fullerton elementary - roseburg public · pdf filerehabilitation of existing buildings...

900 Klamath Avenue, Klamath Falls, Oregon, 97601

T: 541.884.7421 • F: 541.883.8804

Prepared by:

Russell C. Carter, PE, SEPrincipal in Charge

Prepared for:

Roseburg School District

Structural Seismic Evaluation Reportfor the

Fullerton Elementary

December, 2015

900 Klamath Avenue, Klamath Falls, Oregon 97601 • T: 541.884.7421 • www.ZCSEngineering.com 1

Grants Pass • Klamath Falls • Medford • Oregon City

December 31, 2015 Cheryl Northam Roseburg School District 1419 NW Valley View Dr. Roseburg, Oregon 97471 Reference: Fullerton Elementary Subject: Seismic Rehabilitation Grant Application & Building Seismic Evaluation Dear Ms. Northam, Please accept this Seismic Grant Application for the State of Oregon Seismic Rehabilitation Grant Program through the Infrastructure Finance Authority and a seismic evaluation report of Fullerton Elementary School located at 2560 W. Bradford Rd., Roseburg, OR 97471. The attached grant application is for $1,495,300.00 dollars. To assist with determining the scope of work as part of the application we have performed the attached evaluation based on the American Society of Civil Engineers, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings (ASCE 41-13). The ASCE 41-13 is an industry standard for the evaluation of existing buildings and is the basis of design for the grant program. In the enclosed report, we have outlined the findings of our structural seismic evaluation, rehabilitation recommendations, cost estimate, and benefit cost analysis. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call me at (541) 884-7421 or email me at [email protected]. Sincerely,

Russell C. Carter, PE, SE President Enc: Seismic Grant Application / Structural Seismic Evaluation Report and Support Drawings provided by ZCS Engineering, Inc.

Roseburg School District December, 2015 Fullerton Elementary Seismic Evaluation Project No: G-0877-15



Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Project Introduction .............................................................................................................. 3 3.0 Structural Evaluation ............................................................................................................ 5 4.0 Seismic Rehabilitation Recommendations ...................................................................... 10 5.0 Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate .......................................................................... 13 6.0 Benefit Cost Analysis ......................................................................................................... 14 7.0 Conclusion and Recommendations .................................................................................. 15 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




1.0 Executive Summary

The Roseburg School District is located in Roseburg, Oregon in Douglas County. The District operates 13 schools located within the community including the property of interest, Fullerton Elementary, approximately 70 miles south of Eugene, Oregon. The District has retained ZCS Engineering, Inc. (ZCS) to perform a seismic evaluation of Fullerton Elementary 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 41-13”.

Fullerton Elementary School is located at 2560 W Bradford CT. in Roseburg, Oregon. The campus is made up of (3) structures ranging in size, use and construction type. The classrooms and multi-use spaces where constructed around 1961 and consist of wood framing with unreinforced masonry construction (URM) with diagonal sheathed roof diaphragm (See Figure). The facility has experienced two additions in the 1970’s to expand the facility with similar layout and construction type. The area of the buildings totals 44,831 SF and used for elementary age student education. The descriptions below were gathered from site observations on September 8th, 2015 and the review of existing construction documents provided.

The evaluation of the facility indicates rehabilitation of existing lateral system components are necessary to meet the requirements for Life Safety outlined in ASCE 41-13. The following is a brief list of seismic deficiencies encountered:

Lack of primary lateral force resistance Aspect ratio and span of plywood sheathed roof diaphragm Roof diaphragm tension chord around perimeter of building Connection of roof diaphragm to top of wall Lateral system load path and anchorage Lack of URM out-of-plane anchorage

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. With the assistance of a local contractor total construction cost of $1,495,300.00 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 2.7. 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 ASCE 41-13. Once rehabilitated, this building will meet the needs of the District and community for future generations.




2.0 Project Introduction

Roseburg School District is centrally located in Roseburg, Oregon in Douglas County. Fullerton Elementary School is located at 2560 W. Bradford Dr. in Roseburg, Oregon The District has retained ZCS Engineering, Inc. (ZCS) to perform a seismic evaluation of Fullerton Elementary. 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 based on the ASCE 41-13 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 Gerry 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 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




3.0 Structural Evaluation 3.1 Introduction ZCS was tasked with evaluating the lateral force resisting systems of the facility. The structures reviewed in our analysis include original 1961 classroom and gymnasium/cafeteria. Fullerton Elementary School is located at 2560 W Bradford Ct. in Roseburg, Oregon. The campus is made up of (3) structures ranging in size, use and construction type. The classrooms and multi-use spaces where constructed around 1961 and consist of wood framing with unreinforced masonry construction (URM) with diagonal sheathed roof diaphragm (See Figure). The facility has experienced two additions in the 1970’s to expand the facility with similar layout and construction type. The area of the buildings totals 44,831 SF and used for elementary age student education. The descriptions below were gathered from site observations on September 8th, 2015 and the review of existing construction documents provided. 3.3 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 41-13”. This manual is the required evaluation tool per the Seismic Rehabilitation Grant Program through Business Oregon Infrastructure Finance Authority. Per ASCE 41-13 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” per ASCE 41-13. The level of performance is defined per ASCE 41-13 as: “Structural performance level, life safety, means 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 has not resulted in large falling debris hazards, either inside or outside the building. Injuries may 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 may not be practical. Although the damaged structure is not an imminent collapse risk, it would be prudent to implement structural repairs or install temporary bracing prior to reoccupancy.”




Per ASCE 41-13 a seismic performance objective is required. The performance level selected for this evaluation in order to obtain a performance level of “Life Safety” was 75% of the BSE-1N design level as defined ASCE 41-13 section 2.4.1.2. The BSE-1N design earthquake has a probability of occurring once in every 475 years, or 10% chance in 50 years. This design level earthquake has a similar rate of occurrence as the current state adopted building codes. The 25% reduction in loading is recommended by the City of Portland City Code for the evaluation and rehabilitation of existing building per chapter 24.85. 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 3.3.3 outlines the existing gravity system and its structural deficiencies found during the evaluation. 3.3.1 Lateral Resisting Systems After reviewing the facility and the existing drawings we have determined the lateral system is defined as a W2 and URM. Per ASCE 41 a W2 and URM 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 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 aby pot-and-beam framing.

Unreinforced Masonry Bearing Walls – These buildings have a perimeter bearing walls that consist of unreinforced clay brick, stone, or concrete masonry. Interior bearing walls, where present, also consist of unreinforced clay brick, stone, or concrete masonry. In older construction, floor and roof framing consists of straight or diagonal lumber sheathing supported by wood joists, which, in turn, are supported on posts and timbers. In more recent construction, floors consist of structural panel or plywood sheathing rather than lumber sheathing. The diaphragms are flexible relative to the walls. Where they exist, ties between the walls and the diaphragms consist of anchors or bent steel plates embedded in the mortar joints and attached to framing. The foundation system may consist of a variety or elements.

Building A – Front Office and Covered Area

1961 (W2) – 5,600 SF




Consists of wood stud framed exterior bearing walls with straight/diagonal sheathing. Covered

area supported by steel pipe columns and wood beams. The roof framing consist of light wood

roof joists and diagonal sheathing over timber beams (flexible diaphragm) (See Figures).

Building B - Classroom Wing

1961 (URM) – 33,289 SF

The classroom pods consist of wood framed roof construction with unreinforced masonry

transvers walls with light framed infill walls and full length glass in the longitudinal direction. The

roof consists of light wood rafters with diagonal sheathings (flexible diaphragm) (See Figures).

Building C – Gym/Cafeteria

1961 (URM) – 5,922 SF

The assembly structure consist of unreinforced masonry walls the lower half of the exterior walls

with wood framed walls above. Roof beams are supported by steel pipe columns. The roof

consists of heavy timber beams supporting light wood rafters with diagonal sheathings (flexible

diaphragm) (See Figures).

3.3.2 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 41-13. The Tier 1 checklists are attached in Appendix B. The following outlines the deficiencies for each portion of the facility. Building A – W2

The exterior straight sheathed interior gypsum shear walls do not have adequate

capacity to resist the prescribed seismic forces generated in the roof diaphragms. The shear wall straight sheathing does not extend to the underside of the roof sheathing

inhibiting the transfer of roof diaphragm loads into the shear walls below. Lack of wood sill connection to foundation

Holdown devices are not present to properly attach the second floor walls to the shear walls below, rendering them susceptible to overturning forces.

Lack of lateral system at canopies Summary Lack of primary lateral force resistance Aspect ratio and span of diagonal sheathed roof diaphragm Roof diaphragm tension chord around perimeter of building




Connection of roof diaphragm to top of wall Lateral system load path and anchorage

Building B – URM

Large windows in the longitudinal direction reduce the available shear wall lengths. The

shear walls with the windows do not have adequate capacity for the prescribed seismic loadings.

No out-of-plane connection at the top of URM walls to keep the walls from separating from the roof framing resulting in collapse.

The shear wall sheathing does not extend to the underside of the roof sheathing inhibiting the transfer of roof diaphragm loads into the shear walls below.

The framing configuration at the top of the walls and glazing package does not provide for a continuous diaphragm top chord. This lack of top chords inhibits the ability of the roof diaphragm to transfer seismic forces into shear walls. Summary Lack of primary lateral force resistance Aspect ratio and span of plywood sheathed roof diaphragm Roof diaphragm tension chord around perimeter of building Connection of roof diaphragm to top of wall Lateral system load path and anchorage Lack of URM out-of-plane anchorage

Building C – URM

The URM shear walls do not have adequate capacity to resist the prescribed seismic

forces generated in the roof diaphragms. The shear wall sheathing does not extend to the underside of the roof sheathing

inhibiting the transfer of roof diaphragm loads into the shear walls below. No out-of-plane connection at the top of URM walls. This discontinuity creates a hinge

in the wall deflects during a seismic event. The walls could buckle due to the lack of reinforcement in the walls to the resist the tension forces developed during the movement with roof framing resulting in collapse. Summary Lack of primary lateral force resistance Roof diaphragm tension chord around perimeter of building Connection of roof diaphragm to top of wall Lateral system load path and anchorage Lack of URM out-of-plane anchorage




3.3.3 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 3.3.4 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.

Suspended ceiling seismic bracing at exits Proper attachment and bracing of storage racks/cabinets/books shelves over 4’ tall or

3:1 (height:width) ratio Attachment of equipment over 20 lbs. and above 4’, and all equipment over 100 lbs. Attachment of all emergency lighting, power equipment and associated wiring Verification/installation of emergency shutoff valves for gas utilities Based upon ZCS’s previous experience and discussions with site personnel the buildings

contain 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.




4.0 Seismic Rehabilitation Recommendations The following structural improvements are required to resolve the deficiencies noted in section 3.9. be made to the existing structure. 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.

Building A – W2

The length to width ratio of the building creates the need to remove the roofing to add plywood

sheathing and provide blocking/edge nailing over shear walls. We also recommend installing

new plywood shear walls and steel moment frames at strategic location in covered canopies,

along exterior and interior wall lines. This will reduce the diaphragm aspect ratios, span lengths,

and shear wall demands to code acceptable levels. Additional blocking, strapping, and wall

anchors will be used in specific areas to collect forces into the top of shear walls. Provide

proper attachment and bracing for all non-structural components and equipment.

Structural Provide new drag tie beams between the beam lines in the transverse direction over the

corridor to complete cross ties Remove the roofing material along the new boundary/drag elements and add plywood

roof sheathing to complete the diaphragm connection Provide blocking, clipping and nailing connections along top of walls in to establish

adequate connection between top of wall and diaphragm A new plywood sheathing to be added at strategic location to supplement existing 1x

straight sheathing to increase the allowable shear capacity of the shear walls to acceptable levels.

Provide steel moment frames to support open canopies Non – Structural

Provide proper attachment and bracing for all non-structural components and equipment Any equipment weighing over 20 pounds shall be attached and properly braced

Building B – URM



new plywood shear walls in strategic location along exterior and interior wall lines. This will

reduce the diaphragm aspect ratios, span lengths, and shear wall demands to code acceptable

levels. Additional blocking, strapping, and wall anchors will be used in specific areas to collect




forces into the top of shear walls and out-of-plane anchorage of URM walls. Provide proper

attachment and bracing for all non-structural components and equipment.

Structural Provide new drag tie beams between the beam lines in the transverse direction over the

corridor to complete cross ties Remove the roofing material along the new boundary/drag elements and add plywood


adequate connection between top of wall and diaphragm Provide blocking, steel straps and anchors along the top of URM walls to provide

connection at the top of the URM walls to the roof diaphragm at 4’ on-center To limit the aspect ratio of the roof diaphragm to code prescribed limits the existing

interior cross walls will be sheathed with plywood on the existing wall framing. The existing gypsum interior finish will be removed and replaced over the plywood sheathing. The walls will be adequately attached to the existing slab on grade utilizing post installed anchors and attached to the existing slab on grade utilizing post installed anchors and attached to the roof framing using structural screws.

The large windows will be removed in strategic locations and in filled to provide new plywood shear walls and establish a shear transfer between to the foundation Non – Structural

Provide proper attachment and bracing for all non-structural components and equipment All piping and HVAC equipment found throughout the building shall be properly braced

and attached to the structure to limit the potential damage. Any equipment weighing over 20 pounds shall be attached and properly braced Suspended ceiling seismic bracing at exits

Building C – URM



new plywood shear walls in strategic location along exterior and interior wall lines around the

main assembly area. This will reduce the diaphragm aspect ratios, span lengths, and shear wall

demands to code acceptable levels. Add new steel columns to reinforce existing columns

supporting heavy timber beams. Add steel spandrels between columns with wall anchors at

specific spacing to collect forces from out-of-plane forces from URM walls at mid-height of wall.

Provide proper attachment and bracing for all non-structural components and equipment.




Structural Remove the roofing material along the new boundary/drag elements and add plywood


adequate connection between top of wall and diaphragm Provide steel spandrel collector between steel new steel columns along the mid-height

of wall to provide connection at the top of the URM walls at 4’ on-center To provide proper lateral support for the gym/cafeteria new full height wood stud and

plywood shear walls will be added in strategic locations (corners). These walls will be incorporated into the original construction in a manner that blends their appearance with the existing interior finish.

To limit the aspect ratio of the roof diaphragm to code prescribed limits the existing interior cross walls will be sheathed with plywood on the existing wall framing. The existing gypsum interior finish will be removed and replaced over the plywood sheathing. The walls will be adequately attached to the existing slab on grade utilizing post installed anchors and attached to the existing slab on grade utilizing post installed anchors and attached to the roof framing using structural screws. Non – Structural

Provide proper attachment and bracing for all non-structural components and equipment All piping and HVAC equipment found throughout the building shall be properly braced

and attached to the structure to limit the potential damage. Any equipment weighing over 20 pounds shall be attached and properly braced




5.0 Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate

The attached engineer’s opinion of probable cost has been developed by ZCS for Fullerton Elementary. 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.

Following the generation of the preliminary construction cost estimate, it was reviewed with a local construction company representative who has participated in similar construction projects. This representative is a highly qualified commercial contractor that has worked on multiple educational facilities and performed seismic retrofits to existing structures. They reviewed the values presented in the construction cost estimate, and provided insight into current construction costs from a contractor’s perspective. They also reviewed the schematic seismic retrofit plans attached in Appendix E and provided insight and constructability review. The comments and insight provided have been included in the proposed construction cost estimate and schematic seismic retrofit plans.

After final review, the final preliminary construction cost estimate is $1,495,300.00.




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 BCA for this project is 2.7. Given the BCA score of 2.7 is greater than 1.0. this project is a good candidate for the grant program.




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 facility for education, 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.ZCSEngineering.com


Appendix A: Figures

DISH

TEACHERS

ROOM

RM #24

PRINCIPAL

NURSE

MENS

P

H

O

T

O

2

/

S

0

.

4

31'-8" 58'-2"30'-0" 64'-0"

6'-0"

62'-8"

24'-0"

3'-4"

47'-4"

10'-8"

MULTI-PURPOSE

ROOM

9'-4" 65'-4"

31'-4" 64'-0"

37'-6"

317'-1 3/4"

8"

30'-8"

CLASSROOM

#14

CLASSROOM

#13

CLASSROOM

#15

CLASSROOM

#12

CLASSROOM

#16

CLASSROOM

#11

CLASSROOM

#17

CLASSROOM

#10

CLASSROOM

#18

CLASSROOM

#9

CLASSROOM

#19

CLASSROOM

#8

CLASSROOM

#6

CLASSROOM

#1

CLASSROOM

#5

CLASSROOM

#2

RECEPT

STORAGE

RM #23

KITCHEN

8'-0"

16'-0" TYP

8"

TEACHERS

TEACHERS

STORAGE

BICYCLE

PARKING

OLD

FURNACE

STORAGE

GIRLS

BOYS

GIRLS

BOYS

GIRLS

BOYS

CLASSROOM

#21

CLASSROOM

#20

LIBRARY

STORAGE

STORAGE

STORAGE

STORAGE

STORAGE

30'-5 3/4"

65'-4"

62'-8"

31'-4"

31'-4"

65'-4"

32'-8" 32'-8"

46'-8" 65'-4" 46'-8" 65'-4" 46'-6" 65'-4"

2'-9 3/4"

27'-8"

61'-4"

5'-7"

27'-10 1/2"

27'-10 1/2"

FURNACE

RM

FURNACE

RM

MUSIC

ROOM #22

LAB

ROOM #7

CLASSROOM

#4

CLASSROOM

#3

431'-7 3/4"

58'-0"

15'-4"16'-0"15'-4"

8'-0"

8'-0"

16'-0"

16'-0"

8'-0"

16'-0"

16'-0"

OVERALL FLOOR PLAN

1/16"= 1'-0"

1

S0.1

P

H

O

T

O

9

/

S

0

.

3

P

H

O

T

O

8

/

S

0

.

3

PH

OT

O

4/S

0.4

P

H

O

T

O

3

/

S

0

.

4

P

H

O

T

O

6

/

S

0

.

2

P

H

O

T

O

5

/

S

0

.

2

P

H

O

T

O

7

/

S

0

.

2

P

H

O

T

O

5

/

S

0

.

3

PHOTO

3/S0.3

P

H

O

T

O

1

/

S

0

.

3

P

H

O

T

O

2

/

S

0

.

2

P

H

O

T

O

8

/

S

0

.

4

PH

OT

O

7/S

0.4

P

H

O

T

O

5

/

S

0

.

4

P

H

O

T

O

6

/

S

0

.

3

P

H

O

T

O

4

/

S

0

.

2

P

H

O

T

O

3

/

S

0

.

2

PHOTO

8/S0.2

P

H

O

T

O

2

/

S

0

.

3

P

H

O

T

O

4

/

S

0

.

3

PHOTO

7/S0.3

P

H

O

T

O

1

/

S

0

.

4

P

H

O

T

O

6

/

S

0

.

4

P

H

O

T

O

1

/

S

0

.

2

P

H

O

T

O

9

/

S

0

.

2

C

5,922 SQ FT.

B

26,784 SQ FT.

A

1,400 SQ FT.

---

---

---

-

OVERALL FLOOR PLAN

S0.1

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71

IF THIS BAR DOES NOT MEASURE

1-INCH IN LENGTH, THEN THE

DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE

---

---

---

-

EXTERIOR PHOTOS

S0.2

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




PHOTO

NTS

1

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

2

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

3

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

6

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

5

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

4

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

7

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

8

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

9

S0.2

---

---

---

-

EXTERIOR PHOTOS

S0.3

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




PHOTO

NTS

1

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

2

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

3

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

4

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

5

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

6

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

9

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

8

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

7

S0.3

---

---

---

-

INTERIOR/EXTERIORPHOTOS

S0.4

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




PHOTO

NTS

1

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

2

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

3

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

4

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

5

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

6

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

7

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

8

S0.4

---

---

---

-


S0.5

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




PHOTO

NTS

1

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

2

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

3

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

4

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

5

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

6

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

7

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

8

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

9

S0.5

---

---

---

-

INTERIORPHOTOS

S0.6

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




PHOTO

NTS

1

S0.6

PHOTO

NTS

2

S0.6

PHOTO

NTS

3

S0.6

PHOTO

NTS

4

S0.6




Appendix B: Structural Tier 1 Check Sheets




Appendix C: Construction Cost Estimate Worksheets

Description Quanity Units Unit PriceTotal Price for

Construction Item

General Conditions 5% % $52,500.00Preconstruction Services 1% % $11,000.00Equipment Rental 3 Month 5,000.00$ $15,000.00Toilet Rental 3 Month 1,800.00$ $5,400.00Cleanup Continuous 3 Month 4,000.00$ $12,000.00Clean Up Dumpsters 3 Month 2,400.00$ $7,200.00Temporary Conditions 0 Lump Sum $0.00Final Clean UP 45000 Square Foot 0.35$ $15,800.00

Soft Demolition 50000 Square Foot 2.00$ $100,000.00Hard Demolition 2400 Square Foot 10.00$ $24,000.00

Asbestos Abatement 45000 Square Foot 1.50$ $67,500.00Foundation Layout 1000 Square Foot 0.40$ $400.00Wall Framing Layout 0 Square Foot 0.25$ $0.00Roofing Framing Layout 45000 Square Foot 0.50$ $22,500.00Interior Finishes Layout 6000 Square Foot 0.50$ $3,000.00

Escalation 2% % $22,300.00Bonding & Insurance 3% % $33,400.00Contractor Profit & Overhead 6% % $70,200.00

General Conditons Subtotal $462,200.00

Shear Wall Footings - Plywood 300 Lineral Foot 150.00$ $45,000.00Floor Finish Reinstallation 1000 Square Foot 13.00$ $13,000.00

Foundation Level Subtotal 58,000.00$

New 2x Framed Shear Walls 2400 Square Foot 15.00$ $36,000.00Sheathing of Existing Walls 1200 Square Foot 8.00$ $9,600.00New Steel Columns 20 EA 2,600.00$ $52,000.00Exterior Finish Repair / Installation 2400 Square Foot 28.00$ $67,200.00Interior Wall Finish Repair 2000 Square Foot 2.00$ $4,000.00

Wall Strengthening Subtotal 168,800.00$

New 60 mil self-adherring TPO roof membrane 45000 Square Foot 7.00$ $315,000.00Diaphragm Attachments - In-Plane Shear 1500 Square Foot 3.00$ $4,500.00Diaphragm Attachments - Out-of-Plane 275 Lineral Foot 65.00$ $17,875.00New Roof Sheathing 45000 Square Foot 2.50$ $112,500.00Ceiling Repair 1000 Square Foot 5.50$ $5,500.00

Roof Strengthening Subtotal 455,375.00$

Misc Electrical / HVAC / Plumbing 1 Lump Sum $0.00 $35,000.00Non-Structural Attachments 1 Lump Sum $0.00 $20,000.00Brace Existing Suspended Ceiling 10000 Square Foot $4.00 $40,000.00

Miscellaneous Subtotal 95,000.00$

Total Construction Cost $1,239,400.00

Architectural Consulting $18,600.00Structural / Rehailitaiton Engineering $117,700.00Geotechnical Consulting $18,600.00Special Inspection Services for Construction $6,200.00Structural Observations during Construction $6,200.00Materials Testing for Design $6,200.00Construction Management / Owner Representation $37,200.00Permitting Fees $37,200.00Relocation of FF&E $8,000.00

$255,900.00

$1,495,300.00

Roof Strengthening Construction

ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - FULLERTON ELEMENTARY REHABILITATION

Total Project Funding Requirement

GENERAL CONDITIONS

Foundation / Floor Strengthening Construction

Wall Strengthening Construction

Miscellaneous Elements

Associated Design / Soft Costs

Design / Soft Cost Subtotal




Appendix D: Benefit-Cost Analysis Worksheets

Entity:

Point of Contact

Telephone:

E-Mail:

BCA File Name: BCA Date: 12/31/2015

Building Name:

Site ID:

Facility Use:

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

User-Defined Database

3

Unique Building ID Number

Building Part Square Footage

Percent of Total SF

Percent of Occupancy

Percent of Budget

Building PartBeing

Retrofitted?

Doug_sch03A 1,400 3.45% 3.50% 3.50% Yes

Doug_sch03B 33,298 81.97% 82.00% 82.00% Yes

Doug_sch03C 5,922 14.58% 14.50% 14.50% Yes

Totals: 40,620 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

Seismic Retrofit Cost Estimate per SRGP Application:

Oregon Seismic Rehabilitation Grant Application: Benefit-Cost Analysis

Roseburg School District

School

Doug_sch03

Cheryl Northam

(541) 440-4027

[email protected]

Fullerton Elementary School

BCA-FullertonElem.xls

How Many Structurally Different Building Parts Are There?

$1,495,300

Page 1 BCA-FullertonElem

Building PartDoug_sch03ADoug_sch03B $476,471Doug_sch03C $119,118

$50,486$20,154

$3,439,558$4,105,787

Total BenefitsTotal Cost

Benefit-Cost Ratio

Casualties

Building DamageContents Damage

Benefits by CategoryAvoided Damages and Losses

Displacement CostsLoss of Function Costs

$862,420

Benefit-Cost Analysis: Summary Results

$3,163,887

Benefits$79,479


2.746

$4,105,787$1,495,300

Total


Number of Months:

2.5

Day of WeekTime of

DayHours per

Day

Average Employees in Building

Calculated 24/7/365

OccupancyDay of Week

Time of Day

Hours per Day

Average Employees in Building

Calculated 24/7/365

OccupancyMonday - Friday Day 9 45 9.516 Monday - Friday Day 8.5 2 0.105Monday - Friday Evening 3 5 0.352 Monday - Friday EveningMonday - Friday Night 3 1 0.070 Monday - Friday Night

Saturday Day Saturday DaySaturday Evening Saturday EveningSaturday Night Saturday NightSunday Day Sunday DaySunday Evening Sunday EveningSunday Night Sunday Night

Subtotal: 9.939 Subtotal: 0.105

Number of Months:

2.5

Day of Week

Average Time in Building (Minutes)

Calculated 24/7/365

OccupancyDay of Week

Average Time in Building (Minutes)

Calculated 24/7/365

Occupancy

Monday - Friday 180 0.705 Monday - Friday 90 0.019Saturday SaturdaySunday Sunday

Subtotal: 0.705 Subtotal: 0.019

350 456 3

175 2541.952 0.385

24

CourseClass

Duration (hours)

Number of Class

Periods per Week

Average Number of Students per Class

Calculated 24/7/365

OccupancyCourse

Class Duration (hours)

Number of Class

Periods per Week

Average Number of Students per Class

Calculated 24/7/365

Occupancy

1 Hr. Courses 1 1 Hr. Courses 11.5 Hr. Courses 1.5 1.5 Hr. Courses 1.52 Hr. Courses 2 2 Hr. Courses 23 Hr. Courses 3 3 Hr. Courses 3Other N/A Other N/AOther N/A Other N/A

Subtotal: Subtotal:

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: Calculated 24/7/365 Occupancy:

College Students: Academic Year College Students: Summer SchoolNumber 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

10 2

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

EventEvents

per YearPeople per

Event

Average Duration per

Event (hours)

Calculated 24/7/365

Occupancy

Carnival 1 500 3 0.171Family Night 6 350 1 0.240Parent/Teacher Con 4 200 0.5 0.046Parent Educaton 9 15 2 0.031Young Rembrandts A 32 12 1 0.044Boys Basketball 30 15 1.5 0.077Bingo 1 150 2 0.034Girls Basketball 18 15 2.5 0.077Book Seminar 4 45 2 0.041Volleyball 20 18 2 0.082Extended School Da 80 27 1.5 0.370

Subtotal: 1.213

Day of Week

Average Time in Building (Hours)

Calculated 24/7/365

Occupancy

Monday - FridaySaturdaySunday

Average Daily Number of In-Patients

Meetings, Sports Events etc.

PatientsTotal Number of In-Patient Beds:

Average Percentage Occupancy

Average Number of Out-Patients per Day

In-Patients:Out-Patients:

Total Patients:


Occupancy Data

Employees 9.939 0.105

SUMMARY OCCUPANCY DATA: Average 24/7/365 Occupancy

Occupancy Category12 Months or

Academic YearSummer

Visitors 0.705 0.019Students: K-12 41.952 0.385Students: CollegeMeetings & Special Events 1.213 N/A

Avg 24/7/365 Occupancy: 54.318

Patients N/ASubtotals: 53.809 0.509


Number

of FTEs1

Average Annual

Salary per Employee

Total Benefits as Percent of Salary

Annual Salary and Benefits

1 Teachers 21.5 $52,243 53.00% $1,718,5332 Administration 1 $90,361 39.00% $125,6023 Other 17.4 $17,260 64.00% $492,5314 $05 $06 $07 $08 $09 $0

10 $0Total Number of FTEs: 39.90 Subtotal: $2,336,667

1 FTEs: Full time equivalents

Annual Cost$41,593$98,276$35,348$13,442

6.15% $219,391

$710,850

Subtotal: $1,118,900

$3,455,567Total Building Annual Operating Budget:

OTHER: specify below

Annual Operating Budget for this Facility

Employees:

Classification

Other Building ExpensesCategory

SuppliesBuilding MaintenanceUtilitiesInsuranceRentAverage Annual Capital Goods

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:


Annual Operating Budget for this Facility

Number

of FTEs1

Average Annual

Salary per Employee

Total Benefits as Percent of Salary

Annual Salary and Benefits

1 Superintendent 1 $135,720 47.00% $199,5082 Asst super/Dir of HR 1 $123,653 46.00% $180,5333 Business Manager 1 $112,918 47.00% $165,9894 Dir Student Srvc/Dir Teaching & Learn 2 $105,640 47.00% $310,5825 Physical Plant Manager 1 $85,175 33.00% $113,2836 Budget & Accounting Manager 1 $83,795 46.00% $122,3417 Teaching & Learning Coordinator 1 $85,215 51.00% $128,6758 Student Services Coordinator 1 $90,361 48.00% $133,7349 WarehouseTransp Supervisor 1 $78,007 48.00% $115,450

10 Clerical 15 $48,179 66.00% $1,199,657Total Number of FTEs: 25.00 Subtotal: $2,669,753

Annual Cost$191,405$15,000$61,542$2,400

Rent

$8,960,500$627,235

Subtotal: $897,582

$3,567,335

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

Total Annual Operating Budget for District Office/Headquarters Building:

Building maintenanceUtilitiesInsurance

Average Annual Capital GoodsOTHER: specify below

Enter replacement value of building:If rent is zero (building owned), a proxy rent is calculated

Supplies

Classification

District Office/Headquarters Building ExpensesCategory


Building Name:

Building ID:

Building Part Name / Description:

Evaluation for Building Part A

Region of Seismicity

PGA Ground Motion (g) 0.408

0.272

0.155

0.062

Spectral Accelerations (g) 0.917

0.583

0.327

0.208

Data Entry Item User Entered Values Default Values Used for BCA

County Douglas DouglasDecimal Latitude 43.21711 43.21711Decimal Longitude 123.38154 123.38154Soil Type C C C

Primary Structure Type (FEMA 154) W2 W1 W2Number of Stories 1 1Year Built 1961 1961

Severe Vertical Irregularity Yes No YesModerate Vertical Irregularity No NoPlan Irregularity No NoPre-Code Yes No YesPost-Benchmark No No

Historic Importance None None NoneHistoric Adjustment Modifier N/A N/A 1.00Building Square Footage - SF 1,400 N/A 1,400Building Replacement - $/SF $250.00 $250.00Building Replacement Value - $ N/A N/A $350,000Historic Building Replacement - $/SF N/A N/A $250.00Historic Building Replacement Value - $ N/A N/A $350,000Contents Value - % of Building Value 25% 25%Displacement Costs - $/SF/month $1.50 $1.50Displacement Costs - One Time $1.35 $1.35Average Annual Occupancy 1.90 1.87 1.90Annual Operating Budget $120,945 $119,099 $120,945

Slight Damage State 0.10 0.10Moderate Damage State 0.16 0.16Extensive Damage State 0.31 0.31Complete Damage State 0.51 0.51Beta 0.66 0.66

Retrofit Building Type W2 W2Retrofit Performance Objective LS LSSlight Damage State 0.22 0.22Moderate Damage State 0.43 0.43Extensive Damage State 0.85 0.85Complete Damage State 1.52 1.52Beta 0.62 0.62

Seismic Fragility CurvesBefore Mitigation

Building Part A: Data for Benefit-Cost Analysis


Site Data

Doug_sch03A

Seismic Hazard Data

Construction Data

10% in 50 year

Moderately High

Front Office

Building Data

Sxs, 10% in 50 year

Sx1, 10% in 50 year

Rapid Visual Screening Data

Sx1, 2% in 50 year

2% in 50 year

5% in 50 year

20% in 50 yearSxs, 2% in 50 year

After Mitigation


canopy extends without lateral systems

Data Documentation: Building Part A

Provide brief documentation below and/or references to other documents included with your application (with page number), but ONLY for data entries in Column C, which replace the default values in Column D.

Soil Type

Primary Structure Type

This would Str. Is 5600 SF

Number of Stories

Year Built

Severe Vertical Irregularity

Moderate Vertical Irregularity

Plan Irregularity

Pre-Code

Post-Benchmark

Construction was 1961

Historic Importance (if not none)

Building Square FootageBuilding Replacement Value $/SF

Contents Value % of Building Value

Fragility Curve Parameters After Mitigation

Other Comments

Displacement Costs One Time

Displacement Costs $/SF/month

Fragility Curve Parameters Before Mitigation


Building Name:

Building ID:


Evaluation for Building Part B



0.272

0.155

0.062


0.583

0.327

0.208


County Douglas DouglasDecimal Latitude 43.21747 43.21747Decimal Longitude 123.38126 123.38126Soil Type C C C

Primary Structure Type (FEMA 154) URM RM1 URMNumber of Stories 1 1Year Built 1961 1961

Severe Vertical Irregularity No NoModerate Vertical Irregularity No NoPlan Irregularity Yes YesPre-Code Yes No YesPost-Benchmark No No

Historic Importance None None NoneHistoric Adjustment Modifier N/A N/A 1.00Building Square Footage - SF 33,298 N/A 33,298Building Replacement - $/SF $250.00 $250.00Building Replacement Value - $ N/A N/A $8,324,500Historic Building Replacement - $/SF N/A N/A $250.00Historic Building Replacement Value - $ N/A N/A $8,324,500Contents Value - % of Building Value 25% 25%Displacement Costs - $/SF/month $1.50 $1.50Displacement Costs - One Time $1.35 $1.35Average Annual Occupancy 44.54 44.53 44.54Annual Operating Budget $2,833,565 $2,832,680 $2,833,565


Retrofit Building Type RM1 C2 RM1Retrofit Performance Objective LS LSSlight Damage State 0.25 0.25Moderate Damage State 0.36 0.36Extensive Damage State 0.68 0.68Complete Damage State 1.15 1.15Beta 0.62 0.62

Sxs, 10% in 50 year

Sx1, 10% in 50 year

Seismic Fragility CurvesBefore Mitigation

After Mitigation

Building Part B: Data for Benefit-Cost Analysis

Building Data


Site Data

Doug_sch03B

Seismic Hazard Data

Construction Data


Class Rooms

Moderately High

2% in 50 year

5% in 50 year

10% in 50 year


Sx1, 2% in 50 year


Data Documentation: Building Part B


Soil Type


Field investigation determined the masonary walls are unreinforced

Number of Stories

Year Built



Plan Irregularity

Pre-Code contruciton in 1961

Post-Benchmark





Other Comments





Building Name:

Building ID:


Evaluation for Building Part C



0.309

0.199

0.082


0.668

0.431

0.285


County Douglas DouglasDecimal Latitude 43.21716 43.21716Decimal Longitude 123.38192 123.38192Soil Type D C D

Primary Structure Type (FEMA 154) URM RM1 URMNumber of Stories 1 1Year Built 1961 1961

Severe Vertical Irregularity No NoModerate Vertical Irregularity Yes YesPlan Irregularity Yes YesPre-Code Yes No YesPost-Benchmark No No

Historic Importance None None NoneHistoric Adjustment Modifier N/A N/A 1.00Building Square Footage - SF 5,922 N/A 5,922Building Replacement - $/SF $250.00 $250.00Building Replacement Value - $ N/A N/A $1,480,500Historic Building Replacement - $/SF N/A N/A $250.00Historic Building Replacement Value - $ N/A N/A $1,480,500Contents Value - % of Building Value 25% 25%Displacement Costs - $/SF/month $1.50 $1.50Displacement Costs - One Time $1.35 $1.35Average Annual Occupancy 7.88 7.92 7.88Annual Operating Budget $501,057 $503,788 $501,057


Retrofit Building Type RM1 C2 RM1Retrofit Performance Objective LS LSSlight Damage State 0.25 0.25Moderate Damage State 0.36 0.36Extensive Damage State 0.68 0.68Complete Damage State 1.15 1.15Beta 0.62 0.62

After Mitigation

Moderately High

2% in 50 year

5% in 50 year

10% in 50 year


Sx1, 2% in 50 year

Sxs, 10% in 50 year

Sx1, 10% in 50 year

Before Mitigation

Construction Data


Seismic Fragility Curves

Building Part C: Data for Benefit-Cost Analysis

Building Data


Site Data

Doug_sch03C

Gym

Seismic Hazard Data


Data Documentation: Building Part C


Soil Type


Field investigation determined the masonary walls are unreinforced

Number of Stories

Year Built



Plan Irregularity

Pre-Code

Post-Benchmark








Other Comments





Appendix E: Schematic Seismic Retrofit Drawings

---

---

---

-

COVER SHEET

S0.0

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71



DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALEFULLERTON ELEMENTARY SCHOOLROSEBURG SCHOOL DISTRICT

2560 W BRADFORD CT, ROSEBURG OREGON 97471

VICINITY MAP

NTS

4

S0.0

SITE LAYOUT

NTS

1

S0.0

SHEET INDEX

- S0.0 COVER SHEET

- S0.1 OVERALL FLOOR PLAN

- S0.2 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS

- S0.3 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS

- S0.4 FRAMING / DEFICIENCIES



- S1.1 FOUNDATION PLAN

- S1.2 ROOF FRAMING PLAN




- S1.6 TYP. BUILDING SECTIONS

PROJECT NARRATIVE

INTENT OF THESE DRAWINGS IS TO ILLUSTRATE THE LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING THE APPLICANT HAS WITH

REGARDS TO THE EFFORT THAT WILL BE REQUIRED TO SEISMICALLY REHABILITATE THE BUILDING. THESE

SCHEMATIC DRAWINGS HAVE BEEN PREPARED USING THE CURRENT OREGON STRUCTURAL SPECIALITY

CODE (OSSC) AND THE ASCE 41 (SEISMIC REHABILITATION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS) AS THE REFERENCES

FOR PRESCRIBED LOADING AND BUILDING PERFORMANCE LEVEL RATINGS.

THE DRAWING ILLUSTRATES BOTH EXISTING CONDITIONS AND GENERAL REPAIRS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE

ACCOMPLISHED TO REACH AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE (LIFE SAFETY) ACCORDING TO

CURRENT CODE.

"STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE LEVEL, LIFE SAFETY, MEANS 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 HAS NOT RESULTED IN LARGE FALLING DEBRIS HAZARDS, EITHER INSIDE OR

OUTSIDE THE BUILDING. INJURIES MAY 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 MAY NOT BE PRACTICAL.

ALTHOUGH THE DAMAGED STRUCTURE IS NOT AN IMMINENT COLLAPSE RISK, IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO

IMPLEMENT STRUCTURAL REPAIRS OR INSTALL TEMPORARY BRACING PRIOR TO REOCCUPANCY"

SEISMIC DEFICIENCIES

- LATERAL FORCE RESISTING SYSTEM (SHEARWALL STRAIGHT SHEATHING CAPACITY)

- LATERAL FORCE RESISTING SYSTEM AND TIES (GREATER THAN 80% OPENINGS)

- NARROW WOOD SHEAR WALL ASPECT RATIO

- CONNECTION OF ROOF DIAPHRAGM TO TOP OF SHEAR WALLS

- ASPECT RATIO OF ROOF DIAPHRAGMS (STRAIGHT SHEATHING CAPACITY)

- ROOF DIAPHRAGM TENSION CHORD AROUND PERIMETER OF BUILDING

- LATERAL SYSTEM LOAD PATH AND ANCHORAGE TO FOUNDATION

- CONNECTION OF HEAVY TIMBER BEAMS AND TRUSSES TO COLUMNS

SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR NON STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS:

- LACK OF SUSPENDED CEILING SEISMIC BRACING

- PROPER ATTACHMENT AND BRACING OF STORAGE RACKS/CABINETS OVER 4' OR 3:1 (HEIGHT:WIDTH) RATIO

- PROPER ATTACHMENT OF EQUIPMENT OVER 20 LBS AND ABOVE 4', OR ALL EQUIPMENT OVER 100 lbs

- PROPER ATTACHMENT OF ALL EMERGENCY LIGHTING AND POWER EQUIPMENT AND ASSOCIATED WIRING

- BRACING OF OVERHEAD FLUID PIPING AND ANY GAS PIPING

- VERIFICATION/INSTALLATION OF EMERGENCY SHUTOFF VALVES FOR GAS UTILITIES

STREET VIEW

NTS

3

S0.0

FRONT ENTRANCE

NTS

2

S0.0

DISH

TEACHERS

ROOM

RM #24

PRINCIPAL

NURSE

MENS

P

H

O

T

O

2

/

S

0

.

4

31'-8" 58'-2"30'-0" 64'-0"

6'-0"

62'-8"

24'-0"

3'-4"

47'-4"

10'-8"

MULTI-PURPOSE

ROOM

9'-4" 65'-4"

31'-4" 64'-0"

37'-6"

317'-1 3/4"

8"

30'-8"

CLASSROOM

#14

CLASSROOM

#13

CLASSROOM

#15

CLASSROOM

#12

CLASSROOM

#16

CLASSROOM

#11

CLASSROOM

#17

CLASSROOM

#10

CLASSROOM

#18

CLASSROOM

#9

CLASSROOM

#19

CLASSROOM

#8

CLASSROOM

#6

CLASSROOM

#1

CLASSROOM

#5

CLASSROOM

#2

RECEPT

STORAGE

RM #23

KITCHEN

8'-0"

16'-0" TYP

8"

TEACHERS

TEACHERS

STORAGE

BICYCLE

PARKING

OLD

FURNACE

STORAGE

GIRLS

BOYS

GIRLS

BOYS

GIRLS

BOYS

CLASSROOM

#21

CLASSROOM

#20

LIBRARY

STORAGE

STORAGE

STORAGE

STORAGE

STORAGE

30'-5 3/4"

65'-4"

62'-8"

31'-4"

31'-4"

65'-4"

32'-8" 32'-8"

46'-8" 65'-4" 46'-8" 65'-4" 46'-6" 65'-4"

2'-9 3/4"

27'-8"

61'-4"

5'-7"

27'-10 1/2"

27'-10 1/2"

FURNACE

RM

FURNACE

RM

MUSIC

ROOM #22

LAB

ROOM #7

CLASSROOM

#4

CLASSROOM

#3

431'-7 3/4"

58'-0"

15'-4"16'-0"15'-4"

8'-0"

8'-0"

16'-0"

16'-0"

8'-0"

16'-0"

16'-0"

OVERALL FLOOR PLAN

1/16"= 1'-0"

1

S0.1

P

H

O

T

O

9

/

S

0

.

3

P

H

O

T

O

8

/

S

0

.

3

PH

OT

O

4/S

0.4

P

H

O

T

O

3

/

S

0

.

4

P

H

O

T

O

6

/

S

0

.

2

P

H

O

T

O

5

/

S

0

.

2

P

H

O

T

O

7

/

S

0

.

2

P

H

O

T

O

5

/

S

0

.

3

PHOTO

3/S0.3

P

H

O

T

O

1

/

S

0

.

3

P

H

O

T

O

2

/

S

0

.

2

P

H

O

T

O

8

/

S

0

.

4

PH

OT

O

7/S

0.4

P

H

O

T

O

5

/

S

0

.

4

P

H

O

T

O

6

/

S

0

.

3

P

H

O

T

O

4

/

S

0

.

2

P

H

O

T

O

3

/

S

0

.

2

PHOTO

8/S0.2

P

H

O

T

O

2

/

S

0

.

3

P

H

O

T

O

4

/

S

0

.

3

PHOTO

7/S0.3

P

H

O

T

O

1

/

S

0

.

4

P

H

O

T

O

6

/

S

0

.

4

P

H

O

T

O

1

/

S

0

.

2

P

H

O

T

O

9

/

S

0

.

2

C

5,922 SQ FT.

B

26,784 SQ FT.

A

1,400 SQ FT.

---

---

---

-

OVERALL FLOOR PLAN

S0.1

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




---

---

---

-

EXTERIOR PHOTOS

S0.2

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




PHOTO

NTS

1

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

2

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

3

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

6

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

5

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

4

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

7

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

8

S0.2

PHOTO

NTS

9

S0.2

---

---

---

-

EXTERIOR PHOTOS

S0.3

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




PHOTO

NTS

1

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

2

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

3

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

4

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

5

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

6

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

9

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

8

S0.3

PHOTO

NTS

7

S0.3

---

---

---

-


S0.4

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




PHOTO

NTS

1

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

2

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

3

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

4

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

5

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

6

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

7

S0.4

PHOTO

NTS

8

S0.4

---

---

---

-


S0.5

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




PHOTO

NTS

1

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

2

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

3

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

4

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

5

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

6

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

7

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

8

S0.5

PHOTO

NTS

9

S0.5

---

---

---

-

INTERIORPHOTOS

S0.6

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




PHOTO

NTS

1

S0.6

PHOTO

NTS

2

S0.6

PHOTO

NTS

3

S0.6

PHOTO

NTS

4

S0.6

6" BRICK WALL BELOW

AT BATHROOM

EXTERIOR WALL

(3) 2x8 HDR

2x14 BLKG TYP AT

ROOF OVERHANG

5'-0"

5'-0"

2x12 O

UT

LO

OK

ER

S @

16"O

C

(3) 2x8 HDR

2x12 O

UT

LO

OK

ER

S @

16"O

C

2x4 @ 16" BEARING

STUD WALL TYP AT

CLASSROOMS

BUILT UP DUCT

FRAMING AT TYPICAL

CLASSROOM

2-1/2" STD COLUMN

BELOW TYPICAL

WHERE SHOWN

2-1/2" STD COLUMN

BELOW TYPICAL

WHERE SHOWN

EXISTING 2x4 @ 16"

STUDS OVER 8"

BRICK WALL W/ #5

@ 4'-0"OC

EXISTING 2x4 @ 16"

STUDS OVER 8" BRICK

WALL W/ #5 @ 4'-0"OC

9x34-1/8 B

EA

M

9x34-1/8 B

EA

M

9x34-1/8 B

EA

M

4

x

1

2

P

U

R

L

IN

S

@

8

'-0

" O

C

4

x

1

2

P

U

R

L

IN

S

@

8

'-0

" O

C

4

x

1

2

P

U

R

L

IN

S

@

8

'-0

" O

C

4

x

1

2

P

U

R

L

IN

S

@

8

'-0

" O

C

(3) 2x10

BUILT UP ROOFING

OVER 2" DECKING

2-1/2" STD COLUMN

BELOW TYPICAL

WHERE SHOWN

2'-0"

OV

ER

HA

NG

2x4 @ 16"OC STUD

WALL OVER BUILT UP

(3) 2x12 BEAM

2

x

1

0

J

O

I

S

T

S

@

1

6

"

O

C

2x8 BLOCKING TYP

AT EA INTERIOR

BEARING WALL

6 WF 15.5

TYP EA END

BUILT UP ROOFING

OVER 2" DECKING

2x10 HDR

2x4 STUDS TYP AT

PERIMETER

2x10 HDR

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

2

x

1

4

J

O

I

S

T

S

@

1

6

"

O

C

2

x

1

2

J

O

I

S

T

S

@

1

6

"

O

C

(N)

1

2

" PLYWOOD SHEATHING,

(N) ROOF & INSULATION

TYP.

2x14 BLKG TYP AT

ROOF OVERHANG

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

BUILT UP ROOFING

OVER 2" DECKING

TYP AT WALKWAYS

(3) 2x8 HDR

(3) 2x8 HDR

(3) 2x8 HDR

(7) B

AY

S E

QU

ALLY

S

PA

CE

D 2x14 S

OLID

B

LK

G2x12 O

UT

LO

OK

ER

S @

16"O

C

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10(3) 2x10(3) 2x10(3) 2x10 (3) 2x10 (3) 2x10 (3) 2x10 (3) 2x10 (3) 2x10 (3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10(3) 2x10(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10 (3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x8 HDR

CONT 7x17-3/8 GLB

2-1/2" STD COLUMN

BELOW TYPICAL

WHERE SHOWN

2-1/2" STD COLUMN

BELOW TYPICAL

WHERE SHOWN

(N)

1

2



TYP.

(N)

1

2



TYP.

HATCH INDICATES (N) PLYWOOD SHEAR WALL

TO EXTEND TO ROOF. PROVIDE CONNECTION

BETWEEN ROOF & SHEAR WALL TYP.

(N) STEEL

COL. TYP.

(N) STEEL SPANDREL

@ HALF HEIGHT

(3) 2x8 HDR

(N) MOMENT FRAME

(N) MOMENT FRAME

(N) MOMENT FRAME

(N) BEAM CONNECTIONS




---

---

---

-

ROOF FRAMING PLAN

S1.1

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




MATCHLINE

SHEET S1.2

MATCHLINE

SHEET S1.3

MATCHLINE

SHEET S1.4

ROOF FRAMING PLAN

1/8"= 1'-0"

1

S1.1

KEY PLAN

NTS

AREA IN VIEW

(3) 2x8 HDR

2x14 BLKG TYP AT

ROOF OVERHANG

5'-0"

5'-0"

2x12 O

UT

LO

OK

ER

S @

16"O

C

(7) B

AY

S E

QU

ALLY

S

PA

CE

D

2x14 S

OLID

B

LK

G

2x12 O

UT

LO

OK

ER

S @

16"O

C

2x4 @ 16" BEARING STUD

WALL TYP AT

CLASSROOMS UNO

8" BRICK WALL BELOW

TYP AT EXTERIOR

CLASSROOM WALLS

BUILT UP DUCT FRAMING

AT TYPICAL CLASSROOM

2

x

1

4

J

O

I

S

T

S

@

1

6

"

O

C

2

x

1

4

J

O

I

S

T

S

@

1

6

"

O

C

6" BRICK WALL BELOW

AT BATHROOM

EXTERIOR WALL

2-1/2" STD COLUMN

BELOW TYPICAL

WHERE SHOWN

EXISTING 2x4 @ 16"

STUDS OVER 8"

BRICK WALL W/ #5

@ 4'-0"OC

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

CONT 7x17-3/8 GLBCONT 7x17-3/8 GLB

2

x

1

4

J

O

I

S

T

S

@

1

6

"

O

C

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

2

x

1

4

J

O

I

S

T

S

@

1

6

"

O

C

(3) 2x8 HDR

(3) 2x8 HDR

(3) 2x8 HDR

(3) 2x8 HDR(3) 2x8 HDR(3) 2x8 HDR(3) 2x8 HDR

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

2-1/2" STD COLUMN

BELOW TYPICAL

WHERE SHOWN

(N)

1

2



TYP.

(N)

1

2



TYP.

(N) WALL TIES TYP.

(N) WALL TIES TYP.

(N) WALL TIES TYP.

(N) WALL TIES TYP.

(N) WALL TIES TYP.










(N) STEEL

COL. TYP.

(N) STEEL SPANDREL

@ HALF HEIGHT

(3) 2x8 HDR

(N) MOMENT FRAME

(N) MOMENT FRAME

(N) BEAM TIES TYP.

(N) BEAM TIES TYP.




---

---

---

-

ROOF FRAMING PLAN

S1.2

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




MATCHLINE

SHEET S1.1

MATCHLINE

SHEET S1.3

MATCHLINE

SHEET S1.4

ROOF FRAMING PLAN

1/8"= 1'-0"

1

S1.2

KEY PLAN

NTS

AREA IN VIEW

6" BRICK WALL BELOW

AT BATHROOM

EXTERIOR WALL

(3) 2x8 HDR

2x14 BLKG TYP AT

ROOF OVERHANG

5'-0"

5'-0"

(3) 2x8 HDR(3) 2x8 HDR

(3) 2x8 HDR

2x12 O

UT

LO

OK

ER

S @

16"O

C

2x4 @ 16" BEARING

STUD WALL TYP AT

CLASSROOMS

BUILT UP DUCT

FRAMING AT TYPICAL

CLASSROOM

10'-0" T

YP

2-1/2" STD COLUMN

BELOW TYPICAL

WHERE SHOWN

2-1/2" STD COLUMN

BELOW TYPICAL

WHERE SHOWN

(3) 2x10

BUILT UP ROOFING

OVER 2" DECKING

2x10 HDR

2x4 STUDS TYP AT

PERIMETER

2x10 HDR

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

2

x

1

4

J

O

I

S

T

S

@

1

6

"

O

C

2

x

1

2

J

O

I

S

T

S

@

1

6

"

O

C

(N)

1

2



TYP.

2x14 BLKG TYP AT

ROOF OVERHANG

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB 5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

2x6 @ 16" BEARING

STUD WALL

BUILT UP HEADER

6x6 TOP PLATE

2x6 FLAT

&4x6 FLAT

BUILT UP HEADER

6x6 TOP PLATE

2x6 FLAT

&4x6 FLAT

114'-5 3/4"

BUILT UP ROOFING

OVER 2" DECKING

TYP AT WALKWAYS

PR

E-M

FR

E

NG

IN

EE

RE

D M

ON

O T

RU

SS

ES

@

24"O

C

2x12 O

UT

LO

OK

ER

S @

12"O

C

SIS

TE

RE

D E

VE

RY

O

TH

ER

T

RU

SS

2x12 O

UT

LO

OK

ER

S @

12"O

C

SIS

TE

RE

D E

VE

RY

O

TH

ER

T

RU

SS

(3) 2x8 HDR

(7) B

AY

S E

QU

ALLY

S

PA

CE

D 2x14 S

OLID

B

LK

G2x12 O

UT

LO

OK

ER

S @

16"O

C

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10 (3) 2x10 (3) 2x10 (3) 2x10 (3) 2x10 (3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10(3) 2x10(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10(3) 2x10

(3) 2x10 (3) 2x10

(3) 2x10

(3) 2x8 HDR

(3) 2x8 HDR(3) 2x8 HDR

BUILT UP

ROOFING

OVER SHTHG

CONT 7x17-3/8 GLB

2-1/2" STD COLUMN

BELOW TYPICAL

WHERE SHOWN

2-1/2" STD COLUMN

BELOW TYPICAL

WHERE SHOWN

(N)

1

2



TYP.







(3) 2x8 HDR

(N) MOMENT FRAME

(N) MOMENT FRAME

(N) MOMENT FRAME



(N) BEAM TIES

(N) BEAM TIES

---

---

---

-

ROOF FRAMING PLAN

S1.3

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




ROOF FRAMING PLAN

1/8"= 1'-0"

1

S1.3

MATCHLINE

SHEET S1.2

MATCHLINE

SHEET S1.1

MATCHLINE

SHEET S1.4

KEY PLAN

NTS

AREA IN VIEW

(3) 2x8 HDR(3) 2x8 HDR

2

x

1

4

J

O

I

S

T

S

@

1

6

"

O

C

CONT 7x17-3/8 GLB

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

CONT 7x17-3/8 GLB

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

5-1/4X14-5/8 GLB

2x6 @ 16" BEARING

STUD WALL

PR

E-M

FR

E

NG

IN

EE

RE

D M

ON

O T

RU

SS

ES

@

24"O

C

2x12 O

UT

LO

OK

ER

S @

12"O

C

SIS

TE

RE

D E

VE

RY

O

TH

ER

T

RU

SS

2x6 @ 16" BEARING

STUD WALL

BUILT UP HEADER

6x6 TOP PLATE

2x6 FLAT

&4x6 FLAT

BUILT UP HEADER

6x6 TOP PLATE

2x6 FLAT

&4x6 FLAT

2x12 O

UT

LO

OK

ER

S @

12"O

C

SIS

TE

RE

D E

VE

RY

O

TH

ER

T

RU

SS

8" BRICK WALL BELOW

TYP AT EXTERIOR

CLASSROOM WALLS

2

x

1

4

J

O

I

S

T

S

@

1

6

"

O

C

2

x

1

4

J

O

I

S

T

S

@

1

6

"

O

C

(3) 2x8 HDR

(3) 2x8 HDR

(3) 2x8 HDR(3) 2x8 HDR(3) 2x8 HDR(3) 2x8 HDR

2

x

1

4

J

O

I

S

T

S

@

1

6

"

O

C

BUILT UP

ROOFING

OVER SHTHG

(N)

1

2



TYP.

(N)

1

2



TYP.

(N) WALL TIES TYP.

(N) WALL TIES TYP.

(N) WALL TIES TYP.

(N) WALL TIES TYP.







(N) BEAM TIES TYP.

(N) BEAM TIES TYP.

---

---

---

-

ROOF FRAMING PLAN

S1.4

G-XXXX

JCF

SEA

XX-XX-XX

FO

R A

GE

NC

Y R

EV

IEW

/ N

OT F

OR

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N

phon

e (5

41) 4

79-3

865

fax

(541

) 479

-387

0

PROJECT NO:

DRAWN:

CHECKED:

DATE:

NO.

REVI

SION

SBY

DATE

FU

LLE

RTO

N E

LE

ME

NTA

RY

SC

HO

OL

RO

SE

BU

RG

PU

BLIC

SC

HO

OLS

25

60

W B

RA

DFO

RD

CT.

RO

SE

BU

RG

, O

RE

GO

N 9

74

71




ROOF FRAMING PLAN

1/8"= 1'-0"

1

S1.4

MATCHLINE

SHEET S1.2

MATCHLINE

SHEET S1.1

MATCHLINE

SHEET S1.4

KEY PLAN

NTS

AREA IN VIEW

fullerton elementary - roseburg public · pdf filerehabilitation of existing buildings...

Documents