2017-0548 Hrankowski-Brown addition-remodel - Urbal Arch.pdfOV EQ_4 City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
DATE: May 22, 2017
TO: Chad Lorentz
Urbal Architecture
chadl@urbalarchitecture.com
FROM: Chuck Miller, Plans Examiner
RE: Plan Check: BLD2017--0548
Project Address: 18622 84th Avenue W
Project: Hrankowski/Brown addition -remodel
Scope: Convert portion of garage to living space — re -frame existing roof and
interior/exterior walls to accommodate interior/exterior changes — interior remodel —
covered deck/patio addition — VB construction - R-YU occupancy groups —
mechanical and plumbing included
Please be advised that the building plans for the above referenced project have been disapproved
for the purposes of obtaining a building permit. During a review of the plans by the Building
Division for compliance with the applicable building codes, it was found that the following
information, clarifications, or changes are needed. Reviews by other divisions, such as Planning,
Engineering, or Fire, may result in additional comments that require attention beyond the scope of
this letter.
A complete review cannot be performed until the revised plans/documents, including a
written response in itemized letter format indicating where the 'clouded' or otherwise
highlighted changes can be found on the revised plans, have been submitted to a Permit
Coordinator.
Resubmittals must be made at the Development Services Department on the 2 nd Floor of City Hall.
Permit Center hours are M, T, Th, & F from 8am-4:30pm and from 8:30am-12pm on Wednesdays.
General plan review note:
I . Provide as part of a complete building permit application submittal construction documents
'sealed' and 'signed' by the licensed design professional per Revised Code of Washington
(RCW) Chapter 18.08.370(2).
2. Specify on the plans the selected option from Washington State Energy Code (WSEC) Table
R406.2 to be used to achieve the minimum number of 'Additional Energy Efficiency
Credits' required per WSEC R406.2.
3. If a significant portion of the roof is removed, along with the amount of rebuilt exterior wall
not otherwise required proposed on sheet 'SY and after that work necessary in response to
the question regarding the interior floor construction and the missing sheet 'Al.01' is
completed, the concern is the possibility that the proposed work will exceed the allowable
extent of removal and reconstruction of the existing structure. If more than 75% of the
existing structure is removed, the project is required to be in conformance with the full
provisions of the City of Edmonds Community Development Code as that of a new
residence. Reinforcing the concern is that noted in plan review comment '9.a' and the
inconsistent interior floor construction represented on the provided construction documents
(including the City of Edmonds 'Residential Building Permit Application' that indicates
'hydronic floor heating' where the 'existing' floor framing is wood -framed construction, and
doesn't note the installation of a boiler or other appliance to provide heat for the system).
The plans must consistently represent the proposed work to be completed to guide proper
review, construction, and inspection for compliance with the applicable codes.
On sheet AO.00 — Title Sheet:
4. Project Description — Clarify the difference in the proposed construction of a 'deck to be
added to the western fagade of the house' and referenced similarly elsewhere (sheets
'AO.01', 'Al.00', 'Al.03', 'A4.02', and 'A5.05') and of that indicated on sheet 'S2' — Main
Floor Framing Plan.
5. Drawing Index — Provide as part of a complete building permit application submittal the
following sheets:
A1.01 — Demolition Plan — Level I
0 A7.01 — Stair Details
On sheet AO.01 — Project Data, Zoning & Conditions of Approval:
6. Energy Code Compliance — Change on the plans the referenced code section regarding the
applicability of the WSEC to alterations and additions of existing buildings to that found in
the currently adopted version of the code.
7. Energy Notes - Change on the plans the wording of the referenced code section regarding
the placement of the WSEC compliance certificate to that found in the currently adopted
version of the code.
On sheet A1.00 — Site Plan:
8. Site Plan — Provide on the plans a detail and a reference to it for the minimum required
construction of the 'Proposed Glass Overhang Above Entry' to guide proper review,
construction, and inspection.
On sheet A 1.02 — Demolition Plan — Roof:
9. Demolition Plan — Roof
a. Clearly specify on the plans the elements of the 'structure to be removed ... to enable
new vaulted ceilings' to guide proper review, construction and inspection. The
'Demo Plan Notes' — Note 4 — indicates 'All existing rafters to remain' as does the
'Roof Framing Plan' on sheet 'S3' although the roof rafters specified in the structural
Page 2 of 7
calculations supporting the gravity design appear to indicate the replacement of the
4existing' rafters.
b. Provide on the plans a detail and a reference to it for the required installation of roof
insulation for areas of the roof with 4x8 beams at 32 inches on -center with 2x
decking per WSEC R503. 1. 1.
10. Demo Plan Notes — Note 4 — Clearly specify on the plans the elements of the 'floors to be
demolished & replaced per plans', such as 'floor finishes only' or as otherwise applicable.
On sheet A1.03 — Floor Plan — Proposed Level 1:
11. Level I
a. Change on the plans the elevation callout for the 'North Elevation' from '3/A3.02' to
'2/A3.02'.
b. Indicate on the plans the 'type' (self-contained portable residential or nonself-
contained residential — See International Swimming Pool and Spa Code (ISPSQ) of
spa (hot tub) to be installed to guide proper review, installation, and inspection for
compliance with the applicable provisions of the ISPSC. Of particular concern are
the means to be used to fill and drain the spa, the means to be used to heat the water,
suction entrapment avoidance, and the safety barrier/cover.
c. Indicate on the plans the required handrail for the stairs leading to the 'At -grade Hot
Tub' per International Residential Code (IRC) R311.7.8.
d. Clarify on the plans the callout to door '108' for the bathroom to the east of the
'Master Bathroom'. The represented door does not appear to correspond with that
indicated on sheet 'A6.03' — Door Schedule.
e. Clarify on the plans the note: "2'-2" x 2'-Y Existing Attic Access to Remain' over
the hallway leading to the various bedrooms. It does not appear to correspond with
that anticipated after the removal and replacement of that required creating the
'vaulted ceiling' referenced on sheets 'Al.02', 'Al.04' and represented on details
'I/A4.02', 'R.I/A9.01'.
f. Provide on the plans a detail and a reference to it for the minimum required
construction of the 'Overhang Added to Existing Roof' to guide proper review,
construction, and inspection.
g. Indicate on the plans the required safety glazing for the window 'marked' 'F'
adjacent door '10 1' — Living Room — per IRC R3 08.4.2.
12. Plan Notes
a. Note 1 - Change on the plans the wording and the referenced code section regarding
the placement of the WSEC compliance certificate to that found in the currently
adopted version of the code.
b. Note 6 - Change on the plans the referenced WSEC code section regarding the
installation of recessed lighting to that found in the currently adopted version of the
code.
c. Note 12 — Eliminate from the note the reference to, or provide, sheet 'A5.06'
containing interior elevations. The referenced sheet does not appear to be listed in
the drawing index on sheet 'AO.00' or to be found among the other submitted
construction documents.
d. Note 14 — Clarify on the plans the reference to sheet 'A8.01' for skylight details.
Corresponding details representing that anticipated could not be found among the
other submitted construction documents.
Page 3 of 7
e. Note 17 — Change on the plans the sheet reference for information regarding door
widths, heights, and details from 'A6.02' to 'A6.03'. Sheet 'A6.02' regards window
installations.
On sheet Al. 04 — Roof Plan:
13. Roof - Change on the plans the elevation callout for the 'North Elevation' from '3/A3.02' to
'2/A3.02'.
On sheet A3.01 — Building Elevations:
14. East Elevation - Clarify on the plans the reference to detail 'H/A6.02' for details regarding
the 'New Cedar Gate'. Sheet 'A6.02' regards window installations.
On sheets A4.01 and A4.02 — Building Sections:
15. General plan review note regarding each of the sections — Clarify on the plans the difference
in the floor construction specified on sheet 'A9.01' for those areas 'marked' 'F. I' and of that
indicated as 'existing' and'... to remain' on sheet 'S2' — Main Floor Framing Plan.
On sheet A5.02 — Interior Elevations:
16. Detail IB - Clarify on the plans the reference to detail 'C/A6.02' for details regarding the
'New Glass Paneled Pocket Door'. Sheet 'A6.02' regards window installations.
17. Detail 2D - Clarify on the plans the reference to detail 'D/A6.01' for details regarding the
'Pocket Door with Glass Panels'. Sheet 'A6.01' regards window types and the 'Window
Schedule'.
On sheet A5.04 — Interior Elevations:
18. Entry Courtyard — Provide on the plans a detail and a reference to it for the minimum
required construction of the 'Entry Overhang Added to Existing Roof' to guide proper
review, construction, and inspection.
On sheet A8.01 — Details:
19. General plan review note regarding each of the details - Provide on the plans the following
information regarding the 'R-38 spray foam insulation' to be installed:
• The air permeability of the product/required minimum thickness to be applied to be
considered air -impermeable.
• The required thickness of product to be installed to meet the minimum insulation value
of R-38.
The 'existing roof framing' of 2x6 rafters over the bedrooms and garage and 4x8 beams at
32 inches on -center with 2x decking over the remainder of the structure noted on sheet 'SY
- Roof Framing - does not appear to provide the necessary conditions for the proposed
placement of spray foam insulation to develop the minimum required insulation value.
Page 4 of 7
On sheet A9.01 — Wall Types:
20. General plan review note regarding details 'C. 1', 'C.2', and 'C. 3' — Clarify on the plans the
note: "2x6 wood studs per struct." and the corresponding note: "R-21 (min.) batt insulation".
They do not appear to reflect the 'existing' framing elements anticipated considering the era
of original construction, required by applicable codes and standards, and predominately of
that required per the provided structural sheets.
2 1. Detail 'R. I' — Typ. Ventilated Roof — Clarify the difference in the specified insulation and
gypsum wallboard installations and of that noted in the roof details provided on sheet
'A8.01' and anticipated by the indicated existing roof framing members noted on sheet 'SY
— Roof Framing Plan.
22. Detail 'F. I' — Slab On Grade - Clarify on the plans the difference in the indicated floor
construction and of that indicated as 'existing' and '...to remain' on sheet 'S2' — Main Floor
Framing Plan.
On sheet S 1 — General Notes:
23. Design Criteria — Change on the plans the referenced code version from '2012' to '2015' to
reflect that currently adopted by the Washington State Building Code Council (SBCC),
effective July 1, 2016.
24. Concrete — Note 2 — Change on the plans the specified minimum concrete strength for
foundation walls and slab -on -grade (exterior) to that required for 'moderate' weathering
potential per IRC Table R402.2/Table R301.2(l) (as amended by Edmonds Community
Development Code (ECDC) 19.05.020.A).
On sheet S2 — Main Floor Framing Plan:
25. Main Floor Framing Plan
a. Clarify on the plans the difference in the proposed construction of a 'slab -on -grade'
structure to be added to the western fagade of the house and of that proposed on
sheet 'AO.00' — Project Description — and referenced similarly elsewhere (sheets
'AO.01', 'Al.00', 'Al.03', 'A4.02', and 'A5.05').
b. Clarify on the plans the callouts to detail 'I/S5' along the south and west portions
and to detail '3/S5' along the north portion of the structure. The 'reframed exterior
wall' construction specified in the details, along with that noted on sheet 'SY — Roof
Framing Plan — appears to beyond that required per applicable code and referenced
standards (AF&PA — Wood Frame Construction Manual (WFCM), AWC — Special
Design Provisions for Wind & Seismic (SDPWS)). The application of wall
sheathing and post -installed foundation anchorage, even as part of a voluntary
'seismic retrofit/upgrade', would not require the replacement of wall framing
members — see also plan review comment '3'.
c. Clarify on the plans the callout to detail '4/S5' along the west portion of the
structure. The resulting construction appears to be different than that proposed on
sheet 'AO.00' — Project Description — and referenced similarly elsewhere (sheets
'AO.01', 'Al.00', 'Al.03', 'A4.02', and 'A5.05').
Page 5 of 7
d. Clarify on the plans the callout to detail '7/S5' along the west portion of the stairs
leading to the 'At -grade Hot Tub'. The resulting construction appears to be different
than that proposed on sheet 'AO.00' — Project Description — and referenced similarly
elsewhere (sheets 'AO.01', 'Al.00', 'Al.03', 'A4.02', and 'A5.05').
On sheet S3 — Roof Framing Plan:
26. Roof Framing Plan
a. Provide on the plans a note or legend indicating the purpose of the 'number -in -a -
circle' where utilized to guide proper construction and inspection.
b. Clarify on the plans the notes to 'rebuild exterior wall w/ new openings 2x6 at 16"
o.c.' along the east and west walls of the structure. The 'rebuilt exterior walls',
along with the construction specified in the details 'I/S5' and '3/S5 referenced on
sheet 'S2' — Main Floor Framing Plan — appears to beyond that required per
applicable code and referenced standards (AF&PA — Wood Frame Construction
Manual (WFCM), AWC — Special Design Provisions for Wind & Seismic
(SDPWS)). The addition of windows and/or the replacement of existing windows
with larger windows would not require the replacement of wall framing members —
see also plan review comment '3'.
c. Clarify on the plans the proposed use of the 'existing' 2x6 roof rafters to support the
loads over the north portion of the structure. They appear to fail in bending and
deflect beyond that allowed per IRC Table R301.7. The removal of the 'existing'
ceiling framing to 'enable new vaulted ceilings' per sheet 'Al.02' appears to
eliminate the mid -span support bracing typical of a stick -framed roof structure
during the era of original construction. The provided structural calculations
supporting the gravity design appear to indicate a different framing member to be
used. Consideration should be given to the responses to other plan review comments
regarding the required roof insulation in the proposed resolution of this concern.
d. Clarify on the plans the specified beam (6x8) to be used to support the loads over the
windows and door along the east side of the structure. The width appears to be
greater than that required and prevents the required installation of 'R- 10' insulation
at the header per WSEC Table R402. 1. 1 not otherwise required if the 'existing' 2x4
wall framing is retained.
On sheet S4 — Shearwall Plan:
27. Shearwall Plan — Clarify on the plans the reference to detail '19/S5' for the required
installation of anchorage for the 'HDU4' holdown. It does not appear to reflect the type of
anchorage typical of that utilized for installations where the 'existing' foundation walls are
to be retained as noted on sheet 'S2' — Main Floor Framing Plan.
On sheet S5 — Details:
28. Detail I — Foundation Section — see plan review comment '25.b'.
29. Detail 3 — Foundation Section — see plan review comment '25.b'.
30. Detail 4 — Section — see plan review comments '25.a' and '25.c'.
Page 6 of 7
3 1. Detail 5 — Foundation Section — see plan review comments '25.a' and '25.c'. Of additional
concern is the intended use of the proposed construction to support a shear wall per sheet
'S4' — Shearwall Plan. The holdown anchorage (SB anchor bolt) specified on detail 'I 9/S5'
— HDU Holdown Detail — for the indicated holdown (HDU4) cannot be installed in concrete
masonry unit (CMU) foundation walls per the product manufacturer.
32. Detail 6 — Foundation Section — see plan review comments '25.a' and '25.c'.
33. Detail 7 — Slab On Grade Stairs — see plan review comments '25.a' and '25.d'.
34. Detail 8 — Foundation Section — see plan review comments '25.a' and '25.c'.
35. DetaiI19 — HDU Holdown Detail — Clarify on the plans the difference in the indicated
structural element supporting the shear wall and of that resulting from that specified on
detail '5/S5' — Foundation Section.
Page 7 of 7