1517 132ND ST SE 2024-11-21 - Laserfiche WebLink

(2.-3 o6—OO pmPM DESIGN GROUP, INC. aau ED 211 Gateway Rd W, Suite 208 Napa, CA 94558 DESIGN JAN 0 3 2024 CITY OF EVERETT ECOVED October 2, 2023 Permit Services D OCT 0 7 2023 City of Everett Building Department VERETT 3200 Cedar Street, 2nd Floor LtTY OF E ices Everett, WA 98201 pefrnit RE: Chase Bank Everett 1517 132nd St. Se Everett, Wa 98208 PMDG JOB NO. CBR22023.0 Dear Drew: Please find below responses to the Plans Review comments dated 8/01/2023 for the Chase Bank TI project. Plan revisions are identified with Delta 1 dated 9/11/2023. Architectural 1. The south accessible route has a 5.81%slope and qualifies as a ramp. Handrails are required, or the ramp slope should be reduced to not exceed 5%(i.e., 1:20). Note that if handrails are provided, these will require extensions that may conflict with maneuvering at the lower landing. Response: Slope revised to be compliant. No handrails are required. The condition is a Curb Cut Parallel ramp. Refer to Civil plans and sheet detail 15/A0.2.1 2. The project is required to provide infrastructure for new and future EV charging stations. See IBC Section 429. Response: Refer to the updated arch, Civil, and Electrical plans for EV infrastructure. 3. The roof is required to be solar-ready per WSEC Section C411. The roof plan should designate a solar area that complies with the fire access clearances per IFC Section 1204.3. The structural design criteria should specify the minimum 4psf superimposed load in addition to other loads; the current 5psf mechanical load should not be considered to include the 4 psf load. Response: Future solar-ready area added to roof plan (Maximum practicable area). Building shape and rooftop equipment make full compliance with this section impractical. Requesting to reduce the size of the solar zone required by Section C411.2 to the maximum practicable area. Structural See enclosed Structural response letter. 4. The design of the roof diaphragm, and specifically the tributary loading of the diaphragm to the shear walls, is not clear. Tributary distribution should be based on a flexible diaphragm assumption. It appears that some shear walls may be undersized, including but not limited to Grids H and 6. The direct connection length may not be sufficient for the short walls. Where Additional documentation substantiating the load distribution and diaphragm transfer mechanisms should be submitted for review. See IBC Section 1604.4 and 1613.1, and ASCE Sections 12.3.3.1 and 12.7.3. 5. The roof includes multiple drag trusses. The loads should be designated as ASD or LRFD. pmdg@pmdginc.com/pmdginc.com/877.277.9193