2015-1591 Beauty Salon TI - LOT Design2.pdf
City of Edmonds
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
BUILDING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
DATE: May 18, 2016
TO: Golden T Construction
lthrondsen@msn.com
FROM: Chuck Miller, Plans Examiner
RE: Plan Check: BLD2015-1591
th
Project Address: 10014 238 Street SW
Project: Beauty Salon TI
Scope: Construct beauty salon B occupancy 1337 sq. ft. gross area 13
occupants - V-B construction NFPA sprinkler system not required mechanical
and plumbing included
disapproved
Please be advised that the building plans for the above referenced project have been
for the purposes of obtaining a building permit. During a review of the plans by the Building
Division for compliance with the applicable building codes, it was found that the following
.
information, clarifications, or changes are neededReviews by other divisions, such as Planning,
Engineering, or Fire, may result in additional comments that require attention beyond the scope of
this letter. Items that recur on this list appear in italics.
A complete review cannot be performed until the revised plans/documents, including a
written response in itemized letter format indicating where the clouded or otherwise
highlighted changes can be found on the revised plans, have been submitted to a Permit
Coordinator.
nd
Resubmittals must be made at the Development Services Department on the 2 Floor of City Hall.
Permit Center hours are M, T, Th, & F from 8am-4:30pm and from 8:30am-12pm on Wednesdays.
On the Washington State Energy Code Commercial Provisions Lighting Compliance Forms
1.Provide as part of a complete submittal Washington State Energy Code (WSEC) Lighting
Compliance Forms reflecting the requirements of the currently adopted 2012 code. The
resubmitted WSEC Lighting Compliance Form needs to be corrected as follows:
The Project Description selection needs to be changed to New Building per
·
WSEC C101.4.4/C405.5 due to the change of space use.
The selected Lighting Power Allowance Method of Building Area Method is not
·
supported by the proper calculation forms LTG-INT-BLD. The provided
calculation form LTG-INT-SPACE is not intended to be used for larger,
contiguous areas such as those represented on the plans. Task lighting is often used
for those areas where additional lighting is desired without over-illuminating the
larger area.
On sheet SP1 Drainage Site Plan
2.Site Plan - Clarify on the plans the indicated width of the accessible parking space. It and
the referenced detail on sheet C2 Handicap Parking Detail - does not appear to meet the
requirement for a van parking space per IBC 1106.5/ICC A117.1-2009 502.2.
On sheet A-5 Ceiling Framing Plan
3.Ceiling Framing Plan
Clarify the proposed installation of diagonal uprights @ 4-0 16 o/c. With the
·
2x6 rafters spaced 24 on-center as specified on sheet A-7 Building Section
those without the diagonal uprights appear to be over spanned, fail in bending, and
deflect beyond that allowable per IBC Table 1604.3. The response to the plan
The diagonal upright spacing has been changed from 4-
review comment states:
0 o.c. to 16 o.c. reducing the span of the new 2x6 celing(sic) joists installed at
16 o.c. to 10 feet. See changes on sheet A5 & A7 attached ceiling joist
calculation.
. The concern noted in the plan review comment regards the span of
the rafters, not the ceiling joists. Placing the diagonal uprights at 16 o.c. still
results in bracing provided for every-other rafter and those without failing in bending
and deflecting beyond that allowable per IBC Table 1604.3. Typically diagonal
bracing is placed at the same spacing as the rafters or is connected to a purlin below
the repetitive roof rafters per IBC 2308.10.5.
Clarify the proposed installation of 2x6 HF #2 ceiling joists at 16 on-center. It
·
does not appear to result in the roof framing construction per IBC 2308.10.4. The
see 8a. response.
response to the plan review comment states: . The concern noted
in the plan review comment by reference to IBC 2308.10.4 regards the required
ceiling joist and rafter connections, not the load capacity of the ceiling joists. The
difference in the spacing of the rafters and the ceiling joists results in every-other
pair of rafters not having a ceiling joist connection to resist the outward thrust at the
top of the walls due to roof loads.
Page 2 of 2