Laserfiche WebLink
'MOMMENDCI 111 • MI <br /> NM <br /> IM <br /> EfGIr1EER5 <br /> g T Washington <br /> Oregon <br /> California <br /> Texas Pl?ECEIN-E— <br /> Alaska <br /> Colorado ... NOV 2 6 2018 12) <br /> 5 ! Montana CITY YOF EVERETT <br /> November 13, 2018 Permit Services <br /> Charlie Morgan, Jr. <br /> Charles Morgan &Associates <br /> 7301 Beverly Lane <br /> Everett, WA 98203 <br /> The following Structural comments are in response to the Second Review letter dated October <br /> 24, 2018. The item numbers below correspond to those of the initial review: <br /> Structural <br /> 1. (Cleared) <br /> 2. See ETABS Output on page 29 of Supplemental Structural Calculations, dated November 12, <br /> 2018.The ratio of Maximum to Average displacement is less than 1.2 which makes the <br /> structure regular for Earthquake in X and Y direction, including 5% accidental torsion in X and <br /> Y direction. Therefore, redundancy factor= 1.0. <br /> 3. See Supplemental Structural Calculations, dated November 12, 2018: <br /> a. All the shear walls in the ETABS model now match Structural as well as Architectural <br /> drawings. See the latest ETABS output <br /> b. The analysis model now includes Cracked Stiffness Factor of 0.5, as allowed by ACI <br /> 318-14 6.6.3.1.2 for walls. <br /> c. Does not apply. See ETABS Output on page 29 of Supplemental Structural <br /> Calculations. The ratio of Maximum to Average Displacement is less than 1.2 which <br /> makes the structure regular for Earthquake in X and Y direction, including 5% <br /> accidental torsion in X and Y direction <br /> d. Since, the structure is regular and is analyzed using Equivalent Lateral Force <br /> method, Two Stage Analysis Procedure can be performed according to ASCE 7-10 <br /> 12.2.3.2. <br /> e. The mass of the entire superimposed structure has been divided into two different <br /> slab areas to capture the actual distribution in ETABS i.e. courtyard and wood <br /> structure. Please see page 3 of Supplemental Structural Calculations for different <br /> slab modelling and page 26 for loads associated with it. <br /> f. See ETABS output on page 7 of Supplemental Structural Calculations. Six load <br /> cases were defined including EX, EY and 2 each with positive and negative 5% <br /> eccentricity. Since, the structure is regular with no Type 1 eccentricity, no <br /> amplification is required per ASCE 7-10,12.8.4.3 <br /> g. Soil Loads have been defined on page 7 of Supplemental Structural Calculations and <br /> the loads as shown on Page 2 were applied to ETABS diaphragm as can be noticed <br /> on page 26. The piers were checked using the load combinations as indicated on <br /> page 26 of the Supplemental Structural Calculations. <br /> h. No revision of Lateral Analysis method is required. Please see the calculations for <br /> revised forces and design. <br /> 2600 Michelson Drive,Suite 930 Irvine,CA 92612(949)892-4950 <br /> / Service Innovation Value <br />