HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondenceDave Argo
From: Dave Argo
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 12:14 PM
To: 'WARNER FAMILY'
Subject: Pole Barn Garage: Permit #BLRE-08-17-4873
Tracy:
I have reviewed plans for both your new Clayton Homes residence and the accessory use Pole Barn Garage building, but
before we finalize our review and issue building permits we need clarification on a couple of items. Yesterday I sent an
email to Richard Ruse at Clayton Homes & I am still awaiting his response to one of those items.
In regards to the pole barn structure which, as I understand from Brooke, was submitted for permit by you, I wanted to
ask if you had received a set of plans stamped by a Structural Engineer? In looking back over our previous email
correspondence you emailed over to me an Engineer's stamped set, but the current application includes an Engineer's
stamp on only (3) roof truss sheets, not on the remainder of the pole barn structure. Do you have a full set of stamped
plans that perhaps didn't get submitted along with your application? If so, can you please submit (2) 11 x 17 size copies
of these drawings?
If you could get back to me on this issue I'd greatly appreciate it so that we can finalize our plan review & issue these
permits.
Thanks,
Dave Argo
Plans Examiner
_{ _ Garfield County
Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: 970-945-8212
Email: dargo@garfield-county.com
Web: garfield-county.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email communication and any files transmitted along with it are intended only for the person or entity to which it is
addressed. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by email and delete it from your files.
1
Dave Argo
From: Dave Argo
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 4:50 PM
To: 'WARNER FAMILY'
Subject: RE: Engineer Verification Items
Tracy:
A final item that needs to be verified by your pole barn manufacturer is the following design criteria:
• Building Code Reference: 2015 IRC
• Snow Loads: 40 PSF as measured at roof (Pf) with Load Duration: 1.0
Please have the Engineer of Record send me an email with confirmation that design meets these specific criteria.
Thank you -
Dave Argo
Plans Examiner
_ Garfield County
Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: 970-945-8212
Email: dargo@garfield-county.com
Web: garfield-county.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email communication and any files transmitted along with it are intended only for the person or entity to which it is
addressed. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by email and delete it from your files.
Original Message
From: WARNER FAMILY [mailto:tracywarner@frontier.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 12:59 PM
To: Dave Argo <dargo@garfield-county.com>
Subject: Stamped plans
Hello Dave,
Here are the only other stamped prints I have is this what you are wanting?
Thank you
1
Dave Argo
From: Dave Argo
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 11:47 AM
To: 'Patrick McGuire'
Cc: Warner Family; Robert Turner
Subject: RE: Engineer Verification Items
Attachments: 2016 GarCo Bldg Resolution.pdf
Patrick:
Thanks for replying to my request. I have attached to this email specific highlighted sections from Garfield County's 2016
Building Resolution where these snow load requirements are defined. The Load Duration Factor = 1.0 specifically results
from "leveling the playing field" for all truss manufacturers.
Please contact me if you have further questions.
Dave Argo
Plans Examiner
CGarfield County
Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: 970-945-8212
Email: dargo@garfield-county.com
Web: garfield-county.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email communication and any files transmitted along with it are intended only for the person or entity to which it is
addressed. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by email and delete it from your files.
From: Patrick McGuire [mailto:pmpe31751@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 6:11 AM
To: Warner Family <tracywarner@frontier.com>; Dave Argo <dargo@garfield-county.com>; Robert Turner
<rturner@pole-barn.info>
Subject: Re: FW: Engineer Verification Items
Can you please provide a Code reference for the load duration factor = 1 with a 40 psf roof snow load? Usually
that only applies to 65 psf & greater? I am checking for it & will get back to you, thanks.
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 8:23 PM, Warner Family <tracywarner@frontier.com> wrote:
From: Dave Argo [mailto:dargo(agarfield-county.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 4:50 PM
To: WARNER FAMILY
Subject: RE: Engineer Verification Items
Tracy:
A final item that needs to be verified by your pole barn manufacturer is the following design criteria:
• Building Code Reference: 2015 IRC
1
• Snow Loads: 40 PSF as measured at roof (Pf) with Load Duration: 1.0
Please have the Engineer of Record send me an email with confirmation that design meets these specific criteria.
Thank you -
Dave Argo
Plans Examiner
C-,, Gut field County
Community Development Department
108 8Th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: 970-945-8212
Email: daraoC►aarfield-county.com
Web: Aarfield-countv.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email communication and any files transmitted along with it are intended only for the person or entity to which It is
addressed. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by email and delete it from your files.
2
1111 MLR Will 11111
Reception#: 875344
03!2472016 09:06 24 AM Jean Alberioo
23 of 41 Rep F. SO 00 Doc Fee -0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO
prior approval of the building official.
21. Section 902.1 is amended by adding the following definition within the alphabetical order
of the existing definitions to be included in Chapter 2.
FIRE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL. The fire department official or the state of Colorado
Division of Fire Safety or their authorized representative shall be an approved agency for
inspection of fire protection systems required by this code.
22. Section 903.2.8 is amended by adding the following exceptions:
903.2.8 Group R. An automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with
Section 903.3 shall be provided throughout all buildings with a Group R fire area.
Exception: 1. Group R-2 with occupancy of 5 or less (maximum floor area of
1000 square ft. Table 1004.1.2).
23. Section 1503 is amended by adding two new subsections to read as follows:
1503.7 Snow -shed barriers. Roofs shall be designed to prevent accumulations of snow
from shedding above or in front of gas utility or electric utility meters and egress doors.
1503.7.1 Mechanical barriers for metal roof shingles and metal roof panels.
Mechanical barriers installed to prevent snow shedding from the roof shall be secured to
roof framing members or to solid blocking secured to framing members in accordance with
the manufacturer's installation instructions. Individual- devices installed in a group of
devices to create a barrier to prevent snow shedding shall be installed in at least two rows
with the first row no more than 24 inches from the edge of the roof or eave. The rows shall
be parallel with the exterior wall line and the devices in each row shall be staggered for a
spacing of no more than 24 inches on center measured parallel with the exterior wall line
Continuous snow barriers shall be secured to roof framing at no more than 48 inches on
center. Continuous barriers shall be installed parallel with the exterior wall line and no
more than 24 inches from the edge of the roof or eave.
24. Section 1608.2 is amended to read as follows:
1608.2 Roof snow load. As determined by Garfield County snow load based on
elevations. Snow loads (Pf) are as follows:
TO 7000FT. 40PSF
7001 TO 8000FT. 50PSF
8001 TO 9000FT. 75PSF
9001 TO 10,000FT. 100PSF
Potential unbalanced accumulations of snow at valleys, parapets, roof structures and offsets
23
1111111Angu011gIVAIWANCINOWII0114101k 111111
Reception#• 875144
03/24/2016 09:00:24 AM Jean Alberico
24 of 41 Rec FQQ:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO
.in roofs of uneven configuration shall be considered. Minimum snow loads are in pounds
per square foot of horizontal projected area. All snow load designs are to be designed and
sealed by a Colorado registered professional engineer or architect.
25. Section 1807.1 amended to read as follows:
1807.1 General. Foundations shall be designed and constructed in accordance with
Sections 1807.1.1 through 1807.1.6. All foundations shall be designed and sealed by a
Colorado licensed engineer or architect except for foundations supporting a Group S-1 or U
occupancy not over 600 square foot of maximum floor area.
26. Section 1807.2 is amended to read as follows:
1807.2 Retaining walls. Retaining walls shall be designed in accordance with Sections
1807.2.1 through 1807.2.3 and be designed and sealed by a Colorado licensed engineer or
architect.
27. Section 1807.3 is amended to read as follows:
1807.3 Embedded post and poles. Designs to resist both axial and lateral loads
employing post or poles as columns embedded in earth or in concrete footings in earth shall
be in accordance with Sections 1807.3.1 through 1807.3.3 and designed and sealed by a
Colorado licensed engineer or architect.
28. Section 1808.1 is amended as follows
1808.1 General. Foundations shall be designed and constructed in accordance with
Sections 1808.2 through 1808.9. Shallow foundations shall also satisfy the requirements of
Section 1809. Deep foundations shall also satisfy the requirements of Section 1810. All
foundations shall be designed and sealed by a Colorado licensed engineer or architect
except for foundations supporting a Group S-1 or U occupancy not over 600 square foot of
footprint.
29. Section 1809.4 is amended to read:
1809.4 Depth and width of footing. The minimum depth of footings below undisturbed
ground surface shall be 12 inches. Where -applicable, the requirements of Section
1809.5 shall also be satisfied. The minimum width of footings shall be 16 inches unless
designed and sealed by a Colorado licensed engineer or architect. Footings are allowed
to be frost protected if designed and sealed by a Colorado engineer or architect.
30. Section 1809.7 is amended to read:
1809.7 Prescriptive footings for light -frame construction. Minimum width of all
footings is 16 inches; minimum thickness of all footings is 8 inches unless designed and
24
1111 i.trl d+h'ti6Iit: 'rPh` 10.91k 1FO�'Ia'b 11 11 1
Reception#: 875144
03124/2016 09:08:24 AM Jean Alberioo
26 of 41 Roo Fse;$0.00 Doc Fee;0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO
sealed by. a Colorado engineer or architect.
31. Section 1810.1 is amended to read as follows:
1810.1 General. Deep foundations shall be analyzed, designed, detailed and installed in
accordance with Sections 1810.1 through 1810.4 and designed by a Colorado licensed
architect or engineer. Garfield County will not inspect the drilling, reinforcement and
placement of piers, piles or shafts. The engineer of record shall perform all inspections of
the installation and provide the County with a sealed letter approving the work prior to the
final inspection of the building or structure.
32. Section 2301.2 is amended to add item 6.
6. The use of load duration factors for snow load shall not be permitted ill any of these
design methods. Load Duration equals 1.0.
33. 2303.1.11 is amended to add the following exceptions:
Exceptions:
1. In single family dwellings of log construction, wall logs need not be graded.
2. In log construction, all structural log designs and connections shall be designed by a
licensed Colorado architect or engineer and inspected by that architect or engineer after the
completion of the framing with the architect or engineer certifying to the building
department that the logs are of the size, quality and species of the design and that they were
installed to that design. Wall logs need not be part of the structural design.
34. Section 2901.1 is amended to read as follows:
2901.1 Scope. The provisions of this chapter and the International Plumbing Code shall
govern the erection, installation, alteration, repairs, relocation, replacement, addition to, use
or maintenance of plumbing equipment and systems. Plumbing systems and equipment
shall be constructed, installed and maintained in accordance with the International
Plumbing' Code_ Private sewage disposal systems shall conform to the OWTSRegulations
as adopted by Garfield County.
35. Section 3001.1 is amended to read as follows:
3001.1 Scope. This chapter governs the design, construction, installation, alteration,
maintenance and repair of new and existing installations of elevators, dumbwaiters,
escalators, and moving walks, requiring permits therefore and providing procedures for the
inspection and maintenance of such conveyances.
36. Chapter 30, concerning elevators, moving walks, escalators or dumbwaiters, is amended by
,25
Dave Argo
From: Patrick McGuire <pmpe31751@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 12:23 PM
To: Dave Argo
Subject: Re: Amended Drawings for 1.0 duration. Warner
Attachments: Clayton Homes Warner 1.0 Duration 4'oc - Component Drawing.pdf
SEE RESPONSE IN CAPS
After looking over the Engineer's latest drawings which I received on Friday, we still don't have all information we
requested to insure that design complies with Garfield County's building requirements. More specifically, the snow load
criteria shown on the truss drawings need to meet the 40 PSF for the Pt value (not the Pg value) — see attached redline
of the most recent truss drawings.
Although it sounds like the Engineer has added two additional trusses and decreased spacing of the trusses, the specs
called out on their truss drawings (pages 2-3) do not show this value correctly and therefore we cannot yet release for a
building permit. Perhaps this is simply an oversight on the Engineer's part (?) but we'd like to have this shown correctly
on our approved set of plans when we release for building permit.
THE TRUSS DESIGN ENGINEER HAS USED 40 PSF LIVE LOAD IN LIEU OF SNOW. WITH A LDF =1 THIS I5 MATHEMATICALLY
THE SAME. WE CAN CHECK THIS BY THE TRUSS REACTIONS. (SEE ATTACHED) TRIBUTARY AREA = 4'X36'/2 = 72 SF; 72X50
PSF TOTAL = 3600# = 40 PSF SNOW X72 = 2880# + 10 PSF X72 = 720#. HIS SOFTWARE AUTOMATICALLY CHECKS THE
UNBALANCED LOAD CONDITION USING 40 PSF GROUND SNOW & USES THE WORST CASE TO DESIGN THE MEMBERS.
Also, I am a little confused about the (3) PDF drawings (sent as filename: sealsWarnerRevB090717.pdf) Are these
intended to supplement or replace the (11) drawing sheets originally submitted to our office? Please clarify.
REPLACE. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE SHEETS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED TO YOUR DEPARTMENT WITHOUT A
STAMP WERE AN ATTEMPT TO AVOID HIRING AN ENGINEER SUCH AS MYSELF. THOSE SHEETS WERE GENERATED BY A
SOFTWARE PACKAGE FOR ILLUSTRATION & DIY INSTRUCTIONS, NOT AS ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS. IF THERE IS A
CONFLICT BETWEEN THOSE SHEETS & THOSE DRAWN & SEALED BY MYSELF, MINE GOVERN.
I have also copied Patrick McGuire on this email & we look forward to receiving a response to these questions so that we
can finalize our plan review & issue a building permit for your project.
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Dave Argo <dargo@gartield-countv.com> wrote:
Tracy:
1
After looking over the Engineer's latest drawings which I received on Friday, we still don't have all information we
requested to insure that design complies with Garfield County's building requirements. More specifically, the snow load
criteria shown on the truss drawings need to meet the 40 PSF for the Pf value (not the Pg value) — see attached redline
of the most recent truss drawings.
Although it sounds like the Engineer has added two additional trusses and decreased spacing of the trusses, the specs
called out on their truss drawings (pages 2-3) do not show this value correctly and therefore we cannot yet release for a
building permit. Perhaps this is simply an oversight on the Engineer's part (?) but we'd like to have this shown correctly
on our approved set of plans when we release for building permit.
Also, I am a little confused about the (3) PDF drawings (sent as filename: sealsWarnerRevB090717.pdf) Are these
intended to supplement or replace the (11) drawing sheets originally submitted to our office? Please clarify.
I have also copied Patrick McGuire on this email & we look forward to receiving a response to these questions so that
we can finalize our plan review & issue a building permit for your project.
Dave Argo
Plans Examiner
C. Garfield County
Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: 970-945-8212
Email: dorso@aarfield-countv.com
Web: aarfield-countv.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email communication and any files transmitted along with it are intended only for the person or entity to which it is
addressed. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by email and delete it from your files.
From: WARNER FAMILY [mailto:tracvwarner@frontier.com]
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2017 11:35 AM
2
Job Number: APBPOL 9433
Clayton Homes Warner -APB Pole Barn -Clayton Homes Warner
Truss Label: T01
6"3
9'6"7
Ply: 1
Qty: 9
Wgt: 212.8 lbs
SEQN: 250229 / T8 / COMN
FROM:
DRW:
/ ... 09/06/17
18'
26'5"9
36'
9'6"7
8'5"9
8'5"9
9'6"7
{
1q
A -1'11"1-d-
1113X4
7'5"1
8'7"5
8X10
8'7"5
1113X4
7'5"1
Loading Criteria (psf)
TCLL: 40.00
TCDL: 5.00
BCLL: 0.00
BCDL: 5.00
Des Ld: 50.00
NCBCLL: 0-00 Soffit: 2.00
Load Duration: 1.00
Spacing: 48.0 "
9'4"11
Wind Criteria
Wind Std: ASCE 7-10 Speed: 115 mph
Enclosure: Part. EncCategory: I EXP: B
TCDL: 2.4 psf BCDL: 2.4 psf
Mean Height: 15.00 ft
MWFRS Parallel Dist: 0 to h/2
C&C Dist a: 3.60 ft
Loc. from endwall: Any
1: 0.77 GCpi: 0.55
Wind Duration: 1.33
Snow Criteria
(Pg,Pf in PSF)
Pg:40.0 Ct:1.1
Pf: 29.6 Ce: 1.2
CAT: I
Lu: - Cs: not use
Snow Duration: 1.00
18'
Code / Misc Criteria
Bldg Code: IBC 2012
TPI Std: 2007
Rep Factors Used: No
FT/RT:20(0)/0(0)
Plate Type:
WAVE, HS
26'7"5
34'0"6
1 1'11'19
T 36
Deft/CSI Criteria
PP Deflection in loc Udefl U#
VERT(LL): 0.489 G 876 240
VERT(TL): 0.672 G 637 240
HORZ(LL): 0.162 F - -
HORZ(TL): 0.222 F -
Mfg Specified Camber:
♦ M u • m Reactions (lbs)
Loc
/Rw /Rh /RL /W
Max TC CSI: 0.972 I 3600 / 581 /1101/- / 154 /8.5
Max BC CSI: 0.993 E 3600 / 581 / 1101/ - / - / 8.5
Max Web CSI: 0.817 Wind reactions based on MWFRS
Creep Factor: 1.5 I Min Brg Width Req = 3.0
E Min Brg Width Req = 3.0
Bearings I & E are a rigid surface.
VIEW Ver: 16.01.01D.0710.13
Lumber
Value Set: 13B (Effective 6/1/2013)
Top chord 2x6 SP 2400f -2.0E
Bot chord 2x6 SP 2400f -2.0E
Webs 2x4 SP #2
:Lt Wedge 2x6 SP #1::Rt Wedge 2x6 SP #1:
Lumber value set "13B" uses design values approved
1/30/2013 by ALSC
Bracing
(a) Continuous lateral restraint, equally spaced on
member.
Purlins
In lieu of structural panels or rigid ceiling use purlins
to laterally brace chords as follows:
Chord Spacing(in oc) Start(ft) End(ft)
TC 24 0.00 36.00
BC 106 0.15 35 85
Apply purlins to any chords above or below fillers
at 24" OC unless shown otherwise above.
Loading
Truss designed for unbalanced snow loads.
Wind
Wind loads based on MWFRS with additional C&C
member design.
**WARNING** READ AND FOLLOW ALL NOTES ON THIS DRAWING!
**IMPORTANT** FURNISH THIS DRAWING TO ALL CONTRACTORS INCLUDING THE INSTALLERS
Trusses require extreme care in fabricateng hianr!dlinq shipping, Inslalli and bracing. Refer to and follow the latest edition of SCSI (Building
Component Safety Informalien,bv TPI and SBCA) torr safely practices rier to performing these functions. lnslallers sh l provide temporary
bracing per SCSI Unless noled otherwise,top chord shall have properly attach structural sheathing and bottom chord shall havea properly
aattttach • rigid ceiling. oLoceatioanss shown for permanent lateral restraint Of webs shall have bracing installed per SCSI seciie� 7�efeBr 10,
drawings fid. Apply platessiandat plateh facsd eof truss and position as shown above and on the Joint -Details, unless noted oth
Alpine, a division of ITIW Bu' IIrramponnts Group Inc. shall not be responsible for any deviation from this drawing,any failure 10 build the
truss in conformance with A SIIT 11, or tor andlirlg shipping, installation a bracing. 01 Trusses. seal on the mewing ortover page
fisting ts drawing,indicates acceptance of rofessional engineering responsti llity solely for the design shown. The sue ability
and use of this dawing for any structure is theoresponsibility of the Building Designer per ANSI/TPI 1 Sec.2.
Far more infarmadan see This job's genera! roles passe and (hese web sites: ALPINE www-alpineitw.com; IP l: wrw,tpnst.orp; SBCA: wwwsbdndusey.com; CC; wxw esafe.orp
IIIM Rif W MOIE1AL
Maximum Top Chord Forces Per Ply (lbs)
Chords Tens.Comp. Chords Tens. Comp.
A - B 3077-8586 C - D 2278 -6009
B - C 2278 -6009 D - E 3077 -8586
Maximum Bot Chord Forces Per Ply (lbs)
Chords Tens.Comp. Chords Tens. Comp.
A - H 8007 - 2721 G - F 8001 -1!23
H - G 8001 -2722 F - E 8007 - 2722
Maximum Web Forces Per Ply (lbs)
Webs Tens.Comp. Webs Tens. Comp.
H - B
B - G
C - G
249 0 G - D
1071 - 2698 D - F
2084 -663
1071 -2698
249 0
Job Number: APBPOL 9433
Clayton Homes Warner -APB Pole Barn -Clayton Homes Warner
Truss Label: GE1
CD
5x16(61
6"3
A
5'10"14
5'10"14
14x1
1 Ply: 1 SEQN: 250232 / T9 / GABL
Qty: 2 FROM:
Wgt: 268.8 lbs Page 1 of 2
9'6"7 { 11'1014 18'
37'9 2'47 - 61"2
12
4 p
=H1014 E
DRW:
/ ... 09/06/17
24'1"2 26'5"9I 30'1"2
61"2 2'47 37"9
k5X5
36'
51014
(a)
(a)
1Im5X16(B1)
r1'11'1d
Loading Criteria (psf)
TCLL: 40.00
TCDL: 5.00
BCLL: 0.00
BCDL: 5.00
Des Ld:50.00
NCBCLL: 0.00
Soffit: 2.00
Load Duration: 1.00
Spacing: 48.0 "
7'5"1
L K
H1014
8'7"5
9'4"11
18'
Wind Criteria
Wind Std: ASCE 7-10 Speed: 115 mph
Enclosure: Part. EncCategory: I EXP: B
TCDL: 2.4 psf BCDL: 2.4 psf
Mean Height: 15.00 ft
MWFRS Parallel Dist: 0 to h/2
C&C Dist a: 3.60 ft
Loc. from endwall: Any
1:0.77 GCpi: 0.55
Wind Duration: 1.33
Snow Criteria
(Pg,Pf in PSF)
Pg:40.0 Ct:1.1
Pf:29.6 Ce:1.2
CAT: I
8'7"5
J
7'5"1
26'7"5
Code / Misc Criteria
Bldg Code: IBC 2012
TPI Std: 2007
Rep Factors Used: No
FT/RT:20(0)/0(0)
Lu: - Cs: not usedPla€e Type
Snow Duration: 1.00 WAVE, HS
34'0"6
` 111"18
36'
Deft/CSI Criteria
PP Deflection in loc Udefl L/#
VERT(LL): 0.471 K 908 240
VERT(TL): 0.648 K 660 240
HORZ(LL): 0.168 J
HORZ(TL): 0.231 J
Mfg Specified Camber:
Max TC CSI: 0.774
Max BC CSI: 0.976
Max Web CSI: 0.585
Creep Factor: 1.5
VIEW Ver: 16.01.01D.0710.13
Lumber
Value Set: 13B (Effective 6/1/2013)
Top chord 2x6 SP 2400f -2.0E
Bot chord 2x6 SP 2400f -2.0E
Webs 2x4 SP #2
:Lt Wedge 2x6 SP #1::Rt Wedge 2x6 SP #1:
Lumber value set "13B" uses design values approved
1/30/2013 by ALSC
Bracing
(a) Continuous lateral restraint, equally spaced on
member.
Plating Notes Wind
All plates are 3X4 except as noted.
Purlins
In lieu of structural panels or rigid ceiling use purlins
to laterally brace chords as follows:
Chord Spacing(in oc) Start(ft) End(ft)
TC 24 0.00 36.00
BC 104 0.15 35.85
Apply purlins to any chords above or below fillers
at 24" OC unless shown otherwise above.
Loading
Truss designed for unbalanced snow loads.
Wind loads based on MWFRS with additional C&C
member design.
Additional Notes
See DWGS A14015ENC101014 & GBLLETIN1014 for
gable wind bracing requirements.
**WARNING** READ AND FOLLOW ALL NOTES ON THIS DRAWING!
"IMPORTANT" FURNISH THIS DRAWING TO ALL CONTRACTORS INCLUDING THE INSTALLERS
Trusses require extreme care In fabricating,handling, she ping, installing and bracing. Refer to and follow the latest edition of BCSI (Building
Component Sa�fety Information, b TPI andSBCA) t0 -r se ty practices prior to performing these f octians Installers shall provide temporary
bracing.per BCSI.. Unless noted oytherwise,top chord shat nave properly attached structural sheathing and bnllom chord shall ha a properly ��`
attached rigid ceill Locations shown for permanent lalgra€ restraint al webs shall have�cinganslalied per BCSI sections B3�7 or 1510,
as appiical5 e. qq plates to each face o truss and position as shown above and on the Join etails, unless noted otherwise. Meter to MARTtitf METAL
drawings 160A -Z rsfandard plate p051110ns.
Alpine, a division of ITW B ildin CCompanen€s Gro iilno. shall not be responsible tar any deviation from this dr wingq,any failure to build the
truss in conformance with ANSIPrPI 1, or for han II s i r installation and bracing f trusses. A seal on this dtaw ng or cover page ,
[sting this drawing,Indicates acceptance of )ession engineering responsibility solely for the design shown. The suitability
and use of this awing for any structure is the responsibility of the Building Designer per ANSIITPI 1 See.2.
Far mare information see Ibis Ion general noses page and these web saes, ALPINE: www.aipaneilw.axn: TPI: WWW. t�nSI.org; SBCA: wwwsbcindusiry.cam: ICC: wwx.iccsafe.erq
♦ Maximum Reactions (lbs)
Loc R /U /Rw /Rh /RL /W
U 3600 / 581 / 1101/ - / 154 / 8.5
I 3600 /581 /1101/- /- /8.5
Wind reactions based on MWFRS
U Min Brg Width Req = 3.0
I Min Brg Width Req = 3.0
Bearings U & I are a rigid surface.
Maximum Top Chord Forces Per Ply (lbs)
Chords Tens.Comp. Chords Tens. Comp.
A - B
B - C
C - D
D - E
3202 -8852 E - F 1456 -4034
2628 - 7469 F - G 2351 -6251
2351 -6251 G - H 2628 -7469
1456 -4034 H -I 3202 -8652
Maximum Bot Chord Forces Per Ply (lbs)
Chords Tens.Comp. Chords Tens. Comp.
A - L 8302 -2874 K - J 8238 -2840
L - K 8238 - 2841 J - I 6302 - 2873
Maximum Web Forces Per Ply (lbs)
Webs Tens.Comp. Webs Tens. Comp.
M -L 195 0 P -Q 1096 -217
M - C 270 0 Q - K 1097 -217
C - N 430-1623 S - G 430 -1623
O- K 421 -1620 G- T 270 0
E- P 1253 - 287 T- J 195 0
K - R 421 -1620
Maximum Gable Forces Per Ply (lbs)
Gables Tens.Comp. Gables Tens. Comp.
Job Number: APBPOL 9433
Clayton Homes Warner -APB Pole Barn -Clayton Homes Warner
Truss Label: GE1
Ply: 1
Qty: 2
Wgt: 268.8 lbs
SEQN: 250232 / T9 / GABL
FROM: DRW
Page 2 of 2
/ ... 09/06/17
"WARNING" READ AND FOLLOW ALL NOTES ON THIS DRAWING!
**IMPORTANT** FURNISH THIS DRAWING TO ALL CONTRACTORS INCLUDING THE INSTALLERS
Trusses require extreme care in fabricating, handling shipping, installing and bracing. ,Refer to and follow the latest edition of BCSI (Building
Component Safety Information, by TPI and SBCA) ib'r safety practices prior to r€arrnmg these limo/ions Ins lers shallprgvide temporary
bracing per BI., Unless noted dtherwise,top chord shall have properlyattach s ructu I sheathing g end, bongm hard shall have a prroopp�e
atlas rigid oelh Locations shown for permanent lateral restraint t webs s all have racing ins aiper CSI sections �3, 87 or B10.
as apphicable. qq ypiateess to each face o truss and position as shown above and on the JoinfDetaiis, unless noted otherwise. l=lefer to
drawings 160A -Z f r standard plate positions.
Alpine, a division of ITW Buitdin mponenls Group inc. shall not be responsible far any deviation from this drawing any failure to bui f the
truss in conformance with ANSI 11, or or handing, s iqpini�, installafr rt and bracing of trusses. A seal an this drawing4 or cover pa e
Fisting this drawing indicates acceptance of professional engineering respons€billty solely for the design shorn. The suitability
and use of this drawing far any structure is me responsibility of the Building Designer per ANSI/TFI 1 Sec.2.
For more inrormalIoar see Ibis lob's general ogles page and these wet, sites: ALPINE: vnnr.aIpineiiw.co e: TPI: wrvw.ipansi.oro: SBCA: www.sbcndosiry.com; ICC: www.irCsate.org
IMIAIMIN METAL
B - M
M - N
D - P
O - Q
635 -1287 P - F
560 -1153 Q - R
1002 - 7922 S - T
556 -1167 T - H
1002 -2922
556 -1167
560 -1153
635 -1287
Dave Argo
From: Dave Argo
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2017 8:35 AM
To: 'Patrick McGuire'
Cc: 'WARNER FAMILY'
Subject: RE: Amended Drawings for 1.0 duration. Warner
Patrick:
Thanks for your explanation regarding snow load capacities, which we believe meet the intent of Garfield County's
building requirements. Based on your input, we will substitute the most recent Engineered stamped truss drawings
dated 9/6/16 — (3) 8 %Z" x 11" size sheets — and the larger size Engineered stamped drawings dated 9/7/17 — (3) 11 x 17
sheets — for the previously submitted drawings.
Tracy:
I will be finalizing my plan review later today, and you will receive a call from either Brooke or Lindsay regarding
instructions for pick-up of your building permit and final payment of balance due. If it's more convenient for you, Brooke
will be in the Rifle office on Thursday which can save you a trip up -valley if you like.
Thank you both for your assistance —
Dave Argo
Plans Examiner
CGarfield County
Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Tel: 970-945-8212
Email: dargo@garfield-county.com
Web: garfield-county.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email communication and any files transmitted along with it are intended only for the person or entity to which it is
addressed. /f you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by email and delete it from your files.
From: Patrick McGuire [mailto:pmpe31751@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 12:23 PM
To: Dave Argo <dargo@garfield-county.com>
Subject: Re: Amended Drawings for 1.0 duration. Warner
SEE RESPONSE IN CAPS
After looking over the Engineer's latest drawings which I received on Friday, we still don't have all information we
requested to insure that design complies with Garfield County's building requirements. More specifically, the snow load
criteria shown on the truss drawings need to meet the 40 PSF for the Pf value (not the Pg value) — see attached redline
of the most recent truss drawings.
Although it sounds like the Engineer has added two additional trusses and decreased spacing of the trusses, the specs
called out on their truss drawings (pages 2-3) do not show this value correctly and therefore we cannot yet release for a
building permit. Perhaps this is simply an oversight on the Engineer's part (?) but we'd like to have this shown correctly
on our approved set of plans when we release for building permit.
THE TRUSS DESIGN ENGINEER HAS USED 40 PSF LIVE LOAD IN LIEU OF SNOW. WITH A LDF =1 THIS IS MATHEMATICALLY
THE SAME. WE CAN CHECK THIS BY THE TRUSS REACTIONS. (SEE ATTACHED) TRIBUTARY AREA = 4'X36'/2 = 72 SF; 72X50
PSF TOTAL = 3600# = 40 PSF SNOW X72 = 2880# + 10 PSF X72 = 720#. HIS SOFTWARE AUTOMATICALLY CHECKS THE
UNBALANCED LOAD CONDITION USING 40 PSF GROUND SNOW & USES THE WORST CASE TO DESIGN THE MEMBERS.
Also, I am a little confused about the (3) PDF drawings (sent as filename: sealsWarnerRevB090717.pdf) Are these
intended to supplement or replace the (11) drawing sheets originally submitted to our office? Please clarify.
REPLACE. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE SHEETS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED TO YOUR DEPARTMENT WITHOUT A
STAMP WERE AN ATTEMPT TO AVOID HIRING AN ENGINEER SUCH AS MYSELF. THOSE SHEETS WERE GENERATED BY A
SOFTWARE PACKAGE FOR ILLUSTRATION & DIY INSTRUCTIONS, NOT AS ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS. IF THERE IS A
CONFLICT BETWEEN THOSE SHEETS & THOSE DRAWN & SEALED BY MYSELF, MINE GOVERN.
I have also copied Patrick McGuire on this email & we look forward to receiving a response to these questions so that we
can finalize our plan review & issue a building permit for your project.
2