City of West Palm Beach eGovPlus

Plan Review Notes

Plan Review Notes For Permit 08020693
Permit Number	08020693
Review Stop	B
Sequence Number	4

Notes

Date	Text
2008-12-22 09:45:29	**CORRECTIONS**

	SAMANTHA HILL, BUILDING PLANS EXAMINER
	561-805-6724 [email protected]

	FBC FLORIDA BUILDING CODE 2004
	FBC EB FLORIDA BUILDING CODE 2004 EXISTING BUILDING
	CODE
	FBC R FLORIDA BUILDING CODE 2004 RESIDENTIAL
	FBC* CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH AMENDMENTS TO THE FBC2004
	FAC FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
	FS FLORIDA STATUTE

	1-5.) ADDRESSED.

	6.) PROVIDE A SOILS INVESTIGATION REPORT FBC1802.2. TWO
	ORIGINALS REQUIRED.

	2ND REVIEW, SEE THE SOILS REPORT AND FAC61G15-23.002,
	ENGINEERING REPORTS MUST BE SIGNED, SEALED AND DATED ON
	A SIGNATURE PAGE OR COVER LETTER BY EACH PROFESSIONAL
	ENGINEER WHO IS IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE OF ANY PORTION OF
	THE REPORT, AND IF PRACTICING THROUGH A DULY AUTHORIZED
	ENGINEERING BUSINESS, THE NAME, ADDRESS AND CERTIFICATE
	OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER OF THE ENGINEERING BUSINESS.
	THE SIGNATURES ARE TO BE ORIGINALS, NOT PHOTOCOPIES.

	3RD REVIEW, CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NOT INCLUDED
	ON THE REPORT AND SIGNATURE IS A PHOTOCOPY,
	FAC61G15-23.002.

	4TH REVIEW, SAME PAPERWORK SUBMITTED. CERTIFICATE OF
	AUTHORIZATION IS TO BE INCLUDED ON THE SOILS REPORT,
	ORIGINAL SIGNATURE REQUIRED FAC61G15-23.002.

	7.) ADDRESSED.

	8.) PARKING STRIPING IS TO COMPLY WITH CITY OF WEST
	PALM BEACH STANDARD, SEE ATTACHED DETAIL. REVISE C1.

	ENGINEER?S RESPONSE IS THAT THE CONTRACTOR WILL
	ADDRESS. AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE IS REQUIRED, AS WELL AS
	ACCESSIBLE PARKING. THEREFORE, IT APPEARS THAT THE SITE
	PLAN PREPARED BY AB DESIGN IS REQUIRED FOR CODE
	COMPLIANCE.

	SHEET 1, THE PARKING DETAIL DOES NOT MATCH THE SITE
	PLAN ON THE SAME PAGE. THE SITE PLAN SHOWS A WHEEL
	STOP, PARKING DETAIL SHOWS A VEHICLE OVERHANG.
	COMPLIANCE NOT CLEAR, SEE FBC11-4.6.3, OVERHANG SHALL
	NOT REDUCE THE CLEAR WIDTH OF ACCESSIBLE ROUTE.

	SEE ALSO COMMENT 23 FROM FIRST LIST; SHOW THE WIDTH OF
	THE SIDEWALK (ROUTE FROM THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING TO THE
	FRONT ENTRY), FBC11-4.6.2(1).

	3RD REVIEW, SIDEWALK WIDTH NOT INDICATED
	FBC11-4.6.2(1). STRIPING DETAIL NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH
	CITY STANDARDS.

	4TH REVIEW, IT IS UNCLEAR WHAT YOU ARE USING FOR A SITE
	PLAN. SAME PLANS SUBMITTED, SOME PHOTOCOPY PLANS WERE
	SUBMITTED (DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY AN ENGINEER TO BE
	SIGNED,SEALED, DATED ORIGINALS FS471), COMMENTS NOT
	ADDRESSED. PLEASE VOID OUT SHEETS SUBMITTED AS
	REFERENCE AND PROVIDE PLANS WHICH SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH
	THE ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.

	9-22.) ADDRESSED.

	23.) FROM FIRST LIST; COMMENT NOT ADDRESSED. SHOW THE
	SIDEWALK WIDTH ON THE PLAN, SIDEWALK BETWEEN ACCESSIBLE
	PARKING AND THE BUILDING. C1 SHOWS A 44INCH SIDEWALK,
	WITH A NOTE "SIDEWALK AS SHOWN ON PLAN" BUT THE
	ENGINEER'S PLAN DOESN'T SHOW ANY SIDEWALKS. THE
	LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S PLAN DOES NOT DIMENSION THE
	SIDEWALK ALTHOUGH IT IS THE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE, AND THERE
	IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE PARKING DETAIL AND THE
	PARKING SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN, BOTH ON AB DESIGN PAGE
	1. THE PARKING DETAIL SHOWS A VEHICLE OVERHANG, PLAN
	SHOWS A WHEEL STOP. SEE FBC11-4.6.3, VEHICLE OVERHANGS
	CANNOT REDUCE THE CLEAR WIDTH. DESIGN INTENT IS NOT
	CLEAR.

	2ND REVIEW, ENGINEER REMOVED SIDEWALK FROM PLAN,
	RESPONSE LETTER STATES THIS WILL BE ADDRESSED BY
	CONTRACTOR. PLEASE REVISE SITE PLAN TO SHOW CODE
	COMPLIANCE.

	3RD REVIEW, CIVIL SHEETS SUBMITTED AND OTHER SITE PLANS
	PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED REMOVED. THE NEW SHEETS DO NOT
	SHOW THE SIDEWALK WIDTH, FBC11-4.6.2(1), SEE ALSO
	COMMENT 8.

	4TH REVIEW, SEE ITEM 8.

	24-39.) ADDRESSED.

	40.) AS DISCUSSED, ALL GLAZING WILL BE IMPACT RATED.
	PLEASE SUBMIT PRODUCT APPROVALS FOR THE STOREFRONT
	GLASS AND FRONT DOOR. PRODUCT APPROVALS ARE TO BE
	REVIEWED BY THE DESIGNER OF RECORD PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL
	FBC*106.

	4TH REVIEW, PLANS WERE SUBMITTED WITH A RESPONSE
	STATING THAT THE GLAZING WILL BE NON IMPACT WITH
	ACCORDIONS. THE DOOR IS AN OUTSWING DOOR SO CANNOT BE
	OPERATED FROM THE INSIDE, SEE FBC1003.6, FBC1008.1.3.5.
	PLEASE ADVISE AS TO WHERE IN THE CODE BLOCKING A
	REQUIRED EXIT IS PERMISSIBLE.

	41.) FOR THE ROOF, SELECT THE APPROVED ASSEMBLY AND
	SPECIFY ENHANCED FASTENING FOR ZONES 2 AND 3. THIS CAN
	BE DONE AT THE TIME OF ROOF PERMIT APPLICATION.

	THE PRODUCT APPROVAL FOR THE ROOF HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM
	THE PACKAGE. THIS IS REQUIRED, REVIEWED BY DESIGNER OF
	RECORD. OTHER INFORMATION (ASSEMBLY, ENHANCED
	FASTENING) CAN BE SUBMITTED WITH THE ROOF PERMIT.

	4TH REVIEW, ALL PRODUCT APPROVALS ARE TO BE REVIEWED BY
	DESIGNER OF RECORD FBC*106.

	42.) SOME OF THE NOAS SUBMITTED ARE DIFFICULT TO READ.
	PLEASE PROVIDE LEGIBLE COPIES. THEY MAY BE AVAILABLE AT
	WWW.BUILDINGCODEONLINE.COM.

	PLEASE SEE THE ROLLUP DOOR PRODUCT APPROVAL. IT IS
	ILLEGIBLE AND I CANNOT FIND/READ DESIGN PRESSURES.
	PLEASE MARK ON THE FLORIDA STATE PRODUCT APPROVAL WHICH
	PRODUCT YOU ARE USING AND SUBMIT COMPLETE, LEGIBLE
	DOCUMENTS FOR THAT PRODUCT. THIS IS AVAILABLE AT
	WWW.FLORIDABUILDING.ORG

	3RD REVIEW, THE GARAGE DOOR PRODUCT APPROVAL HAS A
	DESIGN PRESSURE LIMITATION OF +-30PSF. +33.7/-36.7
	REQUIRED, SEE PAGE A3.

	4TH REVIEW, DESIGNER OF RECORD TO REVIEW ALL PRODUCT
	APPROVALS FBC*106. THE GARAGE DOOR PRODUCT APPROVAL
	SUBMITTED DOES NOT MEET THE DESIGN PRESSURE
	REQUIREMENTS. PLEASE ADDRESS.

	43.) ADDRESSED.

	44-45.) AS DISCUSSED, ALL GLAZING WILL BE IMPACT RATED.

	4TH REVIEW, THE RESPONSE LETTER STATES THAT ACCORDIONS
	WILL BE USED. A SEPARATE PERMIT WILL BE REQUIRED. THE
	EXIT DOORS ARE TO BE IMPACT, FBC1003.6, FBC1008.1.3.5.

	46-51.) ADDRESSED.

	NEW COMMENT:

	THE CONTRACTOR MAY CONTACT ME TO DISCUSS HOW THESE
	ITEMS COULD BE RESOLVED.