2812 RUCKER AVE FAST SIGNS 2025-04-17

Drew Martin From: Drew Martin Sent: Tuesday, May 4, 2021 4:20 PM To: Matt Prevost; D. Sebasstian; Duane Steig Cc: taylordesignarch@gmail.com; Kurtis Brown; Kelsey Heyd Subject: City of Everett Permit Services: 2812 Rucker Avenue (B2103-021) - Second Building Review Hello, Matt. This email recaps our conversation. It appears the negligible building changes have grown somewhat into a whole architectural sheet with new offices and a new exit door in the interior space. It appears this sheet may have been submitted to us without your coordination, and the project cost estimate hasn't been updated. From our perspective, both the rack and building work can be included on the same permit or separate permits, but the entire project scope should be clarified and the submittal documents coordinated. If a separate permit is desired for the building work,we'll need an application for that work. In regards to the new architectural Sheet Al prepared by Taylor Design Architects,the sheet should be revised to address the following: 1. The new exit door at Grid A3.5 should address the following: a. The door opens over the ramp,which is not permitted per ICC A117.1-09 Section 405.7.5. A landing is required at the top of the ramp;the door cannot overlap the landing. See Figure C405.7.5(a) and the code commentary for additional explanation of this code section. Note that a landing is not required if the surface slope approaching the door does not exceed 1:20;see also Comment 1(c) below. b. Continuing with the previous comment,the door must satisfy the maneuvering clearances of Figure 404.2.3.2. The maneuvering clearance may overlap the landing as long as the door does not overlap the landing. The door may swing inward to reduce the resulting landing size outside the door. c. There is a new ramp with a 1:20 slope with an approximate 3' run. It is my understanding that there is a 6"step,which will exceed the maximum slope of 1:12. The door should be revised to comply with ICC A117.1-09. d. The insulation over the new doorway should be minimum R-30 per WSEC-15. 2. Show the maximum egress distances for both spaces. The following should be addressed: a. The egress distance for the space between Grids 5-6,from the most remote point on the mezzanine, is understood to slightly exceed a limit of 100 feet allowed for a space with less than 30 occupants. Verify this distance and state the occupancy limit on the drawings. b. The egress distance for the space between Grids 3-4 exceeds 100 feet. Note that this is based on a presumed occupancy limit of 30. The vehicle loading areas is understood to potentially include a code- compliant man door in the vehicle door. This should be shown if present. Alternatively a second egress route is required from this space. The ramp to the northern space may be viable if the ramp does not exceed accessibility limits;the slope should be specified in the plan. An exit sign would be required, as will code compliant stairs from the vehicle area to the main floor. 3. The following should be addressed for the existing ramp at Grid B.6/3.3-4: a. The ramp and upper floor should be provided with a guard on the west side per the IPMC. If already provided,the guard should be shown. Alternatively, details for a guard should be included. b. If the ramp is required as part of the egress system, railing and wheel guards should be provided on the east side meeting accessibility requirements. Wheel guards should also be provided on the west side. 4. Clarify that the offices in the north space are new. Provide top and bottom connections to the concrete SOG and wood framing above, respectively. 1f2