2015-0639 Pruett addition-proposed ADU 2- Shapiro Arch.pdf
City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
DATE: September 30, 2015
TO: AD Shapiro Architects
Tony Shapiro
tonys@adshipiro.com
FROM: Chuck Miller, Plans Examiner
RE: Plan Check: BLD2015-0639
Project: Pruett addition-proposed ADU
nd
Project Address: 9011 192 Street SW
During a review of the plans by the Building Division for the above noted project, it was found that
A complete review cannot be
the following information, clarifications, or changes are needed.
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.
nd
Resubmittals must be made at the Development Services Department on the 2 Floor of City
Hall. Permit Center hours are M, T, Th, & F from 8am-4:30pm. The Permit Center is closed
on Wednesdays.
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:
1.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.
2.All references to fire-resistance rated construction have been removed from the plans as
permitted by a note on the plans indicating the installation of a smoke alarm system where
all required smoke alarms in the accessory dwelling unit and the primary dwelling unit are
interconnected in such a manner that the actuation of one alarm will activate all alarms in
both the primary dwelling unit and the accessory dwelling unit.
On sheet A 101 Cover Sheet, Code Notes, Vicinity Map, Project Team:
3.Energy Code Data - Note #8 Clarify the selected WSEC Table 406.2 option 3a. The
existing structure is noted by the Snohomish County Assessors office and in the Scope of
Work Note #5 as being heated hydronically. Option 3a regards furnace installations.
Note 3a pertains to the master suite
The response to the plan review comment states:
being heated & cooled by electric heat/heat pump system. Note 5 pertains to the
hydronic infloor heating system in the ADU and existing slab on grade areas which will
have a topping slab over R?(sic) Insulation.
. As noted earlier, option 3a regards
furnace installations, not heat pumps of either the air-source or ground source type covered
by other available options. In addition, there does not appear to be a corresponding entry for
the installation of a heat pump on the City of Edmonds Residential Building Permit
Application. As with most of the options, the building permit drawings shall specify the
option being selected and shall specify the heating equipment type and the minimum
equipment efficiency per WSEC Table 406.2.
On sheet A 111 Main Floor Plan, Window Plan - sheet A 112 Upper Floor Plan, Window
Schedule sheet A 201 East & West Elevations, Window and Door Schedules:
4.Window Schedule
a.Clarify the difference in the number of windows marked 03 proposed to be
installed and of those represented on the plans.
b.Clarify the difference in the number of windows marked 27 proposed to be
installed and of those represented on the plans.
On sheet A 111 Main Floor Plan, Window Schedule:
5.Main Floor Plan Indicate on the plans the required emergency escape and rescue opening
from the sleeping room identified as Bedroom 3 (space 113) that opens directly to a public
way, or to a yard or court that leads to a public way per IRC R310.1. The opening
represented on the plans submitted prior appears to have been omitted or removed.
General Review Note:
6.Sheets S-1 through S-4 - Provide a signed, dated, stamped seal, or facsimile thereof, for the
non-prescriptive structural designs prepared or overseen by a registered design professional
per IRC R301.1.3, IBC 107.1, and RCW 18.08.370.
On sheet S-2 Upper Floor and sheet S-3 - Roof Level:
7.Clarify the required minimum 6x12 existing beam to be verified used to support the loads
over the east and west walls of the Kitchen. Using the same loads as those applied to
beams B2-3 and B2-3 in the provided structural calculations, the 6x12s appear to be over
spanned and fail in bending.
Page 2 of 3
On sheet S-4 Structural Details:
8.Detail #1 - Indicate on the plans the minimum required width of the foundation wall to guide
proper construction and inspection. The response to the plan review comment states:
Footing width dimension of 1-4 has been added to the framing plan.
Footing width
was, and still is, indicated at 1-4. There still does not appear to be an indication on the
plans of the required minimum foundation wall width.
Page 3 of 3