Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_Redline_Letter_From_Renton_180930_v2September 27, 2018 Mr. Russ Sorkness JK Monarch 424 29th St NE, Suite C Puyallup, WA 98372 RE: Building Permit Structural Plan Review – First Submittal 830 Chelan Place NE (B18004548) Dear Mr. Sorkness: We reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the structural provisions of the 2015 International Residential Code (IRC) and 2015 International Building Code (IBC) as amended and adopted by the state of Washington and the City of Renton. The design team should address the comments below. Responses to these review comments should be made in an itemized letter form and any changes to the drawings should be clouded. We recommend that the permit applicant have the architect, structural engineer, and truss engineer respond and resubmit for additional review. All information should be submitted directly to the City of Renton. Geotechnical 1. Geotechnical special inspections. Special inspections and tests should be provided by a qualified geotechnical engineer as recommended in the geotechnical report by Associated Earth Sciences, dated June 20, 2013. See IRC Section R401.4. The following is a summary: a. Site excavation and grading. b. Overexcavation for placement of structural fill. c. Construction dewatering, see Page 4 of the geotechnical report. d. Placement of structural fill and soil compaction. e. Verification of soil-bearing capacity. D08-053 B18004548 V2 REVISION Received: 10/04/2018 / aalexander BUILDING DIVISION Mr. Sorkness Page 2 of 7 September 27, 2018 No response from the applicant is required for this comment. This comment is for the building official and for reference. Architectural 1. Special Inspection Form. Due to the geotechnical inspection requirements indicated on Pages 5 and 8 of the submitted geotechnical report, please complete and submit the City of Renton’s special inspection form. An electronic copy of this form may be found at: https://edocs.rentonwa.gov/Documents/0/edoc/955944/Special%20Inspection %20Form.pdf 2. Our review of the site plan indicates the roof projects within 5 feet of the property line on the south and north sides of the structure. By IRC Section 302.1 and Table 302.1(1), either the underside roof shall have a 1-hour fire- resistance rating or if fire blocking is applied between the top of wall and underside of the roof. We note the “2x solid blocking” note in the Typical Wall Section on Sheet A-4, but it is not clear if opening are to be placed in the blocking to allow for venting; i.e. how is the roof being vented? Please revise the drawings to be consistent with the IRC requirements and resubmit the drawings for review. This may affect the roof ventilation calculations. Please verify. See IRC Section 106.1.1. Structural General 1. Structural special inspections. Structural special inspections. Special inspections by qualified special inspectors do not appear warranted for this project. If it is determined otherwise, the applicable special inspections are noted below. See IBC Sections 1704.1 and 1704.2. Mr. Sorkness Page 3 of 7 September 27, 2018 a. Installation of concrete expansion, adhesive, and screw anchors, where applicable: in accordance with qualifying report of evaluation service (e.g., ICC-ES). See also IRC Section 301.1.3 as well as IBC Section 1705.1.1. No response from the applicant is required for this comment. This comment is for the building official and for reference. 2. The drawings do not include information relating to the proposed wood trusses. The drawings should be revised and resubmitted indicating the following: a. The truss live loading shall be per IRC Section 301.5 and Table 301.5, especially noting footnotes b and g. b. The truss design shall be per IRC Sections 502.11.1 and 802.10.2, especially indicating the truss design and manufacturing shall be per ANSI/TPI 1. c. The truss temporary and permanent bracing shall be per IRC Sections 502.11.2 and 802.10.3 as well as the Truss Plate Institute’s Building Component Safety Information. Please note, we see Note 8 under the Manufactured Wood Trusses on Sheet S-0 indicates bracing per the truss engineer, but does not indicate to what standard the bracing is to satisfy. d. Truss alterations shall not occur unless the approval of a design professional as indicated in IRC Sections 502.11.3 and 802.10.4. Lateral 3. Detail 6/SD-1 indicates a pinned connection where the floor joist run parallel to the wall with respect to out of plane wall loads; in that the proposed connection transfers shear but don’t provide calculate-able moment resistance. Below is image with redlined comments. Please revise the detail to resolve this pinned condition and resubmit for review. Please note, the City of Renton notes per AWC SDPWS-15 Section 4.1.5.1.2 sheathing cannot be used to transfer tensile loads. See IRC Sections 106.1.1 and 301.1.3 as well as IBC Sections 2305.1 and 2306.1. Mr. Sorkness Page 4 of 7 September 27, 2018 4. Currently Detail 23/SD-2 indicates the diagonal bracing passing its load directly to the truss’s top chord for which the truss has not be designed. Please revise the detail to establish a positive load path to the roof. Below are some images with our redlined comments. See IBC Section 107.2.1, 1604.2, and 2306.1. Mr. Sorkness Page 5 of 7 September 27, 2018 5. Our review indicates that a “flat” 2x member, needs to be connected to the 2x diagonal wood bracing shown in Detail 23/SD-2 which braces the top of wall at the end gable truss. This to stiffen the diagonal brace and prevent the diagonal from buckling under loading when the brace length exceeds 6 feet 3 inches. The drawings should be revised to indicate this requirement and resubmitted for review. See IRC Sections 106.1.1, 301.1, and 301.1.3 as well as IBC Sections 107.2.1, 2305.1, 2306.1, and 2307.1 as well as AWC NDS-15 Section 3.7.1. 6. Sheet S-2 indicates plans showing the proposed shear walls, but the shear wall schedule which details the construction requirement of the shear walls is on another sheet, Sheet S-0. The City of Renton requires the shear wall schedule and the plans showing the shear walls to be on the same sheet(s). Please revise the drawings to meet this requirement and resubmit the drawings for review. See IRC Sections 104.1, 106.1.1, and 109.1.4. 7. The drawings, such as Sheet S-0, indicate walls that have sheathing on both sides of the wall (i.e., shear wall types 2W3 and 2W2), but the drawings do not indicate how this loading from both sides of the wall is transferred to the below wall/structure. Is there addition blocking/ rim joists below the double sheathed wall with additional nailing and light gage connections? Please revise the drawings to clarify the design intent for this load path and resubmit for review. See IRC Section 301.1.3 as well as IBC Sections 107.2.1, 1604.2, and 2305.1. Mr. Sorkness Page 6 of 7 September 27, 2018 8. The Upper Floor Framing/ Main Floor SW Plan indicates 2x6 HF Stud Grade studs at 16 inches on-center balloon framing to the north of the proposed stairs. Please submit substantiating data, such as additional calculations which indicate the proposed studs have the capacity to resist the required IBC loadings, especially the combined wind and gravity components and cladding loads. The proposed design may need to be revised. Please verify. See IRC Section 301.1.3 and IBC Sections 107.2.1, 1604.2, 1605.3, and 2306.1. 9. Please revise the drawings to indicate a positive load path from the W4 shear wall at the south side/ entrance of the house to the foundation. Below is an image from Sheet S-2 with our redlined comment. Please resubmit the revised drawings for review. See IRC Sections 106.1.1 and 301.1.3 as well as IBC Section 1604.2. Truss Submittal 1. The truss layout and design should be revised to match Sheet S-2. Below are images from the truss layout drawings with our redlined comments. These redlined notes are to be consistent with Sheet S-2 which appears to use these drag trusses as part of the chord system for the roof. Please resubmit the Mr. Sorkness Page 7 of 7 September 27, 2018 revised layout drawing and revised truss engineering package for review. See IBC Section 107.2.1, 1604.2, 1609.1, and 1613.1. Corrections and comments made during the review process do not relieve the permit applicant or the designers from compliance with code requirements, conditions of approval, and permit requirements; nor are the designers relieved of responsibility for a complete design in accordance with the laws of the state of Washington. This review is for general compliance with the International Residential Code and International Building Code as they relate to the project. See IRC Section 105.4. If you have any questions or need additional clarification, please contact us. Sincerely, Alan D. Findlay, P.E. Building Plan Reviewer, City of Renton cc: File