Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
20070810154819.pdf
or EDS City of Edmonds PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS BUILDING DIVISION �Slr. 3 g9° (425) 771-0220 DATE: August 10, 2007 TO: Valerie Sargent FAX: 206-349-7005 FROM: Ann Bullis, Assistant Building Official RE: Plan Check #2007-0685, 2007-0331 Project: Point Edwards Building 10 Shoring and Grading Project Address: 50 Pine Street During review of the above noted project, it was found that the following items still need to be addressed. Please respond in writing to each item and include the location(s) of the changes to the plans/documents, and cloud the changes made. Please resubmit plans/documents and written comments to Marie Harrison, Senior Permit Coordinator. 1. See attached comments from the City's Consultant. 2. During our consultant's review of the plans for the main building, it was found that there are possible allowable area and type of construction issues that must be addressed and could affect the overall building and thus the grading and shoring. Please see the attached e-mails from the consultant and provide a code analysis to justify your design addressing the issues he raises. The intent is to insure that general building bulk standards will not affect the proposed shoring and grading design. 3. Coordinate with architect that the Area of Safe Dispersal meets IBC 1023.6 exception (a thru e). 4. Provide structural details and calculations for the site retaining walls, and cross reference the details on the site/civil plans. 5. Special inspections are required for the Shoring and Grading as follows: a. By the Geotechnical Engineer of Record i. Excavation, grading and site preparation ii. Shoring installation and monitoring, including placement of concrete iii. Soil bearing verification iv. Placement of fill and compaction v. Retaining wall construction, including drainage vi. General site monitoring vii. Final special inspection letter Complete the enclosed Special Inspection and Testing Agreements, have the owner, general contractor and special inspector sign the forms and return for Building Official approval prior to permit issuance. July 22, 2007 Ann Bullis, Plan Reviewer and Assistant Code Official Development Services Department 121 5th Avenue North, Second Floor Edmonds, Washington 98020 Dear Ann Bullis: This is a plan review on the SHORING PLANS for the: Project Name: Port Edwards Condominium Building " 10; Value: $141,500.00 Plan Review N2-.1118-307 (Your Plan Check Numbers are 2007-0686) Codes: '06 IBC Chapters 14, 16, 17, and 18, & ASCE 7-05 Chap. 5, & Secs. 9.7 & 9.14.7.2 PREFACE: This letter -report contains various comments on the submitted plans for potential changes to the design Standards in the Codes indicated above... In each comment, I have specified a general area of concern along with specific locations on the plans and Code -specific Sections where provisions are found. I assume that the designers will have read the entire Code provisions rather than my having to duplicate it in the letter. Unless specified otherwise, references are to the 2006 IBC with '07 WA State Amendments & specifically identified ones from ASCE 7-05. Even though this letter -report is addressed to you as advisory recommendations in case you have alternate provisions, the designers of record need to directly address and resolve the issues. Generally, changes will be required to plans andfor specifications. If, after the architects or engineers dispute my point or have an alternate way of complying with it; they should provide both of us written responses addressing each disputed comment. They should indicate what they intend to do about potential discrepancies and where solutions will be found on revised specifications, plans, change orders or otherwise. They should also provide a cloud around changes. That way, you and I will be able do a final review in an efficient, expedient manner. Grading and Shoring Issues General Site and Specific Comments 1. The shefing plans speeify that the 2003 'PC iS the deSigR GO& ef FeGGFd. URIGGS, yew have n them speGial peFFniSSIOR tQ U68 sheuld be changed to the 2006 19G. 2. The supplemental Geotechnical Report— Building '� 10, Project "° T-4893 referenced on Sheet SH1.0 complies with the minimum requirements of Section 1802 including the seismic soil pressure and I could recommend it for your approval with the exception of the footing and wall drainage issues below. Sections 1802.1 and 1802.2.7 3. Drainage is required by Section 1807.4 and the soils report. However, the plans continue to show that Value Engineering has eliminated them -- see Section views on Sheet A9.0 — as in the past and I have never seen any criteria on the other 9 plans in this complex. The architect has to show how this is to be handled and coordination with the shoring system. 4. Special inspection notes/SH1.0 should also indicate: (a) The required excavation of any unsuitable soil and compaction for the new structural fill; (b) For the concrete work; and (c) For rockeries shown on Triad Assoc. Sheet 8. Sections 1704.1.1, 1704.4, & 1704.13 Ann Bullis, City of Edmonds Shoring for Building 909 Plan Review Number 1118-307 July 21, 2007 Page 2 of 2 5. The general design for the Shoring: a. Although the Soils Engineer determined that seismic earth pressure on the shoring should be 17H psf with surcharge such as shown on Sheet SH -2 for Piles Al, A2, A22, and A23 plus all of the B -B Cut Line Piles, it is not apparent that the Ground Support engineer used it in his design. This should be addressed. b. It is not clear what is being done at the Terra Associates' C -C Cut Line area to mitigate the need for shoring at that the Terra Associates brought up. This should be addressed and justification should be provided. 6. The Shoring and Rockery walls a. Since the rockeries exceed 4' in height and may have vehicle surcharge, they have to be designed for a combination of active pressure, surcharge loading, and seismic loading. Section 1621.1.2. It is possible that the Figure 2/Triad Associates' Sheet 8 is showing this, but I would need to verify it by a design and justification of that design. b. The 30" wide concrete portions around the steel piles need to resist the lateral bearing stresses with an ultimate strength of 2000 psi outlined in Section 1805.7.3, Item # 1 or Item # 2, "controlled low -strength material". Note 21SH1.0 specifies it is to be "Controlled - Density -Fill", which I am assuming is supposed to be the specified material. PCA's Engineering Bulletin on the "Design and Control of Concrete Materials" seems to address what the plans refer to, but it normally reaches anywhere between 100 to 1200 psi strength, so some technical parameters have to be placed on the material so that it reaches the 2,500 psi specified and those should be on the plans. 7. There is a note about the pressure treatment of the wood lagging, but I don't find any thing about its grade and specie of the wood in order to verify its span, nor materials used for its resistance to ground contact. Sections 106.1.1, 2301.1 and 2311.3. CLOSING As stated in the beginning of this letter, the designers should revise the plans and specifications and resubmit them with a letter explaining what they did including any rebuttal to the issues and should indicate on which sheet or detail the correction may be found. If the engineer or architect disputes call me and discuss those issues they may do so to the number on the letterhead. Thank you for the opportunity to be once more of service. An invoice for this review and subsequent recheck{s} and relevant calculation booklets will follow under separate cover. Sincerely, Jerry J. Barbera, P.E. and M. ASCE Construction Codes Consultant Page 1 of 1 Bui[is, Ann From: Jerry Barbera's Company [codes_knowledge@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 6:50 AM To: Bullis, Ann Subject: Port Edwards' Building 10 Ann, I had been planning to just complete the plan review and let it go until later, but then I remembered that I had already looked at the shoring plans and that they may have to revise that and I thought I better bring this up so that the architect can revise things if it happens that they may have to extend the shoring. The mistake they have made is not to completely extend the Type I construction into the first and second levels of Group R-2. Then they are claiming that they have a Type I garage and Type V-A Residential. But the garage only comes out to between Lines 3 and 4 and the wood construction goes down and "under' the garage construction. The only way they could do that is to ignore Section 508.2, 2003 IBC, and try to assume the building is all Type V-A and that may work. I calculated that the grade plane is slightly above Level 2 so, the lower floor of Level 1 is a "basement - see Details 21A3.2 and Sheets A4.0 and A4.1. But that part still has 5 levels of wood, which at the very least will be subject to a lot of shrinkage. May I suggest that they go back into Section 506 and make sure it can be designed completely as a Type V-A with separated uses concept and, if so, to show on the plans how they did it. One mistake they have been doing is to assume that they can have 4 times the allowable, which is not accurate when you use Eq. 5-1 and calculate it correctly, especially for the frontage which is partly blocked at the south end. In the meanwhile I will continue on the review. Sincerely, Jerry J. Barbera, P.E. Owner and President, The Codes -Knowledge CompanyTM 9258 Southeast 46th Street Mercer Island, WA 98040-4408 206-275-4498 (Voice & Fax); 206-650-6751 (Mobile) This e-mail message was created in a system provided primarily for the transaction of my company's business, The Codes -Knowledge Company-"'. This e-mail is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). It contains information that is confidential and/or legally privileged. If you believe that it has been sent to you in error, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this information is prohibited: please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message. Delivery of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privileges. 8/8/2007 Page 1 of 1 Bullis, Ann From: Jerry Barbera's Company [codes_knowledge@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 7:16 AM To: Bullis, Ann Subject: One more thing I almost forgot that the architect apparently thinks he can apply the allowable area to all floors including the top, 4th, floor, which, of course, he can't since Section 506 applies to only three levels. So, he has to prorate the allowable to be divided by four floors or multiplying 0.75 times the allowable value for one story and that will be the maximum per floor. And since he has to do separated occupancies, he has to use Section 302.3.2. Jerry M: Kim CITY OF EDMONDS 679 SPECIAL INSPECTION AND TESTING AGREEMENT The project at Vissued under building permit number requires special inspection and/or testing per IBC Chapter IT The complete list of special inspec :ons is attached to this document. BEFORE A PERMIT CAN BE ISSUED: The owner and contractor and special inspector shall complete this agreement and the attached structural test(s) and inspections schedule including the required acknowledgements. APPROVAL OF SPECIAL INSPECTORS: Each special inspector shall be approved by the Building Official prior to performing any duties or inspections. Each special inspector shall submit Statement of Qualifications to the Building Official for review. Special inspectors shall display identification when performing special inspections on site. Special inspection and testing shall meet the minimum requirements of IBC Chapter 17 and the following: A. Duties and Responsibilities of the Special Inspector 1. Observe Work The special inspector shall observe the site work for conformance with the approved (stamped) plans and specifications and applicable workmanship provisions of the IBC_ Architect or Engineer reviewed shop drawings may be used only as an aid to inspection. Special Inspections are to be performed on a continuous basis—meaning that the special inspector is on site at all times observing the work requiring special inspection. Periodic inspections, if any, must have prior approval by the City based on a separate written plan reviewed and approved by the Building Official and the engineer or architect of record. 2. Report Non -conforming Items The special inspector shall bring non -conforming items to the immediate attention of the contractor and note all such items in the daily field report. Any item not resolved in a timely manner shall be immediate cause of the special inspector to notify the Building Official of the plan deviation, error, change or omission. It shall also be the duty of the special inspector to promptly notify the engineer or architect. 3. Complete Daily Reports Each special inspector shall complete and sign both the special inspection record and the daily report form for each day's inspection. These records shall remain at the jobsite with the contractor for review by the City Building Inspector. 4. Furnish Weekly Reports The special inspector or inspection agency shall furnish the City with weekly reports of tests and inspections. The project engineer or architect, and others as designated shall also be copied on reports. Weekly reports must include the following: • Description of daily inspections and tests made with applicable locations • List of all non -conforming items • Report on status of non -conforming items (resolved or unresolved) • Itemized changes authorized by the Architect, Engineer and City if not included in non- conformance items. S. Furnish Final Construction Report The special inspector or inspection agency shall submit a final signed report to the City stating that all items requiring special inspection and testing were fulfilled and reported. And, to the best of L_VrEMPIBUILDINGISpeciallnspect2onAgreementlBC_doc 7104 his/her knowledge the project is in conformance with the approved plans and specifications, approved change orders and the applicable workmanship provisions of the IBC. Items not in conformance or unresolved items or any discrepancies in inspection coverage, (Le., missed inspections, periodic inspection when continuous inspections were required, etc.) shall be specifically itemized in this report. B. Contractor Responsibilities 1. Notify the Special Inspector It is the duty of the contractor to notify the special inspector when work is ready for special inspection. Note, the items listed on the attached schedule and as noted on the approved plans and specifications are required to have special inspections. Adequate notice shall be provided by the contractor so that the special inspector has time to become familiar with the project. 2. Provide Access to Approved Plans The contractor is responsible for providing the special inspector access to approved plans at the jobsite. 3. Retain Special Inspection Records The contractor is responsible to retain at the jobsite all special inspection records submitted by the special inspector. These records are to be provided to the City building inspector upon request. C. City of Edmonds Building Department Responsibilities l.. Approve special inspectors or inspection agencies The building department shall approve all special inspectors and special inspection requirements. 2. Monitor special inspection and approve weekly reports Work requiring special inspection and the performance of special inspectors shall be monitored by the City Building Inspector. His/Her approval must be obtained prior to placement of concrete or other similar activities in addition to that of the special inspector. 3. Issue Certificate of Occupancy The Building Official may issue a Certificate of Occupancy after all weekly special inspection reports including the final report have been submitted and accepted. D. Owner Responsibilities The project owner or the engineer or architect of record acting as the owner's agent shall fund special inspection services. E. Engineer or Architect of Record_ Responsibilities The engineer or architect of record shall include special inspection requirements on the plans and specifications. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .[have read and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of this agreement. Owner Special Inspector General Contractor City Building Official L_1TEMPIBUILDING1SpeciallnspectionAgreernentIBC_doc 7104 Date Date Date Date SPECIAL INSPECTION AND TESTING SCHEDULE Or- MOTMI D.• REINFORCEDGROUT OR Coner"r GM31ift Great Mortar Aggregate Tests Reinforcing Tests Mix Designs Reinforcing Placement Batch Plant Inspection Inspect Phwinr Cast Samples Pick-up Samples Compression Tests PRECASTIPRESTRESSED CONCRETE: r ues rntt-lets Pre 7Ens Cladding Aggrofratc 3csts Reinforcing Tests sts Tendon Te Mix Desicns Reinforcing Placement Insert Piacemcnt Concrete Hatching m Concrete Platrew Installation Insppction Cam Samples Pick-up Samples Compression Tests MASONRY: — Special Inspection Stresscs Used — Preliminary Acceptance Tests (Masonry Units_ WallPrisms) — Snbsequeru Tests [Mortar. Grout. Field Wall Prisms) — Placement Inspection of Units ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS OR OTHER TES'T'S AND INSPECTIONS: 7-�(v Jf sttabn�cp>rw,urr� wGEr4CY «SFKI, C INSP� STRUCTURAL STEEL/WELDING: — Sample andTcst (list spxif c members below) — Shop Material Identification Welding Inspmlion ❑ Shop ❑ F-tetd --UlumsonieInspection QShop ❑Fidel — Fligh-strength Bolting Inspue°n 0 Shop 0 Field O A32S ❑Aagp EIN ©X DF Metal Deck Welding inspection Reinforcing Steel Welding inspection Metal Stud Welding Inspection Concrete lastrt Welding Inspection FIREPROOFING: — placement Inspection .—.. Density Tests ____ TwckncssTests — Inspect Batching INSULATING CONCRETE: — Sample and Test — Placement Inspection __-_ Unit Weights FILL MATERIAL: _ Acceptance Tests — Placement Inspection _ Field Drnsity STRUCTURAL WOOD: Shear Wall Nailing Inspection Inspection of Glu -lam Fab_ laspection of Truss Jost Fab- - Sampk and Test Components ■► ii'u�� �j iETrl r7,t`�1 111XEW, �I-P" ®r,AM►- Formcornpktcd by_ — lL TcicpbDoc No.: uJ br*Jf 0 1 P, iA I V, j i isTAT !, i 1