| Date |
Text |
| 2014-08-22 12:47:20 | 2010 FBC |
| | |
| | DENIED BY BUILDING |
| | |
| | 1) THE WIND DESIGN DATA ON SHEET A-01 HAS DIFFERENT |
| | EXPOSURE CATEGORIES FOR EACH SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE. |
| | ASCE 7 - 10 SECTION 26.7.4.2 REQUIRES WIND LOADS FOR |
| | THE DESIGN OF THE MWFRS TO BE BASED ON THE EXPOSURE |
| | CATEGORY RESULTING IN THE HIGHEST WIND LOADS FOR ANY |
| | WIND DIRECTION AT THE THE SITE. ASCE 7 - 10 SECTION |
| | 26.7.4.4 REQUIRES DESIGN WIND PRESSURES FOR COMPONENTS |
| | AND CLADDING TO BE BASED ON THE EXPOSURE CATEGORY |
| | RESULTING IN THE HIGHEST WIND LOADS FOR ANY WIND |
| | DIRECTION AT THE THE SITE. THE HIGHEST EXPOSURE |
| | CATEGORY THAT WAS SPECIFIED ON THE PLANS IS EXPOSURE C. |
| | THEREFORE, THE DESIGN FOR THE MWFRS AND THE COMPONENT |
| | AND CLADDING PRESSURES ARE TO BE BASED ON EXPOSURE C. |
| | PLEASE REVISE THE PLANS. |
| | |
| | 2) BASED ON FBCR TABLES R301.2(2), R301.2(3) & |
| | R301.2(4), THE COMPONENT AND CLADDING PRESSURES FOR THE |
| | EXTERIOR DOORS AND WINDOWS ON THE PLANS APPEAR TO BE |
| | HIGHER THAN REQUIRED. FBCR 301.2.1.1 ALLOWS THE WIND |
| | SPEED TO BE CONVERTED TO NOMINAL WIND SPEEDS VASD WHEN |
| | THEIR TEST STANDARDS ARE BASED ON THE NOMINAL WIND |
| | SPEEDS. |
| | |
| | 3) THE MAXIMUM DESIGN PRESSURES ON THE PRODUCT APPROVAL |
| | FOR THE OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR ARE LOWER THAN THE |
| | REQUIRED DESIGN PRESSURES SPECIFIED ON THE PLANS. |
| | PLEASE CORRECT. FBCR 301.2.1 |
| | |
| | 4) FBCR 803.2.3.1 REQUIRES THE ROOF SHEATHING TO BE |
| | FASTENED WITH 8D RING SHANK NAILS AT 6" O.C. & IF THE |
| | ROOF FRAMING HAS A SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF 0.42 TO 0.49 THE |
| | FASTENING SPACING SHALL BE 4 INCHES ON CENTER IN ROOF |
| | ZONE 3. |
| | |
| | 5) SUBMIT TWO SETS OF ENERGY CALCULATIONS FOR THE |
| | DWELLING. FBC ENERGY 401.2 |
| | |
| | 6) PROVIDE A BUCK DETAIL FOR THE 9' X 7' OVERHEAD |
| | GARAGE DOOR ON THE PLAN. FBCR 612.10.2.1 SPECIFY HOW |
| | THE 2 X 6S ARE ATTACHED TO THE STRUCTURE. |
| | |
| | 7) SUBMIT PRODUCT APPROVALS FOR ALL OF THE CONNECTORS |
| | AS REQUIRED BY DCA RULE 9N-3 OR SPECIFY THE FLORIDA OR |
| | MIAMI-DADE PRODUCT APPROVAL NUMBERS IN THE |
| | ANCHOR/CONNECTOR SCHEDULE. THE PRODUCT APPROVAL NUMBERS |
| | ARE NOT PROVIDED. THE MIAMI DADE NOA NO. OR THE STATE |
| | FL # IS REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | 8) SUBMIT TWO COPIES OF THE PRODUCT APPROVALS FOR THE |
| | STRUCTURAL WINDOW MULLIONS AS REQUIRED BY DCA RULE |
| | 9N-3. |
| | |
| | 9) THE PRODUCT APPROVALS ARE REQUIRED TO BE REVIEWED |
| | AND APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE DESIGNER OF RECORD FOR |
| | THE PROJECT. |
| | |
| | 10) THE WINDOW TYPES ARE NOT IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANS. |
| | FROM THE DRAWINGS IT APPEARS THAT ALL OF THE WINDOWS |
| | ARE SINGLE HUNG. PRODUCT APPROVALS WERE SUBMITTED FOR A |
| | FIXED WINDOW. PLEASE IDENTIFY THIS WINDOW ON THE PLANS. |
| | CITY AMENDMENTS 107.2.1 |
| | |
| | 11) THE INFORMATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED FOR THE SINGLE |
| | HUNG WINDOWS AND THE DOORS DOES NOT HAVE THE FLORIDA OR |
| | MIAMI DADE PRODUCT APPROVAL ON THEM. PLEASE PROVIDE THE |
| | SHEETS WITH THIS INFORMATION SO THAT THEY CAN BE |
| | VERIFIED. DCA RULE 9N-3. |
| | |
| | 12) IN ORDER TO REDUCE PLAN REVIEW TIME, 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] |
