2015-0032 Memory Care.pdf
City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
DATE: March 30, 2015
TO: Edmonds Memory Care, LLC
jeff@rjdevelopmentservices.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 could not 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.
Again, please note that a complete review could not be performed by the Building Division, and
therefore may result in additional comments during any subsequent reviews.
Structural Calculations
1.The minimum snow load typically accepted within the City of Edmonds is 25 PSF due to the
high moisture content of snowfall in this area in addition to the high probability of rain
subsequent to a snow event. Please revise calculations or verify the adequacy of the
structural members selected.
2.The seismic design category for this site address is D. Please revise the calculations.
2
3.The calculations show options for rafters of various sizes, grades and materials, however the
only option on the plans refers to a manufacturer (Hambro) designed layout. Please clarify.
a.Additionally, no roof layout from Hambro was provided. If no roof framing layout
is provided at the time of resubmittal, please note on the plans that the roof framing
will be a deferred submittal item.
4.It appears that the column design provided utilizes the f (perpendicular) for Douglas Fir.
c
That would require Douglas Fir mud sill plates throughout the structure. Verify the use of
Douglas Fir mud sill plates or revise the calculations for Hemlock Fir.
5.The lateral design shows that the Response Modification Factor, R, used in calculating
lateral loads is 6.5. That value for R is reserved for light-weight, wood-framed construction.
This structure also consists of concrete and masonry shear walls at the lower level. Please
revise the calculations as required.
Structural Plans:
6.Sheet S-1
a.Revise allowable soil bearing pressure to match that provided in the geotechnical
report and which was used in the structural calculations.
b.Verify the use of the correct Seismic Response Coefficient, R.
7.Sheet S-1.2
a.Detail F
i.Provide the complete beam call-out.
ii.Describe how the lateral load generated by the concrete slab will be
transferred to the decking and steel beams.
b.Details J and K Please complete the details.
8.Sheet S-1.3
a.Detail H Specify vertical reinforcement spacing.
9.Sheets S-2.1a and S2.1b This sheet number (as listed in the Structural Sheet Index) does
not exist. Instead, Sheets H1.1-EST and H1.2-EST were included in the plan. Additionally,
those sheets that were included are incomplete, and do not include a beam schedule. Please
reconcile the Structural Sheet Index with the actual sheets included, verify that those sheets
are complete, and include a beam schedule to help guide proper review, construction and
inspection.
10.Sheets S3.1a and S3.1b See comment 9 above. Reference Sheets H2.1-EST and H2.2-EST
included in the submittal set.
11.Sheet S4.1
a.The roof trusses 1.1 through 1.13 have not been specified on the plans
b.Many of the structural elements listed on this sheet are inconsistent with the
calculation package, the framing plan, or both. Others were not readily located on
the plans. Please reconcile the plans to match the calculations and vice versa. The
elements observed to be in error include: 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 2.7, 2.11, 2.12, 2.13, 2.20,
2.25 and 2.31. Additional structural elements were found to be incorrect. Those
elements are identified under comment 13b, because those elements are specified on
the sheet associated with that comment. Again, please note that the next review of
the structural sheets may result in additional comments.
c.Two of the detail bugs have a sheet number referenced but no detail number
referenced. Please update.
d.Provide a detail bug for all the applicable details. Remove extraneous details from
the plans.
12.Sheet S4.2
a.The structural notes included on this sheet should be removed since the note at the
end of the structural notes on Sheet S-4.1 reference Sheet S-4.3.
b.Detail D the beam 2.4 referenced is in error. Please revise.
c.Detail H for consistency, please reference the beam by the member number it was
assigned.
d.Details I and K The member numbers referenced are in error. Please revise.
13.Sheet S4.3
a.Detail E specify the strap to be used.
b.Per comment 11b above, the following structural members were found to be in error:
2.36, 2.40, 2.41, 2.42, 2.43 and 2.45. Again, please note that the next review of the
structural sheets may result in additional comments.
Page 2 of 3
14.Sheet S-5.1
a.Several detail bugs appear to be incomplete. Please revise.
b.Include shear flow details for shear walls of each material, especially where non-like
materials interface.
c.Concrete Shear Wall Schedule and Notes Specify the rebar spacing. Include
detailing for the concrete shear walls.
d.Include structural detailing for the masonry shear walls.
15.Sheet S-5.2
a.See comments 14a through 14d above.
16.Sheet S-5.3
a.References to shear wall details are confusing and incomplete. This sheet does not
explain where the associated specifications can be found. Additionally, the
following sheet, Sheet S-5.4 does not contain some of the details referenced, and
some of the details do not match the walls where they are referenced. Please revise.
17.Sheet S-5.4 verify that each of the details is correctly referenced on the plans. Some were
found to be in error.
Page 3 of 3