End split 20d 21d X End split 20h 21h X End split Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedSANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Lateral Timber Bracing (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 5.E.b Packet Pg. 669 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Lateral Timber Bracing (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 20k 21k X Connection damage 20L 21L X End split 20M 21M X End split 20n 21n X Dry rot, connection damage 20N 21N X End split 20q 21q X End split, connection damage 20w 21w X End split, connection damage 20y 21y X Connection damage 21c 22c X Split ends 21g 22g X Split ends 21h 22h X Split ends 21i 22i X Split ends 21j 22j X Split ends 21k 22k X Split ends 21l 22l X Split ends 21p 22p X Split 21s 22s X Split at ends 21v 22v X Split ends 21x 22x X Split 22aa 23aa X Dry rot 22c 22.5 c X 22d 23d X 22g 23g X Dry rot 22h 23h X Split ends 22K 23K X 22L 23L X 22m 23m X 22M 23M X 22N 23N X 22O 23O X 22p 23p X Splits 22u 23u X Dry rot 22v 23v X Termite 22w 23w X Split ends 22x 23x X 23O 24O X End split 23z 24z X End split, connection damage 24k 25k X End split, connection damage 24L 25L X End split, connection damage 24m 25m X End split, connection damage 24s 25s X Splitting, connection damage 25h 26h X Section loss 25j 26j X End split, connection damage 25u 26u X Splitting, connection damage 25w 26w X Splitting, connection damage 25x 26x X Splitting, connection damage 25z 26z X Splitting, connection damage 26aa 27aa X Splitting, connection damage 26b 27b X Splitting, connection damage Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 670 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Lateral Timber Bracing (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 26f 27f X Splitting, connection damage 26h 27h X Splitting, connection damage 26j 27j X Splitting,connection damage 26l 27l X Splitting, connection damage 26M 27M X Splitting 26n 27n X Splitting, connection damage 26N 27N X Splitting 26o 27o X Splitting, connection damage 26p 27p X Splitting, connection damage 26q 27q X Splitting, connection damage 26s 27s X Splitting, connection damage 26y 27y X Splitting, connection damage 27a 28a X Split ends 27aa 28aa X 27f 28f X Split ends 27l 28l X 27m 28m X Split ends 27n 28n X Dry rot 27N 28N X Split ends 27y 28y X 28c 29c X 28h 29h X 28L 28L X 28m 29m X Split at end 28M 28M X 28N 28N X Missing hardware 28O 28O X 28p 29p X Dry rot 28x 29x X 30q 31q X End split 31c 32c X Splitting 31i 32i X Dry rot, section loss 31L 32L X Splitting 31M 32M X Section loss, connection damage , minor splitting 32v 33v X Splits and connection 33l 34l X Fungal rot 33M 33M X Splits 34a 35a X Section loss, minor splitting 34h 35h X Splitting, fungal rot 34i 35i X Splitting 34p 35p X Connection damage 34t 35t X Splitting 35i 36i X Splitting 36c 37c X Split 36m 37m X Fungal rot and splits 37i 38i X Corrosion at connection 37L 38L X Corrosion at connection 37M 38M X Corrosion at connection Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 671 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Lateral Timber Bracing (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 37N 38N X Corrosion at ends 37O 38O X Corrosion at connection 38c 39c X Dry rot 38d 39d X Splits 38e 39e X Splits 38g 39g X Dry rot and splits ends 38i 39i X Dry rot 38l 39l X Dry rot 38L 39L X Corrosion at connection 38M 39M X Corrosion at connection 38n 39n X Dry rot 38N 39N X Corrosion at connection 38O 39O X Corrosion at ends 39a 40a X Dry rot and splits 39j 40j X Dry rot 39l 40l X Dry rot 39L 40L X Dry rot 40b 41b X Missing hardware 40c 41c X Dry rot 40f 41f X Missing hardware/ dry rot 40h 41h X Splits 40l 41l X Dry rot 40L 41L X Dry rot 40N 41N X End connection corrosion 40O 41O X End connection corrosion 41f 42f X Dry rot 41g 42g X Dry rot 41i 42i X Dry rot 41k 42k X Splits 42k 43k X Fungal rot 42l 43l X Fungal rot 42m 43m X End connection corrosion 43a 44a X Splitting, corrosion at connections 43n 44n X Connection damage, fungal rot 44d 45d X Splitting 44e 45e X Splitting, section loss, connection corrosion, fungal rot 44h 45h X Fungal rot, corrosion at connections 44i 45i X Corrosion at connections, fungal rot 44j 45j X Fungal rot, corrosion at connections 44l 45l X Fungal rot, corrosion at connections 45a 46a X Fungal rot 45b 46b X Fungal rot 45c 46c X Fungal rot Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 672 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Lateral Timber Bracing (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 45h 46h X Fungal rot 45l 46l X Fungal rot 47b 48b X Fungal rot 47c 48c X Fungal rot 47d 48d X Fungal rot 47e 48e X Fungal rot 47f 48f X Fungal rot, minor splitting 47g 48g X Fungal rot 46g 47g X Fungal rot, corrosion at connections 47h 48h X Fungal rot 48a 49a X Fungal rot 48c 49c X Fungal rot 48d 49d X Fungal rot 48f 49f X Fungal rot 48g 49g X Fungal rot 48h 49h X Fungal rot 48j 49j X Fungal rot 49g 50g X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 49h 50h X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 49k 50k X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 49l 50l X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50g 51g X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50h 51h X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50i 51i X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50j 51j X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50k 51k X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50l 51l X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 50m 51m X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50n 51n X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 51c 52c X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 51d 52d X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 51e 52e X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, majorNot IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 673 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Lateral Timber Bracing (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 51f 52f X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, moderate 51g 52g X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 51h 52h X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 51i 52i X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52a 53a X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52c 53c X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 52e 53e X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52h 53h X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52l 53l X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 52m 53m X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 7f 7.5f X End split 7h 7.5h X End split 9ab 10ab X Split ends 9x 10x X Both ends split 9y 10y X Split ends 9z 10z X Split at ends 36a.5 37a.5 X Split 52d.5 53d.5 X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 34a.5 35a.5 X Splitting 31r.9 32r.9 X Splitting 51.7i 53i X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 50.9j 52j X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware 50.9l 52l X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 50.9m 52m X Fungal rot / corrosion at hardware, major 47h.7 NW 48i X Fungal rot, minor section loss 6.5N 8N X double braces, Dry rot, end splits 6.5M 8M X double braces, Dry rot, end splits 6.5L 8L X double braces, Dry rot, end splits 6.5K 8K X double braces, Dry rot, end splits 13M 14M X double braces, Dry rot, end splits 11b 12b X Flaking 11c 12c X Connection splits 21o 22o X Split ends 25s 26s X Splitting, connection damage Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 674 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Lateral Timber Bracing (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 26l 27l.5 X Splitting, connection damage 29f 30e X End split 32l.9 33m X Splits and connection 33o 34o X Split 44m.5 45m.5 X Fungal rot, corrosion at connections N/A N/A 260 N/A N/ATOTAL =Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 675 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV 40.5d 41d X Full height corrosion 40.5e 41e X Full height corrosion 40.5f 41f X Full height corrosion 40.5g 41g X Full height corrosion 40.5h 41h X Full height corrosion 40.5i 41.5i X Full height corrosion 40.5b.5 41b.5 X Corrosion full section N/A N/A N/A N/A 7 SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Lateral Steel Bracing (Severe) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING TOTAL =Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 676 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV 51h 51i Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included X Corrosion through section N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Transverse Steel Bracing (Severe) TOTAL = COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 5.E.b Packet Pg. 677 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV 40.5c 41c Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedX Not IncludedCorrosion half section N/A N/A N/A 1 N/ATOTAL = SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Lateral Steel Bracing (Major) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 5.E.b Packet Pg. 678 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV 43b 43c X Corrosion 43c 43d X Corrosion 43j 43k X Corrosion 46l 46m X Corrosion at connections 36l 36m X Paint peeling 44b 44c X Corrosion 44e 44f N X Corrosion 44g 44h X Corrosion 44i 44j X Corrosion 46a 46b X Corrosion 47c 47d X Corrosion N/A N/A N/A 11 N/ATotal = SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Transverse Steel Bracing (Major) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 679 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO.ND MN MD MJ SV 39g 39h X Corrosion to coatings 46i 46j X Corrosion 47l 47m X Corrosion 51b 51c X Corrosion 43l 43m X Corrosion 43m 43n X Corrosion 44m.5 44n X Corrosion 44c 44d X Corrosion 44i 44j X Corrosion 44j 44k X Corrosion 44l 44m X Corrosion at connections 45A 45B X Corrosion 47e 47f X Corrosion 48a 48b X Corrosion N/A N/A 14 N/A N/ATotal = Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 3 - Transverse Steel Bracing (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 5.E.b Packet Pg. 680 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier AREA ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO. ND MN MD MJ SV 36l-36m-3lL-37m X Split 37k-37n-38k-37n X Full height splits and spike defects TOTAL = N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY PILE CONDITION RATING ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 4 - Stringer Defect Area (Severe)Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 681 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier AREA ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO. ND MN MD MJ SV 6n-6p-7p-7o X Currently being temporarily supported 6q-6t-7t-7q X Splitting, most without temporary support 10k/11k - 10p/11p X 1/2"ƐƉůŝƚƐƚƌŝŶŐĞƌƐĨƵůůŚĞŝŐŚƚ 11n/12n - 11y/12y X Full length splits 21y 22y 21v 22v X Full height splits 27y 28y 27w 28w X Broken stringers 27p 28p 27t 28t X Broken stringer 28z 29z 28r 29r X Broken stringer 29y-30y-30z-29z X Splitting 29w-30w-30x-29x X Splitting 29s.8-30s.8-30u-29u X Stringers being supported, splitting TOTAL = N/A N/A N/A 11 N/A SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 4 - Stringer Defect Area (Major) PILE CONDITION RATING Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 682 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier AREA ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV 4q - 5q - 5w - 4w X 7.5k-7.5n-8n-8k X Dry rot and splitting 10v/11v - 10y/11y X Full height splits 9x/10x - 9o/10o X Full height splits 8w-9w-9r-8r X Splitting, glued together, temporary supports 6.5O-6.5K X Splitting 13k-13o-15o-15k X Splitting 15O-15A-16a-16O X Split 11b/12b - 11i/12i X Fungal rot 16O/16a - 17O/17a X 15e-15g-16g-16e X Splitting 15m-15n-16n-16m X Splitting 19K-21K-21l-19l X Splitting from loading and nail spikes, 19l-20l-20m-19m X Splitting from loading and nail spikes, minor and moderate 23p-23r-24r-24p X Split stringers, some supported by temporary 23x-23y-24y-24x X Split stringers, some supported by temporary 24w-24x-25x-25w X Split stringers 22y 23y 22t 23t X Half height splits 25s-25u-26u-26s X Split stringers 26x-26y-27y-27x X Split stringers 26s-26u-27u-27s X Split stringers 26O-26b-27b-27O X Split stringers 34z-34aa-35aa-35z X Splitting 32K-32L-33K-33L X Splits 38c-38d-39c-39d X Shin under stringer s Total = N/A N/A 25 N/A N/A SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 4 - Stringer Defect Area (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 683 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier AREA ID COMMENTS AREA NO. ND MN MD MJ SV Defect Area 1 X Split deck boards Defect Area 2 X Split deck boards at roadway Defect Area 6 X Split deck boards at driveway Defect Area 7 X Splitting deck boards at drive islo Defect Area 9 X Split deck boards, moderate to major TOTAL =N/A N/A N/A 5N/A SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 5 - Deck Area (Major) PILE CONDITION RATING Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 684 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier AREA ID COMMENTS AREA NO. ND MN MD MJ SV Defect Area 3 X Split deck boards at roadway Defect Area 4 X Split deck boards at roadway Defect Area 5 X Split deck boards at roadway Defect Area 8 X Split deck boards at parking lot TOTAL =N/A N/A 4N/AN/ANot Included Not Included SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) Item 5 -Deck Area (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 685 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO. ND MN MD MJ SV AS_24G Not Included Not Included Not Included X Not Included Rust bleeds and crack at cap TOTAL = N/A N/A N/A 1 N/A SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment (Bent 35 – Bent 53) Item 6 - Amusement Structure Piles (Major) PILE CONDITION RATING 5.E.b Packet Pg. 686 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV AS_24K X Rust bleeds at cap connection AS_29A X Spalling and minor rust bleeds AS_22B X Rust bleeds and spalling AS_21C X Concrete pop out. AS_11C X Jet tube exposed AS_11D X Jet tube exposed AS_10B X Jet tube port exposed AS_15B X Jet tube exposed AS_17B X Corrosion and spalling at top of pile AS_20B X Jet tube exposed AS_20A X Jet tube exposed AS_30G X Rust bleeds at cap, minor spalling AS_30J X Rust bleeds and minor spalling AS_32C X Rust bleeds at cap AS_32B X Rust bleeds and spalling AS_32A X Splitting and minor rust bleeds and minor abrasions AS_35C X Rust bleeds and spalling AS_35B X Rust bleeds and spalling AS_37A X Rust bleeds and spalling AS_37C X Rust bleeds and spalling AS_37B X Rust bleeds and spalling AS_33A X Rust bleeds and minor spalling AS_33B X Rust bleeds and minor spalling Total = N/A N/A 23 N/A N/ANot IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedSANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment (Bent 35 – Bent 53) Item 6 - Amusement Structure Piles (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING Not Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 687 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV 37s X 38o X Spalling at top of pile 40s X Spalling 44aa X 45s X Spalling and PVC pipe 51s X Exposed jet tube 53q E X Crack 38q W X Spalling at top of pile 53q W X Crack Total= N/A N/A 9 N/A N/A SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment (Bent 35 – Bent 53) Item 6 - Concrete Piles (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 688 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO. ND MN MD MJ SV 42s X Spalling at bottom of capital 41s X Spalling 1"ĚĞĞƉ͕ϯΗǁŝĚĞ͕ϰΗůŽŶŐ͕ ĞǆƉŽƐĞĚƌĞďĂƌ ϰϯŽ X Spalling at bottom of cap 52u X Spalling Total = N/A N/A 4 N/A N/A SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment (Bent 35 – Bent 53) Item 7 - Capitals (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING EŽƚ/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚEŽƚ/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚEŽƚ/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚEŽƚ/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ5.E.b Packet Pg. 689 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMPONENT ID COMMENTS COMPONENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV AS_19 X Spalling,section loss, corrosion, and exposed rebar. AS_23 X Cracking at corner or cap TOTAL = N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment (Bent 35 – Bent 53) Item 8 - Amusement Structure Caps (Severe) COMPONENT CONDITION RATING Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 690 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMPONENT ID COMMENTS COMPONENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV AS_21 X Cracking around cap. AS_25 X Cracking AS_28 X Crack NW corner TOTAL = N/A N/A N/A 3 N/ANot Included SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment (Bent 35 – Bent 53) Item 8 - Amusement Structure Caps (Major) COMPONENT CONDITION RATING Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 691 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMPONENT ID COMMENTS COMPONENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV AS_12 X Spalling on bottom of cap AS_27 X Crack at SW corner TOTAL = N/A N/A 2 N/A N/ANot Included SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment (Bent 35 – Bent 53) Item 8 - Amusement Structure Caps (Moderate) COMPONENT CONDITION RATING Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 692 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV 51u 51w X Concrete is No Damage, but steel connector from amusement structure has moderate rust 52w 51w X Concrete is No Damage, but steel connector from amusement structure has moderate rust 50q 50s X Rust bleeds 47q 46q X Rust bleeds 42aa 41aa X Spalling at bottom of cap and potential full height crack 42y 41y X Spall at top of cap due to rust from steel plates above 41w 41y X Spalling on bottom of cap N/A N/A 7 N/A N/ATOTAL = SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment (Bent 35 – Bent 53) Item 8 - Concrete Caps (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING Not Included Not Included Not Included Not Included 5.E.b Packet Pg. 693 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier COMMENTS START BENT NO. END BENT NO. ND MN MD MJ SV 51K 51L Not IncludedNot IncludedX Not IncludedNot IncludedRust bleeds N/A N/A 1 N/A N/ATOTAL = SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 3 - Concrete West-End Approach Pier Segment (Bent 42 – Bent 59.8) Item 12 - Concrete Caps (Moderate) COMPONENT ID COMPONENT CONDITION RATING 5.E.b Packet Pg. 694 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier PILE ID COMMENTS BENT NO. / ROW NO.ND MN MD MJ SV 95C X Steel embed corrosion 93E E X Rust bleeds Total= N/A N/A 2 N/A N/A SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 4 - West-End Platform Pier Segment (Bent 60 – Bent 103) Item 15 - Concrete Piles (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING Not IncludedNot IncludedNot IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 695 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier AREA ID COMMENTS AREA NO. ND MN MD MJ SV Defect Area 13 Not Included Not Included X Not Included Not Included Crack TOTAL = N/A N/A 1 N/A N/A SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 4 - West-End Platform Pier Segment (Bent 60 – Bent 103) Item 16 - Waffle Slab (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING 5.E.b Packet Pg. 696 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier AREA ID COMMENTS AREA NO. ND MN MD MJ SV Defect Area 14 X Sunken deck board Defect Area 15 X Crack in deck board all the way through TOTAL =N/A N/A 2N/AN/ANot IncludedNot IncludedSANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER INSPECTION SUMMARY ZONE 4 - West-End Platform Pier Segment (Bent 60 – Bent 103) Item 18 -Deck Area (Moderate) PILE CONDITION RATING Not IncludedNot Included5.E.b Packet Pg. 697 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225 Appendix F: Reference Documents 5.E.b Packet Pg. 698 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 699 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 700 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 701 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 702 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 703 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 704 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 705 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 706 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 707 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 708 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier AECOM 310 Golden Shore, Suite 100 Long Beach, CA 90802 Tel: 562.308.2300 July 11, 2016 Joshua Jilk John S. Meek Company, Inc. Project Manager 14732 S Maple Ave, Gardena, CA 90248 Subject: Construction Observations of Pacific Park Concrete Pile Repairs Santa Monica Pier, Santa Monica, California AECOM Job # 60493919 Dear Mr. Jilk: AECOM performed construction observations for the repairs of the Pacific Park support piles 53C, 46F (A) and 46F (B) located at the Newcomb Pier, at the Santa Monica Pier, in Santa Monica, CA. The observations were performed between June 8 and June 30, 2016. The construction observation consisted of assessing pile deterioration, provide repair details and conform piles have been repaired in accordance with industry standard repair methods and procedures. Site Layout The piles to be repaired are located on the southern side of the Santa Monica Pier under the Pacific Park amusement park, as is shown in Figure 1. This portion of the pier is constructed using timber decking and stringers, which are supported by concrete beams and pile caps, which in turn are supported by concrete piles. Figure 1: Aerial View of Santa Monica Pier Pile Repair Area 5.E.b Packet Pg. 709 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Construction Observations of Pacific Park Concrete Pier Repairs Santa Monica Pier, Santa Monica, California 2 Three exhibits are attached which show the layout of the columns, beams and piles. Exhibit 1 shows an overall plan of the Newcomb Pier Pile Plan. Exhibits 2 and 3 provide an enlarged plan which identifies the labeling of the individual piles. Inspection and Repair Methods The repair observations were performed under the supervision of a California Registered Engineer. The piles that were in the water were accessed using built-in catwalks and contractor supplied scaffolding underneath the pier. John S Meek Company Inc. (JSM) removed loose and spalled concrete to expose the existing reinforcement. AECOM performed a visual inspection of the exposed reinforcement and concrete. Our observations indicated that the visible corrosion was mainly on the spiral ties, dowel tubes and pre- stressing strands. There was little corrosion on longitudinal reinforcement. Based on the observation, AECOM provided JSM with the repair detail shown on Exhibit 4 along with the following recommended repair sequence: 1. Remove spalled and unsound concrete. 2. Clean area to be repaired of all foreign materials. 3. Where existing spiral ties are missing, severely corroded or as directed, add new W11 spiral ties @ 3 inches on center. 4. At locations where the remaining perimeter distance of sound concrete is greater than 24 inches, a partial circle W11 spiral tie shall be used and lapped with existing ties a minimumA of 10 inches. 5. At locations where remaining perimeter distance of sound concrete cover is less than 24 inches, the entire concrete cover shall be removed and full circle spiral ties shall be used. 6. The concrete cover to all new reinforcing shall be 3" minimum. 7. Existing reinforcing bars and exposed steel shall be cleaned of all rust and contaminants and then coated with a minimum of two coats of Sika Armatec 110 EpoCem and applied per manufacturer’s recommendation. 8. Encase the pile with Simpson FX-70 fiberglass jacket for a height of concrete removed plus 24 inch lap with sound concrete. 9. Top of jacket shall be dropped approximately 1/2 inch below bottom of pile cap. 10. First seal about bottom 6” with Simpson FX-70-6MP epoxy grout under gravity through fill ports in the jacket. 11. After the bottom is sealed, pump Simpson FX-70-6MP epoxy grout through fill ports in the jacket until it exits from top of jacket. 12. After grout has set and any settlement of grout has occurred, the voids in between the top of the fiberglass jacket and the bottom of the pile cap shall be completely filled with Simpson FX-763 epoxy. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 710 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Construction Observations of Pacific Park Concrete Pier Repairs Santa Monica Pier, Santa Monica, California 3 Observation Findings Pile 53C Field Observation 1. Loose and deteriorated concrete was removed over a height of approximately 3’-2”. 2. Concrete cover was removed all around the pile for about the half the length of concrete removed, and partial concrete cover was removed for the remaining length of concrete removed. See Photo No. 2. 3. Tie reinforcement, grout tube and two strands were corroded. Tie reinforcements and two strands were totally corroded. Only some parts of the grout tube were corroded and dowels could be seen. The dowels were not corroded. No additional or supplemental reinforcing was required to account for the two deteriorated strands. 4. No observed corrosion to longitudinal reinforcing. 5. New full circle W11 Ties at 3” on center were added where entire concrete cover was removed. 6. New partial circle W11 Ties were added where concrete cover was not completely removed all around. 7. Concrete cleaned and rebar coated with Sika Armatec 110 8. Fiberglass jacket, 5’ long 9. Approx. 5 gallons of FX-70-6MP epoxy poured for bottom seal. 10. Approx. 50 gallons of FX-70-6MP epoxy pumped into the fiberglass jacket. Pile 46F (A) Field Observation 1. Loose and deteriorated concrete was removed over a height of approximately 7’-9”. 2. Concrete removed all around the pile. 3. Tie reinforcement, grout tube and one strand were corroded. Tie reinforcements and one strand totally corroded. Only some parts of the grout tube were corroded. No additional or supplemental reinforcing was required to account for the deteriorated strand. 4. No observed corrosion to longitudinal reinforcement. 5. New full circle W11 Ties at 3” on center were added. 6. Concrete cleaned and rebar coated with Sika Armatec 110 7. Fiberglass jacket, 10’-3” long 8. Approx. 5 gallons of FX-70-6MP epoxy poured for bottom seal. 9. Approx. 36 gallons of FX-70-6MP epoxy pumped into the fiberglass jacket. Pile 46F (B) Field Observation 1. Loose and deteriorated concrete was removed over a height of approximately 6’-0”. 2. Concrete removed all around the pile. 3. Tie reinforcement, grout tube and one strand were corroded. Tie reinforcements and one strand totally corroded. Only some parts of the grout tube were corroded. No additional or supplemental reinforcing was required to account for the deteriorated strand. 4. No observed corrosion to longitudinal reinforcement. 5. New full circle W11 Ties at 3” on center were added. 6. Concrete cleaned and rebar coated with Sika Armatec 110 7. Fiberglass jacket, 8’-2” long 8. Approx. 5 gallons of FX-70-6MP epoxy poured for bottom seal. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 711 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 712 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Pacific Park Concrete Pier Repair Observation - Photo Report 1 1. PILE 53C – CONCRETE REMOVED TO EXPOSE CORRODED REBAR AND STRANDS 2. PILE 53C – NEW SPIRAL REINFORCEMENT. REINFORCEMENT CLEANED AND COATED WITH SIKA ARMATEC 110 5.E.b Packet Pg. 713 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Pacific Park Concrete Pier Repair Observation - Photo Report 2 3. PILE 53C – FIBERGLASS JACKET AND POUR FX70 EPOXY BASE SEALER 4. PILE 53C –FX70 EPOXY PUMPED TO TOP OF JACKET 5.E.b Packet Pg. 714 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Pacific Park Concrete Pier Repair Observation - Photo Report 3 5. PILE 46F (A) – CONCRETE REMOVED TO EXPOSE CORRODED REBAR AND STRANDS 6. PILE 46F (A) – NEW SPIRAL REINFORCEMENT. REINFORCEMENT CLEANED AND COATED WITH SIKA ARMATEC 110 5.E.b Packet Pg. 715 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Pacific Park Concrete Pier Repair Observation - Photo Report 4 7. PILE 46F (A) – FIBERGLASS JACKET AND POUR FX70 EPOXY BASE SEALER 8. PILE 46F (A) –FX70 EPOXY PUMPED TO TOP OF JACKET 5.E.b Packet Pg. 716 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Pacific Park Concrete Pier Repair Observation - Photo Report 5 9. PILE 46F (B) – CONCRETE REMOVED TO EXPOSE CORRODED REBAR AND STRANDS 10. PILE 46F (B) – NEW SPIRAL REINFORCEMENT. REINFORCEMENT CLEANED AND COATED WITH SIKA ARMATEC 110 5.E.b Packet Pg. 717 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Pacific Park Concrete Pier Repair Observation - Photo Report 6 11. PILE 46F (B) – FIBERGLASS JACKET AND POUR FX70 EPOXY BASE SEALER 12. PILE 46F (B) –FX70 EPOXY PUMPED TO TOP OF JACKET 5.E.b Packet Pg. 718 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Pacific Park Concrete Pier Repair Observation - Photo Report 7 13. FX 70 EPOXY – PUMP SETUP 5.E.b Packet Pg. 719 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Pacific Park Concrete Pier Repair Observation - Photo Report 8 14. FX 70 EPOXY – PART A AND B 15. FX 70 EPOXY – PART C 5.E.b Packet Pg. 720 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Pacific Park Concrete Pier Repair Observation - Photo Report 9 16. FIBER GLASS JACKET 5.E.b Packet Pg. 721 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 722 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 723 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 724 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 725 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 726 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 727 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 728 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 729 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 730 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 731 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 732 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 733 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 734 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 735 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 736 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 737 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 738 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 739 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 740 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 741 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 742 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 743 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 744 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 745 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 746 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 747 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 748 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 749 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10/24 12 10/24 12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 750 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 751 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 752 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 753 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 754 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 755 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 756 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 757 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 758 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 759 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 760 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 761 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 762 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier ATTACHMENT 1 - PIAS 5.E.b Packet Pg. 763 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 764 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 765 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 766 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 767 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 768 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 769 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 770 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 771 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 772 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 773 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier Architectural Conditions Assessment submitted by Wallace Roberts & Todd, LLC February 8, 20088 5.E.b Packet Pg. 774 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier URBANFURNISHINGS– TABLEOFCONTENTS SubsectionPageNumber AssessmentandMethodology………………………………………………………………………………….10 Railings………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………11 Benches…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….14 Tables………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..16 TrashReceptacles……………………………………………………………………………………………………..18 Curbs…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………21 Decking………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….22 Lighting……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..24 Features……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………27 QuantitativeAssessmentChart………………………………………………………………………………..34 PierSectorGraphic……………………………………………………………………………………………………35 ExistingSiteFeatures…………………………………………………………………………………………………36 9 5.E.b Packet Pg. 775 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Assessment and Methodology The Santa Monica Pier has been an iconic element of the city since the early 1900’s. It was and still is today a space where tourists and locals congregate to enjoy sunsets, entertainment, and activities featured on the pier. Despite the step grade, narrow sidewalks and high curb, thousands of people visit the Pier, by either walking, bicycling or driving on the Pier Bridge. They are welcomed by iconic signage that displays the Santa Monica name and logo and by informational Kiosks explaining elements on the pier to enjoy; such as the historic carousel, fi shing piers, entertaining performers and Pacifi c Park. The idea of the pier and the history that surrounds it sets a whimsical background for those who visit it. However, over many years of harsh coastal weather, unforeseen vandalism problems, a mish mash of replacement furniture, and a lost sense of style standards, the elements on the pier no longer present a cohesive atmosphere that tie all of the pier’s characteristic icons together. Pier Assessment and Methodology Development on the Pier has been guided by Santa Monica Pier Design Guidelines, adopted in 1987. These Guidelines address many features found on the Pier, but give only general guidance. WRT referred to these Guidelines during its assessment of current conditions, and noted where future recommendations about specifi c features would be warranted. It is WRT’s intent in the Architectural Conditions Assessment Report to assess the public amenities for their functional- ity, appearance, durability, comfort, sustainability and maintenance condition. Information and observations about these amenities will be the basis for more detailed recommendations to be formulated in coordination with the City and with input from the Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corporation and the public. The issues raised in this Report and the results of community input, will be further expanded upon and incorporated into the Sustainability Plan, the Maintenance Plan, the Lighting Plan and the Urban Design Plan. This section looks not only at urban furnishings, but opportunities to improve specifi c areas of the Pier to enhance the public’s enjoyment of this nationally recognized community, environ- mental and cultural resource. This assessment report provides the team’s analysis of the various site elements as they ap- peared during these site visits. The following elements were addressed: 1. Railings 2. Benches 3. Picnic Tables 4. Trash Receptacles 5. Curbs 6. Decking 7. Lighting Fixtures 8. Special Features The letter designations in the text refer to the Pier Sector Graphic. 4.10 5.E.b Packet Pg. 776 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Railings Rail Type 1: Blue Metal Rail Location: Primary railing, used on pier perimeter Sector Graphic: (A, B, D, E, F, G) Number: Approximately 4,500 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Materials: The railing is constructed of 3 (sometimes 4) horizontal 2” diameter steel pipe rails, with 2” diameter steel tube posts and fi ttings. All metal tubing is painted blue and appears to have been painted multiple times. Stainless steel cables have been added in the horizontal direction, centered between metal rails to create the 4” minimum clearance required by code. However, code has been updated and vertical barriers at minimum 4” O.C. have not been added. Joints vary in diff erent sections of the railing; some are welded, while others are assembled with metal tees. Maintenance: Paint has been chipped and repainted multiple times. Rust appears where paint is missing, most typically in areas of concentrated fi shing activity. Metal rails require constant repainting to prevent rust, as rust can form wherever metal is exposed.* Functionality/Placement: The railing provides a safety barrier at the edge of the pier. However, the railing no longer meets current safety requirements as there are more than 4” square openings in the rail. Durability: Painted metal is a durable option for railing if rust is prevented. Sustainability: There is no evidence that this railing uses low VOC paint or a renewable material. Recycled content material should be considered for this application in the event of replacement. Comfort: While the rail provides a fairly transparent barrier to the ocean, the steel rail is not very comfortable to lean against. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 Rail Type 1: Socket Rail Type: Steel cables The entire pedestrian area of the Pier is surrounded by a barrier rail with a minimum height of 42 inches. The predominant railing type is a painted blue metal post and railing. There is a section of this railing that is similar but with a wooden top rail. At the west end of the Pier there is also a painted wood and metal railing that separates the upper and lower decks and forms the stair railing. These varied railings do not create a cohesive design for the Pier. The 1987 Pier Design Guidelines recommends that the railings should be compatible with overall build- ing design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. No specifi c type of rail is prescribed. 5.11 5.E.b Packet Pg. 777 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Rail Type 2: Blue Metal with Wooden Top Rail Location: Southeast corner of pier Sector Graphic: (G) Number: approximately 1,200 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Materials: The railing is similar to Type 1 with the addition of a 2x8 wooden top rail. The railing is made of 3 (sometimes 4) 2” diameter horizontal metal tubes, with 2” diameter tubular metal posts. The top rail is a stained and coated wooden 2x8 plank, heavily worn, and supported by a bracket underneath. All metal tubing is painted blue and appears to have been painted multiple times. Stainless steel cables run horizontally only, centered between metal tubes to reduce the opening size to 4” in one direction. Joints vary in diff erent sections of railing; some are welded while others are assembled with tees and sockets. Maintenance: In general, the paint covers the metal railing consistently. Paint is worn and chipped in limited areas of high use especially along ramps, with rust observed where metal has been exposed. Metal tubing must be painted to prevent rust as wear requires. Wood is teak and requires pressure washing and re oiling annually in the spring. * Functionality/Placement: The railing provides a safety barrier at the edge of the ramp and at the deck above the volleyball court. The railing does not meet current safety requirements as there are more than 4” square openings between members. Durability: Metal and wood are solid, durable, and appropriate materials for this railing if the metal remains painted to prevent rust and the wood is regularly refi nished. Sustainability: There is no evidence that this railing uses low VOC paint or a renewable material. Recycled content material should be considered for this application as well as a recycled composite in the event of replacement. Comfort: The rail is more comfortable to lean against because of the wide, wooden top rail. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 Rail Type 2: Wooden Railing 6.12 5.E.b Packet Pg. 778 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Rail Type 3: White Rail with Green Top Rail Location: West end of pier, on deck and staircases Sector Graphic: (E) Number: approximately 400 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Materials: This metal rail is quite diff erent than the other two rails and occurs only in a limited area at the Observation Deck at the west end of pier. The rail is made of 2” diameter painted steel posts and bottom rail, with a painted green wooden top rail. Horizontal stainless steel cables and turnbuckles have been added in the horizon- tal direction to limit size of openings. Maintenance: In general, the paint covers the metal rail- ing consistently. The paint is worn and chipped in limited areas of high use but rust was not observed. The painted wood top rail is worn and raw wood is exposed in some areas. Functionality/Placement: The railing does not meet cur- rent safety requirements as there are more than 4” openings between members. Durability: Metal and wood are solid, durable, and appropriate materials for this railing if the metal remains painted to prevent rust and the wood is regularly refi nished. Sustainability: There is no evidence that this railing uses low VOC paint or any renewable materials. Recycled composite should be considered for wood substitute as well as recycled content metal. Comfort: The rail is more comfortable to lean against because of the wide, wooden top rail. Rail Type 3: Green Top Rail 7. General Observations about Railings: It was observed and confi rmed by maintenance that these railings are not holding up to the standards of the pier and require too much maintenance.* There are missing pieces, rust and failing sections that need constant upkeep and are unappeal- ing to pier users. A material/railing that does not rust and requires no painting will be considered and researched further by WRT. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 13 5.E.b Packet Pg. 779 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Bench Type 1: Blue Seat with White Logo Base Location: Along promenade Sector Graphic: (A, B, D) Number: 29 Quality assessment: Materials: This bench is the “standard” Santa Monica park bench found throughout the City. The base and supports for this bench are white painted pre-cast concrete with the words “Santa Monica” stamped into the base. Seat and seatbacks are 2x4 wood slats which are been painted blue. Benches are approximately 7 feet long and accommodate 4 people. There appears to be two slightly diff erent bench types, assumed to be of diff erent eras. Maintenance: Concrete supports require painting to maintain a clean fi nish, wood slats require regular painting and sanding or replacement if damaged. Functionality/Placement: Benches are located in such a way that adjacent railings block ocean view when seated. All benches face the ocean. An option should be considered that allows benches to be oriented in other directions to take advantage of sun and people watching. These benches do not have any arm rests which makes them targets for bench sleepers. Durability: The base is heavy, not easily moved, and very durable. The wood components may be easily defaced. Sustainability: Recycled content material should be con- sidered in the event of replacement. Comfort: This bench has a straight, tall back making it more comfortable for taller users. The seat and seatback surfaces are made of wood which is more comfortable than the metal benches on the pier. However, this bench could have been more comfortable if it had more lumbar support and curve on the seating surface. The wood surface dries quickly in the marine environment. Benches Bench Type 1 Bench Type 2 There are currently three diff erent styles of benches on the Pier. The blue Seat/white base benches are custom made and most predominant bench on the Pier. The other benches are prefabricated and appear to have been added at diff erent dates than the original. The 1987 Pier Design Guidelines recommends that the benches should be compatible with overall building design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. No particular type of bench is prescribed. 8 . Bench Type 2: Blue Metal Hatch Location: West side of entrance to Pacifi c Park Sector Graphic: (C) Number: 1 Quality assessment: Materials: This bench is a modern design and approxi- mately 6 feet long and seats 3 adults. It is fabricated of blue painted or powder coated open grid metal, with one piece seat and back. Metal tubes on sides act as legs and armrests. It is bolted to the deck.14 5.E.b Packet Pg. 780 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Bench Type 2: Blue Metal Hatch Continued. Maintenance: Routine repainting is required to prevent rust; removal from site is required if powder coating needs to be reap- plied, per manufacturer’s directions. The open metal seat prevents water from ponding on the surface. Functionality/Placement: This bench is less likely to attract bench sleepers as it is shorter and has arm rests. This bench was ob- served to be very well used at all times, with high demand for seating in this area. Durability: Rust was observed at base and near welds where the metal has been exposed. Sustainability: Consider recycled content and sustainable materials in the event of replacement. Comfort: Curved seat and seatback provides lumbar sup- port, however the grid open metal pattern is uncomfortable to sit on, especially in shorts. The curved shape of the seat and seatback is not conducive to sitting at any angle other than straight-ahead. Bench Type 3: Victorian Bench Location: West end of pier; Sector Graphic: (E) Number: 2 Quality assessment: Materials: Victorian style six foot bench that seats four adults. Bench is made of 3 ornate cast iron supports/arm rests with a composite slat board. Bench is bolted to wood deck. Maintenance: The benches are inside the Observation Deck and are in excellent shape. Composite boards are easily replaced if they were to become damaged. Functionality/Placement: This bench design captures the “Victorian” character of the carousel, but does not blend well with the more rustic pier aesthetics at the western end. No other benches or site furnishings found on the Pier match this style. The bench appears lighter and less solid than the exterior benches. Durability: Composite boards may be subject to scratch- ing and carving. The lightweight construction of this bench appears to be much less durable than other site furnishings. Sustainability: Composite slats could have been made of recycled content but are not identifi ed as such. Comfort: Shape, materials, and armrests make this the most comfortable bench on the pier. Bench Type 3 9 . General Observations about Benches: It was found that not only was seat- ing insuffi cient on the pier but those which were provided did not meet aesthetic, functionality or comfort expectations. Maintenance expressed a need for at least a dozen more.* In the Urban Design Plan, WRT, in consulta- tion with the City and SMPRC, will identify additional locations for public seating and will give guidance about how seating should be arranged. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 15 5.E.b Packet Pg. 781 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Tables Table Type 1: 4-foot Square Orange Powder Coated Table (seats 8) Location: Entrance to the Pacifi c Park Sector Graphic: (C) Number: 10 Note: Privately owned Quality assessment: Materials: Prefabricated outdoor picnic table, with top and seats made of vinyl coated metal mesh. The seats are attached to table top with painted tubular metal legs. An umbrella opening is provided, but none of the tables have umbrellas. Maintenance: The vinyl coating on the tables allows the table to be easily wiped or hosed off for cleaning. However, it looked as if daily maintenance had not been performed; many tables were coated with a layer of dust and/or dirt. Functionality/Placement: The vinyl coating defl ects sunlight, keeping this table cooler when placed in the direct sunlight. All of the outdoor tables are located at the entrance to the amusement park. Although this arrangement is convenient for patrons who pur- chase food at adjacent stands, there are no quiet places to sit at a table. Handicap accessible tables should be made available; tables provided have permanent benches on all four sides, leaving no roll up access for persons in wheelchairs. A table with one open side or alternative table design with easy accessibility is strongly suggested. Durability: The tables all seemed to be withstanding the ocean/salty conditions. There was no observed rust and the tables ap- peared to be fairly new. Sustainability: There are no apparent sustainable aspects to these furnishings. In the event of replacement, low VOC paint, recy- cled content, and local materials should be utilized wherever possible. Comfort: This is a relatively comfortable outdoor cafete- ria table. The seats are wide enough to comfortably seat two adults on each bench. The edges are rounded and have a plastic coating which provides a level of safety and comfort. They generally experience rapid customer turnover. The Pier currently has one main outdoor eating area adjacent to the main food vendors and Pacifi c Park. There are two styles of tables and they are intermingled on either side of the amusement park entrance walkway. Table Type 1 10 .16 5.E.b Packet Pg. 782 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Table Type 2: Round Metal Table Location: Entrance to Pacifi c Park Sector Graphic: (C) Number: 9 Note: Privately owned Quality assessment: Materials: Three-Foot diameter metal table with three attached bench seats. Tables seat six adults very tightly and are more appropriate for three persons. They are colorful, with bright pink and yellow seats with white tables. Fabric umbrellas are provided at each table. Maintenance: The metal fi nish is chipped and limited rust was observed. Functionality/Placement: These tables are heavily utilized because they serve all the food vendors at the Pacifi c Park entrance. It would be desirable to have more tables in this area, and designate another area on the pier where people could eat as well. Durability: The round metal tables have some rust. Sustainability: There are no apparent sustainable aspects to this piece of furniture. In the event of replacement, low VOC paint, recycled content, and local materials should be used where possible. Comfort: The seat and table top are made of painted metal. The leg room under this table is small to accommodate a group of adult users. Table Type 2 11 . General Observations about Tables: The existing tables provide insuf- fi cient seating and lack basic ADA standards. Table 1 is maintenance friendly and easy to clean, however table 2 has signifi cant imperfec- tions mainly rust, due to inappropriate material choices. Any additional tables to be maintained by Pier Maintenance would have to be easy to clean, ADA accessible, adaptable for diff erent types of users, and aes- thetically cohesive throughout the pier. New tables could possibly be an opportunity to get private owners to update their tables. Setting a standard for furniture should be enforced. 17 5.E.b Packet Pg. 783 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Receptacle Type 1: “Barrel” Receptacle Location: Around Pacifi c Park Sector Graphic: (C, F) Number: 4 Note: Privately owned Quality assessment: Materials: Barrel with wood staves wrapped with metal bands and a plastic funnel lid. Wood is unfi nished. Receptacles look old. Maintenance: The wood is unfi nished and would require sealant to increase longevity. The plastic funnel lid (white) shows dirt eas- ily. Functionality/Placement: The plastic funnel lid helps to keep trash in the barrel and hidden from view; however, it is not very aes- thetically pleasing. Visually, this receptacle does not match any other site furnishings found on the pier. Durability: The metal straps around the outside of the bar- rel have small amounts of rust, and the screws holding these straps are rusted. Sustainability: No sustainable elements are obvious in this furniture. Use of renewable wood could be implemented in the event of replacement. Trash Receptacles Trash Receptacle 1: Barrel Trash Receptacle 2: Santa Monica logo Trash receptacles are a necessary and important site furnishing. They should be viewed as another opportunity to strengthen the design concept and cohesion. More recycling receptacles should be provided throughout the pier to encour- age recycling. The 1987 Pier Design Guidelines recommends that the trash re- ceptacles are compatible with overall building design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. No particular type of receptacle is prescribed. The Design Guidelines do require that dumpsters for the various concessions are screened. 12 . Receptacle Type 2: Concrete Cylinder with Santa Monica Logo Location: Present in all zones on the pier. Sector Graphic: (A-G) Number: 45, most predominant trash receptacle on the pier Quality assessment: Materials: Custom pre-cast light colored concrete cylinder with metal collar around center hole, as well as bronze City of Santa Monica Logo. These pre-cast receptacles are new. Maintenance: Requires little maintenance, weight makes it diffi cult to move or take, which is why Maintenance expressed their prefer- ence for this receptacle.* There is no rust and weathering, but on-going cleaning is necessary. Functionality/Placement: The pre-cast concrete is a good choice for marine environments since they contain no metal and painting is not necessary. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 18 5.E.b Packet Pg. 784 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Receptacle Type 2: Concrete Cylinder with Santa Monica Logo Continued. Durability: The receptacle appears to be very durable concrete construction, with few signs of wear or need of for replacement. Sustainability: No sustainable factors appear to be consid- ered for development of this product in regard to materials. However, the long life span of the receptacle reduces need for replacement and thus reduces waste. Receptacle Type 3: Blue Metal Trash Receptacle Location: West end of pier (E), South edge Sector Graphic: (F, G) Number: 21, second most predominant trash receptacle on pier. Quality assessment: Materials: Fabricated blue powder coated painted metal with vertical slats and horizontal bands. A metal liner holds the trash. Maintenance: The receptacle is very rusted, faded and appears dirty. Functionality/Placement: This trash receptacle has no lid, exposing trash to seagulls and wind. Durability: Rust is forming where the paint has failed. Metal looks unsubstantial for the use and marine environment. Sustainability: No sustainable elements are associated with this product. A recycled metal alternative should be considered in the event of replacing such furnishings. Trash Receptacle 3: Blue Metal 13 . Receptacle Type 4: Blue Metal Recycling Receptacle Location: West end of pier; Sector Graphic: (E), South edge (G) Number: 4 Quality assessment: Materials: Fabricated blue powder coated painted metal with vertical slats and horizontal bands with a standard tapered formed lid, similar in style to trash can. A liner holds the recycled material. A blue and white “recycle” sign designates this bin for recycling. Maintenance: The container was worn and not clean. Regular repainting is required. Functionality/Placement: Site recycle bins do not sepa- rate any recyclable materials and are not clearly labeled as to which recyclables they accept. The Pier should include more recycling stations and they should be placed along side trash receptacles. Containers that accommodate multiple recyclable materials should also be imple- mented. Recycled materials include, but are not limited to, newspaper, plastics, glass, food, compost, etc. Durability: Rust is forming where the paint has failed, but with routine repainting this is a durable option. Sustainability: No sustainable elements are associated with this product. A recycled metal alternative should be considered in the event of a replacement. Trash Receptacle 3: Blue Metal Recycling 19 5.E.b Packet Pg. 785 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 14 . General Observations of Trash Receptacles: The most functional recep- tacle was the Santa Monica custom concrete designed bin. The rest are made of corrosive materials that don’t match, are hard to maintain and are easily vandalized or stolen. WRT will look into receptacles similar to the Santa Monica concrete variety and suggest additional opportuni- ties for placement. Additional recyclable bins are also suggested that match the current receptacles. Providing adequate and appropriate receptacles will help to keep the pier clean. Receptacle Type 5: Recycled Content Receptacle Location: In enclosed observation deck (E) Number: 1 Quality assessment: Materials: Made of 100% recycled content plastic boards that match the adjacent bench with cast iron details. Maintenance: The receptacle is inside the enclosed ob- servation deck and is in excellent shape. Composite boards can easily be replaced if they were to become damaged. Functionality/Placement: This receptacle design cap- tures the “Victorian” character of the carousel, but does not blend well with the more rustic pier aesthetics at the western end. The receptacle appears lighter and less solid than the exterior receptacles. Durability: Composite boards may be subject to scratching and carving. The lightweight construction of this recep- tacle appears to be much less durable than other site furnishings located outside. Sustainability: Receptacle is made of 100% recycled content plastic boards. Trash Receptacle 5: Recycled Content Receptacle 20 5.E.b Packet Pg. 786 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Curb Type 1: 6x6 Wood Timber Curb – Painted Yellow Location: Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (A, B); South Parking area (G) and used for wheel stops in parking area. Number: approximate 200 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Materials: Painted wood timber. Maintenance: Repainting required on a regular basis. Functionality/Placement: This curb defi nes the mainte- nance/fi re lane. This curb off ers no aesthetic benefi t to the pier experi- ence and could pose a tripping hazard. Durability: The timber appears durable enough to satisfy function though edges of wood are becoming worn and repainting is necessary to maintain color. Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sus- tainable forestry practices. Alternative renewable materials should be considered, such as a high recycled content composite. Curb Type 2: 8x10 Wood Timber Curb – Painted Red Location: Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (A, B) Number: approximate 200 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Comfort: N/A Materials: Painted Wood timber. Maintenance: Repainting required on a regular basis Functionality/Placement: Curb required for traffi c manage- ment and directs vehicular traffi c into parking lot. These curbs off er no aesthetic interest to pier experience and pose a tripping hazard for pedes- trians. Durability: The timber appears durable enough to satisfy function though edges of wood are becoming worn and repainting is necessary in places. Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sustain- able forestry practices. Otherwise alternative renewable materials should be considered, such as a high recycled content composite. Curbs The curbs found on The Pier are made of heavy timbers which have been bolted to the decking. These timbers serve to guide traffi c and defi ne the fi re lane. Curbs are not defi ned in the 1987 Design Guide- lines but the Guidelines do require timber wheel stops. Curb Type 1: Yellow Curb Type 2: Red 15 . General Observations about Curbs: It was concluded that the curbs’ biggest weakness was its upkeep of repainting and replacement.* They function properly, however WRT will look into opportunities to cut down on maintenance on this element of the pier.** * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 21 5.E.b Packet Pg. 787 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Decking The pier’s top decking material is made up primarily of 2x12 pieces of lumber. In most places the decking runs perpendicular to the edge of the pier, however, there are areas where the planks are mounted di- agonally at a 45 degree angle to the sides of the pier. The 1987 Design Guidelines require exposed wood decking for all pier walkways, access and service drives and parking areas. Decking Type 1: Pedestrian Areas Location: All wood areas for pedestrian use; Sector Graphic: (A-G) Area: approximately 180,000 Square Feet Quality assessment: Materials: Exposed 12” wide pressure-treated wooden decking planks, unfi nished. Maintenance: The wood planks were generally in good condition. There were no signifi cant gaps identifi ed, and it appears that where gaps had occurred, they had been corrected. Wood decking requires routine washing, sealing (except for pressure treated wood), and replacement as necessary due to wear and exposure. Functionality/Placement: When well cared for wood decking makes for an enjoyable and marine oriented walking surface. Durability: The decking shows limited wear in the pe- destrian areas. Challenges for wood decking include the variability of wood products, twisting, warping, splitting, etc. Also, wear of deck can leave hazardous exposed nails. Deck boards should be replaced when nails are exposed. Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sus- tainable forestry practices. Otherwise alternative renewable materials should be considered, such as a high recycled content composite. Comfort: The wood decking is comfortable to walk on provided it has been adequately maintained. Decking Type 1: Pedestrian Decking Type 2: Asphalt 16 . Decking Type 2: Asphalt covered decking Location: Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (B) Area: approximately 5,400 Square Feet Quality assessment: Materials: Asphalt coated wood deck with corrugated metal panels Maintenance: Occasional cleaning is required, along with routine repainting of the stripes. Functionality/Placement: The metal sheets appear to cover a mechanical chase. An alternative to this design is desired as this option is inconsistent with the requirement of the Design Guide- lines. 22 5.E.b Packet Pg. 788 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Decking Type 2: Asphalt covered decking continued. Durability: The asphalt was cracking and showing signs of wear. Sustainability: Materials more sustainable than asphalt and steel should be used where available. Comfort: The asphalt rises above the level of the wooden deck and creates an uneven surface. The corrugated metal sheets are uncomfortable to walk on due to their uneven surface. Pedestrians did not appear to prefer to walk on this surface unless necessary. Note: Asphalt covered decking and corrugated metal panels are scheduled to be removed and replaced with wood decking.* General Observations about Decking: We have identifi ed that there are/were signifi cant gaps in the decking. Large areas of repair have been corrected by maintenance by replacing said areas with “patches” of decking. However, over- all decking was in good shape on the main walk. And it was noted that there are plans to replace decking with 3” thick boards, instead the 2” boards that are currently used. ** Therefore, gaps and general repairs will be reduced. Sealing of decking is not necessary due to the fact that the boards are pressure washed.*** The painted parking lines wear and fl ake and need to be repainted several times each year. WRT will make recommendations to be included in the Maintenance Plan about alternative approaches to striping parking lots with more durable materials * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 ** Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 *** Todd: Gemni Forest Products Decking Type 3: Parking lot and vehicular traveled decking Location: Parking Deck; Sector Graphic: (G) Area: approximately 83,000 Square Feet Quality assessment: Materials: Pressure treated wooden decking planks, 12” wide, painted with parking lot striping. Maintenance: These areas appear to have been replaced at diff er- ent times. Decking should be replaced where cracks and gaps pose a hazard. Re-striping should also occur on a regular basis to ensure a cohesive fl ow within the lot. Functionality/Placement: The parking deck planks appear uneven and worn when compared to “pedestrian only” areas. The boards are spaced further apart and in many cases greatly exceed ¼” between fl oor boards. Durability: The vehicular decking is signifi cantly more worn than pedestrian decking due to heavy and constant use. Raised knots and nails were observed. Typical challenges of wood decking include dealing with variability of wood products, twisting, warping, splitting, etc. . Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sustainable forestry practices. Otherwise alternative renewable materials should be consid- ered, such as a high recycled content composite. Comfort: The uneven surface is bumpy while driving in a car. Decking Type 3: Parking Lot 17 .23 5.E.b Packet Pg. 789 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Lighting There are fi ve diff erent lighting fi xtures existing on the Pier. They are of assorted designs and styles and various heights. Lighting is predominant on the perimeter of the pier, and less prevalent in the parking lot or central areas. The majority of the lighting fi xtures appear to be of diff erent vintages and some are in questionable or non-working condition. (Observed at nighttime, about 20% of the lights were not lit). The Pier lacks a coherent theme in lighting and a consistency in fi xtures. The Design Guidelines dictate that there is a minimum of 4 footcandles and a maximum of 8 footcandles in lighting levels. Style and fi xture type is not prescribed but recommends that the fi xtures are compatible with overall building design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. Lighting Type 1: Cobra Head Light Fixture Location: First 100 feet of Central Walkway Sector Graphic: (A) Number: 12 Quality assessment: Materials: Standard cobra head fi xture made of metal with glass lamp cover on a painted white metal pole, 18 feet high. Maintenance: Routine replacement is required for ex- pired bulbs. Painted white metal poles need annual painting and occasional cleaning, and maintenance has confi rmed that painting the tall lights is not a problem with the use of a crane.* According to Bill Bollinger, the Pier Maintenance supervisor, there was a previous desire to replace the 26” Cobra Head” lights with the other ornamental lights along the rest of the deck. Functionality/Placement: Tall overhead lighting serves to illuminate the main path; however they provide no pedestrian ambi- ance on the pier at night. Lights of this style are generally associated with vehicular traffi c and parking. This lighting arrangement is not ap- pealing for a pedestrian oriented walking space. Durability: Many of the Cobra head light poles are se- verely rusted and the bases are weakened by the corrosive environ- ment. Sustainability: Fixture should use an effi cient, low watt- age lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable, high recycled content materials. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 Lighting Type 1: Cobra Head 18 .24 5.E.b Packet Pg. 790 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Lighting Type 2: Grey Arched Light Fixture Location: Succeeds the cobra head fi xture down the second half of the pier, wraps around the observation deck, and continues down the east side of the deck. Sector Graphic: (A, B, D, E, F) Number: 40 Quality assessment: Materials: Ornate metal light pole, 15 feet, is painted grey with a tear drop shaped glass lamp cover, in a “historic” style. Hanging banner or pot hooks are provided, however there were no banners or fl ower pots observed. Maintenance: The fi xtures appear relatively new and in good condition. They require routine replacement for expired bulbs. Grey poles may need occasional cleaning and repainting. Functionality/Placement: The poles are spaced at approximately 40 feet on center. Light levels felt safe and comfortable for the pedestrian, when operating. The shorter fi xture has a more human scale and seems to fi t in with the character of the Pier better. This pole is more ornate than the other fi xtures on the Pier, with curvilinear appendages and unique globes. The dark color hides dirt and blemishes better than the white poles. Durability: These light poles are durable and showed few signs of rust. Provided adequate attention is given to regular painting these poles should remain durable. Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable, high recycled content materials. Lighting Type 3: Wooden Light Fixture Location: Observation/fi shing decks. Located around the observation deck and the lower fi shing decks; Sector Graphic: (E) Number: 7 Quality assessment: Materials: 8x8 wooden pole, 15 foot tall, with wood cross arms supporting two metal light fi xtures. Fixtures appear to be sodium vapor (orange glow) at night. Maintenance: The wood is weathered and pressure treated. Maintenance is necessary to prevent the wood from becoming weathered looking. Functionality/Placement: The design of this fi xture has horizontal arms which provide bird roosts. Bird repellent measures (“bird spikes”) appear to be an after market addition. The fi xture is a box “spotlight” style that provides little aesthetic character. Durability: The wooden pole is very weathered looking. It also has a shorter lifespan than its metal counterparts and more susceptible to vandalism; concrete or fi berglass may be more desirable for durability. Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp wherever possible. Also poles should be made of renewable and high recycled content materials. Lighting Type 2: Arched Fixture Lighting Type 3: Wooden Fixture 19 .25 5.E.b Packet Pg. 791 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Lighting Type 4: Box Light Fixture Location: Illuminates the perimeter of the southern parking deck; Sector Graphic: (G) Number: 7 Quality assessment: Materials: 8x8 painted wooden pole (teal green), 20-25 feet tall with a dual, box light fi xtures mounted at top. An additional light fi xture is provided shining onto beach. Conduit runs outside the pole with exposed junction boxes. Bird spikes are provided to prevent roosting. Maintenance: The wooden pole is in need of new paint, as it is noticeably peeling. Because it is wood, regular maintenance and upkeep will require the light to function at its best. Functionality/Placement: The lights illuminate the perimeter of the parking lot, but there is a lack of lighting in the middle of the deck. Durability: The wood is worn and requires regular painting to maintain fi nish. Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable and high recycled content materials. Lighting Type 5: Bell Shaped Light Fixture Location: Eastern edge of pier near Carousel; Sector Graphic: (G) Number: 8 Quality assessment: Materials: Gray/green painted round metal pole with 2 bell-shaped fi xtures on arched posts mounted at top of pole. Poles are approximately 15 feet high. Maintenance: The painted poles are well worn and scratched. The inside of fi xture is very rusted. Functionality/Placement: When observed at night, these lights provided a comfortable level of light for pedestrians. There did not appear to be “hot” bright areas or deep dark areas in this area by the carousel. The light poles are appropriately scaled to function in a human scale/promenade experience. However, these lighting fi xtures are not consistent in style with any other fi xture on Pier. They are located in only one corner of the deck instead of being integrated into the rest of the design. Durability: The metal seems to be very durable for this situation if painted surface is maintained to prevent rust. Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable and high recycled content materials. Lighting Type 4: Box Light Fixture Lighting Type 5: Bell Fixture 20 . General Observations of Lighting: Some of the lighting featured on the pier have the festive char- acter the pier desires, where others are more utilitarian in nature. Because of the many diff erent lighting styles, no overall lighting feature contributes substantially to the pier’s character. The Type 2 Arched Fixture is the most in keeping with the desired historical compatibility and pier character but its limited use does not promote a consistent image. Currently the varied fi xtures create a variety of maintenance concerns, including corrosion in the ocean environment, bird perches, and the need for repainting. WRT has noted that a comprehensive and cohesive lighting fi xture will substantially contribute to the urban design character of the pier as well as create uniform maintenance require- ments and uniform light levels. 26 5.E.b Packet Pg. 792 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier While these items were not identifi ed in the scope of the Urban Design assessment and therefore not investigated to the same level as the previous items, they were observed as critical to the pier’s char- acter and environment. These items are included here to further address the additional features that make up the urban context. Features Feature Type 1: Telescopes Location: Along the northern edge of the Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (B, D) Number: 11 Quality assessment: Materials: Grey painted prefabricated metal pedestals mounted to pier decking, with a step for child’s use. Maintenance: Moderate rust was observed. Routine cleaning and occasional repainting is required for upkeep. Functionality/Placement: We noticed many of the telescopes were in use every time we visited the pier. Telescopes look out towards the beach, water, City of Santa Monica, and Santa Monica Mountains in the distance. Durability: The telescopes appear to be high grade and appropriate for this application. Sustainability: No particular sustainable elements apparent in this feature. Feature Type 2: Designated Smoking Areas Location: Four locations throughout the pier, two on the observation deck, one on the western edge and southern edge of amusement park adjacent to railing. Sector Graphic: (D, E, F, G) Number: 8 Quality assessment: Comfort: The platforms allow for a designated place to smoke. Smoking is prohibited on other parts of the pier. Materials: The grey painted plywood sheet with smoking urn sits directly on pier decking. Maintenance: The platform requires regular painting and clean up of garbage around smoking area. Functionality/Placement: Smoking will be banned from beach in the future which would eliminate the need for this element. Durability: Smoking stations appear to address a designated need but are not integrally designed as part of the pier. They appear to be a temporary solution. Sustainability: No sustainable elements in existing feature. General Observations of Smoking Areas: Recommendations for more compatible smoking receptacles and smoking areas will be identifi ed in the Urban Design Recommendations. Feature 1: Telescope Feature 2: Smoking Areas 21.27 5.E.b Packet Pg. 793 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Feature Type 3: Fishing Utilities Location: Lower level fi shing decks at east end of pier Sector Graphic: (E, D) Number: 3 Sinks Quality assessment: The Design Guidelines identifi es that cutting boards, cleaning sinks and railings shall be consistent and compatible with the rest of the pier. It also suggests that “new construction at fi shing pier shall also evoke whimsy and fantasy.” There is no whimsy or fantasy in these utilitarian services. Materials: Wooden 12x24 fi sh cutting boards are located at various random intervals along the metal rail. The wood is untreated and heavily carved. Three free-standing pre-fabricated stainless steel sinks with fi sh cleaning stations. Maintenance: The wooden cutting boards are easy to detach and replace when necessary. The metal sink design is simple and easily cleaned using a hose. Functionality/Placement: Sinks and water source are easily accessible at all lower fi shing decks. Currently sinks are provided as well as wooden cutting boards attached to existing railings. There are also movable aluminum garbage bins for use by fi shermen. Durability: Perhaps more permanent trash receptacles could be designed for use by fi shermen specifi cally. Stainless steel sinks seem to be very high quality and used heavily. Amenities need to be durable due to heavy use of the pier by fi shermen. Sustainability: No sustainable elements noted in existing features. Feature Type 4: Planters (belong to restaurant-private property) Location: Near entrance to Pacifi c Park (C) and near restaurant at end of pier (E); Sector Graphic: Number: 4 Quality assessment: Design Guidelines: The Design Guidelines include a statement that landscape features shall be minimized and not compete with the architecture. Species shall be compatible with the beach environment. Materials: One wood and three plastic pots Maintenance: Maintained adequately by concession. Functionality/Placement: Planters can be a very pleasing site amenity; however this has not been executed successfully due to a lack of coherency. Durability: Wood or heavy plastic planters are appropriate and durable materials for this application. Existing planters were not in need of replacement or refurbishing. Sustainability: Wood, especially harvested using responsible forestry techniques, is a preferred alternative over plastic unless it is a recycled plastic product. Feature 3: Fishing Utilities Feature 4: Planters 22 .28 5.E.b Packet Pg. 794 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Feature Type 5: Bike Racks Location: Four locations with three diff erent styles of bike racks: A row of two standard metal racks on the west side of Pacifi c Park, one metal “low profi le” rack next to the restaurant at end of pier, one “wave” rack just east of the Carousel, and one “wave” rack at beginning of the pedestrian walk; Sector Graphic: (D, E, F, G) Number: 5 racks total Quality assessment: Materials: Metal, Blue Paint Maintenance: Some rust on bike racks where not painted. Functionality/Placement: The bike rack at the entrance of the pedestrian walk has room for eight bikes and was full upon one observation; consideration should be given to adding more parking spaces at this location. The rack at the west end of the Pier has room for eight bikes; two bikes were parked at this rack. “Low profi le” racks are less desirable because they do not support the bike on its frame; bikes to fall over more easily in this style of rack. There were no bikes parked at the other three rack sites. Effi cient rack system would help encourage fi sherman and pier visitors to use bicycle transportation. Durability: With proper paint, bike racks should be able to survive the pier climate with little rust damage. Painted bike racks are easily scraped by bikes and locks. Stainless steel is more durable and will not rust but is more expensive. Sustainability: Bike racks encourage non-motorized transportation. Recycled content metals should be used wherever possible. General Observations: Bike valet stations were introduced to the Pier in 2007 during the Twilight Dance Series and were very popular. The Urban Design Study will address possible locations for bicycle valet stations. Feature 5: Bike Racks 23 . Feature Type 6: Security Barriers Location: The City installed approximately 3’x3’x3.5 boxes around the Pier. Quality assessment: Materials: Wood, and fi lled with sand Maintenance: Originally, Pier Maintenance planted plants in the boxes, but the water damaged the deck boards, so the plants were removed and plywood was placed on the tops. Functionality/Placement: Sited to create a traffi c barrier. General Observations: These security barriers are large, and block pedestrian fl ow. Bollards that require little maintenance could serve the pier better and are recommended in the pier guidelines. If planters are to be used, we suggest that they follow the design guidelines. Feature Type 6: Security Barriers 29 5.E.b Packet Pg. 795 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Feature Type 7: Parking Kiosk and Pedestrian Access Location: The kiosk to the parking lot is located at the entrance to the Newcomb Deck. A pedestrian walkway, designated by chain link and raised curbs, leads pedestrians to and from the Newcomb Deck to the Municipal Pier. Quality assessment: Functionality/Placement: The pedestrian path, designated by a chain link fence, is not in character with the pier and appears temporary, but the function is appropriate for protection from vehicular activity. Options such as bollards and diff erential fl ooring material can serve the same purpose and create a safe walking space for pedestrians. The Design Guidelines state that the pier is to develop a unique, pedestrian oriented environment with ease of access and user friendliness as a prime design consideration. Improvements to the pedestrian circulation will create a better pedestrian environment. General Observations: The pedestrian walkway presents an opportunity to improve the ambiance of the Pier and create a walkway that adheres to the goals of the Design Guidelines. These goals encourage improvements that relate to the Pier and create a safe, functional and appealing circulation path and entrance to the Pier for both vehicles and pedestrians. Feature Type 7: Parking Kiosk Feature Type 8: Observation Deck Location: At the west end of the Pier Number: l General Observations: The Observation Deck at the west end of the Pier is a rarely used resource. It is an enclosed area and access is from a staircase or by an elevator. The Observation Deck is furnished with benches and a trash can and is painted red and green, which is complementary to the adjacent Mexican Restaurant, but not to the public nature of the Pier. The Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corporation Staff has indicated that they will install historic displays in this area as part of the Pier’s 100th Anniversary. Selection of paint colors, repair of windows, replacement of light fi xtures, and installation of seating and tables would add to the ambiance. Guidance about how to treat this area will be included in the Urban Design Study. Feature Type 8: Observation Deck 24 .30 5.E.b Packet Pg. 796 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Feature Type 9: Display Cases Location: Display cases are located near the Police Sub-station and the elevators at the west end. Quality assessment: Maintenance: Unless display cases are cleaned regularly and the material updated, they give an appearance of neglect. Functionality/Placement: Their current location is not an ideal spot for visitors to congregate and read. The displays are right outside of the bathrooms, they are up a level of stairs and not easily accessible to everyone, and they are tucked away out of view. General Observations: Display cases create an opportunity to share important information about the Pier, businesses and current activities. When part of a regular program, they create interest and educate Pier visitors. Feature Type 9: Historic Display Cases Feature Type 10: Pier Skirting Location: Around the pilings of the pier where pedestrian accessibility is an issue Quality assessment: Materials: wood fencing General Observations: The skirting was constructed to prevent unauthorized access under the pier and security, while the existing Design Guidelines suggest whimsical treatment. Our observation is that the skirting/fencing should not compete with the festive activity on the pier and should remain ‘background’. Feature type 10: Pier Skirting 25 .31 5.E.b Packet Pg. 797 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Feature Type11: Outdoor Dining Barriers Location: Outside Pacifi c Park dining areas and restaurant located on the west end of the pier. These structures are privately maintained. Quality assessment: Functionality/Placement: Serve their purpose of sectioning off and privatizing the eating spaces. General Observations: Each restaurant on the Pier provides barriers for its outdoor dining. The Design Guidelines state that development of exterior dining, lounge and vending areas is strongly encouraged. However to match the architectural standards of the guidelines they should still retain the whimsical character that matches the rest of the architecture, which the current barriers do not. Although these are privately constructed barriers around the tenants’ leasehold areas, they are highly visible feature of the Pier. The Urban Design Study will provide guidance about alternative designs for barriers that enhance the ambiance of the Pier. Feature Type 11: Restaurant barrier Feature Type 12: Gazebos Location: Newcomb Deck, at the southeast corner of the Pier. Number: 2 Quality assessment: Materials: Steel, same as railing system Maintenance: Same maintenance and material as the railings. Yearly painting and touch-ups. Functionality/Placement: Main seating for the volleyball courts is provided by the bleachers to the south of the parking lot. While the gazebos fi t in with the character of the pier, they are architectural “follies”. General Observations: The Gazebos were intended to be rest areas for visitors, but lack seating, cover and functionality. In consultation with the City the Urban Design Study, will make recommendations as to how these amenities can be enhanced. Feature Type 12: Gazebo 26 .32 5.E.b Packet Pg. 798 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Feature Type 13: Signage Location: Along deck. More concentrated at west end. Quality assessment: Functionality/Placement: WRT noticed a lack of signage for bathroom locations and overall directional signs. Regulation signs were noticeable and suffi cient. The main Kiosk is large but placed off the main path. It provides visitors with useful information but seems to go unnoticed by many visitors. General Observations: Signs advising the public about acceptable rules of conduct on the Pier (e.g. no diving, no alcohol, etc.) are placed throughout the Pier. These signs are of metal, about and were installed in 2007. Consolidation of information on these signs has reduced clutter. A diff erent location for the pier’s informations kiosk should be considered as well as a more inviting display around it to attract visitors. The Urban Design Study will recommend an expansion of the signage program and kiosk display. Feature Type 13: Pier Visitor Conduct Signs Feature Type 13: Visitor Kiosk 27 .33 5.E.b Packet Pg. 799 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier SANTA MONICA PIER ASSESSMENT- Quantitative Assessment Chart SECTOR OF PIER ASSESSED (Based on Graphic)SITE FEATURE ABCDEFGTotal NOTESRailing Blue Metal 5146 429Metal tubing, painted blue, stainless steel cable, metal socket joints Blue Metal with Wooden Top Rail 5146 429Metal tubing, painted blue, stainless steel cable, wooden 2x6 railingWhite with Green Top Rail 5146 429Painted wood seat boards, painted white concrete baseBenches Blue seat/White base 5146 429Painted wood seat boards, painted white concrete base Blue metal 1 1 Prefabricated, powdercoated, blue metal Wooden/black metal 2 2 Composite board seat, painted black metal frame total 32 TablesOrange/metal 10 10 Plastic coated metal meshRound/Colored seats 9 9 Prefabricated, painted metal total 19Trash Receptacles Imitation "Barrel"314Wood staves, metal bands Concrete Cylinder with SM Logo 514 1365245 Custom made, bare cast concrete, metal logo, "Santa Monica" lettering Blue Metal Recycling 11 1 14 Metal vertical slats, horizontal metal bands, painted blue,"Recycle" signBlue Metal 461121 Metal vertical slats, horizontal metal bands, painted blue total 74 CurbWood Timber Curb - Painted Yellow Bolted down timber 4x4's, painted yellowWood Timber Curb - Painted Red Bolted down timber 4x4's, painted red totalDecking Pedestrain Areas Untreated wooden decking boards Asphalt Covered Decking Asphalt and corrugated metal panels Parking Lot and Vehicular Decking Wooden decking boards, painted parking lot striping total LightingWhite/Cobra Head 27 2 11 Standard cobra, metal pole, painted white, glass lamp, 18' highGrey/Single Curved 91714 40 Metal pole, gray, tear drop glass lamp cover, 15' high Wood/Double Head 3 3 Wooden pole, metal fixture Shoe Box/deck parking 527 Wooden pole, box light Green/Curved/ Bell 8 8 Metal pole, gray/green paint total 69 FeaturesTelescopes 11 Grey painted prefabricated metal pedestals Smoking Areas 2222 8 Grey painted plywood sheet with smoking urn Fishing Amenities (sinks)21 3 Wooden fish cleaning platforms, stainless steel sinks Planters 21 3 An assortment of wood and plastic potsBike racks 1214 Metal, blue paint 34 5.E.b Packet Pg. 800 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 801 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier SANTA MONICA PIER ASSESSMENT *A-Pier Entrance -Extends from Bridge entrance to parking lot entrance*B-Pier (First Half) -Section of Asphalt topped pier*C-Amusement Park Entrance*D-Pier(Second Half) -End of ﬁ rst half of pier to the observation deck*E-Observation Deck -Bo*F-West and South deck -Deck behind and to the west of the amusement park*G-Parking Deck Legend Pier Sectors 35 5.E.b Packet Pg. 802 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 803 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Trash ReceptacleBlue Metal-recyclable Located full length of Pier -4 Total RailingsRailing top Located full length of PierLightingWooden pole ﬁ xtureLocated around perimeter of deck at end of pier only -3 Total BenchWooden Bench (trex)Located inside site deck -2 Total Trash ReceptacleSanta Monica Pier CustomLocated full length of Pier -45 Total LightingWhite overhead ﬁ xtureLocated along ﬁ rst half of pier -12 Total CurbWooden Curb (painted red) along Pier and Deck. By Amusement park. CurbWooden Curb (painted yellow) along Pier and Deck. By amusement park. BenchWooden Bench- Santa Monica CustomLocated along entire stretch of pier -29 TotalTableRound table with UmbrellaLocated by amusement park only -9 Total TableCoated Metal TableLocated by amusement park only -10 Total LightingGrey arched ﬁ xtureLocated along second half of pier and west deck -40 Total SANTA MONICA PIER ASSESSMENT CurbWooden Curb (painted yellow) along parking deck only LightingGrey Deck FixtureLocated on east deck only -8 Total RailingsWooden Railing top Located on east deck only RailingsWooden Railing top for ramp Located on east deck only DeckingDecking at transition across bridge *A-Pier Entrance -Extends from Bridge entrance to parking lot entrance*B-Pier (First Half) -Section of Asphalt topped pier*C-Amusement Park Entrance*D-Pier(Second Half) -End of ﬁ rst half of pier to the observation deck*E-Observation Deck*F-West and South deck -Deck behind and to the west of the amusement park*G-Parking Deck Fact and Figures (Approx... Quantities) Trash ReceptaclesWooden Barrel-4 TotalLocated all within the amusement park entrance -4 Total BenchMetal coated benchLocated along the west side of the deck 1 Total Trash ReceptacleBlue Metal Located south deck and parking lot -21 Total Smoking PadDesignated smoking areas throughout pier and deck -4 Total LightingGrey Parking Deck FixtureLocated in deck parking lot only -7 Total G F B Amusement ParkRailingsBoards designate ﬁ shing locations. RailingsStair railingsLocated at end of pier only D E DeckingWorn and separated boards on the parking deck. SignageFishing is allowed only at designated areas on the pier. A C Metal PierAccess to underside of pier.Extends length of pier.Parking Lot EntranceObservation Tower Benches Tables DESCRIPTION QUANTITY STYLES Trash Receptacles Lighting 32 19 74 69 3 2 4 5 Legend PlantersAssorted pots -3 Total SinksSinks and cleaning stations are provided in ﬁ shing designated areas- 3 Total Bike RacksTwo styles, many unused-4 Total Existing Site Features 36 5.E.b Packet Pg. 804 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 805 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 806 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 807 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 808 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 809 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 810 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 811 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 812 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 813 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 814 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 815 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 816 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 817 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 818 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 819 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 820 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 821 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 822 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 823 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 824 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 825 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 826 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 827 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 828 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 829 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 830 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 831 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 832 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 833 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 834 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 835 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 836 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 837 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 838 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 839 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 840 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 841 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 842 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 843 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 844 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 845 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 846 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 847 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 848 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 849 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 850 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 851 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 852 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 853 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 854 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier Infrasturcture Assessment Phase 2 – Upgrade Studies Table of Contents Subject Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………………………………… ii NEWCOMB PIER STRUCTURAL UPGRADE………………………………………….. ..1 AQUARIUM ROOF ASSESSMENT……………………………………………………... 12 MUNICIPAL PIER PHASE 4 UPGRADE………………………………………………... 14 MUNICIPAL PIER CONCRETE UPGRADE (Seaward of Bent 59) ……………………. 16 EMERGENCY GANGWAY……………………………………………………………… 18 CAROUSEL CUPOLA ONION DOME………………………………………………….. 25 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM…………………………………………………………… 29 UTILITY SYSTEMS……………………………………………………………………… 45 LIGHTING STUDY……………………………………………………………………….. 49 TEN-YEAR PLAN………………………………………………………………………… 66 URBAN DESIGN STUDY (WRT)…………………………………………...APPENDIX A i 5.E.b Packet Pg. 855 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 856 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 857 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 858 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 859 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 860 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 861 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 862 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 863 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 864 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 865 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 866 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 867 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 868 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 869 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 870 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 871 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 872 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 873 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 874 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 875 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 876 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 877 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 878 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 879 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 880 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 881 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 882 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 883 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 884 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 885 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 886 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 887 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 888 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 889 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 890 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 891 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 892 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 893 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 894 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 895 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 896 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 897 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 898 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 899 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 900 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 901 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 902 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 903 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 904 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 905 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 906 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 907 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 908 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 909 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 910 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 911 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 912 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 913 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 914 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 915 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 916 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 917 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 918 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 919 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 920 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 921 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 922 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 923 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 67 5.E.b Packet Pg. 924 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier APPENDIX A URBAN DESIGN STUDY (WRT) 5.E.b Packet Pg. 925 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier This document is a part of the Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assess- ment Study to assist in the develop- ment of the City of Santa Monica’s multi-year Capital Improvement and Maintenance Program, led by Moffat & Nichol. Wallace Roberts & Todd, LLC Planning and Design 1133 Columbia St., #205 San Diego, CA 92101 November 17, 2008 Santa Monica Pier Assessment Recommendations Report for Urban Design Elements 5.E.b Packet Pg. 926 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 927 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 1 Introduction 2 Methodology 3 Reccomendations 4 Site Furnishings contents 21 Carousel Building Roof 5.E.b Packet Pg. 928 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Elizabeth R. Sedat Collection 5.E.b Packet Pg. 929 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 1 The Santa Monica Pier has been an iconic element of the City and region since the early 1900’s. Unique among California piers, the Santa Monica Pier, its history and activities, are a clas- sic yet – whimsical stage welcoming tourists and locals alike. How- ever, over many years of harsh coastal weather, active urban use and the addition of an eclectic mix of site furnishings (benches, lighting, trash receptacles, etc) the Pier no longer presents a cohe- sive atmosphere worthy of Santa Monica. This set of recommen- dations, based on an assessment of current conditions, is intended to guide the choices for the selection of new and replacement furnishings. Introduction 5.E.b Packet Pg. 930 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 2 The fi rst step in the process was to review the Santa Monica Pier Design Guidelines (Guidelines), adopted in 1987. The Guidelines provide a general vision for the character of the buildings and furnishings and allow fl exibility in accomplishing its goals. methodology WRT then interviewed City staff from maintenance, public safety and operations. The Assessment of Ex- isting Conditions was conducted in late 2007 and presented to the Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corpora- tion (SMPRC) March 5, 2008, and is included as Attachment No. 1. WRT was then directed to prepare recom- mendations for improving the charac- ter and function of the public spaces of the Pier. Design alternatives were presented to the SMPRC Operations Committee on May 28, 2008. The alternatives in- cluded three ‘families’ of site furnish- ings representing a range from those of Palisades Park and South Beach to contemporary styles and materials. Based on this input, WRT is making the following recommendations. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 931 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 3 The Santa Monica Pier was built for the pleasure of the public in 1909. Ever since, citizens and visitors have enjoyed the amuse- ments and relaxation of the Pier. The very nature of a pier – apart from the land, above the sea and into the sky – is a place for en- joying a remarkable set of experiences. Santa Monica’s traditions of spinning around the carousel, soaring in the Ferris wheel, gath- ering for picnics, entertainment, fishing, strolling, and enjoying the view remain strongly held. The nationally recognized historic structure of the Hippodrome Building and contributing elements on the Pier, combined with the purpose – for fun, sets the founda- tional character and style of the public realm of the Pier deck. This character has been best described as ‘whimsical.’ Two fundamental opportunities were identifi ed in the Assessment of Exist- ing Conditions: 1. Visual clarity, user comfort and maintenance could be improved with the selection of a complementary ‘family’ of site furnishings. 2. The placement of site furnishings could assist in directing circulation and defi ning spaces for specifi c use, i.e. performance. recommendations The following recommendations are organized to guide the selection of specifi c items, i.e. benches, lights, etc., – Site Furnishings; and how to arrange them on the Pier. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 932 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 4 The historic Byzantine-Moorish styled Hippodrome at the base of the bridge graciously marks the entrance to the Pier. More recently constructed buildings line the eastern portion of Pier and are characterized by the bold signage for the dining and amusement attractions within. The architecture of the distant west end might be characterized as an eclectic craftsman style. The site furnishings are a mix of styles and materials and the wood decking is compromised by numerous anomalies of asphalt and metal plates. The style and character of the Pier’s site furnishings need to be simplifi ed to become an integrated family of elements that is complementary of the architecture styles and contributes to a sophisticated sense of whimsy. This will reduce the visual clutter that distracts from the quality of the Pier experience and reduce efforts in maintenance and operation. site furnishings Each of the items meets basic criteria for high quality materials that will reasonably withstand the corrosive coastal environment and require minimal maintenance which con- tribute to a level of ‘sustainability.’ The manufacturers and model infor- mation illustrate the design intent. Equivalent elements may be identi- fi ed through the City’s public bid process. Quantities are approximate, provided for planning purposes. Fig- ure 1 diagrammatically locates each of the site furnishing elements. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 933 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5 Figure 1, Location Diagram for Site Furnishings 5.E.b Packet Pg. 934 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 26 5.E.b Packet Pg. 935 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 7 The 6,100 linear feet of rail on the Pier is constructed of three to four horizontal two inch steel pipe rails, with two inch diameter steel tube posts and fi ttings, fi gure 2. Some sections have a wood top rail. Stain- less steel cables have been added in the horizontal direction, centered between metal rails to create a four inch minimum clearance. However, current code requires vertical barriers at minimum four inches on center. In addition, joints vary in different sections of the railing. There are various materials that could replace the railing that would require less maintenance and present a different aesthetic image. However, the cost to replace the railings is estimated at $2.75 million. A more economical alternative is to retrofi t the railing to meet current code for opening size. To achieve the require- ment, stainless steel cable at four inch on-center spacing should be added in a vertical pattern. The color of the railing should be painted Mediterranean Blue, RAL color system 5002 to match new benches, tables and lighting. railings Figure 2 Railing 5.E.b Packet Pg. 936 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 8 Figure 4 Benches by artists Figure 3 Bench 5.E.b Packet Pg. 937 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 9 The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions concluded that there were not enough seating and resting opportu- nities on the Pier. In addition, there are three types of benches on the Pier, some of which are more comfortable than others. The Condition Assess- ment Report noted that the benches on the Pier have backs and are in a fi xed position, most facing the ocean. These types of benches limit the visi- tors view. A backless bench provides more fl exibility for the visitor. WRT recommends a new bench standard to replace variety of existing benches. The new benches should be of a style that provides options for backless benches and benches with backs, inviting the visitor to look out to the ocean or onto the spectacle of performances and people on the Pier. This report recommends the removal of all thirty two existing benches and the addition of forty one new backed benches and twenty seven backless. They should be surface mounted to the deck and carefully located in the locations shown in fi gure 1 to provide a range of seating opportunities. The recommended style of bench, fi gure 3, is 48” Scarborough – hori- zontal metal strap as manufactured by Landscapeforms, fi gure 3. These benches should all be powdercoated by the manufacturer in ‘Ocean Blue’ to match the railing, tables and lights. The estimated cost for each bench is $990 for backless and $1,080 for backed. benches The bench is also an opportunity to engage public art on the Pier. Intro- ducing public art into the seating is encouraged to build on the legacy of ‘whimsy’ of the Pier. Santa Monica, renowned for its programs for public art, may consider numerous options, such as: a. replace all existing benches with a ‘off-the-shelf’ benches and add a few artist-designed/ custom made benches each year, fi gure 4; b. locate artist-designed/custom made benches in specifi c locations, such as on the deck east of the Hippodrome; or c. engage an artist to enhance a new set of ‘off-the-shelf’ benches. WRT recommends establishing a public art program to invite qualifi ed artists to create one-of-a-kind seating for specifi c sites along the pier. Figure 1 illustrates the eight locations where the off-the-shelf bench might be replaced, over time, with an art- ist bench. The estimated budget for the artist benches is $12,000 each, including artist fee, materials and fabrication, installation, one year’s maintenance. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 938 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 10 The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions found that all the nineteen tables are owned and maintained by merchants and shop owners. Their locations serve the tenant’s use. How- ever, there is a need for public picnic tables. Ten of the nineteen existing tables are the square, as shown in fi gure 5, with red seating and table surface. The other ten are small round tables. The style and character of the square metal tables, now used by tenants, with attached bench seating is recom- mended above other options consid- ered, fi gure 5. The existing nineteen should be replaced by merchants to match the recommended blue color and nine- teen new tables should be added (to be owned and maintained by the City) in the locations, fi gure 1. picnic tables Figure 5 Picnic table Six to ten of the new tables should have two or three benches to invite wheel chair users to the table. The color of the perforated metal table tops should be powder coated ‘Slate Blue’, as manufactured by Wabash Valley, for movable tables: Models SG140P - 46” Sq. Table - Perforated and SG155P - 46” 3 - Seat ADA Accessible Table; and for surface mounted tables: SG229P - 46” Sq. Table - 4 Seats - Surf. Mt - Basic Frame - Perforated, and SG234P - 46” Sq. Table - 3 Seats - Surf. Mt - Basic Frame – Perforated. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 939 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 11 Five types of trash receptacles were identifi ed by the Assessment of Exist- ing Conditions. Of the seventy four existing receptacles forty fi ve are the recommended concrete unit, fi gure 6. They were found to require minimal maintenance and most durable of the options available. Approximately thirty new trash receptacles and twenty new receptacles for recycled materials should be placed as shown, fi gure 1, for ease of use and collec- tion. The trash receptacle model QR-CAL2832W, anodized aluminum lid A-24 as manufactured by Quick- crete or approved equal, with the city name embossed and bronze logo inset to match the existing units. Mate- rial to be Ecocast, made from 70% post consumer and industrial waste, color – Erosion. The top eight inches, including the rim, should be sealed to minimize staining. Receptacles for recyclable materials need to be added to the Pier (twenty total). They should be set next to the trash receptacles. It is recommended that the twenty new receptacles for recyclable materials match the trash receptacles with the addition of sig- nage. Signage or other designations on the trash receptacle, is recom- mended to designate the specifi c use of the receptacle and educate the public on the importance of recy- cling. The signage program is to be coordinated with other City agencies. trash receptacles Figure 6 Receptacle The City of Santa Monica uses the following receptacle for recyclable materials: Recycled Recycler Excel Series Model 900-X50-F 50 gal. front access 25”x 22”x 49’” 115 lbs., ‘Designer’ series, as manufactured by Midpoint International. For the Pier, brown recycled plastic lumber, is recommended. It includes a rubber baffl e to discour- age inappropriate removal of materi- als.Figure 7 Recyclable Materials Receptacle 5.E.b Packet Pg. 940 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 12 decking The tradition of the wood deck is important to the distinct character of the Pier. The top decking is primar- ily two inch by twelve inch by twenty foot long lumber. Portions of the pier are covered with asphalt and metal plates. The Design Guidelines require wood decking for the whole pier. The ongoing program for repairing the wood deck is encouraged to con- tinue so that all the metal plates and asphalted areas will be removed and replaced with wood decking. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 941 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 13 Seat walls should be introduced along the curb line, at the change in surface elevation between the two decks. The seat wall should be sixteen inches tall by sixteen inches wide in various lengths with two foot wide gaps at approximately twenty foot intervals to allow pedestrians to walk between, see fi gure 1. The curb seating should be constructed in recycled plastic lumber/wood composite, in a me- dium dark brown color, fi gure 8. curbs The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions noted the use of heavy timbers bolted to the pier deck to guide traf- fi c, defi ne the fi re lane and cover the transition between the different eleva- tions between the Municipal Pier from the pedestrian walkway. While the curbs could be a tripping hazard for pedestrians and visually unappeal- ing they also are used for seating. The fi re lane and pedestrian areas should be defi ned by other means, i.e. bol- lards – see section B. Spatial Com- position and Circulation. A wooden ramp should replace the asphalt infi ll along the seam between the two piers at the amusement facility entrances. Figure 8, Seat wall 5.E.b Packet Pg. 942 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 14 Figure 9, Decorative arched pole Figure 10, Task lights to be added to the decorative poles 5.E.b Packet Pg. 943 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 15 The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions revealed that there were six styles of lights on Santa Monica Pier. The existing decorative arched poles with the acorn light fi xtures are not identifi ed as historic elements, but contribute to the classic character of the Pier. To create a cohesive im- age, remove clutter and improve this important visual element of the Pier, three types of lights are recom- mended. All lights must provide the Pier staff the ability to control each independently. a. Decorative arched poles with an acorn light fi xture, fi gure 9, are the primary character defi n- ing light element of the Pier. Figure 1 illustrates the locations for ninety seven new lights on the twelve foot tall poles at thirty eight foot spacing around the entire pier perimeter. This light serves pedestrians and the light fi xtures, see the Infrastructure Upgrades volume of the Santa Monica Pier Assessment. The original manu- facturer of the existing lights has not been determined. Replacement of a matching pole and fi xture is feasible and should be conducted carefully to achieve the desired character. The rec- ommended manufacturer is Sitelink by Holophane. b. Task lights, fi gure 10, should be placed on the decorative arched poles with three to fi ve spot lights adjustable to illuminate specifi c fea- tures, i.e. fi shing areas, boat launch, performance areas, etc. Figure 1 recommends twenty nine locations. c. Parking lot lights should be replaced on the Newcomb Pier. The lighting study of the Infrastructure Upgrades recommends a twenty fi ve foot tall pole, spaced eighty feet on center along the pier perimeter to provide maximum fl exibility to program events on the Newcomb deck. It is estimated that fi fteen poles , located on fi gure 1, will provide suf- fi cient illumination. d. Necklace Lights currently trim the edge of the pier. It was recommended that the existing lights be replaced with 750 energy effi cient LED fi xtures, at fi ve feet on center, vandal resistant marine grade with cast housing, high impact lens and gasketed cast lens guard as manufac- tured by Cole Lighting. The esti- mated cost exceeded the budget. See the “Lighting Study” for alternatives considered. lights 5.E.b Packet Pg. 944 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 16 a. Bicycle racks are currently on the Pier, but underutilized because of their inconvenient locations. While bicycle riding is not encouraged on the Pier due to potential confl icts with pedestrians, bikes are recognized as a popular and sustainable mode of transportation for locals. To encour- age bicycle access to the Pier new racks are recommended to replace the existing fi ve with additional locations for new bike racks are illustrated on fi gure 1. The galvanized steel ‘Wave’ rack is recommended, fi gure 11, each securing up to eight bikes, as manu- factured by Bike Security Racks Co. b. Security barriers, currently sited, are large three foot by thee foot wooden boxes now serve as bollards to designate pedestrian areas and vehicle areas. It is recommended that the wooden boxes be removed and replaced with 127 fi xed and 14 removable bollards. Model “San Fran- cisco”, as manufactured by Urban Accessories, fi gure 12, spaced eight feet on-center and located as shown on fi gure 1. These cast aluminum furnishings should be powder coated by the manufacturer in RAL color system 5002 to match other furnish- ings. special features Figure 11, Bicycle rack Figure 12, Bollard 5.E.b Packet Pg. 945 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 17 c. Gazebos have been part of the Pier for over 15 years. The two decorative gazebos are located on the south rail of the Pier. They were de- signed as performance areas, but are currently underutilized. To encour- age use, it is recommended a picnic table is installed in each with a trash receptacle nearby, and a system of colorful fabric to animate the space and discourage bird resting/dropping. d. Smoking areas are currently designated and maintained on the Pier, fi gure 1. The existing eight ash urns should be replaced with eight surface mounted, powdercoated (RAL color system 5002) aluminum ash urns, model Grenadier as manufactured by Land- scapeforms, fi gure 13. The deck of the smoking areas should be a solid surface to keep burning items away from the wood Pier. In- stead of the existing painted plywood, it is recommended that a four foot by eight foot deck of tightly set recycled plastic lumber, one inch thick (or less) by six inches wide, tongue and groove, a medium dark brown color, is installed directly on the wood Pier. It is recommended that the envi- ronmental graphics program direct smokers to the designated areas. Figure 13, Ash Urn 5.E.b Packet Pg. 946 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 18 e. Signage is an important interface between the public and the facilities of the Pier, as well as key to the identity of the public places, the merchants and shop owners. Signage for individual tenants and merchants are required to follow the Archi- tectural Design Guidelines. These recommendations are for the public signs. The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions found recently installed signs that provide consolidated informa- tion about rules and regulations that apply to the Pier. However other signage on the Pier is inconsistent in its character, quality, message and placement. A comprehensive environmental graphics program should be devel- oped to direct the replacement and addition of signage on the Santa Monica Pier. The graphics program should be based on what and how information is delivered. It should include an interpretive program ad- dressing cultural resources, natural history, and functions of the pier. The graphics program should coordinate the character of interpretive signage with that needed for directional and regulatory information. The solution should serve the Pier for fi fteen to twenty years allowing an amount of fl exibility with high quality materials located to minimize clutter and focus the message to the public. Figure 14, Interpretive Panel, by Mortar & Ink 5.E.b Packet Pg. 947 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 19 The historic information displayed near the police sub-station at the west end of the Pier may be more effectively displayed in a series of panels along the railing, see fi gure 14. Porcelain enamel is recommended for interpretive signs. This technique and use of materials is proven to hold up well in the ocean climate and deliver hi-quality graphic detail. The size could vary within the system. Figure 1 identifi es up to eight potential loca- tions for interpretive information. Regulatory and directional compo- nents may be aluminum to fi t within the city’s signage program. The existing information kiosk is a helpful and attractive element, fi gure 15. Two additional kiosks are recom- mended as located on fi gure 1. Figure 15, Kiosk Centennial anniversary signage should be considered temporary, un- less it can be included in the com- prehensive environmental graphics program. To assist in the effi cient and effectiveness of a temporary program the PRC should consider: • Defi ning the identity of the year long event; • Building on the City’s envi- ronmental signage program and production capabilities; • Utilizing materials that can be recycled appropriately; and • Engaging local sponsors. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 948 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 20 f. Performance areas are man- aged by the SMPRC, fi gure 1. These open spaces along the edge of the Pier, between the emergency vehicle access path and the railing. These sites should be marked with a painted white star on the wood deck as de- fi ned by the environmental graphics program. g. Vendor carts are managed by the City of Santa Monica in locations shown on fi gure 1. They are marked on the deck with a painted white “T”. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 949 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 21 The Santa Monica Looff Hippodrome building is listed National Historic Landmark, National Register Number: 87000766. Statement of SigniÄ cance (as of designation - February 27, 1987): The principal historic element of the formerly extensive collection of amusement facilities at the Santa Monica (Looff) Amusement Pier, this is a rare, intact example of an early shelter structure built (1916) to house a carousel in an amusement park and the better preserved of the two such structures that remain on the West Coast. http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1979&ResourceType=Building carousel building roof Historic photos of the Santa Monica Looff Hippodrome (Carousel Build- ing) show the elegant curved funnel shaped roof rising to the central ‘onion dome’ on a cupola. The perimeter of the building has octagonal shaped turrets at the corners of the building. The northeast corner is wider and taller than the other three. Each of the turrets may have had a viewing deck on the fl at roofs with a railing. Three dome shaped features were equally spaced along the roofl ine of each façade. 5.E.b Packet Pg. 950 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 22 Currently the metal funnel roof rises out of a fl at roof with the wood cupola sitting on top. Missing is the ‘onion dome’ cupola roof, the railing around the perimeter of the turret roofs and the twelve dome shaped features. The 1987 Design guidelines note that the Carousel Building was “already restored”, page 56. The graphics of the design guidelines to not indicate the reconstruction of the ‘onion dome’ or the dome shaped features around the building perimeter. Construction plans and specifi cations for Roofi ng and Cupola Replacement were prepared in 1997 by Pugh Scarpa Kodama. They call for the removal of the existing fl at roof portion to the underlying curved sheathing. They do not address the dome shaped features around the building perimeter. The City of Santa Monica’s Land- marks Commission adheres to the National Park Service—Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treat- ment of Historic Properties. Decisions and agreement concerning the Carou- sel Building roof should be confi rmed prior to further action. Recommendations: 1. Confi rm specifi c elements to be reconstructed to meet the Santa Monica Landmark Commission’s requirements and agreements to maintain the National Historic Landmark status of the building. 2. Update the Roofi ng and Cupola Replacement Plans to meet current building and safety codes and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (including, but not limited to, the restoration of the turrets, addition of perimeter dome shaped features if necessary). 5.E.b Packet Pg. 951 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 952 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 953 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 954 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 955 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 956 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 957 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 958 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 959 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 960 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 961 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 962 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 963 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 964 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 965 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 966 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 967 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 968 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 969 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 970 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 971 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 972 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 973 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 974 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 975 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 976 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 977 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 978 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 979 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 980 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 981 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 982 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 983 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 984 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 985 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 986 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 987 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 988 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 989 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 990 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 991 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 992 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 993 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 994 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 995 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 996 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 997 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 998 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 999 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1000 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1001 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1002 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1003 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1004 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1005 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1006 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1007 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1008 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1009 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1010 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1011 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1012 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1013 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1014 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1015 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1016 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1017 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1018 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1019 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1020 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1021 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1022 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1023 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1024 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1025 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1026 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1027 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1028 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1029 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1030 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1031 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1032 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1033 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier 4225 E. Conant Street Long Beach, CA 90808 T (562) 590-6500 www.moffattnichol.com 5.E.b Packet Pg. 1034 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier CITY OF SANTA MONICA OAKS INITIATIVE NOTICE NOTICE TO APPLICANTS, BIDDERS, PROPOSERS AND OTHERS SEEKING DISCRETIONARY PERMITS, CONTRACTS, OR OTHER BENEFITS FROM THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA Santa Monica’s voters adopted a City Charter amendment commonly known as the Oaks Initiative. The Oaks Initiative requires the City to provide this notice and information about the Initiative’s requirements. You may obtain a full copy of the Initiative’s text from the City Clerk. This information is required by City Charter Article XXII—Taxpayer Protection. It prohibits a public official from receiving, and a person or entity from conferring, specified personal benefits or campaign advantages from a person or entity after the official votes, or otherwise takes official action, to award a “public benefit” to that person or entity. The prohibition applies within and outside of the geographical boundaries of Santa Monica. All persons or entities applying or receiving public benefits from the City of Santa Monica shall provide the names of trustees, directors, partners, and officers, and names of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation or revenue interest. An exception exists for persons serving in those capacities as volunteers, without compensation, for organizations exempt from income taxes under Section 501(c)(3), (4), or (6), of the Internal Revenue Code. However, this exception does not apply if the organization is a political committee or controls political committees. Examples of a “public benefit” include public contracts to provide goods or services worth more than $25,000 or a land use approval worth more than $25,000 over a 12-month period. In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity. Therefore, if you are seeking a “public benefit” covered by the Oaks Initiative, you must supply that information on the Oaks Initiative Disclosure Form. This information must be updated and supplied every 12 months. 5.E.d Packet Pg. 1035 Attachment: Oaks Initiative Form - Moffatt & Nichol (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) CITY OF SANTA MONICA OAKS INITIATIVE DISCLOSURE FORM In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity. Public benefits include: 1.Personal services contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-month period; 2.Sale of material, equipment or supplies to the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period; 3.Purchase, sale or lease of real property to or from the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period; 4.Non-competitive franchise awards with gross revenue of $50,000 or more in any 12-month period; 5.Land use variance, special use permit, or other exception to an established land use plan, where the decision has a value in excess of $25,000; 6.Tax “abatement, exception, or benefit” of a value in excess of $5,000 in any 12- month period; or 7.Payment of “cash or specie” of a net value to the recipient of $10,000 in any 12- month period. Name(s) of persons or entities receiving public benefit: Name(s) of trustees, directors, partners, and officers: Name(s) of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenue interest: Prepared by: ____________________________Title: __________________________ Signature: ______________________________________ Date: ________________ Email: ____________________________________ Phone: ____________________ FOR CITY USE ONLY: Bid/PO/Contract # ____________________________ Permit # ___________________________ See the attached list of Key Officers and Directors. 1)Eric A. Nichol, and 2) Douglas Nichol Moffatt & Nichol Shares Trust dated November 28, 2006. 5.E.d Packet Pg. 1036 Attachment: Oaks Initiative Form - Moffatt & Nichol (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) ATTACHMENT Officers and Directors list Title Name Address President / Chief Executive Officer Eric A. Nichol, PE 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Senior Vice President / Chief Olie Abbamonto 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Financial Officer Senior Vice President / Chief David W. Huchel 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Legal Officer / Secretary Senior Vice President / Chief Douglas J. Plasencia, PE 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Operations Officer Senior Vice President Richard M. Rhoads, PE 2185 N. California Blvd., Suite 500, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Senior Vice President Jeffrey L. Sparrow, PE 21308 Small Branch Place, Ashburn, VA 20148 Vice President / Assistant Secretary Sarah M. Sabunas 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director / Chairman Eric A. Nichol, PE 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Michelle Anghera, PhD 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Randell Iwasaki, PE 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Ralph Larison 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Jim Nevada 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Michael N. Rieger 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Lynn L. Schrier-Behler 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Richard D. Steinke 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Moffatt & Nichol 5.E.d Packet Pg. 1037 Attachment: Oaks Initiative Form - Moffatt & Nichol (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) CITY OF SANTA MONICA OAKS INITIATIVE NOTICE NOTICE TO APPLICANTS, BIDDERS, PROPOSERS AND OTHERS SEEKING DISCRETIONARY PERMITS, CONTRACTS, OR OTHER BENEFITS FROM THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA Santa Monica’s voters adopted a City Charter amendment commonly known as the Oaks Initiative. The Oaks Initiative requires the City to provide this notice and information about the Initiative’s requirements. You may obtain a full copy of the Initiative’s text from the City Clerk. This information is required by City Charter Article XXII—Taxpayer Protection. It prohibits a public official from receiving, and a person or entity from conferring, specified personal benefits or campaign advantages from a person or entity after the official votes, or otherwise takes official action, to award a “public benefit” to that person or entity. The prohibition applies within and outside of the geographical boundaries of Santa Monica. All persons or entities applying or receiving public benefits from the City of Santa Monica shall provide the names of trustees, directors, partners, and officers, and names of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation or revenue interest. An exception exists for persons serving in those capacities as volunteers, without compensation, for organizations exempt from income taxes under Section 501(c)(3), (4), or (6), of the Internal Revenue Code. However, this exception does not apply if the organization is a political committee or controls political committees. Examples of a “public benefit” include public contracts to provide goods or services worth more than $25,000 or a land use approval worth more than $25,000 over a 12-month period. In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity. Therefore, if you are seeking a “public benefit” covered by the Oaks Initiative, you must supply that information on the Oaks Initiative Disclosure Form. This information must be updated and supplied every 12 months. 5.E.e Packet Pg. 1038 Attachment: OaksInitiative-wEx-Completed-081723 (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) CITY OF SANTA MONICA OAKS INITIATIVE DISCLOSURE FORM In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity. Public benefits include: 1.Personal services contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-month period; 2.Sale of material, equipment or supplies to the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period; 3.Purchase, sale or lease of real property to or from the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period; 4.Non-competitive franchise awards with gross revenue of $50,000 or more in any 12-month period; 5.Land use variance, special use permit, or other exception to an established land use plan, where the decision has a value in excess of $25,000; 6.Tax “abatement, exception, or benefit” of a value in excess of $5,000 in any 12- month period; or 7.Payment of “cash or specie” of a net value to the recipient of $10,000 in any 12- month period. Name(s) of persons or entities receiving public benefit: Name(s) of trustees, directors, partners, and officers: Name(s) of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenue interest: Prepared by: ____________________________Title: __________________________ Signature: ______________________________________ Date: ________________ Email: ____________________________________ Phone: ____________________ FOR CITY USE ONLY: Bid/PO/Contract # ____________________________ Permit # ___________________________ See the attached list of Key Officers and Directors. 1)Eric A. Nichol, and 2) Douglas Nichol Moffatt & Nichol Shares Trust dated November 28, 2006. 5.E.e Packet Pg. 1039 Attachment: OaksInitiative-wEx-Completed-081723 (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) ATTACHMENT Officers and Directors list Title Name Address President / Chief Executive Officer Eric A. Nichol, PE 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Senior Vice President / Chief Olie Abbamonto 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Financial Officer Senior Vice President / Chief David W. Huchel 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Legal Officer / Secretary Senior Vice President / Chief Douglas J. Plasencia, PE 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Operations Officer Senior Vice President Richard M. Rhoads, PE 2185 N. California Blvd., Suite 500, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Senior Vice President Jeffrey L. Sparrow, PE 21308 Small Branch Place, Ashburn, VA 20148 Vice President / Assistant Secretary Sarah M. Sabunas 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director / Chairman Eric A. Nichol, PE 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Michelle Anghera, PhD 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Randell Iwasaki, PE 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Ralph Larison 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Jim Nevada 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Michael N. Rieger 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Lynn L. Schrier-Behler 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Director Richard D. Steinke 4225 E. Conant Street, Suite 101, Long Beach, CA 90808 Moffatt & Nichol 5.E.e Packet Pg. 1040 Attachment: OaksInitiative-wEx-Completed-081723 (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)