4156_001.pdfOctober 17, 2018
Mike Clugston, AICP
City of Edmonds
121 5"" Ave North
Edmonds- WA 98020
Permit BLD20181169 10610 240 PL SW, Edmonds
Planning Comment letter October 1, 2018
Clugston,
We are in receipt of the comment letter dated October 1, 2018 and have made changes
to our plans in response. Below are the items from the letter, with additional
comments describing our updates to the plans.
Sheet A-2. 1:
The north face of the existing building encroaches into the required 25' setback
from the street property line along 240th Place. As a result, it is nonconforming
relative to that setback. A new wall and entry system are shown to encroach
further in the setback on Sheet A-2. 1. This cannot be approved because it
would make the structure more nonconforming than existing. Please revise A-
2. 1, the associated Site Plan, and any other plan sheets as necessary to
eliminate the additional encroachment.
We have updated our design concept and opted to remove the existing brick
veneer which was extending over 6" into the setback. Our newfa(!ade, and
retaining wall to close off the garage door is about an inch less than the
previous encroachment, making the remodel condition less non -conforming
that the existing home.
Please do not hesitate to call should you have any questions on this resubmittal.
Partners Architectural Design Group, Inc.
Eric E. Koch
Updated drawings dated 10/17/2018
CI-TY Copy
RESU3
OCT 18 2018
BUILDING DEPARTtvltj�,i
C" OF EDMOND�"'
8383 158"' Ave NE, Suite 250
Redmond, WA 98052
425-636-8006
INC. 180 Nickerson St.
Suite 302
Seattle, WA
98109
(206) 285-4512(V)
(206) 285-0618(F)
October 15, 2018
Eric Evensen
Building Plans Examiner
City of Edmonds
121 51h Ave N
Edmonds, WA 98020
c/c,
Eric Koch
8383 1581h Ave NE
Suite 250
Redmond, WA 98052
Re: BLD2018-1169
10610 240th P1 SW
Dear Eric,
We have reviewed the comments dated September 24, 2018 for the structure noted above. We
have prepared the following itemized response to those comments that pertain to the structural
items. Please refer to the original comments as we have provided only our responses.
7. The headers for windows G and H are non -bearing. The headers can be (2)2x4 headers.
9. We have reviewed the lengths of the shear walls, Al -A4 and B1 and they are adequate
for the expected lateral load on the building structure.
10. Please refer to detail 1 O/S 1.0 for the pony wall detail. We have added a reference to the
framing plans for this detail. Please see A2.0.
12. We understand that the headers over windows A and B are 48's. These are adequate for
the expected loads. This is noted in the original calculations on page 3. The headers at
windows G and H are non -bearing as noted in response to item 7.
We trust that this letter address your comments regarding structural items. Please call if you have
any questions pertaining to this letter, the calculations, or plans.
RESUB
74 OCT 18 2018
Craig F. Roberts
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF EDMONDS
TA17270Fox-Cruz Docs Residence\Docs Out\Review Comments pdf
Structural Engineers Printed: October 15, 2018
C1 TyL VAL COPY