20060706142300.pdfCity of Edmonds
A
�M
�0!
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
DATE: July 6, 2006
TO: Craig Reimer
Fax (425)775-8395
FROM: Jenny Readwin, Plans Examin*
RE: Plan Check # 2006-0692
Project: Eaglewood Homes SFR
Project Address: 18019 Andover St.
During review of the above noted application, it was found that the following information,
corrections, or clarifications are needed. Please redline plans or submit two (2) sets of revised
plans/documents (affected sheets only) with a written response to each of the items below to a
Permit Coordinator.
1) Reduced site plan needs to show entire lot. The West property line is not shown. Please revise.
2) Label covered porch on the site plan.
3) Show size and location of crawlspace access.
4) Specify on the elevation views the grade slope away from the building. If minimum 6" within
10' is not possible or habitable or useable space is below grade, foundation drainage is requir e- d
Provide footing drain detail on foundation sections complying with R405.1 and show required
drain locations on the foundation plan.
5) See attached structural comments from city consultant. Respond to each item in writing.
Eagle Eye Consulting Engineers, P.S.
PO Box 523
O[alla, WA 98359
hoytjeter@centurytel.net
2538574151
Fax 253 857 5759
To: Theresa Umbaugh
City of Edmonds
Edmonds, WA 98020
Re: Eaglewood
18019-Andover Street
Edmonds, WA 98020
Plan Review 4 06-269
Structure
Stated Area
S.F.
Main floor
1680
Second floor
1834
Total
3514
Garage
722
Grand total
4236
Date: June 22, 2006
EECE 9 EDM 06-31
The above referenced project is in the process of plan review for compliance with
Edmonds ordinances and applicable codes. The following comments,
deficiencies/corrections must be addressed prior to completion of plans review and
subsequent issuance of permits.
Provide revised plans and calculations along with a written response to each of the items
listed below to facilitate a shorter back -check time.
SCOPE OF REVIEW
The scope of this review is for the Structural requirements of this project.
All features were checked only to the extent allowed by the submittals provided. All
portions of this project are assumed to meet or will meet other departmental requirements,
conditions and concerns before permit approval.
Page 2 of 4
EECE EDM 06-31
Plan Review Number 06-269
STRUCTURAL COMMENTS
General
1. Design analysis used the length of shear walls that do not match the drawings.
Each individual length of wall measure shall be used. Please clearly dimension the
required length of the shear wall on the drawing to show they match or exceed the
analysis.
2. Submit horizontal diaphragm analysis. All that was in the lateral analysis was for
the shear walls. The horizontal diaphragm analysis is required to be submitted to
justify shear transfer.
3. If the shear walls meet the height to width ratio then this is tine to add up all the
length for shear resistance. But the wall appears not to meet this requirement. The
shear walls have to meet IBC table 2305.3.3. Please modify accordingly. I13C
2305.3.3
4. Please provide a key plan for the beam design. It is not clear based off the drawings
m
which beam is for which beams. For example window header at the kitchen. The
clear span is 4 feet but the drawings do not show this beam. The only beam with
this size is at the nook, and the beam exceeds this length. Please submit a key plan
to match the design analysis in order to complete the review.
Sheet 7 FOUNDATION PLAN:
5. Design analysis state holds down are required for SW-3 but none are shown on the
drawing. If using the perpendicular wall to resist the overturning forces the
drawing should show how they are going to be tied together in order to transfer the
shear force? Please either add the hold down or add details and analysis to
transfer the required shear forces.
6. Please specify the required connections of the post at the covered entry.
7. Submit analysis for the 34x34x12 footing with the forces being applied at an
eccentricity. Analysis is required for this footing to show it will support the design
loads.
8. Please specify the size of the footing shown at the den and the living room. The
footings are larger then the typical footing 24x24 as noted. All footing that is
required to be larger the size and the reinforcement should be shown on the
drawings.
Sheet 8 UPPER FLOOR FRAMING PLAN:
Page 3 of 4
EECE EDM 06-31
Plan Review Number 06-269
9. Please add detail 1/3 as called out on this sheet. There is not a detail 1 on sheet 3.
. Please add this detail in order to complete the review of the load path.
10. It appears the continuous glu-lam. beam was used and the allowable bending stress
to determine the required size was 2400 psi. This is not correct. The allowable
stress will be at the support and not at the mid -span and the allowable bending
stress is 1850. Resubmit analysis using the correct bending stress or label the beam
to be a 24F-V8.
11. Please specify the required header over SW2 at the entryway.
12. The beams in the analysis do not match the drawings. For example the span of the
glu-1am at the foyer exceeds 6.5 feet as used in the design. Please submit a key in
order to clearly cross reference the design with the drawings.
13. Please specify on the drawing the required post to beam connections.
Sheet 9 ROOF FRAMING PLAN:
14. Not all the shear wall is specified. Please specify all location of the shear walls.
15. Detail are required to be added to the drawing to show hour the shear forces will
transfer to the interior shear walls. This should show all collector elements that are
required.
16. Double studs will not support the vertical loads from the Girder Trusses. Submit
analysis to justify what is shown on the drawings. Also the required connections
should be specified.
17. Please specify the required diaphragm naing on the drawings.
Sheet 10 SECTION DETAELS: (Please note the information on this sheet appear to be per
the UBC and not the international codes as adopted by the State of Washington for
example the stair detail)
18. Nailing schedule does not match the requirement of the IBC/IRC. For example the
double studs shall be nailed with 16d nails and not I Od as called out on the
drawings. Please modify the schedule to meet the international codes and not the
LTBC. 113C table 2304.9.1 and IRC table R602.3
Additional corrections may be required following receipt of corrections and
additional information as requested.
Your plans are being reviewed concurrently with the Building Department, Fire
Department, Zoning Department and Public Works Engineering. Changes,
Page 4 of 4
EECE EDM 06-31
Plan Review Number 06-269
clarifications or additional corrections may be required subsequent to the Building
Department plan review when comments are received from the other concerned
departments.
Should you have any inquiries regarding this letter, please contact Hoyt Jeter at
(253) 857-4151 between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
By:
Hoyt Jeter, P.E.
President
M