20070621081512.pdfDATE: June 21, 2007
City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
TO: Shawn Leiser
Fax 206-533-6038
FROM: Jenny Readwin, Plans Exmi
RE: Plan Check ## 2006-1384
Project: Walnut St Condo (Duplex)
Project Address: 301 Walnut St.
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) ok.
2) ok
3) ok
4)
a) South stair enclosure:
i) ok
ii) ok
iii) ok
b) ok
c) ok
d) Elevator shaft:
i) ok
ii) 6121107 Show 60 minute rated door at the lower floor like what is shown on the main floor.
Provide manufacturer's specifications for the specific elevator to be installed. If the elevator is
not provided with minimum 1 -hour fire rated hoistway doors at each opening, self-closing 1 -
hour fire rated doors are required at each wall opening in the elevator shaft to maintain the
required shaft rating.
e) 6/21107 This information can not be deferred. Please show location of equipment room. You
should talk to Labor and Industries about elevator equipment room requirements now so you can
design it per their requirements to avoid future location problems. This all needs to be shown on
the plans. Show the location of the elevator equipment room on the floor plans. Ventilation (supply
and exhaust) will be required to maintain the required operating temperature specified in the
manufacturer's information. Show the location of supply and exhaust air. If penetrations are made
in the 1 -hour rated assemblies, shown how the fire rated assembly will be maintained, such as with
gypsum lined joist bays, shafts, etc.
5) ok
6) ok
7) ok
8) ok
9) ok
10) 6/2I/07See attached additional Comments. See attached structural comments from city consultant.
Respond to each item in writing.
Eagle Eye Consulting Engineers, P.S.
PO Sox 523
Olalla, WA 98359
hoytjeter@centurytel.net
360 874 0562 UO
Fax 360 874 0591
To, Theresa Umbaugh
121 5th Avenue N
Edmonds, WA 98020
Re: Gallaugher Duplex June 1, 2007
301 Walnixt Street
Edmonds, WA 98020
Plan Review # 2006-1384 EECE # EDM 07-02 (2)
Second comment letter
Structure
Area S.F.
Lower floor
674 -
Main floor
1620
Upper floor
1620
Total
3914
Garage
571
Total
4485
eck Upper floor
50
rand total
4535
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 07-02 (2)
Gallaugher Duplex (2006-1384)
STRUCTURAL COMMENTS
Sheet S2 FOUNDATION/2� FLOOR PLAN:
1. 4. EOR please sped the required connection of the (4) 2x6 to the 5-114X11-718
PSL dropped. The drawings still does not specify the required connections for the
PSL. This should be added clearly to the drawings.
2. 5. IBC section 2305.2.5 requires blocked diaphragm to be classified as a rigid
diaphragm. Since the floor cantilever out the lateral forces are required to
transfer to the interior shear wall through the horizontal diaphragm. Please
specify the diaphragm to be completed blocked in order to transfer the required
forces. The response state the code does not requires blocked diaphragm when
using rigid analysis. The only way to justify rigid analysis is by calculating the
deflections of the diaphragm. The current adopted code only recognized blocked
diaphragm to calculate the deflections per IBC 2305.2.2. ( Also TBC 2006 has this
requirements alos) Modify drawing to state blocked diaphragm or modify analysis
accordingly.
Sheet S3 3RD FLOOR/ROOF FRAMING PLAN:
3. 7. EOR, please provide an analysis for the deckframing considering wind uplift.
IBC 1605.3.1 EOR analysis was not submitted. Submit analysis to justify.
4. 8. Shear wall schedule: EOR, please modify panel edge stud far shear wall mark B
level 1 to state 3X members are required. When nails are spaced at 2" O/C the
minimum size panel edge member shall not be less then a single 3X. TBC 2306.4.1
The code does not allow member to be over stressed even by 2% as noted in the
response. The engineer's response that he accept overstress member is not code
compliant. The city will have to accept member that are overstressed. T will not
sign off any member that is overstressed even if by a little bit. In addition the code
is very clear that a single 3X shall be used for nails spacing at 2" OIC. This also is
in the 2006 IBC. Modify drawings to state 3X member and not double 2X when
nail spacing is at 2" as required per code and modify drawings so no member or
elements are overstressed. ( Also note the 3X is required due to the nailing not the
loading as per commentary submitted in the response)
5. 10. EOR please provide analysis for the lateral loads transferred through the
horizontal diaphragm to the interior shear wall B on the lower floor. Note the
main floor diaphragm is unblocked and this force is required to be added The
load path is required to transfer this lateral force. Base off the submitted analysis
Page 3 of 3
EECE#: EDM 07-02 (2)
Gallaugher Duplex (2006-1384)
an unblocked diaphragm will not transfer this force. Please modem accordingly.
IBC table 2306.3.1 See comment 2 above.
Additional corrections may be required following receipt of corrections and
additional information as requested.
Your pians 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
(360) 874-0562 between 8A0 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
By:
Hoyt Jeter, P.E.
President