Loading...
2013-0211 Dent remodel-addition.pdf City of Edmonds PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS BUILDING DIVISION (425) 771-0220 DATE: April 15, 2013 TO: Paul and Jenelle Dent paul@griffinmaclean.com FROM: Chuck Miller, Plans Examiner RE: Plan Check: BLD2013-0211 Project: Dent remodel-addition th Project Address: 16330 75 Place W During a 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 as to where the changes can be found on the plans, cloud all changes on the revised plans, and submit the revised plans/documents to a Permit Coordinator. Thank you. General notes: 1.The unique and specific nature of the work necessary to complete your project requires special inspection per IBC 1704. A City of Edmonds ‘Special Inspection and Testing Agreement’ (see attached) for the following work will need to be completed and returned prior to permit issuance. Structural Fill · Welding · 2.Provide pages 9 and 10 of the building plans for proper review, installation, and inspection. The page numbering of pages 1-8 submitted at permit application reference ‘of 10’ and the letter from Robinson-Noble dated February 14, 2013 notes that 10 sheets were provided by Design Lines for their review. 3.Indicate on the plans the required depth of structural fill and placement criteria per the provided geotechnical report to guide proper installation and inspection – see pages 7, 8 , and 9 of ‘Robinson-Noble RN File No. 3000-030A’. On page 4: 4.Lower Floor Plan – ‘Laundry’ - Indicate on the plans the required minimum 90 cfm ventilation rate for a continuously operating whole house ventilation exhaust fan per Table M1508.2. 5.Lower Floor Plan – Clarify the callout for beam ‘L-5’ – 3-1/2x9-1/2 1.55E Timberstrand LSL – found in ‘Bedroom #4’. There is no leader line indicating the referenced framing member and it is different than the beam identified as ‘L-5’ in the provided structural calculations. 6.Lower Floor Plan – Clarify the note ‘Flr joists hang on flush bm @ cant. Do not bear on ex’g wall.’ for the floor/ceiling framing members above ‘Bedroom #2’. There does not appear to be a cantilever represented at this location on this page or on the ‘Right Elevation’ on page 1. On page S1.1: 7.Details – Provide on the plans detail ‘PFF’ referenced in detail ‘PF’ as the required foundation below the portal frame with hold-downs – see review note #13 on specified hold-down. 8.General Structural Notes – Garage Floor Diaphragm – Indicate on the plans the required impervious moisture barrier for the garage slab supported by wood framing per R317.1. On page S1.3: 9.Clarify the required reinforcement for the various foundation designs. The provided geotechnical report requires the foundation to be “suitably reinforced to allow an unsupported foundation span of 10 feet.” – see page 9 of ‘Robinson-Noble RN File No. 3000-030A’. On page S2: 10.Foundation Plan - Clarify the difference between the size and the location shown for the continuous footing/point load supporting the framing below the bearing wall between ‘Bedrooms #2, #3, and #4’ and that represented on page 3. 11.Foundation Plan – Clarify the callout for the footing at/below the garage door opening. It does not appear to meet the requirements of Figure R602.10.3.2 (referenced in R602.10.3.3) for the construction of the portal frame with hold-downs. On page S3: 12.Lower Floor Shearwalls - Provide on the plans detail ‘DTC’ referenced for construction over the ‘Family Room’ to guide proper review, installation, and inspection. On page S4: 13.Main Floor Shearwalls - Clarify the callout for the ‘STHD14’ holdowns at the ends of the main floor portal frame braced panels along braced wall line ‘D’. Per the manufacturer, they are unable to develop the tension loads noted in the provided structural calculations at those locations. Geotechnical Peer Review (Landau Associates) review comments: 14.It has been our experience that the contractor tends to build what is specifically shown on the plans and simply making reference to the geotechnical report is often not sufficient to achieve the We recommend that the plans specifically include the requirement for a 2 ft intended result. thickness of compacted structural fill beneath the foundations and that the zone of compacted fill be shown to extend a minimum of 2 ft beyond the footing in order to create a 1H:1V Page 2 of 3 envelope from the base of the footings as recommended in the geotechnical report. We also recommend that the footing drains and associated drainage material as recommended by the geotechnical engineer be specifically shown on the plans, and that free-draining wall backfill with a footing drain be provided behind all foundation walls acting as a retaining wall. Page 3 of 3