PIER: Documents from an OPRA request

[VENTNOR eVOICE ADMIN]

These are presented without comment, but with a further post providing photos that help "explain" something mentioned in one of the letters below.

Letter of 1/30/08



Letter of 1/28/08



Diagram sent with letter



Another diagram sent with letter

[VENTNOR eVOICE ADMIN]

Photographs which might demonstrate the nature of the "damage/splitting" -- sometimes referred to by a nickname of "brooming" amongst other terms -- are shown below. The wood in the illustration was Southern Yellow Pine, which is a softer wood than Greenheart.

To accept a rig which looks like a "helmet" as part of the pile driving process, the tops of the piles shown in this photo have been cut into beveled sides so that the helmet can fit over them.



After the pile driving on this particular pile, one can see the nature of the "damage/splitting" mentioned in the letter from R. A. Walters to the city. In the project depicted by these photos, the minimum design embedment was about 90% achieved by jetting, and then pile driving increased that embedment but it was done for purposes of making sure the piling could carry the engineer-prescribed "required load" needed to support a structure.

The spray-painted lines marked off certain lengths from the jetted (submerged and hidden) tips, so that the lines on the pilings could be correlated to a point-of-reference on land. The reference point was set to 10-feet Mean Sea Level (MSL), using a marker on a telephone pole. The pier project might have used the known MSL of the boardwalk for a reference point, or some other "marker" on land.




The next two photos show the amount of top-cuttings which were taken from pilings when all were cut to a uniform elevation, at the top, to accept beam lumber placed at a level position. The amount of lumber "lost" from the cuttings on the project depicted by these photos ranged from 1 linear foot to 3 feet, after both engineer-prescribed embedments and loading capacities had been attained. The amount lost solely due to "splitting" at the top was a very small part of those linear lengths. About a foot would be lost from the process of cutting beveled sides.

[AbsolutelyOutraged]

I dont understand this jargon. Is the pier safe? Did the contractor save money by not hammering the wood in? Did Ventnor get a credit or refund? It looks like they wrried about cutting any wood off the pilings, would that not be a good thing?

[VENTNOR eVOICE ADMIN]

Originally Posted by AbsolutelyOutraged

I dont understand this jargon. Is the pier safe? Did the contractor save money by not hammering the wood in? Did Ventnor get a credit or refund? It looks like they wrried about cutting any wood off the pilings, would that not be a good thing?

An engineer would need to review the diagrams and the jargon. If there was no pile driving, there would have been savings on labor since it's the driving which can consume a fair amount of time.

A lumber supplier which sells greenheart pilings has a list of its advantages and one of these mentions that the wood is so hard that it can be driven without a steel plate. (Normally, a steel plate is put on the top of a piling to protect the wood from being hit directly by the dropping hammer of a pile-driver.) It's not known how well that information squares with what the contractor, R. A. Walters & Son, Inc., stated in its letter when it mentioned the contractor's fear of "damage/splitting" at the top of the piling.

As far as a credit/refund, Commissioner Weintrob was asked if the new railings had cost Ventnor the $200,000 in Change Order amount which had been rumored during the spring. He stated that as far as he could tell, there had been "charge backs" to the contractor, and that the total net increase of charges to Ventnor had been around $35,000 over the original contract price. The conversation was in early July, when the pier opened, and more might be known now. The details of the "charge backs" which were deducted from the contract price are not known to WLV.

[OPRA Reporter]

The news article reporting about the pier closing during the storm mentioned that an engineer was going to take a look before Commissioner Weintrob would let it reopen.

On the chance that an inspection might have produced a report, WLV can submit an OPRA that asks for it.

[Mr Inside Says]

where did the old railings go? Scrap prices up, places are passing laws for metal thieves



http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/...ap5412695.html

[VentnorMod]

Originally Posted by Mr Inside Says

where did the old railings go?

That question was asked at the July 10th Ventnor workshop session. If you go to this link, you will find a list of WLV videos which is continuously updated as our organization tries to duplicate to some small degree what public local access cable channels in other towns might provide.

http://www.ventnorevoice.com/bulleti...read.php?t=235

It appears that segment #10 of the July 10th video finds the question posed and answered. The segments usually have brief descriptions about what they cover, and they are laid out in the sequence that topics arise at the public sessions. That particular workshop was the first time WLV had ever covered those less formal sessions, and it was done only to promote an awareness of how they are handled so that people would feel encouraged to attend.

[normkling]

At the end of segment 10 from the July 10, 2008, workshop meeting,

http://www.ventnorevoice.com/bulleti...read.php?t=235I ,

I ask about the aluminum from the old railings on the pier that were replaced by new railings. I wanted to know if they could be sold for scrap and where the rest of them were as I spotted only a small pile of the railings on Suffolk Ave. next to the boardwalk. Commissioner Weintrob said that the old railings would be retained to replace railings on the boardwalk. There was no response as to where the rest of the railings were. Based on what I read on WLV, I repeat my question: where are all the old railings taken from the pier? An accounting must be made of this property of the City. I ask for a written report from Public Works and from anyone else involved with removal and storing of these railings.

Also, I would like to see reports dealing with change orders, charge backs, offsets and credits relating to the pier construction. There is entirely too much city business that has previously been conducted informally by word-of-mouth. And, on the most expensive projects (examples are the library and the pier) there lacks a complete and comprehensive paper trail that can be found in one central file for the project.

Norm Klinger

[VENTNOR eVOICE ADMIN]

Because the blueprints for the new pier, in WLV's possession, show that the pier extends approximately 1,000 feet in length, there would be a minimum of 2,000 linear feet of "old" aluminum railing if one accounts for railing being on both sides. The pier also had, and still has, areas where it widens and it is estimated that another 400 or 500 linear feet of aluminum railing would have been needed for those. The global amount of railing to be accounted for would therefore seem to be 2,400 or 2,500 linear feet.

It has been represented in the past that the city was storing these materials at the lifeguard headquarters area, out at the golf driving range, and at Public Works.

Informal information is that scrap aluminum was selling for $4 per pound and, as another poster pointed out, there may have been a brisk trade in stolen scrap metals nationwide if the new Ohio law he/she linked is any indication.

Further informal information is that there is no "old railing" to be found at the driving range, and an estimated 800 linear feet at the Suffolk Ave. location. Verification of the quantity at Public Works might be called for.

With respect to the need for consolidating documents about the pier, WLV is able to provide only this insight. The reader will note that the address for delivery to the city of the letter from R. A. Walters & Son, Inc. is at city hall. However, when WLV filed an OPRA request by e-mail, the clerk's office -- when it did not have the documents in its own file and had located the document by calling the city engineer at his separate office -- apologized for the poor legibility of what was being conveyed. It was reported to be a problem with either the sending or receiving FAX machine. WLV learned at that time that a hard copy had never been sent to city hall back on January 30th, and that "delivery" to the city had been solely to the engineer's office and solely by means of the FAX.

With respect to the situation of the engineering inspection which was reportedly conducted out at the pier, WLV is amidships with its informational pursuits. WLV has expressed grave concerns to all three Commissioners about the latest findings which confirm that pile-driving was "waived" on the installation of the pilings. It is unclear how the foundation certification that a clubhouse might need -- if it is to comply with currently required IBC standards -- would be, or could be, obtained in the absence of authenticated (written) "rated capacity" of the piles supporting it.

The contractor's letter seeking the waiver has one sentence that stands out: "While the pier is not necessarily built for load bearing ..."

[VentnorMod]

Corrections or clarifications posted to WLV by e-mail:

One reader pointed out that 2,500 linear feet of railing should be stated as "railing sections" - meaning upper bar, lower bar, and vertical anchoring bars of aluminum. The reader believed that the total quantity of tubular aluminum would actually be 7,000 linear feet.

Another reader pointed out that engineer Czar's letter was careful to state that it was forming an opinion on the "supplemental structure" only, and that it appeared this supplemental structure consisted of steel I-beams, wooden "matting" and possibly girders. All of these combined would provide a form of platform, along which the contractor's equipment planned to roll as it performed construction activities. As to all else, the Czar engineering opinion deferred to the design drawings of the contract and its specifications. Since the letter from the Walters construction firm which asked for permission to only jet the pilings was later in time, the reader raised a question about whether Czar may have believed that pilings had been driven and used that as an assumption ("we defer to the contract documents for all other design information").