| 2005-10-06 00:00:00 | ****CORRECTIONS**** |
| | |
| | SAMANTHA HILL, BUILDING PLANS EXAMINER |
| | 561-805-6724 [email protected] |
| | |
| | FBC FLORIDA BUILDING CODE 2001 |
| | FBC* CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH AMENDMENTS |
| | TO THE FBC2001 |
| | |
| | COMMENTS FROM PREVIOUS TWO REVIEWS: |
| | |
| | 1.)FLORIDA STATE OR LOCAL PRODUCT |
| | APPROVALS REQUIRED FAC9B72.ALSO SUBMIT |
| | BACKUP DOCUMENTATION SUCH AS |
| | INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS AND EVALUATION |
| | REPORT.THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED ARE NOT |
| | LEGIBLE. (REVIEW 1) |
| | |
| | THE COPIES YOU SHOWED ME WERE LEGIBLE. |
| | THESE ARE NOT.YOU HAD FLORIDA STATE |
| | APPROVALS IN OUR MEETING; THEY ARE NOT |
| | IN THIS PACKAGE.I ATTEMPTED TO LOOK IT |
| | UP ONLINE FOR YOU BUT THIS COMPANY HAS |
| | TOO MANY DIFFERENT PRODUCTS FOR ME TO |
| | EASILY DETERMINE WHICH ONE YOU ARE |
| | USING.WWW.FLORIDABUILDING.ORG (REVIEW |
| | 2) |
| | |
| | SAME ILLEGIBLE SHEET SUBMITTED WITHOUT |
| | PRODUCT APPROVAL.(REVIEW 3) |
| | |
| | 2.)PROVIDE MEAN ROOF HEIGHT OF THE |
| | BUILDING.DESIGN PRESSURES FOR A HIGH |
| | RISE (OVER 60')ARE REQUIRED TO BE |
| | DETERMINED BY AN ENGINEER, FBC1606.1.1. |
| | DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY AN |
| | ENGINEER AND SUBMITTED FOR PUBLIC RECORD |
| | ARE TO BE SIGNED SEALED ORIGINALS |
| | FAC61G15-23.002. (REVIEW 1) |
| | |
| | THIS NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED ON THE PLAN |
| | OR PERMIT APPLICATION. (REVIEW 2) |
| | |
| | SAME COMMENTS STILL APPLY.THERE WAS A |
| | NOTE FROM THE CONTRACTOR, REFERRING TO |
| | THE WRONG UNIT, WITH THE MEAN ROOF |
| | HEIGHT AND A SPECIFICATION FOR |
| | INSTALLATION AND INSTALLATION |
| | CONDITIONS.THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. |
| | THE CORRECTION REQUESTED FOR THE |
| | INFORMATION TO BE PUT ON THE PLAN OR ON |
| | THE APPLICATION. THE INSTALLATION IS TO |
| | BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PRODUCT |
| | APPROVAL, WHICH WAS NOT PROVIDED(REVIEW |
| | 3) |
| | |
| | NEW COMMENTS FROM SECOND REVIEW: |
| | |
| | 3.)ONLY TWO SHEETS WERE PROVIDED.THE |
| | PRODUCT INFORMATION PROVIDED WERE FOR |
| | FACE MOUNT (WALL) INSTALLING INTO |
| | CONCRETE, HOLLOW BLOCK OR WOOD WALL. |
| | YOUR APPLICATION IS INTO A SLAB AT THE |
| | BOTTOM AND IT IS NOT CLEAR WHAT YOU ARE |
| | ANCHORING INTO ABOVE.THIS APPLICATION |
| | IS NOT IN THE SHEETS PROVIDED.THE |
| | SHEET SPECIFYING MINIMUM EDGE DISTANCE |
| | IS NOT IN THE TWO ILLEGIBLE SHEETS |
| | SUBMITTED. (SECOND REVIEW) |
| | |
| | THE PLAN SUBMITTED DOES NOT SHOW |
| | CONCRETE THICKNESS FOR EITHER THE SLAB |
| | OR THE BALCONY.ALL INFORMATION IS TO |
| | BE ON THE PLAN, NOT IN THE FORM OF A |
| | LETTER.THE NEW DRAWING IS FOR UNIT |
| | B307, NOT A103. IN OUR TELEPHONE |
| | CONVERSATION YOU STATED THAT THE PLAN |
| | B307 IS TO APPLY TO UNIT A103.THIS |
| | SHOULD BE CLEAR ON THE PLAN, BUT HOW CAN |
| | THE DETAIL AND CONCRETE THICKNESS BE THE |
| | SAME WHEN THE APPLICATIONS ARE |
| | DIFFERENT?THE DRAWING SHOWS ANCHORING |
| | INTO THE SLAB ABOVE, A WALL/RAILING AT |
| | THE BOTTOM.MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT |
| | THE FIRST FLOOR IS TO BE INSTALLED |
| | ANCHORING INTO THE BALCONY ABOVE AND THE |
| | SLAB BELOW.THAT IS WHAT YOUR SECOND |
| | DRAWING SHOWS. (THIRD REVIEW) |
| | |
| | 4.)ADDRESSED. |
| | |
| | 5.)PROVIDE STRUCTURAL DETAILS FOR THE |
| | CONDITIONS FOR INSTALLATION; DIMENSIONS |
| | FOR SLAB BELOW AND BALCONY ABOVE.SEE |
| | GENERAL NOTE #5 ON THE PAPERWORK YOU |
| | PROVIDED IN REGARDS TO ENGINEERING BEING |
| | REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | NOT ADDRESSED.A DRAWING FOR UNIT B307 |
| | WAS SUBMITTED INSTEAD OF A103.SEE |
| | COMMENT 3. |
| | |
| | NOTE - NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION PROVIDED |
| | TO DETERMINE CODE COMPLIANCE |
