| Date |
Text |
| 2015-12-14 12:24:07 | 2ND REVIEW: FBC 2014 5TH ED. RESIDENTIAL |
| | |
| | 1. THE PLAN IS REDUCED AND TOO SMALL TO READ AND TOO |
| | SMALL FOR RECORD RETENTION. PLEASE PROVIDE AN ENLARGED |
| | PLAN. COMMENT IS SEMI COMPLIED, ADDITIONAL PLANS ARE |
| | REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | FBC 107.2.1.4 QUALITY OF BUILDING PLANS. BUILDING PLANS |
| | SHALL BE DRAWN TO A MINIMUM 1/8 INCH SCALE UPON |
| | SUBSTANTIAL PAPER, CLOTH OR OTHER ACCEPTABLE MEDIUM. |
| | THIS POLICY MAY INCLUDE SUCH THINGS AS MINIMUM SIZE, |
| | SHAPE, CONTRAST, CLARITY, OR OTHER ITEMS RELATED TO |
| | RECORDS MANAGEMENT. |
| | |
| | 2. THE WIND DESIGN AND STRUCTURAL ATTACHMENT |
| | INFORMATION IS UNCLEAR AND APPEARS GENERIC. SUCH DESIGN |
| | MUST BE SITE SPECIFIC. PLEASE PROVIDE THE SPECIFIC |
| | APPLICABLE DESIGN PRESSURES AS DETERMINED USING THE |
| | METHODS IN FBC-R301.1.3 ENGINEERED DESIGN. PLEASE |
| | PROVIDE A SPECIFIC PLAN INDICATING THE LOCATION AND |
| | TYPE OF CONNECTORS TO BE INSTALLED. PROVIDE WIND DESIGN |
| | CRITERIA FOR THE SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION OF THE |
| | BUILDING AND CONSIDERING THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE |
| | SYSTEM ON THE BUILDING. IF DESIGN IS NOT TO BE PROVIDED |
| | BY A FLORIDA LICENSED ENGINEER, THEN PROVIDE STRUCTURAL |
| | CALCULATIONS TO JUSTIFY THE DESIGN. NOT COMPLIED |
| | |
| | YOU HAVE SUBMITTED A DESIGN USING SOFTWARE TO DEVELOP A |
| | LAYOUT FOR AN ARRAY WHICH SPECIFIES CERTAIN COMPONENTS |
| | OF A SYSTEM. THE INFORMATION IS NOT SITE SPECIFIC AND |
| | DOES NOT BEAR THE SEAL OF AN ENGINEER. ALTHOUGH CERTAIN |
| | DESIGN PARAMETERS ARE EVIDENT IN THE WIND LOAD ANALYSIS |
| | PLAN, SUCH AS WIND SPEED, EXPOSURE, AND BUILDING |
| | HEIGHT, YOU HAVE PROVIDED SOME PAGES RELATED TO SNOW |
| | LOADS RATHER THAN WIND LOADS FROM PART OF A GENERAL |
| | DESIGN ANALYSIS OF THE PRODUCT BY SML INC. PLEASE |
| | PROVIDE SPECIFIC WIND DESIGN PRESSURES. YOU MAY PROVIDE |
| | DESIGN LOADS FROM CHARTS BY THE MANUFACTURERS |
| | CONSULTANT ENGINEER, BUT DETERMINATION OF SYSTEM |
| | COMPONENTS SUCH AS CONNECTOR'S TO THE ROOF AND SPACING |
| | OF SUCH CONNECTOR'S SHOULD BE VERIFIED BY AN ENGINEER |
| | TO ASSURE THE SYSTEM DESIGN CAN WITHSTAND WIND |
| | PRESSURES. YOUR INCLUSION OF SNOW LOAD CHARTS IS NOT |
| | USEFUL. THE SPEC SHEETS PROVIDED FOR THE FLASHFOOT |
| | ANCHORS DO NOT SPECIFY THE LENGTH OF THE ANCHOR AND |
| | PROVIDES TWO POSSIBLE BOLT DIAMETERS. THE ANCHOR |
| | INDICATES IT IS FOR SHINGLED ROOF WHICH SUGGEST IT IS |
| | FOR SLOPED APPLICATIONS AND NOT FOR A FLAT ROOF AS |
| | PROPOSED. THE DOCUMENT FROM IRONRIDGE INDICATES THE |
| | 2010 FBC IN IT'S CODE COMPLIANCE PAGE, THE VERSION IS |
| | INCORRECT. |
| | |
| | |
| | STEVEN KENNEDY, CBO |
| | CHIEF PLANS EXAMINER |
| | (561) 805-6710 |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
