| Date |
Text |
| 2017-01-04 18:00:27 | ****CORRECTIONS**** |
| | |
| | SAMANTHA HILL |
| | BUILDING PLANS EXAMINER |
| | [email protected] |
| | 561-805-6724 |
| | |
| | FBC = FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, 5TH EDITION (2014) |
| | FBC B = FBC BUILDING |
| | FBC EB = FBC EXISTING BUILDING |
| | FBC A = FBC ACCESSIBILITY |
| | FBC EC = FBC ENERGY CONSERVATION |
| | |
| | FROM PREVIOUS LIST: |
| | |
| | 1. THIS APPEARS TO BE A CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY. REVISE |
| | PLAN TO SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH FBC EXISTING |
| | BUILDING CHAPTER 10. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW, PLAN REVISED TO STATE THAT THE PREVIOUS |
| | OCCUPANCY WAS "INDUSTRIAL". SEE FBC B CHAPTER |
| | 10 AND REVISE PLAN TO DECLARE AN OCCUPANCY FROM THE |
| | BUILDING CODE FOR . DO YOU MEAN FACTORY |
| | INDUSTRIAL (F)? F1 OR F2? |
| | |
| | REVISE PLAN TO SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH FBC EB CHAPTER 10. |
| | NO INFORMATION PROVIDED. IT APPEARS THAT |
| | YOU PROPOSE TO GO TO A HIGHER RISK IN SOME OR ALL OF |
| | THE TABLES. WHILE I AM ABLE TO DETERMINE |
| | COMPLIANCE IN SOME INSTANCES, NO SURVEY WAS PROVIDED SO |
| | COMPLIANCE WITH FBC EB TABLE 1012.6 CANNOT |
| | BE DETERMINED. WITHOUT A SURVEY AND OCCUPANCY |
| | CLASSIFICATION, COMPLIANCE CANNOT BE DETERMINED. |
| | |
| | 2. SEE COMMENT 3. |
| | |
| | 3. OCCUPANT LOAD WAS PROVIDED USING 100 SF PER PERSON, |
| | BUT IT APPEARS THAT A PORTION OF THIS AREA |
| | SHOULD USE MERCANTILE, SEE FBC TABLE 1004.1.2. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW, INCORRECT OCCUPANT LOAD FOR MERCANTILE, SEE |
| | FBC B TABLE 1004.1.2. |
| | |
| | 3. 2ND REVIEW, REVISE PLAN TO CLARIFY: |
| | |
| | BUILDING CLASSIFICATION IIIB; CLARIFY |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW, DO YOU MEAN CONSTRUCTION TYPE? REVISE PLAN |
| | TO TERMINOLOGY CONSISTENT WITH THE BUILDING |
| | CODE OR PROVIDE CLARIFICATION. |
| | |
| | 4. FBC 1006.1, MEANS OF EGRESS ILLUMINATION IS REQUIRED |
| | IN THE EXIT DISCHARGE. NO LIGHTING IS SHOWN |
| | IN THE OUTDOOR AREA WHICH IS A PART OF THE EXIT |
| | DISCHARGE. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW, RESPONSE LETTER STATES TO SEE A2. THIS IS |
| | THE DEMO PAGE. SHEET E2 HAS SOME LIGHTING |
| | ADDED BUT NOT IN ALL OUTDOOR AREAS. |
| | |
| | 5. FLORIDA STATE OR LOCAL PRODUCT APPROVALS REQUIRED |
| | FOR COMPONENTS AND CLADDING, FBC 1609. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW, DRAWING SHEETS ARE ILLEGIBLE. LOOSE SHEETS |
| | WERE ALSO PROVIDED. IT APPEARS THAT THE |
| | NOAS WERE NOT PROPERLY BOUND. ONLY ONE PRODUCT APPROVAL |
| | WAS PROVIDED (GLAZED DOOR). ANY PRODUCT |
| | APPROVALS NOT SUBMITTED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE WILL |
| | BE REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED AS A REVISION, |
| | WITH FEES. |
| | |
| | 6. FBC 1011.1, THE EXIT DISCHARGE WHICH GOES THROUGH |
| | THE OUTDOOR FENCED PLAY AREAS IS NOT READILY |
| | APPARENT. IT APPEARS THAT EXIT SIGNS ARE REQUIRED IN |
| | THIS AREA, REVISE PLAN. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW, NOT ADDRESSED. PLAY AREAS 1, 2, 3 DO NOT |
| | PROVIDE A CLEAR PATH TO EXIT. IF THE |
| | OCCUPANT LEAVES THE BUILDING AND TURNS LEFT, THEY DEAD |
| | END. IF THEY TAKE GATE INTO PLAY AREA 3, |
| | THEY ARE ALSO REQUIRED TO BACKTRACK. IT IS NOT CLEAR |
| | HOW AN OCCUPANT SHOULD KNOW THAT THEY NEED TO |
| | EGRESS THROUGH DOG PLAY AREAS 1 OR 2 TO GET TO THE |
| | PUBLIC WAY. A CLEAR PATH TO THE PUBLIC WAY IS |
| | NOT PROVIDED, REVISE. |
| | |
| | EXPLAIN RATIONALE OF FORCING OCCUPANTS TO TRAVEL |
| | THROUGH ANIMAL AREAS TO EXIT. IT APPEARS THAT A |
| | SAFER MEANS OF EGRESS SHOULD BE PROVIDED. |
| | |
| | 7. REVISE PLAN TO SHOW EXIT DISCHARGE (PATH OF EXIT TO |
| | THE PUBLIC WAY), FOR THE REAR EXIT, |
| | INCLUDING THE MEANS OF EGRESS ILLUMINATION FBC 1008. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW, NOT ADDRESSED. |
| | |
| | 8. OK |
| | |
| | 9-10. OK |
| | |
| | 11. PROVIDE A DETAIL FOR THE CHECK OUT COUNTER, FBC |
| | ACCESSIBILITY 904. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW, THE DETAIL SHOWS THE COUNTER TOP AT 3', A |
| | SECOND COUNTER AT 3'6. SEE FBC A 904. |
| | |
| | 12. REVISE PLAN TO SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH ACCESSIBLE |
| | ROUTE, FBC ACCESSIBILITY 202.4, 206.2. |
| | INFORMATION REGARDING THE ENTRY DOOR AND PARKING |
| | LOCATION WAS NOT PROVIDED; DOES THE ROUTE COMPLY |
| | WITH FBC A 303? |
| | |
| | 13. SEE IMPACT FEE REVIEW. |
| | |
| | NEW COMMENT: |
| | |
| | 14. OFFICE DOOR LACKS MANEUVERING CLEARANCE, PULL SIDE, |
| | FBC ACCESSIBILITY 404.2.4.1. |
| | |
| | 15. PLAN PAGES ARE NUMBERED |
| | |
| | CVR OF 10 |
| | A-0 OF 9 |
| | ETC |
| | |
| | IT IS NOT CLEAR WHETHER THERE SHOULD BE 9 OR 10 PAGES. |
| | REVISE TO BE CONSISTENT. |
| | |
