2008-0319 Nordic Center.pdf
City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
DATE: December 5, 2008
TO: Megumi Matsumura
CDA Architects
megumim@cdaarch.com
FROM: Leif Bjorback, Assistant Building Official
RE: Plan Check: 2008-0319 Review #2
Project: Nordic Center
th
Project Address: 310 5 Ave. S.
During review of the plans for the above noted project, it was found that the following information,
clarifications or changes are needed. Please provide written responses as to where the changes can
be found on the plans, and submit revised plans/documents to Marie Harrison, Senior Permit
Coordinator. Thank you.
1.Previous item 3. You have indicated that you intend to complete the office and retail spaces
under this permit. In this case, please provide a seating plan for reception areas, reference
rooms and lounges, etc. Also, show on the drawings all fixed equipment such as copy
machines, display cases, merchandise racks and public counters (including accessible
features).
2.Previous item 5. On the shoring detail 4/A-1.1 and on the Updated Geotechnical Report dated
October 11, 2008, indicate whether there is an expected surcharge on the shoring. If there is a
surcharge, or if the ecology block wall (drawn as an option) is taller than 8 feet, then provide
engineering calculations along with the design. These calculations will require peer review at
full cost to the applicant. Please indicate the maximum height of the ecology block wall.
3.Previous item 26. You removed the exit sign in the garage that was potentially confusing to
occupants, however an exit sign will be required at the southwest exit door of the garage.
Please add this to the plans.
4.Previous item 30. The door (C3a) at the north stairway that opens into the exit passageway
must be as close to the bottom of the stairs as practical to preserve the nature of the vertical
exit enclosure. Please move the door closer to the stairway while maintaining a minimum
landing of 48 between the stairs and the door; and provide adequate accessible door
approach dimensions.
5.Previous item 46. On the Wall Types, please include on the plan details the type, size and
spacing requirements for drywall fasteners according to the listing of the assembly, typical.
6.Previous item 52. The Residential Energy and Ventilation Worksheet shows electrical wall
heaters and manual air inlets for the second floor. Please show on the plans how each
habitable room on the second floor will be provided with 4 square inches of outside air. (ie.
Vented window frames).
7.Previous item 59. Provide structural skylight calculations or manufacturer listing to show
compliance with IBC 2404.
8.Previous item 61. More detail is needed to show accessibility features in the Type B units.
Please indicate on the plans that each of the residential units is Type B, and show dimensions
for features such as door threshold heights, light switches and electrical outlets, plumbing
fixture controls, clear space for toilets, tubs and sinks, etc. Also show reinforcement
(backing) for the future installation of grab bars at toilets and tubs. ANSI 117.1 Section 1004.
9. Previous item 63. Even though mechanical plans will be a deferred submittal, it is necessary
to include construction details for anticipated penetrations of fire-resistive assemblies. Please
show how the fire rating will be maintained at ceiling fans and can lights (if any), ductwork in
ceilings, and venting of lower floor appliances. If rated shafts or gyp tenting is to be used,
show how these are to be constructed. Air handling units are shown above the restroom and
break room areashow will this work?
10.Previous item 64. The garage exhaust outlet must terminate per WAC 51-52-501.2.1 #2. This
information may not be deferred as the exhaust location may impact other features of the
building/site. Clearly show location and required dimensioned distances on the plans. If a
rated shaft will be provided as part of the redesign, please provide a detail and listed and
tested fire assembly. Also show how the make-up air will be provided for the garage exhaust
systemthis will be of particular concern since an overhead door is proposed.
11.Please see the following structural comments from the citys consultant. Please contact Mr.
Jeter directly if there are particular structural concerns you may have.
Plan Review # 2008-0319 EECE # EDM 08-42 (2)
Plan review number 02
Structure Occupancy Gross
Area S.F.
Parking S2 5730
Garage/Basement
Retail/ First floor M 2176
Office / First Floor B 3404
nd
Residential/ 2 Floor R2 5395
Total 16705
Decks 234
Grand total16939
Sprinklers16939
AC 5580
Page 2 of 6
Edmonds
The above referenced project is in the process of plan review for compliance with
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.
Original comment will be written in italic if more information is required.
SCOPE OF REVIEW
Structural only
The scope of this review is for therequirements 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.
STRUCTURAL COMMENTS
General
1.3. The restrained retaining wall was not designed for the additional 100 psf added to the
active pressure. Please resubmit the retrained wall analysis with the 100 psf added as
required per the geotechnical report. Please resubmit all restrained retaining walls with the
correct active equivalent fluid pleasure. The retaining wall analysis submitted shows the
base of the wall ratio exceeding 1 and the minimum code is therefore not met. Revise
analysis and drawings accordingly.
2.4. Please submit the geotechnical report with the plot showing the location of the test
boring. (The report state see site plan but the site plan does not includes. Also the report
shall have this information contained in the report) IBC 1802.6 This still has not been
submitted as required per the code. Please submit. IBC 1802.6
3.6. Engineer of Record (EOR), please justify 50 psf live to be used for the parking garage
vault lid. The load also of 3000 pound applied over an area of 4.5 inches X 4.5 inches also
must be considered. This appears to be able to control the design of the vault lid and not 50
psf. Please modify accordingly. ASCE table 4-1. The response statement that the vault lid is
not used for passenger vehicle storage so this does not have to be used is not correct. The
or
footnote states floors in garages portions of a building used for the storage of motor
vehicles shall be designed for the point loads. Therefore, floors in garages shall be designed
for the uniform distributive live loads of table 4-1 or the following concentrated loads. For a
garage restricted to passenger vehicles accommodating not more then 9 passengers, 3000
pound force must be investigated on the floor system. Please submit analysis for this design
force.
4.7. Please clarify how the stirrup area was determine to be .44 in^2 when there is not any
stirrup specified for the vault lid. Please clarify upon the response. The response appears to
be designing the slab as a beam. Beams have stirrups but slabs do not. The shear design for
the beam reinforcement shall be placed in the shear plane, but the slab reinforcement does
not have reinforcement in the shear plane. Shear is diagonal cracking and not flexure. In
Page 3 of 6
addition, the deflection shall be computed off the cracked moment of inertia, not the gross
moment of inertia. See ACI section 9.5
Sheet S1 General Notes and columns and beam schedule
5.8. EOR, please add to the drawing a statement of special inspections as required per IBC
1705. The response states all epoxies are not a statement of special inspections as per IBC
1705. Please add the requirement of IBC section 1705.
6.9. EOR, please add the pertinent information from the snow load design to the drawings as
required per IBC 1603.1.1 The response states see updated notes S-1. However, this sheet
does not have Ce or the Cr factors as required per the code. Please modify accordingly.
7.11. EOR, please add all the required earthquake design date to the drawings as required per
IBC 1603.1.5. IBC 1603.1.5. EOR, per the response, please clarify the seismic force resisting
system to be A13. This is not a defined seismic resisting force system. The definition of
seismic force system-resisting system as defined per code does not have A13, but the
definitions is the following.: That part of the structural system that has been considered in
the design to provide that required resistance to the seismic forces prescribed in the code.
ASCE 11.2
Sheet S-2 Foundations Plan and Details
8.13. Detail 10: EOR, Please provide analysis for ht ¼ Diameter KWIK bolts. The ESR-1197
does not have this size. The smallest size of bolt is 3/8. Submit ICBO report and analysis
for the ¼ Diameter bolts to transfer the required design forces. The response states See
attached Hilti Catalog for the ¼ bolt. ICC approved values must be used, not the
manufacturers catalog. The ICC report ESR-1917 which is the current one for the Hilti
Kwik bolts does not approve ¼ bolts. Also the attached catalog is outdated and not
approved at this time. Submit analysis and modify the drawing to approved anchoring
system. ICC ESR 1917 and Hilti 1-800-879-9000
Sheet S-3 Lower level shear Walls with First Floor Framing Plan
9.14. EOR, please provide a detail for the connection for beam mark 27 to the wide flange
beam. The response states 4X6 flat ripped at bottom of beam is required, but the drawings
do not reflect this requirement. Please modify the drawings to show this requirement.
10.16. EOR, please clarify on the drawing the required connection of the floor system to the
perimeter concrete walls. Nothing is specified at this time in order to complete the review.
The revised drawings still do not reflect how this will be connected. Please modify the
drawings accordingly.
11.17. EOR, please provide a detail for the bearing wall on the wide flange beam to transfer
the design forces. There still is not any detail or reference as to how the shear wall forces
will be transferred when they are bearing on the wide flange beams. For example, you have
a bearing wall along grid B wide flange beam mark 20. Please provide analysis and detail to
show how the design forces will be transferred.
Sheet S-4 First Floor Shear Wall with Second floor Framing Plan
Page 4 of 6
12.19. EOR, please specify the required post and connections for the 5-1/8X13-1/2 with a mark
of # in the hexagon. The response states posts are (3) 2x6 with CC66. The width of CC
with the bolted holes is 5.5 but (3)2x6 have only a width of 4.5 (3*1.5) Please provide a
detail at these locations. ( Also, please correct the call out in the hexagon with the number
sign and not the actual number.)
13.20. EOR, please clarify on the drawing the required connections of wide flange beam mark
23 to the diagonal beam mark 5 along grid line C1 between grid 3 and grid 4. The response
states ½ Diameter CB is required at each side of the web. See attached steel beam
Glulam BM connections detail. However, this is not specified on the drawing. Please
modify accordingly to show a complete load path.
14.22. Please add to the drawing for the length of the shear wall on this level. It appears the
length used in the analysis does not match the drawings. Please add this required minimum
length to the drawings. The lengths are still not referenced on the drawings. All that is stated
is they do match the drawings. Please add the length to assure the shear walls are built as
designed.
Sheet S-5 Second Floor Shear walls and Roof Framing Plan
15.23. The effective width of the Shear wall mark SW4 exceeds the maximum height to width
ratios. Please modify accordingly. IBC table 2305.3.4. The shear wall SW4 that is at a
diagonal cannot use the full width as per the design. The effective width must be used.
Therefore, per the response, the width of 3 feet is not correct.
16.24. Please add to the drawing the required width of the shear wall notes as required per the
analysis. This still has not been addressed at this time on the drawings. Please add the
required minimum width as per the analysis.
17.25. EOR, the beams marks 34 does not match the schedule on sheet on sheet S2. Please
clarify the required connection and modify accordingly. The response states BM 34 is
designed as a 3-1/8X10-1/2, but the drawings reflect something different. In addition, the
response states See updated sheet. But It appears this sheet has not been updated.
18.26. EOR, please specify the required connections of the 6x6 post to beam mark 40. Nothing
is specified at this time. For some reason, the post and beam have been deleted from the
revised set. Please specify the required beam size and the post required to support the beams
at the perimeter. I assume a layer was turned off when the revised set was printed.
Shoring Comments
Sheet A1-1
A.EOR, please submit shoring drawings and analysis. The geotechnical reports state temporary
shoring is required. However, there was neither analysis nor shoring drawings submitted for
review. Drawings and analysis are required for the shoring system, not just a note that the
geotechnical engineer will provide inspections. IBC 1803.1
Page 5 of 6
B.Please submit geotechnical recommendations for the cut slope of 1.25 to 1 as noted on this
sheet. There is an existing street, and without shoring, how is the soil able to be stabilized?
Since there is an existing asphalt street, some type of shoring must be provided for this
structure with analysis and details.
C.There is an existing building noted that will effect the excavations and constructions of this
site. Submit drawings and shoring procedure for this site. It also appears an easement will be
required from the existing property. IBC figure 1805.3.1.
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.
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
Page 6 of 6