Loading...
TacoTime2.pdf City of Edmonds PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS BUILDING DIVISION (425) 771-0220 DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Rick Lentz Merrick Lentz Architect FAX: 425-747-7149 FROM: Ann Bullis, Building Official RE: Plan Check: 2008-0444 Project: Taco Time Restaurant Project Address: 23904 Highway 99 During re-review of the plans for the above noted project, it was found that the following information, clarifications or changes are still needed and were not addressed. Please provide written responses as to where the changes can be found on the plans, and submit revised plans/documents to a Permit Coordinator. 1.Previous item 2 not completely addressed: The following plans still show existing construction to remain and/or be repaired (the entire building was demolished under permit 2008-0333). Please revise. a.Floor Plan (Sheet A2) still shows the south wall to remain. b.Site Plan (Sheet A1.0) still shows the south wall as existing. 2.Previous item 5 not addressed: A 1-hour exterior wall is required at the south side opening (between the columns) of the covered drive-through due to the close proximity to the property line (IBC 602 & 704.8). A 30” parapet with on-combustible face on the roof side is required for this exterior wall unless an exception can be used. Provide details and cross-reference where they apply to clearly show code compliance. This was included in the preapplication comments dated 1/17/07 and discussed at the meeting. Architectural and Structural plans must be revised. 3.Previous item 18 incomplete: The Special Inspection and Testing Agreement submitted has only been signed by the Architect. Signatures are still required by the owner, general contractor and special inspector (geotechnical engineer). Comments from the City’s Structural Consultant: 1.EOR, it is not clear the eccentricity was considered in the design of the exterior wall due to the ledger support. The details are not standard platform framing. Please clarify where this information was in the analysis. 2.Previous item 18. Detail M and F: EOR, it appears based off the analysis submit that (8) 16d nails are required for the 2x12 ledger but the drawings state 5. Please clarify why a smaller amount is used then required by analysis. Wood over time will shrink and it is not equivalent to just add a 2X under the 2x12 for new constructions. Please provide solid member with the correct connections as required per the analysis or provide a method to tie the 2x6 to the 2x12 together to prevent the shrinkage and separations. Modify the drawings accordingly.