| Date |
Text |
| 2006-11-17 17:08:48 | BUILDING REVIEW 2ND CHECKLIST: |
| | 1- OWES $4.46 FOR RADON FEES. |
| | |
| | 2- SOIL TEST REPORT SUBMITTED. COMMENTS ON FIRST |
| | CHECKLIST WERE NOT ADDRESSED AT ALL: |
| | A) NEED 2 COPIES WITH ORIGINAL SEAL, SIGNATURE AND |
| | DATE AS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 471 FLORIDA STATUTES. |
| | B) NEED ENGINEERING FIRM CERTIFICATE OF |
| | AUTHORIZATION IN THE REPORT AS REQUIRED BY FLORIDA |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE CODE SEC. 61G15-23.002. |
| | C) REPORT SAYS THAT PROPOSED CONTRUCTION IS MASONRY. |
| | PLANS SHOW WOOD FRAME CONSTRUCTION. CLARIFY AND REVISE |
| | AS REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | 3- ENGINEER IN SOIL TEST REPORT RECOMMENDS STEM WALL |
| | FOOTING FOUNDATION SYSTEM RATHER THAN A MONOLITHIC |
| | FOUNDATION SYSTEM. SEE PAGE 2 OF REPORT.DRAWINGS SHOW |
| | MONOLITHIC FOOTING. ENGINEER OF RECORD TO AKNOWLEDGE |
| | THAT HE REVIEWED THE SOIL TEST REPORT AND DECIDES TO |
| | USE MONOLITHIC FOOTING EVEN THOUGH SOILS ENGINEER |
| | RECOMMENDS STEM WALL SYSTEM.ENGINEER OF RECORD TO |
| | PROVIDE LETTER ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE. SEC. 106.1.2 CITY |
| | AMENDMENTS TO FBC 2004. |
| | |
| | 4- REMAINDER: COMPLETE TRUSS PACKAGE WILL NEED TO BE |
| | PROVIDED FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. SEE SEC. |
| | R802.10 2004 FLORIDA RESIDENTIAL CODE FOR REQUIRED |
| | INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED. |
| | |
| | 5- SHOW IN PLANS AND ELEVATIONS ALL SPECIFIC LOCATION |
| | OF VENTILATION OPENINGS. ALSO, SPECIFY SIZE TO VERIFY |
| | COMPLIANCE WITH SEC. R806.2 2004 FLORIDA RESIDENTIAL |
| | CODE. CALCULATIONS SHOWN ONLY SAYS THAT NEED 3S.F.. |
| | THAT'S WHY NEED SPECIFIC SIZE AND NUMBER OF VENTS TO |
| | VERIFY COMPLIANCE. |
| | ***NOTE: VENTS SHALL PROVIDE TOTAL NET FREE VENTILATING |
| | AREA. |
| | |
| | 6- ALL PRODUCT APPROVALS NEED TO BE REVIEWED AND |
| | APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE DESIGNER OF RECORD AS |
| | REQUIRED BY SEC. 106.3.3 CITY AMENDMENTS TO FBC 2004. . |
| | ENGINEER'S STAMP ALONE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.ENGINEER |
| | NEEDS TO APPROVE IN WRITING THE PRODUCT APPROVAL AS |
| | REQUIRED BY SEC. ABOVE. |
| | |
| | 7- PROVIDE FLORIDA PRODUCT APPROVAL AS REQUIRED BY RULE |
| | 9B-72 FOR: |
| | A) WINDOW MULLIONS. NEED COPY OF APPROVED FLORIDA |
| | PRODUCT APPROVAL #261 WITH THE APPROVED APPLICATION |
| | STATUS. ONE SUBMITTED SAYS VALIDATED.PRODUCT MUST BE |
| | APPROVED TO BE USED. |
| | |
| | B) FLAT ROOF SYSTEM: |
| | * NEED TO IDENTIFY SPECIFIC APPROVED ASSEMBLY TO BE |
| | INSTALLED. SEE LIST OF APPROVED ASSEMBLIES ON DADE |
| | COUNTY NOA REPORT. |
| | ** IF SYSTEM IS LIMITED BY GENERAL LIMITATION #7, |
| | THEN NEED TO PROVIDE RAS 117 CALCULATIONS. CALCULATIONS |
| | SUBMITTED ARE DONE BY THE HOUSE OWNER (LARRY LUNDER) |
| | AND ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE UNLESS THE OWNER IS ONE OF THE |
| | PROFESSIONALS LISTED IN THE GENERAL LIMITATION #7. |
| | *** IF SYSTEM IS LIMITED BY GENERAL LIMITATION #9, |
| | THEN THE SYSTEM MAY NOT BE USED IN THIS REGION BECAUSE |
| | THE DESIGN PRESSURES ARE TOO LOW AND THEY CANN'T BE |
| | ENHANCED. SEE GENERAL LIMITATION #9 ON LAST PAGE OF |
| | DADE COUNTY NOA 02-0212.07 SUBMITTED. |
| | ****NOTE: KEEP IN MIND THAT SELECTED ASSEMBLY NEEDS |
| | TO BE AN INSULATED ONE AS SPECIFIED ON PLANS. |
| | |
| | C) SIMPSON CONNECTOR SPH6. PROVIDE FLORIDA PRODUCT |
| | APPROVAL COVER PAGE FOR 2004 VERSION. ONE SUBMITTED IS |
| | FOR 2001 VERSION. PROVIDE ONLY THE FLORIDA PRODUCT |
| | APPROVAL COVER PAGE FOR 2004 VERSION AND THE SPECIFIC |
| | PAGE WITH THE SELECTED CONNECTOR. |
| | |
| | 8- ON FIRST SUBMITTAL ALL DOORS AND WINDOWS PRODUCT |
| | APPROVALS WERE FOR IMPACT GLAZING. NOW THE ONLY PRODUCT |
| | APPROVAL SUBMITTED FORIMPACT GLAZING IS FOR THE FIXED |
| | WINDOWS. CLARIFY IF ONLY THE FIXED WINDOWS WILL HAVE |
| | IMPACT GLASS, THEN HOW ARE THE OTHER WINDOWS GOING TO |
| | BE PROTECTED. PROVIDE COMPLETE INFORMATION FOR STORM |
| | SHUTTERS INCLUDING PRODUCT APPROVAL, KEY PLAN AND |
| | COMPLETE INSTALLATION SCHEDULE. SEE ATTACHED SAMPLE. |
| | |
| | 9- SHEET 2/3: |
| | A) TYPICAL WALL SECTION: REVISE SPECIFIED FASTENERS |
| | FOR MTS20. SEE LATEST SIMPSON CATALOGUE. OTHERWISE, |
| | PROVIDE COMPLETE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS FOR FASTENERS AND |
| | UPLIFT LOADS THAT DIFFER FROM THOSE TESTED AND |
| | PUBLISHED BY THE MANUFACTURER. SEC. 106.1.2 CITY |
| | AMENDMENTS TO FBC 2004. |
| | |
| | B) CLARIFY ROOF TRUSSES SPACING. ROOF FRAMING PLAN |
| | SAYS 24"O.C. WHILE TYPICAL WALL SECTION SAYS 16"O.C.. |
| | REVISE AS REQUIRED. ALSO, TYP. WALL SECTION CALLS FOR |
| | FLOOR TRUSSES INSTEAD OF ROOF TRUSSES. |
| | |
| | JULIO GOMEZ |
| | BUILDING PLANS EXAMINER |
| | (561)805-6712 |
