2015-0007 Resource Transition (Munson).pdf
City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
DATE: February 6, 2015
TO: Randall J. Munson
randy.munson@comcast.net
FROM: Andrew Gahan, Plans Examiner
RE: Plan Check: BLD2015-0007
Project: New SFR
Project Address: 18300 Sunset Way
During a review of the plans by the Building Division for the above noted project, it was found that
the following information, clarifications, or changes are needed. A complete review cannot be
performed until the revised plans/documents, including a written response indicating where the
clouded or otherwise highlighted changes can be found on the revised plans, have been submitted
to a Permit Coordinator. Reviews by other divisions, such as Planning, Engineering, or Fire, may
result in additional comments.
Sheet A-3:
1.Update the Code references to 2012 in note 1 of the window and door legends.
Sheet A-5:
2.Denote safety glazing at the window above the toilet in the bathroom per IRC R310.
Sheet A-6:
3.Add a note or detail bug to direct the contractor to section detail 2/A9 for the typical
foundation detail.
Sheet A-7:
4.Add a note that all shear walls are to be SW-1, u.n.o. Or label all shear walls.
5.The lateral marks on the plan to not match the lateral calculations provided including:
a.The interior front to rear shear walls between the garage and the habitable space are
indicated as SW-2 with T-1 holdowns in the calculations.
b.The far right exterior wall along the living room fireplace wall is indicated as SW-3
with T-1 holdowns at each end in the calculations.
c.The SW-2 shear walls and T-1 holdowns shown at each side of the front door are not
included as shear walls in the calculations, and dont meet the required aspect ratio
per the AF&PA SDPWS Table 4.3.4. Please remove those marks.
6.Please provide details/specifications for:
a.Upper shear wall to lower shear wall shear transfer through lower roof.
b.Shear transfer where the upper shear walls are offset from the lower shear walls
through cantilevered joists.
c.Irregular connections including:
i.Where Beams 3 and 7 intersect Beam 8.
ii.Where Beam 16 intersects Beam 17.
7.Correct the following detail bugs:
a.Reference to details 15 and 16/A-9 (2 places). It appears that details 5 and 6/A-9 are
applicable.
b.Refence to detail 6/A-9. Detail does not appear to be applicable.
8.Gravity Calculations:
a.Beam 2 should have (2) point loads resulting from the header above, which is
carrying the girder truss.
b.Beam 3 it appears that the actual length is 11.5 rather than 9.25.
c.Beams 4 and 5 it appears that the actual length is 15.5 rather than 15.
d.Beam 8 should include point loads from beams 3 and 7, the unlabeled roof beam
above (2 places) and from the angled girder truss above. only 2 point loads appear in
the calculations.
e.Beam 10 6x12 shown in calculations, but 4x12 shown on the plans.
f.Beam 12 missing girder truss point load reaction cantilevered above, uniform load
should be reaction from cantilevered joists above.
g.Beam 16 loading used appears to be low. Please review and revise as needed.
h.Beam 17 girder truss point load missing, point load from the unsupported wall
above missing, adjust point load F for revised beam 16.
i.Beam 20 5.25x9.5 PSL shown in calculations, but 3.5x11.875 shown on the plans.
j.As alluded to in several comments above, it appears that the girder truss point loads
were not traced to the foundation, nor accounted for in the floor framing calculations.
k.The upper floor wall above the right side of the garage (supporting the left wall of
the Utility Room) appears to be unsupported.
Sheet A-8:
9.The roof framing represented on sheet A-8 creates very specific loading conditions that
affect the sizing of a significant number of bearing members. Therefore, truss drawings
shall be submitted to the Permit Coordinator for intake and review prior to truss installation
per R802.10.1.
Page 2 of 2