Loading...
2008, 04-04 Permit App: 08001236 Pole Building New project fl 10°1°9\41111*.a Arlan Ors Project New pre-app meeting poiane Transmittal Plan revisions City of Spokane Valley Transmittal Date: 4000 Val,. Communit} Development Friday,April 04,2008 Department 11703 E.Sprague Ave,Suite B3 Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Phone:509.688.0036 Site Address: 1508 N OBERLIN RD Project Number: 08001236 Parcel Number: 45171.0107 Zoning: UR-3.5 Water District: Fire District: FD 01 Applicant: ACCUSTOM CONSTRUCTION Owner: LOOMIS, SUSAN D 901 E FARWELL RD 1508 N OBERLIN RD SPOKANE WA 99208 SPOKANE. WA 99206-3994 (509) 467-4775 e-mail: e-mail: Contact: ACCUSTOM CONSTRUCTION Occupant: 901 E FARWELL RD e-mail: SPOKANE WA 99208 (509) 467-4775 e-mail: Contractor: ACCUSTOM CONST. INC. Arch/Engineer: 901 E FARWELL RD SPOKANE, WA 99208 ID Fr I` r ;\,./ (509) 467-4775 e-mail: _ Project fD 20 X 30 POLE BLDG Description: 1_ Ill Ilk!! Building Landuse Engineer Utilities Health Fire Dist Assessor APPLICATION SITE PLAN _l PLANS' ' (� 191�IOGI c'4✓rtd N 2 4?)&1`v M4', 7 f.../ EA/GhV&rdYt O /°/-441J Ivo t- s-7-4,44 Aso 4y �.NdarAof Per-to Please send all plan review and project comments via e-mail to the highlighted individuals. I C.11111L L_.C.11LC.1 Suit( 11703 E Sprague Ave,Suite B-3 PERMIT NUMBER: 1'2;72E0O pokane Spokane Valley,WA 99206 PERMIT FEE: /Valley' (509)688-0036 FAX: (509)688-0037 www.spokaneval ley.org Community Development Residential Construction New Construction 1j: Accessory Bldg Permit Application n Addition/Remodel n Deck n Other: SITE ADDRESS: AI / 5() ( ) h CA /I ` ) ASSESSORS PARCEL NO: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Building Owner: Contractor: 41( pa ),,,,e ,-.�cow eC Name: / Name: r e) )1frz1l (6:2/71/ S Corry / 1/ ((4//// Address. tu / .5 G ? 619(-71/,,, Address: i F� ��' . � City: �J zkc4, State:L✓�9 Zip: City: "---v110,C.,(_/A. L� State:( ,,4 Zipgq Phone: 19 ry Fax: (� Phone emz`_ `�y6 / Fax:y6, _3-6,6 4Contractor Lic No: L� Exp Date: ttera<c-rryyc/ 0 !SyG / Contact Person City Business Lic.No: Name: Phone: Describe the scope of work in detail: Cost of Project: Si,-, 'c S j( >s3P e l e 11,11d[it.`y 1,,rn 6 6-a Po 7--, . Proposed Use: pc,it�/ �ck/u.- 4 r[or **************The following MUST be complete: (write N/A if not applicable)********************** HEIGHT TO PEAK://, DIMENSIONS: k #OF STORIES/ TOTAL HABITABLE SP Al: 'T MAIN FLOOR TO Q. 2"D FLOOR SQ. FTG: UNFIN BASEMENT SQ. FTG: IMPERVIO URFA FTG: /j �G '. AREA: k!`5 f1H GZ�d4- f1/fil- /v/4-- FINISHED BASEMENTr�f GARAGE SQ. FTG: DECK/COV. PATIO SQ. FTG: 30% SLOPES ON ti./0 ,y:t�t SQ. FTG: /190 Tom= BC ft)/1- PROPERTY: #OF BED OOMS: CONSTRUCTION TYPE: HEAT SOURCE: SEWER OR SEPTIC? Lic/ t;;,•._ ?' it!/4- Pie 13,t 1 id I,v7 f U `t ildi G' The permitee verifies, acknowledges and agrees by their signature that: 1) If this permit is for construction of or on a dwelling,the dwelling is/will be served by potable water. 2) Ownership of this City of Spokane Valley Permit inure to the property owner. 3) The signatory is the property owner or has permission to represent the property owner in this transaction. 4) All construction is to be done in full compliance with the City of Spokane Valley Development Code. Referenced codes are available for review at the City of Spokane Valley Permit Center. 5) This City of Spokane Valley Permit is not a permit or approval for any violation of federal,state or local laws,codes or ordinances.6) Plans or additional information may be required to be submitted, and subsequently approved before this application can be proc sed. SIGNATURE: Gt 16)72i DATE: 7 -3 gIT, ,-,- , , :-rf< < ✓3 LEY Method of Payment: app' r! �1 r(i(ik' ❑ Cash Check 0 Mastercard VISA Bankcard#: Expires: V #: `iY_ Authorized Signature: REVISED 2/15/07 Sjib ka11703E Spra♦gue509.688.0036 Ave Suite B♦ Fa-3♦ Spokane509.688.0037 Valley 7 99206 x: Valley ❑X Completed Building and Mechanical Application with: Accurate address, Parcel Number and/or Legal Description, description of work, owner and contractor information, signature and date. EX Three (3) sets of plans including Site Plan, elevations, floor plans, foundation plans with details, roof plan, framing plans and details. ❑X Show the height of any proposed buildings or accessory structures. ❑X Floor plan for each floor: Dimension to scale(minimum 1/8") and label each room (including sq footage of house and garage on plans) show each level of existing house and square footage of any additions. . ❑X Egress windows: Provide at least one window or exterior door approved for emergency escape or rescue from basement and in every room for sleeping. ❑X Floor framing details: Joist type, size, spacing and installation details. EE Roof framing plan and details ❑X Furnace and hot water heater location EX All header locations: type, size and connections [2 Foundation plan ❑X Insulation information ❑X Decks and Stairway details All braced wall panel types: show locations and details of installation, including engineered design Smoke detector locations 22" x 30" attic access location 18" x 24" crawl space access One-hour separation detail: between house and garage For City Use Only sookane PLUS Project Number Project Address 4gooi. a eValley ° 11703 E Sprague Ave Suite B-3 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.688.0036 ♦ Fax: 509.688.0037 ♦ permitcenter@spokanevalley.org As part of our on-going commitment to customer service during the review process of your project application, we are providing you with a TARGET DATE for the initial technical application review. If for any reason we cannot meet this date, we will contact you with a revised target date. r • Your application review TARGET DATE is The TARGET DATE is the date we estimate your project application will have had its initial technical review. It is not the date for approval or permit issuance. Tips for a Smoother Project Application Review ➢ Submit complete, accurate plans and documents. Extra time may be required for re-submittals as project application reviewers work on multiple applications and it may be several days before they can look at your new or revised information. ➢ Designate a specific contact person to communicate with the City. While the person designated as the applicant's contact person with the City can be changed, one individual with the expertise for dealing with reviewer comments would be the best choice for the entire review process. ➢ Call staff regarding the status of your project only after the target date shown at the top of the page. Although you should be contacted on or by the target date,please feel free to contact us if you haven't heard from us by your target date. Staff may contact you before the target date if the initial review is complete. By following this procedure,you will save time and allow the reviewers to complete the work more expeditiously. Steps in the Permit Process 1. Counter Complete. Your application has been accepted as counter complete. This means all of the required documents, as indicated on your Pre-Application Checklist have been submitted or have been approved for deferred submittal. This does not prevent technical staff from requesting additional information as a result of their technical review. 2. Quality Check. The next step in the process is a quality check to make sure that the application is reviewable and free from substantive flaws that would prevent technical staff from completing the technical review once it is started. When this step is complete, your application will be routed to the appropriate staff and remain in their review queue until it comes up for review. 3. Technical Compliance. Once an application is administratively complete, it is routed to technical staff for compliance review. Depending on the type of project, technical staff may include multiple reviewers. You should be contacted by phone,fax, email,or mail by your TARGET DATE once the initial technical compliance review is complete. 4. Permit Issuance. When the technical compliance review of the application is complete, including any subsequent re- submittals, each reviewer will approve their section of the application and route it to the Permit Center. When all sections of the application are received, a Permit Specialist will process the application and contact the person specified on your application for permit pick-up. Information regarding fees and pre-construction meetings (if required) will be provided by the Permit Specialist at that time. WHITE-APPLICANT PINK-BUILDING FILE REV 9/07 w. DATE: April 8, 2008 TO: Mary Kate Martin, Building Official FROM: Tom Melbourn, Plans Examiner SUBJECT: Unauthorized Use of Engineered Plans On April 4, 2008, a set of engineered plans for a pole building was submitted by Garry McCulip of Accustom Construction to the Building Department at 11703 E. Sprague Ave., Spokane Valley, WA to obtain a building permit to construct a pole barn at 1508 N. Oberlin, Spokane Valley for Susan Loomis. (Permit Application Number 08-001236) It should be noted that the Building Department does not accept engineered plans without an original stamp/seal by the engineer of record. Upon receipt of the plans for review at approximately 9:45 am on April 7, 2008, I discovered that the pole barn plans were those of Daniel Wambeke, PE. I have reviewed this particular plan many times. It is a single sheet approximately 2 ft. by 3ft. in size with drawn details, specifications, and a long schedule table of various pole barn spans, column size, footings, volume of concrete, etc. However,the seal/stamp block of Mr.Wambeke had been removed and the original stamp/seal of Eugene F. Fisher, PE had been placed over the location where Mr. Wambeke's seal would have been. The stamp/seal had been signed and dated on 4-4-08 in blue ink by Mr. Fisher. Since this may have been a violation of WAC 196-23-020 Seal/stamp usage regarding direct supervision, I telephoned Eugene Fisher at(509) 927-0120 at approximately 10:00 am on April 7, 2008 and spoke with a person who identified himself as Eugene Fisher. I inquired if Mr. Fisher had stamped a set of pole barn plans for Accustom Construction. Mr. Fisher replied that he had. I then asked if Mr. Fisher knew that the set of plans belonged to Daniel Wambeke. Mr. Fisher replied that he had been given the plan by Accustom Construction with the understanding that the stamp of the engineer of record had expired. Mr. Fisher went on to explain that he had reviewed the plan, and since he could not find anything to add, had stamped and signed the plan with his own seal/stamp. I stated that I would consult with Mr. Wambeke before any decision would be made and would telephone Mr. Fisher with the response. I immediately afterwards telephoned Wambeke Engineering at(509)443-6186. I left a message on the answering machine, since no one answered the call. The message outlined the use of Mr. Wambeke's plan by Eugene Fisher, P.E. Certificate Number 11592. I also explained that an e-mail would be sent with further information. Mr. McCulip of Accustom Construction appeared at the Building Department at 11703 E. Sprague Ave. Suite 3, Spokane Valley, WA at approximately 11:00 am and spoke with me. Mr. McCulip inquired about the plans he had submitted to see if he could get the plans back and was told that the plans would be kept by the Building Department until Mr. Wambeke could be informed of the use of Mr. Wambeke's plans by Mr. Fisher. Mr. McCulip stated that he had received a telephone call from Mr. Fisher. Mr. McCulip provided the following background information. Mr. McCulip had obtained a set of Daniel Wambeke's pole barn plans from a friend, who had supposedly not built the pole barn. The stamp/seal of Mr. Wambeke had an expired date, so Mr. McCulip placed a piece of paper over the stamp/seal of Mr. Wambeke and copied the plan. Mr. McCulip then delivered the copy of the plan to Mr. Fisher and told Mr. Fisher that the previous engineer's stamp had expired. Mr. Fisher reviewed the plans, signed, and stamped the plan with Mr. Fisher's stamp/seal even though it was obvious according to Mr. McCulip that this was a copy of another engineer's plan. Mr. McCulip then left the Building Department without the plans. I sent an e-mail to dwambeke@msn.com, a copy of which is attached. Eugene Fisher then appeared at the Building Department at the above address at approximately 1:00 pm and spoke with me. Mr. Fisher stated that he had spoken with Mr. Wambeke. Mr. Fisher said that Mr. Wambeke had stated that he had received my e-mail and was reviewing its contents. Mr. Fisher asked if he could have the submitted plans back, and was informed by Mr. Melbourn, that the plans would be kept by the Building Department until I could consult with Mr. Wambeke and a decision made as to the proprietary nature of the plans. Mr. Fisher stated he understood that Mr. Wambeke had to be consulted first. Mr. Fisher asked if he could see the plans and I provided him with a copy to review. Mr. Fisher stated that he had obviously made a mistake in stamping these plans, because the plans were more detailed than those he would have drawn. Mr. Fisher also volunteered that copies of these plans were in abundance in the field as stated by Mr. Wambeke who did not know the exact location of all the plans. Mr. Fisher inquired about the location where Mr. Wambeke's stamp/seal would have been placed, and mentioned that it may have been"whited out". Mr. Fisher left shortly thereafter without the plans. On April 8, 2008 I received a reply from Daniel Wambeke via e-mail, which is attached. Dan Page 1 of 3 • Tom Melbourn From: Daniel Wambeke[dwambeke@msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 7:06 AM To: Tom Melbourn Subject: RE: Unauthorized Use of Your Engineered Plans by another Engineer Dear Tom: This is certainly an ethics violation that could be reported to the WA Board of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors. You have all the proof with you and you could do it. The contractor is also complicit—he could have contacted me, as I have been in Spokane the past three weeks. Mr. Fisher came to see me yesterday after receiving your telephone call. I asked him about the circumstances of this activity and he explained it to me, more or less as you have described below. I asked him to telephone you, indicating he had made a mistake and ask that the plans be withdrawn. I also asked him to inform his client that he had to withdraw the plans and get them properly engineered. If he would do that, which he did agree to do, I would not press for a complaint to the board. The embarrassing situation he has put himself in should be punishment for his actions and I believe will prevent him from doing it again. Final decision on this matter is up to you. You can call me any time of day at 509-979-1213. Regards, Daniel Wambeke Daniel Wambeke, P. E. Wambeke Engineering 2913 East 61St Court Spokane, WA 99223 Phone: 509-443-6186 Fax: 509-448-6582 Mobile: 509-979-1213 From: Tom Melbourn [mailto:tmelbourn@spokanevalley.org] Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 12:46 PM To: dwambeke@msn.com Subject: Unauthorized Use of Your Engineered Plans by another Engineer Dan The City of Spokane received a copy of your plans with your signature block removed and that of another engineer in its place. That engineer is Eugene F. Fisher License# 11592. In a telephone call to the engineer, I was informed by Mr. Fisher that Accustom Construction brought to him a copy of your plans with the signature block removed and the understanding that the engineering seal that was removed had an expired stamp date. (This was confirmed in a later conversation with Mr. Garry McCulip of Accustom Construction.) Mr. Fisher stated that he reviewed the plans, but saw nothing he could add. He then stamped the copy of your plans with his stamp/seal. Since Fisher did not supervise the preparation of this pole barn plan, it is at minimum an ethics violation or the falsification of a public document, because it was submitted to the Building Department for the express purpose of obtaining a permit based on its authenticity. 4/8/2008 Dan Page 2 of 3 If you want to contact me directly my telephone is(509) 688-0044. Pertinent Washington State Administrative Code sections are provided below. Sincerely yours, Tom Melbourn, Plans Examiner City of Spokane Valley WAC 196-23-020 Seal/stamp usage. The use of the seal/stamp shall be in accordance with chapter 18.43 RCW or as otherwise described herein: ... (3) Plan sets:Every page of a plan set must contain the seal/stamp and signature of the licensee(s) who prepared or who had direct supervision over the preparation of the work. (5) Document review: When a licensee is required to review work prepared by another professional engineer or land surveyor, the reviewing licensee shall fully review those documents and shall prepare a report that discusses the findings of the review with any supporting calculations and sketches. The reviewing license would then seal/stamp and sign the report. The report would make reference to and/or reference to and/or be attached to the subject document(s) reviewed. WAC 196-23-030 Providing direct supervision. Direct supervision is a combination of activities by which a licensee maintains control over those decisions that are the basis for the finding, conclusions, analysis, rationale, details, and judgments that are embodied in the development and preparation of engineering or land surveying plans, specifications, plats, reports, and related activities. Direct supervision explains the relationship between the licensee and those persons who are performing the work controlled by the licensee. Direct supervision requires providing personal direction, oversight, inspection, observation and supervision of the work being certified. Communications between the licensee and those persons who are perfor4ming the work include, but are not limited to use of any of the following ways:Direct face-to-face communications; written communications; U.S. Mail; electronic mail; facsimiles; telecommunications, or other current technology:Provided, That the licensee retains, maintains and asserts continuing control and judgment. RCW 18.43.070 Certificates and seals. ... Each registrant hereunder shall upon registration obtain a seal of the design authorized by the board bearing the registrant's name and the legend "registered professional engineer"or "registered land surveyor". Plans, specifications, plats and reports prepared by the registrant shall be signed, dated, and stamped with said seal or facsimile thereof. Such signature and stamping shall constitute a certification by the registrant that the same was prepared by or under his or her direct supervision and that to his or her knowledge and belief the same was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the statute. It shall be unlawful for anyone to stamp or seal any document with said seal or facsimile thereof after the certificate of registrant named thereon has expired or been revoked, unless said certificate shall have been renewed or reissued. RCW 18.235.130 Unprofessional conduct—Acts or conditions that constitute. The following conduct, acts, or conditions constitute unprofessional conduct for any license holder or applicant under the jurisdiction of this chapter. (1) The commission of any act involving moral turpitude, dishonesty, or corruption, relating to the practice of the person's profession or operation of the person'business, whether the act constitutes a crime or not. Upon a conviction, however, the judgment and sentence is conclusive evidence at the ensuing disciplinary hearing of the guilt of the license holder or applicant of the crime described in the indictment or information, and of the person's violation of the statute on which it is based. For the purposes of this section, conviction includes all instances in which a plea of guilty or nolo contendere is the basis for the conviction and all proceedings in which the sentence has been deferred or suspended. Except as specifically provided by law nothing in this section abrogates the provisions of chapter 9.96A RCW. However, RCW 9.96A.020 does not apply to a person who is required to register as a sex offender under RCW 9A.44.130; ... 8) Violating any lawful rule made by the disciplinary authority; ... (10) Practice or operation of a business or profession beyond the scope of practice or operation as defined by law or rule; (11) Misrepresentation in any aspect of the conduct of the business or profession; ... RCW 18.43.105 Disciplinary action—Prohibited conduct,acts,conditions. In addition to the unprofessional conduct described in RCW 18.235.130, the board may take disciplinary action for the following conduct, acts, or conditions:... (2) Being willfully untruthful or deceptive in any professional report, statement or testimony; (3) Attempting to injure falsely or maliciously, directly or indirectly, the professional reputation, prospects or business of anyone;... (5) Violation of any provisions of this chapter; ... (10) Committing any other act, or failing to act, which act or failure are customarily regarded as being contrary to accepted professional conduct or standard generally expected of those practicing professional engineering or land surveying. 4/8/2008 .11/11\1111106, Sjö1 Valley® 11703 E Sprague Ave Suite B-3♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 ♦509.688.0036 ♦ Fax: 509.688.0037• April 8, 2008 Accustom Construction Mr. Garry McCulip 901 E. Farwell Rd. Spokane, WA 99208 Dear Mr. McCulip: Your application for a building permit of a pole barn for Susan Loomis at 1508 N. Oberlin Rd, Spokane, WA has been denied. The engineered submittals for your project appear to be in violation of WAC 196-23-020 Seal/stamp usage. A new application with attendant information and a new set of engineered plans will be required to continue your planned project. The current project submittals will be maintained by the Building Department until proper inquiries have been completed. Sincerely yours, Tom Melbourn, Plans Examiner City of Spokane Valley Cc: Eugene F. Fisher, PE Daniel Wambeke, PE 4ws N ‹ , r7s1 ) IN ' A Pe E:::`.- t iwry Or L1F' 4r)!zi. BY, / V i o 1 _ 14 / r 0, \ , ,C hi Z 1 0404 (:1c/ / 57 hill riloasE- \ ii'Ll Thi, IS0S' Obernit n . : <'-i'd . • • ce 0 4 \ v- 013er IL '4:1 TYPICAL GIRT CONNECTION NOTES FOR FLOORPLAN ©INTERIOR R AMEOpDPOSTS, SEE POST SCHEDULE THIS S T C)➢006EPpSTS ffW% xc LT PICAL FOOTING DIMENSIONS. B 0' 8') D = 3' 0' p1ARIND M POST SPACING 12' 0' ©PURLING H @ 4' O Y BEAKING OR JOIST HANGERS (TYPICAL/ /4,0°r PURLIN CONNECTION METHODS! AJ. PURLINS MAY BE HUNG OFF THE! TRUSS STANDARD CHORD FACES J FSON JOISTHANGERS BJ. PURLINS MAY BE BUTTED AND NAILED 1.1 NA INTO EACH PUIRLIN. cJ LAPPED M Y Aa ON CONNECTION METHODS ANDIDC iTOENAIL ° URLI` } CD 16d NAILINTOSs l[ EACH TOP CHORD MEMBER NOTES FOR CGINF.)11,1 JETAI_ TRUSS TOP CHORDS TRUSS DESIGN BY TRUSS MANUFACTURER ©2 PURLIN SUPPORT STRUT B' X "4' X FULL DEPTH OF TOP CHORD PLUS RURLIN. NAIL PURLINS W.) 10 NAILS STRUT ',FLEGP CHORD W 10 CMANUFACTURED TRUSS. MEECH POSTS 1-10' SIDE TO PROVIDE TRUSS SAT. C WOOD POST, SEE /F PGsropnNG SCHEDULE. 4 49d G NAILS IN PRE -DRILLED HOLES OR BOLT -TCT SOLID QBLMACHINE BLOCKING CONNECTION POINTS, 0 IY N, SEE FOR PLAN FOR SIZE U 2' X 6 OP GIRT © 4 - 10 NAILS pR 3/1 ¢ 4. BOLT PLAN VIEW !FL ,gFrnaN1., F.. 4 o.2. DESIGN Bo 4,10 = 2 CONCRETE FOOTING, SEE SCHEDULE E BUILDING SECTION A—A 12 viiAk 13 SINGLE OVERHEAD DOUR OPTION FRONT ELEVATION NOTES FOR No.- ELEV,11. SUPPORT P RUNS GN BY OTHERS 4 ), 6 OR 2 X 2' STD JOISTNHAN BRAS, OWER TRUSS O END OVERHANG, IF REG'D Q 2' X 10' HEADER 0) 2' ' GIRTS @ 24. 0.C., I1F BAYS .0 02 2` X 6` GIFTS o C ' 0., 12' BATS, DF -L 9 2' X FAcIA B ARDS O TREATED WOOD POSTS, SIZED PER SCHEDULE ©uE TREATED z'6x §➢°'TH°d}ToIMTGIRT DETAIL 1 TRUSS COLUMN CONNECTION, PURLIN SUPPORT IP 2 - 16d NAILS a°POST 6R 10° NAILING PATTERN FOR POST LAMINATIONS LAN�NATE MAY BE SVLiCEO MINATE HOST BE A TREATED MEMBER ABOVOME Mn EIOHT OTF COUMN E TEND THE BOTT NOTES FOR FOO?INE DETAIL SI TREATED POSTS AS SIZED PER SCHEDULE VIBRATE OR ROD CONCRETE TO OBTAIN FULL BEARING UNDISTURBED SOIL FOOTING DETAIL GABLE ENL TRUSS—! BGLTrnG BLoc DOUBLE OVERHEAD DOOR OPTION OPTIONAL FRONT ELEVATION SINEI E SLID NO DOOR OPTION' OPTIONAL FRONT ELEVATION — S4 DETAIL 2 — KNEE BRACE MOTES FOR DETAIL 2- KNEEBRACE C TRUSS TOP CHORD, DESIGN BY OTHERS © TRJSS BOTTOM CHORD, DESIGN BY4THERS © 2' X 6' OF -L 02 EACH SIDE . WOOD POST, SEE PST/FOOTING SCHEDULE © K EP NAILS, E SIDE KNEE BRACE REQUIRED WHERE MOT OGUIOAi .ZIYU ND TRUSSES. 21 ALTERNATE KNEE BRACE/POST AND TRUSS/POST EENAE LTETIONOSE 3/4'0 THRU BOLTS, Mut./-4 ALL BUILDING ALL STATE x LocAL euaolNc co°cs. THESE s>EciRCAADS NM OE FIDERoLass AFBOLAlloN. 1 4",, eot,Usew So ov lao wsoi' F` -°.o w.�: BaoFPAxeGLA 00 010000Eo"um TO ToP�R�INs'04wiTN 0 454T4 43404104 ;i�" 4000 0l0440o0A,TY o :H° em 0!00 Ao oa°I�,/5/02- 4.0Aol�i2 c° WeIFFIN l/s , I/2) `od`LYE a 5%121 w Ge LII PLYwo00 S.. OR NA M -PLANK. LAP SIDING mAy SE ETB'oEsIGNED BY ANo BEAR THE 'Elta./F REGISTERED 70 BRACT,. IN THE sixT6 FTE o r// TRUSS WEB BRACING INTERIOR OR GABLE END TRUSSES MUTES FOR TRUSS WEB BRACING DIAGRAMSTRUSS WILL OFTEN RECIJIRC WEB MEMBER BRACING0HICH IS SHOWN ON TROSS DRAWINGS Rn 0 NG FU LOIN THESE 3NS1 B NS F[ _ G T] PLACE RAi 3063 MANDOOR OPTION OPTIONAL FRONT ELEVATION 8 - 16d NAILS CORNER POST BOL i[6' BUCK 0 160 NAILS DETAIL 3 , AB 1111L yEc"°pN Ru N USE BOVNIENGCBpLOCKS BR70W PLL R MN SPIT SLIDER DOOR OPTION OPTIONAL FRONT ELEVATION NOTES FOR ❑ 1,45AL -RUNT ELOVATIONS ®, HALF TRIGS DESIGN BY OTHERS 2' Xto HEADER UP TO 12 Dnp c X 12' HEADER UP TO 20' D' 000 S 2" X 1, BACKED WITH 2' X 6' UP '0 24' 0` 2 x 6' HEADER ® 4' X 6' D POST - THRU ]4 6• DODR P - a ia O DOUBLE F X 6 110037 R. ff a pi Pgnk11&c 'zA w°Hoa°, STEEL SHEETING SCREW PATTERNS NAILS @ 6' ENC. I--1. NAILS @ 6. 0,U 'BRACE OR " X 8' LL BRACE TRUSS WEB MEMBER --TRUSS WEB MEMBER �.ECSJON B -B SECTION 8-2 AT INTERIOR TRUSS AT GABLE END TRUSS `® c7 TYPICAL ('RUSS BOTTOM CHORD BRACING NOTES FOR TRUSS BOTTOM CHORD BRACING OTs. O GABLE © DOUBLE C 2" X 4 0- BRACING 0 1050' O.C. zDR, AS 4 SPECIOED 40 00 SsC'040 FACTlURERU S) TOENAI BRACES TO TRUSSES WITH 3 - 10 NAILS TYPICAL SIDE ELEVATION NO@S FOR SIDE ELEV,ION (NO 2 ' MEAL R z X 1, HEADER FOR 10' & 12' SLIDING DOORS 2 X 6" HEADER FOR B' & SMALLER SLIDING DOORS EupeneE �nm, PE APR 10 500a LE osro.i.R°Nxaa u.om�ae,ruc PERM 011011 — i—® 0 OVERHEAD DOOR I� SLIDING 0040 EPENNG 'Il OPENING 411111111111 TYPICAL SIDE ELEVATION NO@S FOR SIDE ELEV,ION (NO 2 ' MEAL R z X 1, HEADER FOR 10' & 12' SLIDING DOORS 2 X 6" HEADER FOR B' & SMALLER SLIDING DOORS EupeneE �nm, PE APR 10 500a LE osro.i.R°Nxaa u.om�ae,ruc PERM 011011