|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Plan Review Details - Permit 07020242
| Plan Review Stops For Permit 07020242 |
| Review Stop |
B |
BUILDING (STRUCTURAL) |
| Rev No |
4 |
Status |
P |
Date |
2007-03-16 |
|
|
Cont ID |
|
| Sent By |
jgomez |
Date |
2007-03-16 |
Time |
16:23 |
Rev Time |
0.50 |
| Received By |
jgomez |
Date |
2007-03-16 |
Time |
12:37 |
Sent To |
PC |
|
| Notes |
|
|
| Review Stop |
B |
BUILDING (STRUCTURAL) |
| Rev No |
3 |
Status |
F |
Date |
2007-03-05 |
|
|
Cont ID |
|
| Sent By |
jgomez |
Date |
2007-03-05 |
Time |
14:37 |
Rev Time |
0.50 |
| Received By |
jgomez |
Date |
2007-03-05 |
Time |
14:22 |
Sent To |
|
|
| Notes |
| 2007-03-05 16:29:39 | BUILDING REVIEW THIRD CHECKLIST: | | | 1- CALCULATED WIND PRESSURES ARE TOO LOW. SEE FIGURE | | | 6-3 ASCE 7-02.WHAT'S THE EFFECTIVE WIND AREA USED FOR | | | THE CALCULATIONS?.ENGINEER NEEDS TO USE AT LEAST 10SF | | | OF EFFECTIVE WIND AREA.SEE EFFECTIVE WIND AREA | | | DEFINITION ON SEC. 1609.2 FBC 2004. | | | | | | 2- IF USING WIND PRESSURE OF -89PSF FOR ENTIRE ROOF, | | | THEN PROVIDEDFASTENER SPACINGDOESN'T WORK.PROVIDE | | | RAS 117 CALCULATIONS.SEC. 106.1.2 CITY AMENDMENTS TO | | | FBC 2004. CLARIFY WHERE WAS THE -89PSF WIND PRESSURE | | | TAKEN FROM?.IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CALCULATED | | | WIND PRESSURES.SEC. 106.1.2 CITY AMENDMENTS TO FBC | | | 2004. | | | | | | 3- PROVIDE THE ENGINEERING FIRM CERTIFICATE OF | | | AUTHORIZATION NUMBER IN ALL SHEETS AS REQUIRED BY SEC. | | | 61G15-23.002 OF FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE. | | | | | | 4- ENGINEER SEAL IS NOT LEGIBLE. | | | | | | JULIO GOMEZ | | | BUILDING PLANS EXAMINER | | | (561)805-6712 |
|
|
| Review Stop |
B |
BUILDING (STRUCTURAL) |
| Rev No |
2 |
Status |
F |
Date |
2007-02-12 |
|
|
Cont ID |
|
| Sent By |
jgomez |
Date |
2007-02-12 |
Time |
15:02 |
Rev Time |
0.50 |
| Received By |
jgomez |
Date |
2007-02-12 |
Time |
12:45 |
Sent To |
|
|
| Notes |
| 2007-02-12 13:09:50 | BUILDING REVIEW SECOND CHECKLIST: | | | 1-SELECTED ASSEMBLY ON PAGE 38 OF NOA 03-0827.02 HAS | | | A MAXIMUM DESIGN PRESSURE OF -60PSF.UPLIFT PRESSURES | | | AT CORNER AREAS ARE HIGHER. SEE TABLE 1609.6.2.1(2) FBC | | | 2004.THEREFORE, NEED TO PROVIDE RAS 117 CALCULATIONS | | | FOR NAIL ENHANCING AT CORNER AREAS. ACCORDING TO | | | GENERAL LIMITATION #7 OF NOA SUBMITTED THESE | | | CALCULATIONS SHALL BE PREPARED, SINGED AND SEALED ONLY | | | BYARCHITECT, ENGINEER OR REGISTERED ROOF CONSULTANT. | | | SEE LAST PAGE OF NOA SUBMITTED. | | | | | | JULIO GOMEZ | | | BUILDING PLANS EXAMINER | | | (561)805-6712 |
|
|
| Review Stop |
B |
BUILDING (STRUCTURAL) |
| Rev No |
1 |
Status |
F |
Date |
2007-02-09 |
|
|
Cont ID |
|
| Sent By |
jgomez |
Date |
2007-02-09 |
Time |
12:47 |
Rev Time |
0.50 |
| Received By |
jgomez |
Date |
2007-02-09 |
Time |
12:35 |
Sent To |
|
|
| Notes |
| 2007-02-09 13:06:45 | BUILDING REVIEW CHECKLIST: | | | 1-CLEARLY IDENTIFY WHICH APPROVED ASSEMBLY IS GOING | | | TO BE INSTALLED AS REQUIRED BY CITY POLICY FOR ROOFING | | | PERMITS. SEE ATTACHED COPY OF CITY POLICY. | | | | | | 2- IF SELECTED ASSEMBLY IS LIMITED BY GENERAL | | | LIMITATION #7, THEN NEED TO PROVIDE THE RAS 117 | | | CALCULATIONS FOR NAIL ENHANCING AT PERIMETER AND CORNER | | | AREAS. CALCULATIONS NEED TO BE SIGNED AND SEALED BY | | | ARCHITECT, ENGINEER OR REGISTERED ROOFING CONSULTANT. | | | SEEGENERAL LIMITATION #7 ON PAGE 40 OF 40 OF NOA | | | 03-0827.02 SUBMITTED. | | | | | | 3- IF SELECTED ASSEMBLY IS LIMITED BY GENERAL | | | LIMITATION #9, THEN IT CAN'T BE INSTALLED IN THIS AREA | | | BECAUSE NAIL ENHANCING IS NOT ALLOWED. SEE GENERAL | | | LIMITATION #9 ON PAGE 40 OF 40OF NOA 03-0827.02 | | | SUBMITTED. | | | | | | JULIO GOMEZ | | | BUILDING PLANS EXAMINER | | | (561)805-6712 |
|
|
|
Account Summary | Usage Policy | Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2005 – 2014, SunGard Pentamation, Inc & City of West Palm Beach, FL – All Rights Reserved |
 |
|
