Reviewed by: David Misiuk, PE
Phone: (907) 343-7585
Email: david.misiuk@anchorageak.gov
Permit Manager: Richard Dienes-Oehm
Phone: (907) 343-8034
Email: Dienes-OehmRE@muni.org
Permit #: X19-1382 (supercedes C19-1470)
Project: Anchorage Airport Courtyard Marriot Improvements (ANCCY)
Date: May 31, 2019
____________________________________________________________________________________
REVIEW STATUS
05/31/2019 – Initial review complete; revision and additional submittal documents required.
06/05/2019 – Final review complete; all previous comments have been satisfactorily resolved and structural review approved.
This review is based on the requirements of the Anchorage Municipal Code (AMC), 2012 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 plans and specifications does not permit the violation of the codes, or any federal, state or local regulations.
General
The inclusion of a brief structural narrative describing the work, methodologies and assumptions would help expedite the code review process for future submittals.
Please provide a Geotechnical Report indicating subsurface soil conditions and recommendations used in the design of the foundation system. [IBC Section 107]
Please provide foundation structural design calculations including design criteria and any assumptions used.
Calculations
Please show inclusive page numbers in the Calculations index to ensure that no pages are missing.
Please provide a summary of design methodology and assumptions for the MLFRS for the entry canopies, large feature frame and smaller feature frames.
Page 53 and 54: Use of a “Reduced Beam Section, per AISC Seismic Design Manual Section 3.5.5.1” is indicated at the top of the page but a reduced section does not appear to be used or indicated in the drawings and is improperly referenced; please clarify.
Page 55: A W8x40 column is indicated in the calculations but does not appear to be used; please clarify.
Page 56: The heading indicates “Design Procedure: Seismic Design Manual, AISC 358-05, Prequalified Connections, Section 7.6.” It appears that Prequalified Connections were not used; please clarify.
Page 59: For all computer analyses, please provide concise input information indicating the derivation of loads, the load cases considered including appropriate factors, graphical representation of all joint coordinates, joint fixities and member sizes. Please also provide relevant output information including controlling support reactions, joint displacements, member deflections, member forces used in connection design and member unity check/verifications.
Page 75: The use of reduced beam sections is referenced; see comment number 6 above.
Page 77: “Bolted Flange Plate Moment Connection” is indicated and a W8x40 column member is referenced which is not used; please clarify.
Pages 81-88: It appears duplicate calculations have been provided for the port cochere frame.
Pages 89-96: It appears duplicate calculations have been provided for the smaller entry frame.
Page 203: This appears to be a duplicate of page 55.
Drawings
G001: The Building Code Summary incorrectly states the use of the “2016” International Building Code (IBC.)
1/S101: Existing footings are referenced; please provide verification of adequate size.
2/S101: 2/S101 refers to Detail 6/S501 which is actually a section view.
3/S101: 3/S101 calls out a 6-inch diameter hole at mid-depth of (4) W12 beams indicated on the plan. Please provide verification that no additional web reinforcing is required at these locations.
4/S101: An existing footing is referenced; please provide verification of adequate size.
1/S201: Detail 1/S502 appears to call out a splice with the column and pile rotated 90 degrees to that which is intended. It would be helpful to indicate framing member orientation on the elevation views of feature frames as was done for the beam in 2/201.
2/S201: 1/S502 refers to a column splice for the W18 column to HP18 pile used in the main entry feature frame. Please verify that the geometry is also intended for the W14 column to HP14 pile splice.
2/S201: Detail 1/S502 and 2/S502 are referenced but there is a discrepancy in member orientation.
S501 and S502: Please consider revising “all-around” weld symbols where appropriate, as is current standard practice to avoid the creation of unintended triaxial stresses at joint corners. This is an advisory comment only.
1/S501: The welding symbol for the bent plate to beam points to the wrong joint.
3/S501: The steel plate thickness and length are not specified.
3/S501: Please clarify the weld symbol and joint geometry at the angle brace to beam top flange connection; it conflicts with the brace skew shown in plan view.
6/S501: The steel top plate callout points to the beam shear plate.
6/S501: Please clarify the bottom plate geometry. It appears a continuous joint is intended but the depth of W8 beams framing into the connections differ by approximately two-tenths of an inch.
6/S501: Please clarify the bottom plate weld detail; a ½-inch fillet weld is non-prequalified and requires continuous special inspection.
7/S501: This joint also includes a perpendicular framing member which is not shown.
8/S501: The shear plate field weld symbol incorrectly shows welding at the opposite side.
1 and 2/S502: The details show conflicting member orientation; see number 22 above.
2/S502: It appears that a cap-plate is shown on the HSS12x10; please specify the welds required.
2/S502: The weld detail at the cap and bearing plates shows only a transverse fillet weld. Is a longitudinal flare-bevel weld also required?
6/S502: The centerline column callouts show “bm” instead of “col.”
7/S502: Please clarify that the chord splice plates are ¼ x 6’-0”.
11/S502: Please specify the minimum lap length required for Simpson LSTA15 and CS20 strap and number of fasteners required at the first joist bay blocking.
1/S503: There is no reference to this detail in any of the plan or elevation views.
2/S503: Please verify the use of a header with flatwise member orientation. Provide calculations and specify minimum fastening of members to satisfy shear flow requirements to act as a single composite member.
Please address each comment and include one copy of additional/revised calculations and two copies of additional/revised drawings. Please indicate the location of any additions or corrections in the response. All documents should be submitted to the permit manager as shown above.
