20140814152608312.pdfCity of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
a
DATE: August 11, 2014 �
TO: Randall J. Munson
U"a4V➢4�� V1fVGkqu`�6DIfn�€�F Q�6ktlQ �p��� liV��°� / r �v� �t � r° ��y0 �i' 1�,,,
rt.
FROM: Chuck Millen, Plans Examiner
RE: Plan Check: BLD2014-0189
Project: Coleman SFR
Project Address: 902 9th Avenue S
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.
On sheet A-6:
' Foundation Plan — Indicate onthe plans the required `widened' footing to support the load
below the north end of Beam. No. 23'. The review response indicates the provision of
support however, no change appeared to be made on the plans.
`°Z Foundation Plan — Indicate on the plants the required `widened' footing to support the load
below the south ends of `Beam No. 23' and `Beare No. 24' and the east end of `Bearn. No. 7'.
The review response indicates the provision of support however, no change appeared to be
made on the plans. The beam identified in the review response as `Beam No. 24' is actually
`Beam No. 25'.
Foundation Plan — Indicate on the plans the required `widened' footing to support the load
below the area where the south end of 'Beam No. 22' and the west end of `Beam No. 7'
converge. The review response indicates that the item has been `Corrected' however, no
change appeared to be made on the plans.
On sheet A-8:
Roof Framing Plan — Indicate on the plans the required means to be used to support the
west end of 'Beam No. 12' to guide proper review, construction, and inspection. The review
response indicates the addition of `Beam No. 31' along with supporting calculations
however, no such beam or calculations could be found on the plans or among the
resubmitted documents.