Loading...
2015-0375 Mietzner SFR2 - Williams.pdf City of Edmonds PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS BUILDING DIVISION (425) 771-0220 DATE: August 5, 2015 TO: Mietzner Brothers Properties, LLC mikem@mietznergroup.com FROM: Chuck Miller, Plans Examiner RE: Plan Check: BLD2015-0375 Project: Mietzner SFR th Project Address: 20607 85 Place 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. General Review Note: During the review of the resubmitted construction documents, changes appear to have been made to the plans beyond those in response to the earlier plan review comments. Just as with the changes made in response to plan review comments, all other changes are required to be ‘clouded’, or otherwise highlighted, and be accompanied by written notes explaining the change. Otherwise, additional review time is required and possibly additional plan review fees. On sheets A1- Elevations – and A4 – First Floor: 1.Clarify the note “NFPA 13-R Fire Protection System”. Such a system requires all spaces to be sprinklered, including closets, small bathrooms, pantries, attics, and other concealed spaces non-living spaces. While permitted, it is not a required or typical installation in a single family residential structure. On sheet A3 – Foundation: 2.Foundation/Basement a.Clarify the callout for detail ‘4/A3 – minus slab’ for the required foundation construction on the north and east sides of the crawl space below the ‘Office/Den/Bedroom 2’ and the ‘Kitchen’. It does not appear to correspond with the anticipated construction represented on sheet ‘A2’ – Rear Elevation. In addition, the elimination of the slab requires an alternative means to resist sliding of the footing. b.Clarify the callout for the 6x12 beam to be used to support the loads at the east end of the deck joists. It appears to be over spanned, fails in bending, and deflects beyond that permitted by IRC Table R301.7. It appears that the center post was eliminated from the prior submittal. c.Indicate on the plans the required ‘widened’ footing to support the loads below the north end of the beam over the window in the east wall of ‘Bedroom 4’. The ‘typical’ footing appears to be undersized for the loads anticipated by the represented construction. The review comment response states “Footing in Bedrm 4 (actually B3) – widened to 24” – clouded on A3”. No change appears to have been made to the resubmitted construction documents (Bedroom 3 is represented in the southeast corner of the structure, below the ‘Master Bedroom’ walk-in-closet and bathroom, on the submitted construction documents). d.Clarify the callout for detail ‘4/A3 – minus slab’ for the required foundation construction on the west side of the crawl space below the ‘Dining Room’ and the ‘Entry’. It does not appear to correspond with the anticipated construction represented on sheet ‘A1’ – Front Elevation – or the provided structural calculations. In addition, the elimination of the slab requires an alternative means to resist sliding of the footing. e.Indicate on the plans the required foundation construction on the east side of the garage and of the crawlspace to the south of the garage (shearwall line ‘B’) per the provided structural calculations. f.Eliminate from the plans the callout for detail ‘2/A6’ on the west side of the crawl space below the ‘Dining Room’ and the ‘Entry’. There does not appear to be any framed window openings at that location. 3.Detail 9 – Clarify the callout for the 18x18x8 pads to support the loads below each end of the 6x12 deck beam and the east ends of the beams supporting the roof over the deck. They appear to be undersized for the loads anticipated by the represented construction. The removal of the center post below the 6x12 deck beam has resulted in greater loads at the north and south ends of the beam. 4.Detail 15 – Indicate on the plans the required depth of 12 inches below top of slab for interior footings supporting bearing walls per IRC R403.1.4.2. On sheet A4 – First Floor: 5.First Floor a.Indicate on the plans the required minimum beams to be used to support the loads over the ‘Covered Outdoor Living’. The review comment response states “Covered Outdoor Living beams calced (sic) – clouded on A4 and beam calc (sic) attached”. No change appears to have been made to the resubmitted construction documents. Beams (8x12s) have been added to the deck framing on the north and south ends of the deck on sheet ‘A3’ – Foundation/Basement – that may have intended to be represented on sheet ‘A4’. Page 2 of 3 b.Clarify the callout for the 4x12 HF #2 beam to be used to support the loads over the east window in the ‘Master Suite’. It appears to be over spanned and fails in bending. The loads from the east end of the girder truss do not appear to have been accounted for in the provided beam calculations. The review comment response states “Master suite E window beam calc (sic) redone – clouded on A4 and beam calc (sic) attached”. No change appears to have been made to the resubmitted construction documents. The beam calculation appears to be for the loads over the east window in the ‘Sitting Room’. c.Indicate on the plans the minimum required post (‘trimmers’) to support the loads noted in the provided beam calculations below the north end of the 4x12 beam to be used over the east window in the ‘Great Room. On sheet A6 – Details: 6.Detail 20 – Typical Stair Detail - Clarify the note to “Firestop adjacent walls per 708.2.1.”. There is no section 708.2.1 in the IRC or the IBC. Page 3 of 3