Loading...
Certificate of Occupancy IN TIGARD CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY . II CITY OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PERMIT #: BUP2007 00523 TIGARD 131 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 503.639.4171 DATE ISSUED: 1/15/2008 PARCEL: 1 S135DD -05200 ZONING: C -G JURISDICTION: TIG SITE ADDRESS: 11708 SW WARNER AVE SUBDIVISION: HOFFARBER TRACTS NO.2 BLOCK: LOT: 035 CLASS OF WORK: NEW TYPE OF USE: COM • TYPE' OF CONSTR: 2N OCCUPANCY GRP: S1 OCCUPANCY LOAD: 90 TENANT NAME: REMARKS: New mini storage Owner: MIRAGE STORAGE LLC 9055 SW BEAVERTON - HILLSDALE HW PORTLAND, OR 97225 Phone: 503 - 638 - 0170 Contractor: ERIC GAMBEE CONSTRUCTION INC PO BOX 13354 PORTLAND, OR 97213 Phone: 503 - 638 -0170 503- 638 -0170 Reg #: LIC 105085 This CJ tificate issued 11/24/2008 rants occupancy of the above ref - nced building or portiif thereof and confirm at the building has been inspected fo omp " nce with the e of Or - : Speci ty Codes for the group, occup cy, an. .e u .r w the re ced per as is- ed. '/_ :Tr LDING INSPEC B , - DING OFFICI POST IN CONSPI OUS PLACE I/ Y/LVVO a CITY OF TIGAItD 2 :44 :54PM Fees Associated With e 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Case #: BUP2007 -00523 T G n ii n Tigard OR 97223 503.639.4171 Fee Start End Revenue Created Type Date Date Dept Description Account Number By Date Amount Due PLCK 1/1/1990 12/31/2020 [BUPPLN] Pln Rv 245- 0000 - 433000 BLD 10/9/2007 2,638.94 0.00 FIRE 1/1/1990 12/31/2020 [FLS] FLS Pln Rv 245- 0000 - 433020 BLD 10/9/2007 1,623.96 0.00 PRMT 1/1/1990 12/31/2020 [BUILD] Permit Fee 245- 0000 - 432000 DAN 10/11/2007 8,661.23 8,661.23 5PCT 1/1/1990 12/31/2020 [TAX] 8% State Surcharge 100- 0000 - 207020 DAN 10/11/2007 692.90 692.90 PLCK 1/1/1990 12/31/2020 [BUPPLN] Pln Rv 245- 0000 - 433000 DAN 10/11/2007 2,990.86 2,990.86 FIRE 1/1/1990 12/31/2020 [FLS] FLS Pln Rv 245- 0000 - 433020 DAN 10/11/2007 1,840.53 1,840.53 MCET 7/1/2006 12/31/2020 [METCET] Metro Const Excise Tx 245- 0000 - 229202 DAN 10/29/2007 3,924.80 3,924.80 CDCB 12/28/2004 12/31/2020 [CDCBLD] CDC Bld Rev 245- 0000 - 433060 DAN 10/29/2007 143.50 143.50 CDCP 12/28/2004 12/31/2020 [CDCPLN] CDC Pln Rev 100 - 0000 - 433060 DAN 10/29/2007 143.50 143.50 LRP I 12/28/2004 12/31/2020 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100- 0000 - 438050 DAN 10/29/2007 42.00 42.00 EROS 1/1/1990 12/31/2020 [ERPRMT] Erosion Control 100- 0000 - 207307 DAN 11/30/2007 808.00 808.00 ERPC 1/1/1990 12/31/2020 [ERPLN] Erosn Pln Rv CWS 100 - 0000 - 207308 DAN 11/30/2007 262.60 262.60 ERP2 1/1/1990 12/31/2020 [EROSN] Erosn Pln Rv COT 245- 0000 - 433010 DAN 11/30/2007 262.60 262.60 PRK4 7/1/2005 12/31/2020 [PKSDC] COM & IND Park SDC 270- 0000 - 450000 DAN 11/30/2007 327.00 327.00 MISC 1/1/1990 12/31/2020 [BUILD] Misc Fee 245- 0000 - 432000 DAN 1/9/2008 200.00 200.00 MISC 1/1/1990 12/31/2020 [BUILD] Misc Fee 245- 0000 - 432000 DAN 1/9/2008 200.00 200.00 Total Due: $20,499.52 Pace 1 of 1 CaseFees..rpt Dan Nelson From: Saj Jivanjee [saj@jivanjeearch.com] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 8:32 AM To: Dan Nelson Cc: Kim McMillan; Craig Prosser Subject: Mirage Dan, I am sorry that I did not include the drawing which indicates the fire line connection to the building when I first submitted the drawings. I can assure you the drawings were submitted to Kim McMillan last Tuesday. It was only on Friday when I came to your office that I learned you did not have the fire line drawings in the set I had submitted. It is really frustrating that you did not have the courtesy to call me to inform me the drawing was missing. A simple phone call would have done the trick. The fact is that the City of Tigard did have a drawing in the civil department, and that the building department is not willing to walk over and see if they have any information about the fire line. As you know, the water line connections and underground utilities in this case needs both Civil and Building approval, that is why the 2 sets were submitted to the civil engineering department for review. This morning, I will personally submit a set to the fire marshal, John Dalbey, so that he can give his approval before you meet on Tuesday. This way hopefully, he will sign off and meet your requirements so that I will not have to wait another week to find out what else is missing. I also cannot understand why, when my drawings were submitted on Tuesday, that I received a call on Friday from Kim McMillen stating my drawings were not received. Now I understand the drawings were with another staff member. It seems there is no tracking system in the City of Tigard of who has the drawings and who is reviewing them, and that every department wants their own drawings for review and there seems to be no collaboration between departments. I consider this to be a dangerous model, very time consuming and expensive. There is no centralized check list for the whole project It is obvious with the whole project that all information is interconnected for life and safety issues. Please make sure that this email is on record with the City of Tigard information for this project. I hope we can work together so that it is collaborative and still meet all the City of Tigard requirements. As far as I am concerned it is just a matter of good communication in a timely manner. Saj Jivanjee Jivanjee Architect 9055 SW Beaverton - Hillsdale Hwy Portland, OR 97225 503 - 297 -5160 (office) 503 - 970 -0326 (cell) saj(iivanieearch.com 1 Dan Nelson From: Saj Jivanjee [saj @jivanjeearch.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 8:43 AM To: Dan Nelson Subject: Mirage Fire Requirements Dan, I submitted a set of plans to John Dalby, the Deputy Fire Marshal yesterday, as well as to you. I understand you are meeting with Mr. Dalby today, I hope you can give me a quick call if there are any outstanding issues so that I can give you the appropriate information. Saj Jivanjee Jivanjee Architect 9055 SW Beaverton - Hillsdale Hwy Portland, OR 97225 503 - 297 -5160 (office) 503 - 970 -0326 (cell) sajfajivanjeearch.com 1 • &)P2c 7 - it 70$ 5 W a.1 • • ENGINEERING PLAN CHECK RESPONSE DATE: May 13, 2008 REQUESTED BY: Afghan Associates, Inc PHONE NO.: FAX NO.: PROJECT NAME: Mirage Storage Building PROJECT NO.: 08021 Per your request we have reviewed the plan check on the above referenced project dated May 7, 2008 and have the following comments: STRUCTURAL 1. Request: Slab reinforcing shown on S2SS documents does no accurately represent the required chord and drag strut reinforcing for the second and third floor diaphragms. Provide slab reinforcing at the second and third floor slabs according to Afghan Associates, Inc (AAI) construction documents. Response: We called out notes "Slab reinforcement per drawings from Afghan • Associates, Inc ". 2. Request: What vertically spanning exterior siding is being supplied? If the siding is supported at the mid - height of the exterior studs, provide girt detail and design studs for a point wind load. See Calc pgs. 8 and 9. Exterior studs are shown at 30" oc between the roof and 3 floor on AAI documents, but are shown at 60" oc on S2SS drawings. Verify that the 60" spacing wall meet the support needed of the exterior siding. Response: Yes, girt will be needed. We have checked exterior walls at top floors and 6" stud at 60" o.c. is sufficient. Please see girt detail on sheet 19/S1.3 (copied from AAI detail 6/S4.02) • 3. Request: Verify that stud design procedure used is compatible with AISI 2004 standards. The analysis used by AAI yields different results when used with similar design input used by S2SS. AAI analysis shows 4C14 studs are required at interior walls between 2" and 3 floors, instead of the 4C16 studs shown on S2SS documents. See calc pgs. 39 and 40. Response: We have verified design procedure and discussed with engineer of record (Mr. Mark Temple) and agreed with stud size used on S2 drawings with bracing at 1/3 height for stud at 2nd floor and 1st floor. 4. Request: Review and revise as necessary the Z- Purlin design. The analysis yields the incorrect moment due to the stated loads. See calc pgs. 12. Response: We have reviewed calculation and verified Z- purlin design to be sufficient since we have purlin lap at stud support. 5. • Request: Verify the design of the top tracks at bearing walls. The tracks must carry floor loads across a 2' -6" span, between the studs. , The tracks shown on the S2SS drawings are substantially smaller than those shown on the AAI bearing wall schedule, and do not appear to be capable of spanning between the studs. Response: Top track was revised as minimum 4.25 "x3 "x14GA and we have verified it can be sufficient to carry floor loads. 8076 W Sahara, Suite B, Las Vegas, Nevada 89117 Phone: 702.313.9393 Fax: 702.313.9394 • • • • I • ail ENGINEERING PLAN CHECK RESPONSE 6. Request: Verify the design of the bottom track of the bearing wall at the 1 and 2 " floors. They must span to spread out the concentrated axial load from each stud. Response: We have verified design procedure and discussed with engineer of record (Mr. Mark Temple). Minimum 12GA bottom track was called out on ground floor. 7. Request: Add a note on the plans to align studs on different floor to stack vertically. The design of the top track assumed this. Response: We added this note on cover page. 8. Request: For the lateral analysis, the assumption of the exterior CMU walls between the 1 & 2 "d floors having similar stiffness as the CFS shear walls is grossly incorrect. An analysis of the system as a whole shows that the total stiffness of the CMU walls is at least 188 times that of the CFS walls, indicating that all the shear will go to the CMU walls at the 2 floor. Provide all reinforcing for the 2 and 3 floor slabs, including dowels between the CMU wall and slab, as shown on the AAI drawings. Response: We called out notes "Slab reinforcement per drawings from Afghan Associates, Inc ". 9. Request: Provide stud holdowns at bottom of studs between roof and 3` floor, per 1.S4.02, or verify that the.wind uplift and shear wall overturning forces can be transferred from shear wall studs to the expansion anchor bolt through bending of the bottom track. Verify that the expansion anchors can resist combined tension and shear from overturning /uplift due to wind. See calc pgs. 88. Response: We added clips per discussion with engineer of record (Mr. Mark Temple). PROF F 4, Respectfully, (;:t# w= Ri o. • ki Hongyu Wang, P.E. Reviewed by Scott Jacobs, P.E. OPIE4011. 41 4Y13' •Ce• • 7 T E: _LP • EXPIRATION 61 J 30/61 1, • • • 8076 W Sahara, Suite B, Las Vegas, Nevada 89117 Phone: 702.313.9393 Fax: 702.313.9394 • •