20090716150318.pdfo� Ego City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
' BUILDING DIVISION
Et. i a9° (425) 771-0220
DATE: 7/16/2009
TO: North Crest Development Group
PO Box 340
Edmonds, WA 98020
Attn Rick Klemm
RE: Plan Check: BLD20080938
Project: Condominiums
Project Address: 620 Glen Street
During review of the plans resubmitted 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 numbers are based on the city's original building comments on 1-6-2009, and the Achitect's
response resubmitted to the city on 6-15-2009
1. See the city's structural consultant's comments #2.
9. The building still appears to be overheight, see the city's planning comments updated July
15, 2009.
20. The elevator and the mechanical room door are still proposed to open into the exit
passageway (the route from the stairwell door to the exit door). 13C 1021.4 states
"elevators shall not open into an exit passageway". Also stated in the same section:
"openings in exit passageways shall be limited to those necessary for exit access to the exit
passageway from normally occupied spaces".
23. The stair section on G-1 shows 11" from nose to kicker, which is misleading. The correct
way to measure is from nose to nose.
25. Either provide a parapet or show how the parapet exception will be used. See 705.11
Exception 5 which would require fire treated plywood on the roof for 4' from the exterior
wall.
27. The form will need to be completed and submitted prior to permit issuance.
29. Handrail details and locations are still required. The guard portion is okay now. The detail
showing the top of the guard at 42" cannot also be used for the handrail. The correct
handrail height, graspability, and extensions should be detailed.
Pat Lawler
patrick.lawlcr@ci.edmonds.wa.us
Plans Examiner
425 7710220 x1703
M, " ,
Y OF EDMON'DS 121 5 AVENUE NORTH EDMONDs, WA 98020
_ PHONE: 425.771.0220 - FAX: 425.771.0221 - WEB: www.ci.edmondsma.us
DEvEi opmENT SERvICEs DEPARTMENT: PLANNING - BuiLDING
January 6, 2009 (Updated July 15, 2009)
North Crest Development Group
PO Box 340
Edmonds, WA 98020
Ann: Rick Kies
RE: PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS 2 FOR PLAN CHECK 4 2005-0938
NEW 4 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM (NORTH. CREST) AT 620 GLEN STREET
Dear Mr, Klemm:
I have reviewed the above building permit application for the Planning Division. Before I can
sign off on the permit, however, the following information needs to be clarified:
1. Datum: Please indicate on the Site Plan the location and elevation of the datum point
used to calculate height for the project. RESOLVED
2. Scale: Please verify the scale on the Site Plan.. It is described as 1:20 but the scale bar
indicates 1:10. UNRESOLVED -- I redlined the site plan to a 1:10 scale.
3. Light Bollards: Please locate the lighting bollards described in Condition 9 of the
design approval (ADB -07-80) on the Site Plan and/or Landscaping Plan.
UNRESOLVED — I redlined two Bollards on the topo sheet and sheet A4.
4. Landscape Plan: Condition 5 of the design approval states:
Appropriately sized Tilia cordata "Greenspire'/ Greenspire Linden trees shall be
placed in new planting areas (4' by 4' minimum) in the four exterior corners of both
driveways.
The intent of the condition was that additional 4'. by 4' planting areas are to be located
at the exterior corners of the driveways. These areas are not currently shown on the
Landscaping Plan. If the condition was not sufficiently clear, I apologize.
I've scanned the submitted Plan and indicated where the additional planting areas are to
be located. The four Greenspire Linden are to be planted in those areas with
groundcover' similar to the remainder of the site. Groundcover and shrubs can be
relocated to the spaces where the Greenspire are currently indicated. RESOLVED
5, Landscaping Bid: Please provide a cost estimate including all labor and materials
required to install the landscaping. RESOLVED
6. Trellis: Please indicate the design and height of the proposed trellis (which would
actually be termed an `arbor' with respect to the Edmonds Community Development
Code). According to ECDC 17.30.035.C.3, an arbor up to a maximum of nine feet may
be constructed over a gate, walkway or entrance. RESOLVED
7, Height Calculations: As indicated in the Building Division's comments from January
6, 2009, the height calculations shown do not appear to match the lines of topography.
On the Site Plan and sheet Al, all four corners are listed at 109 feet. On the TESC &
Grading PIan, the height calculation lists the four corners as: 104.99', 105.94', 106.88'
and 106.26'. These elevations appear to agree better with the existing topography of
the site. Per ECDC 21.40.030, height means the: average vertical distance from the
average level of the undisturbed soil of the site covered by a structure to the highest
.point of the structure. Please verify which set of calculations are correct and make any
changes necessary to the site plan, elevation drawings, etc.
PIease make all submittals to a Development Services Permit Coordinator, Monday through
Friday, 8:00 am to 4:30 pm. If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 771-0220.
Sincerely
,K,
Mike Clugston, AICP
Planner
Eagle Eye Consulting Engineers, P.S.
PO Box 523
Olalla, WA 98359
hoytieter@centurytel.net
360 874 0562
Fax 360 874 0591
To: Theresa Umbaugh
City of Edmonds Building Dept.
1215 th Ave N
Edmonds, WA 98020
Re: North Crest 4 -Unit Condo
620 Glen Street
Edmonds, WA 98020
Plan Review # 2008-0938 EECE # EDM 08-90 (2)
Plan review number 02
sfrucWre
Area SX,
Lower Floor
561
Main floor
2720
Second floor
2720
Total
5001
Garage
2131
Total
8132
Balcony
240
rand total
8372
The above referenced project is in the process of plan review for compliance with
Edmonds ordinances and applicable codes. The following comments,
deficiencieslcorrections 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.
Please note this structure was noted to be desi n per the IBC and comments will re ect
the IBC code as adopted by the State of Washington with state amendments.
Orizinal comment will be written in italic if not addressed appropriately at this time.
SCOPE OF REVIEW
The scope of this review is for the Structural requirements of this project.
Page 2 of 5
Plan Review Number 02
EECE#: EDM 08-90 (2)
North Crest 4 -Unit Condo
Project Review # 2008-0938
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 CONEVIENTS
General
1. 1. This structure does not meet the definition of townhomes with the foyer space.
Therefore, the IRC cannot be used for the design of this structure. Tows wum .4
single-family dwelling unit constructed in a group of three or more attached units in which each unit extends
from Loundadon to roo and with open space on at least two sides. Please modify the drawing to
the IBC and not the IRC. The response state the drawings reference the 113C. There
still area items throughout the drawings state to use the IRC which cannot be used
for this structures. For example, sheet G-1 typical wall sections is noted per the
IRC. Please modify accordingly.
2. 4. Please add to the drawing the required earthquake design data per IBC
1603.1.5 item 2 (Ss and Sd. The drawing modified does not meet what was used in
the design. Why area smaller values are noted, which are not correct. Please
modify accordingly.
3. 8. Please add to the drawing the required earthquake design data per IBC
1603.1.5 item 6 (Basic seismic -force -resisting system (s)). The drawings state brace
frame as the seismic resisting force system but this is not the case. See ASCE table
12.2.1 or the different basic seismic -farce -resisting system and modify the
drawings accordingly.
4. 9. Please add to the drawing the required earthquake design data per IBC
1603.1.5 item 7 (Design base shear). Please provide analysis how the base shear of
27.72 was determined as shown on sheet L I.
5. 10. Please add to the drawing the required earthquake design data per IBC
1603.1.5 item 8 (Seismic response coefficient(s), Cs). The drawings do not reflect
the correct Cs value. Please modify accordingly.
6. 18. Please add to the drawing the required applicable internal pressure coefficient
used for the wind design IBC 1603.1.4 item 4. The drawing state the internal
pressure coefficient to be 1.0. 1f this is the case submit analysis with the
coefficient. The coefficient is Cpi for your reference.
Page 3 of 5
Pian Review Number 02
EECE#: EDM 08-90 (2)
North Crest 4 -Unit Condo
Project Review # 2008-0938
7. 19. Please add to the drawing the required earthquake analysis procedure used
per IBC 1603.1.5 item 10. The drawings state braced frame, but this is not the case.
Please modify accordingly.
20. AOR, please submit lateral analysis for the horizontal diaphragm. All that was
in the submitted analysis was the shear wall design not the diaphragm
requirements. Please submit this upon the response. ASCE 12.10. The response
only has done lateral analysis for the wind pressure and not the seismic. Please
submit earthquake diaphragm analysis per the code.
9. 22. The dead load used in the analysis has not included the weight of sprinkler
system that is required Please modify the analysis accordingly and resubmit. The
response states the after review the gravity load the sprinkler will not add any
additional loads. Justify this with analysis and provide a break down of the dead
load upon the response to justify the dead load
Sheet A3 Foundation Plan
10. AOR, submit analysis for the exterior standard spread footing to support the point
load of the new beams framed around the elevator opening. Including all dead load
and live load of the floor and the floors above the standard footing does not support
the design loads. Justify with analysis.
Sheet A4 Lower Floor Plan
11. New beams have been added at the elevator framing without the required beam
hanger specified to transfer the loads. Please add this information on the drawings
since now the walls are bearing.
12. AOR, specify the required post to support the beam added. Nothing is specified nor
is the post to beam connections noted. Please modify accordingly.
13. AOR, please provide a detail at the center wall where the Paraliam frame into it.
14. EOR, please provide a detail for the SSW 24X7 since the wall height will exceed
the height of the wall plus the beam. Please provide detail on how this will be built.
15.26. AOR, please sped the required post to beam connections for GB -2. The
response state to see notes added to this sheet, but nothing is specified for this
connections. Please clarify upon the response.
Sheet A5 Main Floor Plan
Page 4 of 5
Plan Review Number 02
EECE#: EDM 08-90 (2)
North Crest 4 -Unit Condo
Project Review # 2008-0938
16.29. AOR, please specify the required connection of the B-3 to B-4 supporting
header beam. The connections is still not detail on how the loads will transfer.
Please modify accordingly.
17.30. AOR, please detail and connection for the beam mark B3 at the post in the
separation of unit A and Unit B. Detail still not provided. Please provide this on
the drawings.
Sheet A6 Upper Floor Plan
18.31. AOR, please provide analysis and detail for the deck shown on this sheet.
Nothing has been submitted for the deck support. Analysis has not been provided
to show the force will be transferred. Please submit this upon the response.
Sheet A8 Section
19.33. Please provide detail and analysis for the retaining wall shown on this sheet.
IBC 1806. Drawings do not reflect the height of the wall. The response state the
"maximum height of 44" of unbalanced backfill, which puts it with in the limits of
standard foundations wall". In addition, the details state for 30". Please provide
analysis and detail to show the forces will be able to transfer the design loads per
the IBC.
Sheet G1 Typical Wall Section
20.41. Please modify the note to meet the IBC and not the IRC. This structure must
fall under IBC and not the IRC. The structure does not meet the definitions far
town homes as defined by the IBCIRC. The drawings still use the IRC thorough
out. The response state the drawings were modified but still there is IRC referenced
throughout. For example; " WHERE POST AND BEAM DISPLACEMENT PER
IRC SECTIONS 502.9". The drawings must reflect the adopted code for this
structure. Please modify accordingly.
21. The footing notes are not per the geotechnical report for this site. For example, the
minimum width shall not be less then 16" but the drawings state 12 and 15", which
is not per the report. Modify the drawings per the geotechnical engineer
requirements.
Additional corrections may be required following receipt of corrections and additional
information as requested.
Page 5 of 5
Plan Review Number 02
EECE#: EDM 08-90 (2)
North Crest 4 -Unit Condo
Project Review # 2008-0938
Your plans are being reviewed concurrently with the Building Department, Fiore
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
Y=
Hoyt Jeter, P.E.
President