3799_001.pdf9/14/2018
Dear Mr. l3jorback,
We are submitting updated plans that show a newly designed bathroom that is
now ADA compliant. The plans also detail a 2 hour shaft wall / 2 hour firewall separation
between new classroom and tenant space (indicated on A-1).
To address "previous item #9" (on letter dated August 1 st 2018 from City) we
have extended the bathroom walls to ensure the bathroom is ADA compliant which
eliminates the need for 20% of project cost upgrades (indicated on A-3).
Thank you,
1 4 D
Autumn & Wesley Snow REsuis
SEP 17 2018
BUILDING DEPARTMEN'T
CrrY OF EDMONDS
10, A:
DATE: August 1, 2018
Citv of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
TO: Autumn Snow
Email: tlieti-ikestoo((i),coriicast.iiet
FROM: Leif Bjorback, Building Official
RE: Plan Check: BLD2018-0578, 2 d review
Project: Trike Stop Partial Change of Occupancy
Project Address: 23107 100' Ave W
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 in letter format as to where the
changes can be found on the plans, and submit revised plans/documents to a permit coordinator in the
Development Services Department. Note that new comments or additions to previous comments are noted in
italics.
Previous item #9: The project alterations trigger the requirement for accessibility upgrades to the
existing structure. Show on the plans how the requirements of JEBC 10 12.8.1 and 705.2 are being
met. Please be aware that the valuation for the project as determined by the building official likely will
be higher than what is shown on the permit application.
This item has not been addressed. On the plans, either a) clearly indicate that the interior accessible
route of travel complies with current code, or b) provide upgrades per the previously referenced
section. Ifyou choose to use exception #1 of that section, provide a letter (reference the code
exception), stating the overallproject cost, 20% of theproject cost, and list the accessibility upgrades
that will be done as part of this permit as well as showing that the total cost of the upgrades is at least
20%. Show thesefeatures on the plans.
For example, the valuation of the project as listed on the permit application is $6771, 20% of which is
$1400. The code requires that in addition to your basic construction budget, a minimum of $1354
must be spent on accessible upgrades unless the spacefully complies with accessibility requirements
ofIEBC 410.7. Possiblefeatures that could be consideredfor upgrades might include accessible
toilets and sinks, restroom grab bars, door sizes and approach space, door hardware, etc.
2. Upon thorough review of the proposedproject, this new item must be addressed. According to IBC
903.2.6 (Washington State amendment, effective beginning in 2016) afire sprinkler system is required
for 1-4 daycares with an occupant load ofgreater than 100, regardless of exiting provisions. Since the
entire building comprises a singlefire area, due to non -separated occupancies, the occupant load of
the entire building counts toward the applicable occupant load number. Note on the plans that a
separate permit will be requiredforfire sprinklers. IEBC407.1
Thank you,
Page 1 of 2
Autumn,
I have been chewing over your ADA Compliant list and find that it does not cleanly address the code requirement. There are
several issues I am concerned with.
1. First of all, my comment requested a letter format (however, I am flexible on the format) that compares the cost of the
upgrades to the overall project cost, and results in a percentage being shown (20% is the minimum.) Please provide the
numbers for comparison.
2. Not all of the items on t he ADA Compliant list can be considered as true "upgrades" to accessibility, as many of them are
basic code requirements already, such as flooring, entry door/36", etc. And some of the items are listed on the plans as
already existing, such as the existing restroom door. These types of items are not eligible to be counted against the 20%.
3. 1 suspect that the original valuation of $6771 listed on your permit application needs to be adjusted upward in order to
fairly include some of your adjusted basic costs such as the more robust construction of the clemising wall, and other
elements that have been added since the first permit review. Once that number is adjusted, it can be used as the
baseline for figuring the 20%. Also, how does the original valuation of $6771 compare to the total cost of $21,931.22 of
ii upgrades" shown on the top of the ADA Compliant list you sent?
Please call or come in if you would like to discuss. Thank you.
Leif