Plans (562) Alk afghan associates, inc.
IL ENGINEERING
Response to City of Tigard Plan Review Co
,�®
P tJ' g n �► � � ��'�
Tigard Triangle Commons Buildi >a't� \e 9a 10 PO
Permit Number: BUP2006 -002 16 ��, -c\; \5\
AAI Project No.: A05224.01 � ( v f ,
The following responds to the Structural Engineering plan review comments provided by Ray
Miller of Miller Consulting Engineers on behalf of the City of Tigard. The response numbers
correspond to the plan review item numbers with the necessary references to the drawings,
calculations and the attached supplementary calculations and materials, referred to as the
Response Package.
Item 1: The calculations that verify the capacity of the trash enclosure walls for seismic
loads are provided in the Response Package.
Item 2: The structural columns and beams are designed to support loads imparted to them
by the canopy. The canopy glazing and the support members are a bidder - design
item that is designed by others. Sheet S1.0: Deferred Submittals is updated to
reflect this.
Item 3: The main structural system is designed to support loads imparted to it by the
storefront glazing system. The storefront glazing system is a bidder - design item
that is designed by others. Sheet S1.0: Deferred Submittals is updated to reflect
this.
Item 4: The main structural system is designed to support loads imparted to it by the
storefront glazing system. The storefront glazing system is a bidder - design item
that is designed by others. Sheet S1.0: Deferred Submittals is updated to reflect
this.
Item 5: The Site Class C designation can be verified on Page 17 of the Geotechnical
Report by GeoDesign, Inc date July 19"', 2005. A copy of the report, without
appendices, has been included in Appendix A of this Response Package.
Item 6: Periodic Inspections are described in Program Note 6: Definitions, B.
Item 7: The bolted connections for the project utilize A325N bolts per Detail 1/S5.1
unless otherwise indicated. The shear plate connections are bearing type
connections that require snug- tightened joints. The snug- tightened joint
reference will be added to Special Inspection Program: High Strength Bolting:
Comments.
Item 8: The calculations used to develop the retaining wall section and schedule shown
in Details 4/S4.1 and 5/S4.1 were provided on Sheets CF -73 through CF -89 of
the Permit Calculation Package.
4875 SW Griffith Drive !Suite 300 1 Beaverton, OR 1 97005
503.620.3030 1 tel 503.620.5539 1 fax w w w. a a i e n g. c o m
Tigard Triangle Building One: Plan Review Response
July 6, 2006
Page 2 of 2
Item 9: The calculations used to develop the retaining wall section and schedule shown
in Details 4/S4.1 and 5/S4.1 were provided on Sheets CF -73 through CF -89 of
the Permit Calculation Package.
Item 10: The calculations for the remaining beams that were not included in the Permit
Calculation Package are provided in the Response Package. The page numbers
are indicated for beams that have calculations in the Permit Calculation Package.
Item 11: Details 5/S5.4 through 9/S5.4 are added for the connections of the 2n Floor 40G
Joist Girder along Grid A, the rolled HSS 10x4x1/4 and the intermediate HSS
5x5x3/16 beams. Detail 18 /S4.1 is revised for the addition of the HSS 8x4x3/8
column at the ends of the curtain wall glazing that extends to the top of the
parapet. Calculations of the members and their connections are included in the
Response Package.
Item 12: The calculations for the W12x26 Beam with the W8x18 Beam cantilevered over
the top are included on sheets FF35 and FF38 of the Permit Calculation Package.
Details 11/S5.4 through 15/S5.4 have been added for the connections in this area.
Calculations for the connections and beams for the added details are provided in
the Response Package.
Item 13: Detail 1/S5.3 is revised to provide a bolted connection with short- slotted holes
where the W24 beams have connections to concrete panels at each end. The
calculations that verify the capacity of the connection are provided in the
Response Package.
Item 14: The plans are updated to show the correct detail at Grid —3.3 and Grid B.5 for the
connection of the W12 at concrete panel as 19/S5.1, not 14/S5.1. The plans are
updated to show the correct detail at Grid —3.1 and Grid C for the connection of
the W12 at concrete panel as 5/S5.3, not 14/S5.3. A note is added to Detail
5/S5.3 to indicate that the W18 embed plate should be used for drag beams W16
and smaller.
Item 15: Detail 16/S56.4 is added for the connection of the HSS 8x6x3/8 panel brace
support at the concrete panel. The calculations that verify the capacity of the
connection are provided in the Response Package.
Item 16: The plans are updated to show the correct detail at Grid 3.2 and Grid C for the
connection of the W14 at concrete panel as 18/S5.2, not 9/S5.4. The plans are
updated to show the correct detail at Grid —2.0 and Grid E for the connection of
the W12 at concrete panel as 19/S5.1, not 14/S5.1.
Item 17: The 12 -foot wide uniform snowdrift loading around the mechanical unit satisfies
the snow drift loading required for both the unit and the screen, see Sheet RF -1 of
the Permit Calculation Package. The plans _ are updated to indicate that the
snowdrift loading is around the full perimeter of the mechanical unit.
Item 18: The calculations that verify the capacity of the connection are provided in the
Response Package.
4875 SW Griffith Drive 1 Suite 300 1 Beaverton, OR 1 97005
503.620.3030 1 tel 503.620.5539 1 fax w w w. a a i e n g. c o m
Tigard Triangle Building One: Plan Review Response
July 6, 2006
Page 3 of 3
Item 19: The detail references in the notes of Details 16/S3.2 and 17/S3.2 are revised.
Item 20: The calculation Sheet CF -53 for the HSS 6x6 columns at the East side glazing
area does not apply because the glazing and column are founded on the retaining
wall system. Calculation Sheet CF -53 should have been omitted from the Permit
Calculation Package. The turned down slab edge shown in Detail 9/S4.1 easily
supports the glazing system at the West entry.
Item 21: The legs of the bent plate and the internal plates per Detail 13/S4.1 are revised to
accommodate weld length required at the vertical A706 bars.
Item 22: The calculations that verify the capacity of the connection are provided in the
Response Package.
Item 23: The faceplates are used to prevent plate bending of the HSS flanges due typical
shear tab beam to column connections that load the middle of the flange. All the
columns that receive the 6 -inch faceplates are 8 -inch square. The 6 -inch plate
places the vertical welds of Detail 3/S5.1 just inside the radius turn of the HSS
section, the strong portion of the column. Using a faceplate smaller than the
column section was elected to save steel, provide easier fabrication and prevent
conflicts with multiple beam connections at a single column.
Item 24: The calculations for the torsion effect due to floor joist loading on the floor beam
section of the concrete panels are provided in the Response Package. The longer
span concrete beams are braced per Detail 9/S5.1 and Detail 10/S5.1. The panels
are detailed with the #8 reinforcing bars each face top and bottom to
accommodate the out -of -plane torsion reaction from the joist loads. These loads
are combined with nominal wind and seismic uniform loads. The beams have
additional capacity to resist torsion from the #3 closed ties provided to meet the
shear wall design criteria.
Item 25: The calculations for the torsion effect due to roof joist loading on the roof beam
section of the concrete panels are provided in the Response Package. The panels
are detailed with the #8 reinforcing bars each face top and bottom to
accommodate the out -of -plane torsion reaction from the joist loads. No
additional panel bracing is required at the roof beams. The beams have
additional capacity to resist torsion from the #3 closed ties provided to meet the
shear wall design criteria.
Item 26: Based on review of the loads, the wide- flanged beam connection to the HSS
column opposite the joist - girder per Detail 4/S5.2 and Detail 5/S5.2 does not
require a faceplate; therefore, the 5 -inch faceplate augments the connection
capacity.
Item 27: Detail 16/S5.2 is revised so the weld relates to the plate connection.
4875 SW Griffith Drive 1 Suite 300 1 Beaverton, OR 197005
503.620.3030 1 tel 503.620.5539 1 fax w w w. a a i e n g. c o m
Tigard Triangle Building One: Plan Review Response
July 6, 2006
Page 4 of 4
Item 28: For Detail 1/S5.3, the 6 -bolt connection per Detail 1/S5.1 designates a 5/16 -inch
fillet weld to the embed plate. The capacity of the welded shear tab is 57 kips.
The largest W24 beam reaction for this detail is 32 kips. For Detail 3/S5.3, the 4-
bolt connection per Detail 1/S5.1 designates a 5/16 -inch fillet weld to the embed
plate. The capacity of the welded shear tab is 32 kips. The largest W18 beam
reaction for this detail is 20 kips. See the calculations in the Response Package
for verification of the connection capacities.
Item 29: Detail 2/S5.3 is revised with supporting calculations included in the Response
Package.
Item 30: The calculations used to develop the steel beam to panel -end connections of
Detail 4/S5.3 were provided on Sheets D -2 through D -5 of the Permit Calculation
Package.
Item 31: The calculations used to develop the steel beam to panel -end connections of
Detail 5/S5.3 were provided on Sheets D -2 through D -5 of the Permit Calculation
Package.
Item 32: The calculations that verify the mechanical screen members and connections are
provided in the Response Package. The top of the mechanical screen is
maximum 10' -0" above the roof deck with a 2' -0" gap at the bottom that can
vary. The architectural information on Details 10/A5.2 and Detail 11/A5.2 is
incorrect and will be revised for the resubmission.
Item 33: The calculations that verify the capacity of the connection are provided on Sheets
D -18 through D -20 of the Permit Calculation Package.
Item 34: The calculation that verifies the capacity of the connection is provided in the
Response Package. Detail 19/S5.3 is revised with references to Details 18/S5.3
and 5/S5.3, instead of 3/S5.3, for the embed plates shown.
Item 35: Detail 20/S5.3 is revised so the weld relates to the W12 beam connection.
Item 36: See the response to Item 17.
Item 37: The building weight and shear distribution that was provided in the Permit
Calculation Package is confirmed by the calculations included in the Response
Package. The weight of the brick was accurately represented in the Permit
Calculation Package. The lateral distribution for the Second Floor story shear
was reviewed and remains correct. The Second Floor shear distribution is
cumulative; therefore, the shear loads to the panels at the second level is the total
shear from the distribution less the roof shear. The roof shear distribution was
recalculated and included in the Response Package. The shear loads are
comparable to those provided in the Permit Calculation Package.
4875 SW Griffith Drive 1 Suite 300 1 Beaverton, OR 1 97005
503.620.3030 1 tel 503.620.5539 1 fax w w w. a a i e n g. c o m
Tigard Triangle Building One: Plan Review Response
July 6, 2006
Page 5 of 5
Items 38 through 47 are procedural matters that will be handled during the progress of the project.
The special inspection agency for the project has not been selected at this time. The special
inspection program and structural observation intended for this project are noted the Sheet S1.0 of
the drawings. Shop drawings for the materials and deferred submittals will be reviewed, stamped
with the necessary action and submitted to the City of Tigard for Review.
Please contact me if you have any questions regarding these responses to your plan review
comments.
Sincerely,
0 I
Steve , oung, SE
Project Manager
detarmili
• chard J Amodeo, SE
Principal
4875 SW Griffith Drive 1 Suite 300 1 Beaverton, OR 1 97005
503.620.3030 1 tel 503.620.55391 fax w w w. a a i e n g. c o m