2712 TAYLOR DR 2023-11-01 - Laserfiche WebLink

This email follows our brief telephone discussion. There are still several comments that have not been clearly addressed. Also, I have some questions regarding the changes for the west balconies. Per your request, I'll try to call you around 10am tomorrow. Once we discuss these comments, we can determine the best way forward to addressing them and finalizing the review. Here are the issues: Architectural 1b. The ACI reference on Sheet A1.01-A still states ACI 318-04. This should be ACI 318-14. 7. This comment addresses the stairs: a. The guards at both stairs (i.e., where full -height walls are not provided) are not clear. b. The construction of the winder staircase is note clear. In particular, it appears that support walls may be intended along the sides, but these are not clear or consistent in the drawings. The stair stringers are only 3.5". The number and spacing is not specify. Sheets A6.01 has three unlabeled details that have not been coordinated with the plans and sections. The apparent guard detail is particularly unclear, and does not appear to provide an adequate connection; it also appears to conflict with the structural details. c. The stairs shows minimum and maximum tread widths of 7 and 12 inches. This does not appear to provide the minimum required 10" depth at the walkline, which is located 12" from the narrow side. See IRC Sections R311.7.3 and R311.7.5.2.1. d. It is not clear if the landings at the middle and top of the winder stairs comply with IRC Section R311.7.6.1. Specifically, the minimum dimension in the direction of travel should be substantiated. e. The response by the structural engineer appears to address the guards at the exterior balconies, not the interior stairways. Details referenced in the response do not appear correct. Note that if Detail S1/S2 is intended, the stair construction does not appear to provide the required framing for the shown connection. 8. This comment addresses the guards at the exterior balconies: a. The architectural and structural drawings provided conflicting details for the guards. See Details 7/A9.01 and S/S2, respectively. b. Both details require a thick framing member for connection. However, this is not provided along the balcony edges per Sheet S7. c. The connections shown appear to penetrate the moisture barriers for the deck framing, and may result in water infiltration to non -decay -resistant wood framing, particularly for the top -mounted connections.