2019-0529-0530 Main St Commons DiMarco.pdf
Page 1
DATE: June 21, 2019
TO: David DiMarco
Email: architect@icloud.com
FROM: Leif Bjorback, Building Official
RE: Plan Check: BLD2019-0529 and BLD2019-0530
Project: Main Street Commons: One new commercial building and renovation of existing
commercial building
Project Address: 550 Main St
During review of the plans for the above noted project, it was found that the following information,
clarifications or changes are needed. Please provide written responses to each comment, and submit revised
plans/documents to a permit coordinator in the Development Services Department.
Please respond to the following structural and non-structural review comments from Beck and Associates.
Beck & Associates, PLLC
Structural Engineering & Code Consulting
beckpllc@msm.com PH: 206-313-3739
June 14, 2019
Leif Bjorback
Building Official
City of Edmonds
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020-3145
Subject: Main Street Commons (Non-structural Review)
Permit: BLD19-00529 – West Building (Existing)
BLD19-00530 – East Building (New)
City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
Page 2 of 12
Per your request, Beck & Associates has completed a non-structural review of the drawings and
calculations for conformance with the 2015 International Building Code (IBC), as adopted and
amended by the State of Washington (WSA) and the City of Edmonds (ECC).
Our review of the plans and calculations indicates that corrections are necessary prior to permit
issuance. The applicant should address the following comments in itemized letter format in addition
to making corrections & revisions to the drawings. Corrections and revisions to the drawing should be
clouded so that they are clearly identifiable.
General
1) On the drawings, identify existing floor area & removed floor area for the West Building.
2) We understand that sprinkler systems themselves will be permitted separately. However, the
plans need to specify that the automatic sprinkler systems in both buildings will comply with NFPA
13.
3) Provide an analysis in the plans for allowable openings in the rated exterior walls of the West
Building. Table 705.8
a) No openings will be permitted in the west wall
b) 25% of the exterior wall is permitted to be openings in the south wall.
4) Provide analysis in the plans for projections from both buildings to demonstrate that the required
distance from property lines is maintained. 705.2
5) On the plans, specify requirements for glazing in skylights. 2405
6) On the plans, specify all locations where safety glazing is required. 2406
7) Where batt insulation is provided at unvented roofs, the insulation is required to be installed
directly under the roof sheathing. Additionally, no interior vapor retarders are permitted to be
installed on the ceiling side of the unvented attic assembly. These requirements need to be
specified on the plans. 1203.3
Egress (Ch. 10)
8) All doors serving A occupancies with an occupant load of 50 or more are required to be provided
with panic hardware. 1010.1.10 Update the Door Schedule to specify panic hardware at all
required locations:
a) West Building: Doors D.1, D.3, D.7, iD.6, iD.7
b) East Building: Doors D.11, D.17, D18, D.19
9) The egress analysis on sheet A0.1 shows that the main space of Tenant 2 has an occupant load
exceeding 49. (As an aside, our electronic scaling of this tenant space identifies an area of 805 sf,
producing an occupant load of 54, based on an occupant load factor of 15 sf/occupant).
a) The space is therefore required to be provided with two means of egress. Please note that
exiting through the Kitchen is not an acceptable means of egress for the main space. 1006,
1016.2
b) Since the occupant load will exceed 49, the egress doors will need to be provided with panic
hardware. 1010.1.10
10) Reference sheet A2.6 Ground Level. The plans show that the Stair from the basement Storage and
Kitchen exit into the Receiving Dock area. However, exiting is not permitted to pass through
storage rooms are spaces used for similar purposes. 1016.2(5)
Page 3 of 12
a) Either provide a mechanism (such as guards) to prevent anything from blocking the path of
egress from the Stair (leading from the Storage Room below) and from the Tenant 2 Kitchen,
or provide an alternate means of egress.
b) Please be aware that as currently designed, due to the common path of travel, the Stair
exiting from the basement Storage is required to exit through the Loading Dock area.
11) In numerous locations throughout the plans, guards are specified to have a height of 36”.
However, all guards are required to have a height of 42”. Handrails, themselves, are required to be
located 36” above the walking surface. Both guards and handrails are required at stairs. Update
the plans accordingly. 1014.2, 1015.3
12) Please be aware that exiting is required to be free and unobstructed at all times, including at
elevated exterior decks/terraces such as Terrace B.
a) Please confirm that door D.14 will remain unlocked at all times.
b) As an alternate, the City of Edmonds may be amenable to a policy that the City of Bellevue
uses in such cases (enclosed). If the applicant would like to use this policy to address this
condition, please include a copy of the policy requirements within the design drawings and
reference that policy from Terrace B.
Accessibility (IBC Ch. 11; ICC A117.1-09)
13) Reference the Site Plan on sheet A0.1.
a) Provide design and detailing for ramps leading from the accessible parking space to the west
side of the East Building. From the Civil drawings, there appear to be two ramps. Specify
slopes, edge protection, handrails, landings, etc. in order to provide the required accessible
route. 1104; ICC A117.1-09, 405
b) Reference the accessible parking space identified on the Site Plan on sheet A0.1.
i) This is required to be a van accessible parking space. 1106.5
(1) Update the plans to indicate that this is a van accessible parking space.
(2) Civil drawings already provide required vehicle and access aisle widths. No additional
dimensions are required. However, the architectural Site Plan should reference the
Civil drawings for these dimensions.
(3) Provide specifications and detailing for the required van accessible signage to
demonstrate compliance with ICC A117.1-09. ICC A117.1-09, 502.7
14) Reference A.eb.6.2 and A.wb.6.1 – Interior (Restroom) Elevations.
a) Specify the dimension and location of the rear wall horizontal grab bars. 604.5
b) Specify the dimension and location of the side wall horizontal grab bars. 604.5
Fire-Resistant Rated Construction
15) Rated parapets are required to be provided at rated exterior walls unless one of the exceptions of
705.11 is met. Update the plans to demonstrate how the parapet requirements will be met (or
how one of the exceptions will be met) for each of the rated wall conditions: 705.11
a) West wall of the West Building
b) South wall of the West Building
Page 4 of 12
16) Reference 3/A.wb.4.1 – Long Section Looking West. The section specifies a 1-hour floor-ceiling
assembly between the lower level and the main level. Identify the listed, tested assembly and
provide complete specifications and detailing for proper construction and inspection of this 1-hour
assembly.
17) Reference 2/A.wb.4.1 – Elevator. Provide complete specifications & detailing at all locations where
the proposed 1-hour assembly intersects or passes by floor and roof construction to demonstrate
the 1-hour rating will be maintained at these intersections.
18) Reference 1/A.wb.4.1 – Cross Section at Loft Bar. Also reference 11 & 12/A.wb.4.3. Provide
complete specifications & detailing at all locations where the proposed 1-hour exterior wall
assembly intersects floor and roof construction to demonstrate the 1-hour rating will be
maintained at these intersections.
Drawing Sheets
A0.1 - Coversheet
19) Reference the West Building plumbing analysis for Tenant 2. Given that the space will be used as a
restaurant, the plumbing fixture counts should be based on 1:125 for men and 1:75 for women for
both dining and kitchens. Update the analysis accordingly.
20) Reference the East Building occupant load analysis. Egress from the upper Event Space should be
based on an occupant load factor of 7 sf/occupant at a maximum since there is nothing prohibiting
the space from being used as standing space. Table 1004.1.2
a) Update the egress analysis accordingly.
b) Update the plumbing analysis accordingly.
21) Reference the Egress analysis for the East Building. Stairways are shown to be designed based on a
factor of 0.2” per occupant. However, the required factor is 0.3” per occupant for stairs. 1005.3.1
A2.6 – Ground Level
22) West Building
a) The elevator machine room is required to be provided with the same rating as the elevator
shaft. Update the plans accordingly. 3005.4
b) It appears that Tenant 1 is provided with an automatic horizontal sliding door at the main
entrance (Door D.1). The plans need to specify all requirements of section 1010.1.4.3 to
demonstrate that the door will meet egress requirements. Please note that even though
adequate egress is provided from this space aside from this main entrance door, the
horizontal sliding door is required to be considered and treated as an egress door. Studies
show that people tend to exit from the door that they used to enter a building. 1010.1.4.3
23) East Building
a) The elevator machine room is required to be provided with the same rating as the elevator
shaft. Update the plans accordingly. 3005.4
A2.8 – Proposed Roof Plan
24) Two separate drain lines are specified at the roof corners. We suspect the intent is to meet the
requirements for secondary drainage. The requirements for secondary drainage need to be
specified on the drawings. Secondary (emergency) roof drainage is required to be provided in
accordance with UPC 1101.12. The secondary roof drains are required to be located no less than 2
inches above the roof surface. The maximum height of the roof drains shall be a height to prevent
the depth of ponding water from exceeding that for which the roof was designed. Additionally, the
Page 5 of 12
secondary roof drainage system is required to be a separate system and be sized in accordance
with Table 1101.12.1 based on the rainfall rate for which the primary system is designed. Update
the plans to provide detailing for the secondary roof drainage and specify the requirements within
the plan set. UPC 1101.12
A.wb.4.4
25) Reference 10/A.wb.4.4 – West Building Canopy Plan, Typ. On the plans, provide specifications for
the U’Lite Polycarbonate Panels to demonstrate that installation will be in accordance with the
code. Reference code sections 2606 & 2609. 2606, 2609
Energy Code (2015 WSEC)
26) The Electrical plans need to be updated to include the following for each building:
a) Lighting power allowance worksheets to demonstrate that the proposed wattage does not exceed
that permitted. Please be aware that reduced lighting power has been chosen as a means to
achieve one of the additional energy efficiency package options. Address both interior and
exterior lighting. WSEC 406.3
b) Provide documentation to demonstrate compliance with lighting controls. WSEC 405.2
Foam Plastic Insulation
27) Foam plastic insulation are required to have a flame spread index of not more than 75 and a smoke-
developed index of not more than 450 where tested in the maximum thickness intended for use in
accordance with ASTM E84 or UL 723. These requirements need to be specified within the plan set.
2603.3
28) Roof assemblies with foam plastic insulation are permitted, provided the assembly with the foam
plastic insulation is a Class A, B, or C roofing assembly where tested in accordance with ASTM E108 or
UL 790. These requirements need to be specified within the plan set. 2603.6
Please contact me should you have any questions.
Respectfully,
Douglas Beck, PE, SE
Beck & Associates, PLLC
Page 6 of 12
June 14, 2019
Leif Bjorback
Building Official
City of Edmonds
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020-3145
Subject: Main Street Commons (Structural Review)
Permit: BLD19-00529 – West Building (Existing)
BLD19-00530 – East Building (New)
Per your request, Beck & Associates has completed a structural review of the drawings and calculations
for conformance with the 2015 International Building Code (IBC), as adopted and amended by the State
of Washington and the City of Edmonds.
Our review of the plans and calculations indicates that corrections are necessary prior to permit issuance.
The applicant should address the following comments in itemized letter format in addition to making
corrections & revisions to the drawings. Corrections and revisions to the drawing should be clouded so
that they are clearly identifiable.
Geotechnical
1) PanGeo is required to provide a review of the submitted plans in order to assess that the
recommendations and design considerations presented in the geotechnical report have been
properly interpreted and implemented into the project design. PanGeo should provide a letter
summarizing their review and providing any additional recommendations. All recommendations need
to be addressed in the resubmitted drawing set. Reference Plan Note #3 on sheet S.wb.2.0 and Plan
Note #2 on sheet S.wb.2.1.
West Building – General
2) When resubmitting, provide key plans for the West Building that are coordinated between the
calculations and the plans so we are able to track the gravity and lateral designs.
3) The basis for the lateral design for the West Building is unclear. Provide a key plan and clear
methodology for determination of lateral loads imposed at the different shear lines. Reference the
comment below regarding the West Building being Risk Category III.
4) Provide a complete lateral design for the West Building mezzanine. Lateral design of the mezzanine
will need to consider the out-of-plane loads imparted to the mezzanine level since existing CMU walls
(west wall) are being anchored to it.
5) The calculation indicate that the existing North & South CMU walls of the West Building are to have
strong backs in order to brace the existing unreinforced CMU walls. However, this is not included
within the design drawings. Provide a complete analysis and design.
6) Provide design and detailing for out-of-plane bracing of the new concrete walls of the West Building
in accordance with ASCE 7-10, 12.11.2, including continuous ties (12.11.2.2.3).
Page 7 of 12
7) Provide design and detailing for the distribution of lateral loads to the new concrete walls. Provide
collectors as required.
East Building – General
8) Sheet S1.0 indicates that the seismic resisting system for the east building is steel ordinary moment
frames. However, this system is not permitted given the weight of the structure (ASCE 7-10, Table
12.2-1, 12.2.5.6). Steel intermediate moment frames and steel special moment frames are permitted.
ASCE 7-10, Table 12.2-1, 12.2.5.6, 12.2.5.7; AISC 341-10
a) Update the plans and analysis to demonstrate which seismic force resisting system will be used.
b) Clearly demonstrate in calculations and details that all of the requirements of AISC 341-10 will be
met for the chosen system.
9) It is unclear how seismic loads are considered in the analysis. The RISA model does not explicitly state
the seismic parameters. Neither are calculations provided that indicate how seismic loads are
determined and vertically distributed. Provide calculations that clearly show the methodology and
model inputs.
10) Provide calculations for design of the foundation. This was not provided within the submitted
calculation package.
Drawing Sheets
S1.0 – General Structural Notes
11) Reference the Design Loading Criteria. The live load for the bowling area (75 psf, unreducible) needs
to be identified. Table 1607.1
12) The primary occupancy of the West Building is public assembly with an occupant load exceeding 300.
Table 1604.5
a) Update the General Structural Notes accordingly.
b) The West Building is therefore required to be designed as Risk Category III. Revise the design
(snow, wind, seismic) accordingly. The IEBC requires structures which undergo a change of
occupancy resulting in the structure being reclassified to a higher risk category to conform to the
seismic requirements for a new structure of the higher risk category. IEBC 407.4
13) Reference the West Building (Proposed) Earthquake information. Ordinary concentrically braced
frames are identified. However, the West Building does not have ordinary concentrically braced
frames. It does have moment frames. Provide coordination.
14) Reference the East Building: Earthquake information. SDS = 0.85 for the site. However, SDS is noted
to be 0.97. Update the drawings accordingly.
S.wb.2.0 – Foundation & Lower Level Plan – West Building
15) An 8” Concrete Wall is specified along grid J. Provide section cuts and detailing for the concrete shear
wall at this level.
16) Provide section cuts and detailing for the foundation between grids H & J and between grids 3 & 4.
S.wb.2.1 – Ground Level Plan – West Building
17) Provide section cuts and detailing for the concrete walls along grid A for this level (foundation).
18) Provide section cuts and detailing for the concrete wall along grid J for this level.
Page 8 of 12
19) Two section cuts are noted along grid J. However, details are not referenced. Provide section cuts and
detailing for these conditions.
20) Provide section cuts and detailing for the foundation & framing located between grids H & J and
between grids 3 & 4.
21) Stairs on grade are shown at approximately grids J & 2.8. Provide section cuts and detailing for the
required retaining wall adjacent to the stairs.
22) Detail 8/S3.0 is identified at grids C.5 & 4. Detailing shows a wood post. However, plans specify a W8
column. Provide coordination.
23) Reference the Ground Level Plan Notes.
a) Plan Note 10 references 6/S4.1. The correct reference is 7/S4.1.
b) Plan Note 11 reference detail 8/S4.0. However, 8/S4.0 does not exist.
S.wb.2.2 – Upper Level Plan – West Building
24) The mezzanine level framing, aside from the Bowling area, is considered to be assembly and is
required to be designed for a live load of 100 psf. However, gravity design at this level is based on 75
psf. Revise the design accordingly.
25) Reference the Upper Level Plan Notes.
a) Plan Note 9 reference detail 8/S4.0. However, 8/S4.0 does not exist.
b) Plan Note 10 references detail 8/S4.0 for the Shear Wall Schedule. The correct reference is
9/S4.0.
26) Headers need to be shown/specified at the following locations:
a) Elevator opening
b) Along grid E.6 at grid 2.5
c) Along grid J at grid 5.5
27) A section cut is shown along grid H at grid 3. However, a detail is not referenced. Provide
coordination.
28) How will the existing west CMU wall be braced for out-of-plane loads at this level where the stair
opening occurs? Provide design and detailing.
29) Detail 4/S4.2 is cut along the west wall where joists are perpendicular to the CMU wall. The correct
reference is 3/S4.2. Detail 4/S4.2 should be called out at locations where joists are parallel to the
CMU wall.
S.wb.2.3 – Roof Plan – West Building
30) Numerous section cuts are provided that either do not exist or that are incorrect. Provide
coordination.
31) Provide section cuts and detailing to address all framing conditions.
32) Reference the Roof Plan Notes.
a) Note 4 reference detail 6/S4.0. It appears that the correct reference should be to 7/S4.0.
b) Note 9 references 6/S7.41. It appears that the correct reference should be to 7/S4.1.
33) 1/S4.4 and 2/S4.4 are referenced from the Roof Plan. These details show WF beams. However, the
conditions for the West Building roof shows GL beams. Provide coordination.
S.wb.2.4 – Plaza Plan – Art Panels
Page 9 of 12
34) Specify required reinforcement of the foundation elements supporting the Art Panels.
S.eb.2.1 – Ground Level Plan – East Building
35) Detail 4/S3.2 is called out at grids C-12. This does not appear to be the correct reference. Provide
coordination.
36) Footing F3.5 and F5.0 are specified on the plans. However, the Spread Footing Schedule (10/S3.0)
does not include these spread footing types. Provide coordination.
S.eb.2.2 – Upper Level Plan – East Building
37) Provide complete dimensions, design, and detailing for the canopies and their connection to the main
building structure.
38) Reference grid 13. The floor level changes elevation at this location. It appears that high and low
beams will be required in order to provide gravity support and lateral resistance (moment frames)
along this line.
39) Reference the Deck at the west side of the building. The plans do not provide a mechanism for lateral
loads in the transverse (east-west) direction to be resisted. Will loads be collected and transferred
back to the main building structure? Provide an analysis and detailing to demonstrate how loads will
be transferred and resisted.
40) Provide calculations for design of the stairs.
41) Details 2 & 8/S4.2 are specified on the plans. However, these details are not applicable to the
conditions on this building. Provide detailing that accurately reflects the framing conditions.
42) Reference the Upper Level Plan Notes.
a) Note 2 references sheets S4.0, S4.1, and S4.2 for typical wood details. However, these details do
not reflect the conditions for this project. Provide detailing specific to the framing conditions for
this building.
b) Note 4 specifies 6-3/4 x 19 Glulam purlins, typ UNO. It appears that this should specify 6-3/4 x 19-
1/2 Glulam purlins.
S.eb.2.3 – Roof Plan – East Building
43) Reference the Roof Plan Notes. Note 4 specifies HGUS face mounted hangers, typical for purlins.
However, face mounted hangers will not work with GLBs. Detailing specifies HW hangers. Provide
coordination.
S3.0 – Foundation Details
44) Reference 10/S3.0.
a) Reference footing F2.5. Detail 8/S3.0 shows the footing to have top and bottom reinforcement.
However, the schedule does not specify this. Provide coordination.
b) Detail 3/S3.2 is referenced for numerous footings. However, the reference appears to be
incorrect. Provide coordination.
45) Detail 13/S3.0 reference 10/S3.0 for typical footing. However, the reference is incorrect.
S3.1 – Details
46) Reference detail 8/S3.1.
Page 10 of 12
a) Detail 9/S3.1 is referenced for connection details. However, 9/S3.1 does not specify the
connection details. Provide coordination.
b) Detail 10/S3.1 is referenced for grade beam and reinforcement. However, 10/S3.1 does not
identify a grade beam or reinforcement.
47) Reference 9/S3.1. Base plate and anchor bolts are specified per plan. However, they are not specified
on the plans.
48) Reference 20/S3.1. Provide calculations for design of the cantilever retaining walls. This was not
included in the submitted calculation package.
S3.2 – Details
49) Reference 6 & 7/S3.2.
a) Reference the appropriate detail for the Column Isolation Joint.
b) Identify the location in the plans where specifications and detailing can be found for the WF base
plates.
50) Reference 9/S3.2.
a) Specified plinth ties may be inadequate for IMF or SMF frames. Review this detail for design and
detailing requirements. Reference AISC 341-10 and ACI 318-14.
b) It appears that the section reference should be to 15 or 20/S3.2, not 19 or 20/S3.2.
51) Reference 18/S3.2. Provide a reference to detailing where the remainder of the structural
requirements can be found.
52) Reference 19/S3.2. Detail 18/S3.2 does not provide any additional information. However, it is
referenced for “typical information.” Provide coordination.
S4.0 – Details
53) Reference 9/S4.0 – Shear Wall Schedule. Note (4) indicates that plate washers are required. The note
also needs to specify that the plate washers are required to be located so that the edge of the plate
washer is within ½” of the plywood sheathing. SDPWS 4.3.6.4.3
S4.2 – Details
54) Reference details 3, 4, & 9/S4.2.
a) Provide an analysis for the anchorage design of the CMU walls. This was not included in the
calculation package. Masonry loads are required to be developed into the diaphragm.
b) Specify required embedment of the masonry anchors.
S4.3 - Details
55) Reference 9/S4.3.
a) While the detailing provides a mechanism to transfer shear loads into the CMU wall, it does not
provide a mechanism to brace the CMU walls out-of-plane (the URFP hardware will simply
rotate). Revise the design to provide out-of-plane resistance to the CMU walls. IEBC 403.6
b) Specify required CMU anchor embedment.
c) Identify specifications for the diaphragm edge nailing.
56) Reference detail 10/S4.3. While the detailing provides a mechanism to transfer shear loads into the
CMU wall, it does not provide a mechanism adequate to brace the CMU walls out-of-plane (the bent
Page 11 of 12
plate does not have adequate strength to resist the loads given the relatively large eccentricity
between the underside of the roof deck and the CMU anchor). Revise the design to provide out-of-
plane resistance to the CMU walls. IEBC 403.6
57) Reference 14/S4.3. 13/S5.0 is referenced for the nailer. The reference is incorrect.
58) Reference 15/S4.3. Detail 14/S5.3 is referenced for information not noted. It appears that 14/S4.3
should be referenced.
S4.5 – Building Sections
59) These Building Sections need to be coordinated with the plans to show all conditions including
additional beams and posts that are specified on the plans.
60) Provide section cuts and detailing for all conditions, including but not limited to pipe connections, rod
connections, 6x6 truss element connections, post/column connections, beam connections, etc.
Include an analysis to corroborate the design.
S5.0 – Steel Details
61) The moment frame details need to be updated to demonstrate compliance with the design and
detailing requirements of ASIC 341-10 for the chosen lateral-force resisting system (intermediate
steel moment frames or special steel moment frames).
62) Reference 11/S5.0. The title indicates that the detail is for braced frames (which do not exist on this
project). However, detailing is consistent with moment frames. Provide coordination.
S5.1 – Steel Elevations
63) Elevations should be updated to include section cuts to and detailing for all moment frame
connection types (roof interior & exterior, floor interior and exterior, other as needed).
64) Elevation 15 & 17/S5.1 need to be updated to show columns that continue up to the roof, consistent
with the plans.
S5.2 – Typical Steel Stair Details
65) Reference 1/S5.0. Stringers are specified per plan. However, the plans do not specify stringer sizes.
S6.0 - Details
66) Reference 8/S6.0. Specify all connections.
67) Detail 12/S6.0 should be referenced from 7/S6.0.
S7.0 – Typical Light Gauge Details
68) Reference 15/S7.0. It doesn’t appear that light gauge shear walls are used anywhere on this project.
The schedule should therefore be removed from the plans.
69) Reference 20/S7.0. Update the details to reflect actual conditions on this project.
Other
70) Provide calculations and design/detailing for the entry portal as shown on 4/A.eb.5.3.
Page 12 of 12
Please contact me should you have any questions.
Respectfully,
Douglas Beck, PE, SE
Beck & Associates, PLLC
In addition to the comments above, please address the following comment which is a condition of the
design review permit PLN2019-0024:
1. The construction project involves demolition of a significant portion of the existing structure.
Please be aware that structures that are demolished to the level that meets or exceeds 75% of the
replacement cost of the structure will not be allowed by city code to be rebuilt except to full-on
standards for new construction. Reference Edmonds Community Development Code section
17.40.020(F) and the following excerpt from a Building Official Interpretation regarding building
restoration after significant demolition.
“For any structure, whether residential or commercial, that is destroyed, damaged or demolished in an
amount equal to 75 percent or more of its replacement cost at the time of destruction, ECDC section
17.40.020(F) shall apply. In such case, any subsequent reconstruction will be considered to be under
the category of "New" construction, and be subject to all applicable requirements for a new structure,
including for land use, utilities and site related provisions. All permit-related documents, such as site
plans, construction drawings, and other related documents shall reflect current code requirements.”
In order to verify that your project does not meet this threshold, the following must be provided to the
city:
a. A cost breakdown showing the demolition is less than 75% of the replacement cost of the building.
Please see the attached cost worksheet that may be used as a template for your convenience;
however this worksheet is not the only format that may be used to provide the necessary information.
Please contact the building official directly if assistance is required.
Thank you,
Leif Bjorback, Building Official