Correspondence — cr 2/ 2 7
/0 3 3 o s.w s`4 Fes.-y
ROGERS
ENGINEERING
Structural Engineering•Building Design•Code Consulting•Inspection Services
558 S.E.Jackson St
Roseburg,Oregon 97470
Ph: (541)672-0315
Fax: (541)672-1787
rozers(irosenet net
June 18, 2012
Otak Architects OFFICE COPY
Attn: Jennifer Nye
17355 Boones Ferry Rd.
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
RE: MET Community Center,Tigard,Oregon
Dear Ms. Nye,
Rogers Engineering is providing structural plan review services for the City of Tigard. A
structural review of the plans for the above noted project has been completed. Additional
information or clarification is needed for the following items in order to complete the review.
1. Sheet S1.01 and calculation page DC2 specifies the design wind speed as 94.5 mph.
OSSC Figure 1609 lists a minimum of 95 mph. Provide revised calculations.
2. Sheet S1.01 does not show an importance factor for the snow load. OSSC Sec. 1603.1.3
3. Calculation page DC6 indicates a simplified wind analysis. Clarify how the structure
meets the criteria of ASCE 7-05, Sec. 6.4.1.1 #1 and#4. OSSC Sec. 1609.1 & 1609.1(4)
4. Calculation page DC 12 specifies a minimum snow design load of 22 psf. Snow drift load
is then combined with a 20 psf load to determine the maximum drift load without use of
the importance factor. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 1608
5. Calculation page B27 appears to specify 12 studs for beam B7. This does not match
sheet S2.02A. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1
6. Calculations for second floor girder G5 were omitted. OSSC Sec. 107.1
7. Beam B6 on page calculation B72 does not match the drawings. Provide revised
calculations or drawings. OSSC Sec. 107.1
8. Calculation page C l specifies a 6x6x 1/4 tube at G-2. This does not match sheet 52.01 A.
Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1
MET Community Center
June 18,2012
Page 2
9. Provide calculations for the anchor bolt pullout for the minaret. OSSC Sec. 1604.8
10. Clarify how the shear walls specified on page SW5 corresponds to those shown on pages
L6 and L28. OSSC Sec. 107.I
11. The notes on sheet S2.01A and 2.02A specify 10 inch concrete walls. Provide
clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.
12. Detail J/S3.03 specifies vertical reinforcing 6d at the simple span wall. This does not
match calculation page SW 15. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1
13. The spread footing schedule on sheet S5.01 does not specify reinforcing. Provide
clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1
14. Clarify the location of the lintels evaluated on calculation pages SW45 to SW52. OSSC
Sec. 107.1
15. Calculation page F4 and F44 specifies footing WE] as 4 ft. wide. This does not match
sheet S2.00. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1
16. Calculation page F4 specifies footing WF as 4 ft. wide. This does not match sheet
S2.01A. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1
17. Footings W17,W18, W20 and WL show"NG"on calculation page F5. Provide
clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1
18. Calculation pages F20, F22, F24 and F26 specify(5)#6 bottom bars. This does not
match schedule 4/S5.01. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1
19. Calculation pages F38-F41 specify a 4 ft. footing for WC and WD. This does not match
sheet S2.01A. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1
20. Calculations for footing type WJ were omitted. Provide a copy of the calculations.
OSSC Sec. 107.1
21. Clarify where the reactions from the minaret design on page M8 are incorporated into the
design on pages F63-F65. OSSC Sec. 1604.4
22. Calculation MS26 specifies(2)#5 bars in u bond beams. It is not clear that(4)bars are
required in detail 5/S7.04. Also clarify the weld for the reinforcing steel to the steel
plate. OSSC Sec. 107.1
•
MET Community Center
June 18,2012
Page 3
23.Provide calculations for the basement retaining walls.OSSC Sec. 107.1
24.Provide calculations for the elevator pit. OSSC Sec. 107.1
25.Provide calculations for connection of the masonry walls to the diaphragm. OSSC Sec.
107.1
26.Provide calculations for the Y columns shown in detail 4/S7.04. OSSC Sec. 107.1
27.Provide calculations for the column baseplates. OSSC Sec. 107.1
28. Provide structural calculations for all stairs. OSSC Sec. 107.1
29.Provide structural calculations for the trash enclosure shown on sheet A9.01. OSSC Sec.
107.1
In order to expedite the review,please provide a written response indicating how each item is
addressed and which sheet,detail,or calculation contains the information. Should you have
questions or need additional information,please contact me at your convenience.
Respectfully,
‘:-//n 11K/
Tom Rog ,P.E.
{, ,< / 3.3D S ti/ ear 'u4°a2 o i z — °42" ) 7
RECEIVED
JUL 08 2013
CITY p1TIGARD
NB RIIILDINGDNISION
Z Consulting
Engineers
Addy(vs: 2/o/7 SW Su+un hint
hlrurtrlun.Ortgun 97(NX►
Ph; 971-222-4378
I iu 5fr 4 848 t(748:
August 02, 2012 OFFICE COPY
(TI AK Architects
Attn: Jennifer Nye
17355 Bones Ferry Rd.
lake Oswego.OR 97035
RE: MET Community Center, Tigard,Oregon
l)ear Ms. Nye,
The following are the clarifications,addition information and responses to Rogers Engineering
structural plan review for MET Community ('enter. Tigard, Oregon.
I. Sheet S1.01 and calculation page 1X'2 specifies the design wind speed as 94.5 mph. ()SS('
Figure 1609 lists a minimum of 95 mph. Provide revised calculations.
Response: ()SS(' Section 1609.3.1 provides two options of determining the wind speed for
the area The w in/l valee l for ilk- .ire i.determined 'icing the formula 16-32.
=1.05V, , +10.5=1.05x80+ 10.5=94.5 Mph.
2. Sheet S1.01 does not show an importance factor for the snow load.OSSC Sec. 1603.1.3
Response: Snow importance factor I = 1 1 added on Sheet S 1.01 Sec page 1
3. Calculation page 1X'6 indicates a simplified wind analysis.Clarify how the structure
meets the criteria of ASCE 7-05. Sec. 6.4.1.1 #1 and#4.OSSC Sec. 1609.1 & 1609.1(4)
Response: The design of the lateral load resisting system is governed by the seismic loads
4. Calculation page IX'12 specifies a minimum snow design load of 22 psf, Snow drift load
is then combined with a 20 psf load to determine the maximum drift load without use of
the importance factor. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 1608
Response: Snow drift revised using a minimum snow design load of 22 psf and S2 03A
updated See attached calculations on pages 2 thru 4C.
5. Calculation page B27 appears to specify 12 studs for beam 87.This does not match
sheet S2.02A.Provide clarification. OSSC' Sec. 107.1
Response: Number of studs revised to 12 on Sheet S2.02A See page 5
6. Calculations for second floor girder 65 were omitted. ()SS(' Sec. 107.1
Response: Calculations added. See pages 6 and 7.
7. Beam B6 on page calculation 1372 does not match the draw ings. Pros ide res iced
calculations or drawings. OSSC Sec. 107.1
11 V
Response: Res ised t aLulauon pros tiled See pages r and is
8. Calculation page Cl specifies a 6x6x I'4 tube at (I-2. This does not match sheet S2.0IA.
Pros ide clarification.OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response: HSS6s6s 114 reposed to IlSS5s51,3/8 Total gra%it) lead = I8 45 kips. unhraced
length = I 3.-4" The allowable load equals 107 kips OK
9. Pros ide calculations for the anchor bolt pullout for the minaret.()SSC Sec. 1604.8
Response: (calculation pros'tied See pages 10 and 14
10. Clarify how the shear walls specified on page SW5 corresponds to those shown on pages
1.6 and L28. OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response: I fr .ho■ s the wall layout to determine the center of rigidity L-28 pros ides the
summary lasuut of the walls with the applicable seismic loads the names of the walls arc
indicated in sheet I -28 See page 15
I I. The notes on sheet S2.0I A and 2.02A specify 10 inch concrete walls. Pros ide
clarification.OSSC' Sec. 107.
Response: Notes on S2 01A and S2 02A were collet ted to read 10' solid grouted
CMl! wall See page 16 and 17
12 Detail J/S3.03 specifies vertical reinforcing 6d at the simple span wall.This does not
match calculation page SWI5. Provide clarification.OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response:, Details J/S3 03 was re%tsed to show type 6e reinforcement (2) #60' 16" (1(
See page 18
13. The spread footing schedule on sheet S5.01 does not specify reinforcing. Provide
clarification.OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response: The tooting schedule was completed in addendum. #1. Sec tesised tooting
schedule 4155 01 See page 19
14 Clarify the location of the lintels evaluated on calculation pages SW45 to SW52.OSSC
Sec. 107.1
gas/mist:
Lintel 1 I occurs at shear wall JPS3.03
Lintel L2 occurs at shear wall D/S3.02
Lintel L3 occurs at shear wall US3.03
Lintel 1.4 occurs at shear wall K/S3 03
15. Calculation page F4 and F44 specifies footing WE1 as 4 ft. wide.This does not match
sheet S2.00. Provide clarification.OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response: The footing sire was changed to match F-4 and 1.44. See page 2(1
16 Calculation page F4 specifies footing WF as 4 ft. wide.This does not match sheet
52.01A. Provide clarification.OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response:, WI. footing width was modified to match spread sheet on page 14 Sec sheet
S2.0l A See page 21
17. Footings WI7, WI8,W20 and WL show "NG" on calculation page F5. Provide
clarification.OSSC Sec. 107.1 Response:
A: tooting WI7 & W I8 were° designed as a beam on elastic foundation The sire was
round acceptable See Sheet 1 24 n I.25
'0
. •
B: Similar condition or footing W19& W20 See sheet F26& I.27
18. Calculation pages F20,F22, F24 and F26 specify(5)#6 bottom bars.This does not
match schedule 4/S5.01. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response: Schedule 4/55 (11 was re%ised to show 15) #6. See page 19
19. Calculation pages F38-F4 I specify a 4 ft. footing for WC and WI).This does not match
sheet S2.0I A.Pro%ide clarification. OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response:, Calculation, lilt the looting W( & WI) were re%iced The 1'6' width is
acceptable See page, 22 thin 25
20. Calculations for footing type WJ were omitted. Provide a copy of the calculations. ()SS('
Sec. 107.1 Footing Footing tR,
Response.' oting (111 µa11 .1 is pro%icled See pages 26 and 27
2 I. Clarify where the reactions from the minaret design on page M8 are incorporated into the
design on pages F63-F65. OSSC Sec. 1604.4
Response: The total minaret dead load of 6 2; lops (1' DIR. load combinations 21 was 'minded
in the total dead load The wind base shear of h 076-6.08 kips IX 1)1kI from the ens elope joint
reactions was used to calculate the total wind mourning. These loads are clouded See pages
28 thru �I)
22. Calculation MS26 specifies(2)#5 bars in(2)bond beams. It is not clear that(4)bars are
required in detail 5/S7.04. Also clarify the weld for the reinforcing steel to the steel
plate.OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response: Iktail was res ised to clearls show the (2) #5 in (2) bond beams on detail 5/57 04
The ''f diameter Nelson deformed bar anchors are also specified Complete weld penetration
is achiesed thin weld gun See page Al and 12
23. Pros ide calculations for the basement retaining walls. OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response: Basement retaining wall calculations are prosided. Sec page 33 that 36.
24. Provide calculations for the elevator pit.OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response: He%ator pit calculations are poi%ided See pages 17 thru 41
25. Pros ide calculations for connection of the masonry walls to the diaphragm.OSSC Sec.
107.1
Response: ('ale Illations pro%ided See page 42
26. Provide calculations for the Y columns shown in detail 4/S7.04 ()SS(' Sec. 107.1
Response: Calculations pro%ided See page ).t
27. Pro ide calculations for the column base plates. OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response: Calculation, prosIded and schedule I/S 7 111 rc•%ised to show 1/4" plate
HSS5x5 See page 44 and 45
28. Provide structural calculations for all stairs. OSSC Sec. 107.I
Response: Stairs are part o) the deferred submittal items.
29. Pros ide structural calculations for the trash enclosure shown on sheet A901. OSSC Sec.
107.1
V
Response:See attached pages 46 through 49 showing the trash enclosure. Details are shown on
architecture sheet A9.01
Best Regards
QN-INNN :?304°til
Hamoudi Zouyed
rROGERS
ENGINEERING
Structural Engineering•Building Design•Code Consulting•Inspection Services
558 SE.Jackson St
Roseburg,Oregon 97470
Ph: (541)672-0315
Fax: (541)672-1787
rooersarosenet net
•
August 5,2013
P 2o(
Otak Architects 2 k`-7
_
Attn: Jennifer Nye OFFICE COPY
17355 Boones Ferry Rd.
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
RE: MET Community Center,Tigard,Oregon
Dear Ms.Nye,
Rogers Engineering is has completed a review of the supplemental information addressing the
plan review comments of June 8,2012. Following is the status of the items from the initial
review.
1. Sheet S1.01 and calculation page DC2 specifies the design wind speed as 94.5 mph.
OSSC Figure 1609 lists a minimum of 95 mph. Provide revised calculations.
Response: OSSC Section 1609.3.1 provides two options of determining the wind speed
for the area. The wind speed for the site is determined using formula 16-32.
V3 = 1.0SYf,, + 10.5 = 1.05x80+10.5 = 94.5 Mph.
Section 16093.1 indicates that 3-second gust speeds of Figure 1609 can be converted
to fastest-mile speeds using Table 1609.3.1 or equation 16-32. Section 1609.3 states
that wind speed for determining wind loads shall be determined by Figure 1609. If
seismic loading controls design of the lateral force resisting system,revised
calculations would not be necessary.
2. Resolved.
3. Calculation page DC6 indicates a simplified wind analysis. Clarify how the structure
meets the criteria of ASCE 7-05, Sec. 6.4.1.1 #1 and#4. OSSC Sec. 1609.1 & 1609.1(4)
Response: The design of the lateral load resisting system is governed by the seismic
loads.
If the simplified analysis does not apply,verify that pressures using the analytical
procedure would not revise the design and seismic still controls.
MET Community Center
August 5,2013
Page 2
4. Calculation page DC 12 specifies a minimum snow design load of 22 psf. Snow drift load
is then combined with a 20 psf load to determine the maximum drift load without use of
the importance factor. Provide clarification. OSSC Sec. 1608
Response: Snow drift revised using a minimum snow design load of 22 psf and S2.03A
updated. See attached calculations on pages 2 thru 4C.
It does not appear that the drift load(55 psf on calculation page 2)was increased by
the 1.1 importance factor. Provide clarification.
5-6 Resolved.
7. Beam B6 on page calculation B72 does not match the drawings. Provide revised
calculations or drawings. OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response:Revised calculation provided. See pages 8 and 9.
Calculation page 9 shows two point loads on the beam. Sheet S2.03A shows this
beam supporting(5)W10x12 beams. Provide clarification.
8-22Resolved.
23. Provide calculations for the basement retaining walls. OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response:Basement retaining wall calculations are provided. See pages 33 thru 36.
The soil point lateral load appears to be applied at 6 feet above the base of the wall.
Provide clarification.
24. Provide calculations for the elevator pit. OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response: Elevator pit calculations are provided. See pages 37 thru 41.
Calculation page 38 specifies#5 bars,whereas SK-23 shows#4 bars for the wall
reinforcing. Provide clarification.
25. Provide calculations for connection of the masonry walls to the diaphragm. OSSC Sec.
107.1
Response: Cakulations provided. See page 42.
MET Community Center
August 5,2013
Page 3
Question was in reference to out-of-plane forces as noted in ASCE 7-05 Sec. 12.11.
Provide information or calculations demonstrating compliance.
26. Provide calculations for the Y columns shown in detail 4/S7.04. OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response: Calculations provided. See page 43.
Detail 7/S7.04 does not appear to specify complete joint penetration welds as noted
in the calculations. Provide clarification.
27. Resolved.
28. Provide structural calculations for all stairs. OSSC Sec. 107.1
Response: Stairs are part of the deferred submittal items.
Provide calculations for review and approval prior to fabrication.
29. Resolved.
In order to expedite the review,please provide a written response indicating how each item is
addressed and which sheet,detail, or calculation contains the information. Should you have
questions or need additional information,please contact me at your convenience.
Respectfully,
1
Tom Rogers,P .