Loading...
20080826163011.pdfo� EDS City of Edmonds �F0�d PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS BUILDING DIVISION (425) 771-0220 DATE: August 26, 2008 TO: Lesley Brown e-mail: lesleyb@adshapiro.com. FROM: Ann Bullis, Building Official RE: Plan Check: 2008-0199 Project: 5"' Avenue 8 Units (6 unit and 2 SFRs) — Building A Foundation Only Project Address: 215 5"' Ave N During re -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 a Permit Coordinator. The followine items need to be addressed under this foundation hermit annlication: 1. Previous item 12: We were unable to find a lot line adjustment application to combine the lots. Please provide the application number. 2. Previous item 21: We are stili awaiting the Special Inspection and Testing Agreement to be submitted. 3. See attached consultant comments The following items need to be addressed with the submittal of the main building permit: 4. Previous items 10, 15, & 19. Also see consultant comments. o� F1) City of Edmonds PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS BUILDING DIVISION Fsc 1Sgo (425) 771-0220 DATE: August 26, 2008 TO: Lesley Brown e-mail: lesleyb@adshapiro.com FROM: Ann Bullis, Building Official Ar RE: Plan Check: 2008-0203 & 2008-0204 Project: 5"' Avenue 8 Units (6 unit and 2 SFRs) -- Building B & C Foundation Only Project Address: 215 5th Ave N During re -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 a Permit Coordinator. The followinLa items need to be addressed under this foundation uermit annlication: 1. Previous item 5: We were unable to find a lot line adjustment application to combine the lots. Please provide the application number. 2. Previous item 9: Note the height of the west deck above grade. From the elevation view it appears to exceed 30" and cannot encroach into the setback — contact the Planning Division if you have questions. 3. Previous item 17: We are still awaiting the Special Inspection and Testing Agreement to be submitted. 4. See attached consultant comments The following items need to be addressed with the submittal of_the _main buildinL, permit: 5. Previous items 6 (stairway details), 8, & 15. Also see consultant comments. Ann Bullis, Building Code Official Development Services Department 121 5t" Avenue North, Second Floor Edmonds, Washington 98020 Dear Ann: This is the 1St Recheck for Building A, Plans for Six Units in the proposed, James Brothers/5th Ave Eight Buildings project. My Plan Review N2:1132-108 (Your Plan Check Ns 2008-199) NONSTRUCTURAL COMMENTS Occupancy, Type of Construction and Means of Egress Comments 2. Code Summary/Compliance notes need revisions to be accurate: d. The proposed floor_ areas are still not accurate. Even though the building area for the units is less than the allowable, the plans have to be precise. Common use space and covered balconies, regardless if they are heated or not, need to be counted. Needs to be addressed now. 3. Construction Issues. h. Where do footing drains discharge to? I see the roof and landscape drains, but not the footing drains. They need to be provided. i. Damp proofing details. They need to be provided. 6. Means of egress (MOE) and accessibility issues. a. Provide a barrier at the first story stairwa . The details of that barrier really have to be shown now. STRUCTURAL COMMENTS Structural Design Details 6. The site retaining and basement walls have to provide, for drainage. What I meant was that the fill is shown right up to the top of the wall and when a large rain storm occurs, the water will spill over the top and could start to erode the earth below the wall. What I was implying, when the engineer reads all the text in Section 1803.3, especially that designated with a bar, is there needs to be a freeboard above the fill and a swale or other means to keep the water from over topping and eroding the fill over the footing below it. This needs to be addressed now. CONSULTANT COMMENTS TO BE ADDRESSED WITH MAIN BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION. NONSTRUCTURAL COMMENTS Occupancy, Type of Construction and Means of Egress Comments 2. Code Summary/Compliance notes need revisions to be accurate: d. The proposed floor areas are still not accurate. Even though the building area for the units is less than the allowable, the plans have to be precise. Common use space and covered balconies, regardless if they are heated or not, need to be counted. Needs to be addressed now. 2. Construction Issues. c. Smoke detectors. This is pending final design plans d. Exterior wall, roofing, and floor finishes have to be given. Pending final design sets. g. Locations of im act lazin . Also pending final design sets. 6. Means of egress (MOE) and accessibility issues. f. Details of guards, their height, 42", and their connections to balconies &_roof decks, • rise and run center supports, top and bottom of Spiral stairways; a!1 need to be on the plans. Sections 106.1.1, 1013, and 1009.8. This is pending coming revised and final plans. g. Details of opening protections in corridors, stairways, and basement. Pending final plans. Emeraencv escape & rescue oneninas are reauired from all rooms with closets (i.e.. thev are sleepina rooms) and details are reauired. Section 1026. The architect may have misunderstood my meaning; I mean windows or doors to balconies off of sleeping rooms. I'll assume it will come with the final plans j. Exterior steps and ramps — water doesn T pond. Sec. 1009.5.2. I'll wait until the final plans come in. k. Means of emergency lighting are required_ in corridors, stairways and garage. Sec. 1006. Ditto. n. The Washington State Building Code Council has modified ANSI A117-1 for accessibility Additional details need to be addressed: ii. Section 1102.2.3 also has provisions for minimum opening force for other than "fire" doors for which all doorways other than into the stair enclosures apply. They are two different items and should be specified in the final plans. iii. Other WA specific stairway issues for the disabled such as.giyen in new Sections 1007.6 through 1007.8.3 need to be addressed and shown on the plans. Pending final plans STRUCTURAL COMMENTS General Many of the notes on Sheet S1 require modifications and/or clarifications: 1. The "Design Base Shear" criteria should show the concrete basement has an R value = 6 in addition to the frame building which is shown as R = 6.5. ASCE 7 Table 12.2.1. Items A-13 and B-5 for the "special reinforced concrete walls" This one was missed apparently. It should be addressed in the final plans. Structural Design Details 1. 42" Guards and details. Section 1013.3. Pending final plans. 2. The first note on Sheet S1 states that the building is designed for both the iBC and IRC. Actually, the IRC is only for Single -Family, Duplex, and "Townhouse" (Row -House) construction of which this building is not So, the note should only state the IBC applies. Likewise, this needs to b addressed in the final set of plans 3. Most of this building is not conventional construction Lasgiven in Chapter 23 and needs to be designed for vertical, seismic and wind loads. No calculations were provided to iustify these forces. Section 1603, especially Section 1603.1.8. Ditto 4. The soils report needs to include a determination of lateral pressures on below grade walls caused by seismic movement. Section 1802.2.7, Item # 1. This needs to be addressed by the Soils Engineer, and should be given to the engineer for his design. 6. Live loads other than for ordinary roofs should be considered in the green roof area as well as the increased dead loads and a redesign is necessary. Section 1603.1.2. This needs to be addressed in the final plans. 7. Specifications are needed on Sheet S1 for the (pre -stressed?) concrete deck over the garage. Since no design is provided, it needs to be added to the deferred submittal list. Ditto. 8. The vertical, seismic, and wind lateral load paths need to be designed for the roof level down to the floor garage deck and detailed for continuity to the transition to the outer edges of that basement down to the foundations. Sections 1604.4 through 1604.10. Ditto. Apparently, none of the following issues were addressed by the engineer, but I will assume that when he gets this note, he would be stating that they will be addressed in the final plan set. please make sure he sees them so that they aren't missed and cause a delay in the final set approval. 9. No shear walls are designated, drag struts are missing, and uplift resistance into the floor below is not shown or detailed. Sections 14.5. 10. An out -of -plane offset irregularity # 4 occurs at line 3 where the wood building redistributes its loads into the concrete lid and needs to be studied for maximum axial loads from the bottom shear wall boundary elements. The shear transferred also has to be increased 25%. 1. The LFRS has to be justified for a continuous load path and relevant provisions given in Section 2305 all have to be considered and mitigated. If the designer is using ASD, Section 2306 would apply. 12. If the structure is within roughly a 1 mile or more of the Puget Sound (5,000') as it seems on the maps that I looked at, it is in Exposure D and needs to be designed for that condition. Sections 6.5.6.2 and 6.5.6.3. Exposure B or C can extend downwind 118`" of a mile (-- 600) or so of the end of this 5,000', and if the building could be Exposure C unless the designer wants to use the method stated on ASCE page 310, which is very complicated to justify. 13. The shallow V-shaped roof portion will act like a "Toughed Free Roof' and needs to be specifically designed for wind. Note that it should be treated is as obstructed in Figure 6-18C on ASCE 7 on page 68. 14. This roof also needs to be checked and/or designed for relevant wind pressures given in Figure 6-18D on page 69 and for component & cladding pressures on pages after 69.