Building Comments 2.pdfCity of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
DATE: February 21, 2018
TO: Catch Design Studio
Elizabeth Montgomery
elizabeth(a), catchstudio. com
FROM: Chuck Miller, Plans Examiner
chuck.miller(2edmondswa. gov
RE: Plan Check: BLD2017-1397 — 2nd review
Project Address: 23830 Highway 99, Suite 119A
Project: Milkie Milkie tenant improvement
Scope: Change of use/tenant improvement for restaurant — remove/add non -bearing
interior walls — construct fire barrier for occupancy separation — separated A-2
occupancy group — 79 occupants — VB construction — no sprinkler system —
mechanical, plumbing, fire alarm, etc. under separate permits
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. Items that recur on this list appear in italics.
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 2nd Floor of City Hall.
Permit Center hours are M, T, Th, & F from 8am-4:30pm and from 8:30am-12pm on Wednesdays.
On sheet A1:
4. Floor Plan
c. Indicate on the plans the required minimum two-hour fire -resistance rated wall
construction separating the `A' occupancy under this permit and the tenant space to
the west per IBC Table 508.4. The plans must specify the minimum required
construction criteria of a listed assembly tested in accordance with ASTMS 119 or
UL 263, or in accordance with IBC 703.3, and meet the requirements of afire
barrier per IBC 707.3.9. The response to the earlier plan review comment states:
"Added the 2 hour fire rated wall.".
• Reference detail `5' — 2-Hour Rated Fire Wall — Indicate on the plans the
minimum required attachment of the floor and ceiling runners.
• Reference `Fire Rated System Design — UL U411'
• Gypsum Board —Specify on the plans the required offset of the joints
of the outer layer of gypsum board from that of the inner layer joints.
• Gypsum Board — Specify on the plans the minimum required
fasteners and their spacing for the attachment of each of the layers of
the gypsum board.
• Steel Studs — Specify on the plans the required length of the studs less
than the height of the assembly.
• General review note regarding the selected fire -resistance rated wall
assembly: Provide an ordered list of the steps, or sequence of construction,
for the installation of the various components of the fire -resistance rated wall
assembly. It is unclear to the plans examiner how a multiple -layered
symmetrical wall assembly almost 50 feet long can be constructed `in -place'
without access from both sides. The use of an `assembly' found in the `shaft
wall' section of the Gypsum Association `Fire Resistance Design Manual' is
often proposed when there is only access from one side to facilitate its proper
construction.
On sheet A2:
Reflected Ceiling Plan
a. Provide on the plans a detail and a reference to it for the minimum required
construction to support/brace the converging offset sides of the `existing T-bar
ceilings' over the `Dining Area'. The response to the earlier plan review comment
states: "Existing T-bar must meet the requirement shown on A5.". None of the
information provided on sheet `A5' addresses that required when a suspended ceiling
located 10 feet above the finished floor and one located 9 feet above the finished
floor, that were separated by the interior wall oriented east -west and 15 feet from the
south exterior wall, now have to serve as one due to the removal of the wall.
Page 2 of 2