UCOP (OR “RATING”) BASED ON TIER 1 EVALUATION FINDINGS … · 2018. 12. 20. · 1981 – Mech. penthouse addition to the original roof (current 5 penthouse structure was removed

ASCE 41-17 Tier 1 Seismic Evaluation

Building Name: Cory Hall

CAAN ID: 1325

Auxiliary Building ID: N/A

Address: Core Campus, Berkeley, CA 94

Site location coordinates: Latitude 37.875046

Plan Image or Aerial Photo

UCOP SEISMIC PERFORMANCE LEVEL

BUILDING DATA

ASCE 41-17 Model Building Type (Governing Building Type bolded for Seismic Risk Model when multiple

types exist):

a. Longitudinal Direction: C2: Concrete Shear Walls (with Stiff Diaphragms)

Steel Moment Frames with Flexible Diaphragm top

b. Transverse Direction: C2: Concrete Shear Walls (with Stiff Diaphragms)

Steel Moment Frames with Flexible Diaphragm top

Square Footage: 206,000 square feet per UCB records,

Building Length: 223’-0”

Building Width: 171’-6” average

Building Height: 90’ from 1st

floor

Story Height: 22’-5” btw 1st

and 2nd

Number of stories above grade: 5 including partially below

Number of basement stories below

1st

story

Year of Original Construction and Code Year:

Year of Later Constuction and Code Year:

COST RANGE TO RETROFIT (if applicable):

Evaluator: XXX Evaluator:

Date:

Tier 1 Seismic Evaluation

, CA 94720

37.875046o Longitudinal -122.257497

o

Plan Image or Aerial Photo Exterior Elevation Photo

PERFORMANCE LEVEL (OR “RATING”) BASED ON TIER 1 EVALUATION FINDINGS

(Governing Building Type bolded for Seismic Risk Model when multiple

C2: Concrete Shear Walls (with Stiff Diaphragms) lower 4

Steel Moment Frames with Flexible Diaphragm top story

C2: Concrete Shear Walls (with Stiff Diaphragms) lower 4

Steel Moment Frames with Flexible Diaphragm top story

206,000 square feet per UCB records, 180,000 gross square feet calculated

floor, 20’-3” btw 2

nd and 3

rd floor, 15’-9” upper 3 stories

5 including partially below grade 1st

story

below grade: 1 partial basement in addition to the partially below g

Year of Original Construction and Code Year: 1950 (per UCB records) 1946 UBC (assumed)

Year of Later Constuction and Code Year: No retrofits, see next page for additions and alterations

COST RANGE TO RETROFIT (if applicable): Medium: over $50 per sf and less than $200 per sf

Evaluator: AC

Date: 12/27/18

Page 1

Exterior Elevation Photo

FINDINGS: V

(Governing Building Type bolded for Seismic Risk Model when multiple

lower 4 stories, S1A:

lower 4 stories, S1A:

calculated

stories

1 partial basement in addition to the partially below grade

1946 UBC (assumed)

ons and alterations.

Medium: over $50 per sf and less than $200 per sf


CAAN ID: 1325

Year of Later Constuction and Code Year

U.O.N.

1958 – 4th floor interior completion and elevator addition

1960 – Mezzanine addition at the south

above 3rd

floor – 1958 UBC (assumed)

1971 – Mezzanine addition at the mi

1971 – Mezzanine addition southwest corner

1981 – Mech. penthouse addition to the original roof (current 5

penthouse structure was removed when 5

1984 – 5th

floor addition - 1979 UBC

1989 – Mezzanine at east extension above 1

2012 – Stair addition at the center of the bui

BUILDING DESCRIPTION

General

The building is located at the north side of the core campus on a slight slope. It is located north of Hearst

Memorial Mining Building and east of Sutardja Dai Hall.

building with 4 stories plus a partial basement

north side. Please refer to the sketch below for location of the grade.

1948. Over the years, there were many modifications to the building, such as addition of mezzanine and

stairs. The most significant modification is addition of a 5

plus partial basement. The building is 90 ft tall

2nd

floor, there is 66ft by 49ft opening

W direction, and it is about 158 ft in N

Cory Hall is connected to Sutardja Dai Hall with a bridge at the 4

Hall.

There is a discrepancy between the designations of the floors on the original drawings vs the

building. What the original drawings call

drawings call 1st

floor is named 2nd

floor in the building, etc. Please note that this report follows the

current designation.

Year of Later Constuction and Code Year (continued): Construction years are the dates on the drawings,

4th floor interior completion and elevator addition – 1955 UBC (assumed)

Mezzanine addition at the south above 1st

floor and mezzanine addition at the northeast corner

1958 UBC (assumed)

Mezzanine addition at the middle of the building above 1st

floor – 1970 UBC (assumed)

Mezzanine addition southwest corner above 1st floor – 1970 UBC (assumed)

enthouse addition to the original roof (current 5th

floor) – 1979 UBC (assumed). The

penthouse structure was removed when 5th

floor was added in 1984.

1979 UBC

extension above 1st

floor – 1985 CBC (assumed)

Stair addition at the center of the building btw 1st

and 2nd

floor – CBC 2010

located at the north side of the core campus on a slight slope. It is located north of Hearst

Memorial Mining Building and east of Sutardja Dai Hall. The building was originally constructed as a

ies plus a partial basement. The 1st

story is partially submerged to the ground on the

Please refer to the sketch below for location of the grade. The original drawings are dated

there were many modifications to the building, such as addition of mezzanine and

modification is addition of a 5th

story in 1984, making the building 5 stories

plus partial basement. The building is 90 ft tall from 1st

floor. It has a trapedoizal shape. Beginning at

opening in the center of the building. The building is about

and it is about 158 ft in N-S direction at the east side and 185 ft at the west si

Cory Hall is connected to Sutardja Dai Hall with a bridge at the 4th

floor. The bridge is isolated from Cory

There is a discrepancy between the designations of the floors on the original drawings vs the

gs call ground floor is currently named 1st

floor; what the original


Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 2

ears are the dates on the drawings,

floor and mezzanine addition at the northeast corner

1970 UBC (assumed)

1979 UBC (assumed). The

located at the north side of the core campus on a slight slope. It is located north of Hearst

originally constructed as a

story is partially submerged to the ground on the

The original drawings are dated

there were many modifications to the building, such as addition of mezzanine and

, making the building 5 stories

trapedoizal shape. Beginning at the

in the center of the building. The building is about 223 ft long in E-

S direction at the east side and 185 ft at the west side.

floor. The bridge is isolated from Cory

There is a discrepancy between the designations of the floors on the original drawings vs the current

what the original



CAAN ID: 1325

Structural System

The gravity load-carrying structural sy

concrete slab spanning to 12” wide to 22” to 30” reinforced concrete beams at about 8’

in turn are supported by 12” wide by 24” to 31” deep reinforced concrete girders. The co

to 24” square reinforced concrete members with eith

with 2-3/4” pitch. The foundation consists of reinforced concrete spread footings under the columns

and strip footings under the walls. The lateral forces are resisted by 24” to 26” thick reinforced concrete

pier-spandrel system at the perimeter and

courtyard and interior stair core walls, which are 10” to 12”

are also part of the vertical load-carrying system

The gravity load-carrying structural system of the upper

deck spanning to wide flange steel beams and girders supported by steel tube columns. The lateral

forces are resisted by steel truss moment frames.

Building Condition

Generally good, but substantial shrinkage

perimeter and at the roof pop-ups.

Date of Site Visit: 11/13/2018, Bret Lizundia

Limitations of walk-through: Not all rooms were entered

SITE INFORMATION

Site Class (A-F): B Basis: Site Specific Zone Map of campus by Geomatrix

Site Specific Ground Motion Study?

Development of Seismic Design Ground Motions

BSE-1N Spectral Accelerations: Basis

depth of rock readings from Site Specific Zone Map of campus by Geomatrix

“Design Development- Geotechnical Investigation

Engineering and Consulting, Inc, dated Nov 14, 2003

SDS: 1.71 SD1: 0.61

BSE-2E Spectral Accelerations: Basis

depth of rock readings from Site Specific Zone Map of campus by Geomatrix

“Design Development- Geotechnical Investigation

Engineering and Consulting, Inc, dated Nov 14, 2003

outlined in ASCE 7-16 Section 21.4.)

SXS: 2.31 SX1: 0.85

Level of Seismicity: High

Performance Level: Collapse Prevention Structural Performance

Geologic Hazards:

Fault Rupture No Basis: CGS website

http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/

Liquefaction No Basis: Report titled “Design Development

North Replacement” by MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc, dated Nov 14, 2003


Landslide No Basis: CGS website http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/

carrying structural system of the original floors consists of 4” to 5” thick reinforced

concrete slab spanning to 12” wide to 22” to 30” reinforced concrete beams at about 8’

in turn are supported by 12” wide by 24” to 31” deep reinforced concrete girders. The co

e members with either 3/8” diameter ties @ 8”, or ½” diameter spirals

oundation consists of reinforced concrete spread footings under the columns


spandrel system at the perimeter and 8” thick reinforced concrete pier-spandrel system

courtyard and interior stair core walls, which are 10” to 12” thick. These exterior piers and interior walls

carrying system.

carrying structural system of the upper floor that was added in 1984 is


forces are resisted by steel truss moment frames.

ubstantial shrinkage cracks are visible in exterior stucco at the roof level

.

11/13/2018, Bret Lizundia and Ayse Celikbas, Rutherford + Chekene

Not all rooms were entered.

Site Specific Zone Map of campus by Geomatrix

Site Specific Ground Motion Study? Yes, 2015 Update to the Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Analyses and

Development of Seismic Design Ground Motions

Basis: 2015 Site Specific Report Table 5 for Rock, <10ft Soil

Site Specific Zone Map of campus by Geomatrix and borings from the report

Geotechnical Investigation- Davis Hall North Replacement” by MACTEC

ngineering and Consulting, Inc, dated Nov 14, 2003

Basis: 2015 Site Specific Report Table 6 for Rock, <10ft Soil

Site Specific Zone Map of campus by Geomatrix and borings from the report

Geotechnical Investigation- Davis Hall North Replacement” by MACTEC

Engineering and Consulting, Inc, dated Nov 14, 2003 (Sxs and Sx1 are determined based on the procedure

)

Collapse Prevention Structural Performance

CGS website


Report titled “Design Development- Geotechnical Investigation

North Replacement” by MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc, dated Nov 14, 2003 and CGS website

//maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/


Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 3

4” to 5” thick reinforced

concrete slab spanning to 12” wide to 22” to 30” reinforced concrete beams at about 8’-6” O.C., which

in turn are supported by 12” wide by 24” to 31” deep reinforced concrete girders. The columns are 14”

½” diameter spirals

oundation consists of reinforced concrete spread footings under the columns


spandrel system at the

exterior piers and interior walls

was added in 1984 is an unfilled metal


at the roof level at the

Specific Seismic Hazard Analyses and

5 for Rock, <10ft Soil based on

and borings from the report

Davis Hall North Replacement” by MACTEC

, <10ft Soil based on

and borings from the report

Davis Hall North Replacement” by MACTEC

are determined based on the procedure

Geotechnical Investigation- Davis Hall

and CGS website



CAAN ID: 1325

PREVIOUS RATINGS SUMMARY

1. Fair – 1997 Preliminary Seismic Evaluation (SAFER), Degenkolb Engineers

DOCUMENTATION

Architectural Drawings: Engineering Building for University of California Berkeley, Will G. Corlett

Arthur W. Anderson Architects & Engineers, Feb 10

Sheet A11, Sketch A/Sheet A2, Sketch B/Sheet A11, S

Structural Drawings: Engineering Building for University of California Berkeley, Will G. Corlett

Arthur W. Anderson Architects & Engineers,

A/Sheet S-1, Sketch A/Sheet S

Seismic Evaluations: 1997 Preliminary Seismic Evaluation (SAFER), Degenkolb Engineers, July

15th

, 1997, FEMA-178

Geotechnical Reports: Design Development,

Replacement by MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc

Other Documents: Additional Drawings:

- Completion of Top Floor Cory Hall, Arthur W. Anderson Winfield H. Hyde & Arthur W.

Anderson, JR. Architects and Engineers, Dec 1

- New Elevator Lobby, Shaft & Entrances,

Arthur W. Anderson Winfield H. Hyde & Arthur W. Anderson, JR. Architects and Engineers,

April 10th

, 1958 Sheets A

- Cory Hall Improvement Step

JR. Architects and Engineers, June 10

- Cory Hall Alterations to Room 144, Kitchen and Hunt AIA Architects, Feb 16

A1 to A4 , S1

- Cory Hall Alterations &

Hunt AIA Architects, Sept 15

- Micro-Electonics Fabrication Facility Cory Hall, Robert C. Davidson Architect A.I.A. &

Associates, David L. Messinger & Associa

A1 to A12, S1, S2

- Phase 2 Instructional Computer Facility

Architect, SOH & Associates Structural Engineers, May 30

- Cory Hall Fifth Floor Addition and Alterations for C.A.D. , Crosby Thornton Marshall

Associates Architects, Forell/Elsesser Structural Engineers, Apr 3

A1.1, A2.1, A2.4, A3.1, A3.2, A3.3R, A3.4 to A3.9, A4.1, A5.1 to A5.5, A6.1 to A6.4,

A7.2, A8.1 to A8.7, A9.1, A9.2, S0.1, S0.2, S1.1 to S1.5, S2.1 to S2.4, S3.1 to S3.10

- 140 Cory Hall: EE40 Lab renovation Study

Structural Engineering, August 2012, Sheets A1.1 to A1.5, A2.1 to A2.4, A3.1 to

A4.3, A5.1 to A5.5, A6.1 to A6.3, Sketches for Sheet A2.3 (3 Sheets), Sketches for Sheet A3.1

(1 Sheet), Sketches for Sheet A3.2 (1 Sheet), Sketches for Sheet A4.1 (1 Sheet), Sketches for

A5.3 (1 Sheet), S1.01 to S1.03, S2.00 to S2.02, S3.01

S6.01 to S6.04, S2.01C, S2.02C, Structural Sketches (11 Sheets)

Structural Calculations for Cory Hall

1983

1997 Preliminary Seismic Evaluation (SAFER), Degenkolb Engineers

Engineering Building for University of California Berkeley, Will G. Corlett

Arthur W. Anderson Architects & Engineers, Feb 10th

, 1948, Sheets X1, A1 to A17, Sketch A/

Sheet A11, Sketch A/Sheet A2, Sketch B/Sheet A11, Sketch A/Sheet A13, Sketch A/Sheet A17.


Arthur W. Anderson Architects & Engineers, Dec 10th

, 1948, Sheets S1 to S19, S

1, Sketch A/Sheet S-2, SX-1 to SX-2

1997 Preliminary Seismic Evaluation (SAFER), Degenkolb Engineers, July

ign Development, Geotechnical Investigation, Davis Hall North

by MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., dated Nov 14, 2003

Additional Drawings:

Completion of Top Floor Cory Hall, Arthur W. Anderson Winfield H. Hyde & Arthur W.

Anderson, JR. Architects and Engineers, Dec 1st

, 1957 Sheets A-1 to A-5

evator Lobby, Shaft & Entrances, Basement, First, Second & Third Floors, Cory Hall,


, 1958 Sheets A-6 to A-8

Cory Hall Improvement Step-2, Arthur W. Anderson Winfield H. Hyde & Arthur W. Anderson,

JR. Architects and Engineers, June 10th

, 1960 Sheets A-7 , S-1, S-2, S-4

Cory Hall Alterations to Room 144, Kitchen and Hunt AIA Architects, Feb 16

Alterations & Rehabiliation ’69-’70 Rooms 197-199 and Mezzanine, Kitchen and

Hunt AIA Architects, Sept 15th

, 1971 Sheets A-1 to A-4 , S-1, S-2

Electonics Fabrication Facility Cory Hall, Robert C. Davidson Architect A.I.A. &

Associates, David L. Messinger & Associates Structural Engineers, Dec 3rd

, 1981, Cover Sheet,

Phase 2 Instructional Computer Facility- Cory Hall, Eduardo Martinez Design Associates

Architect, SOH & Associates Structural Engineers, May 30th

, 1989, Sheets A

Fifth Floor Addition and Alterations for C.A.D. , Crosby Thornton Marshall

Associates Architects, Forell/Elsesser Structural Engineers, Apr 3rd

, 1984, Sheets A0.1, A0.2,

A1.1, A2.1, A2.4, A3.1, A3.2, A3.3R, A3.4 to A3.9, A4.1, A5.1 to A5.5, A6.1 to A6.4,


140 Cory Hall: EE40 Lab renovation Study- Phase 2, Shaffer Architects, Tipping Mar

Structural Engineering, August 2012, Sheets A1.1 to A1.5, A2.1 to A2.4, A3.1 to



A5.3 (1 Sheet), S1.01 to S1.03, S2.00 to S2.02, S3.01, S3.02, S4.01 to S4.03, S5.01 to S5.06,

S6.01 to S6.04, S2.01C, S2.02C, Structural Sketches (11 Sheets)

Structural Calculations for Cory Hall Fifth Floor Addition, Forell/Elsesser Engineers, Inc. Dec 14

Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 4


, 1948, Sheets X1, A1 to A17, Sketch A/

ketch A/Sheet A13, Sketch A/Sheet A17.


S1 to S19, S-13A, Sketch

1997 Preliminary Seismic Evaluation (SAFER), Degenkolb Engineers, July

Davis Hall North

, dated Nov 14, 2003

Completion of Top Floor Cory Hall, Arthur W. Anderson Winfield H. Hyde & Arthur W.

Basement, First, Second & Third Floors, Cory Hall,


nderson Winfield H. Hyde & Arthur W. Anderson,

Cory Hall Alterations to Room 144, Kitchen and Hunt AIA Architects, Feb 16th

, 1971 Sheets

199 and Mezzanine, Kitchen and

Electonics Fabrication Facility Cory Hall, Robert C. Davidson Architect A.I.A. &

, 1981, Cover Sheet,

Cory Hall, Eduardo Martinez Design Associates

, 1989, Sheets A-0 to A-6, S1

Fifth Floor Addition and Alterations for C.A.D. , Crosby Thornton Marshall

, 1984, Sheets A0.1, A0.2,

A1.1, A2.1, A2.4, A3.1, A3.2, A3.3R, A3.4 to A3.9, A4.1, A5.1 to A5.5, A6.1 to A6.4, A7.1 to


Phase 2, Shaffer Architects, Tipping Mar

Structural Engineering, August 2012, Sheets A1.1 to A1.5, A2.1 to A2.4, A3.1 to A3.5, A4.1 to



, S3.02, S4.01 to S4.03, S5.01 to S5.06,

Floor Addition, Forell/Elsesser Engineers, Inc. Dec 14th

,


CAAN ID: 1325

CONSTRUCTION DATA

LATERAL-FORCE-RESISTING SYSTEM

ASCE 41-17 Building Type:

Diaphragms:

Vertical Elements:

Gravity Load Structural System: One

beams supported by reinforced concrete columns

Exterior Transverse Walls: Concrete piers and spandrels

Exterior Longitudinal Walls: Concrete piers and spandrels

Roof Materials/Framing: 1 ½”

Intermediate Floors/Framing: Typical floor

and 4

to 2.5” concrete over 1.5” metal deck

Ground Floor: 5” slab on grade at 1

Columns: 14” to 24” square concrete

columns lower 4

square tube steel columns

5

General Condition of Structure: Generally g

exterior stucco

ups

Evidence of Settling?: No

Special Features & Comments: Numerous mezzanines were added over the years, including one that

was built without any engineering design

Top story

a lateral

The building has heavy partitions consisting of metal pencil studs

with lath and plaster.

RESISTING SYSTEM

Longitudinal Transverse

Building Type: C2: Concrete Shear Walls

(with Stiff Diaphragms) lower

4 stories, S1A: Steel Moment

Frames with Flexible

Diaphragm top story

C2: Concrete Shear Walls


4 stories, S1A: Steel Moment


Diaphragm top

Diaphragms: 4” to 5” concrete slab lower

4 floors, 1.5” metal deck at

roof

4” to 5” concrete slab lower


roof

Vertical Elements: 14” to 24” square concrete

columns lower 4 stories, 10”


btw 5th

floor and roof.

14” to 24” square concrete

columns lower 4


btw 5th

floor and

One-way reinforced concrete slab spanning to reinforced concrete

beams supported by reinforced concrete columns

Concrete piers and spandrels Opening(s)?

Concrete piers and spandrels Opening(s)?

1 ½” metal deck spanning to steel framing

Typical floor is 5” concrete slab with 3” concrete topping slab at 3

and 4th

floors only. 4” concrete slab at 5th

floor. At the mezzanines 2”

to 2.5” concrete over 1.5” metal deck with steel framing

5” slab on grade at 1st

floor



square tube steel columns btw

5th

floor and roof

Foundation:

Generally good, but substantial shrinkage cracks are

exterior stucco at the roof level at the perimeter and at the roof pop

ups

No

Numerous mezzanines were added over the years, including one that

was built without any engineering design

Top story was added in mid 1980s. It is of steel construction and has

a lateral force-resisting system of truss moment frames.


with lath and plaster.

Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 5

Transverse

Concrete Shear Walls


, S1A: Steel Moment


Diaphragm top story

4” to 5” concrete slab lower





floor and roof.

way reinforced concrete slab spanning to reinforced concrete

Yes

Yes

topping slab at 3rd

floor. At the mezzanines 2”

with steel framing

Spread footings

under the

columns, strip

footings under

the walls

are visible in

at the roof level at the perimeter and at the roof pop-

Numerous mezzanines were added over the years, including one that

was added in mid 1980s. It is of steel construction and has

resisting system of truss moment frames.



CAAN ID: 1325

Connections:

Details:

Estimated Fundamental Period, T (sec):

BSE-2E Spectral Acceleration, S

Modification Factor, C:

Building Weight, W (kips):

Seismic Base Shear, V (kips):

System Modification Factor, M

Significant Structural Deficiencies, Potentially Affecting

X Lateral System Stress Check (wall shear, column shear

☐ Load Path

☐ Adjacent Buildings

☐ Weak Story

X Soft Story

X Geometry (vertical irregularities)

X Torsion

☐ Mass – Vertical Irregularity

☐ Cripple Walls

☐ Wood Sills (bolting)

☐ Diaphragm Continuity

X Openings at Shear Walls (concrete or masonry)

☐ Liquefaction

☐ Slope Failure

☐ Surface Fault Rupture

☐ Masonry or Concrete Wall Anchorage at Flexible Diaphragm

☐ URM wall height to thickness ratio

☐ URM Parapets or Cornices

☐ URM Chimney

Concrete shear walls lower 4

stories


stories

Connections: Lap lengths in long. bars in

vert. elements:

3’-6” for 1”sq bar

3’-0” for 1” dia bar

2-6” for 7/8” dia bar

2’-0” for 0.5” dia bar

Lap lengths in long.

vert. elements:

3’-6” for 1”sq bar

3’-0” for 1” dia bar

2-6” for 7/8” dia bar

2’-0” for 0.5” dia bar

Details: Detail S17 on sheet S12, and

detail S5 on sheet S11 for lap

lengths in long. bars

Detail S17 on sheet S12, and

detail S5 on sheet S

lengths in long

Period, T (sec): 0.58 sec 0.58 sec

2E Spectral Acceleration, Sa: 1.45 g 1.45 g

Modification Factor, C: 1.0 (C2 – ASCE 41-17 Table 4-

7)

1.0 (C2 – ASCE 41

7)

Building Weight, W (kips): 36,260 36,260

Seismic Base Shear, V (kips): 52,577 52,577

System Modification Factor, Ms: 4.5 for concrete shear walls

at CP per Table 4-8 of ASCE

41-17

4.5 for concrete shear walls

at CP per Table 4

41-17

, Potentially Affecting Seismic Performance Level Designation:

Lateral System Stress Check (wall shear, column shear or flexure, or brace axial as applic

Geometry (vertical irregularities)

Irregularity

Openings at Shear Walls (concrete or masonry)

Masonry or Concrete Wall Anchorage at Flexible Diaphragm

URM wall height to thickness ratio

s or Cornices

Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 6


Lap lengths in long. bars in

vert. elements:

6” for 1”sq bar

0” for 1” dia bar

6” for 7/8” dia bar

0” for 0.5” dia bar

S17 on sheet S12, and

5 on sheet S11 for lap

lengths in long. bars

ASCE 41-17 Table 4-

4.5 for concrete shear walls

at CP per Table 4-8 of ASCE

Designation:

or flexure, or brace axial as applicable)


CAAN ID: 1325

☐ Heavy Partitions Braced by Ceilings

☐ Appendages

OVERALL SEISMIC DEFICIENCIES & EXPECTED SEISMIC PERFORMANCE

The reinforced concrete columns have either 3/8” diameter ties @ 8” with 135 degree hooks, or ½”

diameter spirals with 2-3/4” pitch. Although for a 14” square column, 8” spacing is more than d/2, the

flexural capacities of the 14” square columns are small,

flexurally-critical. In addition to having relatively closely

demand on the larger columns is expected to be limited to the capacity of the beams that frame to the

columns, and overall the columns are expected to perform relatively well. The shear walls and the truss

moment frames are well distributed, and this is expected to help with the seismic performance.

However, the following significant deficiencies exist:

- The columns and beams under the discontinuous shear walls are expected to be

overstressed.

- The offset in the perimeter shear walls creates torsion in the spandrels supporting them.

- A story was added after the original construction, and calculations that show

building was checked for lateral forces to support the added mass have not be provided.

- Mezzanines typically rely on the existing concrete gravity columns to provide lateral

bracing. The connections of the mezzanines to the columns may not

columns may not be adequate to resist the loads imparted by the mezzanines.

In addition, although the average shear stress demand is not very large, it is above the limit prescribed

by the Tier 1 evaluation. The horizontal bars in the

ratio prescribed by Tier 1 evaluation. The building is torsionally irregular

deformation demand on some walls and columns. The 2nd story might create a soft story condition as it

is significantly taller than the story above. It should be noted that the exterior piers and interior walls

are part of the vertical load-carrying system.

Based on the above deficiencies, the building is assigned a SPL V rating.

All these deficiencies should be checked further with a Tier 3 evaluation. There is mod

the deficiencies can get waived with such an evaluation.

Heavy Partitions Braced by Ceilings

OVERALL SEISMIC DEFICIENCIES & EXPECTED SEISMIC PERFORMANCE


3/4” pitch. Although for a 14” square column, 8” spacing is more than d/2, the

flexural capacities of the 14” square columns are small, and this makes the 14” square columns

critical. In addition to having relatively closely spaced ties with respect to their size, the shear


umns, and overall the columns are expected to perform relatively well. The shear walls and the truss


However, the following significant deficiencies exist:

columns and beams under the discontinuous shear walls are expected to be

The offset in the perimeter shear walls creates torsion in the spandrels supporting them.

A story was added after the original construction, and calculations that show


Mezzanines typically rely on the existing concrete gravity columns to provide lateral

The connections of the mezzanines to the columns may not be adequate



Tier 1 evaluation. The horizontal bars in the 24” wall piers do not meet the minimum reinforcing

prescribed by Tier 1 evaluation. The building is torsionally irregular, and this will increase the


icantly taller than the story above. It should be noted that the exterior piers and interior walls

carrying system.

Based on the above deficiencies, the building is assigned a SPL V rating.

checked further with a Tier 3 evaluation. There is moderate chance that

can get waived with such an evaluation.

Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 7


3/4” pitch. Although for a 14” square column, 8” spacing is more than d/2, the

and this makes the 14” square columns

spaced ties with respect to their size, the shear


umns, and overall the columns are expected to perform relatively well. The shear walls and the truss


columns and beams under the discontinuous shear walls are expected to be

The offset in the perimeter shear walls creates torsion in the spandrels supporting them.

A story was added after the original construction, and calculations that show that original


Mezzanines typically rely on the existing concrete gravity columns to provide lateral

be adequate, and the



do not meet the minimum reinforcing

and this will increase the


icantly taller than the story above. It should be noted that the exterior piers and interior walls

erate chance that


CAAN ID: 1325

Seismic Retrofit Concept Sketches/Description (only if above

Based on the Tier 1 evaluation, the following retrofit measures

structural deficiencies.

• Strengthen members between 1

and south face of the courtyard by adding concrete, steel or FRP jackets to supporting columns

and beams.

• Brace mezzanines by providing their own lateral force

under the new system where needed

In addition to the above, the following retrofit concepts are needed, if further analysis w

the deficiencies:

• Strengthen the edge perimeter beam at 4

under the beam and/or supplemental vertical supports.

• Provide walls to eliminate torsional irregularity

side. Provide new foundations under the

• Stiffen the second story to e

interior walls between 2nd

and 3

foundation might be needed.

A Tier 3 evaluation would likely refine the above conceptual measures.

Appendices

A. Additional Photos

B. ASCE 41-17 Tier 1 Checklists

C. UCOP Seismic Safety Policy Falling Hazards Assessment Summary

D. Quick Check Calculations

Seismic Retrofit Concept Sketches/Description (only if above-listed rating is V or greater):

he following retrofit measures could be used to address the identified

members between 1st

and 2nd

floors under discontinuous shear walls at the north


nines by providing their own lateral force-resisting systems including foundations

under the new system where needed.

In addition to the above, the following retrofit concepts are needed, if further analysis w

Strengthen the edge perimeter beam at 4th

floor at the offset by providing additional concrete

and/or supplemental vertical supports.

Provide walls to eliminate torsional irregularity between 1st

and 2nd

floors at the south and east

. Provide new foundations under the new walls.

to eliminate soft story deficiency by shotcreting the perimeter walls and

and 3rd

floors. Shotcrete to be continued to the foundation,

foundation might be needed.

A Tier 3 evaluation would likely refine the above conceptual measures.

17 Tier 1 Checklists (Structural)

UCOP Seismic Safety Policy Falling Hazards Assessment Summary

Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 8

listed rating is V or greater):

could be used to address the identified

floors under discontinuous shear walls at the north


including foundations

In addition to the above, the following retrofit concepts are needed, if further analysis will not eliminate

by providing additional concrete

at the south and east

liminate soft story deficiency by shotcreting the perimeter walls and

foundation, and new

APPENDIX A

Additional Photos


CAAN ID: 1325

Northeast

Northwest

Northeast Corner (Looking Southwest)

Northwest Corner (Looking Southeast)

Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 2


CAAN ID: 1325

Courtyard

Rooftop

Courtyard (Looking East)

Rooftop (Looking South)

Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 3


CAAN ID: 1325

Unbraced Hazardous Material Storage

Ceiling at the corridor

Unbraced Hazardous Material Storage

Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 4

ASCE 41-17 Tier 1 Checklists (Structural)

APPENDIX B



UC Campus: Berkeley Date: 12/27/2018

Building CAAN: 1325 Auxiliary CAAN:

By Firm: Rutherford + Chekene

Building Name: Cory Hall Initials: AC Checked: BL

Building Address: Core Campus Page: 1 of 3

ASCE 41-17 Collapse Prevention Basic Configuration Checklist

Note: C = Compliant NC = Noncompliant N/A = Not Applicable U = Unknown

LOW SEISMICITY

BUILDING SYSTEMS - GENERAL Description

C NC N/A U

LOAD PATH: The structure contains a complete, well-defined load path, including structural elements and connections, that serves to transfer the inertial forces associated with the mass of all elements of the building to the foundation. (Commentary: Sec. A.2.1.1. Tier 2: Sec. 5.4.1.1) Comments:

C NC N/A U

ADJACENT BUILDINGS: The clear distance between the building being evaluated and any adjacent building is greater than 0.25% of the height of the shorter building in low seismicity, 0.5% in moderate seismicity, and 1.5% in high seismicity. (Commentary: Sec. A.2.1.2. Tier 2: Sec. 5.4.1.2) Comments: Bridge to Sutardja Dai Hall has been designed to allow out-of-phase movement between buildings.

C NC N/A U

MEZZANINES: Interior mezzanine levels are braced independently from the main structure or are anchored to the seismic-force-resisting elements of the main structure. (Commentary: Sec. A.2.1.3. Tier 2: Sec. 5.4.1.3) Comments: Mezzanines are not adequately braced for seismic lateral forces.

BUILDING SYSTEMS - BUILDING CONFIGURATION Description

C NC N/A U

WEAK STORY: The sum of the shear strengths of the seismic-force-resisting system in any story in each direction is not less than 80% of the strength in the adjacent story above. (Commentary: Sec. A2.2.2. Tier 2: Sec. 5.4.2.1)

Comments:

C NC N/A U

SOFT STORY: The stiffness of the seismic-force-resisting system in any story is not less than 70% of the seismic-force-resisting system stiffness in an adjacent story above or less than 80% of the average seismic-force-resisting system stiffness of the three stories above. (Commentary: Sec. A.2.2.3. Tier 2: Sec. 5.4.2.2) Comments: 2nd story has the same amount of walls as the upper stories (15’-9”), but it is taller (20’-3”).








C NC N/A U

VERTICAL IRREGULARITIES: All vertical elements in the seismic-force-resisting system are continuous to the foundation. (Commentary: Sec. A.2.2.4. Tier 2: Sec. 5.4.2.3) Comments: Walls around the courtyard at north and south faces are not continuous to the foundation. Exterior walls between 4th and 5th floor are offset about 3ft from walls below.

C NC N/A U

GEOMETRY: There are no changes in the net horizontal dimension of the seismic-force-resisting system of more than 30% in a story relative to adjacent stories, excluding one-story penthouses and mezzanines. (Commentary: Sec. A.2.2.5. Tier 2: Sec. 5.4.2.4) Comments:

C NC N/A U

MASS: There is no change in effective mass of more than 50% from one story to the next. Light roofs, penthouses, and mezzanines need not be considered. (Commentary: Sec. A.2.2.6. Tier 2: Sec. 5.4.2.5) Comments:

C NC N/A U

TORSION: The estimated distance between the story center of mass and the story center of rigidity is less than 20% of the building width in either plan dimension. (Commentary: Sec. A.2.2.7. Tier 2: Sec. 5.4.2.6)

Comments: Between 1st and 2nd floors, north and east sides have walls along the whole length, which shifts the center of rigidity toward northeast.

MODERATE SEISMICITY (COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS IN ADDITION TO THE ITEMS FOR LOW SEISMICITY)

GEOLOGIC SITE HAZARD

Description

C NC N/A U

LIQUEFACTION: Liquefaction-susceptible, saturated, loose granular soils that could jeopardize the building’s seismic performance do not exist in the foundation soils at depths within 50 ft (15.2m) under the building. (Commentary: Sec. A.6.1.1. Tier 2: 5.4.3.1)

Comments: Per the geotechnical report titled “Design Development- Geotechnical Investigation- Davis Hall North Replacement” by MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc, dated Nov 14, 2003 and per CGS website: http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/

C NC N/A U

SLOPE FAILURE: The building site is located away from potential earthquake-induced slope failures or rockfalls so that it is unaffected by such failures or is capable of accommodating any predicted movements without failure. (Commentary: Sec. A.6.1.2. Tier 2: 5.4.3.1) Comments: Per CGS website: http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/








MODERATE SEISMICITY (COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS IN ADDITION TO THE ITEMS FOR LOW SEISMICITY)

GEOLOGIC SITE HAZARD C NC N/A U

SURFACE FAULT RUPTURE: Surface fault rupture and surface displacement at the building site are not anticipated. (Commentary: Sec. A.6.1.3. Tier 2: 5.4.3.1)

Comments: Per CGS website: http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/ The building is west of Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault zone.

HIGH SEISMICITY (COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS IN ADDITION TO THE ITEMS FOR MODERATE SEISMICITY)

FOUNDATION CONFIGURATION

Description

C NC N/A U

OVERTURNING: The ratio of the least horizontal dimension of the seismic-force-resisting system at the foundation level to the building height (base/height) is greater than 0.6Sa. (Commentary: Sec. A.6.2.1. Tier 2: Sec. 5.4.3.3) Comments: 171.5/90 = 1.9 > 0.6*1.45 = 0.87

C NC N/A U

TIES BETWEEN FOUNDATION ELEMENTS: The foundation has ties adequate to resist seismic forces where footings, piles, and piers are not restrained by beams, slabs, or soils classified as Site Class A, B, or C. (Commentary: Sec. A.6.2.2. Tier 2: Sec. 5.4.3.4) Comments: Site Class B. Also the building has spread and strip foundations.






ASCE 41-17 Collapse Prevention Structural Checklist For Building Type C2-C2A


Low And Moderate Seismicity

Seismic-Force-Resisting System

Description

C NC N/A U

COMPLETE FRAMES: Steel or concrete frames classified as secondary components form a complete vertical-load-carrying system. (Commentary: Sec. A.3.1.6.1. Tier 2: Sec. 5.5.2.5.1) Comments: Some beams frame into interior and exterior walls.

C NC N/A U

REDUNDANCY: The number of lines of shear walls in each principal direction is greater than or equal to 2. (Commentary: Sec. A.3.2.1.1. Tier 2: Sec. 5.5.1.1)

Comments:

C NC N/A U

SHEAR STRESS CHECK: The shear stress in the concrete shear walls, calculated using the Quick Check procedure of Section 4.4.3.3, is less than the greater of 100 lb/in.2 (0.69 MPa) or 2√f’c. (Commentary: Sec. A.3.2.2.1. Tier 2: Sec. 5.5.3.1.1)

Comments:

Story Average Stress N-S dir E-W dir

Btw 4th and 5th floor 52 psi 55 psi Btw 3rd and 4th floor 100 psi 105 psi Btw 2nd and 3rd floor 134 psi 140 psi Btw 1st and 2nd floor 127 psi 132 psi

C NC N/A U

REINFORCING STEEL: The ratio of reinforcing steel area to gross concrete area is not less than 0.0012 in the vertical direction and 0.0020 in the horizontal direction. (Commentary: Sec. A.3.2.2.2. Tier 2: Sec. 5.5.3.1.3)

Comments: 1/2" dia bars @ 12" OC for 8" wall EW EF ==> 0.004 ==> OK 1/2" dia bars @ 12" OC for 12" wall EW EF ==> 0.0028 ==> OK 1/2" dia horz. bars @ 12" OC for 24" wall piers ==> 0.00139 ==> NG

Connections

Description








C NC N/A U

WALL ANCHORAGE AT FLEXIBLE DIAPHRAGMS: Exterior concrete or masonry walls that are dependent on flexible diaphragms for lateral support are anchored for out-of-plane forces at each diaphragm level with steel anchors, reinforcing dowels, or straps that are developed into the diaphragm. Connections have strength to resist the connection force calculated in the Quick Check procedure of Section 4.4.3.7. (Commentary: Sec. A.5.1.1. Tier 2: Sec. 5.7.1.1)

Comments:

C NC N/A U

TRANSFER TO SHEAR WALLS: Diaphragms are connected for transfer of seismic forces to the shear walls. (Commentary: Sec. A.5.2.1. Tier 2: Sec. 5.7.2)

Comments: Per Detail S1 and S2 on Sheet S11

C NC N/A U

FOUNDATION DOWELS: Wall reinforcement is doweled into the foundation with vertical bars equal in size and spacing to the vertical wall reinforcing directly above the foundation. (Commentary: Sec. A.5.3.5. Tier 2: Sec. 5.7.3.4)

Comments: Per Detail S1 and S2 on Sheet S11

High Seismicity (Complete The Following Items In Addition To The Items For Low And Moderate Seismicity)

Seismic-Force-Resisting System Description

C NC N/A U

DEFLECTION COMPATIBILITY: Secondary components have the shear capacity to develop the flexural strength of the components. (Commentary: Sec. A.3.1.6.2. Tier 2: Sec. 5.5.2.5.2)

Comments: Vp/Vn for column between 2nd and 3rd floor is 1.06. However, if the maximum moment demand on the columns is limited to the beams’ capacities that are framing to the columns, the shear capacity is expected to be larger. Therefore, this item is considered to be compliant.

C NC N/A U

FLAT SLABS: Flat slabs or plates not part of the seismic-force-resisting system have continuous bottom steel through the column joints. (Commentary: Sec. A.3.1.6.3. Tier 2: Sec. 5.5.2.5.3)

Comments: No flat slab. One-way slab spanning to beams.

C NC N/A U

COUPLING BEAMS: The ends of both walls to which the coupling beam is attached are supported at each end to resist vertical loads caused by overturning. (Commentary: Sec. A.3.2.2.3. Tier 2: Sec. 5.5.3.2.1)

Comments:








Diaphragms (Stiff Or Flexible)

Description

C NC N/A U

DIAPHRAGM CONTINUITY: The diaphragms are not composed of split-level floors and do not have expansion joints. (Commentary: Sec. A.4.1.1. Tier 2: Sec. 5.6.1.1)

Comments:

C NC N/A U

OPENINGS AT SHEAR WALLS: Diaphragm openings immediately adjacent to the shear walls are less than 25% of the wall length. (Commentary: Sec. A.4.1.4. Tier 2: Sec. 5.6.1.3)

Comments: Interior walls are stair cores and have openings at one side at most of their length.

Flexible Diaphragms

Description

C NC N/A U

CROSS TIES: There are continuous cross ties between diaphragm chords. (Commentary: Sec. A.4.1.2. Tier 2: Sec. 5.6.1.2)

Comments:

C NC N/A U

STRAIGHT SHEATHING: All straight-sheathed diaphragms have aspect ratios less than 2-to-1 in the direction being considered. (Commentary: Sec. A.4.2.1. Tier 2: Sec. 5.6.2)

Comments:

C NC N/A U

SPANS: All wood diaphragms with spans greater than 24 ft (7.3 m) consist of wood structural panels or diagonal sheathing. (Commentary: Sec. A.4.2.2. Tier 2: Sec. 5.6.2)

Comments:

C NC N/A U

DIAGONALLY SHEATHED AND UNBLOCKED DIAPHRAGMS: All diagonally sheathed or unblocked wood structural panel diaphragms have horizontal spans less than 40 ft (12.2 m) and aspect ratios less than or equal to 4-to-1. (Commentary: Sec. A.4.2.3. Tier 2: Sec. 5.6.2)

Comments:

C NC N/A U

OTHER DIAPHRAGMS: Diaphragms do not consist of a system other than wood, metal deck, concrete, or horizontal bracing. (Commentary: Sec. A.4.7.1. Tier 2: Sec. 5.6.5)

Comments:








Connections

Description

C NC N/A U

UPLIFT AT PILE CAPS: Pile caps have top reinforcement, and piles are anchored to the pile caps. (Commentary: Sec. A.5.3.8. Tier 2: Sec. 5.7.3.5)

Comments: No pile caps.

UCOP Seismic Safety Policy Falling Hazards Assessment

APPENDIX C


Summary




By Firm: Rutherford+Chekene


Building Address: Cory Campus Page: 1 of 1

UCOP SEISMIC SAFETY POLICY

Falling Hazard Assessment Summary

Note: P= Present, N/A = Not Applicable

Description

P N/A

Heavy ceilings, features or ornamentation above large lecture halls, auditoriums, lobbies, or other areas where large numbers of people congregate (50 ppl or more)

Comments:

Per Scott McNally (Director of Space Planning and Facilities), ceilings at the corridors (i.e. path of egress) are typically gypboard with glue on tile.

P N/A

Heavy masonry or stone veneer above exit ways or public access areas

Comments:

P N/A

Unbraced masonry parapets, cornices, or other ornamentation above exit ways or public access areas

Comments:

P N/A

Unrestrained hazardous material storage

Comments: There are cabinets containing hazardous materials in the labs that are unrestrained

P N/A

Masonry chimneys

Comments:

P N/A

Unrestrained natural gas-fueled equipment such as water heaters, boilers, emergency generators, etc.

Comments:

P N/A

Other:

Comments:

P N/A

Other:

Comments:

P N/A

Other:

Comments:

Quick Check Calculations

APPENDIX D

Quick Check Calculations


CAAN ID: 1325

Unit Weights:

Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 2


CAAN ID: 1325

Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 3


CAAN ID: 1325

Story Weights

Period

BSE-2E Response Spectrum

2E Response Spectrum

Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 4


CAAN ID: 1325

Story Shears:

Average Stress:

Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/27/18

Page 5


CAAN ID: 1325

Deformation Compatibility Check:

Deformation Compatibility Check:

Evaluator: R+C

Date: 12/07/18