Laserfiche WebLink
From: Drew Martin [mailto:dmartin@everettwa.gov] <br /> Sent:Thursday, November 08,2018 12:26 PM <br /> To: Nadia Azarova <nadia@craftarchitects.com> <br /> Subject: RE:City of Everett Public Works: 3315 Seaway Blvd (B1808-012) <br /> Nadia, <br /> Please also have the structural engineer look at this comment: <br /> 10.This comment has not been completely addressed: <br /> a. Sheet S2.1 now includes a W8x18 hoist beam. The beam is shown at the mezzanine floor level, not the roof <br /> level. Detail 6/S4.0 does not show the beam and the required connection to the columns. The beam elevation should <br /> be clarified. A connection detail should be provided. <br /> b.Section 4/S3.0 on Sheet S2.0 shows a section through the elevator pit. The section shows an "HSS column per <br /> plan". However,the HSS elevator columns do not occur at the locations show in the section. The required connection <br /> for the columns to the foundation should be specified. <br /> CELEBRATING Drew Martin, P.E.,S.E. <br /> % ".— 125 Associate Engineer—Commercial Plans Examiner 1 Permit Services <br /> YEAR' S 425.257.8813 1 3200 Cedar Street, 2"d Floor, Everett,WA 98201 <br /> A story worth telling everettwa.gov/permits I Facebook 1 Twitter <br /> Note:Emails and attachments sent to and from the City of Everett are public records and may be subject to disclosure pursuant to the Public <br /> Records Act. <br /> From: Drew Martin <br /> Sent:Thursday, November 8, 2018 11:55 AM <br /> To: 'Nadia Azarova'<nadia@craftarchitects.com> <br /> Subject: City of Everett Public Works: 3315 Seaway Blvd (B1808-012) <br /> I am reviewing the resubmittal and responses. I have identified a couple of the structural comments that do not appear <br /> to be adequately addressed. Please forward these to the structural engineer. Note that I'm still reviewing other <br /> responses. This request is intended to keep the ball moving on this round of review. The comments are itemized for <br /> consistency with the review letter. <br /> Structural Comments <br /> 7. This comment does not appear to be addressed. Page 5 of the structural calculations include revisions. However,the <br /> revisions do not address the comment. See the following: <br /> a.The original comment noted that the diaphragm load must transfer to shear walls that are shorter in length than the <br /> diaphragm. The wall on Grid F.6 is only 20 feet long. The calculations still appear based on the full diaphragm <br /> depth. Note that the diaphragm shear load appears to be at least 600 plf for the 20'wall length. <br /> b.The general diaphragm design is unclear. The original calculation states that the diaphragm is blocked,though the <br /> drawing do not appear to indicate this. In addition,the calculation considers a nominal diaphragm strength of 680 <br /> plf. This value does not appear to correspond to AWC SDPWS-15 Tables 4.2A and 4.2C for the specified sheathing and <br /> nailing. It is noted that the drawings have added blocking for the first 8 feet at each end of the north-south span. The <br /> design should be clarified. <br /> 8. This comment has not been addressed. LRFD uplift forces have not been calculated. The anchor calculations appear <br /> to be out-of-plane and shear connections between the mezzanine 2nd floor and the precast wall panels. See the original <br /> comment for noted ACI design criteria. In addition,the load should be calculated using ASCE 7-10 Section 12.4.3.2 <br /> 3� <br />