| Date |
Text |
| 2015-09-17 14:53:47 | 9/17/15 RESPONDED E-MAIL TO SAM MALO. |
| | |
| | GOOD AFTERNOON, |
| | THE ENERGY CODE REQUIRES R19 MIN. IF YOU HAVE ENOUGH |
| | ROOM IN THE 2X10 ROOF JOIST FOR CROSS VENTILATION, THEN |
| | I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEM. CHECK THE DIMENSION OF THE R20 |
| | INSULATION. |
| | REGARDS, |
| | |
| | FROM: "SAM MALO" |
| | TO: , |
| | DATE: 09/17/2015 12:24 PM |
| | SUBJECT: GARTH IVEY RES. 15040129 |
| | |
| | GOOD AFTERNOON MR. GOMEZ, |
| | ? |
| | I SPOKE TO LISA SMITH, WHO PREPARED THE ENERGY CALCS. |
| | TO SEE IF WE USED R-20 IN THE "FLAT" ROOF AREA, TO |
| | ALLOW ADEQUATE CLEARANCE FOR VENTILATION, AND HOW THIS |
| | WOULD AFFECT THE CALCULATIONS. SO FAR, THIS DOESN'T |
| | SEEM TO BE AN ISSUE, SINCE THE ROOF AREA IS ONLY ~400 |
| | SF, THE CALCS. STILL PASS. |
| | WOULD THIS BE ACCEPTABLE TO YOU? |
| | ? |
| | THANK YOU, |
| | SAM MALO |
| | |
| | ? |
| | |
| | ***BELOW ARE THE COMMENTS FOR THIRD REVIEW. |
| | |
| | ***NOTE: THE BUILDING REVIEW MAY BE APPROVED WITH A |
| | PROVISO. A PROVISO MEANS THAT THE COMMENTS BELOW WILL |
| | BE ADDRESSED AFTER THE PERMIT IS ISSUED. REVISSION FEES |
| | WILL APPLY. |
| | OWNER TO ADVICE IS PROVISO IS PREFERRED OR IF |
| | RE-SUBMITTING PAPERWORK TO ADDRESS THE COMMENTS BEFORE |
| | PERMIT IS ISSUED. |
| | |
| | |
| | RESIDENTIAL (R3) ALTERATION, THIRD BUILDING REVIEW |
| | COMMENTS. |
| | CODE: 2010 FBC. |
| | |
| | 1- REVISE ENERGY CALCULATIONS SUBMITTED: |
| | (***NOTE: PLEASE MAKE SURE ENERGY CALCULATIONS ARE |
| | COORDINATED WITH PLANS AND ALL THE FORMS ARE COMPLETE |
| | AND SIGNED BY ALL PARTIES TO AVOID UNNECESSARY DELAYS. |
| | REPEAT COMMENT. ENERGY CALCULATIONS AND PLANS WERE NOT |
| | COORDINATED). |
| | |
| | A) CONDITIONED FLOOR AREA SHOWN ON ITEM #6 DOESN'T |
| | MATCH PLANS SUBMITTED. REVISE AS REQUIRED TO MATCH. |
| | SEC. 103.2.1.1.2 OF 2010 FBC-ENERGY CONSERVATION. |
| | |
| | B) R-VALUE SHOWN ON ITEM #9 DOESN'T MATCH PLANS. REVISE |
| | AS REQUIRED TO MATCH. SEC. 103.2.1.1.2 OF 2010 |
| | FBC-ENERGY CONSERVATION. |
| | |
| | C) CEILING TYPES AND AREA SHOWN ON ITEM #10 DON'T MATCH |
| | PLANS. ENGINEER SHOWS VENTED ATTIC (PITCHED AND FLAT |
| | ROOFS) AND THE SQUARE FOOTAGE DOESN'T MATCH PLANS. |
| | REVISE AS REQUIRED TO MATCH. SEC. 103.2.1.1.2 OF 2010 |
| | FBC-ENERGY CONSERVATION. |
| | |
| | D) OWNER/AGENT TO CERTIFY AND DATE BOTTOM OF FORM AS |
| | REQUIRED BY SEC. 103.2.3.2 OF 2010 FBC-ENERGY |
| | CONSERVATION. |
| | |
| | IMPORTANT: LABEL WILL BE REQUIRED SHOWING THE DOORS AND |
| | WINDOWS U-FACTOR AND SHGC FACTOR SPECIFIED ON ITEM #7 . |
| | THIS IS REQUIRED WHEN ENERGY CALCULATIONS DON'T USE THE |
| | DEFAULT FACTOR. |
| | |
| | 2- DESIGN PRESSURES WERE CHANGED ON THE WINDOW AND DOOR |
| | SCHEDULES ON SHEET 5.0. THE REVISE DESIGN PRESSURES |
| | DON'T CORRESPOND TO EXPOSURE "C". REVISE THE DESIGN |
| | PRESSURES ACCORDING TO THE WINDOW/DOOR SIZE AND |
| | LOCATION. SEC. R301 OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | 3- PROVIDE PRODUCT APPROVAL (2 COPIES) AS REQUIRED BY |
| | DCA RULE 9N-3 FOR: |
| | A) MODIFIED BITUMEN FOR THE FLAT ROOF. AND CLEARLY |
| | IDENTIFY APPROVED ASSEMBLY. ALSO, PROVIDE SIGNED AND |
| | SEALED RAS 117 CALCULATIONS IF SELECTED ASSEMBLY |
| | DOESN'T MEET THE DESIGN PRESSURES REQUIRED BY SEC. R301 |
| | OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | ***RESPONSE: FLORIDA PRODUCT APPROVAL SUBMITTED |
| | FL1654-R9 WAS REVISED. NEED TO PROVIDE CURRENT FLORIDA |
| | PRODUCT APPROVAL REVISION #14. ALSO, NEED TO MARK WHICH |
| | APPROVED ASSEMBLY IS GOING TO BE INSTALLED TO VERIFY |
| | DESIGN PRESSURES. SIGNED AND SEALED RAS 117 |
| | CALCULATIONS WILL BE REQUIRED IF THE SELECTED ASSEMBLY |
| | DOESN'T MEET THE DESIGN PRESSURES FOR ALL ROOF ZONES. |
| | (NOTE: MAKE SURE ALL PRODUCT APPROVALS ARE FOR THE 2010 |
| | CODE VERSION). |
| | |
| | ****REPEAT COMMENT. NOT ADDRESSED. |
| | |
| | B) VENTED HARDIE SOFFIT AS SPECIFIED ON SHEET 4.2. NOA |
| | 15-0122.04 SUBMITTED DOESN'T INCLUDE VENTED SOFFITS. |
| | NOTE: ENGINEER TO SPECIFY SIZE OF VENTS TO SHOW |
| | COMPLIANCE WITH SEC. R806. |
| | |
| | 4- ENGINEER OF RECORD TO APPROVE IN WRITING (NOT |
| | SIGNING AND SEALING) ALL PRODUCT APPROVALS INCLUDING |
| | THE PEEL & STICK SHINGLES UNDERLAYMENT SPECIFIED ON |
| | SHEET 4.2. SEC. 107.3.4.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | 5- CLARIFY WHY THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT PRODUCT |
| | APPROVALS SUBMITTED FOR THE OVERHEAD GARAGE DOORS, |
| | SHINGLES RIDGE VENTILATION AND ROOF SHINGLES. CLEARLY |
| | IDENTIFY WHICH ONE IS GOING TO BE USED TO AVOID |
| | CONFLICTS. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | 6- STATIC ROOF LOUVER NOA 12-0809.01 SUBMITTED: |
| | ENGINEER TO REVIEW APPROVED APPLICATIONS ON PAGE 3 OF 4 |
| | OF NOA 12-0809.01 SUBMITTED. THEN ENGINEER'S PROPOSED |
| | INSTALLATION ON SHEET 4.3 DOESN'T COMPLY WITH THE |
| | APPROVED APPLICATIONS. REVISE AS REQUIRED OR PROVIDE |
| | COMPLETE ENGINEER ANALYSIS SHOWING ALTERNATIVE |
| | COMPLIANCE. SEC. 107.2.1.3 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | 7- ENGINEER TO REVISE THE ROOF VENTING DETAIL ON SHEET |
| | 4.3. THERE IS NOT 2" AIR GAP ON 2X10 ROOF RAFTERS WHEN |
| | INSTALLING R-30 INSULATION AS SHOWN ON DETAIL S2/4.2. |
| | KEEP IN MIND THE ACTUAL SIZE OF THE 2X10 AND THE |
| | THICKNESS OF R-30. REVISE AS REQUIRED. SEC. R806 OF |
| | 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | ****PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSE LETTER ADDRESSING EACH |
| | COMMENT TO EXPEDITE THE REVIEW PROCESS. |
| | ****PLEASE REPLACE AND REMOVE ANY REVISED SHEET.. SUMIT |
| | OLD DRAWINGS FOR REFERENCE. |
| | |
| | IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT |
| | JULIO GOMEZ |
| | COMMERCIAL COMBINATION PLANS EXAMINER |
| | DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT |
| | (561)805-6712 |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
| | |
