Loading...
2013-0371 Shahid deck cover2.pdf City of Edmonds PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS BUILDING DIVISION (425) 771-0220 DATE: September 12, 2013 TO: Mohammad Shahid th 19129 84 Avenue W Edmonds, WA 98026 FROM: Chuck Miller, Plans Examiner RE: Plan Check: BLD2013-0371 Project: Shahid deck cover th Project Address: 19129 84 Avenue 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. Items that recur on this list appear in italics. Thank you. On page 1: 1.Roof plan view – Clarify the use of the 4x8 beams used to support the roof rafters. They appear to be over spanned and would fail when subjected to the design snow load. The use of knee braces as shown on the ‘Elevation view’ could provide additional support but must be firmly attached – see review note #4. 2.Roof plan view – Clarify the use of 2x6 roof rafters. They appear to be over spanned and would fail when subjected to the design snow load. The blocking shown at approximately 36”-48” on- center do not provide enough benefit to span the distance indicated. 3. Roof plan view – Clarify the purpose of the ‘new 4x4 treated post’ indicated on the right side of the drawing. Is it supporting an additional girder/beam not shown on the plans? Additional ‘posts’ appear to be represented on the plans but no additional girders/beams are shown – see also review note #1. 4.Elevation view – Provide an attachment detail/description for the connections at each end of the knee braces supporting the 4x8 roof girders. The ‘Post to Beam Connection w/ Knee Brace’ detail – found on page 3 of the attached MyBuildingPermit.com handout – provides a possible means to meet this requirement. If properly attached, the knee braces will allow 4x8 roof girders to be used to support the design snow load – see review note #1. Additional comments as a result of a site visit on September 5, 2013: The load path for the bearing structural elements is not complete and will not safely support the design loads per R301.1. 1.The beam supporting the east end of the roof rafters is supported by posts connected to the rim joist with (2) ½ inch diameter bolts. The rim board is attached with (2) 16d nails to the end grain of cantilevered joists. The fasteners/connections appear to be inadequate and the joists to not appear to have been sized for the additional load at the time of original construction. 2.The ledger used to support the west end of the roof rafters is attached to the existing roof fascia/end grain of the rafter tails. The fasteners/connections appear to be inadequate and the rafters to not appear to have been sized for the additional load at the time of original construction. 3.The various 4x4 post locations, beyond those below the beam at the east end of the roof structure, are connected by blocking to adjacent rafters. While they may provide local support for the 2x6 rafters that they are attached to, they do little for the roof structure as a whole. No beams have been added to provide additional rafter support. Many of the posts do not appear to sufficiently complete the load path to a bearing footing/foundation element. 4.The existing deck structure is being used to provide support for the roof structure. The existing deck structural support elements (beams, joists, footings, etc.) do not appear to have been sized for loads beyond those anticipated at the time of original construction and should not be utilized for the support of additional loads such as a roof. The roof structure should be ‘self-supporting’ or the existing deck structure reinforced as required to support the additional loads. A significant amount of work would be required to be done for the structure to be in compliance with the applicable code requirements. Alternatively, the roof structure could be removed in its entirety, returning the deck structure to its prior approved condition. Page 2 of 2