20060925163305.pdfo� rno City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
FS`t is9� (425)771-0220
DATE: September 25, 2006
TO: Tom Leren
Tom@lerendesign.com
FROM: Jenny Readwin, Plans Ex ne
RE: Plan Check # 2006-0745
Project: Mustach SFR
Project Address: 8208 182"' PL SW
During re -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) Please also add this information to the site plan. Provide top and bottom wall elevations for all
proposed retaining walls at the exterior stairs.
2) ok
3) ok
4) ok
5) ok
6) Jaime Hawkins in Engineering to respond. Garage door is shown for lower floor "wood shop"
but no driveway access is proposed on the site plan. Contact Engineering Department to see if a
second access would be permissible. If so show proposed driveway on the site plan and if not,
then door needs to be reduced in size so that a vehicle would not be about to pass through (i.e.
double man door).
7) See attached additional comments. See attached structural comments from city consultant.
Respond to each 'item in writing.
Eagle Eye Consulting Engineers, P.S.
PO Box 523
Olalla, WA 98359
hoytjeter@centurytel.net
253 857 41 51
Fax 253 857 5759
To: JoAnne Zulauf
City of Edmonds
Edmonds, WA 98020
Re: Mustach Residence
8208 182nd Place SW
Edmonds, WA 98020
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Plan Review # 2006-0745 EECE # EDM 06-35 (2)
Second Comment letter
Structure
Stated Area
S.F.
Basement
1116
First floor
2207
Second floor
1999
Total
5322
Garage
1633
Total
6955
Peck
211
rand total
7166
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 3
EECE#: EDM 06-35
2006-0745
STRUCTURAL COMMENTS
Sheet 10 Details
Detail JI0 EOR please speck the required spacing of the vertical post far the
deck Sheet 5 shows this deck off the computer hallway. This detail is required to
resist a force of 200 pounds applied in any direction and the infill must resist a
force of 50 psf Also per check analysis it appears this connection will not support
this force as details. Please submit analysis to justify. Table R301.5 Per the
engineer response this shall be addressed by the architect. As detail the connection
and post will not resist the code required forces. Please submit analysis to justify
details as shown.
Sheet S 1
2. 2. Please submit design analysis for the site retaining wall. There was not any in
the submitted analysis only the restrained wall design. Per check analysis for the
10 foot high wall it appears the reinforcement will not resist the design force as
specified on the drawings. Please submit design analysis for all walls over 4 feet
high as detailed on this sheet IBC 1808. Design has been submitted for the site
retaining wall but the detail does not match analysis. For example the 5 feet wall
required a minimum of 12" over the toe but as detail the height of soil over the toe
is only 8". The sliding resisting factor was 1.52 with a soil of 12" above the toe.
Modify analysis to show a 1.5 safety factor with 8" and not 12 above the toe. IBC
1808. This only occurs for the 5 foot wall.
3. Please note the vertical reinforcement for the FWS wall shall have a standard 90
degree hook.
Sheet S2
4. EOR please specify the required post size to support the 7X11-7/8 PSL at the stair.
Also please specify the required post to beam connections at this location. IBC
2304.9.7 The response state post have been specified but I was unable to find
where this was called out on the drawings. Please add this information to the
drawings or clarify where this information is clearly specified.
5. EOR it appears the HDR(x) shall be a 4x10 per check analysis. But the drawings
imply 4X6. Submit analysis to justify this beam. ( Note this is the beam close to the
stairs)
Additional corrections may be required following receipt of corrections and
additional information as requested.
Page 3 of 3
EECE#: EDM 06-35
2006-0745
Your plans are being reviewed concurrently with the Building Department, Fire
Department, Zoning Department and Public Works Engineering. Changes,
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 5:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
By:
Hoyt Jeter, P.E.
President