Review Comments

Click Here To Go Back To Permit Information

Permit Number:	06 5266
Permit Type:	Commercial Building Permit - None BldgNew
Address:	3635 AIRCRAFT DR Anchorage
Location:	address was changed from 4737 Lakeshore Dr; 5-14-12, K.Wilson
Work Description:	Work Descr: 7200 sq ft, Remarks: tb 11/24/09 Keep file activetb2/18/10 new owner; contractor transfer to ownertb
Status:	Closed
Project Name:	AIRCRAFT DRIVE HANGARS #1
Review Type:	Structural
Result:	Approved
Result Date:	9/26/2006 12:00:00 AM

Comments:

	Code Section	Review Comment	Status

Advisory Information:
. C(1): PROJECT STATUS 4/28/2006 – 1st review, comments issued. 6 - Footing and undation resubmittal reviewed. Comments issued. 5/2006 - approved for Excavation and Footing and Foundation (excluding piles). 1/2006 - approved for footing and foundation. /12/2006 - Responses reviewed, comments issued. C(2): This review is based on the requirements of the 2003 International Building Code (IBC) and all adopted references thereto as amended by MOA. The following comments must be addressed before a permit can be issued. The approval of the plans and specifications does not permit the violation of the codes, or any federal, state or local regulations. C(3): APRON SECTION Reference detail 3.1/C8.1. The referenced detail indicates 24" of Type IIA fill under 4" of levelling course and 2" of asphalt. Shannon & Wilson's Geotechnical Report, Lot 11B, Block 16, Anchorage International Airport dated August 2005 section 6.5 requires 28" of Type II/IIA of base course fill under 4" of levelling course and 2" of asphalt. Please revise the apron section to match the Geotechnical Engineer's requirements. Reference Anchorage Grading, Excavation and Fill Code section 23.105.106.3.1.D.6. C(4): SPECIAL INSPECTIONS Please provide the name(s) and resume(s) of the individual(s) providing special inspection services for this project. If the inspector(s) is/are on MOA’s list of pre-approved inspectors, then the name(s) will satisfy the comment. C(5): AISC OR ICBO CERTIFICATION R & M Steel Company does not appear to be AISC or ICBO certified. Per IBC section 1704.2.1, a special inspector must be employed to verify that the fabricator maintains detailed fabrication and quality control procedures that provide a basis for inspection control of the workmanship and the fabricator's ability to conform to approved construction documents and reference standards. The special inspector must be employed by the Owner. C(6): CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE At the completion of fabrication, the approved fabricator shall submit a certificate of compliance to Building Safety stating that the work was performed in accordance with the approved construction documents. Reference IBC 03 section 1704.2.2. C(7): CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY Each contractor responsible for the construction of a seismic-force-resisting system, designated seismic system, or component listed in the Quality Assurance Plan shall submit a written contractor’s statement of responsibility containing the information required by IBC 03 section 1705.3 to Building Safety and the Owner before work can begin on the system or component. C(8): QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN Please provide a Quality Assurance Plan for the metal building containing the information required by IBC 03 section 1705.2 C(9): SPECIAL INSPECTION FINAL REPORT A final report documenting required special inspections and correction of any discrepancies noted in the inspections must be submitted to Building Safety for processing. Reference IBC section 1704.1.2. C(10): INCONSISTENT CODE CYCLES Reference the metal building calculations and drawings. It appears there are inconsistencies in the code cycles being used. If the 2003 IBC is to be used, all codes referenced by the that code should be used, i.e. the 2003 IBC references the 2002 AISC 341, and not the 2005 AISC 341. If the 2005 AISC 341 is to be used, the 2006 IBC and all codesreferenced by it should be used too. Reference IBC section 102. C(11): SEISMIC WEIGHT Reference Seismic Load calculation in the building building calculations. The wall dead load contributing to the seismic weight appears to be significantly underestimated. Please provide substantiating data for the weights used or revise and resubmit. Please not it appears the interior wall hasn't been included at all. Reference IBC sections 1604.4 and 1606. C(12): DESIGN OF CABLES It appears the cables have been indicated as ASTM A475. This specification can not be designed using AISC-LRFD or AISC-ASD. Please provide design reference used to design the cables and submit an Alternate Materials and Method's Form for approval. Reference AISC-LRFD section A6, AISC-ASD section A6 and the Anchorage Administrative Code section 23.10.108. C(13): MOMENT FRAME CONNECTION DESIGN Please provide complete moment frame design (not just computer output). This design should show how the following items and limit states are determined or checked: A) Design of bolts. B) Design of end plates. C) Design of welds. D) Panel zone shear limit state. E) Web Local Yielding limit state. F) Web Crippling limit state. Please note that the Tee-stub analogy isnot permitted in the design of the connection when R is taken as greater than 3. Connections with R taken as greater than 3 are required to be designed to AISC design guide 4 or 16. Reference AISC 341-02 section 11.2. Moment frame connection is conservative as compared to the Design Guide 16 requirements; however it does not appear as if the program determines the bolt size correctly per Design Guide 16 when set to design the connection to said design guide. It appears the plate size is conservative regardless of which setting is used. Please note that while the connection is approved for thi C(14): CABLE BRACED FRAME DESIGN Please provide the design of the cables used in the braced frames (roof and wall) per ASCE 19. Reference IBC section 2207.1. It should be noted that the cable generally can not be designed to AISC-ASD or AISC-LRFD, and so the requirements of AISC 341-02 can not be directly used. In order to avoid categorizing this system as a "Structural SteelSystem Not Specifically Detailed for Seismic Resistance" the following method can be used to design the cables: first, the capacity side can be taken as the combined breaking strengths of the cables, second, to calculate the load side, determine the ASD seismic force and amplify it by omega and use this number for T in the appropriate load combinations found in ASCE 19. If the breaking strength is greater than the applied load then the cable is sufficient for the required loads. C(15): BRACED FRAME CONNECTION DESIGN Reference the design for the braced frame connection. It doesn't appears as if the brace connection matches thebrace type indicated in the drawings. The drawings indicate cable braces while the calculations appear to show double angle bracing. Please clarify. Please note that if angle bracing is being used more substantiating data needs to be submitted such as tensile fracture of the brace at the connection, tensile yield and fracture in the gusset, gusset to beam or column connection, and the various limit states in the web of the beam or column. If cables are used with the hillside washers as shown in the drawings these limits states should be checked: yielding in the eyebolt, and the various limit states that could control the design of the column or rafter web. Please note that the connection is required to be designed to the capacity of the brace. Reference AISC 341-02 section 14.2. Please provide check of the following limit states in addition to t C(16): DRIFT Please provide substantiating data showing the drift at the center of mass of the structure as determined by ASCE 7-02 section 9.5.5.7.1does not exceed the allowable story drifts set in ASCE 7-02 table 9.5.2.8. C(17): The following comments are for the footing and foundation design. C(18): GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PILE FOUNDATIONS Reference the Geotechnical report. It doesn't appear as if recommendations for pile design have been provided. Please provided the following recommendations from the Geotechnical Engineer: A) Recommended pile types (provided in report) and installed capacities (provided in calculations) with appropriate safety factors if ultimate capacities are given.. B) Recommended center-to-center spacing of piles for gravity and lateral loads. C) Driving criteria. D) Installation procedures. E) Field inspections and report procedures. F) Pile load test requirements. G) Durability of pile materials. H) Designation of bearing stratum or strata. I) Reduction for group action where necessary. Reference IBC section 1808.2.2 Comment remains. No response provided. WAB - 6/8/2006 C(19): SPACING OF PILES Reference page GB-1 of the calculations and sheet S2.1 of the drawings. It appears the calculations that a maximum spacing of the piles should be 6.9'.The piles on sheet S2.1 are shown at 8'-4" or 8'-7" typical spacing. Please clarify. Reference Anchorage Administrative Code section 23.10.302.3 and IBC section 1604.4. Comment remains. Please provide substantiating data showing the 6" piles as currently spaced are sufficient to support the required loads. WAB - 6/8/2006 C(20): 6" PILES Reference sheet S2.1. It appears many 6" diameter piles are being used. The minimum diameter for piles is 8" Reference IBC section 1809.3.4. This comment has been approved as an Alternate Means and Methods by Matt Hood. WAB - 6/8/2006 C(21): PILE CAP DESIGN ON GRID LINE 1" Reference the calculations designing this pile cap. Please verify the pile caps on this line, where the lateral-force-resisting element is a column, are designed to the flexural capacity of the column. Reference IBC section 1808.2.23.2.3. Comment remains. No response provided. WAB - 6/8/2006 C(22): FRAME LINE 2 TRUST Reference page GB-9 and GB-10 of the calculations. Please clarify what this calculation is for. Why isn't the trust transferred directly into the slab or reinforcement? Please clarify. C(23): PILE CAP ANALYSIS Reference pages GB-11 through GB-41. This comment is to come after speaking with Scott.