My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
301 N Broadway - Shell & Core - Plan
PBA
>
Building
>
ProjectDox
>
B
>
Broadway
>
301 N Broadway
>
301 N Broadway - Shell & Core - Plan
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/24/2026 10:51:20 AM
Creation date
2/24/2026 10:50:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Plan
Permit Number
101120309
Full Address
301 N Broadway
Street Number
301
Street Direction
N
Street Name
Broadway
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2081
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />3rd & Broadway, Santa Ana, CA <br />Volume 2 - Structural Calculations June 17, 2024 | Project # S21043.00 <br /> pg. 54 <br />4.4.3 ASCE 7-16 BUILDING HEIGHT INCREASE ALLOWANCE CHECK <br />According to ASCE 7-16 Section 12.2.5.4, the limits on structural height in Table 12.2-1 are permitted to <br />be increased from 160ft to 240 ft for structures assigned to Seismic Design Categories D with special <br />reinforced concrete cast-in-place shear walls if both of the following requirements are met: <br />1. The structural shall not have an extreme torsional irregularity as defined in Table 12.3-1. <br /> <br />As shown in section 4.4.2, the Residential Building does not have extreme torsional irregularity in <br />either X or Y direction, therefore the provision is satisfied. <br /> <br />The Hotel Building height is less than 160ft, therefore the provision does not apply. <br /> <br />2. The special reinforced cast-in-place concrete shear walls in any one plane shall resist not more <br />than 60% of the total seismic forces in each direction, neglecting accidental torsional effects. <br />While a few levels of the structure demonstrate shear distribution along gridline “RH” are slightly <br />greater than 60% of the total lateral load under an x-direction response spectrum case, TT does <br />not believe that the orientation of the lateral resisting system in the residential building is a <br />configuration that is anticipated to be governed by this provision. Primarily as the two concrete <br />cores are separated by roughly 100ft of a continuous diaphragm, and that cores provide a <br />significant amount of redundancy. It is unlikely that a shear failure of one wall would lead to <br />failure of the other wall along this line as the diaphragm will be able to redistribute forces among <br />the remaining 3 walls of the core due in part because of the torsional resistance of the separated <br />cores. The lateral framing condition at the residential building (double cores) is not a common <br />enough condition to be properly addressed by a standard code provision. <br />It is further noted that the commentary for this section (C12.2.5.4) notes that the second <br />requirement, regarding percent of load to each wall line, is similar to a redundancy requirement <br />and meant to prohibit a system that is overly dependent on a single line of framing or walls. As <br />noted above, the inherent stability of the cores and the continuous diaphragm make the system <br />redundant, allowing load to be redistributed if necessary. <br />The Hotel Building height is less than 160ft, therefore the provision does not apply. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.