The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05010068-Additional Information Designers P.O. Box 90346 (I1 I'\/S Builders Indianapolis, IN 46290 -0346 317/842 -6521 6airtZ Tue, Apr 26, 2005 Dear Adam: I hope this information will satisfy your requirements for proof of header capability at the Johnson Residence`3463 Sedgemoor Circle, Pennit #05010070.'': I am not sure what you want me to do at this point. Do I need to call in another formal inspection? Can you send me a letter saying it is OK to proceed and that this requirement has been satisfied? Please let me know. My cell phone is 250 -6166 Sincerely, I Tyler Crews President Crews Sturtz, Inc. 5��L ac5 L broad ripple design associates, LLC 04.20.05 Tyler Crews Crews Sturtz 8132 Hunters Place Indianapolis IN 46236 Re: Johnson Residence 3463 Sedgemoor Circle Carmel, Indiana 46032 Dear Tyler: At your request, I have investigated the construction of a new window opening in the Johnson Residence. This window is installed into a cut out rough opening in a 6 -inch thick concrete basement wall. This report will identify the methods of construction and verify if the solutions to these structural conditions are adequate, suitable and appropriate. The new window is approximately 96 inches wide and is located directly beneath an existing window of equal size. The jambs are in alignment. (See Illustration No. 1) The procedure for installation included a saw cut removal of a portion of the 6 -inch thick concrete basement wall to accommodate the new window. An 11 -inch high portion of this basement wall above the new window head was left in place. This was done to minimize the disruption of the brick exterior veneer. The floor system is supported on this concrete wall at a dimension approximately 24 inches above the new cut window opening by means of additional cripples. Although this remaining horizontal concrete header was not intended to be a structural header, it is an integral part of the original basement wall placement and presents no structural deficiency to the new opening. (See Illustration Nos. 2 and 3). Additionally it is supported by another double 2x12 header composed of pressure treated SYP #1 material. To accommodate the floor joist bearing, an interior furred wall consisting of 2x4 SYP#2 studs at 16 inches on center was framed on the inside face of the concrete wall with a double 2x12 header, composed of SYP#1. The wall and double header was installed flush against the face of concrete at the new cut opening. This now permits the existing floor framing to be supported on new 2x4 cripple studs in exact alignment with existing floor joists. As a result the existing floor load over this 8 foot opening, is fully supported by the new header and furred wall assembly. The original concrete wall and its remaining concrete header section are now redundant and are supported entirely by the additional treated 2x12 header within the concrete opening. A load analysis shows that the maximum total load on the new header is approximately 2400 Ibs total load, with 1200 Ibs end reactions. End bearing on this header is adequate at about 76 psi actual with 475 psi allowable. The load being carried on this new header is limited only to the single floor load above, which exceeds the allowable span loading tables of the Southern Pine Council by more than 200 Deflection allowed is 0.25 inches based on a L/360. Actual deflection for the total load is only 0.09 inches or about L1980. Therefore, the existing distributed load along the top of the concrete wall is replaced by the new header, leaving the original wall section above the cutout opening carrying only its own dead load of about 3.7 ft of concrete, or 440 pounds. As noted above, the second header installed under the concrete cut -out consisting of a double 2x12 treated SYP #1, was added for support of this small concrete section. 660 east 62nd street indianapolis, Indiana 46220 -1870 317251.0533 fax 317.255.2885 Although this concrete section has significant integral support from the wall panel itself, the treated double 2x12 header is added as a backup method of support for minor settlement and /or cracking. At this time, and throughout the construction work, no cracking of any kind was observed. Using the same loading relationship as above, and assuming the entire concrete header section was supported, this header would then be oversized by more than 800% and well suited to "back -up" this concrete section. The above -grade condition of concrete sitting on treated wood, is an acceptable condition considering the moisture separation from the brick backup. As for the brick veneer, it has no impact on the loading situation since it fully bridges the opening and transfers its load through a steel lintel of equal size as the upper lintel. Therefore the brick veneer dead load is being transferred directly to the supporting foundation without structural implications to the window opening, its framing, or the concrete cut out. Therefore it is my opinion that this installation of the lower window is an appropriate, safe, and stable system and should be an acceptable design solution to the homeowner and the local jurisdiction. I have indicated my approval by signature below and professional certification as a licensed Indiana Architect. If you have any questions on this, or require additional documentation, please contact me. Sincerely, Broad Ripple Design Associates, LLC �o�O �TZ o S �G\ST 9 (i00.0.00000 re•■■•■• 1.-- 00033126 STATE OF i NOfANP James R. Stutzman, AIA, CSI, NCARB President ENV MN di iii li 1111 a iiiiii Illustration No. 2 Illustration No. 3 4 Illustration No. 1