2013-0860 Gray addition5.pdf
City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
DATE: August 12, 2014
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 or otherwise highlighted changes can be found on the revised 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.
On sheet AD1.0:
1.Foundation Demo Plan Clarify the difference in the size of the isolated footing in the
east
center of the garage and of that required at that location on sheet AF1.0 Foundation
Plan. The review response confirms the dimensions of the west isolated footing in the
garage. However, the 3-4 ¾ x 24 footing to the east appears to be a bit smaller than the
48x24 footing represented at the same location on sheet AF1.0.
On sheet AF1.0:
2.Second Floor Framing Plan
a.Clarify the callout for the east existing 5-1/2x7-1/2 glu-lam beam to be used to
support the loads from the (4)2x8 and (3)2x8 built-up members and the loads from
the floor joists. It appears to be over spanned, fails in bending, and deflects beyond
that allowed per Table R301.07. The point load from the (4)2x8s noted in the
provided structural calculations appears to be a bit low and that from the (3)2x8s
does not appear to have been accounted for at all.
b.Clarify the callout for the east existing 5-1/2x7-1/2 glu-lam beam to be used to
support the loads from the (2)2x8 built-up member and the loads from the floor
joists. It appears to be over spanned, fails in bending, and deflects beyond that
allowed per Table R301.07. The uniform loads appear to be a bit low and the point
load from the (2)2x8s does not appear to have been accounted for at all.
3.Foundation Plan - Indicate on the plans the required minimum wood member thickness and
species for the attachment of the HDU11-SDS2.5 holdowns at each end of the shearwall
marked 7 along the north wall of the garage to develop the tension load noted in the
provided structural calculations.
On sheet A1.1:
4.Roof Framing Plan - Clarify the callout for the (4)2x8 HF #2 to be used as a girder
supporting the upper and lower roof rafters. It appears to be over spanned and deflects
beyond that allowed per Table R301.7. The provided structural calculations do not appear
to include the overhang and indicate a lower than anticipated tributary load.
Page 2 of 2