| Date |
Text |
| 2015-04-13 18:59:43 | RESIDENTIAL (R3) ADDITION, SECOND BUILDING REVIEW |
| | COMMENTS . |
| | CODE: 2010 FBC. |
| | |
| | (NOTE: THESE COMMENTS ARE FOR A NEW SET OF CONSTRUCTION |
| | DRAWINGS SUBMITTED FROM ANOTHER DESIGN PROFESSIONAL). |
| | |
| | 1- A) ENGINEER OF RECORD TO PROVIDE COMPLETE ENGINEER |
| | ANALYSIS SHOWING HOW THE PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR TERRACE |
| | ASSEMBLY WILL MEET THE TERRACE LOADS SPECIFIED ON SHEET |
| | S-2 (DEAD LOAD 100 LBS PSF AND LIVE LOAD 125 LBS PSF). |
| | SEC. 107.2.1.3 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | B) PROVIDE COMPLETE ENGINEERED TRUSS PACKAGE (2 COPIES) |
| | SHOWING THE TERRACE DESIGN LOADS SPECIFIED BY THE |
| | ENGINEER OF RECORD ON THE FLOOR FRAMING PLAN ON SHEET |
| | S-2 (100 LBS PSF DEAD LOAD AND 125 LBS PSF LIVE LOAD). |
| | SEC. 107.2.1.3 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | NOTE: PACKAGE TO BE REVIEWED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD |
| | PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL TO THIS OFFICE. |
| | |
| | 2- SHEET S-1: |
| | A) ENGINEER TO CLARIFY DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS NOTE #2. |
| | THESE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS ARE FOR A SECOND FLOOR |
| | TERRACE. WHY IS THE STRUCTURE CONSIDERED "ENCLOSED |
| | STRUCTURE". SEC. R301 OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | B) CONCRETE PAD SCHEDULE IS NOT CLEAR: (1) ENGINEER TO |
| | CLARIFY SIZE OF OF CONCRETE PADS P1 AND P2. PLEASE |
| | PROVIDE DETAIL SHOWING THE 44"W X 42"D AND 42"W X 42"D |
| | CONCRETE PADS. (2) CONCRETE PAD P1 SHOWN ON FOUNDATION |
| | PLAN DOESN'T'T MATCH SIZE SHOWN ON CONCRETE PAD |
| | SCHEDULE. REVISE AS REQUIRED TO MATCH. SEC. 107.2.1 |
| | CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | C) AREA CALCULATIONS ARE INCORRECT. REVISE AS REQUIRED. |
| | SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | D) ALTERATION LEVEL IS INCORRECT. SEE SEC. 401.4 AND |
| | SEC. 407 OF 2010 FBC-EXISTING BUILDING. |
| | |
| | E) ENGINEER TO CLARIFY THE WIND DESIGN LOADS. ENGINEER |
| | CALLS FOR 2 DIFFERENT WIND LOADS ON THE SAME SHEET. |
| | ENGINEER CALLS FOR 170 MPH ULTIMATE WIND LOAD AND 175 |
| | MPH ULTIMATE WIND LOAD ON THE SAME SHEET. REVISE AS |
| | REQUIRED. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | 3- SHEET S-2: |
| | A) SPECIFY ALL CONNECTORS AT THE ENDS OF ALL LVL'S |
| | BEAMS SHOWN ON THE FLOOR FRAMING PLAN. SEC. R301.1 OF |
| | 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | B) PROVIDE COMPLETE SECTION DETAIL THRU (2)2X12 P.T. |
| | WOOD LEDGER SHOWN ON FLOOR FRAMING PLAN. SPECIFY HOW |
| | MUCH EMBEDMENT IS REQUIRED TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE |
| | AND SPECIFY ANCHOR SPACING. PROVIDE ENGINEER ANALYSIS |
| | SHOWING THAT 3/4" DIA X 4"L A.B. IS ADEQUATE FOR THE |
| | SPECIFIED TERRACE LOADS. NOTE: EXISTING STRUCTURE IS |
| | CONCRETE BLOCK. VERIFY TYPE OF ANCHOR SPECIFIED. SEC. |
| | R301.1 OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | C) SECOND FLOOR LAYOUT: PROVIDE GUARDRAIL COMPLETE |
| | CONSTRUCTION DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHOWING |
| | COMPLIANCE WITH THE LIVE LOADS REQUIRED BY TABLE R301.5 |
| | OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | D) HEIGHT OF GUARDRAIL IS DIFFERENT IN ALL PLANS AND |
| | DETAILS ON THIS SHEET. COORDINATE AS REQUIRED. SEC. |
| | 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | E) STAIRS DETAILS: (1) SIZE OF TREAD DOESN'T COMPLY |
| | WITH SEC. R311.7.4.1 OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. (2) |
| | NOSING DETAIL DOESN'T COMPLY WITH SEC. R311.7.4.3 OF |
| | 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. (3) WHERE IS SECTION "A" TAKEN |
| | AT?. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. (4) SPECIFY BEAM. |
| | SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. (5)SPECIFY ALL |
| | CONNECTORS. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. SPECIFY SIZE |
| | AND LOCATION OF HANDRAIL. SEC R311.7.7 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | F) KNEE WALL/STAIRS SECTION: (1) WHERE IS THIS SECTION |
| | TAKEN AT?. INFORMATION DOESN'T MATCH FLOOR FRAMING |
| | PLAN. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. (2) PROVIDE |
| | COMPLETE FRAMING DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE |
| | STAIRWAY CONSTRUCTION. IT'S NOT CLEAR IF THE STAIRWAY |
| | IS GOING TO-BE OPEN ON ONE SIDE?. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY |
| | AMENDMENTS. (3) PROVIDE COMPLETE FASTENING |
| | SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE 1 X 6 WOOD |
| | DECKING AND 1 X 6 CYPRESS CEILING. SEC. R301 OF 2010 |
| | FBC-RESIDENTIAL. (4) WHERE IS THE SCHLUTER-DITRA150 AND |
| | SELF ADHERING-BASE SHEET INSTALLED IF THERE IS NOT |
| | SUBSTRATE BELOW?. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. (5) |
| | FOOTING SIZE DOESN' MATCH FOUNDATION PLAN. SEC. 107.2.1 |
| | CITY AMENDMENTS. (6) PROVIDE COMPLETE DETAILS AND |
| | SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION OF |
| | THE DECORATIVE WOOD LOUVER, INCLUDING LOCATION OF |
| | PROPOSED LOUVER. SEC. R301. (7) PROVIDE COMPLETE |
| | DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF |
| | "STUCCO CROWN MOLDING" AS SHOWN. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY |
| | AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | G) POST COLUMN CONNECTION DETAIL: (1) PROVIDE |
| | MANUFACTURER SPECS FOR POST AND BEAM CONNECTORS |
| | SPECIFIED TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE WITH-THE PROPOSED |
| | INSTALLATION. NOTE: PRODUCT APPROVAL IS ALSO REQUIRED |
| | FOR EACH STRUCTURAL CONNECTOR. DCA RULE 9N-3. (2) POST |
| | SIZE DOESN'T MATCH SIZE SHOWN ON 2ND FLOOR LAYOUT. SEC. |
| | 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | H) GUARDRAIL SECTION REFERENCED ON THE 2ND FLOOR LAYOUT |
| | AND KNEE WALL SECTION IS INCORRECT. SEE THE 2010 |
| | FBC-RESIDENTIAL CODE FOR CORRECT REFERENCE AND REVISE |
| | AS REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | 4-PROVIDE PRODUCT APPROVAL (2 COPIES) AS REQUIRED BY |
| | DCA RULE 9N-3 FOR : |
| | A) ALL SIMPSON STRUCTURAL CONNECTORS SPECIFIED ON ALL |
| | FRAMING PLANS AND DETAILS. PROVIDE FLORIDA PRODUCT |
| | APPROVAL COVER PAGE OR ENGINEER TO LIST FLORIDA PRODUCT |
| | APPROVAL NEXT TO THE SPECIFIED CONNECTOR. |
| | |
| | 5- ENGINEER IS USING OLD SEAL. NEED TO USE CURRENT SEAL |
| | WITH THE WORDING "LICENSE" NOT "CERTIFICATE". SEC. |
| | 61G15-23.001. F.A.C. |
| | |
| | 6- IT'S NOT CLEAR WHY SUBMITTING PRODUCT APPROVALS FOR |
| | SINGLE HUNG WINDOWS, WINDOW MULLIONS. THE PLANS WERE |
| | REVISED AND THEY DON'T SHOW ANY SCOPE OF WORK OF NEW |
| | WINDOWS OR WINDOW REPLACEMENT. IF THERE IS GOING TO BE |
| | WINDOW REPLACEMENT, THEN REVISE PLANS AS REQUIRED |
| | SHOWING AREAS OF WORK. SPECIFY SIZE SIZE AND TYPE OF |
| | EXISTING WINDOWS AND PROPOSED WINDOWS. SEC. 604 OF 2010 |
| | FBC-EXISTING BUILDING. REVISE VALUATION DECLARED IN THE |
| | PERMIT APPLICATION ACCORDINGLY. |
| | |
| | 7- VALUATION DECLARED IN THE PERMIT APPLICATION IS TOO |
| | LOW. VALUATION TO INCLUDE ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, |
| | CONTRACTOR'S OVERHEAD AND PROFIT AND DESIGN |
| | PROFESSIONAL FEES AS REQUIRED BY SEC. 109.3 CITY |
| | AMENDMENTS TO FBC. PROVIDE COPY OF SIGNED CONTRACT. |
| | |
| | *** PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSE LETTER ADDRESSING EACH |
| | COMMENT TO EXPEDITE THE REVIEW PROCESS. |
| | |
| | |
| | IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT |
| | JULIO GOMEZ |
| | COMMERCIAL COMBINATION PLANS EXAMINER |
| | DEVELOPMENT SERVICE DEPARTMENT |
| | (561)805-6712 |
| | [email protected] |
