Reviewed by: Bolen, Wayne A.                                                  Permit #: C13-1941

Phone: 343-8072                                                                        Date: 4/4/2014

Fax: 249-7393

Email: BolenWA@muni.org

Permit Manager: Tommy Cornell

Phone: 343-8181

Email: BarganierTA@muni.org

Project: Avionic Storage Building

Review Number: 328288

____________________________________________________________________________________

PERMIT STATUS

10/23/2013 – Review complete. Comment issued.

12/3/2013 – Responses reviewed. Comments issued.

4/4/2014 – Responses reviewed. Comments issued.

Advisory Comment (no response required):  This review is based on the requirements of the Anchorage Administrative Code (AAC), 2009 International Building Code (IBC), 2009 International Residential Code (IRC) and all adopted references thereto as amended by MOA. The following comments must be addressed before a permit can be issued. The approval of plans and specifications does not permit the violation of the codes, or any federal, state or local regulations.

1. FROST PROTECTED FOUNDATION

This structure does not meet the exceptions for a non frost protected foundation. It is not assigned to occupancy category I. An alternate means and methods must be provided for approved. Reference IBC section 1809.5.

Comment remains. The architectural drawings do not match the structure drawings. Please revise the architectural to match the structural. WAB – 12/3/2013

Comment resolved. The Architectural Drawings have been revised. WAB – 3/6/2014

2. GLOBAL OVERTURNING

Reference the global overturning check in the calculations. Please why wind loads on the roof and lateral on the walls have not been applied simultaneously. Please also note that it is likely that wind load on the floor must be applied since this building it off the ground. Please note that this would affect both the sliding and overturning calculation. Reference IBC section 1604.9 and 1604.4.

Comment remains. Reference page 2-2 of the calculations. The global overturning check is still incorrect as it does not include the vertical component of the wind. Please revise or clarify. Please note that once again it is likely that uplift will need to be applied to the roof and floor since there is a 6” gap from the bottom of beam to grade. WAB – 12/3/2013

Comment remains. Please provide calculations showing there is enough uplift resistance provided by the sonotubes. Reference IBC section 1808.3. Please also note that the Simpson PBS66 will have to be verified for combined uplift and shear loads as well. WAB – 3/7/2014

Comment remains. The sonotube portion of this comment has been resolved, but the PBS66 portion is not. No combined uplift and shear design could be located. Please clarify. WAB – 4/4/2014

3. WIND EXPOSURE

Reference the wind calculations. The wind load has been determined as if the site is exposure B. This is not the case. This site appears to be in exposure C. Please provide justification for the assumption of exposure B. Please also note that that this building appears to be near the runway or where planes are parked, and may be subject to jet blast. Please verify that it isn’t or provide a design that considers this. Please note that this would affect both the sliding and overturning calculation. Reference ASCE 7-05 section 6.5.6.4.

Comment remains. The exposure portion of this comment is resolved. This structure appears to be adjacent to where airplanes are parked. The owner assurance that the structure will not be exposed to jet blast is not sufficient. Please provide something more concrete than owner’s assurance. WAB – 12/3/2013

Comment resolved. Per owner this is not in a jet blast zone. WAB – 3/7/2014

4. HEADER DESIGN

Reference the design of the headers. Please design the headers as complete unbraced or justifiy the assumption of them being continuously braced. Please provide ties downs for wind uplift if required. Where is the design of the header over the double door? Reference IBC sections 1604.4 and 1605.

Comment remains. The response for the uplift portion is not accepted. Where sheathing is continuous from top plate to bottom plate the response is correct; however this case the sheathing is not continuous from top plate to bottom plate. The uplift if from the roof framing to the top plate, top plate to cripple studs, cripple studs to header, and header to jams. If this load path description is not correct please describe the load path for the uplift loads. WAB – 12/3/2013

Comment remains. It is not clear how the LPT5 connecting the headers to the king stud will be installed. Please clarify. This LPT5 needs to have sufficient capacity to transfer the required loads. Please verify. WAB – 4/4/2014

5. ROOF FRAMING

Reference the calculations. Where is the design of the roof framing? Please clarify where in the calculations this design has been provided or provide for review.

Comment resolved. Trusses are indicated as deferred. WAB – 12/3/2013

6. SHEAR WALL DESIGN

Please clarify where the shear wall design is for both shear and overturning. A global check as been provided, but a local check has not. Reference the Special Design Provisions for Wind and Seismic section 4.1.1.

Comment resolved, however if there is jet blast to consider per comment 3, the design of these elements may need to be revised. WAB – 12/3/2013

Comment resolved. WAB – 3/7/2013

7. SHEAR TRANSFER

Please provide details showing how the shear loads are transferred from the roof diaphragm to the final location in the ground/soil. Please verify that the load path provided has sufficient capacity to transfer the required loads.

Comment remains. The response indicates that this has been detailed, but it is not clear where this has been done. The architectural drawings appear to show a load path from the roof into the shear wall where the trusses are perpendicular to the wall, and from the floor to rim board, but no load path to the foundation has been provided. No information has been provided for the walls parallel to the trusses. Please note that the PB44 has a minimum shear capacity of 765 lbs, and this does not appear to be sufficient in the direction for wind load perpendicular to the long direction as there are only two sonotube piers on each resisting line in this direction. The load appears to be 3.2 kips. Please clarify. WAB – 12/3/2013

Comment remains. From page 6-3 on calculations dated 11/7/2013 the wind transverse load is 6.4 kips. This leads to 3.2 kips on each line. It appears the seismic base shear may be 2.3 kips. See also comment 2. WAB – 3/7/2013

Comment remains. The PBS indicated doesn’t have capacity in uplift unless bolts are used. It also will not have sufficient lateral capacity or combined lateral and uplift capacity. It’s also not made to fit an 5 1/8” glulam. Please clarify. WAB – 4/4/2014

8. STATEMENT OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS

Please provide a statement of special inspections as required by IBC section 1805 or indicate that no special inspections are required. Reference AAC section 23.10.104.8.

Comment remains. Special inspections have been indicated for rebar. Is special inspections required on the concrete? What about inspections on wood items? If no other inspections are required please indicate this. Per the design and drawings there are nailing requirements with spacing closer than 6” O.C. which requires special inspection and there are hold downs which requires special inspections per IBC section 1706.2 (since wind appears to control). WAB – 12/3/2013

Comment resolved. This has been added to the drawings. WAB – 3/7/2014

9. SPECIAL INSPECTOR

Please provide a letter from the Owner indicating who they will be hiring to provide the special inspections on this project. The special inspector(s) must be licensed by MOA in the type(s) of inspection(s) to be performed. Reference IBC section 1703.1.

Comment remains. No response provided. WAB – 3/7/2013

Please provide a written response to the comments and include one copy of additional or revise calculations, and two copies of additional or revise drawings.

All submittals should be sent to the permit manager.