SEISMIC EVALUATION REPORT

Pleasant Hill

School District

Seismic Assessment for

Pleasant Hill High School

Gymnasium

84455 N Enterprise Rd.

Pleasant Hill, OR 97455

Prepared for:

Jim Crist

Superintendent

January 5, 2024

23030.00

Prepared By:

WRK Engineers

Brian Knight PE, SE |Principal brian@wrkengrs.com

360.695.9731

EXPIRES: 6/30/2025

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS

FOR ENGINEERING/ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES

EXHIBIT A

Pleasant Hill School District

High School Gymnasium

23030.00

Page i

Project Summary Information

Buildin g Part

Building Part

Name

Included in

Retrofit

Year

Built

Building

Type*

Nonstructural

Retrofits included in

Scope Y/N*

Previous

Seismic Retrofit

Y/N*

(year if Y)

A Auxiliary

Gymnasium No 1961

B High School

Gymnasium Yes 1961

W2 /

URM

Yes No

C Music Center/

Cafeteria No 1961

D Administration

Building No 1961

E Library No 1961

F Classroom

Building No 1964

G Classroom/

Shop Building No 1964

H

Weight

Room/Team room

No 1974

I Classroom

Building No 1967

J Forestry

Building No 1967

*Entries required ONLY for building parts included in proposed seismic retrofit. If building part was previously or is currently being retrofitted, please list the building part’s Risk Category and retrofit design Performance Objective, if known.

Nonstructural deficiencies posing life safety risk MUST be included in the scope of work and budget.

Seismic fragility inputs for existing buildings with previous seismic retrofits MUST be adjusted to reflect previous seismic retrofit measures completed for at building part.

Total Retrofit Cost $2,499,940

Retrofit Square Feet 18,600 SF

Retrofit Cost Per Square

Feet $134.41 Yes or No?

Is the campus within a tsunami**, FEMA flood zone, landslide/slope instability, liquefaction potential or other high hazard area?

If so, provide documentation (e.g. the Oregon Statewide Hazards

Viewer by DOGAMI).

** Projects within a Tsunami Design Zone (as defined in Application Guidance Packet section

2.D.16) require consultation with DOGAMI prior to application submittal. Applicant shall include such documentation with the application.

No

Page ii

Engineering Report Checklist

☒ Engineering Report Cover Page

☒ Project Summary Page Page i

☒ Building Parts Identification Page 5

☒ Statement of the Performance Objective Page 2

Summary of Deficiencies

☒ Structural Seismic Deficiencies Page 7

☒ Nonstructural Seismic Deficiencies Page 10

Summary of Mitigation/Retrofit

☒ Structural Mitigation/Retrofit Page 7

☒ Nonstructural Mitigation/Retrofit Page 10

Summary Construction Cost Estimate

☒ Direct Cost Page 11

☒ Indirect Soft Cost Page 11

☒ Certification Statement by Engineer Page 13

ASCE 41-17 Tier 1 Checklist

☒ Basic Configuration Checklist Appendix E

☒ Building System Structural Checklist Appendix E

☒ Nonstructural Checklist Appendix E

☒ Retrofit Drawings & Sketches Appendix B

☒ DOGAMI or Geotechnical Report Appendix F

☒ Itemized Construction Cost Estimate Appendix C

23030.00

Page iii

Table of Contents

1. Project Background

2. Candidate Qualifications

3. Evaluation Criteria and Methodology

4. Building Description

5. Existing Material Test Results

6. Site Specific Seismicity and Geologic Hazards

7. Building Deficiencies & Recommended Strengthening Measures

7.1 Structural Deficiencies & Strengthening Measures

7.2 Nonstructural Deficiencies & Strengthening Measures

8. Construction Cost Estimate

9. Benefit Cost Analysis

10. Rapid Visual Screening

11. Limitations

12. Certification Statement

APPENDICES

Appendix A Building Photos

Appendix B Conceptual Seismic Strengthening Scheme

Appendix C Construction Cost Estimate

Appendix D Benefit Cost Analysis Worksheet

Appendix E ASCE 41-17 Tier 1 Checklists

Appendix F DOGAMI and RVS

23030.00

1. Project Background

The goal of this evaluation of the Pleasant Hill High School Gymnasium (Gymnasium) is to determine the expected performance during a design basis earthquake. The purpose of our seismic evaluation is to identify the structural and nonstructural deficiencies that exist at the Gymnasium. The evaluation will then be used as the basis for developing a suitable strengthening scheme for the structural system. In addition, the evaluation will assist us in identifying the nonstructural components requiring seismic hardening (i.e. anchorage and/or bracing).

In addition to the Gymnasium described in this report, there are nine (9) other buildings on the site: the auxiliary gymnasium, music center/cafeteria, administration building, library, two classroom buildings, classroom/shop building, weight room, and a forestry building. These buildings are outside of the scope of work and are not included in this report.

Our work is based on the following:

1. A review of available construction documents for the high school gymnasium prepared by Clare K. Hamlin, B. King Martin, dated 1961.

2. A review of available construction documents for the weight room prepared by 1974, dated Hamlin, Martin, Schultz & Geyer.

3. A site visit by Brian Knight, PE, SE, of WRK Engineers on April 14, 2023, to verify the as-built conditions of the building’s structural and nonstructural systems.

2. Candidate Qualifications

Upon review of OAR 123-051-0300 regarding eligible applicants for the Seismic

Rehabilitation Grant, we have confirmed the Pleasant Hill High School Gymnasium is a qualified candidate as it is a public school building routinely used for student activity with a capacity of more than 250 persons, and the building is owned by the Pleasant Hill

School District.

We believe the Pleasant Hill High School Gymnasium is a good candidate for seismic strengthening based on the criteria highlighted in Table 1.

3. Evaluation Criteria and Methodology

For our evaluation of the Gymnasium, we used ASCE Standard 41-17, “Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings” published by the American Society of Civil Engineers

(ASCE). ASCE 41 is the nationally recognized Standard for seismic assessment and evaluation of existing buildings. The goal of ASCE 41 is to identify the “weak links” in a building’s lateral force resisting system that can lead to significant failure and/or collapse.

In addition, ASCE 41 will identify typical nonstructural hazards that may pose a life-safety risk to occupants or a business interruption (i.e. operations) risk to the building.

The methodology utilizes a series of checklists that address possible seismic hazards.

Checklists are included in the Standard for all the major structural systems, nonstructural elements, and geologic and site hazards. The evaluating engineer addresses each statement and determines whether it is compliant or noncompliant. Compliant statements identify conditions that are acceptable. Noncompliant statements identify conditions that need further investigation. In some cases, the Standard specifies additional calculations that may be performed to address a noncompliant statement. In other cases, a detailed analysis of the building must be performed.

ASCE 41-17 provides Performance Objectives based on a building’s Risk Category which are to be used for the evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings. For our evaluation, we have used the Basic Performance Objective for Existing Buildings (BPOE) for Risk Category

IV structures. For this performance objective, the building is evaluated to the Life Safety

(LS) structural performance level and Hazards Reduced nonstructural performance level for the BSE-2E seismic hazard and to the Immediate Occupancy (IO) structural performance level and Position Retention (PR) nonstructural performance level for the

BSE-1E seismic hazard.

TABLE 1 – Candidate Summary

Criteria Response

Is the building in good condition? Yes

Is the building a functional part of the community? Yes

Is the building part of the community’s emergency response (RC IV)? Yes

Is the cost of a rehabilitation low relative to a new building cost? Yes

Is the building located within a site that has low flood or landslide hazards? Yes

Is the seismic rehabilitation cost less than the allowable grant maximum? Yes

Was the original building designed before seismic standards were codified

(pre-1974)?

Yes

Is the building in an area of high seismicity? Yes

Does the building have non-ductile structural systems? Yes

Does the building have vertical or horizontal irregularities? Yes

23030.00

The intent of the IO Structural Performance Level for BSE-1E is:

After a design earthquake, the basic vertical and lateral force resisting systems retain nearly all of their pre-earthquake strength, and very limited damage to both structural and nonstructural components is anticipated during the design earthquake which require some minor repairs, but the critical parts of the building are habitable.

The intent of the LS Structural Performance Level for BSE-2E is:

After the earthquake, the structure has damaged components but there is some margin against either partial or total structural collapse that remains. The damaged structure is not an imminent collapse risk although some structural elements are severely damaged. The building will retain at least some of its strength against collapse and should prevent loss of human life. However, there may be injuries and the building could potentially be damaged beyond the point of economical repair.

The intent of the PR Nonstructural Performance Level for BSE-1E is:

After a design earthquake, the nonstructural components might be damaged to the extent that they cannot immediately function but are secured in place so that damages caused by falling, toppling, or breaking of utility connection is avoided.

Building access and Life Safety Systems, including doors, stairways, elevators, emergency lighting, fire alarms, and fire suppression systems, generally remain available and operable, provided that power and utility services are available.

The intent of the HR Nonstructural Performance Level for BSE-2E is:

After a design earthquake, the nonstructural components are damaged and could potentially create falling hazards, but high hazard nonstructural components as defined in Chapter 13 of ASCE 7-16, are secured to prevent falling into areas of public assembly or those falling hazards from those components could pose a risk to life safety for many people. Preservation of Egress, protection of fire suppression systems, and similar life safety issues are not addressed.

In other words, the IO Structural Performance Level and PR Nonstructural Performance

Level are meant to ensure that a building will continue to remain in operation immediately following a major earthquake. The LS Structural Peformance Level and HR

Nonstructural Peformance Level permit structural damage but ensure the structural integrity of a building after a major earthquake and that occupants are able to evacuate safely. Figure 1 graphically shows the performance objectives for a BSE-1E seismic event in red, and a BSE-2E seismic event in blue.

Figure 1: Structural Performance Level

4. Building Description

The Gymnasium is an 18,600-square-foot, single-story building originally constructed in

1961. The Gymnasium is composed of wood framing and unreinforced masonry. The building is rectangular in plan, approximately 200 feet by 111 feet, with a maximum roof height of approximately 35 feet. The building consists of locker rooms, offices, storage rooms, mechanical rooms, concessions, a gym, and other associated spaces. See Figure

2 for a Building Part Map and Appendix A for photos of the building.

The lateral system of the Gymnasium consists of a 4x tongue and groove decking diaphragm which spans between wood framed shear walls along the perimeter. The East wood framed shear wall bears upon a URM shear wall. The lateral system of the

Gymnasium lobby consists of a 4x tongue and groove decking diaphragm spanning between wood framed shear walls. The roof diaphragms are considered flexible relative to the walls that support them.

The gravity system for the Gymnasium consists of 4x tongue and groove decking which is supported by glulam arches spaced at 17-feet on center. The glulam arches span between concrete buttresses. The gravity system for the Gymnasium lobby consists of 4x tongue and groove decking supported by wood framed bearing walls. The Gymnasium ground floor level is composed of single straight sheathing supported by 2x sawn lumber joists at 12-inches on center bearing on timber beams at 5-foot on center. The timber beams bear on 6x6 timber posts. Gravity and lateral loads are transferred to the soil via spread footings.

The balcony lateral system is composed of single straight sheathing spanning between

URM shear walls along the perimeter. The balcony diaphragm is considered flexible relative to the URM walls supporting it. The balcony’s gravity system consists of single

23030.00 straight sheathing supported by timber joists spaced at 4-foot on center bearing on URM bearing walls. Gravity and lateral loads are transferred to the soil via spread footings.

After reviewing the drawings and as-built condition, the lateral force resisting system and the ASCE 41 building type is classified as W2: Wood Frames, Commercial and

Industrial and URM: Unreinforced Masonry Bearing Walls with Flexible Diaphragms.

Figure 2: Building Part Map

23030.00

5. Existing Material Test Results

An onsite investigation was performed solely to verify the as-built conditions. No materials testing was performed as part of our evaluation.

6. Site Specific Seismicity and Geologic Hazards

Using the data collected by the United States Geologic Survey, Table 2 summarizes the site specific seismicity for the location of the Gymnasium. The building is assumed to be founded on “stiff” soils of varying depths. As a result, the site soil classification is assumed to be Class “D”.

Using the ASCE 41-17 checklists, the geologic hazards that were assessed as part of this engineering evaluation include liquefaction, landslide, flood potential, and tsunami inundation, if applicable. Using the DOGAMI Oregon HazVu website, these potential hazards were evaluated. The result from each hazard HazVu evaluation is included in

Appendix F.

It was determined the site is in an area with NO geologic hazards as identified from the

DOGAMI Oregon HazVu plots. Documentation of geological hazards are in Appendix F.

7. Building Deficiencies & Recommended Strengthening Measures

Using the procedures of ASCE 41, we have identified several deficiencies in the lateral force resisting system. The ASCE 41 Tier 1 checklists used to identify the structural and nonstructural deficiencies are attached as Appendix E. Based on the identified deficiencies and building condition, we have developed a conceptual strengthening scheme (see Appendix B) for the Gymnasium.

TABLE 2 - Site Specific Seismicity

Soil Density Stiff

ASCE 7-16 Soil Classification Class D

BSE-2N Event: Short Period Spectral Acceleration (SS) 0.620

BSE-2N Event: Long Period Spectral Acceleration (S1) 0.361

BSE-2N Event: Soil Condition Amplification Factors (FV / FA) 1.937 / 1.304

BSE-1E Event: Short Period Spectral Acceleration (Sxs) 0.185

BSE-1E Event: Long Period Spectral Acceleration (Sx1) 0.132

BSE-2E Event: Short Period Spectral Acceleration (Sxs) 0.624

BSE-2E Event: Long Period Spectral Acceleration (Sx1) 0.514

FEMA 154 RVS Seismicity Zone Moderately High

ASCE 41-17 Level of Seismicity High

23030.00

The strengthening measures are recommendations intended to provide a general discussion of the potential strengthening/hardening measures likely needed for this building. However, they are conceptual and do not constitute a final engineered solution.

7.1 Structural Deficiencies & Strengthening Measures

Numerous structural deficiencies have been identified at the Gymnasium. All structural deficiencies and the strengthening measures are summarized in Table 3.

TABLE 3 – STRUCTURAL

Deficiencies & Strengthening Measures

Immediate Occupancy Performance Level

Item

Number

Component

Type Deficiency Strengthening Measure

S1 Load Path

The structure does not contain a complete, well-defined load path with structural elements and connections that serve to transfer inertial forces associated with mass of elements to the building foundation.

Provide complete load path for transfer of inertial forces to building foundation.

S2 Adjacent

Buildings

The clear distance between the building being evaluated and any adjacent building is not greater than 0.5% of the height of the shorter building in low seismicity, 1.0% in moderate seismicity, and 3% in high seismicity.

Provide seismic isolation joint to avoid pounding of the taller structure into the lower structure.

Provide all new gravity framing and lateral resisting elements as necessary to provide building separation.

S3 Mezzanines

The interior mezzanine levels are not braced independently from the main structure or are anchored to the seismic-force-resisting elements of the main structure.

Anchor mezzanine to main structure lateral force resisting system and add shear walls as required.

S4 Shear Stress

Check

The shear stress in the shear walls is more than the following values:

Structural panel sheathing - 1,000 lb./ft.; Diagonal sheathing - 700 lb./ft.; Straight sheathing and all other conditions - 100 lb./ft.

Either strengthen existing shear walls or add new lateral force resisting elements.

23030.00

TABLE 3 – STRUCTURAL Deficiencies & Strengthening Measures continued

Item

Number

Component

Type Deficiency Strengthening Measure

S5

Walls

Connected

Through

Floors

Shear walls don't have an interconnection between stories to transfer overturning and shear forces through the floor.

Interconnect all shear walls between stories.

S6 Hold-Down

Anchors

Shear walls do not have hold-down anchors attached to end studs.

Install hold-down anchors at shear walls where they are needed to resist uplift for overturning seismic loads.

S7 Wood Posts There is not a positive connection of wood posts to the foundation.

Add positive connection of wood posts to foundation.

S8 Wood Sills Wood sills are not bolted to the foundation.

Add sill bolts to foundation.

S9 Roof Chord

Continuity

Not all chord elements are continuous, regardless of changes in roof elevation.

Provide continuous chord elements.

S10 Straight

Sheathing

Straight sheathed diaphragms have aspect ratios greater than

1-to-1 in the direction being considered.

Add plywood sheathing overlay at diaphragm with nailing, blocking, and strapping as needed.

S11 Spans

All wood diaphragms with spans greater than 12 ft. do not consist of wood structural panels or diagonal sheathing.

Install plywood sheathing overlay at roof diaphragm with diaphragm blocking, strapping and collectors.

S12

Diagonally

Sheathed and

Unblocked

Diaphragms

All diagonally sheathed or unblocked wood structural panel diaphragms have horizontal spans greater than 30 ft. and aspect ratios greater than 3-to-1.

Add blocking and supplemental nailing as required to reinforce diaphragm.

S13 Wood Sill

Bolts

The existing wood sill bolt spacing is greater than 4 ft.

Add sill bolts to existing wood shear walls.

S14 Shear Stress

Check

The shear stress in the unreinforced masonry shear walls is more than 30 lb/in.2 for clay units and 70 lb/in.2 for concrete units.

Strengthen wall or add new lateral force resisting elements where required.

S15 Wall

Anchorage

Exterior concrete or masonry walls that are dependent on the diaphragm for lateral support are not anchored for out-of-plane forces at each diaphragm level with steel anchors, reinforcing dowels, or straps that are developed into the diaphragm.

Add wall anchorage connections and subdiaphragms.

23030.00

TABLE 3 – STRUCTURAL Deficiencies & Strengthening Measures continued

Item

Number

Component

Type Deficiency Strengthening Measure

S16 Transfer to

Shear Walls

Diaphragms are not connected for transfer of seismic forces to the shear walls, and the connections are not able to develop the lesser of the shear strength of walls or diaphragms.

Add in-plane connection between shear walls and diaphragm.

S17

Girder-

Column

Connection

There is no positive connection hardware between the girders and column supports.

Add positive connection of girders to column supports

S18 Proportions The height-to-thickness ratio of the shear walls is greater than 13.

Strengthen/reinforce wall for expected out-of-plane demands.

S19 Opening at

Shear Walls

Diaphragm openings immediately adjacent to the shear walls are greater than 15% of the wall length.

Strengthen diaphragm to wall connection or add diaphragm collectors.

S20 Plan

Irregularities

There is no tensile capacity to develop the strength of the diaphragm at reentrant corners or other locations of plan irregularities.

Provide diaphragm reinforcement at reentrant corners and openings.

S21 Cross Ties There are no continuous cross ties between diaphragm chords.

Add tension ties and supplemental framing for continuous cross ties.

S22 Straight

Sheathing

Straight sheathed diaphragms have aspect ratios greater than

1-to-1.

Add plywood sheathing overlay at diaphragm with nailing, blocking, and strapping as needed.

S23 Spans

All wood diaphragms with spans greater than 12 ft. do not consist of wood structural panels or diagonal sheathing.

Install plywood sheathing overlay at roof diaphragm with diaphragm blocking, strapping and collectors.

S24

Stiffness of

Wall

Anchors

Anchors of concrete or masonry walls to wood structural elements are not installed taut and stiff enough to limit the relative movement between the wall and the diaphragm before engagement of the anchors.

Install anchors to improve connection stiffness to limit relative movement between the wall and the diaphragms.

S25

Beam, Girder, and

Truss

Supports

Beams, girders, and trusses supported by unreinforced masonry walls or pilasters do not have independent secondary columns for support of vertical loads.

Add supplemental independent support columns for Beam, Girder, and Truss support.

23030.00

7.2 Nonstructural Deficiencies & Strengthening Measures

Numerous nonstructural deficiencies have been identified at the Gymnasium. All nonstructural deficiencies and the strengthening measures are summarized in Table 4.

TABLE 4 – NONSTRUCTURAL

Deficiencies & Strengthening Measures

Position Retention Performance Level

Item

Number

Component

Type Deficiency Strengthening Measure

N1 Shutoff

Valves

Piping containing hazardous material, including natural gas, does not have shutoff valves or other devices to limit spills or leaks.

Add shutoff valves or other devices to limit spills or leaks.

N2 Flexible

Couplings

Hazardous material piping, including natural gas piping, does not have flexible couplings.

Add flexible couplings to hazardous material piping and fluid and gas piping.

N3 Unreinforced

Masonry

Unreinforced masonry or hollow-clay tile partitions are not braced at a spacing of at most 10 ft. in low or moderate seismicity, or at most 6

ft. in high seismicity.

Provide HSS strongback bracing at 6 ft. maximum spacing.

N4 Drift

Rigid cementitious partitions are not 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.

Add HSS strongbacks at URM partition walls to accommodate drift requirements.

N5 Lens Covers Lens covers are not attached to the light fixture with safety devices.

Attach all lens covers on light fixtures with safety devices.

N6 Tall Narrow

Contents

Contents more than 6 ft. high with a height-to-depth ratio greater than 3-to-1 are not anchored to the structure or to each other.

Brace and/or anchor all contents more than 6 ft. high to the structure or to each other.

N7 Fall-Prone

Equipment

Mechanical and electrical equipment weighing more than 20

lb. whose center of mass is more than 4 ft. above the adjacent floor level, and which is not in-line equipment, is not braced.

Brace all mechanical and electrical equipment weighing more than 20 lb. whose center of mass is more than 4 ft.

above the adjacent floor level.

N8 Tall Narrow

Equipment

Equipment more than 6 ft. high with a height-to-depth or height-to-width ratio greater than 3-to-1 is not anchored to the floor slab or adjacent structural walls.

Cabinets and Lockers more than 6 ft. high or with a height-to-depth ratio exceeding 3:1 are to be anchored to ground.

23030.00

TABLE 4 – NONSTRUCTURAL Deficiencies & Strengthening Measures continued

Item

Number

Component

Type Deficiency Strengthening Measure

N9 Flexible

Couplings

Fluid and gas piping does not have flexible couplings.

Add flexible couplings to fluid and gas piping.

8. Construction Cost Estimate

An engineer’s opinion of probable cost has been prepared based on the developed seismic strengthening scheme (see Appendix B) and is attached as Appendix C. The cost estimate addresses all seismic strengthening required and includes all construction costs, contingencies and necessary soft costs required to complete the scope of work. A summary of the cost estimate is provided in Table 5.

TABLE 5 – Cost Estimate Summary

Construction Category Cost Estimate

Engineering $341,991

Construction Management $47,999

Construction $1,716,626

Relocation $59,999

Contingency $333,325

Total $2,499,940

Total Area 18,600 Square Feet

$/Square Feet $134.41

9. Benefit Cost Analysis

The benefit cost analysis (BCA) is performed using the BCA spreadsheet provided by the

Oregon Business Development Department-Infrastructure Finance Authority (OBDD-IFA) as required by the SRGP (Seismic Rehabilitation Grant Program). The BCA tool considers the net present value of costs associated with damage to the building and its contents, displacements costs, loss of functionality costs, and casualties. Default building data and fragility curve information is provided in the BCA tool.

The building database in the BCA tool breaks the Pleasant Hill High School into 10 different building parts. The Pleasant Hill High School Gymnasium is labeled Building Part B. Building

Parts A, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J are not within the scope of this seismic evaluation. Pleasant

Hill School District provided only the occupancy and budget information for Building Part

B. Therefore, on the Main page of the BCA tool (see Appendix D), the occupancy and budget percentages of Building Part B are both set to be 100% and 0% was assigned to

23030.00 the other building parts. This is to avoid having the occupancy and budget provided solely for Building Part B be allocated to Building Parts A, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J.

Please note, Building Part B consists of building type W2 and URM. However, since W2 is the primary lateral force resisting system, the BCA calculations are based on W2 building type.

The BCA score for this project is 0.682. Although the Gymnasium received a BCA score less than 1.0, we believe it is still a strong candidate for seismic strengthening and should be considered for grant funding. The BCA analysis performed using the OBDD-IFA BCA spreadsheet tool does not accurately capture the cost to the building if it is out-of-service after a major seismic event and its importance to the community.

The grant application outlines the additional benefits and the potential costs to the community if the building is excessively damaged and not ready for re-occupancy after a major seismic event.

10. Rapid Visual Screening

The Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) completed many Rapid

Visual Screening (RVS) assessments for public facilities throughout Oregon. However, for the purpose of this report, a new RVS report was created to align with this seismic evaluation. Attached in Appendix F is the RVS report created using the FEMA P-154 Data

Collection Form for the Gymnasium.

Note, only the RVS report for Building Part B has been included since the other building parts are out of the project scope and have no impact on the BCA calculations or grant application.

11. Limitations

The opinions and recommendations presented in this report were developed with the care commonly used as the state of practice of the profession. No other warranties are included, either expressed or implied, as to the professional advice included in this report.

This report has been prepared for Pleasant Hill High School Gymnasium and is used solely in its evaluation of the seismic safety of the building included herein. This report has not been prepared for use by other parties and may not contain sufficient information for purposes of other parties or uses. If you have any comments or questions regarding this evaluation, please contact us.

23030.00

12. Certification Statement

WRK Engineers has reviewed the Pleasant Hill High School Gymnasium, noted the deficiencies in the Tier 1 checklists, developed seismic retrofit solutions to rectify the deficiencies, and a cost estimate for the project. The design engineer certifies the retrofit scope of work includes strengthening measures of all the structural and nonstructural deficiencies identified in the report and all items required to perform the work. The design engineer certifies the cost estimate includes all the retrofit’s scope of work elements.

Brian Knight, PE, SE

Appendix A

BUILDING PHOTOS

Image 1: Southeast Elevation

Image 2: Northeast Elevation

Image 3: Northwest Elevation

Image 4: Southwest Elevation

Image 5: Balcony Framing Over Locker Room

Image 6: Gymnasium

Image 7: Hallway

Image 8: Exterior Canopy Framing

Appendix B

CONCEPTUAL SEISMIC STRENGTHENING SCHEME

G1

PLEASANT HILL HIGH SCHOOL

GYMNASIUM SEISMIC REHABILITATION

GRANT STRENGTHENING CONCEPTS

PROJECT NARRATIVE

THE INTENT OF THESE DRAWINGS IS TO ILLUSTRATE THE SCHEMATIC SEISMIC REHABILITATION TASKS TO RECTIFY THE LISTED SEISMIC AND NONSTRUCTURAL DEFICIENCIES. THESE SCHEMATIC DRAWINGS

HAVE BEEN PREPARED USING THE CURRENT OREGON STRUCTURAL SPECIALTY CODE (OSSC) AND

ASCE 41 (SEISMIC REHABILITATION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS) STANDARD.

THE TARGET FOR REHABILITATION IS TO IMMEDIATE OCCUPANCY (IO) STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE LEVEL AND A POSITION RETENTION (PR) NONSTRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE LEVEL AT THE BSE-1E

SEISMIC EVENT AND THE LIFE SAFETY (LS) STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE LEVEL AND HAZARDS

REDUCED (HR) NONSTRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE LEVEL AT THE BSE-2E SEISMIC EVENT.

THE (IO) STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE LEVEL MEANS THAT AFTER A DESIGN EARTHQUAKE, THE BASIC VERTICAL AND LATERAL FORCE RESISTING SYSTEMS RETAIN NEARLY ALL OF THEIR PRE-EARTHQUAKE STRENGTH AND STIFFNESS. VERY LIMITED DAMAGE TO BOTH THE STRUCTURAL AND NONSTRUCTURAL

COMPONENTS IS ANTICIPATED DURING THE DESIGN EARTHQUAKE WHICH REQUIRE SOME MINOR

REPAIRS, BUT MAY NOT BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO REOCCUPANCY. THE RISK OF LIFE THREATENING

INJURY AS A RESULT OF STRUCTURAL DAMAGE IS VERY LOW.

PROJECT INCLUDES SEISMIC REHABILITATION FOR THE ENTIRE GYMNASIUM BUILDING.

STRUCTURAL DEFICIENCIES

S1. THE STRUCTURE DOES NOT CONTAIN 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.

S2. THE CLEARANCE BETWEEN THE BUILDING BEING EVALUATED AND ANY ADJACENT BUILDING IS LESS THAN 0.5% OF THE HEIGHT OF THE SHORTER BUILDING IN LOW SEISMICITY, 1.0% IN MODERATE

SEISMICITY, AND 3.0% IN HIGH SEISMICITY.

S3. INTERIOR MEZZANINE LEVELS ARE NOT BRACED INDEPENDENTLY FROM THE MAIN STRUCTURE OR

ANCHORED TO THE SEISMIC-FORCE-RESISTING ELEMENTS.

S4. WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALLS DO NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT CAPACITY FOR THE SEISMIC DEMANDS.

S5. WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALLS ARE NOT CONNECTED BETWEEN STORIES TO TRANSFER

OVERTURNING AND SHEAR FORCES.

S6. NOT ALL WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALLS HAVE HOLD-DOWN ANCHORS ATTACHED TO THE END

STUDS CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACCEPTABLE CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES.

S7. THERE ARE NOT POSITIVE CONNECTIONS FROM WOOD POSTS TO THE FOUNDATION.

S8. NOT ALL WOOD SILLS ARE BOLTED TO THE FOUNDATION.

S9. NOT ALL ROOF CHORDS ARE CONTINUOUS.

S10. STRAIGHT-SHEATHED DIAPHRAGMS OVER WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALLS WITH ASPECT RATIOS

GREATER THAN 1-TO-1 ARE PRESENT.

S11. WOOD DIAPHRAGMS OVER WOOD FRAMED SHEAR WALLS WITH SPANS GREATER THAN 12-FEET

CONSISTING OF SHEATHING OTHER THAN WOOD STRUCTURAL PANELS ARE PRESENT.

S12. NOT ALL DIAGONALLY SHEATHED OR UNBLOCKED DIAPHRAGMS OVER WOOD FRAMED SHEAR

WALLS HAVE HORIZONTAL SPANS LESS THAN 30-FEET AND ASPECT RATIOS LESS THAN OR EQUAL

TO 3-TO-1.

S13. SILL BOLTS ARE SPACED GREATER THAN 4-FEET ON CENTER.

S14. URM SHEAR WALLS HAVE INSUFFICIENT CAPACITY FOR THE GIVEN SHEAR WALL DEMANDS.

S15. EXTERIOR CONCRETE OR MASONRY WALLS THAT ARE DEPENDENT ON THE DIAPHRAGM FOR

LATERAL SUPPORT ARE NOT ANCHORED FOR OUT-OF-PLANE FORCES AT EACH DIAPHRAGM LEVEL.

S16. DIAPHRAGMS ARE NOT CONNECTED FOR TRANSFER OF SEISMIC FORCES TO THE URM SHEAR

WALLS.

NONSTRUCTURAL DEFICIENCIES

N1. PIPING CONTAINING HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, INCLUDING NATURAL GAS, DO NOT HAVE SHUTOFF

VALVES OR OTHER DEVICES TO LIMIT SPILLS AND LEAKS.

N2. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL DUCTWORK AND PIPING, INCLUDING NATURAL GAS PIPING, DO NOT HAVE

FLEXIBLE COUPLINGS.

N3. URM OR HOLLOW CLAY TILE PARTITIONS ARE NOT BRACED AT A SPACING OF AT MOST 6-FEET.

N4. RIGID CEMENTITIOUS PARTITIONS ARE NOT DETAILED TO ACCOMMODATE EXPECTED DRIFT RATIOS.

N5. LENS COVERS ON LIGHTS ARE NOT ATTACHED WITH SAFETY DEVICES.

N6. CONTENTS MORE THAN 6-FEET HIGH WITH A HEIGHT-TO-DEPTH OR HEIGHT-TO-WIDTH GREATER

THAN 3-TO-1 ARE NOT ANCHORED TO THE STRUCTURE OR TO EACH OTHER.

N7. EQUIPMENT WEIGHING MORE THAN 20-POUNDS WITH A CENTER OF MASS MORE THAN 4-FEET

ABOVE THE ADJACENT FLOOR LEVEL ARE NOT BRACED.

N8. EQUIPMENT MORE THAN 6-FEET HIGH WITH A HEIGHT-TO-DEPTH OR HEIGHT-TO-WIDTH GREATER

THAN 3-TO-1 ARE NOT ANCHORED TO THE FLOOR SLAB OR THE ADJACENT STRUCTURAL WALLS.

N9. FLUID AND GAS PIPING DOES NOT HAVE FLEXIBLE COUPLINGS.

S:

\P ro je ct s\

\2

.0

- P le as an t H ill Sc ho ol

D is tri ct

S ei sm ic

A ss es sm en ts

\C

AD

\2

.0

0_ G

1.

dw g

2/

/2

:2

Ty le rb

JO

B

N U

M

BE

R

PA

G

E R

EF

ER

EN

C

E:

D

AT

E:

SHEET NO.

PL

EA

SA

N

T H

IL

L

H

IG

H S

CH

O

O L

G

YM

N

AS

IU

M

SE

IS

M

IC

R

EH

AB

IL

IT

AT

IO

N

G

RA

N T

ST

RE

N G

TH

EN

IN

G

C O

N

CE

PT

S

N

EN

TE

RP

RI

SE

R

D.

PL

EA

SA

NT

H

IL

L, O R

/3

0/

0.

STATE MAP3

SITE MAP/BUILDING PARTS IDENTIFICATION1

NORTH

NOTE: ONLY PART B IN SCOPE

VICINITY MAP2

NORTH

COVER SHEET

SHEET

ID

G1

SHEET TITLE

SHEET INDEX

S1 FOUNDATION STRENGTHENING PLAN

S2 BALCONY AND LOW ROOF STRENGTHENING PLAN

PROJECT LOCATION

ALL NONSTRUCTURAL DEFICIENCIES WILL BE MITIGATED AS SHOWN

IN TABLE 4 IN THIS REPORT UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED

OTHERWISE ON THE CONCEPTUAL STRENGTHENING SCHEME

DRAWINGS.

S3 ROOF STRENGTHENING PLAN

PROJECT LOCATION

S4 BUILDING ELEVATION

NORTH

STRUCTURAL DEFICIENCIES

S17. THERE IS NOT A POSITIVE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE GIRDERS AND COLUMN SUPPORTS.

S18. THE HEIGHT-TO-THICKNESS RATIO OF THE URM SHEAR WALLS AT EACH STORY IS LESS THAN 1:3.

S19. DIAPHRAGM OPENINGS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE URM SHEAR WALLS ARE GREATER THAN

15% OF THE WALL LENGTH.

S20. THERE IS NOT TENSILE CAPACITY TO DEVELOP THE STRENGTH OF THE DIAPHRAGM AT REENTRANT

CORNERS OR OTHER LOCATIONS.

S21. THERE ARE NOT CONTINUOUS CROSS TIES BETWEEN DIAPHRAGM CHORDS.

S22. STRAIGHT-SHEATHED DIAPHRAGMS OVER URM WALLS WITH ASPECT RATIOS GREATER THAN 1-TO-1

ARE PRESENT.

S23. WOOD DIAPHRAGMS OVER URM WALLS WITH SPANS GREATER THAN 12-FEET CONSISTING OF

SHEATHING OTHER THAN WOOD STRUCTURAL PANELS AND DIAGONAL SHEATHING ARE PRESENT.

S24. ANCHORS OF CONCRETE OR MASONRY WALLS TO WOOD STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS ARE NOT

INSTALLED TAUT AND ARE STIFF ENOUGH TO LIMIT THE RELATIVE MOVEMENT BETWEEN THE WALL

AND THE DIAPHRAGM TO NO GREATER THAN 1/8-INCH BEFORE ENGAGEMENT OF THE ANCHORS.

S25. BEAMS, GIRDERS, AND TRUSSES SUPPORTED BY URM WALLS OR PILASTERS DO NOT HAVE

INDEPENDENT SECONDARY COLUMNS FOR SUPPORT OF VERTICAL LOADS.

A

C

D

E F

I

B

G

H

NOTE: ONLY PART B IS IN SCOPE

S1

S:

\P ro je ct s\

\2

.0

- P le as an t H ill Sc ho ol

D is tri ct

S ei sm ic

A ss es sm en ts

\C

AD

\D ra fti ng

\O ut

\S R

G P

C ov er \2

.0 0_

S1 .d w g

6/

/2

:3

Ty le rb

JO

B

N U

M

BE

R

PA

G

E R

EF

ER

EN

C

E:

D

AT

E:

SHEET NO.

PL

EA

SA

N

T H

IL

L

H

IG

H S

CH

O

O L

G

YM

N

AS

IU

M

SE

IS

M

IC

R

EH

AB

IL

IT

AT

IO

N

G

RA

N T

ST

RE

N G

TH

EN

IN

G

C O

N

CE

PT

S

N

EN

TE

RP

RI

SE

R

D.

PL

EA

SA

NT

H

IL

L, O R

/3

0/

0.

00FOUNDATION STRENGTHENING PLAN1

NORTH

SEISMIC STRENGTHENING KEYED NOTES:

1 DEMO (E) FLOOR SLAB AND WALL FINISHES AND

ADD CONCRETE SHEAR WALL AND FOUNDATION.

REPAIR AND REPLACE FLOOR AND WALL FINISHES

AS REQUIRED. (S1, S4, S5, S6, S8, S13, S14)

ADD 5x5x1/4 HSS STRONGBACKS AT 6'-0" OC, OR

AS SHOWN, FOR OUT-OF-PLANE WALL BRACING

OF URM SHEAR WALLS (19 TOTAL). PROVIDE

4x4x1/4 HSS AT 12'-0" OC, OR AS SHOWN, TO ACT

AS INDEPENDENT SECONDARY COLUMNS FOR

URM BEARING WALLS (7 TOTAL). USE HSS10x6x1/4

BEAMS SPANNING BETWEEN INDEPENDENT

SECONDARY COLUMNS TO ATTACH (E) JOISTS

AND BEAMS TO SECONDARY COLUMNS. (S17, S18,

S25)

PROVIDE SEISMIC ISOLATION JOINT TO AVOID

POUNDING OF TALLER STRUCTURE INTO THE

LOWER STRUCTURE. PROVIDE ALL NEW GRAVITY

FRAMING SUPPORT AND LATERAL RESISTING

ELEMENTS AS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE BUILDING

SEPARATION. ADD NEW WOOD STUD BEARING/

PLYWOOD SHEAR WALLS AND POSTS/BEAMS TO

SUPPORT (E) FRAMING AND RESIST LATERAL

LOADS AS REQUIRED. (S2)

PROVIDE POSITIVE CONNECTION BETWEEN WOOD

POSTS AND FOUNDATION. ADDITIONALLY PROVIDE

HSS 8x8x1/4 STRONGBACK AT EACH POST TO

BRACE WOOD FRAMED WALL OUT-OF-PLANE.

DEMO AND REPLACE WOOD SIDING AS REQUIRED.

(S1, S7)

DEMO (E) SLAB-ON-GRADE AND SIDING AND ADD

CONCRETE SHEAR WALL AND FOUNDATION.

REPAIR AND REPLACE FLOOR AND WALL FINISHES

AS REQUIRED. (S1, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8, S13)

DEMO FLOORING, CEILING, AND INTERIOR WALL

FINISHES AS REQUIRED. PROVIDE HSS 8X8X1/4 IN

ORDER TO BRACE ABOVE WOOD FRAMED WALL

OUT-OF-PLANE. PROVIDE A HSS10X6X1/4 BEAM AT

BALCONY LEVEL IN ORDER TO UTILIZE THE HSS

STRONGBACKS AS INDEPENDENT SECONDARY

SUPPORTS AT THE BALCONY LEVEL (S1, S25)

NOT IN

SCOPE

NOT IN

SCOPE

NOT IN

SCOPE

TYP

SCALE: NTS

S4

NOT IN

SCOPE

URM WALL IS ADEQUATE FOR

EXPECTED BALCONY LOADS

URM WALL IS ADEQUATE FOR

EXPECTED BALCONY LOADS

URM WALL IS NOT SUFFICIENT FOR

SEE KEYED NOTE 1

S3

P W

R K

P l e a s a n t

H i l l

H

S

G y m

C

A D

S d w g

U

S E

R

J O

B

N

U M

B E

R

P A

G E

F

E R

E N

C E

D A

T E

SHEET NO.

PL

EA

SA

N

T H

IL

L

H

IG

H S

CH

O

O L

G

YM

N

AS

IU

M

SE

IS

M

IC

R

EH

AB

IL

IT

AT

IO

N

G

RA

N T

ST

RE

N G

TH

EN

IN

G

C O

N

CE

PT

S

N

EN

TE

RP

RI

SE

R

D.

PL

EA

SA

NT

H

IL

L, O R

0ROOF STRENGTHENING PLAN

NORTH

1 DEMO (E) BUILT-UP ROOFING AND ADD 1/2"

PLYWOOD SHEATHING W/ 10d NAILS AT 6" OC AT

PANEL EDGES AND 12" OC IN THE FIELD. REPLACE

ROOFING AFTER WORK IS COMPLETE. (S10, S11,

S12, S22, S23)

DEMO (E) CEILING (WHERE OCCURS) TO ADD

IN-PLANE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN DIAPHRAGM

AND SHEAR WALL. REPAIR CEILING AFTER WORK

IS COMPLETED. (S1, S3, S16).

DEMO (E) CEILING (WHERE OCCURS) TO ADD

OUT-OF-PLANE ANCHORS BETWEEN DIAPHRAGM

AND URM WALLS AT 8'-0" OC, OR AS SHOWN.

REPAIR CEILING AFTER WORK IS COMPLETED.

(S15, S24)

INDICATES SEISMIC ISOLATION JOINT. SEE S1 FOR

NEW SUPPORT. PROVIDE ROOFING SEISMIC JOINT

COVER AND REPAIR ROOFING AS REQUIRED. (S2)

ADD SUBDIAPHRAGM TIE WHERE SHOWN. (S15,

S21, S24)

DEMO (E) CEILING (WHERE OCCURS) TO ADD NEW

1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING AND BLOCKING WITH

10d NAILS AT 6" OC TO THE UNDERSIDE OF

BALCONY. REPLACE CEILING FINISHES AFTER

WORK IS COMPLETE. (S23)

ADD STL STRAPPING TO PROVIDE CONTINUOUS

COLLECTOR. (S1, S9, S19, S20)

ADD STL STRAPPING TO UNDERSIDE OF (E)

BALCONY TO PROVIDE A CONTINUOUS

COLLECTOR. (S1, S9, S19, S20)

NEW CONCRETE SHEAR WALL BELOW, SEE KEYED

NOTES 1 AND 5 ON S1. (S1, S4, S5, S8, S13, S14)

ADD HORIZONTAL ROD BRACING TO CONNECT

CANOPY TO LATERAL FORCE RESISTING

ELEMENTS. (S1)

PROVIDE SPLICE PLATE AT SECONDARY COLUMN

SUPPORTS. (S25)

ADD A STEEL COLLECTOR TO TRANSFER SEISMIC

FORCES INTO CONCRETE MOMENT FRAME. (S1)

NEW BLOCKING AND STEEL STRAPPING, SEE

KEYED NOTE 2 ON SHEET S4. (S1)

ADD BEAM SPLICES AT CANOPY TO PROVIDE

CONTINUOUS ROOF CHORDS. (S1, S9, S21)

NOT IN

SCOPE

NOT IN

SCOPE

NOT IN

SCOPE

OPEN T

O B

ELO

W

S2

BALCONY AND LOW ROOF STRENGTHENING PLAN

S4

TYP

SCALE: NTS

12 13

TYP

NOT IN

SCOPE

TYP

SEISMIC STRENGTHENING KEYED NOTES:

S3

P W

K

P l e a s a n t

H i l l

H

S

G y m

C

A D

S d w g

U

S E

R

J O

B

N

U M

B E

R

P A

G

F

E R

E N

C E

D A

T E

SHEET NO.

PL

EA

SA

N

T H

IL

L

H

IG

H S

CH

O

O L

G

YM

N

AS

IU

M

SE

IS

M

IC

R

EH

AB

IL

IT

AT

IO

N

G

RA

N T

ST

RE

N G

TH

EN

IN

G

C O

N

CE

PT

S

N

EN

TE

RP

RI

SE

R

D.

PL

EA

SA

NT

H

IL

L, O R

0ROOF STRENGTHENING PLAN

NORTH

1 DEMO (E) BUILT-UP ROOFING AND (E) SHEATHING.

ADD 1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING W/ 10d NAILS AT 6"

OC AT PANEL EDGES AND 12" OC IN THE FIELD

(S10, S11, S12, S22, S23)

ADD IN-PLANE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE

ROOF DIAPHRAGM AND LATERAL FORCE

RESISTING ELEMENTS. SEE KEYED NOTE 2 ON S4.

(S1)

DEMO (E) CEILING (WHERE OCCURS) TO ADD

IN-PLANE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN DIAPHRAGM

AND LATERAL FORCE RESISTING ELEMENTS.

REPAIR CEILING AFTER WORK IS COMPLETED (S1,

S15).

S4

SCALE: NTS

S4

S:

\P ro je ct s\

\2

.0

- P le as an t H ill Sc ho ol

D is tri ct

S ei sm ic

A ss es sm en ts

\C

AD

\D ra fti ng

\In \2

6_

0.

\2

.0

0_ S4

.d w g

7/

/2

:0

W illN

JO

B

N U

M

BE

R

PA

G

E R

EF

ER

EN

C

E:

D

AT

E:

SHEET NO.

PL

EA

SA

N

T H

IL

L

H

IG

H S

CH

O

O L

G

YM

N

AS

IU

M

SE

IS

M

IC

R

EH

AB

IL

IT

AT

IO

N

G

RA

N T

ST

RE

N G

TH

EN

IN

G

C O

N

CE

PT

S

N

EN

TE

RP

RI

SE

R

D.

PL

EA

SA

NT

H

IL

L, O R

/3

0/

0.

00BUILDING ELEVATION1

NORTH

1 NEW PLYWOOD SHEATHING, SEE KEYED NOTE 1

ON S3. (S10, S11, S12, S22, S23)

PROVIDE BLOCKING BETWEEN GLULAM ARCHES

AND STEEL STRAPPING TO CREATE A

CONTINUOUS COLLECTOR ELEMENT. (S1)

NEW CONCRETE SHEARWALL AND CONCRETE

FOUNDATION, SEE KEYED NOTE 1 ON SHEET S1.

(S1, S4, S5, S8, S13, S14)

SCALE: NTS

2 2

3 3

Appendix D

BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

Entity:

Point of Contact

Telephone:

E-Mail:

BCA File Name: BCA Date: 9/27/2023

Building Name:

Site ID:

Facility Use:

Is the Building in the Oregon BCA Tool Database: Yes or No? No

User-Defined Database

10 Not Listed

Unique Building

ID Number

Building Part

Square Footage

Percent of

Total SF

Percent of

Occupancy

Percent of

Operating

Budget

Building Part

Being

Retrofitted?

Lane-sch01AA 10,269 8.03% No

Lane-sch01AB 18,600 14.54% 100.00% 100.00% Yes

Lane-sch01AC 12,118 9.47% No

Lane-sch01AD 3,053 2.39% No

Lane-sch01AE 4,973 3.89% No

Lane-sch01AF 54,661 42.72% No

Lane-sch01AG 12,385 9.68% No

Lane-sch01AH 5,289 4.13% No

Lane-sch01AI 4,517 3.53% No

Lane-sch01AJ 2,089 1.63% No

Totals: 127,954 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

Seismic Retrofit Cost Estimate per SRGP Application:

How Many Structurally Different Building Parts Are There?

$2,499,940

Oregon Seismic Rehabilitation Grant Application: Benefit-Cost Analysis

Pleasant Hill School District

School

Lane-sch01A

Jim Crist

541-746-9646 jcrist@pleasanthill.k12.or.us

Pleasant Hill High School

Pleasant Hill SRGP BCA Tool 2023

Pleasant Hill High School, Sheet: Main Page 1 mailto:JQP@galaxy.net mailto:JQP@galaxy.net mailto:JQP@galaxy.net mailto:JQP@galaxy.net mailto:JQP@galaxy.net

Building Part

Lane-sch01AA

Lane-sch01AB $484,590

Lane-sch01AC $121,148

Lane-sch01AD $50,782

Lane-sch01AE $42,662

Lane-sch01AF $1,005,511

Lane-sch01AG $1,704,692

Lane-sch01AH

Lane-sch01AI

Lane-sch01AJ

Total Benefits

Total Cost

Benefit-Cost

Ratio

Pleasant Hill High School

0.682

$1,704,692

$2,499,940

Total

Casualties

Loss of Function Costs

Building Damage

Contents Damage

Benefits by Category

Avoided Damages and Losses

Displacement Costs

Benefit-Cost Analysis: Summary Results

$1,704,692

Benefits

Pleasant Hill High School, Sheet: Main Page 2

Number of

Months:

Day of Week Time of

Day

Hours per

Day

Average

Employees in Building

Calculated

24/7/365

Occupancy

Day of Week Time of

Day

Hours per

Day

Average

Employees in Building

Calculated

24/7/365

Occupancy

Monday - Friday Day 6 4 0.594 Monday - Friday Day 2 1 0.010

Monday - Friday Evening 2 1 0.049 Monday - Friday Evening

Monday - Friday Night Monday - Friday Night

Saturday Day Saturday Day

Saturday Evening Saturday Evening

Saturday Night Saturday Night

Sunday Day Sunday Day

Sunday Evening Sunday Evening

Sunday Night Sunday Night

Subtotal: 0.643 Subtotal: 0.010

Number of

Months:

Day of Week

Average

Time in

Building

(Minutes per

Visitor)

Calculated

24/7/365

Occupancy

Day of Week

Average

Time in

Building

(Minutes per

Visitor)

Calculated

24/7/365

Occupancy

Monday - Friday Monday - Friday

Saturday Saturday

Sunday Sunday

Subtotal: Subtotal:

50 25

6 0.5

175 60

5.993 0.086

Course

Class

Duration

(hours)

Number of

Class

Periods per Week

Average

Number of

Students per Class

Calculated

24/7/365

Occupancy

Course

Class

Duration

(hours)

Number of

Class

Periods per Week

Average

Number of

Students per Class

Calculated

24/7/365

Occupancy

1 Hr. Courses 1 19 42 1 Hr. Courses 1

1.5 Hr. Courses 1.5 1.5 Hr. Courses 1.5

2 Hr. Courses 2 2 Hr. Courses 2

3 Hr. Courses 3 3 Hr. Courses 3

Other N/A Other N/A

Other N/A Other N/A

Subtotal: Subtotal:

Calculated 24/7/365 Occupancy:

College Students: Academic Year College Students: Summer School

Number of Weeks per Year of Classes: Number of Weeks per Year of Classes:

Average Daily Number of Students: Average Daily Number of Students:

Average Number of

Visitors Per Day

For benefit-cost analysis, the average occupancy on a 24/7/365 basis is used for casualty calculations.

Enter data below ONLY for the occupancy categories applicable to this building - all other green cell entries should be left blank.

There are entries below for: employees, visitors, students, meetings or special events and patients.

Occupancy Data

NOTE: for buildings with similar occupancies each month, complete the tables on the left side only.

NOTE: For buildings with different summer occupancies, complete the tables both on the left and right sides. If this does not apply, enter "0" for number of summer months

Employees: 12 Months per Year or Academic Year for Schools Employees: Summer Months

Hours per Day: Hours per Day:

Visitors: 12 Months per Year or Academic Year for Schools Visitors: Summer Months

Average Number of

Visitors Per Day

K-12 Students: Academic Year K-12 Students: Summer School

Days per Year: Days per Year:

Calculated 24/7/365 Occupancy:

Pleasant Hill High School, Sheet: Occupancy Page 3

Occupancy Data

Event Events per Year

People per

Event

Average

Time spent at Event

(hours per person)

Calculated

24/7/365

Occupancy

Volleyball 20 100 2 0.457

Girls Basketball 20 150 3 1.027

Boys Basketball 20 200 3 1.370

Band 3 150 3 0.154

Youth Basketball 4 200 4 0.365

Wrestling 4 300 6 0.822

Veteran's Day 1 150 1.5 0.026

Career Fair 1 600 1 0.068

Volunteers Coaches 175 24 2 0.959

Subtotal: 5.248

Day of Week

Average

Time in

Building

(Hours per person)

Calculated

24/7/365

Occupancy

Monday - Friday

Saturday

Sunday

Meetings, Sports Events etc.

Patients

Total Number of In-Patient Beds:

Average Percentage Occupancy

Average Number of

Out-Patients per Day

In-Patients:

Out-Patients:

Total Patients:

Average Daily Number of In-Patients

Pleasant Hill High School, Sheet: Occupancy Page 4

Occupancy Data

Meetings & Special Events 5.248 N/A

Avg 24/7/365 Occupancy: 11.980

Patients N/A

Subtotals: 11.885 0.096

Visitors

Students: K-12 5.993 0.086

Students: College

Employees 0.643 0.010

SUMMARY OCCUPANCY DATA:

Average 24/7/365 Occupancy

Occupancy Category 12 Months or

Academic Year Summer

Pleasant Hill High School, Sheet: Occupancy Page 5

Visitors: Number Per Day

DATA DOCUMENTATION: OCCUPANCY

Provide brief documentation below and/or references to other documents included with your application

(with page number), for the sources of the occupancy data and estimates.

Employees: Numbers

Employees: Hours Per Day

Visitors: Average Time in

Building

K-12 Students: Number

K-12 Students: Hours Per Day

K-12 Students: Days Per Year

Additional Comments

Re: above Occupancy Data

College Student Occupancy

Data

Pleasant Hill High School, Sheet: Occupancy Page 6

Number of Patient

Beds

Meetings, Sports Events and Other Special Events

Overview Statement Re:

Sources of Special

Events Occupancy

Estimates

Volunteer Coaches average five 2-hour shifts throughout the school year (175 days).

It is NOT necessary to provide separate documentation for every special event listed. Rather, provide an

Overview Statement of the sources of special event occupancy estimates.

Provide specific documentation for high occupancy events or very frequent events with high Calculated

24/7/365 Occupancy, especially for occupancies that appear "unusual" or potentially

"out of bounds."

NOTES:

Average Time in

Building for

Out-Patients

Average Daily Number of In-Patients

Average Daily Number of Out-Patients

Hospital Patient Data

Pleasant Hill High School, Sheet: Occupancy Page 7 of FTEs

Average

Annual

Salary per

Employee

Total Benefits as

Percent of Salary

Annual Salary and Benefits

1 PE Teacher / Licensed 3 $61,868 46.00% $270,982

2 Educational Assistant /Classified 1 $36,000 46.00% $52,560

3 Coach 12 $4,500 100.00% $108,000

4 $0

5 $0

6 $0

7 $0

8 $0

9 $0

10 $0

Total Number of FTEs: 16.00 Subtotal: $431,542 FTEs: Full time equivalents

Annual Cost

$10,000

$15,000

$24,000

$8,300

$0

$0

$0

$4,478,390

Subtotal: $4,535,690

$4,967,232

Building Maintenance

Percent of District Office/Headquarters Annual

Operating Budget Attributed to This Building:

If rent is zero (building owned), a proxy rent is calculated automatically, based on the value of the building:

Insurance

Rent

Average Annual Capital Goods

Total Building Annual Operating Budget:

OTHER: specify below

Utilities

Annual Operating Budget for this Facility

Employees:

Classification

Other Building Expenses

Category

Supplies

Pleasant Hill High School, Sheet: Budget Page 8

Annual Operating Budget for this Facility of FTEs

Average

Annual

Salary per

Employee

Total Benefits as

Percent of Salary

Annual Salary and Benefits

1 $0

2 $0

3 $0

4 $0

5 $0

6 $0

7 $0

8 $0

9 $0

10 $0

Total Number of FTEs: 0.00 Subtotal: $0

Annual Cost

Rent

$0

Subtotal: $0

$0

Category

Classification

District Office/Headquarters Building Expenses

For entities with multiple facilities, a fraction of the operating budget for a District Office of Headquarters building may be attributed to the building being retrofitted. That is, the annual operating budget for the building above may include part of the operating budget for the District Office or Headquarters Building.

If so, complete the following tables:

District Office/Headquarters Building Employees

Enter replacement value of building:

If rent is zero (building owned), a proxy rent is calculated

Supplies

Total Annual Operating Budget for District Office/Headquarters Building:

Building maintenance

Utilities

Insurance

Average Annual Capital Goods

OTHER: specify below

Pleasant Hill High School, Sheet: Budget Page 9

Percent of District

Office or Headquarters

Annual Operating

Budget Attributed to the Facility

Operating Budget by

Categories

DOCUMENTATION: ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET

The Annual Operating Budget is used as a "proxy" for the value of services provided from a building and is used to count the benefits of avoiding loss of service in future earthquake events.

NOTE:

Pleasant Hill High School, Sheet: Budget Page 10

Building Name:

Building ID:

Building Part Name / Description:

Evaluation for Building Part A

Region of Seismicity

PGA Ground Motion (g) 0.421

0.277

0.178

0.084

Spectral Accelerations (g) 0.864

0.616

0.371

0.235

Data Entry Item User Entered Values Default Values Used for BCA

County Lane Lane

Decimal Latitude 43.95756 43.95756

Decimal Longitude 122.91598 122.91598

Soil Type D D

Primary Structure Type (FEMA 154) W2 W2

Number of Stories 1 1

Year Built 1961 1961

Pre-Code No No

Post-Benchmark No No

Existing Severe Vertical Irregularity No No

Existing Moderate Vertical Irregularity No No

Existing Plan Irregularity No No

Severe Vertical Irregularity is Resolved N/A N/A

Moderate Vertical Irregularity is Resolved N/A N/A

Plan Irregularity is Resolved N/A N/A