Loading...
20170530151031.pdf0 1: D Af City of Edmonds 1P PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS BUELDING DIVISION (425) 771-0220 DATE: December 2, 2016 TO: Jeff Geers jeffgeers@outlook.corn FROM: Andrew Gahan, Plans Examiner RE: Plan Check: BLD2016-1348 Project: New SFR Project Address: 9342 232 nd Street W SUB MAY 3 r) 2.(ol �_`IIUILDINC, DEPARTMF�,rr CITY OF EDMONDS 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 A5 1. The plans show that a tankless water heater is to be installed, which concurs with the energy code information provided on sheet A2. However, the application Form A submitted states that no tankless water heater is to be used. Please clarify. 2. The windows at the left side (moveable side) of the sliding glass door leading from the Great Room to the Outdoor Living space should be labeled as safety glazing per IRC R308.4.2. Sheet S I 2/S I Main Floor: 3. Detail the shear flow at the bumped out area. This shear wall appears to be offset from the shear walls above and offset from the foundation below. 4. Along the same wall line, please clarify (with details) how the shear load will be transferred around the stair area. In addition, justify the inclusion of the entire shear wall length where the stairs interrupt the floor diaphragm. 3/S I Upper Floor: 5. Clarify why there are specifications for two different shear wall types along what appears to be the same (rear) wall line. 6. An MST72 is shown at the rear, right comer of the building between (2) windows. I was unable to determine the purpose of this strap, please clarify. 7. Similarly, the locations of the (2) MST72 straps located mid -wall in the longest wall along the right side of the structure are atypical. Please clarify their purpose. 8. Similar again, there are MST72 straps located along the left side of the structure where none appear to be required per the engineering, and there are walls with smaller widths along the same wall line that would, by geometry, produce larger overturning forces, but no holdowns are provided. Please clarify. 9. The engineering does not appear to differentiate overturning forces resulting from different shear wall lengths. Therefore, it is assumed that if holdowns are required along a wall line, they are required at each end of each wall. Please clarify why there are wall -ends without holdowns along the right side of the structure. 10. The P 1 -4 shear wall along the right side of the structure at the stairs does not appear to meet the aspect ratio requirements set forth in Table 4.3.4 of the AWC SDPWS. Please clarify. 11. Please add a note to see detail 20/S3 to clarify the intended location of the HDU5 holdowns. Sheet S2 12. Either add the structural information to this sheet, or at a minimum, a note to see the Architectural sheets for structural specifications. 13. For consistency, please show the HDU8 holdowns as appropriate where detail 18/S3 is referenced, consistent with the HDU5 holdowns at the other end of the same floor framing members. 14. It appears that detail 20/S3 should be referenced where detail 21/S3. Please verify. 15. Please verify that the detail bug referencing ll/S3 is correctly placed. It appears to be a different section. Page 2 of 2