Appendix 9: Façade Retention Assessment – Batchelor ...

Dee Street Hotel | Application for Resource Consent to Demolish a Class II Heritage Building and Construct and Operate a Hotel

Appendix 9: Façade Retention Assessment – Batchelor McDougall Consulting Ltd

Wanaka Office: Level 3, 99 Ardmore Street, Wanaka 9343. Ph: +64 3 443 4531

Queenstown Office: Suite 7 Level One, 34 Grant Road, Frankton, Queenstown 9371. Ph: +64 3 441 3351

Christchurch Office: Level 3, 335 Lincoln Road, Addington, Christchurch 8024. Ph: +64 3 338 3351

www.bmconsult.co.nz

FAÇADE CAPACITY & RESTRAINT REPORT

73-81 Dee Street, Invercargill

Client Name: Invercargill Licencing Trust (ILT)

BMC Reference: 1803-2301

Date Issued: 6/04/2018

1803-2301 2 Rev A: 6 April 2018

Quality Statement and Document Control

This report has been prepared for Invercargill Licencing Trust (ILT) by Batchelar McDougall Consulting Ltd.

No liability is accepted by this company or any employee or sub-consultant of this company with respect to

its use by any other parties.

This disclaimer shall apply notwithstanding that the documents may be made available to other persons for

an application for permission or approval to fulfil a legal requirement.

Issue Register:

Revision Date Description

A

6/04/2018 Issue to client

Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by

Name Michael Hobbs Andrew Marriott Graham McDougall

Signature

BE(Hons), ME, MEngNZ BE(Civil), CMEngNZ, CPEng, IntPE(NZ), M.ICOMOS

BE, CMEngNZ, CPEng, IntPE(NZ)

Revision History:

Rev. No Date Issue Description Prepared by Reviewed by

A 06/04/2018 Issue to Client MH AM/GMcD

1803-2301 3 Rev A: 6 April 2018

Table of Contents:

1 Introduction & Scope of Works 4

1.1 Introduction 4

1.2 The Project 5

1.3 Means of Compliance 5

2 Building Details 6

2.1 Building Description 6

2.2 Design Loads 6

3 Façade Capacity 7

3.1 In-Plane Demand/Capacity 8

3.2 Out-of-Plane Capacity 9

3.3 Foundations 9

4 Façade Repair/Strengthening Requirements 10

5 Support Frame Design 11

5.1 Frame Design 11

5.2 Deflection and Movement 12

5.3 Material Properties 12

5.4 Geotechnical Considerations 13

6 Façade Demands on New Build 14

Appendix A A

1803-2301 4 Rev A: 6 April 2018

1 Introduction & Scope of Works

1.1 Introduction

BMC have been engaged by the Invercargill Licencing Trust to undertaken a structural assessment of the

buildings at the above noted address and proposed a temporary works strategy for the retention of the

building facade.

The scope of work includes:-

• Review of all available / related documentation (plan / specification / other related documents have been obtained from Hayden Cawte including a Heritage Report for the building dated 21 June 2017)

• Detailed site inspection (including invasive investigation of the façade to determine construction details, wall make up and materials condition – some 3rd party testing of materials may be required).

• Calculation of in-plane and out-of-plane capacities of the façade element as a %NBS (assuming tied at floor and roof levels) and the overall seismic load on any bracing system.

• Assessment of foundation elements and whether strengthening is required to retain façade assuming orthogonal foundation elements have been cut-off.

• Provision of a schedule of structural quantities for façade temporary works

• Draft, review and issue Report on findings

The assessment and recommendations have been based on BMC’s on-site observations, available structural

drawings and dimensional information provided by Bonisch Consultants.

The assessment of the structure is made with regard to Clause B1 – Structure of the New Zealand Building

Code. No other Building Code Clauses have been assessed by this report.

We have received a geotechnical report for the site providing information regarding subsurface ground

conditions and likely foundation works required. Geosolve Ltd have undertaken this work and issued their

report Ref: 180166 detailing their findings. The reader is advised to refer to and make themselves familiar

with the Geosolve report in full as our comments are intended as a brief summary only. BMC are not specialist

geotechnical engineers and this is outside our area of expertise. We have therefore relied on the advice

provided by Geosolve as specialist geotechnical engineers.

This report summarises the design criteria, loadings and structural findings. 3d drawings have been prepared

and are attached as an appendix to this report. The schedule of structure quantities is included on Sheet 5.5

of these drawings

This report covers the concept design of the building restraint and strengthening works. Under no

circumstances shall this concept design be used for construction. They are for feasibility/pricing purposes

only. Detailed design of the final construction works is required prior to commencement of any construction

and/or fabrication.

This report is provided solely for use by the Invercargill Licencing Trust and shall not be relied on by any other

parties without written approval from Batchelar McDougall Consulting.

1803-2301 5 Rev A: 6 April 2018

1.2 The Project

The project involves the assessment of the existing building façade only and the concept design of temporary

restraints required to support the façade whilst the existing building is demolished and a new-build structure

is constructed behind the facade. The proposed order of works to the building is summarised in bullet point

below. An extract showing the proposed works is shown in Figure 1 below.

1. Repairs required to the façade to be undertaken as required to prevent spalling etc.

2. Braces are to be provided to openings in the façade (steel bracing at ground floor level and timber

infill for upper levels).

3. Install external steel frames to both faces of the façade to provide out-of-plane support to all

elements.

4. Demolish the existing building whilst maintaining the facades.

5. Provide new connections between the existing façade and new structure to allow the façade to

become solely a cladding element.

6. Make good any damage to the decretive façade.

Figure 1 – Proposed support structure, 3d view.

1.3 Means of Compliance

The design of all temporary support structures is in compliance with the New Zealand Building Code (NZBC),

section B1. Loadings on the temporary structure have been assessed assuming a design life of 5 years or

less.

1803-2301 6 Rev A: 6 April 2018

2 Building Details

2.1 Building Description

The building at 73-81 Dee Street is a 3 storey + basement unreinforced masonry building constructed prior

to 1900. The building is listed as a Class 2 structure in Appendix II Heritage Register of the proposed

Invercargill City Council District Plan, dated January 2017.

Figure 2 - Existing building north and west elevations as viewed from the corner of Dee and Don Streets

In general the condition of the building is poor although this has not been specifically assessed by BMC.

Despite this the brick facades on Dee and Don Streets appear to be in reasonable condition for their age.

BMC understand the building owners intend to demolish the building and replace it with a new structure.

Invercargill City Council policy requires the retention of the building façade (as a Class 2 structure) and this

requires the façade to be supported under in-plane and out-of-plane loading.

2.2 Design Loads

The existing structure (façade) is Importance Level 2 in accordance with AS/NZS 1170.0:2002. The structure

is assumed to have a design life of 5 years or less.

2.2.1 Combination of actions

The basic load combinations for both ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state shall be as summarised

in the table below:

1803-2301 7 Rev A: 6 April 2018

Limit State Direction of Action

Combination Description

Ultimate Vertical 1.35G Permanent action only

Lateral G + Eu Permanent, imposed and earthquake action

Because of the temporary nature of the support structure, serviceability limit state loading has not been

explicitly considered but is considered not to govern the design.

2.2.2 Gravity loads

The façade is assumed to carry gravity loads to the same extent as previously and as such gravity loads are

calculated only for the purpose of assessing the seismic mass of the building. Removal of the building behind

the façade will in part reduce gravity loads on the façade structure.

Gravity loads have been assessed based on the material weights detailed below.

Building Material Dead Mass

(kN/m3) Notes

Unreinforced Brick Masonry 18 Walls and spandrels above 1st floor level, parapets, some ground floor walls

Concrete Elements 24 Ground floor columns, basement walls.

2.2.3 Wind and Snow loads

Wind loadings are unlikely to be significant in comparison to earthquake loading owing to the sheltering of

the building by other structures. Snow loads are also likely to be insignificant owing to the small width of the

remaining façade.

2.2.4 Seismic loads

The seismic demand on the façade and support structure have been derived using NZS 1170.5:2004 based

on the following parameters:

Seismic Parameter Values Notes/References/Comments

Soil category: D

Hazard factor Z: 0.17 NZS1170.5.2004 Clause 3.1.4

Return period factor Ru: 0.8 NZS1170.5:2004 Clause 3.1.5

Near-fault factor N(T,D): 1.0 NZS1170.5:2004 Clause 3.1.6

Assumed Period (T) 0.4s

ULS Seismic Coefficient 0.38g

3 Façade Capacity

1803-2301 8 Rev A: 6 April 2018

The capacity of the façade has been assessed based on the qualitative and quantitative procedures detailed

in "The Seismic Assessment of Existing Buildings, Technical Guidelines for Engineering Assessments"

issued by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) et al dated 1 July 2017. Capacities

of the wall and spandrel elements are based on the methods outlined in Section C8 of the MBIE guidance as

outlined below. All frame modelling has been undertaken using SAP2000 computer analysis software.

3.1 In-Plane Demand/Capacity

The in-plane demands on the façade have been assessed using a 3D building model assembled in SAP2000.

The façade model is supported at it’s base and at it’s NE and SW corners and is subjected to earthquake

loading based on the seismic coefficient specified in Section 2.2.4.

Figure 3 – SAP2000 model of the north and west facades

Results from the analysis have been compared to wall and spandrel capacities calculated using the

procedures set out in Section C8 of the MBIE assessment guidelines. Calculations have been based on the

lowest compressive forces observed in the analysis and the highest shear and moment demands. Some

elements were observed as having tensile loads under seismic loading and these are listed in red in the table

below.

1803-2301 9 Rev A: 6 April 2018

A number of elements were noted as having capacities less than 67%NBS. The majority of these elements

are governed by their shear capacity.

The ground floor columns were initially identified as being high risk elements and as such, although their

strengths have not been specifically calculated, strengthening of the ground floor columns will be required.

3.2 Out-of-Plane Capacity

The out-of-plane capacities of the masonry walls have been calculated using the procedures set out in

Section C8 of the MBIE assessment guidelines.

The out-of-plane capacity of the wall elements were assessed using the average wall thickness (approx.

406mm) and the largest floor-floor separation with no additional axial loads. Calculations indicate that

provided the façade is supported at the existing floor levels the out-of-plane capacity of the walls will be in

excess of 100%NBS for an IL2 structure with a design life of 50 years.

The out-of-plane capacity of the parapet was also assessed using the average parapet thickness (approx.

406mm). Calculations indicate that the out-of-plane capacity of the parapet is approx. 53%NBS.

3.3 Foundations

The building foundations were unable to be viewed onsite and were not shown on plans received.

Geotechnical advice obtained for the site indicate that the basement walls beneath the façade are likely to

bear on either alluvial gravels or a thin layer of alluvial silt overlying gravels. Given the lack of observed

settlement damage it is reasonable to conclude that the foundations are sufficient to carry the gravity loads

already applied to the building. Because of the unknown foundation details, additional loads from earthquake

loading is to be avoided and all temporary support structures should have their own foundations.

Element N* min M*max V*max Mn Vn

kN kNm kN kNm kN

North Façade

1st Floor Spandrel 0 524 849 170 84 32% 10%

2nd Floor Spandrel 0 219 329 285 103 130% 31%

Parapet 0 141 162 563 136 399% 84%

Ground Floor N Wall 326 1463 638 1189 226 81% 35%

1st Floor N Internal Column 27 364 240 233 71 64% 30%

2nd Floor N Internal Column 69 176 150 324 127 184% 85%

1st Floor NE Corner Column -140 279 154 181 72 65% 46%

2nd Floor NE Corner Column -5 135 75 165 65 122% 87%

1st Floor NW Corner Column 93 308 161 544 164 177% 102%

2nd Floor NW Corner Column 66 191 111 399 157 209% 141%

West Façade



Parapet 0 194 156 563 136 290% 87%

1st Floor W Internal Column 24 252 159 103 31 41% 19%

2nd Floor W Internal Column -8 133 114 45 17 34% 15%



1st Floor SW Corner Column 40 282 119 291 87 103% 73%

2nd Floor SW Corner Column 95 111 22 406 160 366% 727%

Façade with no additional support

%NBS M %NBS V

1803-2301 10 Rev A: 6 April 2018

Removal of the structure behind the façade may result in instability of the basement walls and support should

be provided to this element to prevent inward collapse (this would be addressed in the detailed design phase).

4 Façade Repair/Strengthening Requirements

Examination of the visible faces of the façade has revealed it to be in good condition for its age with no

significant degradation observed to the outside faces. Stripping of internal linings may reveal areas of

degradation however this will likely be confined to the mortar beds. Demolition of the building behind the

façade may also cause damage and this should be rectified when it occurs.

Strengthening of the façade will be required to ensure it has sufficient in-plane capacity to resist earthquake

loading. Cross braced frames are required at ground floor level to prevent a soft-storey (column collapse)

mechanism from forming at this level. These frames, along with additional out-of-plane supports to represent

the restraint provided by the support frames, have been added to the SAP2000 model and the façade re-

analysed.

Figure 4 – SAP2000 model of the north and west facades including ground floor cross bracing.

Results from the analysis have again been compared to wall and spandrel capacities calculated using the

procedures set out in Section C8 of the MBIE assessment guidelines and are listed in the table below.

1803-2301 11 Rev A: 6 April 2018

A number of elements were still identified by this analysis as being potentially earthquake prone. Allowing for

some re-distribution of loads and load take-up by the support frame (as the masonry degrades and reduces

in stiffness) the façade has sufficient capacity to meet the earthquake demand. The 1st and 2nd floor spandrels

(beam elements), however, are likely to suffer damage, potentially resulting in partial collapse of these

elements. To mitigate this the window openings in the façade should be timber infilled and braced with

plywood on both faces to transfer the shear into the column elements.

5 Support Frame Design

5.1 Frame Design

To provide support to the façade under out-of-plane loads a set of steel frames (5 to each face of the building)

has been proposed. Refer to the attached drawings for member sizing and placement.

The frame structure generally comprises individual A frames made up from I sections. These frames are

connected to each other using SHS struts and braced by tension bracing (Reidbrace or similar) as required.

The frames are connected to support beams which bear against both faces of the façade and are tied together

through window openings. Timber packing will be required to ensure the façade is firmly supported.

Sizing of frame members has been based on the SAP2000 model results. Member sizing has been taken for

the worst-case load combinations on each of the frame members. The proposed frames have also been

assessed for ULS deflections as set out in Section 5.2.

Element N* min M*max V*max Mn Vn

kN kNm kN kNm kN

North Façade



Parapet 0 143 164 563 136 394% 83%

Ground Floor N Wall 0 1061 466 1189 226 112% 48%

1st Floor N Internal Column 76 343 223 380 114 111% 51%

2nd Floor N Internal Column 69 176 146 324 127 184% 87%

1st Floor NE Corner Column -101 270 157 181 72 67% 46%

2nd Floor NE Corner Column 8 132 66 208 81 158% 123%



West Façade



Parapet 0 191 155 563 136 295% 88%

1st Floor W Internal Column 19 198 152 94 28 47% 18%

2nd Floor W Internal Column -30 126 107 45 17 36% 16%



1st Floor SW Corner Column 42 239 136 296 89 124% 65%

2nd Floor SW Corner Column 87 115 29 383 151 333% 521%

Façade with Cross Braces at Ground Floor Level

%NBS M %NBS V

1803-2301 12 Rev A: 6 April 2018

Figure 5 – SAP2000 model of the north and west facades including support frames.

Because of buried services close to the face of the façade the frames have been designed to pass through

the ground floor door/window openings and be founded in the basement behind the façade. Additional props

have been included to transfer loads from the vertical members into these foundations. Some movement or

re-design of these frames may be required to accommodate the new-build construction behind the façade.

5.2 Deflection and Movement

5.2.1 Lateral deflections

Lateral deflections have been checked against the recommended deflection limits of AS/NZS 1170.0:2002

and NZS 1170.5:2004. These are summarised as follows:

• Seismic storey drift: Height/40 (2.5% drift) at ULS

Height/300 at SLS

5.3 Material Properties

The following represents the typical material properties used during the design process:

5.3.1 Reinforced concrete

• Concrete compressive strength: 30 MPa

• Main bar yield strength 500 MPa

• Shear reinforcement yield strength 300 MPa

• Elastic modulus 23.5 GPa

1803-2301 13 Rev A: 6 April 2018

5.3.2 Structural steel

• Open section and plate yield strength 300 MPa

• Hollow section yield strength 350 MPa

• Elastic modulus 200 GPa

• Grade of bolts 8.8

5.4 Geotechnical Considerations

A desktop geotechnical investigation of the site was carried out by GeoSolve Ltd. The results were

documented in their report dated April 2018, reference 180166. A summary of their findings is provided

below:

5.4.1 Sub-soil conditions

The geotechnical report indicates “Subsurface soils beneath the building being assessed is inferred to

comprise:

• Uncontrolled fill/engineered fill, overlying;

• Alluvial silt, overlying;

• Alluvial sand, overlying;

• Alluvial gravel.

Groundwater was observed between 1.4 and 3.3 m bgl (Below ground level) in the area”.

5.4.2 Seismic assessment

The site has been assessed as subsoil category Class D – Deep soil site in accordance with NZS1170 –

Structural Design Actions.

The geotechnical report states “The liquefaction analysis from surrounding sites indicates there is typically

no potential for liquefaction or lateral spreading under SLS seismic loading, however minor liquefaction is

predicted under ULS loading at some sites in the area”.

5.4.3 Foundation options

Foundations on the street frontage will require screw piling owing to the narrow work area and soft surface

soils. These screw piles will need to be located to avoid buried services on both faces of the façade. Services

have been identified from available plans however confirmation of service locations onsite will be required.

Foundations behind the façade can be either screw piles or concrete pads with additional propping to the

underside of the 1st floor beams to prevent uplift of the frame. Pad foundations should be founded (if possible)

on the alluvial gravel layers identified in the geotechnical report to reduce the size of pads required.

The geotechnical report indicates that, for foundations bearing on the alluvial silt layers, “an allowable working

stress of approximately 40 kPa is recommended for a 500 mm wide by 500 mm deep strip footing founded

within alluvial silt. This corresponds to a factored (ULS) bearing capacity of approximately 60 kPa and an

1803-2301 14 Rev A: 6 April 2018

ultimate geotechnical bearing capacity of 120 kPa”. For foundations bearing on the alluvial gravel layer “an

allowable working stress of approximately 100 kPa is recommended for a 400 mm wide by 400 mm deep

strip footing founded within alluvial gravel. This corresponds to a factored (ULS) bearing capacity of

approximately 150 kPa and an ultimate geotechnical bearing capacity of 300 kPa”.

6 Façade Demands on New Build

As noted previously, the new building to be constructed at 73-81 Dee Street should be designed to support

the façade under both in-plane and out-of-plane loads. Support should be provided at each floor level to meet

the demands applied by the façade as outlined below.

Support will also be required to the top of the parapet to ensure it is capable of withstanding 100%NBS out-

of-plane loading.

Level North Façade In-Plane West Façade In-Plane Out-of-Plane

kN/m kN/m kN/m

1st Floor Level 14.4 13.7 10.6

2nd Floor Level 19.8 19.0 10.6

Parapet Level 15.8 15.8 8.1

Loading Direction

1803-2301 A Rev A: 6 April 2018

Appendix A

- Concept Structural Drawings

- Schedule of Structure Quantities

73-81 Dee Street Facade Retention SchemeInvercargill

Project Number: 1803-2301 Project Status :Concept for Pricing

DRAWING INDEX

DRAWING No. SHEET NAME REVISION ISSUE DATE

S0 Cover Sheet 1 06.04.18

S1 3D Views 1 06.04.18

S2 Ground Floor and Services Plan 1 06.04.18

S3 Dee Street Elevation 1 06.04.18

S4 Don Street Elevation 1 06.04.18

S5 Frame Elevations 1 06.04.18

Level 3, 99 Ardmore Street, Wanaka, 9343, Tel : (03) 443 4531

OFFICE SCALE @ A1 SCALE @ A3

PROJECT NUMBER REVISION

SHEET TITLE

PROJECT NAME & ADDRESS

DRAWN BY DESIGNED BY CHECKED BY

SHEET NUMBER

STATUS

Wanaka

The copyright of this drawing belongs to BMC Ltd

Email : http://[email protected] Web :

1

Concept for Pricing

NTS

1803-2301 S1

3D Views

73-81 Dee Street FacadeRetention Scheme

Invercargill

SP MH AM

NTS

REV DATE REASON

1 06.04.18 Concept for Pricing

1 3D View - Dee Street

2 3D View - Don Street

Structural Framing Schedule

Type Count Total Length (m)

125x5.0SHS 27 119

200UC46 101 301

250PFC 8 26

250UB37 8 37

RB12 58 332

Screw Pile 20 0

Slim Soldier 8 136

1

S4

____________

1

S5

____________

GFEDC

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

BA

2

S5

____________

1

S3

____________

approximate outline of building

5

S5

____________

3

S5

____________

4

S5

____________

6

S5

____________

x-brace frame, see note




Services Legend

Power

Telecom

Sewer

Stormwater

Water

Notes:• Services shown are approximate and are

based on information provided to BMC by various authorities.

• Service locations shall be confirmed onsite prior to any work commencing

• X-brace frames are shown in approximate size and locations, actual measurements shall be confirmed onsite.




SHEET TITLE



SHEET NUMBER

STATUS

Wanaka



1 : 100

1

Concept for Pricing

1803-2301 S2

Ground Floor and ServicesPlan


Invercargill

SP MH AM

N

REV DATE REASON


Scale 1 : 100 @ A1S3

1 Ground Floor and Services Plan

Ground Floor0.000m

FF Windows6.100m

FF Windows Top8.280m

2F Windows10.520m

Parapet14.750m

2F Windows Top12.280m

7654

321

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12R

B12

RB12 R

B12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

125x5.0SHS 125x5.0SHS 125x5.0SHS 125x5.0SHS

125x5.0SHS125x5.0SHS125x5.0SHS125x5.0SHS

125x5.0SHS 125x5.0SHS 125x5.0SHS 125x5.0SHS

250PFC

250P

FC 250U

B37

250U

B37

250P

FC

250PFC

250P

FC

250UB37

250U

B37

250PFC

250P

FC

250PFC

GF Windows Top3.920m




SHEET TITLE



SHEET NUMBER

STATUS

Wanaka



1 : 50

1

Concept for Pricing

1803-2301 S3

Dee Street Elevation


Invercargill

SP MH AM

REV DATE REASON


Scale 1 : 50 @ A1S2

1 Building Elevation - Dee Street

Ground Floor0.000m

1

S5

____________

FF Windows6.100m


2F Windows10.520m

Parapet14.750m


G F E D C B A

125x5.0SHS

125x5.0SHS

125x5.0SHS 125x5.0SHS

125x5.0SHS

125x5.0SHS 125x5.0SHS

125x5.0SHS

125x5.0SHS 125x5.0SHS

125x5.0SHS

125x5.0SHS

125x5SHS (angled)

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

RB12

2

S5

____________

1

S3

____________

250PFC

250U

B37250U

B37

250P

FC

250P

FC

250PFC

250P

FC

250U

B37

250U

B37

250P

FC

250PFC

250PFC

Note:Allow for timber framing and ply lining to ALL level 1 and Level 2 windows (not shown).





SHEET TITLE



SHEET NUMBER

STATUS

Wanaka



1 : 50

1

Concept for Pricing

1803-2301 S4

Don Street Elevation


Invercargill

SP MH AM

REV DATE REASON


Scale 1 : 50 @ A1S2

1 Building Elevation - Don Street

Ground Floor0.000m

1

S4

____________

FF Windows6.100m


2F Windows10.520m

Parapet14.750m


3 2 1

Screw pile

200UC46Existing basement wall (Approx)

Screw pile

Slim Soldier ES of wall


RB

12

Existing basement floor (approx)

Note:All frame members are 200UC46All connections are full moment connections


1

S4

____________

3 2 1

200UC46Existing basement wall (Approx)

Existing basement floor (approx)

Screw pile


Note:All frame members are 200UC46All connections are full moment connections

RB

12


1200 x 1200 x 500 deep concrete pad at each frame location

Ground Floor0.000m

D2060

250U

B37

250U

B37

250PFC

250P

FC

250P

FC

250PFC


Ground Floor0.000m

F4040

250UB37

250U

B37

250P

FC

250P

FC

250PFC

250PFC


Ground Floor0.000m

54040

250PFC

250UB37

250U

B37

250PFC

250P

FC

250P

FC


Ground Floor0.000m

73060

250PFC

250P

FC

250P

FC

250U

B37

250UB37

250PFC





SHEET TITLE



SHEET NUMBER

STATUS

Wanaka



1 : 50

1

Concept for Pricing

1803-2301 S5

Frame Elevations


Invercargill

SP MH AM

REV DATE REASON


Scale 1 : 50 @ A1S2

1 Typ. Frame Elevation Opt 1Scale 1 : 50 @ A1S2

2 Typ. Frame Elevation Opt 2

Scale 1 : 50 @ A1S2

3 Grid 2 Frame 1Scale 1 : 50 @ A1S2

4 Grid 2 Frame 2Scale 1 : 50 @ A1S2

5 Grid B Frame 1Scale 1 : 50 @ A1S2

6 Grid B frame 2

Structural Framing Schedule

Type Count Total Length (m)

125x5.0SHS 27 119

200UC46 101 301

250PFC 8 26

250UB37 8 37

RB12 58 332

Screw Pile 20 0

Slim Soldier 8 136

Note:

• Allow additional steel lengths for making of connections.• Additional plates / flats required for Reidbrace

connections are not scheduled.

Dee Street Hotel | Application for Resource Consent to Demolish a Class II Heritage Building and Construct and Operate a Hotel

Appendix 9: Façade Retention Assessment – Batchelor ...

Documents

Transcript of Appendix 9: Façade Retention Assessment – Batchelor ...