1525 75TH ST SW COMCAST 2022-07-14

• • Drew Martin From: Drew Martin Sent: Friday,July 23, 2021 10:31 AM To: Irina Ticu Cc: Carlson,Jim Subject: City of Everett Permit Services: 1525 75th Street SW(M2107-056) - First Building Review Good morning, Irina. I have a few comments for the design team to address. This email will serve as the review letter. I also spoke with the structural engineer regarding the evaluation of the roof to support the new RTU; I am copying him to bring everyone into the same conversation and help expedite responses. Depending on how the comments are addressed, I can receive supplemental information electronically(e.g., a few pages of supplemental calculations, missing details to tape into the drawings, etc.). If more significant changes to the drawings are required,we'll need two complete revised sets. In either case, a single coordinated response letter should be included to clarify how the comments have been addressed. Comments 1. The project appears to include replace of ducts throughout the space. Verify that the ducts do not penetrate fire-rated assemblies. If rated assemblies are penetrated, details are required. Fire/smoke dampers should be specified where required. See IBC Sections 714 and 717. 2. The project appears to include hanging units weighing more than 20 pounds.Support details that include seismic bracing should be included in the construction drawings. Where supports impose loads on truss chords between web connection points, supplemental web bracing should be provided as needed. Structural calculations should be included substantiating the design of the supports and bracing. See IBC Sections 1604.1 and 1613.1, and ASCE 7-16 Sections 13.1.4 Item 6(c)(ii) and 13.6. 3. The structural calculations include an evaluation of the roof framing supporting the new RTU. See IBC Section 1604.1. The following comments should be addressed: a. The weight of the RTU was considered. A 300-pound exhaust fan will be located immediately adjacent to the RTU and should be included in the combined weight. b. The framing analysis should include other equipment being supported by the same framing as the new RTU. c. The analysis does not appear to include snow loading. See IBC Section 1605. The snow load may be considered using either of the following approaches: i. ASCE 7-16 Chapter 7, including all concurrent effects(e.g., unbalanced loading, drifts, rain surcharge, etc.). ii. Uniform 25 psf snow load per the SEAW/WABO White Paper recommendations. Concurrent effects per ASCE 7-16 are not required when this load is used. Please let me know if you have questions. Drew Martin, P.E.,S.E. - Associate Engineer—Commercial Plans Examiner I Permit Services 425.257.8813 13200 Cedar Street, 2nd Floor, Everett,WA 98201 EVERETT Hours: M/W/Th/F: 7:30am-12:OOpm & 1:00pm-3:00pm;Tu: 1:00pm-3:00pm 1