EDM 09-13 Comment letter(1).docx
Eagle Eye Consulting Engineers, P.S.
PO Box 523
Olalla, WA 98359
hoytjeter@centurytel.net
360 874 0562
Fax 360 874 0591
To: Theresa Umbaugh
City of Edmonds Building Dept.
th
121 5 Ave N
Edmonds, WA 98020
Re: Harbor Square Additions
160 W. Dayton Street
Edmonds, WA 98020
Plan Review #2009-0530 EECE # EDM 09-13
Plan review number 1
The above referenced project is in the process of plan review for compliance with
Edmonds
ordinances and applicable codes. The following comments,
deficiencies/corrections must be addressed prior to completion of plans review and
subsequent issuance of permits.
Provide revised plans and calculations along with a written response to each of the items
listed below to facilitate a shorter back-check time.
SCOPE OF REVIEW
Structural
The scope of this review is for therequirements of this project.
All features were checked only to the extent allowed by the submittals provided. All
portions of this project are assumed to meet or will meet other departmental requirements,
conditions and concerns before permit approval.
Page 2 of 6
Plan Review Number 1
EECE#: EDM 09-13
Harbor Square Additions
2009-0530
STRUCTURAL COMMENTS
General
1.Engineer of Record (EOR), please submit the original geotechnical report for this
remodel. The memoranda states to follow this report but it was not in the submitted
package. Also, the general notes state site class E: IBC 104.11.1
2.EOR, the wind analysis used the rapid solution methodology RSM-03 prepared by
SEAW. This method is not adopted by the city of Edmonds or the State of
Washington as an approved method. Please justify this method will meet IBC
sections 104.11 alternative material, design and methods of constructions and
equipment. Analysis shall be submitted to justify equivalence. Please also note this
clearly on sheet S1.0 under sections 1003. IBC 104.11
3.Design analysis pipe piles from DCLU director rule. Since DCLU (now referred as
DPD) is not the jurisdiction for this structure, please submit the director rule in
order to complete the review. IBC 104.11
4.EOR, the design analysis states concrete on metal deck is fine to transfer the
horizontal shear. How was this determined? Please submit the ICC report for the
deck with concrete to transfer the required design force. IBC 1604.4
5.EOR, please list that special inspections are required for the field welding noted on
the details.
6.EOR, the drawings state the soil class shall be E but the analysis used D. Please
clarify why D was used in the design when E is required and is more restrictive.
Sheet A-3:
7.EOR, please provide out of plane analysis for the new opening in the existing
concrete wall being braced by tube steel tubes. Page L3 is not clear on how this
was done as required per code. ASCE 12.11.2.2.2 & ASCE 12.11.1
Sheet S1.0 Structural Notes
8.EOR, please provide sections 01330 as noted under the steel joist sections 5200.
IBC 106.1.1
9.EOR, the ICC report for the steel decking is not per the IBC 2006 but the IBC
2000. Please provide current report for the current code.
Page 3 of 6
Plan Review Number 1
EECE#: EDM 09-13
Harbor Square Additions
2009-0530
Sheet S2.0 Foundation Plan
10.EOR, please provide an analysis for the existing spread footing being cut to install
the pin piles. Since the continuous footing will have to be cut, the footing has been
modified. Please submit an analysis to justify the existing footing will support the
design loads.IBC 106.1.1
11.EOR, please provide an analysis for the new 6x6 post being added to the existing
footing at enlarged plan 3. With the additional force being added to the existing
footing, an analysis is required. IBC 106.1.1 IBC 108.1.2
12.EOR, the analysis submitted states to use 5’x5’x1’6” but the drawings state to use
4’x4’X1’. Please clarify why the drawings have a smaller footing than required by
analysis.
Sheet S3.0 Floor Framing Plan
13.EOR, the roof joist total load shall be 668 plf {(100+67)*4}. The drawing states to
use 670 plf. Please clarify how this was determined for the joist manufacturer’s
design loads.
14.EOR, the drawings show the stair framing to have concrete decking. The dead load
used in the design of the stair framing was 15 psf. Based off the drawings 4”
concrete on composite deck per ICC 2078 will exceed this dead load.
15.EOR, please submit a lateral analysis for the floor system not assuming a flexible
diaphragm. Since there is concrete topping the diaphragm is not flexible. IBC
1613.6.1 and ASCE 12.3.1.1
16.EOR, please clarify where the sections cuts are drawn for the entry framing. The
set shows the cut arrow but does not reflect where these are drawn. Since this area
is not clear, this part cannot be reviewed until the required information is provided.
IBC 106
17.EOR, please submit an analysis for the angle 4x4X 38 (LLV) to support the loads.
Since the deck is supported by the angle, the live and dead load shall be used.
nd
18.2 Floor Framing: EOR, please complete the sections for the bottom cut mark in
order to complete the review. The arrow is shown without any references.
Page 4 of 6
Plan Review Number 1
EECE#: EDM 09-13
Harbor Square Additions
2009-0530
Sheet S4.0 Roof Framing Plan
19.EOR, please clarify where details X/S are located as noted at the corner of the
framing plan.
20.EOR, please provide an analysis that the existing ledger will support the design
loads.
Sheet S5.0 Sections & Elevations
21. EOR, please provide an analysis for the connections shown on this sheet.
22.Detail 1, Detail 3 and Detail 5: EOR please specify the required connection of the
diagonal K-brace. This was not specified on the drawings.
23.Detail 5&6: EOR, please specify the size of the center gusset plate at the 2”
standard diagonal braces shown in the details.
24.Detail 5&6: EOR, please submit an analysis for how the sizes of the members were
determined. This was not in the analysis.
25.Detail 5: EOR please specify the required connection for the top K brace at the
center shown in this detail.
Sheet S6.0 Foundations Details
26.Detail 5: EOR, this detail is cut on sheet S5.0: Submit an analysis for the lateral
loads to transfer for this connection. The X bracing at mid span would cause
horizontal forces to be applied to be transferred to the base. Please clarify with an
analysis how this transfer of force will be done. This was not in the submitted
documents.
27.Detail 6 (Plan 9): EOR please provide an analysis for the additional loads of the
concrete and post being applied on the existing footing. IBC 1604.4
28.Detail 2: EOR, please provide an analysis for the 10” of concrete removed and
reinforcement cut to support the existing design loads. This appears not to be in the
submitted documents. IBC 1604.4
29.Detail 8: EOR, please provide an analysis for the vertical load of the plinth being
applied off center of the footing. This was not in the submitted package. IBC
1604.4
Page 5 of 6
Plan Review Number 1
EECE#: EDM 09-13
Harbor Square Additions
2009-0530
Sheet S7.0 Roof Framing Details
30.Detail 2: EOR; please specify the spacing of the epoxy anchors. It is blank on the
set submitted. Also, submit an analysis to show the angle and the anchors are able
to support the required design loads. IBC 1604.2
31.Detail 1,2,5,6,7,9,and 10; EOR please specify the required epoxy to be used for the
connections of the bolt to the wall. I was unable to find where this was specified in
order to check capacity. Also, submit an analysis to justify this epoxy will support
the design loads. Also note if the fire rating {IIIA} of this building will not affect
the epoxy used. Not all epoxies may be used in rated constructions.
32.Detail 9: EOR, please provide an analysis for the connections of the W6X10 to the
W8X10 in this detail.
33.EOR, please clarify where detail 12, 13 and 14 are to be used. These cannot be
completely reviewed until the locations are clearly shown on the drawings.
34.Detail 12: EOR, please provide an analysis for uplift loads for the connections to
the wall.
Sheet S8.0 Roof Framing Details
35.Detail 6: EOR, please provide an analysis for the existing ledger to support the
design loads. All that is noted is existing ledger without the size, bolts used, etc….
Sheet S4.0 has this section cut on the ‘Enlarged Roof Framing Plan’ but all that is
stated is (E) 4X ledger. More information is required in order to verify this will
support the design loads.
36.Detail 2 and 3 EOR please provide an analysis for the connection of the glu-lam
beams shown. IBC 1604.4
37.Detail 9: EOR, please specify the required embedment for the expansion bolts
specified.
38.Detail 12: EOR please provide torsion analysis for the curved beam shown in this
detail.
Sheet S8.1 Roof Framing Details
39.Detail 7: EOR, please specify the required connections of the truss to the girder
truss or list as a deferred submittal.
40.Section 1: EOR, please clarify the connections noted as the following:
“CONNECTIONS RE:”
Page 6 of 6
Plan Review Number 1
EECE#: EDM 09-13
Harbor Square Additions
2009-0530
Additional corrections may be required following receipt of corrections and additional
information as requested.
Your plans are being reviewed concurrently with the Building Department, Fire
Department, Zoning Department and Public Works Engineering. Changes, clarifications
or additional corrections may be required subsequent to the Building Department plan
review when comments are received from the other concerned departments.
Should you have any inquiries regarding this letter, please contact Hoyt Jeter at (360) 874-
0562 between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
By:
Hoyt Jeter, P.E.
President