| Date |
Text |
| 2014-08-21 14:52:57 | 2010 FBC |
| | |
| | DENIED BY BUILDING |
| | |
| | 1 THE ENERGY CALCULATIONS FOR THE NEW ROOM HAVE NOT |
| | BEEN SIGNED AND DATED BY THE PERSON THAT PREPARED THEM. |
| | 2010 FBC ENERGY SECTION 401.2 |
| | |
| | 2) SUBMIT PRODUCT APPROVALS FOR THE NEW WINDOWS THAT |
| | ARE SHOWN ON THE PLANS AS REQUIRED BY DCA RULE 9N-3. |
| | THE PRODUCT APPROVAL (NOA NO. 11-0107.10) THAT WAS |
| | SUBMITTED IS FOR UN-CLIPPED MULLIONS AND IS NOT |
| | APPLICABLE. |
| | |
| | 3) THE PRODUCT APPROVAL DRAWINGS THAT WERE SUBMITTED |
| | FOR THE EXTERIOR DOORS (NOA NO. 09-0415.08) WERE NOT |
| | SHRUNK TO FIT ON 8.5" X 11" PAPER. PARTS OF THE |
| | DRAWINGS GOT CUT OFF WHEN THEY WERE PRINTED. SUBMIT |
| | COMPLETE DRAWINGS. CITY AMENDMENTS 107.2.1 & DCA RULE |
| | 9N-3 THIS PRODUCT APPROVAL IS FOR A GLAZED DOOR THAT IS |
| | NOT LARGE MISSILE IMPACT RATED. ( PRODUCT APPROVALS FOR |
| | THE IMPACT PROTECTION DEVICES, A KEY PLAN AND AN |
| | INSTALLATION SCHEDULE WILL BE REQUIRED. FBCR 301.2.1.2) |
| | THE MAXIMUM DESIGN PRESSURES FRO THIS DOOR IS LOWER |
| | THAN THE REQUIRED WINDPRESSURES SPECIFIED ON PAGE 2 OF |
| | THE PLANS. |
| | |
| | 4) THE PRODUCT APPROVALS ARE REQUIRED TO BE REVIEWED |
| | AND APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE DESIGNER OF RECORD FOR |
| | THE PROJECT. CITY AMENDMENTS 107.3.4.1 |
| | |
| | 5) IN ORDER TO HELP SPEED THE NEXT REVIEW, PLEASE |
| | SUBMIT A RESPONSE LETTER INDICATING HOW EACH OF THE |
| | REVIEW COMMENTS HAS BEEN ADDRESSED. |
| | |
| | ROBERT MCDOUGAL |
| | BLDG. PLAN REVIEW |
| | (561)805-6714 |
| | [email protected] |
