bridge, highway & rail engineering

entertainment engineering
subaqueous investigation
civil & site engineering
structural design
marine facilities
geotechnics
surveying
forensics

January 19, 2011

Carroll Museums
P.O. Box 119
Stevenson, Maryland 21153
Attn:

Anne Pomykala

Re:

Phoenix Shot Tower Evaluation for Fundraising Event

(MEG File No. 110811)

Email: annepomykala@hotmail.com

At your request, we visited the Shot Tower on July 15, 2010 to observe the equipment installation
for a practice run of the rappelling event scheduled for Spring of 2011 (originally scheduled for Fall
2010). The purpose of our visit was to evaluate the effect of the rappelling apparatus on the
existing roof structure to determine whether there is any need to reinforce the existing roof structure
or provide supplemental supports to distribute the loads imparted by the rappelling apparatus.
The proposed rappelling apparatus is a standard confined space
rescue tripod, typically rated at 310 pounds working capacity. The
current proposal is to install two rappelling stations at the southeast
and south octants of the tower roof to allow participants to rappel
down the face of the tower under supervision of Earth Treks
Climbing Center, who would be responsible for installing the
rappelling apparatus and supervising the descents of the
participants. It is our understanding that primary anchorage of the
tripods and belaying lines will be made to the existing timber
framing, which originally supported the lead crucibles used in the
shot making process. Secondary anchorages will be made to the
steel stair between the fourteenth mezzanine level and roof and to
the flagpole near the center of the roof.
Based on our observations during the practice run on July 15, 2010
and our limited investigations of the existing structure, it is our
professional opinion that the existing roof construction is adequate
to support the loads imposed by the proposed rappelling equipment.
In addition, it is our opinion that the existing timber framing of the
crucible support system and the existing steel stair framing are
adequate to provide primary and secondary anchorage for the
rappelling apparatus.

Shot Tower South

Aerial View

M. G. McLAREN, P.C.
Offices: New York, Maryland, Florida, Connecticut, California
Licensed in:
Alabama Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii
Idaho Illinois Indiana Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi
Missouri Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania
Rhode Island South Carolina Tennessee TexasTrinidad & Tobago U. S. Virgin Islands Utah Vermont Virginia Washington
West Virginia Wisconsin

601 East Pratt Street, Suite 302

Baltimore, Maryland 21202
Phone (410) 243-8787
Fax (410) 243-4956
e-mail: mgmclaren@mgmclaren.com
On the web: www.mgmclaren.com

Phoenix Shot Tower

MEG File No. 110811

Page 2
January 19, 2011

Primary and Secondary Anchorages at Existing

Timber Framing and Steel Stairs

Rappelling Tripod on Roof

In addition to our evaluation of the existing roof structure, we have made a basic review of the
existing stairways and mezzanines that will be used by participants to ascend to the tower roof.
The existing stair framing consists of wall mounted steel stairs (ground floor to second mezzanine
level), wood framed stairs and landings (second mezzanine to 13th mezzanine) a steel spiral stair
(13th mezzanine to 14th mezzanine, approximately 50 rise) and a steel stair from the 14th
mezzanine to roof. The stair runs and connecting platforms are non-compliant with current codes
due to one or more factors, including:

Ground to 1st Mezzanine Stair width is less than 36, guardrail height is less than 42
Typical Stairs and Connecting Platforms (1st to 12th Mezzanine) Stair/platform widths less
than 36, guardrail height less than 42, slopes steeper than current code allows
Spiral Stair Guardrail height less than 42 with no intermediate rail
Mezzanine Levels Guardrails around central core less than 42 height and of
inadequate capacity

In addition to geometric deficiencies of the stair systems, guardrail connections to the stair and
platform framing were loose in several locations, and the load capacity of the existing guardrails do
not comply with current code requirements.
As the planned rappelling event is a one-time special event and is limited to invited guests that will
be guided during the ascent of the tower stairs and rappel, it is our opinion that the guardrail
systems are not required to be upgraded to provide full compliance with current building codes.
M. G. McLAREN, P.C.

Phoenix Shot Tower

MEG File No. 110811

Page 3
January 19, 2011

Since the intermediate mezzanines will serve as rest stops for climbers, we recommend that the
guardrails around the center core of these mezzanines be supplemented with adequate fall
protection in the form of rails at 42 and 21 above the floor levels on all sides of the core. We
have enclosed suggested details for the supplemental guardrails for your use. In the interest of
allowing the fall protection provisions reversible to comply with the guidelines of the Maryland
Historical Trust, we have detailed the mezzanine guardrails to use mechanical clamps to create
reversible attachments to the existing timber columns to avoid drilling into the columns for
installation of bolts or screws.
In addition, we recommend that the connections of all existing guardrails to the stair stringers and
connecting link edge beams be inspected and loose connections be replaced with new through
bolts with nuts and lock washers.
In light of the known deficiencies in the guardrails throughout the existing structure, we
recommend that the rappelling event be restricted to participants 18 years of age or older, and that
all participants be required to read and sign a waiver of liability explaining the deficiencies and
potential hazards involved in the ascent and rappel. We further recommend that ascents of
participants be limited to two or three people per group, and the groups be staggered sufficiently to
prevent congestion on the stairs and connecting links, which increase the risk of falls and injuries.
It is our understanding that in addition to the planned rappelling event scheduled for Spring 2011,
there is a desire to allow small party escorted tours of the tower and smaller scale rappelling events
to be scheduled when groups of sufficient size make these special events feasible. In addition,
there may also be a desire to open the Shot Tower for admission to the general public.
In our opinion, occasional small party supervised events can be treated as special events similar to
the rappelling event scheduled for this Spring and should require no special modifications to the
structure beyond those recommended for the Spring 2011 rappelling event discussed previously.
One cautionary note is that guided bottom-to-top tours, unlike rappels, will require the participants
to descend the stairways after their ascent. As such, fatigue and bathmophobia (fear of steep slopes
and stairs) may become issues making the likelihood of falling and/or freezing due to fear a valid
concern. Because of the known safety deficiencies in the building, we recommend that any small
party events be subject to the same restrictions as recommended for the Spring 2011 rappel (age
restrictions and waiver of liability) discussed previously.
In our opinion, unrestricted admission to the general public on a regular basis, even if escorted and
supervised, would require extensive, and possibly prohibitively costly, modifications to bring the
existing stair and platform safety systems into compliance with current building codes. Because of
geometric constraints of the existing structure and stair assemblies, it is virtually impossible to
modify the existing stairs and connecting platforms to conform to current building code
requirements, even if the stairs and platforms were to be completely demolished and reconstructed.
The inside dimensions of the tower and existing column and crucible rail systems would not permit
the stairway and platforms to be widened sufficiently to meet current code which requires a
minimum clear width of 36 for the exit path. (The existing stairs and connecting links are 30 in
width. At the upper levels immediately below the spiral stair, there is little or no space to increase
the width of the access/egress system.) Because the egress paths are severely restricted, access for
emergency personnel would be greatly hampered, making rescue and assistance of injured or
M. G. McLAREN, P.C.

Phoenix Shot Tower

MEG File No. 110811

Page 4
January 19, 2011

incapacitated occupants both difficult and dangerous. In addition, the majority of the stair system is
constructed of combustible material (wood) and cannot be enclosed in a fire resistant enclosure or
reliably protected by sprinklers. In addition to the issues with egress, buildings open to the general
public are expected to comply with accessibility requirements as set forth in the American with
Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG). Needless to say, the measures required to bring
the existing Shot Tower into compliance with ADAAG requirements would be prohibitively
expensive and would likely result in conflicts with the requirements of the Maryland Historical
Trust in regard to the preservation of the historic condition of the building.
This report is based on our limited visual observations of the existing structure and is prepared in
accordance with generally accepted standards of care and good engineering practice. While we
have made a reasonable effort to provide a comprehensive inspection of the areas of the building
made accessible to us for inspection, we cannot warrant the exact extent and nature of the
conditions that exist throughout the building nor of the types and extents of damages that may exist
outside the areas of our direct inspection.
It should be noted that the building in its current condition, specifically the access/egress systems
(stairs and connecting links) and guardrails for the access/egress systems and mezzanine areas, is
not in conformance with the requirements of the current Baltimore City Building Code. While it is
our opinion that the building can be used in its current condition for limited and controlled
utilization, our opinions can be overridden by the Baltimore City Housing Office of Permits &
Building Inspections and even temporary use for the Spring 2011 rappelling event will require the
procurement of a Temporary Special Event Permit from the Baltimore City Department of Housing
and Community Development. Approval by the City permitting agency(ies) notwithstanding, we
recommend that Carroll Museums obtain advice from competent legal counsel regarding necessary
protection against liability associated with the use of the facility for the proposed event(s).
If we may be of any further assistance in this matter, please contact our office.
Very truly yours,
The Office of
McLaren Engineering Group
M.G. McLaren, P.C.

Mark Cunningham
Senior Engineer
MJC/dec
Attachments: 4 - 11 x 17 Sketches
P:\Proj110\110811 Shot Tower\3. Correspondence (Ltrs,Emails,Trans,Faxes,Telecons,Memos)\Letters\Sent\Ltr02(Final)-A.Pomykala-110811-2011-01-19.doc

M. G. McLAREN, P.C.