2015-0032 Memory Care - Structural 2.pdf
City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
DATE: July 8, 2015
TO: Edmonds Memory Care LLC
jeff@rjdevelpmentservices.com
FROM: Andrew Gahan, Plans Examiner
RE: Plan Check: BLD2015-0032
Project: New Commercial Building
th
Project Address: 7208 & 7220 210 Street SW
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.
Sheet S-1
1.Please add special inspection requirements for the pipe pile placement.
2.The response letter stated that the concrete compressive strength for walls was updated to
3000 psi; however, the cast-in-place concrete table shows 3500 psi for walls. Please clarify.
3.Structural Sheet Index the sheets listed as S0, S1 and S2 OF 3 do not correlate with the
sheets provided in their place. They differ in sheet number, title and content. Please clarify.
Sheet S1.1
4.Verify the shape of the footing located at gridline C-6.
Sheet S-1.1A
5.Clarify the significance of the shaded areas within the foundation plan. In addition, verify
the location of the shaded areas as it is unclear as shown where the extremities of the shaded
areas occur.
6.Move the pier call out 66 at gridline G-6 so the note below is legible.
7.2-way Slab Detail - the note #5 BAR @ 8 O.C. EW ENTIRE BOTTOM OF SLAB points
to the rebar along the top of the slab. Please clarify.
8.Provide dimensions/embedment lengths for the #5 hooked dowel.
9.The geotechnical report does not appear to address the use of pipe piles for this site. Please
provide a geotechnical report to include conclusions/recommendations for the use of pipe
piles. In addition, please provide structural engineering to support the design submitted.
Note that additional review will be required upon receipt of the above information.
Sheet S-1.2
10.Please clarify the load path for the overturning forces resisted by the ST6224 strap in Detail
B. It appears that the load is not being transferred to the wall/foundation below.
11.Similarly, clarify the load path for overturning forces in Detail H. In addition, provide
calculations for the floor joists to include the aforementioned overturning forces.
12.Please clarify that Detail G is to be used as a typical detail if it is to be used as such.
13.Detail M specifies 20d nails per the shear schedule, yet no 20d nails can be found on the
shear schedule. Please clarify.
14.Please provide submittals for those elements to be designed by others including:
a.Concrete floor design
b.Truss design
c.Awning specifications
Sheet S-1.3
15.Provide calculations for each of the cantilevered retaining wall conditions shown.
Sheet S-1.4
16.Please clarify details D, E and F to show what is happening with the rebar ties at the ends
opposite of the foundation walls.
17.Provide calculations for the concrete slab shown in Detail H or identify it as an element to
be designed by others. If by others, see item 13 above.
Sheets HJ1 HJ3
18.Please provide supporting calculations for the structural elements represented in these
sheets. Otherwise, clearly state on sheet S-1 that these items will be submitted as a Deferred
Submittal.
19.In addition, above sheets are stamped NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. Please provide the
sheets intended for construction.
Sheet S-3.1
20.Beam Note 3.22 please specify the beam size.
21.Beam Note 3.24 please specify the beam size.
22.Note 2 please specify the correct maximum span allowable regarding web stiffening.
Sheet S-4.1
23.Structural Notes 1.1-1.12 Please transfer the engineering design to the plans or provide
roof framing plans complete with truss/rafter specifications along with supporting
calculations. Otherwise, clearly state on sheet S-1 that these items will be submitted as a
Deferred Submittal.
Sheet S-5.1
24.The openings shown around the south stairs differs between the framing plan and the shear
wall layout. Please clarify.
Page 2 of 4
Sheet S-5.2
25.There are widespread variances between the shear walls specified in the lateral calculations
provided and the shear wall layout on the plans. In most cases, those variances are in a more
conservative direction (i.e. shear wall upgrades). Please verify that this is the intention of
the designer.
26.Shear wall 4 is used throughout the floor plan; however no shear wall 4 appears in the shear
wall schedule. Please revise.
27.There are many walls that are shaded to indicate that they are shear walls, but they are not
included in the calculations, and furthermore do not meet the aspect ratio required.
Examples are: along gridline (GL) 1 between GL C.5 and E.5, along GL G.2 at GL 5 and 6.
In addition the angled wall adjacent to wall 14 and north of wall s is shaded indicating
that it is a shear wall, but is unidentified and unspecified.
28.There are inconsistencies between the calculations, the plans and the dimensions shown
adjacent to wall aa along GL H. Please clarify.
29.It appears that wall 23 is a discontinuous shear wall. This should be represented as two
separate shear walls.
30.It appears that wall j along GL B.5 between GL 7 and 9 is missing holdowns as specified
in the calculations.
31.It appears that the unidentified wall along GL B.5 at GL 6 may require holdowns. Please
identify the wall and revise with holdowns as required.
32.The walls identified as wall 28 along GL 8.2 at GL F have scaled lengths that differ from
the lengths stated on the plans. Please clarify.
Sheet S-5.3
33.Clarify how the floor load will be routed to the shear walls shown along the exterior walls
adjacent to both sets of stairs.
34.Similar to comment 25 above, please verify that the widespread shear wall upgrades are
intended.
35.Similar to comment 27 above, there are many walls shaded to indicate they are shear walls,
but they are unidentified, unspecified and many do not meet the aspect ratio required.
Please clarify.
36.Similar to comment 29 above, wall 28 appears to be discontinuous, and should be counted
as two separate walls.
37.The wall located along GL 7 between GL B and C is shaded with hatching that differs from
the shear wall hatching in the legends. Please specify what the unidentified hatching
indicates or revise the plan.
38.It appears that the wall 30 along GL 7.5 between E.5 and E.75 is missing holdowns as
indicated in the structural calculations.
39.It appears that wall 23 should be shaded to indicate that it is a shear wall. Please revise.
40.Similar to comment 26 above, shear wall 4 does not appear in the shear wall schedule.
Please revise.
Structural Calculations
41.Please revise page 1 to reference the correct current code(s) administered within the City of
Edmonds.
Page 3 of 4
42.Page 79 it appears that the shear load per linear foot calculated for walls o, p and q
are above the limits of shear wall 6 construction per the shear wall schedule. Please revise.
43.Page 80 - it appears that the shear load per linear foot calculated for walls aa, bb, cc and
dd are above the limits of shear wall 6 construction per the shear wall schedule. Please
revise.
44.Page 80 the calculations for wall 18 is not shown. Please revise.
Page 4 of 4