20061122112745.pdfC) City of Edmonds
t'01
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
` BUILDING DIVISION
�sr 1890 (425) 771-0220
DATE: November 22, 2006
TO: Janette Ronquillo
8817 207" P1 SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
FROM: Jenny Readwin, Plans Exa i
RE: Plan Check 4 2006-1193
Project: New SFR
Project Address: 761 Daley 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) Note garage/dwelling separation on plans. Minimum %2" sheetrock required on garage side of
wall and 518" type X on the ceiling when there is habitable space above and minimum 20 minute
rated or 13/8" solid core door.
2) The code requires a landing on each side of a door. Provide exterior landings on the media room
doors or replace with windows.
3) Show size and location of attic 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 required.
Provide footing drain detail on foundation sections complying with R405.1 and show required
drain locations on the foundation plan.
5) It appears that there will be a site built shower. Provide show pan detail showing slope, drain,
etc.
6) 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
360 874 0562
Fax 360 874 0591
To: Marie Harrison
121 5th Avenue
Edmonds, WA 98020
Re: Ronquillo Residence
761 Daley Street
Edmonds, WA 98020
Plan Review # 2006-1193
stru&ury
Staled Area
-E
First floor
1968
Second floor
2333
Total
4298
Garage
457
Total
4755
Outdoor room patio
175
Entry Porch
53
Deck Upper Level
36
Grand total
5019
November 7, 2006:
EECE # EDM 06-60
RECEIVE:L)
N 0 V - 8 2006
BUILDING DEPT.
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 06-60
Ronquillo Residence
STRUCTURAL COMMENTS
General
1. The design analysis used a least horizontal width of 36 feet but it appears the least
width shall be 39'11". How was the 36 feet determined? Please revise accordingly
or clarify how the 36' was determined. IBC figure 1609.2.1 footnote 10
Sheet A5 UPPER LEVEL FLLOR PLAN:
2. Please provide detail for the support of the guardrail at the deck off the master
bedroom to resist the code required forces. IBC 1607.7.1
Sheet A6 FOUNDATION PLAN AND DETAILS:
3. Please provide calculations for the 4x10 beam supporting the joist shown.
Sheet A7 FRAMING PLAN AND DETAILS:
4. Shear wall schedule: Please modify note 14 to state only single 3X members or
submit an analysis to justify (2) 2X nailed together. IBC 2306.4.1 footnote i.
5. Engineer of Record (EOR) please specify the required connection required for the
beam to the post. The drawing states to use Simpson HH connections to the post
but this will not support the vertical loads. HH header hangers are used when studs
are not provided. The beams forces will not be resisted per Simpson catalog page
166. Note 3 states to use this. The maximum force HH4 can support vertically is
1195 pounds and HH6 is 1595 pounds.
6. EOR, please clarify what is considered significant loaded beams as noted in
footnote 3. How is this to be determined by the contractor/builder? It is not clear
where this shall be used.
7. Provide an analysis for the post to support the glu-lam beam. It was designed
spanning simple supported span of 6 feet and has a mark_ 24F -V4 so must be 3
separate beams. Modify drawings clearly to show the required support of these
beams. A single 4X6 will not work to support these beams. If you elect to run the
glu-lam beams continuously then the allowable bending stress at the top lam must
be used as 1850 and not 2400 psi. Alternatively, modify call out to state 24F -V8
and provide details for the support.
Page 3 of 4
EECE#: EDM 06-60
Ronquillo Residence
8. EOR, please provide a lateral analysis for three side lateral supported diaphragm.
The drawings state solid block of the garage but additional lateral forces are
required to be added to the end walls to resist the lateral forces do to rotations and
must be added to the shear wall. I was unable to determine from the analysis has
this additional forces was accounted for. Please clarify or modify analysis
accordingly. IBC 2305.2.5 ASCE 9.5.5.5
9. EOR, please specify the required collector element between shear wall mark W6 at
the opening in the diaphragm. Nothing is specified to collect the diaphragm forces
into these walls.
10. EOR, please specify the required post to support the beam mark 5 at the.blocked
diaphragm. Please also specify the required positive connections.
11. EOR, please provide a detail on the drawing for the framing of the guard rails at
the balcony. This is required to resist a force of 200 pounds applied in any
direction. Also, the infill shall be design to resist 50 psf. Please add details for this
area.
Sheet A8 FRAMING PLAN AND DETAILS:
12. EOR, please specify the required connection of the girder truss to the multi stud
columns.
13. EOR, please specify the required connection of the glu-lam beam to the multi studs
columns.
14. EOR, please clarify what is considered significant loaded beams as noted in
footnote 3. How is this to be determined by the contractor/builder? It is not clear
where this shall be used or how the contractor is to determine this.
15. EOR, it is not clear what the vertical support is for the beam mark 2 intersecting
with beam 3. Please provide a detail at this location to show how the required-
force
equiredforce will be transferred.
16. EOR, please specify the required post to use to support beam mark 3. It appears
based off a check of analysis that the note 1 will not support the loads.
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,
clarifications or additional corrections may be required subsequent to the Building
Department plan review when comments are received from the other concerned
departments.
Page 4 of 4
EECE#: EDM 06-60
Ronquillo Residence
Should you have any inquiries regarding this letter, please contact Hoyt Jeter at
(360) 874-0562 between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
By:
Hoyt Jeter, P.E.
President