HomeMy WebLinkAboutEngineer's Letter 12.05.2016Lj PEPT God/
KURTZ & ASSOCIATES, INC.
5012 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
STRUCTURAL CONSULTANTS
Phone (970) 945 6305
MEMORANDUM
(2) Pages
To: Garfield County Building Department Date: December 05, 2016
Re: Benson Residence: 0035 Haystack Road,
Oak Meadows Subdivision, Garfield County, CO.
Our office is the structural design engineer for the noted residential project. As such, our
office issued construction documents dated June 06, 2016. The purpose of this memo is
to address a number of issues that were raised during the final framing inspection.
Note that on the site plan the rear lot line runs South 44 degrees, 39 minutes West. The
structural documents specify plan north to the right as one faces the front of the home.
This memo will reference that plan north.
ROOF FRAMING & WINDOW OPENINGS @ MAIN LEVEL:
The construction documents specify a continuous valley plate for roof over -framing. I
understand that this plate was not installed and that over -frame rafters bear directly on the
primary roof sheathing, and that the rafter lay -out is such that each rafter bears directly
above a primary roof truss. This condition is structurally acceptable as long as blocking is
placed on the primary roof, at the valley, between the rafters.
At the south wall of the garage two (2) — 3'-0" wide R.O. (Rough Opening) windows
were framed. These two (2) windows were not reflected on the construction documents.
Each window opening was framed with a (2)-2x8 box header and each header was
supported with (2)-2x6 studs (one jack + one king) each end. This framing is structurally
acceptable. The window layout for the master bedroom was revised at the west exterior
wall. The framing for the two (2) specified 3'-0" wide R.O.'s was framed and later in -
filled. A 5'-0" wide R.O. window opening was framed with a (3)-2x10 header and the
header was supported with (2)-2x6 studs (one jack + one king) each end. This framing is
structurally acceptable.
MAIN FLOOR FRAMING OVER BASEMENT:
At the west exterior wall of the basement two (2) — 3'-0" wide R.O. window openings
were specified with reinforced concrete headers. Rather than concrete headers, the
window openings were framed with double 1.3/4" x 11.7/8", flush framed, LVL
(Laminated Veneer Lumber) headers. This framing is structurally acceptable.
The main level floor framing includes three (3) interior LVL beams. The construction
documents detail the floor joists to be flush framed with joist hangers to the LVL beams.
(2)
The contractor chose to lower the beams so that the floor joists bear on top of the beams.
This is structurally acceptable. The primary, centrally located beam is a (4) — 1.3/4" x
11.7/8" LVL. Detail E/S3 addresses this beam and specifies a screw pattern. This pattern
is based upon the described condition and is not necessary when the joists bear on top of
the LVL beam. I understand that the LVL beam is nailed with three (3) rows of 16d nails
at 24" on center. I recommended that a row of /4" diameter x 6" Timberlok screws
spaced at 24" on center be added to each exterior face of the beam.
At the south foundation wall the original flush framed LVL beam was to bear on the top
of the wall. As a result of the fact that the LVL beam was lowered a steel bracket was
fabricated and installed. The 5" high stiffened bracket provides a 4" long bearing seat for
the LVL beams. The bracket is attached to the face of the concrete wall with (2) — 5/8"
diameter expansion anchors. The bracket and attachment are structurally acceptable.
4