| Date |
Text |
| 2015-02-02 13:48:32 | BUILDING REVIEW APPROVED WITH PROVISO: |
| | *1- PROVIDE PRODUCT APPROVAL (2 COPIES) FOR: |
| | A) ENTRY DOOR SIZE AS SHOWN ON DOOR SCHEDULE. (OK. |
| | ROBERT BROWN APPORVED SITE SPECIFIC DOOR ON 6/17/15 |
| | UNDER APPLICATION #15040967). |
| | B) SLIDING GLASS DOORS SIZES SPECIFIED FOR D106 AND |
| | D107 DOORS ON DOOR SCHEDULE. |
| | C) WINDOW SIZES FOR W5, W6, W7 AND W8 WINDOWS SHOWN ON |
| | WINDOW SCHEDULE. |
| | D) THERE WAS A NEW NOA SUBMITTED FOR CASEMENT WINDOWS. |
| | NOA 13-0129.25 SUBMITTED WAS SUPERSEDED BY MIAMI-DADE. |
| | NEED TO PROVIDE CURRENT NOA. |
| | |
| | **2- ALL PRODUCT APPROVALS TO BE APPROVED BY THE |
| | DESIGNER OF RECORD. |
| | |
| | ***3- FLAT ROOF: ENGINEER TO REVISE THE RAS 117 |
| | CALCULATIONS: |
| | A) EXPOSURE CATEGORY IS "D". B) DESIGN PRESSURES FOR |
| | PERIMETER AREA ARE INCORRECT (-11.2 ?). C) CLEARLY |
| | IDENTIFY WHICH APPROVED FLAT ROOF ASSEMBLY AND BASE |
| | SHEET FASTENING OPTION FROM NOA SUBMITTED IS BEING |
| | CONSIDERED FOR THE CALCULATIONS. (ENGINEER TO READ SEC. |
| | 8.1 OF RAS 117). D) CALCULATIONS SUBMITTED ARE NOT |
| | CLEAR. ENGINEER TO PROVIDE SEPARATE CALCULATIONS FOR |
| | THE PERIMETER AND CORNER AREAS. E) ENGINEER NOTED THAT |
| | "SPACING FALLS BELOW 4" WHICH IS MINIMUM" AND THEN |
| | ANOTHER NOTE SAYING "PERIMETER SPACING AND CORNER NEED |
| | TO BE SPACED 4" O.C.". THIS IS CONTRADICTORY. IF THE |
| | CALCULATIONS CALL FOR SPACING THAT FALLS BELOW 4", THEN |
| | HOW COME THE SPACING IS 4" O. C. ?. F) CLEARLY SPECIFY |
| | NAILING SPACING AT THE LAP AND NUMBER OF ROWS AND |
| | NAILING SPACING IN THE FIELD OF THE SHEET. |
| | |
| | ****4- PROVIDE CURRENT OPEN CELL INSULATION REPORT. |
| | REPORT SUBMITTED IS EXPIRED. |
| | |
| | *****5- SOIL TEST REPORT TO HAVE ENGINEER'S ORIGINAL |
| | SIGNATURE AS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 471 FL. ST. |
| | |
