2013-0860 Gray addition2.pdf
City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
DATE: October 8, 2013
TO: Delores Gray
nd
22306 92 Avenue W
Edmonds, WA 98020
FROM: Chuck Miller, Plans Examiner
RE: Plan Check: BLD2013-0860
Project: Gray addition
nd
Project Address: 22306 92 Avenue W
During a review of the plans by the Building Division for the above noted project, it was found that
the following information, clarifications, or changes are needed. A complete review cannot be
performed until the revised plans/documents, including a written response indicating where the
clouded changes can be found on the plans, have been submitted to a Permit Coordinator.
Reviews by other divisions, such as Planning, Engineering, or Fire, may result in additional
comments. Items that recur on this list appear in italics.
General Note:
The amount and extent of framing member changes (size of rafters, orientation of framing,
·
post sizes, etc.) is unexpected in a structure already constructed and does little to expedite
the review process. While changing the size of the members in response to review comments
is easy to accommodate, having to completely re-review load paths due to changes in
bearing requires an inordinate amount of secondary review. Future changes of this nature
may incur additional review fees beyond those already paid.
On page 2:
1.Foundation Plan - Indicate on the plans the size of the existing beams supporting the loads
over the garage door openings. Clarify the use of (2)2x8s to be used to support the loads
over the 8 foot garage door openings. They appear to be over spanned, fail in bending and
deflect beyond that allowed per Table R301.7. The roof framing over the addition, and the
bearing wall below it, place a new load on the garage door beams beyond that of the existing
sundeck.
2.Foundation Plan - Clarify the identification of the 6x8 LAMINATE BEAMS HF #2 to be
used to support the existing garage ceiling/floor joists for the addition. Sawn members are
typically identified by nominal size, species, and grade, such as that noted. Glued-laminated
beams (also identified as glulams or GLBs) have different sizing, and are identified by their
layup, such as 24F-V4 DF/DF. A GLB using (5)2x6s (1-1/2x5-1/2 each) is typically
identified by its actual size (contrary to dimensional lumber). A framing grade GLB (not
milled for exposed use) would be a 5-1/2x 7-1/2. An architectural grade GLB would be a 5-
1/8x7-1/2. The layup identifies the species (you indicated DF/DF) and the stiffness based
on the grading of the wood used. A 24F-V4 is stiffer than a 16F-V4. The markings are
typically on the top of the beam.
3.Foundation Plan - Clarify the callout for the 6x8 LAMINATE BEAMS HF #2 to be used to
support the existing garage ceiling/floor joists for the addition. They appear to be over
spanned, fail in bending, and deflect beyond that allowed per Table R307.1. The GLB
spanning 12 feet identified in your response as SE appears to be over spanned, fails in
bending, and deflects beyond that allowed per Table R307.1. Note #5 of the Existing
Structural & Changes notes on the prior submittal indicated that a 6x6 post was to be added
at approximately mid-span. My earlier review took this into account and the beam appears
to be over spanned, fails in bending, and deflects beyond that allowed per Table R301.7.
The addition of the post also creates a point load requiring a footing to support it. Include in
your response the size of the footing and indicate it on the plans.
4.Foundation Plan Clarify the callout for the #2 2x8 HF to be used as the existing garage
ceiling/floor joists for the addition. They appear to be over spanned and fail in bending in
the area below the walk-in-closet with the 9 foot span. The roof framing over the addition,
and the bearing wall below it, place a new load on the floor joists beyond that of the existing
sundeck. Blocking between joists/rafters may add some stiffness, but so little that
engineers dont rely on it to size structural members. If all the members are already equally
loaded, asking the adjacent one to help out only means it is taking on more load. Blocking
is good for preventing joist/rafter rotation and for nailing a diaphragm that requires
additional stiffness.
On page 3:
5.Wall & Roof Framing Plan - Clarify the square footage of the proposed Computer Room.
It does not appear to meet the requirements of R304.2 and R304.3. The dimensions of the
room could not be determined by scaling because the plans are not drawn to the ¼=1
scale indicated. The referenced code requirements state that the minimum wall length of a
habitable room other than kitchens be at least 7 feet, with a minimum floor area of not less
than 70 square feet. Your response to the earlier review comments indicates a minimum
wall length of 5 feet 6 inches and floor area of 63 square feet.
6.Wall & Roof Framing Plan - Indicate on the plans the means to be used to provide the
required R-38 roof insulation per WSEC Table R402.1.1. Typical R-38 batt insulation is
between 10 and 12 inches in thickness, and when installed with the required 1 inch airspace,
will not fit in a 2x8 rafter bay.
Page 2 of 3
7.Wall & Roof Framing Plan - Indicate on the plans the exterior wall construction and the
means to be used to provide the required R-21 wall insulation per WSEC Table R402.1.1.
While your response to the review comment about the wall insulation notes the use of 2x4s
to be furred out with 2x2s, your response to the roof insulation stated the use of R-19 wall
insulation. The plans submitted in response to the review comments indicate 2x6 exterior
wall studs with R-21 wall insulation. Since the building plans are used to guide the proper
construction and inspection of the structure, what is shown on the plans prevails.
8.Wall & Roof Framing Plan - Clarify the callout for the (2)2x8 HF to be used as a girder to
support the roof rafters for the two roof structures. It appears to be over spanned, fails in
bending and deflects beyond that allowed per Table R307.1.
9.Wall & Roof Framing Plan Indicate on the plans the means to be used to support the south
end of the (2)2x8 HF to be used as a girder to support the roof rafters for the two roof
structures.
10.Wall & Roof Framing Plan Indicate on the plans the walls used to support the roof rafters
over the Computer Room and the hallway. The span of the rafters and the bearing support
required of the floor framing below the walls cannot be determined until the load path has
been defined.
11.Wall & Roof Framing Plan Clarify the omission of the 4.0x5.0 window in the east wall of
the Walk-in-Closet represented on the earlier building plans. See also review comment
#12.
12.Wall & Roof Framing Plan Indicate on the plans the required beam to support the roof
framing load over the 4.0x5.0 window in the east wall of the Walk-in-Closet represented
on the earlier building plans. See also review comment #11.
13.Wall & Roof Framing Plan The 32 door at the top of the proposed stairway appears to
have been removed in response to the earlier review comment. Clarify the note Proposed
Wood Steps 2x4 Guards to the left of the 3.0x3.0 window adjacent the removed door.
Page 3 of 3