Laserfiche WebLink
City of Edmonds <br />PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS <br />BUILDING DIVISION <br />(425) 771-0220 <br />DATE: October 4, 2017 <br />TO: Randy Steenerson <br />rsteener(2hotmail. com <br />FROM: Chuck Miller, Plans Examiner <br />RE: Plan Check: BLD2017-0993 - post -permit issuance site visit <br />Project Address: 22814 100th Avenue W <br />Project: Amata Thai restaurant <br />Scope: Determination of viability in maintaining existing Type I hood/components <br />and installation for continued use. <br />The initial proposal under the permit submittal was to maintain the use of the existing Type I hood <br />utilized by the former tenant as part of other work to be done as a tenant improvement. The <br />considerations given by the City of Edmonds Building Division for approving the proposal were as <br />follows: <br />The initial installation of the Type I hood was permitted and approved by the Building <br />Division/Fire Department. <br />The type of cooking appliances (presumably `heavy-duty' cooking appliances — see <br />International Mechanical Code (IMC) 507.5 and Chapter 2) were not indicated on the plans <br />as being changed. <br />Any changes to the placement of the cooking appliances (to accommodate the desires of <br />the cook/chef, type of food to be prepared, etc.) that would affect the placement/type of the <br />hood suppression nozzles would be addressed under a separate permit required for all fire <br />suppression system installations and alterations. <br />The greatest concern that came to light during the review of the proposed work was of the `existing' <br />wall construction behind the area of the cooking appliances and the Type I hood serving them. The <br />presence of combustible wall framing requires specific measures to be taken to meet the `clearance <br />to combustibles' requirements of 2015 IMC 507.2.6, 1982/1985 Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC) <br />Section 2003(d), and National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 96 — Standard for Ventilation <br />Control and Fire Protection of Commercial Cooking Operations. The requirements to resolve those <br />concerns were incorporated into the submitted plans and approved. <br />Subsequent discussions specifically regarding the `existing' Type I hood brought new concerns to <br />light. After making a visit to the project site (presumably at the request of the owner/owner's <br />representative) a mechanical systems professional with experience in the installation of Type I <br />hoods and their requirements contacted the Building Division to address the following: <br />