Contents

1.0 SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 3
3.0 STRUCTURE DESCRIPTION................................................................................................................. 3
4.0 ON-SITE INVESTIGATION ................................................................................................................... 4
4.1 Overall Structural Arrangement of the Building ........................................................................... 4
4.2 Soils at the Exterior of the Building .............................................................................................. 4
4.3 Condition of Grade Beams ............................................................................................................ 5
4.4 Settlement of the Slab-On-Ground ............................................................................................... 5
4.5 Subsidence of Soils Below the Slab-On-Ground and Main Column Piers ..................................... 5
4.6 Condition of Rigid Frame Crossties ............................................................................................... 5
4.7 Damaged Floor Tiles (2nd storey), Wall Issues, and Broken Masonry Mortar Joints..................... 6
5.0 CONSULTANTS COMMENTARY ......................................................................................................... 6
5.1 AECL Commentary - Overall Structural Arrangement of the Building .......................................... 6
5.2 AECL Commentary - Soils at the Exterior of the Building ............................................................. 6
5.3 AECL Commentary - Condition of Grade Beams ........................................................................... 7
5.4 AECL Commentary - Settling of the Slab-on-Ground .................................................................... 8
5.5 AECL Commentary - Subsidence of Soils Below the Slab-On-Ground and Main Column Piers .... 8
5.6 AECL Commentary - Condition of Rigid Frame Crossties .............................................................. 9
5.7 AECL Commentary – Damaged Floor Tiles (2nd Storey), Wall Issues, and Broken Masonry
Mortar Joints ............................................................................................................................................. 9
6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REMEDIATION...................................................................................... 10
7.0 ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE COST OF REPAIRS.................................................................................... 12
8.0 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................... 13
9.0 AECL DIAGRAMS.............................................................................................................................. 15
10.0 AECL PICTURES AND COMMENTARY .............................................................................................. 18
Appendix – Wood Environment and Infrastructure Solutions
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

1.0 SUMMARY
Anderson Engineering Consultants Ltd. (AECL) was retained by the Department of Transportation
and Works, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to provide professional commentary
concerning possible structural issues for the Ecole Notre-Dame-du-Cap building located in the
community of Cape Saint George, NL.
Based upon multiple site visits to the building to gather information about the structure, AECL has
made the following observations:
1) The slab-on-ground for the main storey of the structure has settled at the south end of the
building, ranging between 5 mm and 30 mm. AECL completed a north/south level survey
of the slab-on-ground and determined that approximately 3.5 m of the southern edge of
the slab-on-ground has settled.

2) AECL completed test holes through the southern portion of the slab to determine the
amount of subsidence of the supporting soils and has determined that the range of
subsidence varies between 5 mm and 50 mm.

3) AECL uncovered a 25M crosstie (used to prevent the bottoms of the rigid frames from
“kicking out” under the bending of the frame) at two locations and observed that there was
no deterioration (rusting).

4) AECL completed excavations around the exterior of the building to determine the soil
characteristics and observed that the soil was suitable in terms of use for bearing and
backfilling.

5) AECL excavated selected grade beams and pier footings at the south end of the building
and observed that the exterior soils had subsided approximately 25 mm under the grade
beams. No subsidence was noted for the soils below the pier footings. AECL also noted
that there was little ground cover over the bottom of the grade beams (300-400 mm) in
this location.

6) AECL observed spalling of the concrete cover over reinforcement at various locations for
the grade beams. The concrete cover was determined to be approximately 10 mm in
thickness.

7) AECL observed that the exterior soils at the west end of the south face of the building had
settled over time. AECL noted that the soils in this area were damp when compared to
soils away from the building. AECL noted that all the roof water on this side of the building
is either directly or indirectly (through an eavestrough downspout) being discharged to
these soils noted as settling.

8) AECL observed that the concrete access walkway at the south end of the building had
settled approximately 25mm over time.

9) AECL observed that a drainage system had been installed along the north face of the
building. We were not able to determine the outlet from this drainage system.

1
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

10) AECL observed cracking of floor tiles at the second storey as well as wall issues such as
broken masonry mortar joints and torn wall seams.
Based upon these observations, AECL has arrived at the following conclusions:
1) It is AECL’s opinion that the primary structural rigid frames for the building have not been
affected by the settling of the slab-on-ground and that the pier footings for the rigid frame
are likely not being affected by the settling soils.

2) The settling of soils under the interior slab-on-ground and at the exterior of the building
are likely the result of settling backfill. If the backfill was not properly compacted after the
foundation piers and grade beams were constructed, a settlement of the backfilling soils
could be expected over time.

3) It is AECL’s opinion that the settling of the exterior soils at the south face of the building
has been accelerated due to roof water runoff and frost action.

4) It is AECL’s opinion that there is insufficient ground cover over the bottom of the grade
beams to prevent the outward lateral migration of soils within the building structure on the
south side of the building.

5) AECL has determined that the cracking of floor tiles on the 2nd storey is the result of
differential joist deflection as some joists are being unintentionally supported by lower non-
load-bearing walls.

6) AECL has determined that other issues noted for the structure (broken wall seams, broken
wall corners) are not all attributable to the settling slab-on-ground. AECL has identified an
undersized lintel that was responsible for damage to a wall.
Based on these conclusions, AECL has prepared a scope of work for remediation of the building
which can be viewed in Section 6.0. AECL’s Opinion of Probable Cost for the remediation is
approximately $299,000 (engineering, construction, contingencies, and HST included) and a
breakdown of this cost of remediation can be viewed in Section 7.0.

2
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

2.0 INTRODUCTION
Anderson Engineering Consultants Ltd. (AECL) was retained by the Department of Transportation
and Works, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to provide professional commentary
concerning possible structural issues for the Ecole Notre-Dame-du-Cap building located in the
community of Cape Saint George, NL.
AECL’s investigation of the Ecole Notre-Dame-du-Cap building is supplementary to recent
structural investigations completed by Wood Environment and Infrastructure Solutions (2019) and
Atlantic Engineering Consultants Ltd (2013).
Both the Atlantic Engineering and Wood structural reports have identified the structural issue as
a settling of the slab-on-ground at the south face of the building. This settling of the slab-on-
ground has resulted in some damage to the superstructure and questions have been raised about
the adequacy of the structure to safely carry the intended loads in which it would have originally
been designed to carry. Wood’s report, which also contains Atlantic Engineering’s report as an
appendix has been included in the appendix of this report for reference. This report is considered
a continuance to the Wood report and will make reference to that report as required.
The scope of work for AECL’s investigation, as outlined in the Consultant Fee Request by the
Department of Transportation and Works, is as follows:
Site Investigation

• Perform a comprehensive structural investigation.

• Gather geotechnical information about the existing soils for the entire plan area of the
building.
• Determine the amount of subsidence of the fill under the slab-on-grade and main
column piers.
• Determine the condition of crossties.
• Determine the structural arrangements of the building to allow a structural engineer to
make an in-depth review of all the critical structural components.
Final Report

• Detail the site investigation results found during investigation.

• Prepare arrangement drawings that summarize the structural.
• Prepare a report that provides an inventory of the structural repairs needed as well as
the estimated cost of implementing those repairs.
AECL performed structural investigation site visits on May 10th, May 24th, and May 29th of 2019.

3.0 STRUCTURE DESCRIPTION

Please refer to sections 3.1 and 3.2 of the previous report by Wood, included in the appendix,
which describe the location of Ecole Notre-Dame-du-Cap, the general history of the building, and
the floor plan layout for the school. Included in Appendix C of the Wood report are the original
Butler drawings for the building.

3
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

4.0 ON-SITE INVESTIGATION

AECL completed three site visits to the structure to gather information about the structural makeup
of the building and to view issues identified in the previous engineering reports by Atlantic
Engineering and Wood. During the onsite investigations, AECL gathered information regarding:

• The overall structural arrangement of building.

• The composition of soils on the exterior of the building.
• The condition of grade beams on the south side of the building.
• The subsidence of soils below column piers on the south side of the building.
• The settlement of the interior concrete slab-on-ground.
• The amount of subsidence of soils supporting the interior slab-on-ground.
• The condition of rigid frame crossties.
• Other issues identified in earlier reports such as cracking of tile floors, wall issues, and
broken mortar joints in masonry.

4.1 Overall Structural Arrangement of the Building

The general structural arrangement of the building is as follows:

• Rigid steel frames spaced 6.1 m centre-to-centre form the primary wall and roof support
structure. The bases of the rigid frames are connected using a 25 M rebar crosstie which
prevents the base from pushing outward as a result of bending of the frame under gravity
and lateral loads.
• Cold-formed steel “Z” section purlins support the roofing deck between rigid steel frames.
• Cold-formed steel “Z” section girts span between rigid frames to support lateral loads
(wind) acting on the walls of the structure.
• Reinforced concrete piers on reinforced concrete footings support the rigid steel frames.
• Grade beams spanning between those reinforced concrete piers support the vertical self-
weight of siding, girts, insulation, and paneling at the exterior walls. As well, the grade
beam retains soils below the slab-on-ground.
• Reinforced concrete slab-on-ground at the interior of the building supports ground storey
live and dead loads, as well as the second storey for the structure. The thickness of the
slab-on-ground varies between 89 mm and 125 mm.
• The second storey for the structure is wood-frame construction consisting of plywood
paneling over joists of various size and material.
Diagrams detailing the applicable structural makeup of the building have been provided in Section
9.0.

4.2 Soils at the Exterior of the Building

AECL performed excavations on the south, west, and north sides of the building to gather
geotechnical information regarding the soils at the exterior of the structure.
Exterior soils at the south side:

• Medium brown gravel with a mixture of round pebble of approximate average diameter of
25–50 mm.

4
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

• Exterior soils at the west end of the south face were moist with mild cohesive properties
(clumping).
• Settlement or migration of the exterior soils was observed for the south wall of the building
between entrances.
Excavation at the west side of the building:

• This excavation was completed to view the general makeup of soils away from the building
(approximately 10 m from foundation wall).
• The exterior soils in this area were light brown gravel with a mixture of round pebble with
approximate average diameter 25–50 mm. There were also some larger round stone to
approximately 150 mm in diameter.
Excavation at the north side of the building:

• Upon excavation at the north side of the building, AECL observed that a rock-filled
drainage ditch with weeping tile had been installed adjacent to the building’s foundation.
AECL was not able to confirm the manner in which water collected by this drainage ditch
is transferred away from the building during the onsite investigation. AECL observed that
there was subsidence of the soils below the grade beam of approximately 10 mm at this
location.

4.3 Condition of Grade Beams

AECL observed that the reinforced concrete grade beams were in fair condition with some spalling
of concrete cover over deteriorating (rusting) rebar near the top of the beam. AECL observed
that the vertical levelness of the face of the grade beams varied.

4.4 Settlement of the Slab-On-Ground

AECL observed that the reinforced concrete slab-on-ground had settled differentially to the main
structural components for the building (rigid frames, piers, and grade beams) at the southern side
of the structure. The range of differential settlement was determined to be between 5 mm and
35 mm.

4.5 Subsidence of Soils Below the Slab-On-Ground and Main Column Piers
To determine the degree of subsidence of the soils below the slab-on-ground, AECL drilled test
holes through the concrete slab at various locations. AECL observed that the supporting soils
had subsided below the slab-on-ground at the south side of the building only and, based on our
observations, it appears that the subsidence is limited to a 2 to 3-metre wide strip of the concrete
slab-on-ground.
Outside the building, AECL excavated one of the column piers carefully to view the soils at the
underside of the concrete footing for the pier. AECL did not note any subsidence of soils under
the main column pier.

4.6 Condition of Rigid Frame Crossties

AECL selected one rigid frame crosstie for examination in an area that had experienced slab-on-
ground settlement. As there was reason to consider the possibility that water had been migrating
under the slab-on-ground and contributing to the subsidence of soils in the area, the 25 M rebar

5
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

crosstie at this location would theoretically have the most corrosion. AECL exposed this crosstie
at two locations to adequately assess the condition. AECL observed that there was no noticeable
deterioration of the 25 M rebar crosstie at this location.

4.7 Damaged Floor Tiles (2nd storey), Wall Issues, and Broken Masonry Mortar Joints
AECL thoroughly inspected the building for cracked floor tiles, wall issues, broken masonry mortar
joints, and any other signs that the building may have structural issues.
Damaged Floor Tiles (2nd storey) – As described in the Wood report and shown in the AECL’s
pictures, the floor tiles for the second storey are damaged in many areas.
Wall Issues – As described in the Wood report, various wall issues have been observed in the
structure.
Broken Masonry Mortar Joints – As described in the Wood report and shown in the pictures below,
masonry walls within the structure have been identified as having broken mortar joints.

5.0 CONSULTANTS COMMENTARY

5.1 AECL Commentary - Overall Structural Arrangement of the Building
Referring to the structural arrangement drawings provided in Section 9.0, AECL offers the
following commentary:

• Earlier reports by Atlantic Engineering and Wood stated that the second storey was being
supported by the southern and northern edge of the slab-on-ground, and therefore
contributing to the settlement of the slab-on-ground. AECL observed that joists for the
second storey floor vary with respect to direction at that only a portion of the joists are
bearing on the outer edge of the slab. As can be seen in the joist layout plan, many of the
second storey floor joists are bearing on walls that are perpendicular to south wall of the
structure.

5.2 AECL Commentary - Soils at the Exterior of the Building

Exterior soils at the south side of the building

• AECL observed during our site visits that the exterior soils on the south side of the building
appeared to have settled over time. This is especially evident on the west end of the south
face of the building where it appears the exterior soils have possibly experienced up to
300 mm of settlement.

• AECL observed during our site visits that the exterior grade on this side of the building
was generally steep, particularly at the west end of the south face of the building in which
the ground slopes away from the grade beam at approximately 45 degrees.

• AECL observed that the bottom of the grade beam in this location was approximately 300-
400 mm below the ground surface, and upon excavation by hand determined that the soil
had subsided approximately 25 mm below the bottom of the grade beam.

6
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

• AECL noted that the soil was medium brown in colour, while soils away from the
foundation were light brown in colour, indicating the presence of water. It is AECL’s
opinion that the moisture in this area is the result of roof runoff and the presence of an
eavestrough downspout in the area. AECL did not note any indications that water had
been flowing under the grade beam from within the structure. It is AECL’s opinion that the
settlement or migration of soils in this area may be the result of water from the roof and
eavestrough downspout.

• With respect to frost penetration, there were no indications that frost had negatively
affected the structure, although the frost action may be contributing to the settlement or
migration of soils in the area.

• AECL observed that the exterior concrete walkway on this face of the building has settled
approximately 25 mm.
Exterior soils at the west side of the building

• It is AECL’s opinion that the soils in this area, being a true representation of the original
soils prior to construction of the building, are suitable and adequate for foundation bearing
and backfilling.
Exterior soils at the north side of the building

• As was described earlier, the north side of the building has a drainage system installed for
the entire length of the building. Upon excavation, AECL observed that there was some
minor subsidence under the grade beam on this face of the structure. It appears that there
may have been a water issue on this side of the building resulting from overland water
flow and roof runoff.

5.3 AECL Commentary - Condition of Grade Beams

It is AECL’s opinion that the grade beams for the south face of the structure are in fair condition
and function.

• AECL did not observe any vertical cracking in the beam which could be expected if the
beam was overstressed in outward bending between pier supports.

• AECL did not observe any cracks at the grade beam to pier interface which would indicate
overstressing or shearing stress, and there were no indications that the beam was failing
in vertical bending, which was expected noting the small gravity loads on the grade beam.

• AECL did observe that the grade beam varied with respect to vertical levelness but without
the presence of cracking in the beam, it is our belief that the out-of-levelness may have
been present when the structure was built.
• AECL observed that some of the concrete cover over the rebar in the grade beams was
spalling as a result of deterioration (rusting) of the rebar. It is AECL’s opinion that this
rebar does not have adequate concrete cover to prevent water from contacting the rebar
and causing the corrosion. Generally, exterior walls and grade beams are required to
have 40 mm of clear concrete cover over the reinforcement – the reinforcement for the

7
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

grade beams on the south face of Ecole Notre-Dame-du-Cap has approximately 10 mm

of clear cover in areas of spalling.

5.4 AECL Commentary - Settling of the Slab-on-Ground

AECL observed that the slab-on-ground has settled along the south face of the structure, up to
30 mm in selected areas. Upon exterior excavation of the south face of the structure to view the
grade beam and pier footings, AECL observed that there was a gap of approximately 25-30 mm
below the bottom of the grade beam and the soil below. It is AECL’s opinion that the settling of
the slab-on-ground in the result of one or more of the following factors:

• As was referenced in the Atlantic Engineering report, settlement of soils adjacent to

foundation walls (and, in this case, grade beams) is not uncommon as the soils would
have been excavated to install the footings and formwork, and upon completion of the
construction of the wall or beam the existing soils would likely be used to backfill the
excavation. If the backfilling operation was insufficiently compacted, settlement would be
expected to occur over time.

• Water from the roof and eavestrough are directed to the soils directly adjacent to the grade
beam. The constant wetting of backfill soils on the exterior of a building will generally
increase the rate of settlement of the soils.

• The shallow soil depth to the bottom of the grade beams on the exterior face (300-
500 mm) may not provide adequate lateral resistance to contain soil pressure on the
inside of exterior wall, resulting in the loss of soils supporting the slab-on-ground.

• The steep slope of backfill soils on the south face of the building may not be providing
adequate lateral resistance to retain soils below and inside the grade beams. There is a
possibility that the backfill soils may be migrating down and away from the grade beam
and interior slab.

• The shallow soil depth around the grade beams may be allowing frost action to further the
migration of interior and exterior soils.

5.5 AECL Commentary - Subsidence of Soils Below the Slab-On-Ground and Main
Column Piers
AECL observed that the soils below the slab-on-ground at the southern side of the building had
subsided by the approximate values shown in Figure 3, section 9.0. AECL did not observe any
subsidence of the supporting soils at the centre and north edge of the slab-on-ground.

• It is AECL’s opinion that the subsidence of the supporting soils in the southern portion of
the slab-on-ground is the result of a combination of settling of the backfill soils and
migration of soils from within the structure to the exterior under the adjacent grade beams.
The concrete slab-on-ground has deflected downward as a result of the subsidence, but
has not cracked (based on our observations) and is effectively spanning and cantilevering
itself over areas where the supporting soils have subsided.

8
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

Regarding the main column piers, AECL did not observe any subsidence under the base of the
concrete footing selected for inspection and, therefore, has no reason to believe that the main
column piers are settling along with the slab-on-ground.

5.6 AECL Commentary - Condition of Rigid Frame Crossties

Based on our observations, it is AECL’s opinion that the 25 M rebar crossties are in acceptable
condition and have not been negatively affected as a result of the settling slab-on-ground.

5.7 AECL Commentary – Damaged Floor Tiles (2nd Storey), Wall Issues, and Broken
Masonry Mortar Joints
Damaged Floor Tiles (2nd Storey) - Upon further investigation, it is AECL’s opinion that the
damaged floor tiles are the result of differential deflection between floor joists and are not a result
of the settling slab-on-ground. AECL observed that some of the longer 2nd storey joists were
being support by non-load-bearing partitions below. The difference in deflection between two
adjacent joists with different support conditions (one supported by non-load-bearing wall and the
other free-spanning) will cause ridges in the flooring and cracks in the tile for the 2nd storey. This
is not considered by AECL to be a structural deficiency.
Wall Issues – AECL observed various wall issues within the building, some of which are related
to the settling slab-on-ground, and others that are not related. Pictures detailing the wall issues
observed are included in section 10.0 complete with AECL’s commentary regarding the noted
issues.
Broken Masonry Mortar Joints – AECL observed that the two masonry walls for the structure both
had mortar joints that broken near the base of the walls.

• AECL has determined from our site visits that these two masonry walls are bearing walls
for the 2nd storey floor joists. The masonry walls are believed to be supported on thickened
portions of the slab-on-ground.

• It is AECL’s opinion that as the slab-on-ground settled below the masonry wall, the
masonry wall above was not able to settle as a complete unit due to self-support through
cantilever action or possibly because the upper portions of the walls are supported
horizontally by the exterior wall of the structure and the floor assembly above.

• AECL advises that these two masonry walls may be placing additional stresses on the
structure depending on how they are being supported.

9
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REMEDIATION

It is AECL’s opinion that remediation of the aforementioned issues will constitute the following
scope of work:
Exterior of the building:

• Removal of exterior concrete walkway on the south side of the building, the concrete
driveway at the east side entrance to the building, the concrete step at the east side
entrance to the building and a small section of the existing fencing on the east side of the
building.

• Careful excavation of south face of the building down to pier footing elevation.

• Construction of a reinforced concrete wall on the exterior of the grade beams and piers
for the south face and a portion of the east face of the building that will adequately retain
soils under the slab-on-ground.

• Installation of exterior insulation as required to prevent frost action from affecting the
foundation and exterior soils.

• Construction of a reinforced concrete or modular block retaining wall adjacent to vestibule

entrance on the south side of the building. This will likely require some rerouting of existing
sanitary sewer piping in the area.

• Installation of additional eavestrough at the south side of the building to ensure all roof
runoff is captured. Connection of downspout to piping that will carry the runoff away from
the building.

• Installation of properly compacted backfill at the south side of the building and a portion of
the east side of the building.

• Construction of a new barrier free access walkway on the south side of the building.

• Construction of a new parking space on the east side of the building.

• Reinstatement of fencing removed to facilitate construction.

• Installation of eavestrough at the north side of the building. Connection of new downspout
to new piping that will carry all roof runoff away from the foundation.
Interior of the building:

• Removal of the existing suspended ceiling system as required to support existing 2nd
storey floor joists.

• Removal of existing electrical and mechanical components in walls designated to be

removed and replaced.

10
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

• Removal of existing baseboard heaters for areas to be remediated.

• Temporarily support existing second storey floor joists at the south end of the building in
the Corridor, Janitor’s Storage / Recycle Room, the Music Room, and the Central Corridor
using a system of beams and columns. Remove existing load-bearing wall at the south
end of these rooms. Remove existing north/south partitions between these rooms.
Remove approximately 3.5 metres of the existing concrete slab-on-ground in this area to
approximately the centre of the Central Corridor. Install compacted backfill to required
grade. Install compacted granular base. Install new reinforced concrete slab complete
with thickened portion under load bearing walls and positive connection to the existing
concrete slab-on-ground designated to remain. Upon curing of the concrete, jack the
second storey floor assembly to correct elevation, construct a new load-bearing wall at the
south face of these rooms as well as new partitions. (COMBINED ITEM #1 in Estimate of
Probable Cost of Repairs)

• Temporarily support existing second storey floor joists at the south end of the building in
the Central Corridor, Classroom (106), General Office, Principals Office and Corridor #1.
using a system of beams and columns. Remove existing north/south masonry walls at
Classroom (106) to approximately 3.5 metres from the south face of the building. Remove
partition between the General Office and the Principals Office. Remove load bearing walls
at the General Office and Principals Office. Remove approximately 3.5 metres of the
existing concrete slab-on-ground in this area. Install compacted backfill to required grade.
Install compacted granular base. Install new reinforced concrete slab complete with
thickened portion under load bearing walls and positive connection to the existing concrete
slab-on-ground designated to remain. Upon curing of the concrete, construct new
masonry walls at Classroom (106), load-bearing walls at the General Office and Principal’s
Office, and partition between the General Office and Principal’s Office. (COMBINED ITEM
#2 in Estimate of Probable Cost of Repairs)

• Reinstate electrical and mechanical components as required.

• Install new gypsum board, plaster, and paint.

• Install new suspended ceiling system for affected areas.

• Install new window, wall, and door trim.

• Paint new masonry walls.

• Install new flooring.

• Remove and repair damaged 2nd storey floor tiles.

• Modify non-load-bearing walls that are currently supporting 2nd storey floor joists to no
longer support those joists.

11
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

• Install a new lintel across corridor on the east side of the building, refinish the wall and
ceiling in this area.

• Repair areas damaged as a result of Anderson Engineering’s investigation (holes in

concrete floor, broken ceiling tiles etc.)

7.0 ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE COST OF REPAIRS

ITEM COST
EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING
Removal of exterior walkway, driveway, step and fence. $5,000.00
Excavation of south face, construction of new reinforced concrete wall
$8,000.00
c/w rigid insulation.
Construction of new retaining wall or modular block retaining wall at
$8,500.00
vestibule.
Installation of additional eavestrough at south face of building, new
eavestrough at north face of building, downspout and piping away from $6,000.00
building.
Backfilling the exterior of south and east sides of the building. $1,000.00
Construction of a new barrier free access walkway at south side of
$10,000.00
building c/w railing.
Construction of a new asphalt or concrete driveway on the east side of
$7,000.00
the building.
Reinstatement of the fencing on the east side of the building. $1,000.00

INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING

Removal of the existing suspended ceiling system. $8,500.00
Removal of existing mechanical and electrical components in walls and
$6,000.00
ceilings to be removed.
Removal of existing baseboard heaters. $2,000.00
COMBINED ITEM #1 (See Section 6.0) $24,500.00
COMBINED ITEM #2 (See Section 6.0) $33,000.00
New flooring $7,500.00
Reinstate electrical and mechanical components. $8,500.00
Install new gypsum board, plaster, paint. $18,000.00
Install new suspended ceiling. $8,000.00
Install new window, wall, and door trim. $3,000.00
New lintel across corridor at east side of the building. $2,000.00
Minor repairs resulting from AECL’s destructive investigation. $500.00

TOTAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION $168,000.00

CONTIGENCY ALLOWANCE (Unforeseen Costs) $40,000.00
ALLOWANCE FOR ASBESTOS ABATEMENT (IF REQUIRED) $25,000.00
ENGINEERING FEES (Approximated at 10% of construction cost) $27,000.00

SUBTOTAL $260,000.00
HST (15%) $39,000.00
TOTAL COST OF PROJECT (HST INCLUDED) $299,000.00

12
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

8.0 CONCLUSION
Anderson Engineering Consultants Ltd. (AECL) was retained by the Department of Transportation
and Works, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to provide professional commentary
concerning possible structural issues for the Ecole Notre-Dame-du-Cap building located in the
community of Cape Saint George, NL.
Based upon multiple site visits to the building to gather information about the structure, AECL has
made to the following observations:
1) The slab-on-ground for the main storey of the structure has settled at the south end of the
building, ranging between 5 mm and 30 mm. AECL completed a north/south level survey
of the slab-on-ground and determined that approximately 3.5 m of the southern edge of
the slab-on-ground has settled.

2) AECL completed test holes through the southern portion of the slab to determine the
amount of subsidence of the supporting soils and has determined that the range of
subsidence varies between 5 mm and 50 mm.

3) AECL uncovered a 25M crosstie (used to prevent the bottoms of the rigid frames from
“kicking out” under the bending of the frame) at two locations and observed that there was
no deterioration (rusting).

4) AECL completed excavations around the exterior of the building to determine the soil
characteristics and observed that the soil was suitable in terms of use for bearing and
backfilling.

5) AECL excavated selected grade beams and pier footings at the south end of the building
and observed that the exterior soils had subsided approximately 25 mm under the grade
beams. No subsidence was noted for the soils below the pier footings. AECL also noted
that there was little ground cover over the bottom of the grade beams (300-400 mm) in
this location.

6) AECL observed spalling of the concrete cover over reinforcement at various locations for
the grade beams. The concrete cover was determined to be approximately 10 mm in
thickness.

7) AECL observed that the exterior soils at the west end of the south face of the building had
settled over time. AECL noted that the soils in this area were damp when compared to
soils away from the building. AECL noted that all the roof water on this side of the building
is either directly or indirectly (through an eavestrough downspout) being discharged to
these soils noted as settling.

8) AECL observed that the concrete access walkway at the south end of the building had
settled approximately 25mm over time.

9) AECL observed that a drainage system had been installed along the north face of the
building. We were not able to determine the outlet from this drainage system.

13
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

10) AECL observed cracking of floor tiles at the second storey as well as wall issues such as
broken masonry mortar joints and torn wall seams.
Based upon these observations, AECL has arrived at the following conclusions:
1) It is AECL’s opinion that the primary structural rigid frames for the building have not been
affected by the settling of the slab-on-ground and that the pier footings for the rigid frame
are likely not being affected by the settling soils.

2) The settling of soils under the interior slab-on-ground and at the exterior of the building
are likely the result of settling backfill. If the backfill was not properly compacted after the
foundation piers and grade beams were constructed, a settlement of the backfilling soils
could be expected over time.

3) It is AECL’s opinion that the settling of the exterior soils at the south face of the building
has been accelerated due to roof water runoff and frost action.

4) It is AECL’s opinion that there is insufficient ground cover over the bottom of the grade
beams to prevent the outward lateral migration of soils within the building structure on the
south side of the building.

5) AECL has determined that the cracking of floor tiles on the 2nd storey is the result of
differential joist deflection as some joists are being unintentionally supported by lower non-
load-bearing walls.

6) AECL has determined that other issues noted for the structure (broken wall seams, broken
wall corners) are not all attributable to the settling slab-on-ground. AECL has identified an
undersized lintel that was responsible for damage to a wall.
Based on these conclusions, AECL has prepared a scope of work for remediation of the building
which can be viewed in Section 6.0. AECL’s Opinion of Probable Cost for the remediation is
approximately $299,000 (engineering, construction, contingencies, and HST included) and a
breakdown of this cost of remediation can be viewed in Section 7.0.

14
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

9.0 AECL DIAGRAMS

Figure 1 – Floor plans for the Ecole Notre-Dame-du-Cap. (Left – 1st storey, Right – 2nd Storey)

15
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

Figure 2 – Joist layout and supporting walls, 2nd floor assembly.

16
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

Figure 3 - Subsidence of supporting soils below slab-on-ground

17
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

10.0 AECL PICTURES AND COMMENTARY

Picture 1 – South Face of the Ecole Notre-Dame-du-Cap. AECL noted the settling of exterior soils in this area and that runoff from
this side of the roof is either directly or indirectly falling on the soils noted as settling.

Picture 2 – AECL carefully excavated soils on the south side of the structure.

18
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

Picture 3 – Excavation of the grade beam at the south side of the structure. Careful excavation revealed that the soils had settled
approximately 25 mm below the bottom of the grade beam. It is AECL’s opinion that the spalling of concrete cover over the
deteriorating rebar is the result of insufficient concrete cover, and not the result of overstressing of the beam.

Picture 4 – AECL observed that the concrete walkway at the south side of the structure had settled approximately 25 mm.

19
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

Picture 5 – AECL completed a test pit away from the foundation to view the soils in an undisturbed state. It is AECL’s opinion that
the existing soils are suitable for construction purposes.

Picture 6 – AECL excavated the north side of the building and observed that a drainage system had been installed. AECL was not
able to determine the outlet of the drainage system during our site visits.

20
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

Picture 7 – AECL observed that the north side of the structure does not have an eavestrough and has reason to believe that
settling soils (attributable to roof runoff) at this location may have warranted the installation of a drainage system.

Picture 8 – AECL excavated the southeast corner of the building in an effort to determine the outlet for the drainage system at
the north of the building. We were not able to determine the outlet for the system.

21
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

Picture 9 - It is AECL’s opinion that the spalling of concrete cover over the deteriorating rebar is the result of insufficient concrete
cover, and not the result of overstressing of the beam.

Picture 10 - Settling of the slab-on-ground at the southeast corner of the building.

22
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

Picture 11 - AECL utilized a flexible camera to view the subsidence of soils under the slab-on-ground. Subsidence was observed to
range between 5 mm and 50 mm.

Picture 12 - Using hand tools, the bottom of the pier footing was excavated to determine the amount of subsidence of soils
below the footing, if any. AECL observed that there was no subsidence of soils below the pier footing.

23
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

Picture 13 – AECL selected one crosstie for examination (observed in two locations).

Picture 14 – Observation of the crosstie at the south end of the slab-on-ground revealed that the 25 M rebar had very little
corrosion.

24
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

Picture 15 – AECL selected one crosstie for examination (observed in two locations).

Picture 16 - Observation of the crosstie at the north end of the slab-on-ground revealed that the 25 M rebar had very little
corrosion. (Centre of picture)

25
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

Picture 17 – It is AECL’s opinion that the cracking and bulging observed for the 2nd storey floor is the result of differential
deflection between adjacent joists. AECL observed that some joists are unintentionally supported by non-load-bearing walls
below.

Picture 18 – Upon further investigation of a torn wall seam, AECL observed that one portion of the wall had settled with the slab
whereas the wall framing for the column did not settle. A further indication that reinforced AECL’s opinion that the main
structural frame for the building is not being affected by the settling of the slab-on-ground.

26
STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION – ECOLE NOTRE-DAME-DU-CAP CAPE SAINT GEORGE, NL

Picture 19 – Although difficult to view in this picture, the corner of the wall at the left of the picture was damaged. Upon
removal of the suspended ceiling, AECL observed that the wood lintel above the opening is insufficiently supported at its ends.
Location – East side corridor on 1st storey

Picture 20 – AECL observed cracking of mortar joints at the base of masonry walls, identified in Figure 2. This cracking is
attributable to the settling of the slab-on-ground below

27
 Appendix
Wood Environment and Infrastructure Solutions Report
 15 Mar. 2019

IMPORTANT NOTICE
