![]() |
. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Building Envelope Remediation at Canterbury Court |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Canterbury Court consists of 178 units in 2 eight-unit 2 story buildings, 6 twelve-unit 3 story buildings, and 5 18 unit three story buildings. The buildings were constructed in 1994. The building owner settled a lawsuit against the builder in 2001. The building exterior was replaced in 2001. Project Key ParticipantsExterior Research and Design, LLC provided a summary specification, details, and to provide contract administration. Western Exterior Service, Inc. was engaged as the general contractor initially to perform limited work during the development of the specification and subsequently to carry out the work to the entire project. The project manager was Mark Reichlin. The Superintendent was John (Jack) Kuljis. Gary Swenson SE. of Swenson Saye Faget Engineering provided analysis and recommendations for repairs to the wood frame structure were excessive damage had occurred. Paul Daltas, of Surveys Inc. represented the lender for the complex refinance
Project Overview
The project consisted of; removal of all vinyl siding and house wrap. A new Weather Resistive Barrier (WRB) was installed complete with; window flashings, transition flashings, and vents. The original siding was reinstalled along with new trim materials.
Project Challenges
Maintaining Access for Tenants Through-out the Project: The original specification was developed to replace the surfaces in like kind. Walkway repairs were specified as for removal of the concrete walkways, installation of new waterproofing, and pouring new concrete topping. The tenants ability to access their units would be severely disrupted while carrying out this work. Emergency Exiting: A Building Access and Emergency Egress Plan was developed and implemented. The plan was not a permit requirement, but was implemented nevertheless to provide a base point for continued training of our staff on the importance of tenant access during working hours and during hours that we were not on site. The plan was submitted to and approved by Whatcom County. Lender Participation: The owner had been unable to refinance due to the building defects and the pending litigation. The spread between the original, and current market for interest rates was significantly affecting the cash flow from the properties.
Technical Challenges
Stair Stringer Transitions to Waterproof Surfaces: The existing stair- stringers transitioned to the new waterproofing, and facias. Flashing to the wood stringers was technically difficult. Sagging Eaves: The eaves of the buildings were not well supported and were sagging severely. The eaves were jacked up. Knee braces were constructed and installed at a corner where the load would be transferred to a perpendicular wall. The knee braces were attractive and the buildings look much better. Intermittent Decay In Stair Tower Posts: Each stair towers was supported by 6 10x 10 fir posts. The bases of the posts were originally wrapped with cedar to hide the hold down connectors. The cedar wraps trapped water around the base and about 10% of the posts needed replacement. The cedar wraps were removed. Every post was visually inspected. Those that were decayed were replaced a second inspection was made by drilling ? diameter holes to the center bottom of the posts. The removed shavings were inspected for hidden decay. The holes were then injected with a liquid borate based wood preservative. The following day a glass borate preservative Impel Rod was placed into the holes which were then capped. The borates will provide a lasting protection, and the caps can be removed in five years to reapply the preservative. The wraps were left off the bottoms of the posts. Deck Structures Were Not Draining: The deck structures were connected to the building and supported by posts at the outside corners. The some buildings settled to a greater degree than the posts resulting in a reversal of the slope. Posts were removed, shortened and reinstalled. The rim at the closets was disconnected and lowered. All the decks drained well at the end of the project. Deck Fascias Did Not Interface Well With The Building: The face of the decks was made of treated wood and allowed water to enter where it met the siding. It looked horrible. The fascia was reconfigured and clad with vinyl siding. The end result is watertight and attractive. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Contact Us. Email : markr@exteriorservice.com |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Original Construction