22-710Fully Bound JoLaneSeisEvalRpt.pdf

JOSEPH LANE MIDDLE SCHOOL - MULTIPURPOSE ROOM

Matthew R. Smith, PE, SE | Principal In Charge

524 Main Street, Suite 2, Oregon City, OR 97045

T: 503.659.2205

MattS@zcsea.com

2153 NE Vine St, Roseburg, OR 97470

Roseburg Public Schools

PREPARED BY ZCS ENGINEERING & ARCHITECTURE

STRUCTURAL SEISMIC EVALUATION REPORT FOR:

Matthew R. Smith, PE, SE | Principal In Charge

524 Main Street, Suite 2, Oregon City, OR 97045

T: 503.659.2205

MattS@zcsea.com

PREPARED BY ZCS ENGINEERING & ARCHITECTURE

Roseburg Public Schools November, 2018 Joseph Lane Middle School Seismic Evaluation Project No: G-1117-17

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 0

Grants Pass • Klamath Falls • Medford • Oregon City

Table of Contents

1.0 Executive Summary

2.0 Project Introduction

3.0 Structural Evaluation

4.0 Seismic Rehabilitation Recommendations

5.0 Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate

6.0 Benefit Cost Analysis

7.0 Conclusion and Recommendations

Appendix A: Figures

Appendix B: Structural Tier 1 Check Sheets

Appendix C: Construction Cost Estimate Worksheets

Appendix D: Benefit Cost Analysis Worksheets

Appendix E: Schematic Seismic Retrofit Drawings

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 1

1.0 Executive Summary

The Roseburg Public Schools is located in Roseburg, Oregon in Douglas County. The District operates 13 schools located within the community including the property of interest, Joseph

Lane Middle School approximately 98 miles northwest of Medford, Oregon. The District has retained ZCS Engineering and Architecture (ZCS) to perform a seismic evaluation of Joseph

Lane Middle School that provides the District with an objective, comprehensive analysis of the condition of the building’s seismic resisting systems. The purpose of the evaluation is to determine the seismic lateral resisting system deficiencies when compared to buildings designed using modern building codes. This evaluation was performed in accordance with the

American Society of Civil Engineers “Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings ASCE/SEI 41-

17”.

Joseph Lane Middle School is located at 2153 NE Vine Street in Roseburg, Oregon (See

Sheet G0.0 – Vicinity Map). ZCS was tasked with evaluating the lateral force resisting systems of the facility. The structure reviewed in our analysis includes the multipurpose room situated in the south east corner of the campus. This structure is a standalone building connected to adjacent building only with covered walkways. The structure was constructed in 1976, and consists of a multipurpose room and kitchen on the main floor and locker rooms in a partial daylight basement. The basement is constructed with cast-in-place basement walls. The main floor consists of wood framed walls with metal siding and brick veneer. The roof is framed out with wood open web joists supporting plywood sheathing at the multipurpose room, and glulam beams with 2x10 rafters and plywood sheathing over the kitchen space. The floor consists of slab on grade at ground level, and concrete hollow core plank with topping above the basement.

The evaluation of the facility indicates, rehabilitation of existing lateral system components are necessary to meet the following requirements as outlined in ASCE 41-17:

Emergency service buildings and school areas that may be used as emergency shelters shall be categorized as Risk Category IV and evaluated to meet:

o The Life Safety structural performance and Hazards Reduced nonstructural performance level for BSE-2E level, AND o The Immediate Occupancy structural performance and Position Retention nonstructural performance level for BSE-1E level

See section 3.2 for performance level definitions.

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 2

The following is a brief list of seismic deficiencies encountered:

The exterior gypsum shear walls below the roof structure do not have adequate capacity to resist the prescribed seismic forces generated in the roof diaphragm.

The covered walkway roof structure is lower than the walls of the buildings outside the scope of work of the retrofit. This creates a vertical irregularity. This vertical irregularity could result in pounding between the covered walkway and the other building. The pounding effects increase the buckling loads on the walls.

Adequate holdowns do not exist at the ends of the shear walls, making them susceptible to overturning forces.

The lower unblocked roof diaphragm does not meet the prescribed allowable span. The code limits the span length to minimize the shear demands and deflection.

The top of the brick veneer walls are not anchored adequately for out-of-plane forces to the existing diaphragm.

Recommendations mitigating the known deficiencies determined by our analysis are outlined in section 4.0 of this report. In addition to the rehabilitation recommendations, we prepared schematic seismic retrofit drawings to convey the intent of the rehabilitation effort. These drawings are included in Appendix E.

To help the District understand the magnitude of the rehabilitation effort and secure funding sources for the seismic system rehabilitation of the building, a preliminary construction cost estimate was developed. Based on our extensive experience and with the assistance of past contractors a total construction cost of $1,200,210.00 including all soft costs associated with architecture/engineering, permitting, and District Project Management was developed. Refer to section 5.0 of the report body.

In addition to the construction cost estimation efforts we performed a “Benefit Cost Analysis” using the tool provided by the State of Oregon Infrastructure Finance Authority. The building has a benefit cost score of 0.922. Refer to Appendix D for BCA worksheets.

It is our final recommendation that given the BCA score and the general condition of the seismic resisting systems, this building is an excellent candidate to be rehabilitated to meet the currently prescribed seismic demands for Life Safety (BSE-2E) and Immediate Occupancy

(BSE-1E) per ASCE 41-17. Once rehabilitated, this building will meet the needs of the District and community for future generations.

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 3

2.0 Project Introduction

Roseburg Public Schools is centrally located in Roseburg, Oregon in Douglas County. Joseph

Lane Middle School is located at 2153 NE Vine Street in Roseburg, Oregon (See Sheet G0.0 –

Vicinity Map).

The District has retained ZCS Engineering and Architecture (ZCS) to perform a seismic evaluation of Joseph Lane Middle School. The purpose of the evaluation is to provide the

District with an objective, comprehensive analysis of the condition of the existing seismic force resisting systems of the facility when compared to a building constructed using modern building codes. In addition to evaluating the building’s seismic performance, schematic seismic retrofit plans have been developed. The rehabilitation plans have been developed using our extensive knowledge of seismic rehabilitation and are intended to meet the objectives and the level of performance of Life Safety (BSE-2E) and Immediate Occupancy (BSE-1E) based on the ASCE 41-17 requirements. Based on the seismic evaluation and schematic rehabilitation design drawings, a preliminary construction cost estimate was developed. Based on the preliminary construction cost estimate, a benefit cost analysis was prepared to help the District determine whether or not the rehabilitation efforts outlined in this report are financially responsible.

This work was conducted at the request of Gary Washburn, Superintendent, under an engineering services contract between the District and ZCS.

2.1 Scope of Work

The following scope of work was developed to meet the objectives outlined above.

Seismic Evaluation & Preliminary Rehabilitation Services:

Review original building construction drawings to determine existing structural systems and areas of concern.

Perform site visits of the structure to observe structural systems and visually review structural condition and deficiencies.

Observe lateral system (seismic) components and load path.

Observe gravity system components and load path.

Observe for damage and failing elements.

Verify original building drawings for use in developing schematic level as-builts.

Evaluate existing construction based on visual observations and available as-constructed documentation against ASCE 41 Tier 1 requirements.

Collate findings and perform preliminary calculations to assist in the determination of each building's seismic deficiencies.

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 4

Prepare an evaluation report for the facility identifying the structural integrity and seismic deficiencies stamped by a registered Structural Engineer licensed in the State of

Oregon.

Preliminary Construction Cost Consulting Services:

Develop project base sheets based on the District provided original drawings.

Prepare conceptual rehabilitation drawings based on ASCE 41 guidelines to convey the intent of rehabilitation recommendations.

Prepare a project cost estimate based on historic projects of similar scope and magnitude.

Review constructability and cost estimate with a licensed contractor.

Revise plans based on contractor input as required to optimize the efficiency of the rehabilitation plan and develop final construction cost recommendations.

Prepare cost benefit analysis based on SRGP methodologies

*Financial and enrollment information has been provided by the District

Summarize findings in final report package stamped by a registered Structural Engineer licensed in the State of Oregon.

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 5

3.0 Structural Evaluation

3.1 Introduction

ZCS was tasked with evaluating the lateral force resisting systems of the facility. The structure reviewed in our analysis includes the multipurpose room situated in the south east corner of the campus. This structure is a standalone building connected to adjacent building only with covered walkways. The structure was constructed in 1976, and consists of a multipurpose room and kitchen on the main floor and locker rooms in a partial daylight basement. The basement is constructed with cast-in-place basement walls. The main floor consists of wood framed walls with metal siding and brick veneer. The roof is framed out with wood open web joists supporting plywood sheathing at the multipurpose room, and glulam beams with 2x10 rafters and plywood sheathing over the kitchen space. The floor consists of slab on grade at ground level, and concrete hollow core plank with topping above the basement.

3.2 Structural Evaluation

The following outlines the evaluation of the existing structural components of the building. The evaluation includes site observations of the existing structural elements and follows the guidelines outlined in the American Society of Civil Engineer’s “Seismic Evaluation of Existing

Buildings – ASCE 41-17”. This manual is the recommended evaluation tool per the Seismic

Rehabilitation Grant Program through Business Oregon Infrastructure Finance Authority. Per

ASCE 41-17 a Tier 1 evaluation has been performed. The purpose of a Tier 1 evaluation is to provide “Quick Checks” to properly evaluate a building and determine deficiencies related to the lateral resisting elements.

It is the intent of the District, as part of this study, to determine the structural deficiencies of the building as compared to current prescribed loading and detailing requirements for lateral

(wind/seismic) loading to a performance level of “Life Safety (BSE-2E)” and “Immediate

Occupancy (BSE-1E)” per ASCE 41-17. The level of performance is defined per ASCE 41-17 as:

“Structural Performance Level S-3, Life Safety, means the post-earthquake damage state in which significant damage to the structure has occurred but some margin against either partial or total structural collapse remains. Some structural elements and components are severely damaged, but this damage has not resulted in large falling debris hazards, either inside or outside the building. Injuries might occur during the earthquake; however, the overall risk of life-threatening injury as a result of structural damage is expected to be low. It should be possible to repair the structure; however, for economic reasons, this repair might not be

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 6 practical. Although the damaged structure is not an imminent collapse risk, it would be prudent to implement structural repairs or install temporary bracing before reoccupancy.

“Structural performance level, Immediate Occupancy, means the post-earthquake damage state in which only very limited structural damage has occurred. The basic vertical- and lateral-force resisting systems of the building retain nearly all of their pre-earthquake strength and stiffness. The risk of life threatening injury as a result of structural damage is very low and although some minor structural repairs may be appropriate, these would generally not be required prior to reoccupancy.”

Per ASCE 41-17 a seismic performance objective is required. The performance levels selected for this evaluation in order to obtain a performance level of “Life Safety” was the BSE-

2E design level as defined in ASCE 41-17 section 2.4.1.3. The BSE-2E design earthquake has a probability of occurring once in every 975 years, or 5% chance in 50 years. This design level earthquake represents ground motions approximately 75% as large as those prescribed for new buildings. In addition, to obtain a performance level of “Immediate Occupancy,” the

BSE-1E design level as defined in the ASCE 41-17 section 2.4.1.4 was selected. The BSE-1E design earthquake has the probability of occurring once in every 227 years or 20% chance in

50 years. We feel this provides an appropriate level of improvement for this facility.

Lateral resisting systems work in conjunction with gravity framing systems. As such, the existing gravity framing system was also reviewed for structural deficiencies during our site observations. Section 3.2.3 outlines the existing gravity system and its structural deficiencies found during the evaluation.

Geologic hazards were assessed as part of our engineering evaluation. The main hazards evaluated in our analysis included liquefaction, slope failure, and surface fault rupture potential.

These potential hazards were evaluated using ASCE 41-17 guidelines, as well as information provided by the online Oregon HazVu: Statewide Geohazards Viewer, maintained by DOGAMI.

Results from the HazVu analysis are included in Appendix B.

3.2.1 Lateral Resisting Systems

After reviewing the facility and the existing drawings we have determined the lateral system is defined as a W2. Per ASCE 41 a W2 lateral system is defined as:

Wood Frames, Commercial and Industrial W2 – These buildings are commercial or industrial buildings with a floor area of 5,000 ft2 or more. There are few, if any, interior walls. The floor and roof framing consists of wood or steel trusses, glulam or steel beams, and wood posts or steel columns. The foundation system may consist of a variety of elements. Seismic forces are resisted by wood diaphragms and exterior stud walls sheathed with plywood, oriented strand

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 7 board, stucco, plaster, or straight or diagonal wood sheathing, or they may be braced with rod bracing. Wall openings for storefronts and garages, where present, are framed by a post-and-beam framing.

3.2.2 Lateral Resisting Element Deficiencies

The following lateral resisting element deficiencies are based on visual observations of the existing structural elements and the structural analysis performed during the Tier 1 “Quick

Checks” of the ASCE 41-17. The Tier 1 checklists are attached in Appendix B. The following outlines the deficiencies for each portion of the facility.

S1. The exterior gypsum shear walls below the roof structure do not have adequate capacity to resist the prescribed seismic forces generated in the roof diaphragm.

S2. The covered walkway roof structure is lower than the walls of the buildings outside the scope of work of the retrofit. This creates a vertical irregularity. This vertical irregularity could result in pounding between the covered walkway and the other building. The pounding effects increase the buckling loads on the walls.

S3. Adequate holdowns do not exist at the ends of the shear walls, making them susceptible to overturning forces.

S4. The lower unblocked roof diaphragm does not meet the prescribed allowable span.

The code limits the span length to minimize the shear demands and deflection.

S5. The top of the brick veneer walls are not anchored adequately for out-of-plane forces to the existing diaphragm.

3.2.3 Gravity Resisting Systems and General Observations

The following gravity resisting deficiencies are based on visual observations of the existing structural elements. No formal structural analysis was performed during this evaluation of the gravity resisting elements.

No known gravity deficiencies were observed.

3.2.4 Evaluation of Incidental Items

Incidental, non-structural items can play a major role in the overall expense of rehabilitating an existing building. These costs can be significant, and can be very difficult to estimate prior to construction.

N1. Interior CMU partition walls are not braced by the floor diaphragm.

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 8

N2. The ceiling above the locker rooms consists of a heavy suspended ceiling supported by a hanging grid system. The ceiling grid system is not properly braced.

N3. Brick veneer attachment over the egress paths is not adequate.

N4. Proper attachment and bracing of storage racks/cabinets/books shelves over 4’ tall or 3:1 (height: width) ratio.

N5. Attachment of equipment over 20 lbs. and above 4’, and all equipment over 100 lbs.

N6. Suspended items are not braced adequately to the ceiling framing.

N7. The ceiling light fixtures and their elements are not properly braced and are not supported by the ceiling framing.

N8. The existing cantilever canopy at the building exit is not adequately braced to the wall framing for seismic loads.

Based upon ZCS’s previous experience and discussions with site personnel the building contains some form of hazardous material. These materials will need to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis as they are encountered during the project.

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 9

4.0 Seismic Rehabilitation Recommendations

The following structural improvements are required to resolve the deficiencies noted in section

3.2.2. These improvements are detailed below and in the attached schematic seismic rehabilitation drawings found in Appendix E. These drawings were prepared to assist in defining the rehabilitation scope of work.

4.0.1 Rehabilitation Recommendations for Lateral Resisting Elements (See Section 3.2.2)

S1. Provide plywood sheathing full height of shear walls at strategic locations to provide lateral support.

S2. The multi-purpose building and covered walkway will be seismically isolated from the surrounding out-of-scope buildings to minimize the pounding action and vertical irregularity.

S3. Where required new holdown devices shall be installed to resist overturning forces.

S4. Provide additional blocking and nailing to the unblocked roof diaphragm to increase the allowable shear capacity and span length.

S5. Provide new top of wall attachments for the brick veneer walls.

4.0.2 Rehabilitation Recommendations for Gravity Resisting Systems and General Observations (See Section 3.2.3)

Rehabilitation of the gravity resisting system is not required at this time.

4.0.3 Rehabilitation Recommendations for Incidental Items (See Section 3.2.4)

N1. The interior cmu partition walls will be adequately braced out-of-plane to the floor diaphragm.

N2. Install new suspended ceiling that is adequately braced to the ceiling framing.

N3. The brick veneer over the egress paths of the building will be attached to the wood walls to minimize falling hazard.

N4. Storage racks, cabinets, and book shelves shall be adequately braced to structure.

N5. Any equipment weighing over 20 lbs. and above 4’, and all equipment over 100 lbs.

shall be attached and properly braced.

N6. All suspended items without lateral bracing shall be support by and braced to the ceiling framing

N7. Install new light fixtures in suspended ceiling braced to existing framing.

N8. Provide additional bracing to the existing canopy so that seismic loads can be resisted.

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 10

5.0 Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate

The attached engineer’s opinion of probable cost has been developed by ZCS for Joseph Lane

Middle School. ZCS has a successful record of completing seismic rehabilitation projects within the State of Oregon. The prices provided in the attached cost estimate have been developed using the extensive list of past projects as a baseline for this project. These prices are based on Oregon BOLI wage rates. The cost estimate is broken down into multiple line items associated with each major task (general conditions, foundation, structural steel, MEP, etc) associated with the rehabilitation. Additional line items are included for design associated permit costs, and owner construction management.

The preliminary construction cost estimate, including line item costs, was generated based on our extensive experience with completing retrofit projects of similar scope and construction type. Detailed final costs to complete recent projects were reviewed to ensure the values presented in the attached cost estimate are up-to-date with industry standard. Contractors specializing in retrofit construction were also consulted periodically to confirm more complicated line item costs are constructible within the budget allotted. After final review, the preliminary opinion of probable cost is $1,200,210.00.

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 11

6.0 Benefit Cost Analysis

The provided benefit-cost analysis (BCA) included in Appendix D, has been prepared by ZCS using the BCA tool as provided by the State of Oregon Infrastructure Finance Authority. The costs associated with the building replacement value, contents replacement value, and occupancy values have been developed by District staff using recent data.

The Joseph Lane Middle School was surveyed during the state wide assessment of emergency buildings performed by Department of Geology, Mineral and Industries’ (DOGAMI) Rapid

Visual Screening (RVS) process in 2005 as part of senate bill 2. The entire school is part A of the RVS scoring provided by DOGAMI. The occupancy and budget data provided by the

District is for the entire school campus.

The BCA for this project is 0.922. Although the BCA score of 0.922 is less than 1.0, we still recommend the proposed seismic retrofit and feel this building is a great candidate for the grant given its importance to the community it serves.

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 12

7.0 Conclusion and Recommendations

The findings described in this report have been limited to the lateral force-resisting structural system and general assessment of the gravity force-resisting elements. Based on our visual observations, we find the structure to be in good condition and generally safe for occupancy.

No significant damage to the existing structural system was discovered.

Given the current condition of the structure, the current code section on existing buildings does not mandate that upgrades are required unless the building is scheduled for repairs, alterations, additions, or change in occupancy. However, it is our understanding the goal of the

District is to continue utilizing the existing building as a gymnasium, and the District wants the seismic structural system to be compliant with the current code. To clarify, upgrades outlined in this report are strictly at the discretion of the District.

We have attempted to identify all areas requiring upgrades to achieve a scope of work for current code compliance, associated estimated costs and project schedule.

Please contact our office if you would like to discuss our findings. Please review the attached schematic drawings that can be used to refine a scope and budget.

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 13

Appendix A:

Figures

MAIN FLOOR PLAN

NTS

A1.1

KEY PLAN

NTS

S2.1

S2.1

S2.1

P

H

O

T

O

A

S2.1

P

H

O

T

O

A

P

H

O

T

O

A

P H

O T

O

A

P

H

O

T

O

A

P

H

O

T

O

A

AREA IN VIEW

S2: (N) CANTILEVER

COLUMN AND

FOOTING, TYP

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

O N

E

I N

C H

E

Q U

A L S

F

U L L

S

C A

L E

JOSEPH LANE MIDDLE

SCHOOL

2153 NE VINE ST.

ROSEBURG, OR 97470

ROSEBURG

PUBLIC SCHOOLS

SEISMIC

RETROFIT GRANT

APPLICATION

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 | 541-479-3865

F O

R

A

G E

N C

Y

R

E V

I E

W

N

O T

R

N

S T

R U

C T

I O

N

11-1-18

KNT

JCF

G-1117-17

REVISION ID: DATE:

P

R

E

L

I

M

I

N

A

R

Y

N

N

S

T

R

U

C

T

I

O

N

A1.1

MAIN FLOOR

PLAN

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXPIRES: 06-30-20

AutoCAD SHX Text 70888

AutoCAD SHX Text

OREGON

LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN

NTS

A1.2

S2.1

S2.1

S2.1

S2.1

P

H

O

T

O

A

P

H

O

T

O

A

P

H

O

T

O

A

P H

O T

O

A

P

H

O

T

O

A

KEY PLAN

NTS

AREA IN VIEW

S2: (N) CANTILEVER

COLUMN AND

FOOTING, TYP

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

O N

E

I N

U

A

L L

S

C A

L E

JOSEPH LANE MIDDLE

SCHOOL

2153 NE VINE ST.

ROSEBURG, OR 97470

ROSEBURG

PUBLIC SCHOOLS

SEISMIC

RETROFIT GRANT

APPLICATION

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 | 541-479-3865

F O

R

A

G E

N C

Y

R

E V

I E

W

N

N

S T

R U

C T

I O

N

11-1-18

KNT

JCF

G-1117-17

REVISION ID: DATE:

P

R

E

L

I

M

I

N

A

R

Y

N

N

S

T

R

U

C

T

I

O

N

A1.2

LOWER

LEVEL

FLOOR PLAN

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXPIRES: 06-30-20

AutoCAD SHX Text 70888

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

O N

E

I N

U

A

L L

S

C A

L E

JOSEPH LANE MIDDLE

SCHOOL

2153 NE VINE ST.

ROSEBURG, OR 97470

ROSEBURG

PUBLIC SCHOOLS

SEISMIC

RETROFIT GRANT

APPLICATION

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 | 541-479-3865

F O

R

A

G E

N C

Y

R

E V

I E

W

N

N

S T

R U

C T

I O

N

11-1-18

KNT

JCF

G-1117-17

REVISION ID: DATE:

P

R

E

L

I

M

I

N

A

R

Y

N

N

S

T

R

U

C

T

I

O

N

A2.1

PHOTOS

PHOTO

1/4"= 1'-0"

A2.1

PHOTO

1/4"= 1'-0"

A2.1

PHOTO

1/4"= 1'-0"

A2.1

PHOTO

1/4"= 1'-0"

A2.1

PHOTO

1/4"= 1'-0"

A2.1

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXPIRES: 06-30-20

AutoCAD SHX Text 70888

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

O N

E

I N

U

A

L L

S

C A

L E

JOSEPH LANE MIDDLE

SCHOOL

2153 NE VINE ST.

ROSEBURG, OR 97470

ROSEBURG

PUBLIC SCHOOLS

SEISMIC

RETROFIT GRANT

APPLICATION

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 | 541-479-3865

F O

R

A

G E

N C

Y

R

E V

I E

W

N

N

S T

R U

C T

I O

N

11-1-18

KNT

JCF

G-1117-17

REVISION ID: DATE:

P

R

E

L

I

M

I

N

A

R

Y

N

N

S

T

R

U

C

T

I

O

N

A2.2

PHOTOS

PHOTO

1/4"= 1'-0"

A2.2

PHOTO

1/4"= 1'-0"

A2.2

PHOTO

1/4"= 1'-0"

A2.2

PHOTO

1/4"= 1'-0"

A2.2

PHOTO

1/4"= 1'-0"

A2.2

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXPIRES: 06-30-20

AutoCAD SHX Text 70888

550 SW 6th Street, Suite C, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 • T: 541.479.3865 • www.ZCSEA.com 14

Appendix B:

Structural Tier 1 Check

Sheets

524 Main Street, Suite 2, Oregon City, Oregon 97045 • T: 503.659.2205 • www.ZCSEA.com

Tier 1 Deficiency Summary

Noncompliant Item In Tier 1

Deficiency Number(s) Per Sections 3.2.2 - 3.2.4

& Retrofit Drawings Comments

Multi-Purpose Building Load Path S1, S5

Adjacent Buildings S2

Shear Stress Check S1 Gypsum Walls S1

Walls Connected Through Floors S3 Holdown Anchors S3 Unblocked Diaphragms S4

Unreinforced Masonry N1 Heavy Partitions Supported By

Ceilings N1

Integrated Ceilings N2 Edge Clearance N2

Edge Support N2 Independent Support N2 Pendent Supports N7

Lens Covers N7 Ties N3

Tall Narrow Contents N4 Fall-Prone Contents N5 Canopies N8

Suspended Contents N6

Appendix C: Summary Data Sheet

BUILDING DATA

Building Name: Date:

Building Address:

Latitude: Longitude: By:

Year Built: Year(s) Remodeled: Original Design Code:

Area (sf): Length (ft): Width (ft):

No. of Stories: Story Height: Total Height:

USE Industrial Office Warehouse Hospital Residential Educational Other: ____________

CONSTRUCTION DATA

Gravity Load Structural System:

Exterior Transverse Walls: Openings?

Exterior Longitudinal Walls: Openings?

Roof Materials/Framing:

Intermediate Floors/Framing:

Ground Floor:

Columns: Foundation:

General Condition of Structure:

Levels Below Grade?

Special Features and Comments:

LATERAL-FORCE-RESISTING SYSTEM

Longitudinal Transverse

System:

Vertical Elements:

Diaphragms:

Connections:

EVALUATION DATA

BSE-1N Spectral Response

Accelerations: SDs= SD1=

Soil Factors: Class= Fa= Fv=

BSE-1E Spectral Response Accelerations: SXS= SX1=

Level of Seismicity: Performance Level:

Building Period: T=

Spectral Acceleration: Sa=

Modification Factor: CmC1C2= Building Weight: W=

Pseudo Lateral Force:

V=

CmC1C2SaW=

BUILDING CLASSIFICATION:

REQUIRED TIER 1 CHECKLISTS Yes No

Basic Configuration Checklist

Building Type Structural Checklist

Nonstructural Component Checklist

FURTHER EVALUATION REQUIREMENT: _______________________________________________________________ kevinhassett Text Box W2 kevinhassett Text Box 2E

Table 17-2 (Continued). Collapse Prevention Basic Configuration Checklist

Status Evaluation Statement Tier 2

Reference Commentary Reference

Moderate Seismicity (Complete the Following Items in Addition to the Items for Low Seismicity) Geologic Site Hazards C NC N/A U LIQUEFACTION: Liquefaction-susceptible, saturated, loose granular soils that could jeopardize the building’s seismic performance do not exist in the foundation soils at depths within 50 ft (15.2 m) under the building.

5.4.3.1 A.6.1.1

C NC N/A U SLOPE FAILURE: The building site is located away from potential earthquake-induced slope failures or rockfalls so that it is unaffected by such failures or is capable of accommodating any predicted movements without failure.

5.4.3.1 A.6.1.2

C NC N/A U SURFACE FAULT RUPTURE: Surface fault rupture and surface displacement at the building site are not anticipated.

5.4.3.1 A.6.1.3

High Seismicity (Complete the Following Items in Addition to the Items for Moderate Seismicity) Foundation Configuration C NC N/A U OVERTURNING: The ratio of the least horizontal dimension of the seismic-force-resisting system at the foundation level to the building height (base/height) is greater than 0.6Sa.

5.4.3.3 A.6.2.1

C NC N/A U TIES BETWEEN FOUNDATION ELEMENTS: The foundation has ties adequate to resist seismic forces where footings, piles, and piers are not restrained by beams, slabs, or soils classified as Site Class A, B, or C.

5.4.3.4 A.6.2.2

Note: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, and U = Unknown.

Table 17-3. Immediate Occupancy Basic Configuration Checklist

Status Evaluation Statement Tier 2

Reference Commentary Reference

Very Low Seismicity Building System—General C NC N/A U LOAD PATH: The structure contains a complete, well-defined load path, including structural elements and connections, that serves to transfer the inertial forces associated with the mass of all elements of the building to the foundation.

5.4.1.1 A.2.1.1

C NC N/A U ADJACENT BUILDINGS: The clear distance between the building being evaluated and any adjacent building is greater than 0.5% of the height of the shorter building in low seismicity, 1.0% in moderate seismicity, and 3.0% in high seismicity.

5.4.1.2 A.2.1.2

C NC N/A U MEZZANINES: Interior mezzanine levels are braced independently from the main structure or are anchored to the seismic-force-resisting elements of the main structure.

5.4.1.3 A.2.1.3

Building System—Building Configuration C NC N/A U WEAK STORY: The sum of the shear strengths of the seismic-force-resisting system in any story in each direction is not less than 80% of the strength in the adjacent story above.

5.4.2.1 A.2.2.2

C NC N/A U SOFT STORY: The stiffness of the seismic-force-resisting system in any story is not less than 70% of the seismic-force-resisting system stiffness in an adjacent story above or less than 80% of the average seismic-force-resisting system stiffness of the three stories above.

5.4.2.2 A.2.2.3

C NC N/A U VERTICAL IRREGULARITIES: All vertical elements in the seismic-force-resisting system are continuous to the foundation.

5.4.2.3 A.2.2.4

C NC N/A U GEOMETRY: There are no changes in the net horizontal dimension of the seismic-force-resisting system of more than 30% in a story relative to adjacent stories, excluding one-story penthouses and mezzanines.

5.4.2.4 A.2.2.5

C NC N/A U MASS: There is no change in effective mass of more than 50% from one story to the next. Light roofs, penthouses, and mezzanines need not be considered.

5.4.2.5 A.2.2.6

continues

Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Structures 269 kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse

Ellipse

Table 17-3 (Continued). Immediate Occupancy Basic Configuration Checklist

Tier 2

Reference Commentary Reference

C NC N/A U TORSION: The estimated distance between the story center of mass and the story center of rigidity is less than 20% of the building width in either plan dimension.

5.4.2.6 A.2.2.7

Low Seismicity (Complete the Following Items in Addition to the Items for Very Low Seismicity) Geologic Site Hazards C NC N/A U LIQUEFACTION: Liquefaction-susceptible, saturated, loose granular soils that could jeopardize the building’s seismic performance do not exist in the foundation soils at depths within 50 ft (15.2 m) under the building.

5.4.3.1 A.6.1.1

C NC N/A U SLOPE FAILURE: The building site is located away from potential earthquake-induced slope failures or rockfalls so that it is unaffected by such failures or is capable of accommodating any predicted movements without failure.

5.4.3.1 A.6.1.2

C NC N/A U SURFACE FAULT RUPTURE: Surface fault rupture and surface displacement at the building site are not anticipated.

5.4.3.1 A.6.1.3

Moderate and High Seismicity (Complete the Following Items in Addition to the Items for Low Seismicity) Foundation Configuration C NC N/A U OVERTURNING: The ratio of the least horizontal dimension of the seismic-force-resisting system at the foundation level to the building height (base/height) is greater than 0.6Sa.

5.4.3.3 A.6.2.1

C NC N/A U TIES BETWEEN FOUNDATION ELEMENTS: The foundation has ties adequate to resist seismic forces where footings, piles, and piers are not restrained by beams, slabs, or soils classified as Site Class A, B, or C.

5.4.3.4 A.6.2.2

Note: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, and U = Unknown.

Table 17-4. Collapse Prevention Structural Checklist for Building Types W1 and W1a

Status Evaluation Statement Tier 2

Reference Commentary Reference

Low and Moderate Seismicity Seismic-Force-Resisting System C NC N/A U REDUNDANCY: The number of lines of shear walls in each principal direction is greater than or equal to 2.

5.5.1.1 A.3.2.1.1

C NC N/A U SHEAR STRESS CHECK: The shear stress in the shear walls, calculated using the Quick Check procedure of Section 4.4.3.3, is less than the following values:

Structural panel sheathing 1,000 lb/ft (14.6 kN/m) Diagonal sheathing 700 lb/ft (10.2 kN/m) Straight sheathing 100 lb/ft (1.5 kN/m) All other conditions 100 lb/ft (1.5 kN/m)

5.5.3.1.1 A.3.2.7.1

C NC N/A U STUCCO (EXTERIOR PLASTER) SHEAR WALLS: Multi-story buildings do not rely on exterior stucco walls as the primary seismic-force-resisting system.

5.5.3.6.1 A.3.2.7.2

C NC N/A U GYPSUM WALLBOARD OR PLASTER SHEAR WALLS: Interior plaster or gypsum wallboard is not used for shear walls on buildings more than one story high with the exception of the uppermost level of a multi-story building.

5.5.3.6.1 A.3.2.7.3

C NC N/A U NARROW WOOD SHEAR WALLS: Narrow wood shear walls with an aspect ratio greater than 2-to-1 are not used to resist seismic forces.

5.5.3.6.1 A.3.2.7.4

C NC N/A U WALLS CONNECTED THROUGH FLOORS: Shear walls have an interconnection between stories to transfer overturning and shear forces through the floor.

5.5.3.6.2 A.3.2.7.5

C NC N/A U HILLSIDE SITE: For structures that are taller on at least one side by more than one-half story because of a sloping site, all shear walls on the downhill slope have an aspect ratio less than 1-to-1.

5.5.3.6.3 A.3.2.7.6

continues

270 STANDARD ASCE/SEI 41-17

kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse

Table 17-6 (Continued). Collapse Prevention Structural Checklist for Building Type W2

Tier 2

Reference Commentary Reference

C NC N/A U DIAGONALLY SHEATHED AND UNBLOCKED DIAPHRAGMS: All diagonally sheathed or unblocked wood structural panel diaphragms have horizontal spans less than 40 ft (12.2 m) and have aspect ratios less than or equal to 4-to-1.

5.6.2 A.4.2.3

C NC N/A U OTHER DIAPHRAGMS: The diaphragms do not consist of a system other than wood, metal deck, concrete, or horizontal bracing.

5.6.5 A.4.7.1

Note: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, and U = Unknown.

Table 17-7. Immediate Occupancy Checklist for Building Type W2

Status Evaluation Statement Tier 2

Reference Commentary Reference

Very Low Seismicity Seismic-Force-Resisting System C NC N/A U REDUNDANCY: The number of lines of shear walls in each principal direction is greater than or equal to 2.

5.5.1.1 A.3.2.1.1

C NC N/A U SHEAR STRESS CHECK: The shear stress in the shear walls, calculated using the Quick Check procedure of Section 4.4.3.3, is less than the following values:

Structural panel sheathing 1,000 lb/ft (14.6 kN/m) Diagonal sheathing 700 lb/ft (10.2 kN/m) Straight sheathing 100 lb/ft (1.5 kN/m) All other conditions 100 lb/ft (1.5 kN/m)

5.5.3.1.1 A.3.2.7.1

C NC N/A U STUCCO (EXTERIOR PLASTER) SHEAR WALLS: Multi-story buildings do not rely on exterior stucco walls as the primary seismic-force-resisting system.

5.5.3.6.1 A.3.2.7.2

C NC N/A U GYPSUM WALLBOARD OR PLASTER SHEAR WALLS: Interior plaster or gypsum wallboard is not used for shear walls on buildings more than one story high with the exception of the uppermost level of a multi-story building.

5.5.3.6.1 A.3.2.7.3

C NC N/A U NARROW WOOD SHEAR WALLS: Narrow wood shear walls with an aspect ratio greater than 2-to-1 are not used to resist seismic forces.

5.5.3.6.1 A.3.2.7.4

C NC N/A U WALLS CONNECTED THROUGH FLOORS: Shear walls have an interconnection between stories to transfer overturning and shear forces through the floor.

5.5.3.6.2 A.3.2.7.5

C NC N/A U HILLSIDE SITE: For structures that are taller on at least one side by more than one-half story because of a sloping site, all shear walls on the downhill slope have an aspect ratio less than 1-to-2.

5.5.3.6.3 A.3.2.7.6

C NC N/A U CRIPPLE WALLS: Cripple walls below first-floor-level shear walls are braced to the foundation with wood structural panels.

5.5.3.6.4 A.3.2.7.7

C NC N/A U OPENINGS: Walls with openings greater than 80% of the length are braced with wood structural panel shear walls with aspect ratios of not more than 1.5-to-1 or are supported by adjacent construction through positive ties capable of transferring the seismic forces.

5.5.3.6.5 A.3.2.7.8

C NC N/A U HOLD-DOWN ANCHORS: All shear walls have hold-down anchors attached to the end studs constructed in accordance with acceptable construction practices.

5.5.3.6.6 A.3.2.7.9

Connections C NC N/A U WOOD POSTS: There is a positive connection of wood posts to the foundation. 5.7.3.3 A.5.3.3 C NC N/A U WOOD SILLS: All wood sills are bolted to the foundation. 5.7.3.3 A.5.3.4 C NC N/A U GIRDER–COLUMN CONNECTION: There is a positive connection using plates, connection hardware, or straps between the girder and the column support.

5.7.4.1 A.5.4.1

continues

274 STANDARD ASCE/SEI 41-17

kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse professional to require further investigation shall be categorized as Noncompliant or Unknown. For evaluation statements classified as Noncompliant or Unknown, the design professional is permitted to choose to conduct further investigation using the corresponding Tier 2 evaluation procedure listed next to each evaluation statement.

17.4 STRUCTURAL CHECKLISTS FOR BUILDING

TYPES S1: STEEL MOMENT FRAMES WITH

STIFF DIAPHRAGMS AND S1A: STEEL MOMENT

FRAMES WITH FLEXIBLE DIAPHRAGMS

For building systems and configurations that comply with the S1 or S1a building type description in Table 3-1, the Collapse Prevention Structural Checklist in Table 17-8 shall be completed where required by Table 4-6 for Collapse Prevention Structural Performance, and the Immediate Occupancy Structural Checklist in Table 17-9 shall be completed where required by Table 4-6 for Immediate Occupancy Structural Performance. Tier 1 screening shall include on-site investigation and condition assessment as required by Section 4.2.1.

Where applicable, each of the evaluation statements listed in this checklist shall be marked Compliant (C), Noncompliant

(NC), Not Applicable (N/A), or Unknown (U) for a Tier 1 screening. Items that are deemed acceptable to the design professional in accordance with the evaluation statement shall be categorized as Compliant, whereas items that are determined by the design professional to require further investigation shall be categorized as Noncompliant or Unknown. For evaluation state-ments classified as Noncompliant or Unknown, the design professional is permitted to choose to conduct further investiga-tion using the corresponding Tier 2 evaluation procedure listed next to each evaluation statement.

17.5 STRUCTURAL CHECKLIST FOR BUILDING

TYPES S2: STEEL BRACED FRAMES WITH

STIFF DIAPHRAGMS AND S2A: STEEL BRACED

FRAMES WITH FLEXIBLE DIAPHRAGMS

For building systems and configurations that comply with the S2 or S2a building type description in Table 3-1, the Collapse Prevention Structural Checklist in Table 17-10 shall be comple-ted where required by Table 4-6 for Collapse Prevention Struc-tural Performance, and the Immediate Occupancy Structural Checklist in Table 17-11 shall be completed where required by Table 4-6 for Immediate Occupancy Structural Performance.

Table 17-7 (Continued). Immediate Occupancy Checklist for Building Type W2

Status Evaluation Statement Tier 2

Reference Commentary Reference

Foundation System C NC N/A U DEEP FOUNDATIONS: Piles and piers are capable of transferring the lateral forces between the structure and the soil.

A.6.2.3

C NC N/A U SLOPING SITES: The difference in foundation embedment depth from one side of the building to another does not exceed one story high.

A.6.2.4

Low, Moderate, and High Seismicity (Complete the Following Items in Addition to the Items for Very Low Seismicity)

Seismic-Force-Resisting System C NC N/A U NARROW WOOD SHEAR WALLS: Narrow wood shear walls with an aspect ratio greater than 1.5-to-1 are not used to resist seismic forces.

5.5.3.6.1 A.3.2.7.4

Diaphragms C NC N/A U DIAPHRAGM CONTINUITY: The diaphragms are not composed of split-level floors and do not have expansion joints.

5.6.1.1 A.4.1.1

C NC N/A U ROOF CHORD CONTINUITY: All chord elements are continuous, regardless of changes in roof elevation.

5.6.1.1 A.4.1.3

C NC N/A U DIAPHRAGM REINFORCEMENT AT OPENINGS: There is reinforcing around all diaphragm openings larger than 50% of the building width in either major plan dimension.

5.6.1.5 A.4.1.8

C NC N/A U STRAIGHT SHEATHING: All straight-sheathed diaphragms have aspect ratios less than 1-to-1 in the direction being considered.

5.6.2 A.4.2.1

C NC N/A U SPANS: All wood diaphragms with spans greater than 12 ft (3.6 m) consist of wood structural panels or diagonal sheathing.

5.6.2 A.4.2.2

C NC N/A U DIAGONALLY SHEATHED AND UNBLOCKED DIAPHRAGMS: All diagonally sheathed or unblocked wood structural panel diaphragms have horizontal spans less than 30 ft (9.2 m) and have aspect ratios less than or equal to 3-to-1.

5.6.2 A.4.2.3

C NC N/A U OTHER DIAPHRAGMS: The diaphragms do not consist of a system other than wood, metal deck, concrete, or horizontal bracing.

5.6.5 A.4.7.1

Connections C NC N/A U WOODSILL BOLTS: Sill bolts are spaced at 4 ft or less with acceptable edge and end distance provided for wood and concrete.

5.7.3.3 A.5.3.7

Note: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, and U = Unknown.

Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Structures 275 kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse

Table 17-38. Nonstructural Checklist

Status Evaluation Statementa,b Tier 2

Reference Commentary Reference

Life Safety Systems C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—LMH; PR—LMH. FIRE SUPPRESSION PIPING: Fire suppression piping is anchored and braced in accordance with NFPA-13.

13.7.4 A.7.13.1

C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—LMH; PR—LMH. FLEXIBLE COUPLINGS: Fire suppression piping has flexible couplings in accordance with NFPA-13.

13.7.4 A.7.13.2

C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—LMH; PR—LMH. EMERGENCY POWER: Equipment used to power or control Life Safety systems is anchored or braced.

13.7.7 A.7.12.1

C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—LMH; PR—LMH. STAIR AND SMOKE DUCTS: Stair pressurization and smoke control ducts are braced and have flexible connections at seismic joints.

13.7.6 A.7.14.1

C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—MH; PR—MH. SPRINKLER CEILING CLEARANCE:

Penetrations through panelized ceilings for fire suppression devices provide clearances in accordance with NFPA-13.

13.7.4 A.7.13.3

C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—not required; PR—LMH. EMERGENCY LIGHTING:

Emergency and egress lighting equipment is anchored or braced.

13.7.9 A.7.3.1

Hazardous Materials

C NC N/A U HR—LMH; LS—LMH; PR—LMH. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL EQUIPMENT:

Equipment mounted on vibration isolators and containing hazardous material is equipped with restraints or snubbers.

13.7.1 A.7.12.2

C NC N/A U HR—LMH; LS—LMH; PR—LMH. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL STORAGE:

Breakable containers that hold hazardous material, including gas cylinders, are restrained by latched doors, shelf lips, wires, or other methods.

13.8.3 A.7.15.1

C NC N/A U HR—MH; LS—MH; PR—MH. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL DISTRIBUTION:

Piping or ductwork conveying hazardous materials is braced or otherwise protected from damage that would allow hazardous material release.

13.7.3 13.7.5

A.7.13.4

C NC N/A U HR—MH; LS—MH; PR—MH. SHUTOFF VALVES: Piping containing hazardous material, including natural gas, has shutoff valves or other devices to limit spills or leaks.

13.7.3 13.7.5

A.7.13.3

C NC N/A U HR—LMH; LS—LMH; PR—LMH. FLEXIBLE COUPLINGS: Hazardous material ductwork and piping, including natural gas piping, have flexible couplings.

13.7.3 13.7.5

A.7.15.4

C NC N/A U HR—MH; LS—MH; PR—MH. PIPING OR DUCTS CROSSING SEISMIC

JOINTS: Piping or ductwork carrying hazardous material that either crosses seismic joints or isolation planes or is connected to independent structures has couplings or other details to accommodate the relative seismic displacements.

13.7.3 13.7.5 13.7.6

A.7.13.6

Partitions C NC N/A U HR—LMH; LS—LMH; PR—LMH. UNREINFORCED MASONRY: Unreinforced masonry or hollow-clay tile partitions are braced at a spacing of at most 10 ft (3.0 m) in Low or Moderate Seismicity, or at most 6 ft (1.8 m) in High Seismicity.

13.6.2 A.7.1.1

C NC N/A U HR—LMH; LS—LMH; PR—LMH. HEAVY PARTITIONS SUPPORTED BY

CEILINGS: The tops of masonry or hollow-clay tile partitions are not laterally supported by an integrated ceiling system.

13.6.2 A.7.2.1

C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—MH; PR—MH. DRIFT: Rigid cementitious partitions are detailed to accommodate the following drift ratios: in steel moment frame, concrete moment frame, and wood frame buildings, 0.02; in other buildings, 0.005.

13.6.2 A.7.1.2

C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—not required; PR—MH. LIGHT PARTITIONS SUPPORTED BY CEILINGS: The tops of gypsum board partitions are not laterally supported by an integrated ceiling system.

13.6.2 A.7.2.1

C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—not required; PR—MH. STRUCTURAL SEPARATIONS: Partitions that cross structural separations have seismic or control joints.

13.6.2 A.7.1.3

continues

Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Structures 319 kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse kevinhassett Ellipse

Table 17-38 (Continued). Nonstructural Checklist

Tier 2

Reference Commentary Reference

C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—not required; PR—MH. TOPS: The tops of ceiling-high framed or panelized partitions have lateral bracing to the structure at a spacing equal to or less than 6 ft (1.8 m).

13.6.2 A.7.1.4

Ceilings C NC N/A U HR—H; LS—MH; PR—LMH. SUSPENDED LATH AND PLASTER: Suspended lath and plaster ceilings have attachments that resist seismic forces for every 12 ft2 (1.1 m2) of area.

13.6.4 A.7.2.3

C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—MH; PR—LMH. SUSPENDED GYPSUM BOARD:

Suspended gypsum board ceilings have attachments that resist seismic forces for every 12 ft2 (1.1 m2) of area.

13.6.4 A.7.2.3

C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—not required; PR—MH. INTEGRATED CEILINGS:

Integrated suspended ceilings with continuous areas greater than 144 ft2

(13.4 m2) and ceilings of smaller areas that are not surrounded by restraining partitions are laterally restrained at a spacing no greater than 12 ft (3.6 m) with members attached to the structure above. Each restraint location has a minimum of four diagonal wires and compression struts, or diagonal members capable of resisting compression.

13.6.4 A.7.2.2

C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—not required; PR—MH. EDGE CLEARANCE: The free edges of integrated suspended ceilings with continuous areas greater than 144 ft2 (13.4 m2) have clearances from the enclosing wall or partition of at least the following: in Moderate Seismicity, 1/2 in. (13 mm); in High Seismicity, 3/4

in. (19 mm).

13.6.4 A.7.2.4

C NC N/A U HR—not required; LS—not required; PR—MH. CONTINUITY ACROSS STRUCTURE JOINTS: The ceiling system does not cross any seismic joint and is not attached to multiple independent…