| Date |
Text |
| 2003-10-07 00:00:00 | SECOND CHECKLIST: |
| | 1-MISSING SECOND FLOOR PLAN AS REQUESTED |
| | ON FIRST REVIEW. SECTION 104.3.1.1 OF |
| | CITY AMENDMENTS TO FBC 2001. |
| | 2-SURVEY IS MISSING FROM PACKAGE. |
| | 3-CLARIFY WHY WAS WINDOW D DELETED FROM |
| | WINDOW SCHEDULE, BUT STILL SHOWN ON |
| | EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS. |
| | 4-PROVIDE COMPLETE SECTION/DETAIL WITH |
| | COMPLETE SPECS FOR BALCONIES & MASTER |
| | TERRACE. SECTION 104.2.1.2 OF THE CITY |
| | AMENDMENTS TO FBC 2001. INCLUDE GUARD- |
| | RAIL DESIGN. SEE SEC. 1015 FBC FOR |
| | BOTTOM RAIL. |
| | 5-DESIGN PRESSURES FOR DOORS AND WINDOWS |
| | SHOWN ON PLANS DON'T REFLECT ANY OF |
| | THOSE SHOWN ON TABLES OF SEC. 1606 IF |
| | THE DESIGN CRITERIA IS FBC 2001. |
| | CLARIFY HOW ARE THESE DESIGN PRESSURES |
| | CALCULATED. EVEN THE DESIGN PRESSURES |
| | SHOWN ON THE SAME PLANE SHOW SOME |
| | DISCREPANCIES ACCORDING TO SIZE AND |
| | LOCATION. SEC. 104.2.1.2 AMENDMENTS TO |
| | FBC 2001. |
| | 6-TWO STORY WALL SECTION: A)DOESN'T SHOW |
| | LOAD CONTINUITY FROM ROOF TO FOOTING. |
| | IT DOESN'T SHOW HOW WOOD FRAMED WALL |
| | IS ATTACHED TO FLOOR TRUSS & TO BOND |
| | BEAM. |
| | B)BOND BEAM IS NOT SPECIFIED. |
| | C)SPECIFY LOCATION OF STRONG-WALL |
| | SHEARWALLS. ALSO, DRAWINGS IS SHOWING |
| | ROD, NOT THIS TYPE OF CONNECTION. |
| | D)CLARIFY NAILING OF SP6. |
| | E)SEE PLANS FOR COMMENTS AND RETURN |
| | REDLINED DRAWINGS TO EXPEDITE REVIEW. |
| | |
| | 7-ONE STORY WALL SECTION: REVISE USP |
| | CONNECTOR TO COMPLY WITH SEC. 1609.4.3 |
| | FBC 2001. STEEL STREES INCREASE IS NOT |
| | ALLOWED. INFORMATION GIVEN ABOUT 133% |
| | AND 160% IS INCORRECT. THIS IS WHAT IS |
| | NOT ALLOWED. |
| | 8-ARCHITECT TO SPECIFY THE FIREBLOCKING |
| | MATERIAL. ALSO, PROVIDE GENERAL SPECS |
| | FOR FIREBLOCKING AT ALL CONCEALED |
| | SPACES AS REQUIRED BY SEC. 2305 FBC. |
| | INCLUDING FIREBLOCKING AT STAIRS. |
| | 9--UPDATE TRUSS ANCHOR SCHEDULE TO |
| | COMPLY WITH SECTION 1609.4.3 FBC. THE |
| | 133% AND 160% INCREASE IS NOT ALLOWED. |
| | 10-GARAGE STRUCTURAL BUCK DETAIL:CLARIFY |
| | WHY ANCHORS ARE NOT EQUALLY SPACEDIN |
| | ORDER TO EQUALLY DISTRIBUTE THE LOAD |
| | TO THE SUBSTRATE. SEC. 104.2.1.2 CITY |
| | AMENDMENTS TO FBC 2001. |
| | 11-WINDOW BUCK DETAIL IS NOT CLEAR. SEE |
| | SEC. 1707.4.4.2 FBC 2001 AND SHOW HOW |
| | IS BUCK INSTALLED TO PROVIDE COMPLETE |
| | SUPPORT OF WINDOW. ALSO, DETAIL FOR |
| | DOOR BUCK SHOW A WINDOW, NOT A DOOR. |
| | REVISE AS REQUIRED. |
| | 12-SHOW DRAFSTOPPING MATERIAL & LOCATION |
| | ON 2ND FLOOR FRAMING PLAN. SEC. 2305 |
| | FBC 2001. |
| | 13-PROVIDE BEAM SCHEDULE. |
| | 14-PROVIDE PRODUCT APPROVAL FOR: |
| | A)ENTRY DOOR WITH SIDELITES ASSEMBLY AS |
| | SHOWN ON PLANS. OTHERWISE PROVIDE SITE |
| | SPECIFIC ENGINEERING. |
| | B)FRENCH DOORS WITH SIDELITES (THERE ARE |
| | 6 COPIES SUBMITTED BUT DRAWINGS ARE NO |
| | LEGIBLE. ONLY NEED TWO COMPLETE & WITH |
| | CLEAR DRAWINGS. |
| | C)STORM SHUTTERS NEED LEGIBLE DRAWINGS |
| | AND CHECK ON DRAWINGS INSTALLATION |
| | TYPE & ANCHOR AND SPACING TO BE USED. |
| | WHY USING STORM PANELS IF ALL OTHER |
| | DOORS AND WINDOWS ARE IMPACT GLAZING? |
| | D)PROVIDE DRAWINGS (2 LEGIBLE COPIES) |
| | FOR GARAGE DOORS PRODUCT APPROVAL. |
| | E)FLAT ROOF SYSTEM. |
| | 15-ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES ENGINEER LETTER |
| | REGARDING FOOTING SIZE NEED TO HAVE |
| | ORIGINAL SEAL, SIGNATURE, DATE AS |
| | REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 471 FL STATUTES. |
| | 16-PROVIDE COMPLETE SECTION DETAIL AT |
| | GABLE END. SEE SEC. 2313.4 FBC 2001 |
| | FOR SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS. |
| | 17-SPECIFY LIVE LOADS USED FOR DESIGN. |
| | SEE TABLE 1604.1 FBC 2001. THIS INFO. |
| | IS REQUIRED FOR PROPER DESIGN OF THE |
| | ENGINEERED TRUSSES. INCLUDE ATTIC |
| | LIVE LOADS. |
| | |
| | NOTE: CALLED ARCHITECT TO GO OVER THE |
| | DEFICIENCIES OF THE DRAWINGS BUT |
| | HE WAS OUT ON VACATION. |
