Laserfiche WebLink
Project Name:VVS - 829 N Garfield St Engineer:Elie Sayegh, PE <br />Project No.:127 Date: <br />Gridlines 1, 2, A, & C, 4 & 5, E & D <br />Gridlines B & 3 <br />Gridline 6 <br />Existing walls are a exterior or partially exterior perimeter wall with horizontal 1X decking <br />supported over existing continuous concrete foundation. Additionally they are significant in length <br />& with very low height to width (length) ratio. The walls are also stucco'd and they are not of tall <br />plate heights. There are no newly introduced seismic weights. Strengthening is not required, and <br />we believe is not necessary. <br />Those gridlines fall along the interior party walls of the units and are not supported on a concrete <br />stem footing. New lateral force resisting system would introduce new continuous foundation at <br />those gridlines reducing the span between party walls where not solid concrete foundation is <br />provided. Additionally, those gridlines align with the damaged braced walls. New shear walls have <br />been designed to support what would be the tributary loads under today's flexible diaphragm <br />design & per the ASCE Ch. 12 Equivalent Lateral Force approach. <br />Proceeding lateral calculations consider the entire building geometry & weights, but narrows down <br />to the 2 aforementioned gridlines. Finally, additional shear walls or & shear penal retrofits are <br />shown on the plans. These are added by design inspection & not as a result of a specific lateral <br />calculation. <br />This the transverse final gridline in line with the back side garages. They are support only a single <br />story roof that is lightweight. No added weight are being introduced, no restoration is taking place, <br />and therefore strengthening is not required, and we believe is not necessary. <br />7/3/2024 <br />C. LATERAL ANALYSIS - RESTORATION NOTES <br />Lateral Design Summary <br />Our main basis of not analyzing the entirety of the existing structure under CBC & ASCE 7 is the <br />lack of seismic weight increase that exceeds the 10% threshold implied in the CEBC section CEBC <br />502.5. Nonetheless, we reviewed each of the shear lines & provided new shear walls designed per <br />the ASCE 7-16 Ch.12 at locations where a) we believed it would provided added lateral strength <br />countering any deficiencies due to the damages noted to the braced wall system. <br />Page 23 <br />HOLD- 829 N <br />Garfield St1/15/2025