| Date |
Text |
| 2011-04-20 12:16:09 | BUILDING PLAN REVIEW |
| | PERMIT: 11040299 |
| | ADD: 2431 S DIXIE HWY |
| | CONT: TBD |
| | TEL: (954)557-1300 |
| | |
| | FL BLD CODE= 2007 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE |
| | W/ 2009 FBC SUPPLEMENTS |
| | * WEST PALM BEACH AMENDMENTS |
| | |
| | 2007 EXISTING BUILDING CODE LEVEL II 701.3 |
| | COMPLIANCE. ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION ELEMENTS, COMPONENTS, |
| | SYSTEMS, AND SPACES SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS |
| | OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, BUILDING. |
| | |
| | 1ST REVIEW |
| | ACTION: DENIED |
| | |
| | 1) SHEET A102: |
| | 1A) DOOR # 4 VERSES THE DRINKING FOUNTAIN. THE OUT |
| | SWING OF DOOR # 4 DOES NOT HAVE THE REQUIRED 18 INCHES |
| | ON THE LATCH SIDE. PLEASE REVIEW 11-4.13.6. |
| | |
| | 1B) THE SECOND ISSUE WITH DOORWAYS BOTH DOORWAYS 5 &6 |
| | ARE ILLUSTRATERD AS A PAIR OF DOUBLE DOORS. THE DOOR |
| | SCHEDULEFOR DOOR # 5 INDICATES A 3'-0" DOOR NOT A PAIR |
| | OF DOORS. |
| | |
| | 1C) THE DOOR SCHEDULE ALSO DOESN'T INDICATE TYPE OF |
| | HARDWARE, PLEASE INDICATE COMPLIANCE WITH 11-4.13.4. |
| | |
| | 1D) DOOR # 5 VERSES THE DRINKING FOUNTAIN MAY BECOME |
| | MORE OF AN ISSUE IF IT IS MOVED DOWN TTHE WALL TO |
| | COMPLY WITH DOOR # 4. |
| | |
| | 2) DOOR # 1 & 17, WILL BE RAISED APPROXIMATELY ONE FOOT |
| | WITH THE NEW FLOOR LEVEL. I DIDN'T SEE ANY CUT SECTIONS |
| | THROUGH THE PLANS INDICATING HOW THE NEW ELEVATIONS ARE |
| | GOING TO EFFECT THE EXISTING LINTELS AND OR BEAM. SHEET |
| | S-3 DETAIL # 1 DOES HAVE A NOTE TO VEREIFY EXISTING |
| | BEAM CONDITION. |
| | |
| | 3) FL BLD CODE 1609.6.2.2 COMPONENTS & CLADDING, |
| | PROVIDE 2 COPIES OF PRODUCT TESTING REPORTS, MISSING |
| | REPORTS ARE AS FOLLOWS: |
| | 3A) WINDOWS FIXED GLASS |
| | 3B) EXTERIO DOORS |
| | 3C)ROOFING APPROVALS BOTH FLAT AND TILE |
| | 3D) ROOF TOP EXHAUST FANS |
| | |
| | PLANS SUBMITTED ARE TO BE DETERMINED, SINCE THE |
| | PRESSURES ON THE BUILDING ARE CORRECT THIS PERMIT CAN |
| | BE ISSUED WITH THE PRODUCT APPROVALS COMING IN AT A |
| | LATER DATE AFTER ISSUANCE. NOTE IN DOING SO THIS WILL |
| | CONSTITUTE A REVISION REQUIRING SEPERATE REVIEWS AND |
| | ASSOCIATED FEES!!! FOR EACH PRODUCT APPROVAL TO BE |
| | SUBMITTED. PLEASE NOTE IN MANY CASES THERE ARE WITHIN |
| | THE PRODUCT APPROVAL THERE ARE EITHER SUB-SYSTEMS OR |
| | DIFFERENT TYPES OF GLAZING WITH DIFFERENT PRESSURES, |
| | PLEASE CIRCLE WHICH SYSTEM TO BE INSTALLED UNDER THIS |
| | PERMIT. |
| | |
| | 4) 106.3.3 PRODUCT APPROVALS. THOSE PRODUCTS WHICH ARE |
| | REGULATED BY THE DCA RULE 9B-72 SHALL BE REVIEWED AND |
| | APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE DESIGNER OF RECORD PRIOR TO |
| | SUBMITTAL FOR JURISDICTIONAL APPROVAL. |
| | |
| | 5) AT THE REAR OF THE BUILDING THERE IS A DOWN SPOUT |
| | NEAR DOOR # 17, THIS DOWN SPOUT IS ALSO LOCATED ON A105 |
| | PLEASE PROVIDE WHERE THIS DOWN SPOUT IS GOING TO DRAIN. |
| | 2007 FBC-B 1503.6. |
| | |
| | 6) SHEET A104 THE PLANS HAVE A STATEMENT THAT THE |
| | ROOFING INSULATION SHALL BE RIGID INSULATION A AVERAGE |
| | R-20. |
| | INFORMAL BOAF INTERPRETATION |
| | DATE: TUE NOV 13 2007 |
| | REPORT #: 5438 |
| | CODE: BUILDING |
| | SECTION: 404.1.A |
| | QUESTION: |
| | IS IT THE INTENT OF THE CODE "....THE INSULATION SHALL |
| | HAVE A R-VALUE OF AT LEAST R-19, SPACE PERMITTING." TO |
| | MEAN THE MINIMUM R-VALUE OF ROOF INSULATION TO BE R-19 |
| | AT LOWEST POINTS AT DRAINS? ALL ROOFERS WHO WE HAVE |
| | SPOKEN TO, INTERPRETED THIS CODE AS MINIMUM AVERAGE |
| | R-19, |
| | NOT MINIMUM R-19 AND HAVE DONE MOST ROOFING JOB |
| | ACCORDINGLY. THANK YOU |
| | ANSWER: |
| | A MINIMUM LEVEL OF INSULATION REQUIRED IS THAT, A |
| | MINIMUM, NOT AN AVERAGE. HOWEVER, PROVIDED THE MINIMUM |
| | R-19 VALUE HAS BEEN MET, A REASONABLE AVERAGING |
| | PROCEDURE CAN BE USED BY ROOF AREA FOR CALCULATIONS OF |
| | THE VALUE. |
| | COMMENTARY: |
| | THIS QUESTION ACTUALLY REFERS TO SECTION 13-404.1 (A) |
| | PRESCRIPTIVE REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIC TO METHOD A. THIS |
| | SECTION MANDATES COMPLIANCE WITH FLA/COM METHOD A, |
| | HOWEVER GIVES A PRESCRIPTIVE REQUIREMENT OF AN R-19 FOR |
| | MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL ROOF/CEILING ASSEMBLY. AS SPACE |
| | PERMITS, MAY RELATE TO THE AREA OF THE EAVES WHERE THE |
| | R- 19 INSULATION WOULD HAVE TO BE COMPRESSED TO FIT IN |
| | THE SPACE AVAILABLE. HOWEVER, THE PETITIONER ALLUDES TO |
| | THE ROOFER INSTALLING THE INSULATION. THERE ARE NO |
| | SPACE CONSTRAINTS FOR INSULATION APPLIED TO A ROOF |
| | DECK; IT SHOULD BE R-19 MINIMUM. IF THE BUILT-UP ROOF |
| | IS SLOPING TO A DRAIN IN A MANNER WHERE SOME PARTS OF |
| | THE ROOF HAVE MORE THAN R-19 AND SOME HAVE LESS, THEN |
| | THE RESIDENT WHOSE APARTMENT/CONDO IS UNDER THE ROOF |
| | SECTION WITH LESS THAN R- 19 WOULD BE PENALIZED WITH |
| | HIGHER HEAT LOADS AND HIGHER ENERGY COSTS THAN THEIR |
| | NEIGHBOR. |
| | |
| | 7) SHEET A104 & A104A BOTH INDICATE NEW ROOF TOP A/C |
| | CURBS BUT THE PLANS DO NOT INDICATE HOW THEY ARE TO BE |
| | ATTACHED TO THE ROOF FRAMING (BAR JOIST SYSTEM? NO |
| | INFORMATION IS PROVIDED FOR THIS DETAIL IN TTHE |
| | STRUCTURAL PLANS EITHER. |
| | |
| | 8) PLANS ARE NOT CLEAR AS TO THE EXTERIOR WALLS AND |
| | TYPE OF INSULATION TO BE USED AND WHAT POINT THE |
| | INSULATION WILL END IN RELATION TO THE ROOFING |
| | ASSEMBLY? FBC-B 2603.4 & FBC-M 602.1.5.1. |
| | |
| | JAMES A. WITMER C.B.O. |
| | COMMERCIAL COMBINATION PLANS EXAMINER |
| | TEL: (561)805-6715 |
| | FAX:(561)805-6731 |
| | E-MAIL: [email protected] |
| | |
