2013-0810 Salopek Addition.pdf
City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
DATE: August 16, 2013
TO: Thomas Marshall
Sortun Vos Architects
Email: tom@sortun-vos.com
FROM: Leif Bjorback, Building Official
RE: Plan Check: 2013-0180
Project: Salopek Addition
Project Address: 829 Poplar Way
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 in the
Development Services Department. Thank you.
1.Architect, please stamp and sign applicable plan sheets per state law.
2.On Sheets A2.0 and A2.1 show a carbon monoxide alarm in the Hall. R315.2
3.On Sheet A2.0 show a smoke alarm in the Hall outside the bedrooms and one on the
basement level. R314.3
4.On Sheet A5.0 please remove all references to SRC (Seattle code?)
5.On Sheet A5.0 under Whole House Ventilation Notes, revise the code reference to the
appropriate code, namely section M1507 IRC.
6.In the Window Schedule, indicate windows U3, U4 and U5 as Safety glazed. R308.4.5
7.On Sheet A5.0 under Energy Code Requirements:
a.Change 2009 Edition to 2012 Edition.
b.Please note that Option III is no longer valid; however it appears by the worksheet
provided that compliance is achieved as per the Total UA Alternative option in
R402.14 of the 2012 WSEC.
8.Please include a Shear wall Schedule in the structural calculations as well as on the
drawings.
On the provided structural calculations:
9.Clarify the load noted at R1 for Beam 10 1-3/4x11-7/8 LSL (identified on the
architectural plans as a 5-1/4x9-1/2 PSL). It appears that the load from the existing 2x8
floor joists was not accounted for in the structural calculations Sheet 1-3.
10.Clarify the point load noted from Beam 10 (see review note #9) and the location of the load
on Beam 5. The architectural plans indicate the load at approximately 6.25 feet from the
left and the provided structural calculations place it 5 feet from the left.
11.Clarify the extent of the partial uniform load shown on Beam 5. The architectural plans
indicate the load from 0 to approximately 6.25 feet from the left and the provided structural
calculations place it from 0 to 5 feet from the left.
12.Clarify the point load noted from Beam 5 (see review notes #2 and #3) on, and the reaction
noted at R1 of, Beam 6. The point load and the reaction appear to be lower than that
anticipated by the construction shown and affect the sizing/loading of other supporting
members.
13.Clarify the callout for Beam 7 3-1/2x11-7/8 LSL. It appears to be over spanned and
deflects beyond that allowed per R301.7/IBC 1604.3. The point loads from Beam 3 and
Beam 6 appear to be lower than that anticipated by the construction shown and affect the
sizing/loading of other supporting members. Please revise the plans as needed.
Page 2 of 2