The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutBLD2018-00185 - NSFRDEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368'lel 360.319.4450 | Fax: 360.379.4451 Web: www.co.iefferson.wa.us /communiwdevelooment E-mai-l: dcd@co.iefferson.wa.us CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY PERMIT # APPLICANT: BLD18-00185 SCOTLAND STROHM PO BOX 441 QUILCENE WA 98376 272 Lexinqton Pl. QUILCENE,98376 PHONE: 760-315-6868 lssue Date: 071512018 Final Date: 412512019 Block: Lot: Section: 2 Township: 27 N Range: 2W SITE ADDRESS: SUBDIVISION: PARCEL NUMBER:702021028 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, WITH ROOF TOP SOLAR PANELS AND EAI!i I INL' ZCU L'AL. !'KUI-ANE IANA UE,I-'Ib.UUUUU THE PROJECT LISTED ABOVE COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF THE BUILDING CODE 2015 EDITION. OCCUPANCY GROUP: R-3 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: 5N SPRINKLER SYSTEM No THE PROJECT PASSED ITS FINAL INSPECTION AND RECEIVED FINAL SIGN OFF ON 412512019 Acting Building Official, Patty Charnas \\tidemark\data\forms\F_BLD_Occupancy. rpt 5t6t2019 O JEFFERS.N couNrY O DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 621 Sheridan Street I PortTownsend, WA 98368 360-3794450 | email: dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us www. co. jefferson.wa. us/com md evelopment BUILDING PERMIT PERMIT #: SITE ADDRESS: OWNER: SUBDIVISION: PARCEL NUMBER BLD18-00185 272 Lexinqton Pl. QUILCENE, 98376 SCOTLAND STROHM PO BOX 441 QUILCENE WA 98376 702021028 Received Date: lssue Date Expiration Date PHONE: 760-315-6868 Section: 2 Township: 27 N Range: 2\ 4t18t2018 7t5t2018 7t5t2019 CONTRACTOR:NIEMAN CONSTRUCTION CO P. O. BOX 846 QUILCENE WA 98376-0846 PHONE: (360) 434-0717 Contractor's License NIEMACCOlSMZ PROJECT DESCRIPTION: NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, WITH ROOF TOP SOLAR PANELS AND EXISTING 250 GAL. PROPANE TANK SEP16.00080 TYPE OF WORK TYPE OF IMP VALUATION CODE EDITION: OCCUPANCY: OCCUPANCY: CONST TYPE: CONST TYPE: RES NEW 380,000.00 2015 R-3 5N SQUARE FOOTAGE: MAIN: ADD'L: HEAT BASE: UNHEATED: OTHER: GARAGE: DECK: 1,495 400 HEAT TYPE: HEAT TYPE: # OF STORIES: SHORELINE. SETBACK: BANK HEIGHT: PRO SEWAGE DISPOSAL: WATER SYSTEM: BEDROOMS: Exist:Prop: 3 Total: 3 ALT l PWELL BATHROOMS Exist:Prop: 2 Total: 2 HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION THIS PERMIT IS VALID FOR ONE YEAR OR IT MUST BE PROPERLY RENEWED BUILDING INSPECTION HOT-LINE 3794455. Request must be received by 3pm the day before the inspection is needed. Final lnspections require 24 hour notice. Office Hours 9:00 am - 4:30 pm MONDAY - THURSDAY HOT LINE AVAILABLE 24 HOURS A DAY SPECIAL CONDITIONS APPLY - SEE ATTACHED Amount Paid Bv: Date: Receipt Permit Plan Check Consistency Review State Building Code Scanning Fee EH SEP/RES Rev Potable Water Application $2,749.00 $1,786.85 $276.00 $4.50 $23.00 $134.00 $134.00 04t18t18 04118118 04t18t18 04t18t18 04t18t18 04t18t18 04t18t18 177952 177952 177952 177952 177952 177952 177952 SRE SRE SRE SRE SRE SRE SRE Type $5,107.35Total: 105.5 Expiration. Every permit issued shall become invalid unless the work authorized by such permit is commenced within 180 days after its issuance, or if the work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days after e time the work is commenced Jefferson County Building Permit Nu BLD18-00185 Applicant: STROHM BUILDING PERMIT INSPECTION APPROVALS Appticabte Code: 2015 tnternationat Buitdins codes To schedule inspections, call (360)379-4455 no later than 3:00PM the day before the inspection is needed. Requests received after 3:00 PM will not be scheduled for the next day's inspections. ELECTRICAL PERMITS are issued by the Washington State Department of Labor & lndustries. The electrical permit must be signed off by the State lnspector prior to the County's Framing lnspection lnspection Item Date Approval Signature Notes Setbacks Foundation Footing t& Footing Drains r1 Foundation Stem Wall Under Floor Framing Straps (hold downs)I tg Ext. Shear Wall Nailing I Rough-in Plumbing Framing Airseal lnsulation: Walls 0 lnsulation: Floors 4 lnsulation: Ceiling IL t0 Wallboard Nailing Gas Line: lnterior t g "sw Gas Line: Exterior 4 d ful'J Propane Tank HeaUChimney Clearance Blower Airtight Test Smoke & CO Address Posted Water Meter lnspection management area *e""Tv brs *-tt \tftt sth ,h L\|y'U I I Lal.- final inspection will not be scheduled until the following are completed and signed off by the applicable Department; o Building Permit Conditions dre met o Septic Permit Final/Complete for ony building contoining plumbing o Lond Use Conditions met ond signed ofl . Public Works Permit Final (where opplicoble) FINAL INSPECTION k FINAL INSPECTION MUST BE APPROVED PRIOR TO BUILDING BE!NG OCCUPIED THIS PERMIT IS VALID FOR ONE YEAR .-},) ^l CONDITIONS for Building Permit # :8-00185 1 .) The potable water source for this residence was drilled under USR17-16. The water well report and the 4 hour pump test submitted show the well produced approximately .45 gallons per minute for t hour. Static water levels maintained at 298.1 with a totalwell depth of 325' bgs. RECOMMEND low water use water fixtures through out home, water conservation measures to minimize water use and rainwater collection from roof area for any irrigation or stockwatering needs. NTT will be required for the proposed ADU on the property (based on the septic capacity). ) 10' minimum separation required between the water line and any onsite sewage system components including sewage transport lines. The application was reviewed by the Jefferson County Department of Community Development Staff on May 18,2018 for the potential presence of Critical Areas under the provisions of the Unified Development Code (UDC). After an initial Geographic lnformation Systems mapping review the following CriticalAreas were confirmed to be present on the subject property: Lanslide hazard area, erosion hazard area. This approval is for a new single family residence only. Any future permits on this site are subject to review for consistency with applicable codes and ordinances and does not preclude review and conditions which may be placed upon future permits. The revised site plan submitted with the new single family residence application on May 23,2018 has been reviewed for consistency under the UDC, and has been approved by Jefferson County Department of Community Development. Any modifications, changes, and/or additions to the stamped, approved site plan dated May 23,2018 shall be resubmitted for review and approval by Jefferson County Department of Community Development. Geologically Hazardous Areas in Jefferson County are characterized by slope, soil type, geologic material, and groundwater that may combine to create problems with slope stability, erosion, and water quality during and after construction or during natural events such as earthquakes or severe rainstorms. The applicant is proposing to create or add 2,695 square feet of impervious surface and 7,695 square feet of land disturbing activities. JCC 18.30.060 and 18.30.070 require the project applicant submit a stormwater plan meeting Minimum Requirements #1 through #5 of the Department of Ecology Stormwater Manual for Western Washington. The stormwater plan shall address measures to control stormwater, erosion, and sediment during construction and shall address permanent measures to stabilize soil exposed during construction, and in the design and operation of stormwater drainage control systems. 8.) The project shall adhere to the Best Management Practices (BMPs)to control stormwater, erosion and sediment during construction. BMPs shall address permanent measures to stabilize soil exposed during construction, and in the design and operation of stormwater and drainage control systems. ) KMH ) 10 ) The project is located within and thus is subject to compliance with State Department of Ecology ln Rule for that region. The parcel is within the _Leland sub-basin in a designated Reserve ManagementArea; as such, conservation standards per state regulations require the following: 1. A permit-exempt well serving an individual user shall not exceed a maximum of 500 gallons per day (gpd) or an annual average more than 350 gpd, for all permit-exempt uses authorized under RCW 90.44.050. (WAC 173-517-120(1Xb)) 2. Awell serving a group domestic system shall not exceed a maximum use of 500 gallons per day (gpd) or an annual average more than 350 gpd, for each residence, and shall not exceed a total use of 5,000 gpd for the group. The design and construction of group domestic systems must be consistent with applicable state department of health requirements and applicable Jefferson County or Clallam County requirements. (WAC 173-517-1 20(1 Xc)) 3. INSTALLATION OFAWATER METER, MEETING DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY SPECIFICATIONS, IS REQUIRED FOR ALL NEW USES THROUGHOUT THE WATERSHED. (WAC 173-517-180). BROCHURES W|TH SPECTFTCATTONS ARE ENCLOSED WITH THE PERMIT. Refer to enclosed documents for more INFORMATION; see Ecology web site at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wr/instream-flows/quilsnowbasin.html or contact Ecology at 360-407-6300. 11.) This building approval accounts lor 240 GPD of septic system capacity, of the 480 GPD septic system designed and approved under SEP16-00080. 12.) The agricultural building shown on the site plan has not been approved for plumbing. Owner has future plans to install a bathroom and shower, a permit is required to add plumbing to any unplumbed building. Approval of this permit does not provide any assurance of future approvals for onsite sewage disposal on the property or use of any existing septic systems. Actions taken to date and proposed as part of this project may limit or prevent future development of an onsite sewage system. Future proposals must meet current code at the time of application. \\tidemark\data\forms\F_BLD_Permit_Bldg. rpt 7t5t2018 ga.ryE..: #.=---A=A 360/ 683-3eAt 360/ 38s.s3sr 36A/ 307-7822 FAX:683"397tl{ffiffiro co"221 West Cedar 5tr9_e![qyiry-wA 98382 rilo0C,r Atr rIPtPrS z 72 - F'L' ,".,.,"., Ct i, {!t:hq11t,,,11,;s1,,, VEND0R lOllrTCS CERTf : 2236Site Duct Testing ealculator {New Construction) Lea Test Method A.ir Handier Pre$srt to Exterior or rl]tal Lea Handler N0T Pr*sent to Exterior CIr Total Pl Conditioned Floor Area Ceili i{eight (Fti 1. Iast CFL{rr rnust be ri3 Air Leakage Tetting f,alculator {Blo,,rrer Ooor Test} Calcuiated Volume bic Fee A'tb 223 / Testing Technicians Signature Certified Technician { Date of Testing Glossary: Rough in: After tnstallation ot the complete air distribution sy$ern but before installation of in$ulation and sheet rock. Allows for access to all duct seams and copnections for re-evaluation of seal integrity if standard iS not nret in initial test. Fort C$nstruction; At or near final inspection. The home rnust be complete enough to pressurize the home to 25 pa. Total Leakage: Aggregation of the entire systems duct leakage in a duct test" Leakage to exterior: Aggregation of all duct system leaks to the exterior of the CFA in a duct test. Pascal (pa): Unit of Pressure. C.fA: Conditioned floor area in square feet {FMr; Cubic feet per nrinute of air leakage at 25 Pascals of pressure, CfMlll,: Cubic feet per minute at 50 Pascals of Fressure. Conditi,oned Voluma: Volume of Conditioned space {CFA X ceiling Height) A{Hro: Air Changes per hour at 50 Pascals of pressure.W APR 2 5 20t9 1 House Address or Lot Conditioned F loor Area Drl':t festar Location: Prassilre Iap Location: if licable Calculated Tgstr CFM:u Standa rdr J { CFMc P*r 100 sf of CFA s 3 (FMz: per liO sf oi CFA 4 fb/l/.{5 Standard Iested cFM{u Calculated Test Result {,4{ltro} s s.o Act,llfllcFMmx 60 + Corrdiriohel Volume!* JTT!':iSCN COUNTY DCD to or leis than the calculated 'il {,vhr Sally EIIis From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Daniel Nieman <niemanconstructioninc@msn.com> Wednesday, April24,2019 8:53 PM Sally Ellis Strohm: BLD18-00185: Air Test 2019_04 24 StrhmAir test.pdf Hi Sally, Please note the attached AIR TEST as required forthe Strohm residence at272 Lexington Pl., Quilcene, Wa. : BLD18-0185. Jim Coyne asked for a copy to be placed in the permit file. lf you could let him know, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Da,wNLetnan APn 24208 couNty JEFFERSOTV oq6 1 brukr [,NGINEE RIN6 LLC Date: August 27,2018 To: DanNieman(niemanconstructioninc@msn.com) From: Catherine Bailey Re: Strohm Residence, located at Parcel #702021028, Quilcene, WA It is understood that during construction the foundation excavation resulted in a much deeper foundation alonggridlinesAandBoftheconstructionplans. Weunderstandthatthefinalunbalancedfillforthis foundation wall will not exceed 5'-6". The wall was constructed per the attached detail and is found to meet the intent of our engineering. Sincerely, Catherine Bailey, PE, MEng Daniel Buker, PE, SE, LEED AP Attached: SK-l - Exterior Floor Framing at Crawlspace AUO raEnsesorv 3t 2on oqo Buker Engineering, llc Ph: 206.258.6333 4303 Stone Way N. Seattle, WA 98103 B" b-Ocl&r courvlP Page 1 of 1 \ \/ERI. (ALr. BENDs) #4 @ 12', 0C HORIZ. #4 @ 18', 0C >a \o _t ar') co 5 PANEL EDGE NAILING OVER AtL HOLDOWN SIUDS H0LDOWN (WHERE 0CCUR5) PER PLAN W/ ALL-THREAD TO IVATCH A B. SIZE IN HOLDOWN SCHEDULE 435 PER SHEARWALL SCHEDULE VERTICAL GRAI N BLOCKI N G TO IVATCH HOLDOWN STUDS SHEARWALL PER PLAN NAILING PER SHEARWALL ScHEDULE (TYP.) (4)8d rNTO EA. BLOCK J0lsT DIRECTI0N AND SHEATHING PER PLAN N0TE: FL00RJOIST IUAY BE HUNG FROIV CONCRETE AT CONTRACTOR'S CHOICE 2x Rllt/ J0IST (2) #4 r0NT. TOP (1 EA. slDE 0F A.B.) = oo >< O _t\-o (2) 1 6d THRU EA. JOtsT 0R BLOCK \/vHEREJ0rSrS ARE PARALLEL, PROVIDE 2x BL0CKING @ 48" 0C P.T. 2x6 PLATE w/ A.B. PER SHEARWALL SCHEDULE P/t"s @ 48' 0C ELSEWHERE) z (O bukr ENGINEERING (2)#4 C0NT BOTTOIV ALL FASTENERS INTO PRESSURE TREAIED WOOD SHALL BE GALV OR STAINLESS STEEL PER GENERAL NOTES DATE 08D1t2018 PROJECT Strohm Residence S K-1 SCAtE 3/4" =1'-0"TITLE Exterior Floor Framing at Crawlspace o B -lG Sally Ellis From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Daniel Nieman <niemanconstructioninc@msn.com> Tuesday, August 28,2018 5:46 PM Jim Coyne Sally Ellis BLD18-00185 : Fwd: Strohm: Foundation wall height and Vaulted ceilings Foundation Memo.pdf Hi Jim, Per your request, please note the attached letter from the structural engineer regarding the increased concrete foundation wall height. Owners: Scot and Bobbie Strohm Permit number: BLDl8-001 85 Address: 272 Lexington Pl. Quilcene, wa.98376 Begin forwarded message From: Catherine Bailey <catherine@bukeren Subject: RE: Strohm: Foundation wall height and Vaulted Date: August 27,2018 at 5:41:33 PM PDT To: Daniel Nieman <niemanconstructio > Okay, here is your foundation memo bk, r H,r,t filhJ uil{ t rta(; Catherine Bailey, PE, MEng 206.258.6335 (Direct) 206.258.6333 ext. 1002 viryvw. bukereng i neeri ng. com From: Daniel Nieman Imailto:niemanconstructioninc@msn.com] Sent: Monday, August 27,2078 2:29 PM To: Catherine Bailey <catherine@bukerengineering,com> Subject: Re: Strohm: Foundation wall height and Vaulted ceilings I believe it's 5'6" from top of footing to finish grade Sent from my iPhone On Aug 27,2018, at2:17 PM, Catherine Bailey <catherine@bukerens wrote Okay Dan, what is the unbalanced fill on that back wall? <image001.gif> Catherine Bailey, PE, MEng 206.258.6335 (Direct) 1 abc, "rA i.*ti Exceptions: 1. Air-impermeable spray foam products shall be permltted to be applied without additionaljoint seals. 2. Where a duct connection is made that is partially inaccessible, three screws or rivets shall be equally spaced on the exposed portion ofthejoint so as to prevent a hinge effect' 3. Continuously welded and locking-type longitudinaljoints and seams in ducts operating at static pressures less than 2 inches of water column (500 Pa) pressure classification shall not require additional closure systems. Ducts shall be leak tested in accordance with WSU RS-33, using the maximum duct leakage rates specified. Duct tightness shall be verified by either of the following: l.Postconstructlon test: Total leakage shall be less than or equal to 4 cfm (113.3 Vmin) per 100 square feet (9.29 mz) of conditioned floor area when tested at a pressure differential of 0.1 inches w.g. (25 Pa) across the entire system, including the manufacturer's air handler enclosure. All register boots shal! be taped or otherwise sealed during the test. Leakage to outdoors shall be less than or equal to 4 cfoi (133.3 L/min) per 1@ square feet of conditioned floor area. 2. Rough-in test: Total leakage shall be less than or equal to 4 cfm (113.3 Vmin) per 100 square feet (9.29 mz) of conditioned floor area when tested at a pressure differential of 0.1 inches w.g. (25 Pa) across the systein, including the manufacturer's air handler enclosure. All registers shall be taped or othenpise sealed during the test. tf the air handler is not installed at the time of the test, total leakage shall be less than or equal to 3 cfm (85 Umin) per 100 square feet (9.29 mz) of conditloned floor area. Exceptlon: The tota! leakage test is not required for ducts and air handlers located entirely within the building thermal envelope. Ducts located in crawl spaces do not qualify for this exception. R6t,2.2.LSeated air handler. Air handlers shall have a manufacturer's designation for an air leakage of no more than 2 percent of the design air flow rate when tested in accordance with ASHRAE 193. Alr Leakage Testing Code Language Rp2.4.t.2Testing. The building or dwelling unit shall be tested and verified as having an air leakage rate of not exceeding 5 air changes per hour. Testing shall be conducted with a blower door at a pressure of 0.2 inches w.g. (50 Pascals). Where required by the code officiol, testing shall be conducted by an opproved third party. A written report of the results of the test shall be signed by the party conducting the test and provided to the code officiol. Testing shall be performed at any time after creation of all penetrations of the building thermal envelope. Once visual inspection has confirmed sealing (see Table R4O2.4,L,LI, operable windows and doors manufacturedby smollbusiness shallbe permitted to be sealed off at the frame prior to the test. During testing:' 1. Exterior windows and doors, fireplace and stove doors shall be closed, but not sealed, beyond the intended ' weather-stripping or other infiltration control tneasures; 2. Dampers including exhaust, intake, makeup air, backdraft and flue dampers shall be closed, but not sealed beyond intended infiltration control measures; 3. lnterior doors, if installed at the time of the test, shall be open, access hatches to conditioned crawl spaces and conditioned attics shall be open; 4, Exterior openings for continuous ventilation systems and heat recovery ventilators shall be closed and sealed; 5. Heating and cooling systems, if installed at the time of the test, shall be turned off; and 6. Supply and return registers, if installed at the time of the test, shall be fully open. HVAC ducts supply and return registers shall not be sealed. 206.258.6333 ext. 1002 www. bukerengineeting. com From: Daniel Nieman Imailto:niemanconstructioninc@msn.com] Sent: Monday, August 27,201812:31 PM To: Catherine Bailey <catherine@bukerengineering.com> Subject: Re: Strohm: Foundation wall height and Vaulted ceilings Hi Catherine, If the revised stick cut beams are acceptable, we wouldn't need any documentation for a couple of months. However, since the framers are ready to rock and roll next week, I'm hoping you can tell me if the beams are acceptable or need to be upgraded. The truss plants are running further and further behind. Even if we wanted trusses we wouldn't be able to get them until 10125. Just a verbal yes or no for now would be great. Thanks, Dan On Aug 14,2018, at 6:58 PM, Daniel Nieman <niemanconstructioninc@.msn. com> wrote : Good morning Catherine, Per our conversation last week, the building inspector is asking for a letter to put in the file which will state that the 8' high restrained concrete foundation walls are acceptable. For review: Due to the sloped lot, the foundation cut ended up with a 6'0" elevation difference from front to back. In addition, in order to minimize the number of steps into the front entry we raised the concrete wall in lieu of a rim joist and will be hanging the floor joists off of a PT 2x8 sill. The 3/4" CDX Subflooring will be tied into this 2x8 sill plate to insure a restrained wall. The concrete footings and walls were constructed and inspected per your engineered drawings. The second issue involves the 4:12 roof vaulted areas over the two wings which were originally designed with scissor trusses. Due to timing issues (we can't get trusses until Oct. l0) and to maximize the sloped ceiling height in these two areas we would like to "stick cut" these areas by using 2x12 DF rafters with a GLB beam support in the middle. Since I'm not an engineer and you are, I propose the following: 5 ll2" x 15" GLB ridge beams: 1/19' span and 1/13'6" span 2xl2DF#28 rafters at24" OC 5 ll2" x 15" GLB header at Location A: 1 1'0 span with ridge support post (point load) at 2'0 from end. 5 7 /2" x 12" GLB header at Location B : 3 '0" span with ridge support (point load) centered over span. Hopefully, this all makes sense and feel free to give me a call if needed. 2 Sally Ellis From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Daniel Nieman <niemanconstructioninc@msn.com> Tuesday, December 11, 2018 3:24 PM Sally Ellis scot@ranchosuenos. com Fwd: BLD18-00185 : Fwd: Strohm: Foundation wall height and Vaulted ceilings HiSally, Jim Coyne asked for the following verification from the structural engineer re: trusses vs. stick cut rafters. Please forward to Jim and/or place in the permit file. Thanks, Dan Nieman Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Catherine Bailey <catherine@ bukerengineering.com> Date: December 11., 2018 at 1:17:47 PM PST To: Daniel Nieman <niemanconstructioninc@msn.com> Subject: RE: BLD18-00185 : Fwd: Strohm: Foundation wall height and Vaulted ceilings Daniel, Calculations were checked and the glulam beams mentioned in the correspondence daled 8/14/18 were found to be acceptable for the loading as well as the 2x12 rafters at24" oc for the framing of the roof. We are okay with changing the framing of this roof to a stick framed roof vs truss framed with the beams and rafters as mentioned in the correspondence from Nieman Construction on 8/t4lt8. bwkrEH*tNE{}r*I{{; ;i+ Catherine Bailey, PE, MEng 206.258.6335 (Direct) 206.258.6333 ext. 1002 www.b_u_kergngin--e---e_ring,pom_ From: Daniel Nieman Imailto:niemanconstructioninc@msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 71,20\8 72:24PM To: Catherine Bailey <catherine @bukerengineering.com> Subject: FW: BLD18-00185 : Fwd: Strohm: Foundation wall height and Vaulted ceilings HiCatherine, Please note the emailcorrespondence datedS/74118 regarding "second issue" concerning the 4:12 vaulted ceilings. l'm not sure if you sent a reply to this question, but the inspector would like an OK on the change from scissor trusses to 2xL2 stick cut rafters. Please call if you have any questions. Thanks, Dan 1 Sent from Mail for Windows 10 t 7_ I From: Sally Ellis <SEllis@co.iefferson.wa.us> Sent: Friday, August 3L,20Lg 7:30:30 AM To: Daniel Nieman Subject: RE: BLD18-00185 : Fwd: Strohm: Foundation wall height and Vaulted ceilings Dan I have printed this information and shown it to Jim Coyne and added to the bld file Thank you Sally Ellis Permit Tec Jefferson County DCD 360-379-4452 From: Daniel Nieman <niemanconstructioninc@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 28,2O!8 5:46 PM To: Jim Coyne <iimc@co.iefferson.wa.us> Cc: Sally Ellis <SEllis@co.iefferson.wa.us> Subject: BLD18-00185 : Fwd: Strohm: Foundation wall height and Vaulted ceilings HiJim, Per your request, please note the attached letter from the structural engineer regarding the increased concrete foundation wall height. Owners: Scot and Bobbie Strohm Permit number: BLD18-00185 Address: 272 Lexington Pl. Quilcene, wa. 98375 Begin forwarded message: From: Catherine Bailey <catherine@bukerengineerinR.com> Subject: RE: Strohm: Foundation wal! height and Vaulted ceilings Date: August 27 ,2018 at 5:41:33 PM PDT To: Daniel Nieman <niemanconstructioninc@msn,com> Okay, here is your foundation memo. b kr T,NilINELHIHC Catherine Bailey, PE, MEng 206.258.6335 (Direct) 206.258.6333 ext. 1002 www. bukerenoineering.com From: Daniel Nieman Imailto:niemanconstructioninc@msn.com] Sent: Monday, August 27 ,ZOLB 2:29 PM 2 ) To: Catherine Ba iley <catherine@bukerenqineering.com> Subject: Re: Strohm: Foundation wall height and Vaulted ceilings I believe it's 5'6" from top of footing to finish grade Sent from my iPhone On Aug 27 ,2018, at 2: I 7 PM, Catherine Bailey <catherine@bukeren wrote: Okay Dan, what is the unbalanced fill on that back wall? <image001.gif> Catherine Bailey, PE, MEng 206.258.6335 (Direct) 206.258.6333 ext. 1002 www..! u ke re ns i n eef i n g..co m From: Daniel Nieman Imailto:niemanconstructioninc@msn.com] Sent: Monday, August 27,2OL812:31 PM To: Catherine Ba iley <catherine@bukerengineering.com> Subject: Re: Strohm: Foundation wall height and Vaulted ceilings Hi Catherine, lf the revised stick cut beams are acceptable, we wouldn't need any documentation for a couple of months. However, since the framers are ready to rock and roll next week, l'm hoping you can tell me if the beams are acceptable or need to be upgraded. The truss plants are running further and further behind. Even if we wanted trusses we wouldn't be able to get them until 70/25. Just a verbal yes or no for now would be great Thanks, Dan On Aug 74,2018, at 6:58 PM, Daniel Nieman <niemanconstructioninc@msn.com> wrote: Good morning Catherine, Per our conversation last week, the building inspector is asking for a letter to put in the file which will state that the 8' high restrained concrete foundation walls are acceptable. For review: Due to the sloped lot, the foundation cut ended up with a 6'0" elevation difference from front to back. ln addition, in order to minimize the number of steps into the front entry we raised the concrete wall in lieu of a rim joist and will be hanging the floor joists off of a PT 2x8 sill. The 314" CDX Subflooring will be tied into this 3 ( a.\ \ 2x8 sill plate to insure a restrained wall. The concrete footings and walls were constructed and inspected per you r engineered drawings. The second issue involves the 4:12 roof vaulted areas over the two wings which were originally designed with scissor trusses. Due to timing issues (we can't get trusses until Oct. 10) and to maximize the sloped ceiling height in these two areas we would like to "stick cut" these areas by using 2xl2 DF rafters with a GLB beam support in the middle. Since l'm not an engineer and you are, I propose the following: 5 L/2" x 15" GLB ridge beams: L/L9' span and t/I3'6" spa n 2xL2DF#28 rafters at24" OC 5l/2" x 15" GLB header at Location A: 11'0 span with ridge support post (point load) at 2'0 from end. 5 t/2" x 12" GLB header at Location B: 3'0" span with ridge support (point load) centered over span. Hopefully, this all makes sense and feelfree to give me a call if needed. Da n<l MG_2829.jpeg><lMG_5768.jpeg><l MG_8146.jpeg 4