Prepared by · Web viewThe seismic evaluation is accomplished utilizing ASCE/SEI 31-03 Tier 1 (screening phase) and Tier 2 (evaluation phase), along with engineering judgment, to

Structural Evaluation Report (SER)(Basic Safety Evaluation)

of theMeetinghouse

at Street Address, City, State

Owner’s Property No. XXX-XXXX

FIRM LOGOPrepared by Firm Name

Month, Day, Year

Engineers Stamp

Firm Job Number Firm NameFirm Street Address, City, State, Zip Code; with Phone (xxx)-xxx-xxxx and Email Address xxxxxxxxxx

Insert color picture of the front elevation of the facility

Engineer of Record (12/05/2018):Use this template for all meetinghouse buildings, regardless of risk category (RC), unless directed otherwise by the Owner’s Representative. Submit reports to the Project FM, the Project PM and AEC ([email protected]) for review and to be loaded into the “As Built Catalog”. The information from the report will be incorporated into the Seismic and Gravity Load Systems At Risk List.

The template was created for use with ASCE/SEI 31-03 combined with ASCE/SEI 41-06. The use of ASCE/SEI 41-13 instead is acceptable. Update affected notes and other information as needed.

At the conclusion of any structural upgrade, the Engineer of Record will be required to: Add a page at the front of the structural “as built drawings” which includes, in table format,

STRUCTURAL UPGRADE MEASURES from previous SERs and RTERs noting the status of those structural upgrade measures. Refer to the “At Risk Lists” for a concept example. Submit “as built drawings” to the Owner’s Representative and AEC ([email protected]) to be loaded to the “As Built Catalog”.

Update Tables 5-1, 5-2, 6-1, and 6-2 through 6-4 of this report, if applicable, and submit them to the Owner’s Representative and AEC ([email protected]) to be loaded into the “As Built Catalog”. The information from the updated tables will be incorporated into the Seismic and Gravity Load Systems At Risk List.

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Structural Evaluation Report (SER) Street Address, City, State, Zip CodeReport Date: Owner’s Property Number: XXX-XXXX

Page 1

Executive SummaryBUILDING DATA

Owner’s Property Number: XXX-XXXX ASCE/SEI 31-03Building Type:

XXXXXX

Building Plan Type: XXXXXXXXXX Year Constructed: XXXX

Site Visit Date: XXXXXXXXXX Year(s) of Additions: XXXX

Report Date: XXXXXXXXXX Total Building Area: XX,XXX sq. ft.

Structural Engineer: XXXXXXXXXX Number of Stories: X

Firm Job Number: XXXXXXXXXX Basement: X

UPGRADE COST ESTIMATEROOF UPGRADE BALANCE COMPLETE UPGRADE

STRUCTURAL: $ 0 $ 0 0NON-STRUCTURAL: $ 0 $ 0 0MECHANICAL/ELECTRICAL/COMM: $ 0 $ 0 0FURNISHINGS/CONTENTS: $ 0 $ 0 0

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST: 0 0 0

STRUCTURAL DESIGN FEE: $ 0 $ 0 0GEOTECHNICAL TESTING FEE: $ 0 $ 0 0MATERIALS TESTING FEE: $ 0 $ 0 0STRUCTURAL OBSERVATION FEE: $ 0 $ 0 0SPECIAL INSPECTION FEE: $ 0 $ 0 0

TOTAL FEES: 0 0 0

TOTAL STRUCTURAL COST1: 0 0 0TOTAL SEISMIC COST1: $ 0 $ 0 $ 0

The above estimates do not include the cost for removal and replacement of roofing or other replacements and improvements costs.

Comments:1. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX



Page 2

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ................................................................................1

Table of Contents ................................................................................2

1. Facility Data ..............................................................................3

2. Structural Description ...............................................................................4

3. Site Hazards ...............................................................................9

4. Evaluation and Upgrade Procedures .....................................................11

5. Findings .............................................................................14

6. Recommendations ..............................................................................22

7. References ..............................................................................29

Appendices

Appendix A ASCE/SEI 31-03 Checklist

Appendix B Photographs

Appendix C Structural Calculations

Appendix D Cost Estimate Details

Appendix E Testing Results

Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation Report



Page 3

1. Facility Data

Original Construction

1. Architectural Drawings: firm, date

2. Structural Drawings: firm, date

Additions



Remodeling/Renovations



Reports

1. Geotechnical: firm, report title, date

2. Hazardous Materials: firm, report title, date

3. Structural Evaluation Report: firm, report title, date



Page 4

2. Structural Description

Table 2-1CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

Design Date DescriptionXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Table 2-2VERTICAL LOAD-RESISTING ELEMENTS

FOR THE HIGH ROOF SECTIONS

Horizontal Elements Source*

Sheathing: 5/8 “ plywoodRoof Joists: 2 x 8 @ 16” on center

Purlins: NoneBeams: Curved glued-laminatedGirders: None

Truss Type 1: Carpenter built with split ring connectorsTruss Type 2: Carpenter built with split ring connectors

Attic insulation: Yes or no. If yes, provide brief descriptionFloors Type: 4” concrete slab on grade

Vertical ElementsColumns: None

Walls: Partially grouted reinforced concrete 8” slump block i.e. bearing walls with 4” veneer

Column foundations: None Wall foundations: Concrete strip footings

* D – Structural Drawing FO – Field Observations T - Testing




Page 5

Table 2-3VERTICAL LOAD-RESISTING ELEMENTS

FOR THE LOW ROOF SECTION


Roof Sheathing: 5/8” plywoodJoists: 2 x 8 @ 16” on center

Purlins: None

Beams: None

Girders: None

Truss Type 1: None

Truss Type 2: None

Attic insulation: Yes or no. If yes, provide brief description

Floors Type: 4” concrete slab on grade

Vertical ElementsColumns: None

Walls: Partially grouted reinforced concrete 6” slump block bearing

Column foundations: None

Wall foundations: Concrete strip footings

* D – Structural Drawing FO – Field Observations T - TestingComments:

1. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Table 2-4TRUSS TYPE 1

Truss location: Chapel

Truss span (ft): 50 Ridge connection: Split ringTop chord: 2x6 Top chord/Web connection: Nails

Bottom chord: 2x6 Bottom chord/Web connection: NailsWeb members: 1x4 Bottom chord splice connection: Split ring

Bottom/Top chord connection: Split ring



Page 6

Table 2-5TRUSS TYPE 2

Truss location: Cultural hall

Truss span (ft): 50 Ridge connection: Split ringTop chord: 2x6 Top chord/Web connection: Bolts

Bottom chord: 2x6 Bottom chord/Web connection: BoltsWeb members: 1x4 Bottom chord splice connection: Split ring

Bottom/Top chord connection: Split ring

Table 2-6LATERAL LOAD-RESISTING ELEMENTS


Diaphragms: 5/8” plywood sheathing acts as a flexible diaphragm

Vertical ElementsShear walls: Partially grouted reinforced concrete block walls



Table 2-7SPIRE/STEEPLE VERTICAL AND LATERAL ELEMENTS


Diaphragms: Connected to low roof diaphragm

Vertical ElementsColumn/Walls: Rectangular CMU box column (6’ x 6’)

FoundationSpread footing: 12’ x 12’ x 18”





Page 7

Figure 2-1 – Architectural Floor Framing Plan(s)


Insert 8 ½” x 11” reduced copy of the original architectural floor plan(s) for each level and structural foundation and floor plan(s) as needed to clarify the evaluation. Adjust the titles for the figures accordingly.


Page 8

Figure 2-2 – Structural Roof Framing Plan(s)


Insert 8 ½” x 11” reduced copy of the original structural roof framing plan(s) and architectural roof plan(s) as needed to clarify the evaluation. Adjust the titles for the figures accordingly.


Page 9

3. Site Hazards

Table 3- 1SOILS INFORMATION

Description: UnknownShear wave velocity: Vs value - note how determined

Site class: Site class - note how determinedSoil stability: Expansive or collapsible

Reference: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXComments:


Table 3- 2SEISMIC HAZARD

Hazard MCE

Spectral Acceleration10.2 sec period: 0.XX g (Ss = X.XX, SDS = X.XX)

1.0 sec period: 0.XX g (S1 = X.XX, SD1 = X.XX)

Vulnerability2

Fault rupture: Yes or No

Slope failure: Yes or No

Liquefaction: Yes or No

Distance to Nearest Fault3 X miles

References:1. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX



Page 10

Table 3- 3WINDSTORM CHARACTERIZATION

Parameter DescriptionWind speed (mph)1: XXX

Site exposure category: B , CSite exposure description: B, terrain with buildings, forest or surface irregularities

20 feet or more in height covering at least 20% of the area, extending one mile or more from the siteC, terrain is flat and generally open, extending ½ mile or more from the site

References:1. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


Table 3- 4

SNOW CHARACTERIZATION

Parameter DescriptionGround snow load (psf): XX

Roof snow load (psf): XX

Snow drift locations: Locations are noted on the roof seismic upgrades planComments:




Page 11

4. Evaluation and Upgrade ProceduresThe objective of this study is to determine if the existing facility meets the Church’s acceptance criteria for the given demands of gravity, seismic, wind and snow loads.

If the acceptance criteria are not met, then conceptual upgrade measures are to be developed along with the associated costs for implementation.

Gravity Load (Dead and Live Load) System Evaluation Procedure: The gravity evaluation (i.e. dead plus live and snow drift where applicable)

demand and acceptance criteria are in accordance with the current edition of the International Existing Building Code. The allowable wood values at the time of construction should be used.

This includes a thorough visual screening (visual observation and engineering judgment) of the roof trusses, associated secondary framing, bracing, and support connections for deficiencies including failing/failed split ring truss connections and other identifiable roof framing deficiencies.

This also includes reviewing the roof truss as-built drawings and performing calculations of the split ring truss connections capacity and the gravity load carrying capacity of the roof trusses.

Snow Load System Evaluation Procedure:o The snow evaluation, including snow drift, demand and acceptance criteria

are in accordance with the current edition of the International Existing Building Code.

Gravity Load (Dead and Live Load) System Upgrade Procedure: Deficient members that do not meet the above demand and acceptance criteria

are upgraded to comply with the full demand and capacity criteria of the current edition of the International Building Code.

Snow Load System Upgrade Procedure:o Areas that are deficient because general or drift snow demands exceed

capacity are to be upgraded to comply with the full capacity criteria of the current edition of the International Building Code.



Page 12

Seismic Load Resisting System Evaluation Procedure: The building must be checked for both criteria listed below. The seismic

deficiencies are determined from the analysis. The seismic evaluation demand and acceptance criteria are as follows:

Seismic Demand Performance Level

Acceptance Criteria

Larger of: 2/3 MCE

and0.75 x 2/3 MCE

ORBSE-1N (2/3 MCE)

Life Safety

Life Safety

Life Safety

ASCE/SEI 31-03

ASCE/SEI 41-06

ASCE/SEI 41-13

0.75 x MCE

ORBSE-2E (.75 x MCE)

Collapse Prevention

Collapse Prevention

ASCE/SEI 41-06

ASCE/SEI 41-13

Where:MCE (Maximum Considered Earthquake): An earthquake ground motion based on the lesser of probabilistic values with a 2-percent probability of exceedance in 50 years and 150 percent of the median deterministic values at a given site

Notes:1. The seismic evaluation is accomplished utilizing ASCE/SEI 31-03 Tier 1

(screening phase) and Tier 2 (evaluation phase), along with engineering judgment, to identify whether critical structural and nonstructural elements are identified as acceptable or potentially deficient.

2. For the remaining potential deficiencies, an ASCE/SEI 31-03 Tier 3 (detailed evaluation phase) should be performed only when there is a high probability that the deficiency can be eliminated to avoid upgrading.



Page 13

Seismic Load Resisting System Upgrade Procedure: Deficient members that do not meet the above evaluation procedure are

upgraded to comply with the following demand and acceptance criteria:

Seismic Demand Performance Level

Acceptance Criteria

2/3 MCE

ORBSE-1N (2/3 MCE)

Life Safety

Life Safety

ASCE/SEI 41-06

ASCE/SEI 41-13

MCE

ORBSE-2N (MCE)

Collapse Prevention

Collapse Prevention

ASCE/SEI 41-06

ASEC/SEI 41-13

Wind Load Resisting System Evaluation Procedure The wind evaluation demand and acceptance criteria are in accordance with the

current edition of the International Existing Building Code.

Wind Load Resisting System Upgrade Procedure Deficient members that do not meet the above evaluation procedure are

upgraded to comply with the full demand and capacity criteria of the current edition of the International Building Code.



Page 14

5. FindingsNotes to EOR for Tables 5-1 and 5-2:

Provide different “opinions of performance level” for different areas of the building that would have different performance levels.

Provide different “opinions of performance level” for additions that would have different performance levels than that of the original building.

If the opinion of earthquake performance level meets the criteria provided in “4. Evaluation and Upgrade Procedures”, the building will not be required to be upgraded.

If the level of seismicity is less than “High” (SDS is less than 0.50g and SD1 is less than 0.20g), the building will not be required to be upgraded.

Table 5- 1OPINION OF EARTHQUAKE PERFORMANCE LEVEL

WITHOUT UPGRADE PER SEISMIC EVALUATION

Item Description Performance level:

(2/3 MCE per ASCE/SEI 31-03and .75*2/3 MCE per ASCE/SEI 41-06)

Collapse Risk, Collapse Prevention, or Life Safety

Geotechnical/Geologic site condition: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxStructural damage: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Non-structural damage: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxContents and furnishings damage: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Post-earthquake inspection tag: xxxxxxxxxxxxEstimated down time: xxxxxxxxxxxx

Estimated repair costs: xxxxxxxxxxxxEstimated repair time: xxxxxxxxxxxx



Page 15

Table 5- 2OPINION OF EARTHQUAKE PERFORMANCE LEVEL

WITHOUT UPGRADE PER SEISMIC EVALUATION

Item DescriptionPerformance level:

(.75 MCE per ASCE/SEI 41-06)Collapse Risk, Collapse Prevention, or Life Safety

Geotechnical/Geologic site condition: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxStructural damage: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Non-structural damage: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxContents and furnishings damage: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Post-earthquake inspection tag: xxxxxxxxxxxxEstimated down time: xxxxxxxxxxxx

Estimated repair costs: xxxxxxxxxxxxEstimated repair time: xxxxxxxxxxxx



Page 16

Table 5- 3PRIORITIZED STRUCTURAL DEFICIENCIES

No. Item Description Photo No. Type*

Gravity Load System Deficiencies:S-1 Split ring

connections:Slipping or do not satisfy calculations

S-2 Truss Top Chords: Un-BracedS-3 Bolted connections: Slipping or do not satisfy calculationsS-4 Plywood gusset

plates:Insufficient nailing

S-5 Truss web members Cut or missingS-6 Truss Type 1: Overstressed due to snow loadsS-7 Truss top and bottom

chords:Wood splitting at the connections

S-8 Steeple support connection:

Inadequate connection

S-9 Suspended ceiling support framing:

Inadequate connection

S-10 Overbuild framing: Inadequate connection

Lateral Load System Deficiencies:S-11 High roof diaphragm: Without blocking, the high roof

demands exceed capacitiesS-12 Shear wall 1: The CMU wall between the classroom

and the offices is inadequate to act as a shear wall.

S-13 Shear wall 2: The wall at the front of the classroom exceeds overturning criteria.

S-14 High roof-to-wall connection:

No out-of-plane wall anchors exist nor does a load path exist to transfer diaphragm shear to the classroom or offices walls.

S-15 Entrance canopies: Anchorage of canopies is inadequate.

S-16 Stairs: URM is unacceptable in the stairways.

* G – Gravity EQ – Earthquake W – Wind S - SnowComments:




Page 17



Page 18

Table 5- 4STRUCTURAL DETERIORATION

No. Item DescriptionPhoto

No.D-1 Dry rot: Evidence of dry rot exists in the soffit at the northwest

corner of the south wing.D-2 Mildew: Evidence of mildew exists in the ceiling of the boiler

room.D-3 Termite: Evidence of termite damage exists in the foundation next

to the south stairway.D-4 Settlement: Approximately 1” of settlement was observed at the front

entry.

D-5 Corrosion: Corrosion was observed in rebar in the concrete column at the south end of the chapel.




Page 19

Table 5- 5NON-STRUCTURAL DEFICIENCIES

No. Component Description Photo No.NS-1 Non-load bearing

partitions:CMU partitions are unanchored at the top.

NS-2 Metal stud tracks: Track fastening is inadequate.

NS-3 Ceiling systems: Gypsum board ceiling is sagging and pulling away from the furring attached to the bottom of the roof trusses.

NS-4 Glazing: Panes over 16 square feet in area, located up to a height of 10 feet above an exterior walking surface, should have safety glazing. Glazing located over 10 feet above an exterior walking surface should be laminated annealed or laminated heat-strengthened safety glass.

NS-5 Masonry veneer: Veneer anchorage is not indicated on the drawing and internal veneer exists in the chapel.

NS-6 Parapets/Cornices: URM parapets h/t >1.5

NS-7 Masonry chimneys:

URM chimney h/b > 2

NS-8 Cladding: No evidence exists of brick veneer attachment to the CMU.

NS-9 Suspended items: Inadequate attachment to the structure




Page 20

Table 5- 6MECHANICAL / ELECTRICAL / COMMUNICATIONS DEFICIENCIES

No. Component Description Photo No.

M-1 Emergency power: Control panel to generator is not braced.

M-2 HVAC: XXXXXXXXXM-3 Vibration isolators: Snubbers are not provided on HVAC

units on roof.M-4 Furnace: XXXXXXXXX

M-5 Water heater: XXXXXXXXXM-6 Boiler: XXXXXXXXX

M-7 Piping: Fire suppression piping is not braced.M-8 Natural gas seismic

shut-off valve:Church requirement for buildings in Seismic Design Category D, E, or F

M-9 Ducts: XXXXXXXXXE-1 Transformers: XXXXXXXXX

E-2 Switchgear: XXXXXXXXXE-3 Lighting fixtures: XXXXXXXXX

C-1 Satellite dish: XXXXXXXXXC-2 Sound system: XXXXXXXXX




Page 21

Table 5- 7FURNISHINGS/CONTENTS DEFICIENCIES

No. Item Description Photo No.

FC-1 Bookcases: Bookcase in materials center is 6 ft high and not anchored.

FC-2 Filing cabinets: Filing cabinet (4 drawers) in materials center is not anchored.

FC-3 Computers: Desktop computers in offices are not anchored.

FC-4 Family History equipment:

Desktop copier is not anchored.

FC-5 Toxic substances: Glass bottles of toxic chemicals are stored in open shelves.




Page 22

6. RecommendationsNotes to EOR:

The items listed are to correspond numerically to those in Table 5-3. Tables 5-1, 5-2, 6-1, and 6-2 through 6-4, if applicable, are to be updated when

structural upgrades are performed. For the Gravity Load System Upgrade Measures and Lateral Load System

Upgrade Measures, list only those items that the EOR is recommending be upgraded.

For the “Lateral Load System Upgrade Measures”:o If the opinion of earthquake performance level meets the evaluation criteria

provided in “4. Evaluation and Upgrade Procedures (Seismic Load Resisting System Evaluation Procedure)”, the building will not be required to be seismically upgraded.

o List only those seismic upgrade measures needed to increase the seismic performance level of the building to the seismic upgrade criteria provided in “4. Evaluation and Upgrade Procedures (Seismic Load Resisting System Upgrade Procedure)” or those items that should be seismically upgraded regardless of the expected seismic performance level of the building.

Table 6- 1STRUCTURAL UPGRADE MEASURES

No. Items and Comments Upgrade R or B1

Plan No.

Sketch No.

Recommended Upgrade Year/Timing

Actual Upgrade

Date

Gravity Load System Upgrade Measures:S-1 Split ring connection R 6-2 SK-? Next reroofS-5 Truss web members R 6-2 SK-? 2019

Lateral Load System Upgrade Measures - Listed upgrade measures are intended to achieve the Basic Safety Objective (Life Safety at 2/3 MCE and Collapse Prevention for MCE per ASCE/SEI 41-06):

S-11 Diaphragm blocking R 6-2 SK-? Next reroof

S-12S-13

Wall strengthening B 6-1 SK-? Next R&I project that affects the

walls

S-12S-13

Wall and footing strengthening

R 6-1 SK-? Next R&I project that affects the

walls

S-14 Out-of-plane wall anchors

R 6-2 SK-? 2019

S-? Describe item R 6-2 SK-? Provide timing for



Page 23

No. Items and Comments Upgrade R or B1

Plan No.

Sketch No.

Recommended Upgrade Year/Timing

Actual Upgrade

Date

work

S-? Describe item B 6-1 SK-? Provide timing for

work


work


work

D-1 Describe item B 6-2 SK-? Provide timing for

work


work


work


work


work

R – Roof - indicates an upgrade item that should occur during a scheduled re-roof project B – Balance - indicates an upgrade item that should occur during a scheduled exterior or interior R&I project


Table 6- 2NON-STRUCTURAL UPGRADE MEASURES

No. Item UpgradeR or B2

Plan No.

Sketch No.

Recommended Upgrade

Year/Timing

Actual Upgrade

Date

NS-1

Brace top of partitions B 6-1 SK-21 Next reroof

NS-2

Fasten tracks B 6-1 SK-22 2015

NS- Brace ceiling systems B 6-1 SK-23 2015



Page 24

3NS-

4Replace glazing B 6-1 SK-24 2015

NS-5

Describe upgrade B 6-1 SK-25 Provide timing for work

NS-6

Describe upgrade R 6-2 SK-26 Provide timing for work

NS-7

Describe upgrade R 6-2 SK-27 Provide timing for work

NS-8


NS-9


R – Roof - indicates an upgrade item that should occur during a scheduled re-roof project B – Balance - indicates an upgrade item that can be installed independent of a scheduled re-roof project


Table 6- 3MECHANICAL/ELECTRICAL/COMMUNICATIONS UPGRADE MEASURES

No. ItemUpgrad

eR or B3

Plan

No.Sketch No.

Recommended Upgrade

Year/Timing

Actual Upgrade Date

M-1 Brace control panel B 6-1 SK-30 2015M-2 Describe upgrade B 6-1 SK-31 Provide timing

for workM-3 Provide snubbers R 6-2 SK-32 2015M-4 Describe upgrade B 6-1 SK-33 Provide timing

for work

M-5 Describe upgrade B 6-1 SK-34 Provide timing for work


M-7 Brace fire suppression piping

B 6-1 SK-36 2015

M-8 Provide natural gas seismic shut-off valve

B 6-1 SK-37 2015




Page 25

No. ItemUpgrad

eR or B3

Plan

No.Sketch No.

Recommended Upgrade

Year/Timing

Actual Upgrade Date

E-1 Describe upgrade B 6-1 SK-39 Provide timing for work



C-1 Describe upgrade B 6-1 SK-42 Provide timing for work

C-2 Describe upgrade B 6-1 SK-43 Provide timing for work

R – Roof - indicates an upgrade item that should occur during a scheduled re-roof projectB – Balance - indicates an upgrade item that can be installed independent of a scheduled re-roof project


Table 6- 4FURNISHINGS/CONTENTS UPGRADE MEASURES

No. ItemUpgradeR or B4

Plan No.

Sketch No.

Recommended Upgrade

Year/Timing

Actual Upgrade

Date

FC-1

Anchor bookcase to wall

B 6-1 SK-44 2015

FC-2

Anchor file cabinet to wall

B 6-1 SK-45 2015

FC-3

Velcro computers to desk

B 6-1 SK-46 2015

FC-4

Velcro copier to desk B 6-1 SK-47 2015

FC-5

Toxic chemicals should be stored in unbreakable containers and restrained in a lockable cabinet

B 6-1 SK-48 2015

R – Roof - indicates an upgrade item that should occur during a scheduled re-roof projectB – Balance - indicates an upgrade item that can be installed independent of a scheduled re-roof project




Page 26

Table 6- 5RECOMMENDED DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PHASES ACTIVITIES1

Phase Activity

Design Geotechnical review to quantify potential differential displacement or lateral spreading due to liquefaction in MCE seismic event

Design Architectural treatment of new ceilings and walls Design Mechanical engineer to reroute ducting due to interference of

new shear wallConstruction Confirm roof diaphragm nailing and truss to wall connections

Activities recommended in addition to structural services to develop designs for upgrade items identified in Tables 6-1 thru 6-4.



Page 27

Figure 6-1 – Floor Plan(s) – Recommended Upgrades


Insert an 8 ½” x 11” annotated plan view - reduced photocopy of original plan(s) or photocopy of tracing of drawing(s).

Note the Upgrade No. and reference the Sketch No. on the plan(s).


Page 28

Figure 6-2 – Roof Plan(s) – Recommended Upgrades


Insert an 8 ½” x 11” annotated plan view - reduced photocopy of original plan(s) or photocopy of tracing of drawing(s).

Note the Upgrade No. and reference the Sketch No. on the plan(s).


Page 29

Sketch SK-1 – XXXXXXXXXX

Sketch SK-2 – XXXXXXXXXX


Insert hand sketch here identifying conceptual upgrade detail.

Insert hand sketch here identifying conceptual upgrade detail.


Page 30

7. ReferencesA. Codes and Standards

1. American Society of Civil Engineers, Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings, ASCE/SEI 31-03, 2003.

2. American Society of Civil Engineers, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, ASCE/SEI 41-06, 2007.

3. American Society of Civil Engineers, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, ASCE/SEI 41-13, 2013.

4. International Code Council, International Existing Building Code, 2012.

B. Geotechnical Information

1. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX



C. Test Reports

1. firm, report title, date

2. firm, report title, date



Page 31

Appendices

Appendix A - ASCE/SEI 31-03 Checklists

Appendix B - Photographs

Appendix C - Structural Calculations

Appendix D - Cost Estimate Details

Appendix E - Testing and Inspection Results

Appendix F - Geotechnical Evaluation Report



Page 32

Appendix A – ASCE/SEI 31-03 Checklists



Page 33

Appendix B – Photographs This appendix should include a photograph of each deficiency noted in this

report. Provide descriptive titles for the photographs with numbering matching the numbering in Tables 5.

In addition, the following minimum photographs of the property should be included:

o Google Earth photograph of the propertyo One (1) photograph of each of the four major elevations of the building



Page 34

Photograph 1 - XXXXXXXXXX

Photograph 2 – XXXXXXXXXX


Insert photograph here. Add short description and identifying Deficiency No.

Insert photograph here. Add short description and identifying Deficiency No.


Page 35

Appendix C – Structural Calculations This appendix is for structural calculations that are performed to support the

findings and recommendations in this report.



Page 36

Appendix D – Opinions of Cost This appendix is for the detailed cost estimate that is prepared for this report. The cost estimate line items should be referenced to the upgrade numbers in the

report. The cost estimate is intended to be a conceptual cost estimated based on the

structural engineer’s judgment, experience with similar projects, and/or the assistance of an architect, general contractor, cost estimator, or other available technical resource.



Page 37

Appendix E – Testing and Inspection Results This appendix is for the testing and inspection results/report that are performed

as a part of the evaluation of this facility. Testing and inspection should follow ASCE 31 and 41 requirements as

appropriate. The engineer should use good judgment when the testing requirements appear

to be unnecessary and then explain the reason for not performing them in this section.



Page 38

Appendix F – Geotechnical Evaluation Report This appendix should include the geotechnical evaluation report, if applicable,

that is prepared as a part of the evaluation of this facility.


Documents

Prepared by · Web viewThe seismic evaluation is accomplished utilizing ASCE/SEI 31-03 Tier 1 (screening phase) and Tier 2 (evaluation phase), along with engineering judgment, to