| Date |
Text |
| 2015-12-17 18:05:55 | ****CORRECTIONS**** |
| | ****UPDATED ON 1/26/2016**** |
| | |
| | SAMANTHA HILL |
| | BUILDING PLANS EXAMINER |
| | [email protected] |
| | 561-805-6724 |
| | |
| | PLAN PREPARED BY **REDACTED** DATED 11/16/15: |
| | |
| | 1. FBC 107.2.1: CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS SHALL BE OF |
| | SUFFICIENT CLARITY TO INDICATE THE LOCATION, NATURE AND |
| | EXTENT OF THE WORK PROPOSED AND SHOW IN DETAIL THAT IT |
| | WILL CONFORM TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CODE AND |
| | RELEVANT LAWS, ORDINANCES, RULES AND REGULATIONS ... |
| | |
| | IN ORDER FOR AN ACCURATE REVIEW TO BE PERFORMED, |
| | PROVIDE BASIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE EXISTING BUILDING: |
| | OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION FBC CHAPTER 3, BUILDING TYPE |
| | FBC CHAPTER 5. |
| | |
| | 2. FBC 5TH EDITION EXISTING BUILDING 301.1, APPLICANT |
| | IS TO ELECT THE METHOD OF COMPLIANCE. REVISE PLAN TO |
| | INDICATE METHOD SELECTED. COMPLETE CODE REFERENCES |
| | CANNOT BE PROVIDED WITHOUT THIS INFORMATION. |
| | |
| | 3. SCOPE NOT CLEAR. SECTION 1-6 STATES THAT ELECTRICAL |
| | WIRING MAY BE REUSED BUT NO ELECTRICAL PLAN WAS |
| | SUBMITTED, NO ELECTRICAL APPLICATION SUBMITTED, FBC |
| | 107. |
| | |
| | 4. SOME STATEMENTS ON THE PLAN ARE NOT CLEAR AS TO |
| | MEANING. FOR INSTANCE, ITEM 1-4, "NEW BALCONY DECKING |
| | AND ALUMINUM RAILING, THIS DOES NOT QUALIFY EXISTING |
| | JOIST INTEGRITY." DESIGNER'S INTENT IS NOT CLEAR, |
| | PLEASE REVISE TO CLARIFY. |
| | |
| | ALSO SEE SECTION 3 "INSPECTION OF EXTIN'G CANTILEVER WD |
| | JST WITH ROT (STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY):" AND THEN PROVIDES |
| | A SPEC FOR REPAIR. DESIGNER'S INTENT NOT CLEAR, PLEASE |
| | REVISE TO CLARIFY. |
| | |
| | SECTION 3 "NON-BRG EXIST SEPARATION WALLS W/ROT SHALL |
| | REPLACE WITH REPAIR EQUAL TO EXISTING." NO |
| | SPECIFICATION (OTHER THAN "REPLACE WITH REPAIR EQUAL TO |
| | EXISTING") WAS PROVIDED. THIS IS A WALL SUBJECT TO WIND |
| | LOADS. BUILDING "E" ELEVATION INDICATES THAT THE WALL |
| | IS TO REMAIN. SCOPE NOT CLEAR, FBC 107. |
| | |
| | NOTE 1-6 "NO STRUCTURAL REMOVAL AS INDICATED ON THE |
| | DRAWINGS." |
| | |
| | 5. THE PLAN IS NOT CLEAR AS TO SCOPE, FBC 107. BUILDING |
| | "E" ELEVATION AND SECTION 3 AND ADJACENT ELEVATION |
| | INCLUDE ELEMENTS WHICH ARE NOT CLEAR AS TO WHETHER THEY |
| | ARE EXISTING OR ARE TO BE REPLACED, PLEASE REVISE TO |
| | CLEARLY DEPICT SCOPE. |
| | |
| | 6. FBC 1609, SECTION 1-12 STATES "WIND PRESSURES |
| | DESIGNED FOR OPEN STRUCTURE", BUT THIS STRUCTURE DOES |
| | NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF OPEN, SEE FBC 1609, |
| | ASCE7-10, CHAPTER 26. REVISE ENCLOSURE CLASSIFICATION |
| | AND REVISE OTHER DETAILS AS APPLICABLE OR CLARIFY. |
| | |
| | 7. MEAN ROOF HEIGHT IS GIVEN AS 24 FEET. BUILDING 'E' |
| | ELEVATION DEPICTS THREE STORIES AND A PITCHED ROOF. |
| | SECTION C SPECS A 12" FLOOR JOIST. IT APPEARS THAT 24 |
| | FEET IS NOT AN ACCURATE MRH FOR THIS STRUCTURE AS IT IS |
| | 26' FROM FINISHED FLOOR TO UNDERSIDE OF ROOF TRUSSES, |
| | NO DIMENSION PROVIDED FOR THE ROOF. EITHER CORRECT THE |
| | MRH OR PROVIDE INFORMATION TO CLARIFY THE STATED MRH OF |
| | 24'. |
| | |
| | 8. FBC 1809.4, TYPICAL WALL SECTION DOES NOT SPECIFY |
| | DEPTH OF FOUNDATION RELATIVE TO GRADE, REVISE. |
| | |
| | 9. HARDIPLANK SPECIFIED; FLORIDA STATE OR LOCAL PRODUCT |
| | APPROVAL REQUIRED, FAC9N-3, FBC 1609. PRODUCT APPROVALS |
| | ARE TO BE REVIEWED BY DESIGNER OF RECORD PRIOR TO |
| | SUBMITTAL. |
| | |
| | 10. CEILING FINISHED ARE TO BE REMOVED, BUT NOT |
| | REPLACED. PLAN INDICATES THAT THE EXISTING JOIST WILL |
| | REMAIN. IT APPEARS THAT THE PREVIOUS DESIGN INCLUDED AN |
| | ENCLOSED JOIST, THE PROPOSED DESIGN IS FOR OPEN, BUT NO |
| | INFORMATION REGARDING THE EXISTING JOIST WAS PROVIDED |
| | (SUCH AS TYPE OF LUMBER, PT). FOR JOISTS WHICH DID NOT |
| | ROT, THEY ARE TO REMAIN, BUT THE PLAN IS NOT CLEAR AS |
| | TO WHETHER OR NOT THE JOISTS WERE DESIGNED TO BE IN |
| | DIRECT CONTACT WITH THE ELEMENTS, FBC 107. |
| | |
| | 11. BALCONY DESIGN LOADS NOT SPECIFIED, PLEASE REVISE, |
| | FBC 107. |
| | |
| | 12. NEW RAILINGS ARE PROPOSED BUT NO STRUCTURAL |
| | SPECIFICATION (DESIGN LOADS, INSTALLATION SPEC, ETC.) |
| | PROVIDED, FBC 107. |
| | |
| | 13. ELEVATIONS AND SECTIONS ARE NOT MARKED RELATIVE TO |
| | DIRECTION. SECTION 3 APPEARS TO BE THE REAR (BASED ON |
| | ROOF ORIENTATION). IF THIS IS A SECTION WHICH |
| | REPRESENTS THE REAR, CONSTRUCTION/REPAIR OF THE |
| | CANTILEVER TO THE SIDES IS NOT CLEAR. IT APPEARS THAT |
| | NO REPAIR DETAIL WAS PROVIDED FOR THE SECOND FLOOR LEFT |
| | AND RIGHT SIDE CANTILEVERED BALCONY AREAS, FBC 107. |
| | |
| | 14. NO FLASHING DETAIL(S) PROVIDED, FBC 107. TYPICAL |
| | WALL SECTION AND SECTION 3 GRAPHICALLY APPEAR TO DEPICT |
| | FLASHING ON THE SECOND FLOOR, BUT NOT ON THE THIRD |
| | FLOOR. FBC 1403.2, REVISE PLAN TO EITHER INCLUDE |
| | FLASHING DETAILS OR PROVIDE DETAILS TO CLARIFY HOW AN |
| | INSTALLATION WHICH LACKS FLASHING WILL NOT COMPROMISE |
| | THE WATER RESISTANCE OF THE EXTERIOR WALL. |
| | |
| | 15. I WAS UNABLE TO FIND A SPECIFICATION FOR THE NAILS |
| | OTHER THAN SIZE. ARE THEY COMMON HOT DIPPED GALVANIZED, |
| | OR STAINLESS, OR ANOTHER TYPE? |
| | |
| | ****NEW COMMENT ON 1/26/2016**** |
| | |
| | 16. BASED ON A CONVERSATION WITH THE CONTRACTOR, THE |
| | EXISTING BALCONY FLOOR JOISTS ARE NON TREATED SPRUCE |
| | LUMBER. AS THE NEW DESIGN PROPOSED TO EXPOSE THE |
| | INTERIOR GRADE LUMBER TO THE ELEMENTS, IT APPEARS THAT |
| | THIS DESIGN DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE MINIMUM |
| | REQUIREMENTS OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. IT APPEARS |
| | THAT AN ALTERNATIVE DESIGN SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. PLEASE |
| | CONTACT ME IF YOU WISH TO DISCUSS. |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
