a facility assessment for the lemont public library district

A Facility Assessment for the Lemont Public Library District

LEMONT PUBLIC LIBRARY DISTRICT 50 E. Wend Street Lemont, Illinois 60439 Prepared By; Dewberry Architects Inc. 25 S Grove Ave, Elgin IL 60120 www.dewberry.com Updated August 05, 2013

Lemont Public Library Facility Assessment P a g e | 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1 – Summary

Objectives page 5

Acknowledgements page 5

Facility Description page 5

SECTION 2 – Site Analysis

Site Accessibility page 9

Landscape page 10

Drainage page 10

Pavement page 12

SECTION 3 – Building Analysis

Exterior Envelope

Exterior Wall Assembly page 19

Openings page 21

Roofing System page 23

Interior Architecture

Entrances page 29

Restrooms page 29

Flooring page 30

Ceiling / Soffits page 31

Basement Usability page 32

SECTION 4 – Systems Analysis

Electrical Systems page 35

Lighting and Lighting Controls page 36

Fire Alarm Systems page 39

Mechanical Systems page 40

Plumbing Systems page 47

Fire Protection Systems Page 47


SECTION 1 – Summary


Objectives The facility assessment is a look at the physical condition of the building and grounds. The survey was prepared by a team of architects and engineers experienced in library design and building renovations and is prepared as an objective report on the condition of building assemblies and major systems such as the mechanical and electrical systems. Independent of any desires to modify the building to better service needs, this report projects remaining life cycle on the systems evaluated and provides an understanding of current and near future replacement work on the building.

Acknowledgements This study was commissioned by the Board of Trustees of the Lemont Public Library District in March 2013. The assessment was developed by Dewberry Architects Inc. with the support of the following:

Douglas Pfeiffer, Architect Mike Parrish, Electrical Engineer Jay Thakkar, Mechanical Engineer Adam Keyster, Civil Engineer Nathan Bossenga, Structural Engineer James Stalter, Cost Estimator

Facility Description: The Library facility was constructed in 1997 on Wend Avenue just north of 127th Street in Lemont, Illinois. The building is single story with partial basement on a lot of approximately 2.25 acres. The basement is currently used only for storage and mechanical systems and is accessible only by staff through a hydraulic elevator or interior stairwell. The main entry is located on the north side of the building with parking contained in a dedicated lot on the north side of the building. The library is located within a residential context, with commercial development existing about a block away on both the South and East. The Library has an area of approximately 22,000 gross square feet with a main level of 16,600 square feet over a basement level of roughly 5,400 square feet. Expansion area has been reserved on the south and east sides of the property. The mechanical systems are located in the Basement Level. The building construction consists of non-load bearing exterior masonry walls on the main level over cast in place concrete foundation walls. A steel structure supports the main level floor and roof. The Library was minimally renovated in 2008 to create a dedicated Teen Tech Zone between the youth and adult departments.


SECTION 2 – Site Analysis


Site Accessibility

An accessible route is provided to the front entrance by way of two curb ramps that connect the parking lot to the front sidewalk. One generally serves as a patron drop-off point and the other connects to accessible parking spaces.

The rear egress path, which also serves as the staff entrance door, does not currently connect to an accessible route. The egress door discharges to a compliant sidewalk, but a curb ramp is required at the north termination of the sidewalk to provide access to the parking lot. A tactile surface similar to that installed at the accessible parking stalls should be incorporated into the curb ramp to meet ADA requirements.

The threshold at the staff entrance door is currently within the ½” allowable tolerance, but the concrete sidewalk should be monitored for further settlement to ensure the ½” dimension isn’t exceeded at the door.

Install curb ramp at end of sidewalk


Landscape The building is only landscaped on the north side and within the parking lot and consists almost entirely of foundation plantings in mulch beds. Beds are generally graded to slope away from the building, but the slope is minimal. In a few locations, the bed grade is lower than adjacent turf, which will encourage ponding water, but the conditions are not considered to be problematic. Two large shrubs in the front of the building have overgrown the planter and surface roots indicate the extent to which they have consumed the planter bed. We would recommend replacement of these taller shrubs for new material that is properly scaled to the area.

Drainage The south and east yards are graded to a shallow swale that directs stormwater to a discharge swale on the northwestern corner of the property. There is good positive overland drainage slope in the yard with the exception of the western swale. Ponding water was observed in the western swale at the time of this assessment and indicates that there has been some erosion of the swale bottom. The condition isn’t significant, but the stagnant waters can contribute to insect issues. In most cases, it appears that this area will drain sufficiently that we would not recommend a complete regrading of the swale to correct the issue.


The paver patio on the west side of the building has depressed to the point that it affects positive drainage. This is likely the result of a failure of the subbase along the foundation wall. We would recommend repair of the patio along this edge to properly divert water from the basement foundation wall. A similar issue can be found at various points along the southern foundation wall. There are areas in which the foundation backfill appears to have settled and has created a backslope toward the building instead of away from the building. This is not a significant problem and doesn’t occur along areas of the basement, so we would recommend simply adding topsoil or mulch along the foundation line as part of routine landscape maintenance.


Pavement A visual inspection and evaluation of the current pavement conditions was performed with the intent to provide the Library District with information to develop a prioritized plan to maintain or improve pavement conditions for the property. The Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating (PASER) manual methodology was used to provide a standard approach that could be followed in future evaluations to maintain consistency. The PASER methodology rates the asphalt pavement surface based on a rating scale ranging from a high of 10 (excellent condition) to 1 (failed). During the site visits, pictures were taken to document the surface condition of the pavement and the drainage conditions of the parking lots and storm structures with particular attention to locations of poor pavement. These pictures have been included and referenced in this report. Based upon these inspections, an evaluation was developed of the current conditions along with proposed recommendations.

PASER Rating: 6-7 (GOOD) The PASER rating system describes the rating as follows:

Rating 6 – GOOD: “Slight raveling (loss of fines) and traffic wear. Longitudinal cracks (open ¼” – ½”), some spaced less than 10’. First sign of block cracking. Slight to moderate flushing or polishing. Occasional patching in good condition.”

Treatment Measures: Could extend life with sealcoat.

Rating 7 – GOOD: “Very slight or no raveling, surface shows some traffic wear. Longitudinal cracks (open ¼”) due to reflection or paving joints. Transverse cracks 9open ¼”) spaced 10’ or more apart, little or slight crack raveling. No patching or very few patches in excellent condition.”

“Treatment Measures: Maintain with routine crack fillings.“ The pavement appears to be in

The lot pavement is generally in good condition with some signs of age. Cracks have been sealed and should be regularly sealed to keep water from migrating to the subbase and weakening the base. There are localized areas of rutting within the drainage path that will have a tendency to reduce the effectiveness of the lot drainage and lead to continued deterioration. We would recommend a complete reseal of the parking lot within two years and localized patching where rutting has started to occur within 5 years.


Observed Surface Defects: Raveling – The pavement has slight raveling of the surface course. The small aggregate particles have worn away exposing the tops of large aggregate. In this case, raveling is most likely due to the age of the pavement. Flushing – Little to no evidence of flushing (having excess asphalt on the surface) was indentified within the pavement. Polishing – Little to no evidence of polishing. Rutting – There is moderate rutting (under 2”) evident near the loading dock drive aisle and southwestern aisle. Rutting is often caused by base or subgrade consolidation and settlement. Rutting also occurs when heavy vehicles make turning movements within a parking area (See pictures below).

Rutting

Rutting Distortion – No evidence of distortion was identified within the pavement. Distortion is the shoving or rippling of surface material displaced crossways to the direction of traffic.


Observed Cracks: Transverse Cracks – No evidence of transverse cracks were identified within the pavement. Transverse cracks are regular spaced cracks in the pavement caused by the movement of pavement due to temperature changes and the hardening of the asphalt with age. Reflection Cracks – No evidence of reflection cracks were identified. Reflection cracks are cracks in overlays that reflect the crack pattern in the pavement underneath. Slippage Cracks – No evidence of slippage cracks were identified.

Longitudinal Cracks – Longitudinal cracks are found in construction joints between the drive aisles and parking stalls, near pavement edges and in some of the wheel paths. Most of the cracks in construction joints and wheel paths have been filled with a sealant. The majority of the cracks are generally ¼” or smaller (See Picture on left). Longitudinal Cracks

Block Cracks – Large sized block cracking occurs in the main drive aisle pavement west of the library entrance (See picture on right). Block cracks have started to occur in the western parking area. Most of these cracks have been filled with sealant. These blocks are typically less than 10 feet across. Block cracking typically leads to alligator cracks.

Block Cracks


Alligator Cracks – Alligator cracks are found throughout the parking area. Alligator cracks are small interconnected cracks that form irregular shaped pieces ranging in size from 1” to 6” (the term comes from the pavement looking like an alligator’s skin). These cracks can be found most noticeable at the entrance just and in the south western portion of the parking lot. Alligator cracking has also spread from longitudinal cracks and near pavement edges..

Alligator Cracks

Patches and Potholes: Patches – There are no patches in the parking lot. Potholes – No Potholes were observed. Budgeting: We recommend Seal Coating and Striping the lot within two years at a budget cost of $4,000 in today’s dollars. We recommend the use of a coal tar pitch sealer to provide a thicker and more durable coating. Seal coating should be repeated every 5 years for basic maintenance. Within 5 years, we recommend the library consider a mill & overlay of the existing lot surface to correct cracking that is noted today and to protect the longevity of the sub base. Mill and overlay is estimated in the range of $15,000 - $17,000. Cost can be expected to escalate due to inflation at a rate of 3-4% per year. Proper maintenance should allow the existing pavement to last another 15 to 20 years before more substantial replacement is required.


SECTION 3 – Building Analysis


Exterior Envelope

Wall Systems The exterior wall construction of the Library consists of a modular face brick in running bond

with concrete masonry unit interior back-up. The wall assembly is a traditional masonry cavity

wall design with evidence of through-wall-flashing and weeps at the base of walls and

window head / sills. Control joints were installed at the time of construction in conformance

with masonry institute standards and there are no visible signs of cracking beyond those

control joints. Mortar joints are tooled with a shallow concave profile and there were no

observed instances of mortar failure. There were no indications of efflorescence on the main

building walls. The wall system appears in very good condition and should continue to require

very little maintenance over the next several years.


Control joint sealants are original to the building and show signs

of age. In most instances, the sealants show indications of

hardening and are either stiff to the touch or display evidence of

alligator cracking. In all locations, the sealant appears to still

adhere to adjacent wall surfaces and doesn’t contain gaps

where water may penetrate, but the age of the sealants warrant

replacement within the next 2-3 years.

The pre-cast concrete and masonry piers

that support the main entrance canopy are

the only area that shows signs of distress.

Evidence of efflorescence in the mortar

indicates presence of water within the wall.

The precast concrete columns rely upon

properly sealed joints to prevent water from

entering the assembly and it appears that

joints have been resealed at least once

through a regular maintenance program. It

may be possible to install flashing just

beneath the stone base cap to prevent

water from migrating into the layer of brick,

but this would require reconstruction of the

column to achieve. At this time, we would

recommend a continuation of the current

maintenance regimen.


Openings All exterior windows are aluminum

frame with fluoropolymer color coating.

All frames contain fixed, insulated

glazing units with clear glass. There are

no indications of failed seals. One

window in the youth activity room has a

hole in the outer light, caused by a

projectile. This has reportedly been in

this condition for several years. We

would recommend replacement to gain

the benefit of the insulated window.

With the penetration, the insulating layer does not work.

There are no signs of water penetration

on interior window sills, except at the

farthest southwest window in the youth

department. Interviews of staff suggest,

however, that the considerable water

damage to the wood sill was the result

of potted plants that were on the sill

rather than penetration of the window.

Exposed steel lintels at the doors and

windows are also kept painted and

sealed and are without signs of rust. The

aluminum sill flashing at a couple of

windows on the south and west facades

have peeling paint. This is a cosmetic

issue. The aluminum will not rust.

Proper surface preparation and paint

can be applied to repair the condition.


Exterior doors, with the exception of the aluminum entrance door,

are all painted hollow metal frame. The paint is kept in good

condition and there were no indications of rust on either the doors

or frames. The door from the western staff entrance is bowed. It

appears that additional weatherstripping has been installed to seal

the door frame and positive latching is still possible. If the problem

gets worse, it is possible to replace the door and frame, but given the

relative difficulty of doing such, it is acceptable to wait until the

condition worsens.

Replacement cost for the door is estimated to be:

$1,250 Door, frame, hardware – Material $750 Labor $500 Markup & miscellaneous $2,500


Roofing System The current roof is original to the building (16 years old) and is a simulated shake asphalt

shingle with 25-year warranty. The roof is in good condition with almost no evidence of

shingle curling, buckling, or blistering. Owner has noted evidence of granular loss from the

shingles in gutters, which is a normal condition of shingles as they age. The granules provide

protection against premature UV deterioration of the shingles, but will shed from the shingles

as they age. We observed no evidence of severe thinning of the coating and no areas of

distinct discoloration which might indicate uneven wearing conditions.


The boiler flue, which penetrates the roof near the ridge at on

the southeast side has started to rust. While it doesn’t appear

that the liner has failed, the rusting will continue and eventually

compromise the system. It’s possible that flashing of the flue at

the roofline is also rusting, but it can’t be confirmed without

physically inspecting at the roof level. There are signs of rust

stains on the shingles, but this could be the result of the liner

rust.

Plumbing vent penetrations (on the northwest and southwest roofs) look like they may be a

rubber boot flashing. The original building drawings called for a 2-part flashing to seal the

penetration. Due to a known leak in the ceiling of the workroom, we recommend that the

boot flashing be inspected and sealed if necessary. The 2-part flashing may be installed

without affecting the shingling if it is missing or has failed.

There are no overhanging trees that might cause maintenance issues with gutters and the

roof pitch is sufficiently steep (8:12 pitch) for proper drainage. Visual observation of ridge and

valley flashing didn’t identify any clear problem conditions and the formation of ice dams is

unlikely.


Painted steel gutters and downspouts are still

supported properly and there were no visible signs of

stains on the exterior walls that would suggest leaking

from the gutters. All downspouts are tied to perimeter

site drains. The boot for the downspout to the right of

the main entrance has sunken, or the downspout is cut

short. We recommend an extension be installed on the

downspout to ensure that water is directed into the

drain rather than splash at the foundation wall and

cause erosion.

Roof Replacement Cost There are approximately 18,800 horizontal SF of shingled roof; 560-Ft of gutter; and 13

downspouts that will eventually need replacing. Replacement may not be required for

another 10 years, or more, but budgeting for such work is appropriate at this time. We

recommend budgeting for a complete roof replacement, which would include replacement of

shingles, 4” rigid polyisocyanurate insulation and vented nail-base sheathing, flashing,

gutters, and downspouts. While it may only be necessary to replace the shingles, establishing

a budget for full replacement provides contingency to address unexpected conditions or to

accommodate energy codes which will continue to be more stringent.

The budget for full replacement is $321,000 in today’s dollars and can be expected to escalate

in cost due to inflation at a rate of 3-4% per year. The budget would reduce by $130,000 if

one assumed that the insulation and vented sheathing would be re-used at time of

replacement.


Interior Architecture


Entrances The exterior gypsum ceiling at the main entrance has developed visible cracks at the panel seams. This is likely the result of exposure to extreme temperatures and moisture. Although the soffit has necessary vents, expansion and contraction over time has caused the seams to telegraph. This seam can be repaired by taping, plastering, and repainting the soffit.

The main entrance doors are automated, sliding aluminum doors and there are three sets of doors in succession within the lobby. The sensors for the doors have a sufficient range that multiple doors are triggered by any movement within the lobby. This leads to excessive opening and closing of the doors and an increase in air exchange within the vestibule. Although the sliding doors are highly convenient, the library might wish to consider replacement in the future to fixed doors and a power assist operator on one door leaf at each threshold. This would reduce the amount of free area that is open during the winter and reduce motor wear.

Restrooms The main restrooms are sufficient to meet code and ADA compliant. Each restroom is finished in ceramic tile flooring which is in sufficient condition to last several more years. It may be desired to perform a grout cleaning for cosmetic improvement. Toilet partitions are in good condition, with only slight signs of rust at the bottom edge of panels. Paint touchup will slow the rate of deterioration.


The lavatories are plastic laminate countertops. While durable, it is likely that wear will become more prevalent within the next 5 years. There are already signs of separation between the countertop and backsplashes that should be sealed to stop water penetration. We would recommend considering a solid surface countertop replacement in the future. There is also pitting in the mirror of the men’s room. The condition is only cosmetic, but replacement may be warranted to maintain a clean, fresh appearance of the room.

Flooring The library is carpeted in most areas, except the front entrance lobby. Carpeting is a

commercial quality, low pile broadloom carpeting that has endured well. With the exception

of the Teen Tech Zone area, carpeting is original to the building (16 years old) and is at end of

life expectancy. While less trafficked areas are in reasonable condition, high traffic areas show

severe signs of distress. The computing area, in particular, needs immediate replacement due

to bubbling of the carpet which can become a trip hazard.

We recommend budgeting for carpet replacement at 10-12 year intervals at a cost of

$825,000 including moving costs.


Ceilings / Soffits Generally, all ceilings have remained

in good condition throughout the

facility. The public spaces are about

equally divided between acoustical

ceiling grid system and painted

gypsum board ceilings. Non-public

spaces are nearly all suspended grid

system. The grid system is a

conventional 15/16” t-bar system

which provides the greatest accessibility to areas above ceiling and causes the least damage

to tiles during routine maintenance work.

The only areas that require attention are a zone

within the circulation workroom that has a

evidence of a prior leak and an area of gypsum

board soffit on the southeast wall of the adult

collection where an expansion crack has formed.

The workroom leak has been intermittent, but the

source is unknown. It will occasionally appear

during rain events and is almost certainly the

result of migration down the roof structure and

likely originating at the flue flashing. No evidence

of water stains could be found above the ceiling at

the time of this report.

We recommend that the gypsum board soffit be

removed in this area enough to expose the metal

stud framing and to allow for a proper movement

joint to be framed into area. Given the length of

the soffit, the crack is likely the result of expansion

and contraction of the gypsum panels and a

movement joint (control joint) will relieve the

pressure that gets built up.

Ceiling Repair Cost We estimate that the cost to install a control joint, patch soffit, and repaint the length of

soffit to be about $6,500.


Basement Usability

The lower level was designed with a tall clear area to allow for its potential use as public space. There are two means of egress from the lower level and an accessible elevator; (cab dimensions: 52” x 60”). Throughout most of the lower level, it would be possible to install a finished ceiling at a height of at least 9-feet, which will support a variety of activities and lighting solutions. Much of the space could accommodate a taller ceiling. The two aspects that provide challenges to its ultimate usability are the location of the rear exit and the location on the main level in which one accesses the main stair and elevator. The latter is a question of planning. If the lower level were to be used for public services, public access would need to be provided to the elevator and stair, which are currently situated in restricted staff areas. This could be accomplished by changes to the meeting room and staff break area. The rear stair poses a challenge in that one must pass through the mechanical room to reach the door. In most situations, life safety codes do not allow this condition. The solution would be to partition a corridor through the mechanical room to provide safe access, but there is limited space around equipment. Without the use of the rear stair, current building codes would limit the use of the lower level to an occupancy limit of 49 individuals. With access to both stairs, occupancy would increase to 320 individuals. At 49 people, the lower level may be suitable for staff or small group functions. With a limit of 320, the space could potentially serve most any need. The basement is completely unfinished at this time, but all foundation walls are dry and

display no evidence of water seepage. There are very few shrinkage cracks in the walls. The

existing floor is cast in place concrete slab over a vapor barrier. The space is readily suited for

improvement if desired.


SECTION 3 – Systems Analysis


Electrical Systems Incoming Electrical Service and Equipment The existing building is served by outdoor, 3 phase, pole mounted utility transformer owned and maintained by ComEd and located across the street. The transformer has been replaced twice during the history of this facility. The cause of the transformer failure is apparently related to under-sizing. Utility companies determine transformer selection for a given facility, not consultants nor facilities personnel. The service has an exterior mounted CT cabinet and meter fed from underground. The main distribution panel (DP) is an 800 amp, 120/208 volt, 3 phase, 4 wire main distribution panel. It is located in the basement of the facility on the north wall. Conduits supplying ‘DP’ emanate from a pull box that receives conduits from the exterior mounted CT cabinet, and stubbed through the foundation wall. It appears ground water has been leaking into the pull box with the visual evidence of rust. The source of water may be from the foundation wall penetration or migration through the conduit. The feeder conduits are THHN rated, meaning they may be in contact with moisture without significant degradation of the insulation, but it would be prudent to eliminate the infiltration to stop ongoing damage. Repair work would likely occur at the building exterior by exposing the foundation wall and resealing the wall penetration and conduit joints. The distribution panel has 4 spaces, each capable of accommodating up to a 200 amp, 3 pole circuit breaker. A copy of the maximum electrical demands was not readily available so no comparison between capacity and maximum use has been established at this time.

MAIN DISTRIBUTION PANEL INCOMING FEEDER PULL BOX WITH RUST There are 4 branch panels throughout the facility, 2 at 225 amps, 1 at 100 amps, and 1 at 60 amps. There is minor available space in each panel. There is evidence that some loads and equipment have been added through the years utilizing some of the spare circuits represented in the original documents.


The equipment is approximately 16 years old based on the date on the original drawings. Industry standard life is anticipated to be 30 years, however with regular maintenance and cleaning, exercising of circuit breakers annually, thermo-scanning connection points for hot spots every few years, electrical distribution equipment can be expected to operate for 50 years. Two conduits feeding exterior lights and receptacles show advanced evidence of water infiltration through the conduit. These conduits penetrate into the foundation wall and turn vertically to serve a wall light above the stair door and an adjacent wall receptacle. It appears that water is migrating through the conduit and suggests that the seal around the devices have failed and allow water to enter the system. The problem is localized to the initial leg of conduit and stops at the junction box. We recommend resealing the devices. Because the conduit is cast into the wall, it is not feasible to replace.

CONDUIT TO WEST EXTERIOR LIGHTS Generally the electrical distribution components, distribution panel, branch panels, motor starters, and disconnects are in good condition and there is no need to consider replacement or embellishment at this time.

Lighting and Lighting Controls Lighting in the core of the library consists primarily of indirect linear lighting utilizing T8 fluorescent lamps and electronic ballast. This system is still in current use today and appears to be in good working order. There are also lay-in fluorescent troffers in other satellite spaces also using T8 fluorescent lamps and electronic ballasts. The acrylic lenses are yellowing due to age and replacement should be considered. There are track lights in the public meeting room on dimmers which we heard some complaints about. We suggest these lights be re aimed to the front of the room to prevent glare from those sitting in the room. The public meeting room track lighting and down lighting are dimmer controlled and the 2x4 fluorescent troffers are simply switched. Facility


users felt it would be better if the 2x4 lighting in the room dimmed, rather than have a series of dimmable down lighting currently being used. This work can be achieved with a ballast replacement, some additional control conductors and revised dimmers. We speculate cost to eliminate the down lights, replace ballast in 16 2x4 fixtures with 5% dimming and replace the controls to be $5,000-$6,000.

GENERAL INDIRECT LIGHTING PUBLIC MEETING ROOM 2X4’S, TRACK, DOWNLIGHTS

The central rotunda has wall mounted indirect HID lights which highlight up into the high space. Facility noted the ballast on these units fail repeatedly and they are expensive to replace. A new fixture could be consider utilizing LED technology which should address the regular maintenance and replacement cost of these items. We speculate cost to replace 8 uplights to be $4,000-$5,000.

CENTRAL ROTUNDA UPLIGHTS

Basement utilizes an 8’ industrial pendant shop type fluorescent light. These lights work fine for this unfinished space however the T12 lamps utilized in these fixtures are eventually being eliminated from production and will be replaced with T8 fluorescent types with higher efficiency. We suggest maintaining the fixtures as they are and only spending the money to replace when the need arises. Considering there is no permanent occupancy in this space the lighting should not operate with the same regularity as the main floor.


All exit lights and emergency egress lights utilize on board battery backup. If these units are not tested regularly the batteries and charging circuits can fail over time. We suggest all emergency lighting in the facility be tested for proper operation and, due to the age of the units, replaced with new as the cost per unit for new exit signs and ‘bugeye’ emergency lights are less than $100 each. Exterior lighting has apparently encountered failures over the years. Existing parking lot luminaries (Kim Architype) have been replaced with standard shoebox fixtures in several locations. Typically we do not see replacement of an entire luminaire, only lamp and ballast. It is unknown why the entire luminaire has been replaced. Existing bollard lighting is original and appears to be in acceptable condition. Controls for all lights is via time-switch and contactor located in the basement adjacent to the main distribution panel. At this time we do not see a need for replacement other than potential energy savings with luminaire changeout to LED type sources. Speculate the cost of replacement to be $850/luminaire head.

ORIGINAL LIGHT ON RIGHT, REPLACEMNT ON LEFT


Fire Alarm Systems The existing Building is served by an original multiplexed Fire Lite system. There is a transponder system set up that appears to send a signal to the monitor agency, though we could not confirm. The system is regularly inspected and the assumption it operates properly. Because of the size of the existing facility we speculate this system could expand if needed to cover additional space. It was noted that some of the smoke detectors are yellowing with age, which is common with some older plastics used on a large variety of devices. If the yellowing is an issue the smoke detectors can be replaced with new in situ at an approximate cost of about $200/detector.

MAIN FIRE ALARM PANEL YELLOWING SMOKE DETECTOR


Mechanical Systems The current mechanical system consists of one modular, indoor Air Handling Unit (AHU-1) with direct expansion cooling coil manufactured by Trane which includes return air/outside air mixing plenum, filter section, cooling coil section, fan section and discharge plenum section. The unit is installed in the basement level; supplies cooling and heating air through nineteen variable air volume boxes with reheat coils. There is a matching Air Cooled Condensing Unit (ACCU-1) located outdoors at the south side of the building. AHU-1: This is a size 30 unit, with supply air quantity of 14,545 cubic feet per minute. It has drive side unit-mounted Universal Programmable Control Module (UPCM) with 36 control points. Filter section is 2” double wall gasketed panels with 1.5 lbs/cu. ft. sandwich insulation, left hand door with 2” filter frame for replaceable 2” throwaway filters. This section is mounted with Belimo electric actuator for outside air damper, dirty filter switch, and averaging temperature sensor. Cooling coil section is a 2” double wall gasketed panel with 1.5 lbs/cu. ft. sandwich insulation. 6 row DX coil. Fan Section is 2” double wall gasketed panels with 1.5 lbs/cu. ft. insulation with a 15 horsepower, 208volts/3 phase plug fan. Supply air quantity is of 14,545 cubic feet per minute. It has drive side unit-mounted Universal Programmable Control Module (UPCM) with 36 control points.


Although, this existing unit is at near the end of its life, with proper maintenance and cleaning it will provide service for remaining years of life. It should be replaced within the next five years. Attending personnel indicated that this unit is serviced by Johnson Controls. The pictures above show the rust at the bottom in the coil section and water marks in the base of the unit indicate that at some point the condensation was not draining properly. Adequate cleaning and maintenance is required to make the unit run properly without causing molds and mildews. Unit Controls: The complaint is that the control system is not functioning properly. Unit mounted control module and interface module are not communicating for the library’s current operational strategy. Our opinion is that the air conditioning unit is nearing the end of its useful life and starting to have issues maintaining space temperature, particularly in the extreme cooling months, where the unit does not seem to be providing the output that is needed. In the interim period before changing the major equipment, our suggestion is to reprogram the control systems for the present situation and requirements of the library. When the unit will be replaced, the recommendation is to implement some control strategies to improve the efficiency of the new unit. This would include specifying more efficient compressors, and Demand Controlled Ventilation (DCV). DCV is a control strategy that measures the amount of carbon dioxide in the space and varies the amount of outside air the unit will deliver to the space. This will reduce energy required to heat and cool the air if the amount of people within the Library is less than design conditions. Our opinion of probable construction cost to replace the existing unit is $70,000 to $80,000.


ACCU-1: This size C50 is a 50 ton up-flow air-cooled condensing unit with 6 propeller fans. As per ASHRAE’s HVAC Service Life Database, this unit is expected to serve for another 2 to 4 years. Proper maintenance is necessary. Visual inspection indicates piping insulation is deteriorating near the unit outdoors, and it should be replaced. HWB-1 & HWB-2: These Weben-Jarco boilers are standard efficiency (80%, when new) boilers. Life expectancy is listed for 18 to 20 years. These should be replaced in the very near future with high efficiency boilers (up to 90 to 97%) to save energy. Weben-Jarco does not seem to be in business anymore and it would be hard even to get parts for repairs. Periodic maintenance will provide adequate service in the interim period. HWP-1 and HWP-2: These are the primary pumps circulating water through HWB-1 and HWB-2 boilers respectively. They seem to be functioning well. Their life expectancy is 21 to 25 years, somewhat more than the boilers, but when the boilers will be replaced, it is advisable to replace the pumps as well and save the existing pumps for future use.


HWP-3 and HWP-4: These are the secondary (system) pumps circulating water to the building heating system. They seem to be functioning well. Their life expectancy is 21 to 25 years, but during the next system overhaul, it is advisable to replace the pumps and save the existing pumps for future use. Supporting system equipment such as expansion tank, air separator, and by-pass feeder seem to be working fine. Need periodic cleaning during maintenance.


Equipment Tag Model # Serial # Age (YR)

Expected Life (YR)

Notes Current Replacement

Cost

AHU-1 MCCA030 K97F72327

16 18-20 ≈ 40 tons / TRANE $35,900

ACCU-1 RAUC C50 J97D81401

16 18-20 ≈ 50 tons / TRANE $41,500

Boiler HWB-1 AJHWB50 4509 16 18-20 12 BHP / WEBEN-JARCO $17,270

Boiler HWB-2 AJHWB50 450X 16 18-20 12 BHP / WEBEN-JARCO $17,270

PUMP HWP-1 IN-LINE 16 21-25 PRIMARY PUMP / BELL & GOSSETT

$1,275

PUMP HWP-2 IN-LINE 16 21-25 PRIMARY PUMP / BELL & GOSSETT

$1,275

PUMP HWP-3 IN-LINE, SERIES 60

16 21-25 B & G SERIES 60: SECONDARY (SYSTEM) PUMP

$2,300


16 21-25 B & G SERIES 60: SECONDARY (SYSTEM) PUMP

$2,300

BY-PASS FEEDER DBF-5 16 18-20 5-GALLON CAPACITY $1,500

SUSPENDED UNIT HEATER SUH-1

UHS 16 21-25 25,000 BTUH $4,000


UHS 16 21-25 25,000 BTUH $4,000


UHS 16 21-25 40,000 BTUH $4,000

DOMESTIC WATER HEATER GWH-1

BT-80-112 C06M002392

7 8-13 74 GAL CAP., 75.1 MBH INPUT/ AOSMITH

$3,950


Plumbing Systems The Domestic Water Heater:

This unit is a natural gas water heater and 7 years old, another 5 to 7 years of life to go. The hot water system is functioning well and there is no complaint at this time. The plumbing fixtures seem to be in proper working condition and there is no complaint at this time. The sump pumps and standby back-up system is in proper working order at this time. The building has two sump pumps that serve a perimeter drain tile system. The sump pumps are backed up by SUMPRO flood control system in case of a power failure. The existing plumbing system consists of a 2-1/2” cold water pipe and 4” fire protection service.


Fire Protection Systems The 4” fire protection back flow preventer seems fine. Continue with yearly inspection by the local jurisdiction as it is required by law and also have the fire alarm devices associated with the sprinkler system tested as well.

The building is fully sprinkled and the sprinkler system appears to be in good condition. No need to be replaced in the near future.


Appendix A – Capital Replacement Cost Summary

Total cost of recommended replacement in years 1-5 = $156,390*

Total cost of recommended replacement in years 5-25 = $454,400*

*(assume an average of 4% cost escalation per annum until replacement in addition to budget shown below)

Item Expected Life (YR)

Age (YR)

Recommended Action Period

(YR)


Cost

NON-MECHANICAL SYSTEMS REPLACEMENT IN LESS THAN 5 YEARS

Parking Lot Sealcoat & striping 5 N/A 1-5 yrs Recommend w/ coal tar pitch sealer.

$4,000

Parking Lot Milling and Overlay 20 16 1-5 yrs Replace 1 1/2' of topping $15,000

Replace Exterior door @ staff entrance 0 16 1-5 yrs Warped and recommended for replacement

$2,500

Install Gypsum Wallboard Control Joint @ cracked soffit.

0 16 1-5 yrs $6,500

Add dimming capability in public meeting room

n/a 16 1-5 yrs Replace ballasts, remove downlights.

$6,000

Replace HID Lighting in Lobby 15-20 16 1-5 yrs Replace with LED fixtures $5,000

SUBTOTAL FOR YEARS 1-5 $39,000

NON-MECHANICAL SYSTEMS REPLACEMENT GREATER THAN 5 YEARS

Shingle Roof Replacement 25-30 16 5-10 yrs Re-shingle only with new flashings and limited fascia repair.

$191,000

Upgrade parking lot lighting to LED light source

N/A 16 5-10 yrs Recommended for operating efficiency and longevity

($850 per luminaire head)

$4,250

Re-carpeting (flooring) throughout non-public areas

10-12 2 7-10 yrs Includes moving expenses $110,000

Roof Replacement (additional systems replacement) Condition of these items may allow re-use until next shingle replacement.

40-50 16 25-30 yrs Replace roof insulation, gutters, downspouts, all flashings and fascia

$130,000

SUBTOTAL FOR YEARS 5+ $435,250


MECHANICAL SYSTEMS REPLACEMENT IN LESS THAN 5 YEARS

Equipment Tag Model # Serial # Expected Life (YR)

Age (YR)

Recommended Action Period

(YR)


Cost

AHU-1 MCCA030 K97F72327 18-20 16 1-5 yrs ≈ 40 tons / TRANE $35,900

ACCU-1 RAUC C50 J97D81401 18-20 16 1-5 yrs ≈ 50 tons / TRANE $41,500

Domestic Water Heater GWH-1

BT-80-112 C06M002392

8-13 7 1-5 yrs 74 GAL CAP., 75.1 MBH INPUT / AO SMITH

$3,950

Boiler HWB-1 AJHWB50 4509 18-20 16 1-5 yrs 12 BHP / WEBEN-JARCO $17,270

Boiler HWB-2 AJHWB50 450X 18-20 16 1-5 yrs 12 BHP / WEBEN-JARCO $17,270

BY-PASS FEEDER DBF-5 18-20 16 1-5 yrs 5-GALLON CAPACITY $1,500

SUBTOTAL YEARS 1-5 $117,390

MECHANICAL SYSTEMS REPLACEMENT IN GREATER THAN 5 YEARS

PUMP HWP-1 IN-LINE 21-25 16 5-10 yrs PRIMARY PUMP / BELL & GOSSETT

$1,275

PUMP HWP-2 IN-LINE 21-25 16 5-10 yrs PRIMARY PUMP / BELL & GOSSETT

$1,275


21-25 16 5-10 yrs B & G SERIES 60: SECONDARY (SYSTEM) PUMP

$2,300


21-25 16 5-10 yrs B & G SERIES 60: SECONDARY (SYSTEM) PUMP

$2,300


UHS 21-25 16 5-10 yrs 25,000 BTUH $4,000


UHS 21-25 16 5-10 yrs 25,000 BTUH $4,000


UHS 21-25 16 5-10 yrs 40,000 BTUH $4,000

SUBTOTAL YEARS 5+ $19,150


End of report

a facility assessment for the lemont public library district

Documents