Rapid Building and Site Condition Assessment

INSPECTION Page ___ of _____

Inspection Date and Time: August 16, 2022, 1400H  AM  PM Attachments
Inspector: Engr. Villasis, Engr Galvez, Engr Lopez  Exterior Only  Sketches  Documents
Mr. Sagre,  Exterior and Interior  Photographs  Others

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Type of Construction Primary Occupancy

Building Name: Guimaras Tourism and Information  Wood Frame  Public Assembly  Commercial
Center (GTIC)
Location: ____________________________  Steel Frame  Government  School
No. of Storeys Above Ground: 3 Below Ground 0  Reinforced Concrete  Emergency Services  Religious
Approximate Building Footprint Area (m2) 500  Concrete & Steel  Others: ____________________
 Concrete & Wood Occupied?  yes  No
 Other __________ Owner/Contact
GSO/PA

CHARACTERISTICS
Building Age  to 25  26-50  51-100  verified  Reported  Estimated
Foundation  Pier  RC Footing  Basement  Others
Roof Type  Hip  Gable  Flat  w/ parapet  RC deck
Roof Covering  Metal  Asbestos  Tiles  Slates  Concrete  other
For 2 or more storeys building
Structural Frame Materials (Column)  Reinforced Concrete  Steel  Wood  Other
Structural Frame Materials (Beam)  Reinforced Concrete  Steel  Wood  Other
Structural Frame Materials (Sus Slab)  Reinforced Concrete  Steel  Wood  Other
Int. Partition (Above GF)  6” CMU  4” CMU  Drywall  Other
Ext. Partition (Above GF)  6” CMU  4"’ CMU  Drywall  Other

FLOOD DATA Nature of Water  Flowing  Seepage  Watermarks  Other

Entrance of Water  Basement  Roof  2nd Floor  other 2nd flr alley
Depth of Water measured from ground/FFL
Sediment deposit  on site  structure Site erosion  yes  No  No Info

EVALUATION Collapse or Off foundation  Minor/None  Moderate  Severe Estimated

(Evaluation is Leaning/Other structural Damage  Minor/None  Moderate  Severe Building
through visual Defects on Walls  Minor/None  Moderate  Severe Damage
investigation only Defects on Column  Minor/None  Moderate  Severe  None
of the structure Defects on Beam  Minor/None  Moderate  Severe  1-10%
hence, area Defects on Slab  Minor/None  Moderate  Severe  10-30%
covered is limited Defects on Electrical  Minor/None  Moderate  Severe  30-60%
and degree of Defects on Mechanical  Minor/None  Moderate  Severe  60-90%
defects might not Other observed Defects/damage  Minor/None  Moderate  Severe  90-100%
be fully assessed) Paint blistering

FURTHER ACTIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS
Detailed evaluation recommended  Structural  Mechanical  Electrical  Others

Other Remarks/Recommendation
1. The assessment was conducted through visual inspection only and scope and degree of evaluation are therefore limited.
2. Defects as enumerated in the attached Structural Assessment should be properly repaired (sealed and painted) to prevent
possible expansion of defects as well as to eliminate eyesore and its equivalent negative psychological impact.
3. Generally, based on the visual assessment and evaluation, the building has no significant structural defects.

1
Photos of actual assessment of Structural Integrity of Infrastructures in the GTIC building
conducted by The PEO, GSO, DPWH and PDRRMO on Aug. 16, 2022
GROUND FLOOR

TOURISM OFFICE

Conducting an assessment of Structural

Integrity of Infrastructures in the AOR at the
Tourism Office Aug. 16, 2022 conducted by
The PEO, GSO, DPWH and PDRRMO
(1:44PM)

Wall slightly cracked near the entrance of the Tourism Office (1:45pm). Cracked found near the
electrical outlet (mid photo) at the opposite wall of Liberty Ferrer’s office (1:49PM)

PEDO’S SHOW ROOM (SOUVENIR SHOP)

Cracks found at the opposite wall of Tourism Office (1:52:48PM)

Cracks found at the left side of the backdoor of PEDO’s Show Room (Souvenir Shop, right
photo) (1;55;06PM)

2
Paint blistering (water leakage) was observed at the beam in front of PEDO’s Office
(1;59;34PM)
A crack was spotted at the right wall inside the PEDO’s Office (2;00;16PM, right photo)

OFFICE OF THE CONGRESSMAN

Conducting an assessment of Structural Integrity in the Office of the Congressman

A slightly crack in the ceiling was temporarily repaired at the Office of the Congressman
(2:05:20PM, right photo)

Multiple paint blistering (water marks) found in the beam of GTIC building in front of
Congressman’s Office (2:08:24PM)

GTIC BUILDING (Exterior)

Electrical wirings not properly arranged at the right side and back of GTIC building (2:09:14PM)
3
Cracks spotted at the back of GTIC building at the side of the window (2:11:26PM)

Water mark was spotted at the GTIC ceiling in front of PEDO’s Show Room entrance (Souvenir
Shop), above is the closed balcony of GTIC building that clogged rain water.(2:14:36PM)

SECOND FLOOR
FUNCTION HALL (OFFICE OF THE SANGGUNIANG PANLALAWIGAN)

Water mark was found at the left side ceiling near the entrance inside the Function Hall Office of
the Sangguniang Panlalawigan (2:22:08PM)
A water mark was observed in the wall coming from the ceiling at the end part right side of the
Function Hall (2:23:46PM, right photo)

A corroded reinforcing steel bar caused the concrete spalling and possibly, water leakage inside
the Function Hall Office of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan (2;20;52PM)
4
Water mark was observed in the wall near the electrical outlet at the end part right side of the
Function Hall (2:26:14PM)

Water mark found in the ceiling at the end part

of the Function Hall of Sangguniang
Panlalawigan (2:26:52PM)

Cracks on tiles almost aligned to the top of the transversal beam, observed in the floor (hallway)
near the office table of 1st District Sangguniang Panlalawigan Cecil Gumarin (2:32:28PM)

GTIC MAIN ENTRANCE COVER (fronting Land Bank)

A GTIC closed balcony (2nd floor) holds water

that possibly caused water leakage below
(2:43:02PM)

5
GTIC ROOF TOP

At the GTIC rooftop, found a multiple cracks on roof deck (2:41:14PM)

Cracks were observed on the parapet wall at GTIC rooftop (2:43:36)

A water coming from Air Condition Unit in the

office of Vice Governor with no proper
drainage can possibly cause water leakage
below (2:45:18)

6
Structural Assessment
1. Structural plans and details:
a. Description of the site and its structures
Guimaras Tourism and Information Center (GTIC) is a two-storey building with roof deck. Additional
structure (Executive Lounge), made of light materials (wood and plywood), was constructed on the roof deck
occupying around a third of the deck area. Building footprint is approximately 500 sq.m.
b. Description of the foundation system
No Structural plan available.
c. Description of the structural system (including story height)
The main structural frame is made of Reinforced concrete.
2. Presence of critical structures and structures without redundancies:
Around 8m unsupported length of transversal roof deck beam and approximately 1.5m cantilever floor and roof
deck beams for alleys.
3. Loading:
a. Compatibility of existing usage with the design loading
No reference
b. Deviation from intended use or supporting higher design imposed loads
No reference
c. Signs of overloading
None as visually observed
4. Addition and Alteration works:
a. Presence of Additions and Alterations
Executive Lounge occupying almost a third of the roof deck area, eastern side portion of the building
b. Impact of Additions and Alterations on the building structure
None as visually observed
5. Signs of structural defects and deterioration:
a. Building tilt/ settlement
None as visually observed
b. Structural deformation
None as visually observed
c. Major structural defects (e.g. structural cracks, decayed timber member)
None as visually observed. Other structures could not be visible inspected due to presence of ceiling.
d. Minor structural defects
 Hairline cracks was observed on several portions of beams but most likely, these are cracks on cement
plaster.
 Concrete spalling (less that 0.10 sq.m. or less than 1 sq. foot) was observed on the roof slab (corner
portion near column) above the function room (now utilized as office space for SP staff). The concrete
spalling or busting of concrete, was due to the corrosion developed on the exposed steel bars. While the
defect is considered minor, but immediate repair is recommended to prevent the possible expansion of
defects.
 Minor cracks on floor tiles observed in the second floor (function room) approximately on top of the
floor beam line. These cracks were observed many years ago and no significant progress on its width.
Repair is recommended.
e. Non-structural defects
 An approximately 1.5mm “through” crack was observed on Concrete Masonry Unit (CMU) or wall,
between Provincial Tourism Office and PEDO on the ground floor however, from the information
gathered, this crack was initially observed sometime in 2004. Considering the period of occurrence, this
crack is not considered critical but immediate repair is recommended.
 Several cracks were observed on the CMU or walls. Most likely, these cracks on walls are in the cement
plaster only. Sealing of cracks and repainting is recommended.
7
6. Termite Attack:
a. Need for inspection by anti-termite specialist
Presence of termite was observed on the rear portion of the building towards the roof deck where there are
presence of wooden materials.
b. Need for termite treatment by anti-termite specialist
For further inspection and recommendation
7. Exposure to aggressive environment:
a. Immersed in water – Columns and Basement, or Leaks in Roof
Paint blistering was observed on the exposed beams. This may be due to water leakage from the alley or
penetration of water on the paint.
b. Aggressive chemical which may accelerate the deterioration of structural elements, particularly in industrial
buildings
None
8. Retaining walls and slope protection structures:
a. Defects of retaining wall and other slope protection structures (e.g. cracks, tilt, displacement)
Not Applicable
b. Signs of undesirable condition surrounding retaining wall (e.g. tension cracks in soil, presence of big trees
nearby, inadequate surface, drainage)
Presence of big trees on the vicinity. Falling leaves may cause clogging of downspouts/drainage if not
properly maintained.
9. Safety Barriers (i.e. parapets & railings):
Any defects
None as visually observed

10. Record of previous strengthening works done

Selected transverse roof deck beams above the Function Room was retrofitted sometime in 2014 due to
presence of cracks.

Inspected by:

RAMILO A. VILLASIS RONALD HERBEE E. GALVEZ BRENDON T. LOPEZ

Engineer III/PEO Engineer II/PEO Engineer II/PGSO

DEMETRIO M. GAITAN RAYMAN I. SAGRE LEW S. NOVILLA

Engineer II/DPWH-GED LDRRMO I/PDRRMO LDRRM Assistant/PDRRMO

SHERWIN C. DIOSTO
PDRRMO Documentor