Complying with the Notice Of Intent (NOI)

The Notice of Intent to disturb ground surface is an obligation for all construction sites of residential and commercial buildings. Starting April 1st, 2007, there are new procedures and filing requirements in place for complying with these obligations on construction projects. I encourage you to read the full explanation of the process and the new changes in a recent post I made on this site called "Soil & Sediment Control and Stormwater Changes".

For projects that will disturb a TOTAL area that is less than 1 acre in size, the control practices are required to be used, including
- Some form of perimeter control (silt fence, as an example)
- Means of keeping soil from leaving site on vehicle tires
- Onsite inlet protection
- Stockpile Protection

For projects that will disturb 1 acre or more throughout the life of the project, there are additional requirements including the filing of a Notice Of Intent (NOI). A plan summary is required to be submitted along with the NOI submittal for all commercial buildings.

At this time, I am recommending all of our builder clients become familiar with this process and involve the Owner's directly in this process on new projects and NOT rely on Halberg Engineering to complete this obligation. The reason is that the Owner / Owner's Agent is going to be required to "monitor and maintain the erosion control measures on the site as per the plan. This includes documenting in a log book, a record of the owner/owner's agent site inspections and maintenance events."

This obligation for site erosion control lies with the Owner and, if delegated to others, needs to be delegated to someone with frequent access to the site and adequate responsibility to control the conditions on the site. The builder seems to be in the obvious situation to best provide this service for the Owner.

Is it something that we could consider just one more legislative hoop to jump through?
Yes.
Is it something that could provide some real benefit to the owner and to our natural resources?
I really believe so.

Most of us might agree that it is difficult to legislate reason and responsibility, but the motives for this legislation appear to be necessary due to many violations of reason in this area in many past projects.

Halberg Engineering can provide assistance in understanding and complying with these requirements. If you have questions after reviewing the information available here, please let us know how we can help!

Soil & Sediment Control and Stormwater Changes

The following letter was received by Aaron Halberg, P.E. on March 30th via e-mail from Randy Baldwin, Director, Integrated Services for the Safety & Buildings Division of the Wisconsin Department of Commerce along with his apology for the late notice due to many last minute decisions:

APRIL 1 SOIL & SEDIMENT CONTROL AND STORMWATER CHANGES

Revisions to the Commerce erosion control and post construction storm water rules become effective on April 1, 2007. The changes to the mandated measures, additional performance requirements and processes are not enough of a change to cause a tremendous shock to Wisconsin’s construction industry, but the heightened awareness and subtle changes may create a tremor.

First of all, what’s changing? Here is a list of what will be different for erosion and sediment control in Wisconsin on April 1, 2007.

* A $25.00 fee must be included with the submittal of an electronic NOI (Notice of Intent) for a commercial building site where one acre or more surface area will be disturbed during construction.

* A $325.00 fee for a paper submittal of an NOI and plan summary. The paper submittal of an NOI and erosion and sediment control plan summary may be necessary when the online NOI process does not match your design methodology..

* NOI submittals to Commerce for commercial buildings will not be accepted without a plan summary. This plan summary will state what methods are included in the erosion and sediment control plan for meetings the performance requirements of Comm 60.

There are three options for this plan summary.
1) The first method is a completed soil loss analysis Excel spreadsheet that creates an answer that complies with the soil loss requirements in Comm 60. This soil loss standard is met by altering the time the site is open or by applying practices to the site.
2) The second method is by complying with the time periods listed in the appendix tables A-60.20-1 and -2.
3) The third method includes the submission of an erosion control plan summary that meets the 80% reduction in sediment contained in runoff from the construction site.

* All buildings constructed in Wisconsin that are under Commerce authority, including one- and two-family dwellings, are required to have an erosion and sediment control plan on site. The plan must meet the requirements of s. Comm 21.125 (3) or s. Comm 60.20(3), Wis. Adm. Code. In most cases, mandated practices create a compliant small site of less than one acre disturbed area.

* All building sites of less than one acre disturbed area must have the mandated practices implemented during the construction period The mandated practices include: some form of perimeter control, a means to keep soil from leaving the site on vehicle tires and through dewatering activities, onsite inlet protection, and stockpile protection.

April 1 Notice of Intent Changes Implementation—FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDING SITES

Information, answers to questions, on line educational opportunities for these subjects, etc. can be found on http://www.commerce.state.wi.us/SB/SB-SoilErosionControlProgram.html

On Friday March 30 at 4:00 PM the current web submittal for Notice of Intents will be shut down for conversion to the new application.

After that time, if you want to file an NOI under the pre-April 1 code you must send in the paper Form Number10376 found on our web site at the link below and have the mailing postmarked March 31, 2007 or earlier. http://www.commerce.state.wi.us/SB/SB-DivForms.html#commercial

On Monday April 2 the new version of the Notice of Intent/Plan Data Summary will be activated for web submittal. Click on Number 3 at the link below. http://commerce.wi.gov/SB/SB-DivPlanRevSchedLaunch.html


NOTICE OF INTENT-SOIL EROSION CONTROL PLAN REVIEW PROCESS

Beginning April 1, 2007

The designer/Submitter of the NOI will evaluate the site conditions, determine solutions and prepare a plan to satisfy erosion-and sediment control code requirements

The designer/submitter of NOI will double check the plan using the approved methods from
the code appendix, or the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) spreadsheet found on the Safety & Building website and incorporated in the online submittal, or RUSLE 2 program developed by the USDA or some other method acceptable by the department.

Submit via Mandatory online entry of the plan summary and NOI request except for site specific plans that do not comply with the approved methodologies in the code appendix, or the RUSLE spreadsheet, or RUSLE 2.
If the RUSLE method is chosen the submitter will have to complete the spreadsheet on line. The results will be validated and the submittal will not be allowed to be completed until the summary indicates a complying soil loss per acre.

(If your plan is based on a method other than the approved methodologies in the code appendix, or the RUSLE spreadsheet, or RUSLE 2, plan submittal must be done by paper. This paper submittal requirement is also for designs where the overall soil loss is determined using the RUSLE spread sheet for various parts of a site. The fee is the $25 NOI fee +$200 miscellaneous review fee + $100 submittal fee. Submit to our Madison office only. Plans will be assigned upon receipt to the next available opening).

$25 online payment can be made via credit card, or request by the submitter to be invoiced. For the first few weeks in April the credit card functionality will not be ready. Instead, the Submitter of the NOI will be invoiced for the $25. Payment is expected within 30 days of receiving the invoice.

Submitter agrees to self certify compliance (remember to check the box on the web screen first, then submit).

The plan methodology summary and site information is accepted into our database. The data is auto filled into an electronic calculator that determines whether or not the plan meets the acceptable soil loss per acre standard.

An NOI acknowledgement letter/plan summary approval is emailed to the Submitter of NOI and other entered customers for which email addresses were provided.

The NOI acknowledgement /plan summary approval letter is printed and signed by the OWNER . The owner or owner’s agent attaches a copy of the signed NOI acknowledgement letter to the prepared erosion-sediment control plan and maintains those on the building site.

The owner/owner’s agent implements and maintains the Erosion and Sediment Control plan on the site. The owner/owner’s agent monitors and maintains the erosion control measures on the site as per the plan. This includes documenting in a log book, a record of the owner/owner’s agent site inspections and maintenance events. This log book is kept on the building site and available for inspection.

Inspectors make periodic site visits to monitor erosion-sediment control compliance.

Acknowledged NOI’s will be displayed on the web in the “Search Commerce Records” database by Fall 2007.

At this time, submitters have a choice to submit the NOI’s and plan summary to the Department of Commerce or to Commercial Building Certified Municipalities for projects within their jurisdiction, unless that municipality chooses to waive the submittal to Commerce.
Inspection is the responsibility of the Certified Municipality. The municipality may also require other local reviews and permits.

Commercial Building Delegated Agents are not mentioned in Comm 60 at this time. In the future, Commerce will work with municipalities for the delegation of erosion and sediment control & post construction storm work.

Where plumbing systems are utilized for stormwater management, plumbing plans are required to be submitted to Commerce or to a Plumbing Agent Municipality in accordance with Tables 82.20 -1 & 2. If the plans include subsurface infiltration serving stormwater dispersal, the plans must be submitted to Commerce or, if, within their boundaries, to the City of Eau Claire, Janesville, Madison, Sheboygan.

New Soil Erosion Rules

There are new Soil Erosion & Sediment Control Rules for the State of Wisconsin which go into effect April 1, 2007. To help educate builders and those associated with commercial and residential building projects get up to speed on this topic, the Wisconsin Builders Association and the Wisconsin Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc. are sponsoring training workshops around the state.

For $60 ($30 to members) the 3.5 hour workshop will share information on Erosion Prevention, Sediment Control, De-watering, Inspections, Documentation, Final Stabilization and a Q&A Session. Workshops will be held from 1pm to 4:30pm in the following cities:

Wausau - March 22

Madison - March 27

Rice Lake - April 3

LaCrosse - April 5

Fond du Lac - April 11

Green Bay - April 26

As the promotional brochure and registration form (available online) reads:

"DID YOU KNOW...These rules establish performance standards for practices to address erosion and sediment control on sites where land-disturbing construction activity is to occur, regardless of the size of the site, and these rules update both the WI Uniform Dwelling Code and the WI Commercial Building Code?

AND DID YOU KNOW...These rules further establish monitoring and maintenance provision for erosion and sediment control?

NO?

Then you need to attend this brief afternoon workshop to learn the new requirements."

Additional information from the Safety & Building Division on the topic of Soil Erosion Control is available on their website at http://commerce.wi.gov/SB/SB-SoilErosionControlProgram.html

Horizontal Siding for Post Frame

Horizontal siding is often fastened over vertical studs in conventional wood frame buildings, so horizontal 2x4 or 2x6 girts used instead of studs on post frame buildings presents a bit of a dilemma... or is it an opportunity? Recommendations for new construction include the creation of a drainage plane behind the siding by using a housewrap over the structure and vertical air channels under the siding (picture at left).

To create the vertical air channels, both conventional wood frame and post frame buildings require vertical members behind the siding. This moisture drainage plane assists with more than just exterior moisture as the membrane is designed to allow moisture out of the wall to atmosphere.

Vertical nailing members will be required at a spacing no greater than the maximum fastener spacing required for the siding. For horizontal vinyl siding, installation specifications recommend 16" o/c fastener spacing and for Fiber Cement siding (such as HardiPlank), 24" o/c fastener spacing is recommended. By attaching vertical members to horizontal girt members, Post Frame wall will have less energy loss through conductivity than an equivalently insulated conventional wood frame wall (since, as shown in the picture, vertical studs would be lined up with vertical strips).

Keep in mind that when horizontal lap siding is used instead of light gauge metal wall panels, a separate method for resisting lateral loads will still be required, such as a layer of structural sheathing or adequately designed diagonal bracing. Also, Post Frame vertical strips spanning from girt to girt should be larger than the 1/2" x 2" strips shown above.

If this topic is of interest to you, or if you have comments to share with others, please share your comments using the link below.

AWC online calculators

The American Wood Council has made a couple handy calculators available for free online. The span calculator will tell you what size and species will satisfy a given load and span conditions or you can have it determine the the maximum span a given size, species, and load condition can achieve. Their most recent calculator is a connection load calculator that can specify the allowable capacity for bolts, screws, nails, and lags. This calculator is based on the latest data available in the 2005 edition of the NDS, which is adopted in the 2006 IBC.

Again, these are handy tools which I encourage you to explore and use. If you have questions about the factors that the provided help cannot answer, contact your favorite design professional for assistance!

NFBA Expo summary online

If you missed it, or if you didn't have time to absorb it all while you were there (like me), the NFBA Expo Exhibitor Showcase and Presentation materials are available Online. There was some great material presented at the show. I reviewed some of these in a prior post on my blog and will review some others soon, including my presentation on Truss Bracing according to the BCSI documents.

I encourage you to keep on learning!

Mezzanine and Egress - Code Questions

In a series of discussions on the building code, I'd like to start today with some thoughts on the building code in general and also about accessibility... specifically for Mezzanines and for accessible egress.

It is always interesting when one of my clients calls out of the blue with a question for me. I never know where the discussion will lead. Helping find the answers to these questions is one of my favorite parts of this job. It can be overwhelming at times, but I am thankful that I can help in this area, so please keep them coming and I'll keep on learning right along with you. I believe we need to keep learning every day and take an interest in the well-being of others. Your questions give me the opportunity to do both!

Thoughts on the Building Code
The building code identifies minimum requirements and we're always free to exceed these requirements in terms of safety, accessibility, and Structural Integrity. We often want to know what the Minimum Requirements are since, except for lottery winners, the project owners typically have limited resources at their disposal.

The building code dictates what we must do in certain areas of our construction projects, and we offset these requirements by building smaller or spending more to provide the dictated features, such as firewalls, sprinklers, and accessibility. In certain situations where expectations of the building code requirements are not clear up front, the code requirements may halt the project as financially infeasible.

Despite the "Thou shalt..." tone, the building code does have a benefit for the safety of the public in mind. We actually heard of commercial roof collapses during the recent snow falls in the Wisconsin... mostly flat roofs as far as I've heard (none of your projects, I'm sure). But in 2006 we saw the collapse of an ice arena in Germany claim 11 lives and 67 lives were lost in the collapse of a Polish trade hall, so we do have cause to say that some measure of rational design is required to insure the safety of the public.

Accessible Mezzanines
Are mezzanines required to be accessible to the wheelchair bound? I sure didn't think so earlier today. Small mezzanines have certainly been approved without an elevator or accessible ramps, but the Wisconsin Commercial Building Code requires all elements of a our commercial buildings to be accessible, with some exceptions.

The exception for non-accessible mezzanines is in Comm 62.1104(4)(b), and states that floors above and below accessible levels with an aggregate area of not more than 3,000 sq. ft. do not require an accessible route to them. In other words, if your mezzanine will be over 3,000 sq. ft., reason for concern, but the cause may not be lost.

Since code questions are typically more simple than the answers: There are some provisions in Comm 62.1003(2)(h) and (i) which identify some general exceptions to accessibility requirements which allow Limited access spaces (h) and Equipment Maintenance and Repair areas (i) not to be accessible. These areas are viewed by the code as areas where work could not reasonably be performed by a person in a wheelchair and so it negates the requirement for an accessible route to them.

Accessible Means of Egress
The building code requires at least one accessible entrance to commercial buildings, but two accessible egresses. It means we may have a door from a building that could be used during emergency as an accessible egress (when the building's on fire) with the assistance of others which would not be an accessible entrance during normal operation of the building.

The accessible entrance is viewed as an equal access provision to provide equal access opportunity in public buildings. The accessible egress is a life safety issue that allows for the fact that during an emergency (fire, for example), the entrance used to gain access to the building may be blocked by the situation causing the emergency. It is assumed that egress may be accomplished by people working together in the event of getting a wheelchair down a flight of steps during an emergency as long as provisions are made for the person in a wheelchair to have access to communication for assistance from a relatively safe and secure location.

These concepts are covered in the code by the terms "Areas of Refuge" (IBC 1003.2.13.5) and "Exterior Areas for Assisted Rescue" (IBC 1003.2.13.7). In building projects without complete accessibility going into and out of the building, remember to consider the egress requirements during emergency situations. It is not enough to say that "nobody in a wheelchair works here and wouldn't have a reason to come here". Public buildings must not be designed with an inherently dangerous situation based on the assumptions of what level of physical ability people must possess before they use that building. That is a type of discrimination we cannot tolerate.

Frame Building Expo Summary

I attended the 2007 Frame Building Expo last week in Indianapolis. It is hard to absorb all of the information and networking opportunities available at such an event, but I'd like to share some of my highlights as they affect the projects for my business and my clients in the months and years ahead.

On the first day, Prof. Gary Anderson, P.E., PhD from South Dakota State University presented a thorough discussion of the effect that soil backfill has on the stiffness of our embedded post buildings. Gary presented a lot of technical information on how the soil stiffness can be modeled more precisely. If it helps present a visual picture, I typically model the soil for embedded posts as a whole bunch of springs resisting lateral movement of the post with the stiffness of the springs getting higher the further below grade you go. Gary's presentation was aimed at more accurate predictions of spring stiffness modeling in various soil embedment conditions.

Because this whole analysis can affect the amount of stress in the columns and the location of the maximum stress, the modeling that Gary presented is quite important to the basic question of "What size columns do I need?" and it's one reason I have been reluctant to assist others in developing column sizing charts... there are many variables which can have a large impact on the calculated stresses. This is just one of those variables (diaphragm stiffness is another!)

On Thursday, Prof. David Bohnhoff from the University of Wisconsin gave a presentation on Post Frame Foundation Options. He presented the basic factors of deciding whether or not to embed the posts in the ground, a decision that seems to be trending toward "not to embed" in my opinion. He discussed the options in terms of structural considerations, construction impacts, and other issues to consider.

Dave also presented some great information on Grade Beam Foundations, or Frost-Protected Shallow Foundations (FPSF). These foundations are not designed to extend to frost depth but to be protected from the effects of Frost by other means. You need three things for frost heave 1) Water, 2) Freezing Temperatures, and 3) Soils conducive to ice lense formation. Removing one or more of these factors from the soil beneath the footings reduces the frost heave potential. Dave ended his presentation with a discussion of Thermal Envelope Requirements and, as with all of his presentations, great graphical displays accompanied all of the information. (Dave has a wealth of great Post Frame information on his website.)

Later on Thurday, Charles Carter of the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) discussed Steel Panel Braced Frames which will be discussed in a soon to be published design guide (#20) by the AISC. These strong shear wall segments could serve as a custom made alternative to products such as the Simpson Strong Wall system. These could lend themselves to use in Post Frame projects where we have a lot of endwall forces to transfer from roof to foundation with very little endwall to do it in, such as Airplane Hangars or any storage buildings with large endwall openings.

For additional summary information from the Expo, including the many exhibitors with popular and new products, you should check out the Rural Builder Buzz blog by Scott Tappa. He gets around and knows a lot about many issues in the industry that I don't have the time to keep up with.

In future posts at Structural Integrity, I will try to go into more detail about these engineering topics presented here as well as others that I think are relevant. I'll also try to use this forum to answer some of the questions that come up from clients as a way to share information with more people who may have similar questions. I hope you find this useful.

Have a great day!

Stepping out...

There's something to be said for getting away from the daily routine and immersing yourself in something different for a little time of renewal. The 3 day National Frame Building Expo wrapped up in Indianapolis this morning and although I am looking forward to returning home and seeing my family again, I am taking home some new ideas and some new energy for the construction season ahead.

It was great to reconnect with old friends and meet some new friends. Many of my clients were at the Expo with the opportunity to see the same vendor displays and educational seminars, although we all had our own nuggets to take away from the event. Growth opportunities for the needs of each individual abound at these events for those who are willing to find them.

One of the greatest surprises was learning a little about WebLogging from my friend (and fellow Wisconsin Alumnus) Scott Tappa at the Rural Building News booth. Scott's got a great flair for sharing information and I have always enjoyed his ability to educate me on topics from BigTen Athletics to the latest Building Trends. Thanks to Scott's impromptu lesson on Blogging a couple hours ago, here I sit in a hotel lobby in Indianapolis composing my first Blog Post on my brand new Blogspot!

Scott is so good on the computer that I predict he will find this web site before I can even tell him I have it up and running, so "Thanks, Scott!" for sharing the time with me and being a true ambassador for the Post Frame industry. The exchange of knowledge and ideas is the reason we get together at these conventions and Scott embodies that ability better than most people I know.

It's the little serendipities of life that often bring the largest joys and impacts in our lives!

God Bless America