1708 25TH ST A B 2023-04-07 - Laserfiche WebLink

• 0 4" oc are being used on this project. Per IBC 1705.12.2, special inspections would be required for this wall construction. 22. It appears that the lateral design of the structure is using the Simplified Procedure to obtain forces for the seismic design of lateral force resisting elements. Use of the Simplified Procedure would require the use of ASCE 7-10 Table 12.14-1 to categorize the proposed seismic force resisting system. Please revise as required. For example, it appears from the permit calculations, that the concrete column members intended to be part of the lateral force resisting system are acting as a cantilever columns rather than as a portal frame system. Per ASCE 7-10 12.14.1.1, the Simplified Procedure for seismic design, cantilever column systems are not covered under the table. 23. It appears that use of the Simplified Procedure cannot be applied to this proposed structure as it appears that an in-plane irregularity such as discontinuous shear walls occurs on Sheet 5 between the Middle Floor and the Lower Floor Level per ASCE 7-10 Sec 12.14.1.1 Item 11. The T-1 holddowns are developing into the glulam beams which do not stack with a shear wall below. Please clarify the design or revise the analysis as required. 24. If a cantilever column system is intended to be used for the lateral resistance of the structure, then the analysis procedure as required by ASCE 7-10 Sec 12.6 would be required to be implemented in the force determination over the currently used Simplified Procedure. Also, the following items would need to be addressed: a. Cantilever columns used for lateral resistance are required to adhere to the special design and detailing requirements in ACI 318-14 Sec 18.7. Requirements such as minimum column dimensions, tie spacing, shear capacity of the column do not appear to meeting these criteria as shown on Details 1A and 2A on Sheet 3 of the permit drawings. b. It appears that the glulam beams, are intended to transfer lateral forces into the concrete columns, which would also indicate the glulams and their connections would be required to be designed with the overstrength factors included per ASCE 7-10 Sec 12.3.3.3. 25. On the Shear Transfer Detail of Sheet 7, a note that indicates "If wall above is 350 plf or greater, A35 anchors to tie the rim to the mudsill." Currently, shear wall schedules do not appear to indicate capacities nor demands on the drawings to determine when this connection is to be used. Please identify these locations on the drawings or provide a means for the contractor or builder to obtain these loads/capacities in order to determine where this condition occurs on the project. IBC 107.2.1 and 1603.1.8. 26. On Sheet 2 of the drawings, there appear to be two call outs of design live loads on the notes. One set under "Building" and another under "Lumber Strength." Under the "Building" heading, the deck design live loads are to be 1.5 times the occupancy served per WAC Amendment to IBC Table 1607.1. It appears under the "Lumber Strength" heading, that the deck design live load is shown to be 40 psf. Please revise the notes as required for code consistency. 27. On Sheet 8, it appears that the roof to shear wall transfer details do not supply plywood sheathing to transfer the roof diaphragm loads to the shear walls. Please clarify if sheathing Page 3of4 CITY OF EVERETT• 3200 Cedar Street • Everett, WA 98201 • (425) 257-8810 • Fax(425) 257-8