20090424095636.pdfE� City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEWCOMMENTS.
" BUILDING DIVISION
Fst 1890
425 771-0220
DATE: 4122/09
TO: Interbay Properties, LLC
Attn: Darryl Lewis
437 5th Ave S, Suite 101
Edmonds, WA 98020
FROM: Pat Lawler
RE: Plan Check: BLD20080237
Project: SFR
Project Address: 1139 Sierra PI
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 a Permit Coordinator.
1. The plans appear to have been prepared by a Washington state registered architect. Washington
State registered architects and engineers must stamp and sign all drawings prepared by them
when filed with public authorities [RCW 18.43.070, RCW 18.96.150, and RCW 18.08.370(2) as
interpreted by AGO 1990 No. 9]
2. Provide a letter from Associated Earth Science, Inc (AESI), Geotech of Record, indicating that
they have reviewed the project plans (most current revision) to verify the geological
recommendations have been followed, in compliance with 1.1 of their report dated January 25,
2008.
3. Page 15 of AESI report calls out 4" of pea gravel and a 10 mil vapor barrier under slabs with
habitable space above. Revise drawings to show this detail.
4. The foundation drainage called out in the AESI report is significantly different from the plan
details. Revise plan details to comply with report, e.g. footing drain location and grade, blanket
drain detail, etc.
5. The flex room, because it contains a closet, will be considered a bedroom for egress, ventilation,
and smoke detector purposes. The whole house fan is based on bedrooms and floor square
footage. The correct size whole house fan for your application is from 150-225 cfrn, and should
he correctly indicated on the plans.
6. FOR to provide shear transfer detail for architectural detail 6/A6.0. See City's consulting
engineer's comments for structural review.
7. Provide roof ventilation calculations for 2" diameter holes into joist bays at 3/A6.3. One hole
per bay appears inadequate. The roof ventilation notes on page A2.2 use 4" round vents in the
talcs.
8. The roof plan on sheet A2.2 indicates a 1/4" per foot slope in one direction, but does not show
crickets , gutters, or other methods to divert the water to the downspouts. Provide these details
and scupper/overflow details.
9. There appears to be an issue with the type A windows. Sill heights less than 24" AFF and more
than 72" above finish grade need to meet the IRC requirements of R613.2.
10. The window glazing schedule shows an incorrect U value of .40. The correct U value for
unlimited glazing in the WS EC is currently .35.
11. Detail 5/A6A shows rigid insulation above the ventilated space. If this is above heated space,
the insulation should be below the ventilated space and would need to be R-38 value.
Pat Lawler
patrick.lawler@ci.edmonds.wa.us
Plans Examiner
425 7710220 x 1703
Page 2 of 2
Eagle Eye Consulting Engineers, P.S.
PO Box 523
Olalla, WA 98359
hoAeter@centurytel.net
360 874 0562
Fax 360 874 0591
To: Theresa Umbaugh
121 5th Ave N
Edmonds, WA 98020
t
Re: Lewis Residence Revised'/W"--OA
1137 Sierra Place
Edmonds, WA 98020
Plan Review # 2008-0237 EECE # EDM 09-06 (EDM 05-27)
Plan review number 02
Structure
Stated Area
S.F.
Lower
1885
Main
2719
Upper
1940
Total
6544
Garage
982
Total
7526
Peck first floor
792
rand total
831$
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 Only 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
Plan Review Number 42
EECE#: EDM 09-06 (EDM 08-27)
Lewis Residence
2008-0237
STRUCTURAL COMMENTS
General
1. Design analysis submitted show the factor of safety for sliding les then required per
code. The code requires a factor of safety for sliding to be 1.5. Submit analysis to
show the factor safety will meet this requirement and not be less then this based off
the information on sheet S3.2. IBC 1806.1
2. EOR, please justify the soil weight to be 125 PCF used in the analysis for the
retaining wall. Please submit letter for the geotechnical engineer that the dead
weight of the soil is this high. Soil weight is typical 110 pcf not 125 pcf. This
weight is used for the factor safety of sliding. In addition, this is resisting the
sliding and overturning forces.
3. EOR, please clarify where the added axial force used in the design of the retaining
wall came from. This appears to be used to resist the sliding due to the coefficient
of frictions of the footing and the soil. Based off different height of walls different
added axial forces was added. Please clarify upon the response how this was
determined.
4. EOR, please provide details on the drawing for the construction of the rockery
walls.
Sheet S2.0 Foundations Plan
5. . EOR, please provide analysis for the stair stringer bearing on the 4" Slab. Per
check analysis it appear the slab will not support the design loads. Please provide
analysis to justify.
6. EOR, please specify the required hold down for end of the shear wall at footing
mark F5.5. There is only a hold down on one end of the wall. Please clarify why
there is only one hold down.
7. EOR, please provide the required post to beam connections for the post installed in
the walls. All post base shall be positively attached to prevent translations. IBC
2304.9.7
Page 3 of 4
Plan Review Number 02
EECE#: EDM 09-06 (EDM 08-27)
Lewis Residence
2008-0237
Sheet S2.1 2"d Floor Framing
8. . EOR, please specify he required collector nailing at the SW2 at the opening in the
diaphragm. There is a steel beam without the specified collector elements
diaphragm nailing requirements specified not the analysis. Please submit this upon
the response and modify accordingly.
9. EOR, the floor diaphragm has discontinuity as defined by ASCE table 12.3-1.
Please submit analysis to account for the discontinuity and modify drawings
accordingly. ASCE 12.3.2.1
10. EOR, please submit analysis for the 2X12 sloped from 11.25" to 7.5". Based off
this changed in depth and the span it appears the sloped 2x12 will not support the
design loads. Please submit analysis to justify.
11. EOR, please specify the required connections of the PSL 3-1/2X 11-718 to the (2)
LSL at the dining room.
12. EOR, please specify the required connections for the 3-1/2X 18 @ the exterior wall
at the office and laundry room.
Sheet S3.2 Foundations Sections & Details
13. Retaining Wall Schedule at High Slab 4/S3.2: EOR, please submit analysis for the
surcharge. The analysis submitted for these walls has not provided surcharge forces
for the high slab. IBC 1806
14. Retaining Wall Schedule at High Slab 1/S3.2: EOR the analysis submitted show
the factor of safety for sliding will be exceeded. The safety factor shall not be less
then 1.5 but the analysis show this will not be met. Submit analysis to show the
factor of safety of 1.5 will be achieved. 113C 1806
Sheet S4.1 Framing Sections & Details
15.. Detail 4: EOR, please specify the required plywood nailing to the top flange of
the wide flange beam. This braces the compression zone of the beam under
bending. This detail show joist framing into it but the plan shows the joist parallel
on sheet S2.1. Please either submit analysis's for the Lu full length or specified the
required connections of the plywood to the top flange.
16. Detail 4: EOR, please submit analysis for torsion forces with the connection below
the neutral axis of the wide flange beam.
Page 4 of 4
Plan Review Number 02
EECE#: EDM 09-06 (EDMO8-27)
Lewis Residence
2008-0237
Sheet 54.3 Framing Sections & Details
17. Shear Wall Schedule 1154.3: When nails are spaced at 2" OIC the member shall be
a 3 x and not double. Please modify the shear wall schedule to state 3X. TBC
2306.4.1 footnote e
18. Shear wall Schedule 1/54.3: EOR please modify schedule to state the nails that the
16 nails @ 2" OIC shall be staggered. IBC 2306.4.1 footnote e.
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.
M.
Hoyt Jeter, P.E.
President