| Date |
Text |
| 2007-01-12 14:12:16 | BUILDING PLAN REVIEW |
| | PERMIT: 06070445 |
| | ADD: 2029 OKEECHOBEE BLVD. (SHELL PERMIT) |
| | CONT: BOCA DEVEL. & CONST. |
| | TEL: (561)391-6227 |
| | FL BLD CODE= 2004 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE |
| | EX FBC CODE= 2004 EXISTING FLORIDA |
| | BUILDING CODE |
| | * WEST PALM BEACH AMENDMENTS |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW |
| | ACTION: DENIED |
| | |
| | 1)--- VERY IMPORTANT STATEMENT --- |
| | PLEASE DO NOT IGNORE! |
| | WHEN RESUBMITTING PLANS PLEASE INDICATE |
| | THE REVISION & REMOVE & REPLACE ANY |
| | PAGES AS NECESSARY. A TRANSMITTAL LETTER |
| | LISTING THE ORIGINAL REVIEW COMMENT NUM- |
| | BER, WITH A DESCRIPTION OF THE REVISION |
| | MADE, IDENTIFYING THE SHEET OR SPECIFICA |
| | TION PAGE WHERE THE CHANGES CAN BE FOUND |
| | WILL HELP TO EXPEDITE YOUR PERMIT. THANK |
| | YOU FOR YOUR ANTICIPATED COOPERATION. |
| | |
| | 2) FL S S 713.13 |
| | NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT, TO BE FILED |
| | WITH THE CLERK OF THE COURT BEFORE A |
| | PERMIT WILL BE ISSUED. NOTE: 713.13(2) |
| | IF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THE NOTICE OFCOMMENCEMENT IS |
| | NOT ACTUALLY COMMENCED |
| | WITHIN 90 DAYS AFTER THE RECORDING |
| | THEREOF, SUCH NOTICE IS NULL & VOID. |
| | |
| | 3) SEE ADDRESSING COMMENT FROM THE FIRST REVIEW, THE |
| | ADDRESS TO BE USED FOR THIS SHELL PERMIT IS 2029 |
| | OKEECHOBEE BLVD.2029 SHOULD BE USED |
| | ON ALL PLANS, PERMIT APPLICATION & ANY SUBMITTALS. |
| | |
| | 4) COMPLIED. |
| | |
| | 5) WILL BE A BUILDING PROVISO: |
| | ENGINEER OF RECORD IRVING ABCUGTO SHALL |
| | SUBMIT A SHORING PLAN PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OF ANY |
| | BEARING COMPONENTS. |
| | |
| | 6) COMPLIED. SURVEYS SHOW A NEW UTILITY EASEMENT. |
| | |
| | 7)TABLE 602, DEALS WITH THE BUILDING NOT TO |
| | TRANSGRESS ACROSS PROPERTY LINES. COMMENTS |
| | FROM THE LAST REVIEW INDICATE THE OWNERS ARE PROCEEDING |
| | TOWARDS SECURING A UNITY OF TITLE. PLEASE PROVIDE A |
| | COPY OF THE RECORDEDNOTICE |
| | OF COMMENCEMENT WITH THE CLERK OF THE COURT. |
| | |
| | 8) COMMENT#(10) FROM THE PREVIOUS REVIEW, DEALS WITH |
| | CHARTER 13 ENERGY, ONE BIG CHANGE IN THE CODE DEALS |
| | WITH ELECTRICAL |
| | COMMENT# 3, AUTOMATIC LIGHTING CONTROLS, FBC |
| | 12-415.1.ABC 1.1, 1.2. |
| | |
| | 9)2ND REQUEST COMMENT# 11 FROM THE PREVIOUS REVIEW, |
| | DEALS WITH THE STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONSDESIGNED TO ASCE |
| | 7-98 VS. THE STRUCTURAL PLANS DESIGNED TO ASCE 7-02. |
| | RESPONCE COMMENTS REFER TO STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS? PLEASE |
| | ELABORATE WHERE THIS DOCUMENT COULD BE FOUND? |
| | |
| | 10) 2ND REQUEST, COMMENT 13A & 13B: |
| | 10A) (13A) A1.3 SITE PLAN DETAIL A8.1.1DETAIL NUMBER 3, |
| | PLANS DO NOT PROVIDE THE WIDTH |
| | OF THE CURB CUT. PLEASE PROVIDE DETAILS INDICATING |
| | COMPLIANCE WITH |
| | CURB CUTS AS USED WITH THIS PLAN. |
| | |
| | 10B)2ND REQUEST(13C) THE CROSS WALKS THAT LEAD FROM |
| | THE |
| | DEISABLED PARKING SPACE TO THE STORES |
| | DOES NOT LEAD TO THE STORE FRONTS WHERE |
| | THE COVERED ENTRY IS LOCATED BUT TO A |
| | SIDEWALK WITH A MUCH SMALLER CANOPY AND |
| | A FURTHER DISTANCE TO THE STORE FRONT. |
| | 11-2.2 EQUIVALENT FACILITATION. |
| | RESPONCE INDICATES A NEW SECTION |
| | BUT THE SECTION DOESN,T SHOW ANY CURB CUTS? |
| | |
| | 11) 2ND REQUEST, PLANS COMMENT NUMBER (14A) FROM THE |
| | PREVIOUS REVIEW: |
| | I SPOKE WITH THE ARCHITECT ABOUT THIS SITUATION, A |
| | NARRATIVE MAY BE HELPFUL IN INDICATING COMPLIANCE, A1.2 |
| | SITE PLAN INDICATES THE NEW |
| | CURB CUTS ACCESS AISLES, NEW LANDSCAPE |
| | AND NEW LANDSCAPED ISLAND. EX FBC 706 |
| | A BUILDING, FACILITY OR ELEMENT THAT IS |
| | ALTERED SHALL COMPLY WITH CHAPTER 11 OF |
| | THE FBC, BUILDING. |
| | 11-4.6.2(1) ALL PARKING SPACES MUST |
| | BE LOCATED ON AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE NO |
| | LESS THAN 44 INCHES (1118 MM)WIDE SO |
| | THAT USERS WILL NOT BE COMPELLED TO WALK |
| | OR WHEEL BEHIND PARKED VEHICLES |
| | THIS PLAN DOES NOT PROVIDE THE |
| | DISABLED ACCESS TO THE SSTORES WITHOUT |
| | TRAVELING BEHIND SOMEONE ELSES PARKED |
| | VEHICLE. |
| | NOTE, 11-4.1.6(2) DUTY TO PROVIDE AN |
| | ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL TO ALTERED |
| | AREAS SHALL BE DEEMED DISPROPORTIONATE |
| | TO THE OVERALL ALTERATION WHEN THE COST |
| | EXCEEDS 20 % OF THE COST OF THE ALTERA- |
| | TION TO THE PRIMARY FUNCTION AREA. |
| | (A)(I) AN ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCE |
| | (II) AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE |
| | (III) AT LEAST ONE ACCESSIBLE REST- |
| | ROOM FOR EACH SEX OR A SINGLE |
| | UNISEX RESTROOM |
| | (IIII) ACCESSIBLE TELEPHONE |
| | (IV) ELEMENTS SUCH AS PARKING, STOR- |
| | AGE OR ALARMS. |
| | PLEASE PROVIDE AN ALYSIS OF MONIES |
| | SPENT TO MEET THE 20% OF CONTRACT VALUE. |
| | |
| | 12) 2ND REQUEST COMMENT# (14B) FROM THE PREVIOUS |
| | REVIEW, |
| | 14B) THE SECOND ISSUE IS THE CROSS WALKS |
| | AND HANDICAPPED ACCESS |
| | AISLES,11-4.6.2(1) SO THAT NO USER WILL |
| | NOT BE COMPELLED TO WALK OR WHEEL BEHIND |
| | PARKED VEHICLES. |
| | A1.1.3 THE DEMO PLAN DOESN'T |
| | INDICATE THE SITE AS IS NOW. |
| | 11-4.1.6(1) |
| | GENERAL. ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING |
| | BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES SHALL COMPLY |
| | WITH THE FOLLOWING: |
| | (A)NO ALTERATION SHALL BE |
| | UNDERTAKEN WHICH DECREASES OR HAS THE |
| | EFFECT OF DECREASING ACCESSIBILITY OR |
| | USABILITY OF A BUILDING OR FACILITY |
| | BELOW THE REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW |
| | CONSTRUCTION AT THE TIME OF ALTERATION. |
| | (B)IF EXISTING ELEMENTS, SPACES, OR |
| | COMMON AREAS ARE ALTERED, THEN EACH SUCH |
| | ALTERED ELEMENT, SPACE, FEATURE, OR AREA |
| | SHALL COMPLY WITH THE APPLICABLE |
| | PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11-4.1.1 TO |
| | SECTION 11-4.1.3 , MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS |
| | FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. IF THE APPLICABLE |
| | PROVISION FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION REQUIRES |
| | THAT AN ELEMENT, SPACE, OR COMMON AREA |
| | BE ON AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE, THE ALTERED |
| | ELEMENT, SPACE, OR COMMON AREA IS NOT |
| | REQUIRED TO BE ON AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE |
| | EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 11-4.1.6 |
| | (2), ALTERATIONS TO AN AREA CONTAINING A |
| | PRIMARY FUNCTION. |
| | |
| | 13) COMMENT# 16 FROM THE 1ST REVIEW, |
| | FL BLD CODE 1606.1.5: COMPONENTS & |
| | CLADDING, PROVIDE 2 COPIES(3 IF THRESH- |
| | OLD OR RESIDENT INSPECTOR) OF PRODUCT |
| | TESTING REPORTS,MISSING REPORTS ARE AS |
| | FOLLOWS: |
| | A) STOREFRONT SYSTEMS/ MULLIONS |
| | B) GLAZED SWING DOORS |
| | C) EXTERIOR METAL SWING DOORS |
| | D)ROLL UP DOORS |
| | E)LOUVERS |
| | F) ROOF ASSEMBLIES |
| | G) PREMANUFACTURED METAL A/C STANDS |
| | H) METAL BAHAMA SHUTTERS SEE NOTE! |
| | |
| | 14) COMMENT# 17FROM THE PREVIOUS REVIEW, |
| | PRODUCT APPROVALS SUBMITTED WITH |
| | PERMIT APPLICATION AFTER OCTOBER 1, 2003 |
| | ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE FLORIDA |
| | PRODUCT APPROVAL SYSTEM. FOR INFORMATION |
| | PLEASE SEE THE STATE WEBSITE AT |
| | WWW.FLORIDABUILDING.ORG. |
| | PRODUCTS WITH STATEWIDE APPROVAL ARE REQUIRED TO BE |
| | SUBMITTED WITH A COVER SHEET THAT LISTS |
| | THE PRODUCT IDENTITY NUMBER FROM THE |
| | STATE. IF THE PRODUCT DOES NOT HAVE |
| | STATEWIDE APPROVAL, SUBMIT AN APPLICA- |
| | TION FOR LOCAL PRODUCT APPROVAL OR SITE |
| | SPECIFIC FORM PER RULE 9B-72. SEE |
| | ATTACHMENT. WWW.FLORIDABUILDING.ORG |
| | |
| | 15) COMMENT# 18FROM THE PREVIOUS REVIEW, |
| | W P B ADMINISTRTIVE CODE 106.3.3* |
| | PRODUCT APPROVALS. THOSE PRODUCTS WHICH |
| | ARE REGULATED BY DCA RULE 9B-72 SHALL BE |
| | REVIEWED AND APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE |
| | DESIGNER OF RECORD PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL |
| | FOR JURISDICTIONAL APPROVAL. |
| | |
| | 16) 2ND REQUEST, COMMENT# 19 FROM THE PREVIOUS REVIEW, |
| | METAL BAHAMA SHUTTERS- TO BE |
| | INSTALLED IN THE FIXED OPEN POSITION, |
| | SHUTTERS WILL REQUIRE ENGINEERING IN THE |
| | OPEN POSITION. THIS SYSTEM WILL NOT |
| | REQUIRE FL COVERSHEET. |
| | |
| | 17)BEFORE A PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT, MAY |
| | BE ISSUED, IMPACT FEES MUST BE PAID TO |
| | PALM BEACH COUNTY. THE ACTUAL PERMIT |
| | SET OF PLANS MUST BE STAMPED BY THAT |
| | OFFICE, AND A COPY OF THE PAID RECEIPT |
| | ATTACHED TO THE PERMIT APPLICATION. |
| | PLEASE CALL (561)233-5025 FOR MORE |
| | INFORMATION. |
| | |
| | BUILDING PLAN REVIEW |
| | JIM WITMER C. B. O. |
| | |
| | TEL: (561)805-6715 |
| | FAX: (561)659-8026 |
| | E-MAIL: [email protected] |
| | |
