| Date |
Text |
| 2017-04-11 11:28:28 | BUILDING PLAN REVIEW |
| | W. P. B. PERMIT: 16120880 |
| | ADD: 3200 N. CONGRESS / TENNIS CENTER BUILDING |
| | CONT: HEDRICK BROTHERS |
| | TEL: 561-308-2954 |
| | E-MAIL: [email protected] |
| | |
| | 2014 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE W 2014 WEST PALM BEACH |
| | AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, CHAPTER 1, |
| | ADMINISTRATION |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW |
| | DATE: TUES. APRIL 11/ 2017 |
| | ACTION: DENIED |
| | |
| | 1) 2ND REQUEST. A TRUE SITE ADDRESS WILL BE REQUIRED |
| | BEFORE THE PERMIT CAN BE ISSUED. THIS SITE HAS BEEN OR |
| | IS THE PROCESS OF BEING REPLATED WITH NEW STREET NAMES; |
| | THE PERMIT APPLICATION USED THE STREET NAME OF N. |
| | CONGRESS WHEREAS SHEET A-1.101 SHOWS THE STREET |
| | DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING NAMED RESORT COURT. . |
| | CITY MUNI CODE SEC.78-6 (1-7). THE SUBMITTED ADDRESS |
| | WILL BE REASSIGNED BY CONTACT: |
| | MICHAEL ORIO GIS SUPPORT SPECIALIST/ INFORMATION |
| | TECHNOLOGY |
| | TEL: 561-494-1040 |
| | E-MAIL: [email protected] |
| | |
| | 2) BUILDING PROVISO: THIS PROJECT QUALIFIES FOR ART IN |
| | PUBLIC PLACES. THE CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH ART IN |
| | PUBLIC PLACES ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT THAT APPLIES TO ANY |
| | REMODEL OR NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECT FOR WHICH THE |
| | PERMIT APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED AFTER 6/29/14, AND THE |
| | TOTAL PROJECT CONSTRUCTION COSTS ARE EQUAL TO OR |
| | GREATER THAN $750,000 WILL NEED TO COMPLY WITH THIS |
| | ORDINANCE. |
| | PER CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH ORDINANCE NO. 4504-14, AND |
| | CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH CODE OF ORDINANCES, ARTICLE V, |
| | ART IN PUBLIC PLACES, SECTION 78-123(A) AND SECTION |
| | 78-126(A), THE ART ASSESSMENT IS 1% OF THE TOTAL |
| | PROJECT CONSTRUCTION COST. |
| | PER CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH CODE OF ORDINANCES, ARTICLE |
| | V, ART IN PUBLIC PLACES, SECTION 78-122, RENOVATION AND |
| | NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS ARE ASSESSED CUMULATIVELY, SO |
| | THE ART ASSESSMENT WILL BE APPLICABLE TO ALL FUTURE |
| | PROJECTS. |
| | FOR CONTACT INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT: |
| | MS. SYBILLE WELTER ART IN PUBLIC PLACES COORDINATOR |
| | 822-1515 E-MAIL: [email protected] |
| | |
| | 3) 2ND REQUEST. THIS PROJECT THE TENNIS CENTER BUILDING |
| | IS EVALUATED AT $783420.00 DOLLARS. UNDER THE MAIN |
| | BUILDING PERMIT THE VALUES FOR THE, |
| | GROUNDWATER-DEWATERING, EXCAVATING, DE-MUCKING AND |
| | BACKFILL FOR THE BUILDING, MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, |
| | PLUMBING & ROOFING SUB-PERMITS ARE INCLUDED. PLEASE |
| | NOTE THIS REVIEW IS FOR THE BUILDING ONLY, NOT FOR ANY |
| | SITE AMENITIES OR PARKING LOTS. |
| | |
| | ALL OTHER PERMITS FIRE SPRINKLER, FIRE ALARM, EXHAUST |
| | HOODS, ANSUL SYSTEMS OR ALTERNATIVE AUTOMATIC |
| | FIRE-EXTINGUISHING SYSTEMS , WALK IN COOLERS & |
| | FREEZERS, ALL LOW VOLTAGE PERMITS, GENERATORS & FUEL |
| | TANKS, GAS PERMIT, POOL, JACUZZI AND ASSOCIATED |
| | SUB-PERMITS, AWNING, CANOPY, FENCE, LANDSCAPE , |
| | IRRIGATION, AUGER CAST PILE AND OR FOUNDATION OR |
| | STRUCTURE ONLY PERMIT WILL BE SEPARATE REVIEWS AND |
| | ASSOCIATED FEES WITH EACH PERMIT. |
| | |
| | PLEASE PROVIDE AN ITEMIZED LIST AND SUBTRACT THESE LINE |
| | ITEMS AND THEIR VALUE FROM THE OVERALL BUILDING VALUE |
| | STATED ON THE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THIS PROJECT. THE |
| | REMAINING BALANCE WILL BE AFFECTIVELY THE VALUE OF THE |
| | BUILDING YOU WILL BE PAYING FOR THIS PERMIT. THE |
| | BUILDING DEPARTMENT DOES NOT WANT TO COLLECT TWICE FOR |
| | THE VALUE OF THESE SUB-PERMITS NOT COVERED UNDER THE |
| | PRIME OR MASTER PERMIT. |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | 4) SEMI-COMPLIED. ONE SET OF PLANS IS SIGNED AND |
| | SEALED. THE 2ND SET OF PLANS ARE SIGNED BUT THE SEAL ON |
| | THE PLANS IS NOT EMBOSSED ENOUGH TO BE LEGIBLE. THE |
| | SEAL IS NOT A COLORED SEAL. |
| | 1ST ROUND OF COMMENTS. ALL SHEETS SIGNED BY THE |
| | ARCHITECT DANIELE E. ADACHE THE DESIGNER HAS USED AN |
| | INK STAMP FOR THE REQUIRED WRITTEN SIGNATURE. FL ADMIN |
| | CODE 61G16.003 ARCHITECTS. PLANS ARE TO BE SIGNED WITH |
| | A FULL SIGNATURE FROM THE ARCHITECT OF RECORD PER |
| | 481.221 WITH A MINIMUM OF FIRST AND LAST NAME AS SHOWN |
| | ON THE ARCHITECTS' LICENSE, FAC 61G1-16.003 |
| | |
| | 5) 2ND REQUEST. PLANS THAT STILL SHOW THE FINISH FLOOR |
| | IN NAVD: |
| | A-0.0.02 UNDER THE HEADING PROJECT COMPONENTS/ BUILD. |
| | HEIGHT, |
| | A-1.3.01 IS GIVEN BOTH NGVD AND NAVD. THE FLOOR PLAN IS |
| | NGVD, THE HEADING BUILDING HEIGHT IN NAVD |
| | 1ST ROUND OF COMMENTS. DISCREPANCY IN PLANS. SHEET |
| | 1-1.1.02 VERSES A-1.3.0.1. SHEET A-1.1.02 INDICATES THE |
| | FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION AS 18.00 FT. NGVD WHEREAS SHEET |
| | A-1.3.0.1 THE FINISH FLOOR HEIGHT IS EXPRESSED AS 22.00 |
| | FT. NAVD88. THE CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH IS STILL |
| | WORKING OFF OF THE FIRM MAPS DATED MARCH 1/ 1979. |
| | PLEASE UPDATE PLANS TO NGVD. 107.2.1.3 ADDITIONAL |
| | INFORMATION IS REQUIRED. DISCREPANCY IN PLANS. |
| | |
| | 6-7) COMPLIED. |
| | |
| | 8) 2ND REQUEST. RESPONSE INDICATES THE SURVEY IS TO BE |
| | SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER. PLEASE REFER TO; |
| | 4X FEE NOTICE!!!!! FLORIDA STATUTE 553.80(2)(B) WITH |
| | RESPECT TO EVALUATION OF DESIGN PROFESSIONALS? |
| | DOCUMENTS, IF A LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINDS IT NECESSARY, IN |
| | ORDER TO ENFORCE COMPLIANCE WITH THE FLORIDA BUILDING |
| | CODE AND ISSUE A PERMIT, TO REJECT DESIGN DOCUMENTS |
| | REQUIRED BY THE CODE THREE OR MORE TIMES FOR FAILURE TO |
| | CORRECT A CODE VIOLATION SPECIFICALLY AND CONTINUOUSLY |
| | NOTED IN EACH REJECTION, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, |
| | EGRESS, FIRE PROTECTION, STRUCTURAL STABILITY, ENERGY, |
| | ACCESSIBILITY, LIGHTING, VENTILATION, ELECTRICAL, |
| | MECHANICAL, PLUMBING, AND GAS SYSTEMS, OR OTHER |
| | REQUIREMENTS IDENTIFIED BY RULE OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING |
| | COMMISSION ADOPTED PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 120, THE LOCAL |
| | GOVERNMENT SHALL IMPOSE, EACH TIME AFTER THE THIRD SUCH |
| | REVIEW THE PLANS ARE REJECTED FOR THAT CODE VIOLATION, |
| | A FEE OF FOUR TIMES THE AMOUNT OF THE PROPORTION OF THE |
| | PERMIT FEE ATTRIBUTED TO PLANS REVIEW. |
| | |
| | 1ST ROUND OF COMMENTS. IN THE ARCHITECTURAL SET OF |
| | PLANS THERE IS AN OVERALL MASTER SITE PLAN FOR THE |
| | DEVELOPMENT AND A SITE PLAN. THE CIVIL PLANS SHEET 4 OF |
| | 9 SHOWS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED TENNIS PAVILION, |
| | BUT THERE IS NO SURVEY IN THIS REVIEW CYCLE GIVING THE |
| | LOCATION OF PROPERTY LINES AND THE DISTANCE FROM THE |
| | BUILDING TO SUCH PROPERTY LINES. |
| | 107.3.5 MINIMUM PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA FOR BUILDINGS. |
| | 107.3.5.1 COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS: |
| | . 107.3.5.1.1 COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS: BUILDINGS-SURVEY. |
| | CANNOT VERIFY: |
| | 2014 FBC-B TABLE 602 FIRE-RESISTANCE RATING |
| | REQUIREMENTS FOR EXTERIOR WALLS BASED ON FIRE |
| | SEPARATION DISTANCE |
| | 2014 FBC-B TABLE 705.8. MAXIMUM AREA OF EXTERIOR WALL |
| | OPENINGS BASED ON FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE AND DEGREE |
| | OF OPENING PROTECTION |
| | |
| | 9) SHEET S-0.00 FOUNDATION NOTES 310000: |
| | |
| | 9A) 2ND REQUEST. RESPONSE INDICATES THAT THE REVISED |
| | GEOTECHNICAL REPORT THAT ADDRESSES THE EXTENT OF THE |
| | ONSITE SOILS ENGINEER TO BE SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE |
| | COVER IN RESPONSE TO THIS COMMENT. |
| | 4X FEE NOTICE!!!!! FLORIDA STATUTE 553.80(2)(B) WITH |
| | RESPECT TO EVALUATION OF DESIGN PROFESSIONALS? |
| | DOCUMENTS, IF A LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINDS IT NECESSARY, IN |
| | ORDER TO ENFORCE COMPLIANCE WITH THE FLORIDA BUILDING |
| | CODE AND ISSUE A PERMIT, TO REJECT DESIGN DOCUMENTS |
| | REQUIRED BY THE CODE THREE OR MORE TIMES FOR FAILURE TO |
| | CORRECT A CODE VIOLATION SPECIFICALLY AND CONTINUOUSLY |
| | NOTED IN EACH REJECTION, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, |
| | EGRESS, FIRE PROTECTION, STRUCTURAL STABILITY, ENERGY, |
| | ACCESSIBILITY, LIGHTING, VENTILATION, ELECTRICAL, |
| | MECHANICAL, PLUMBING, AND GAS SYSTEMS, OR OTHER |
| | REQUIREMENTS IDENTIFIED BY RULE OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING |
| | COMMISSION ADOPTED PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 120, THE LOCAL |
| | GOVERNMENT SHALL IMPOSE, EACH TIME AFTER THE THIRD SUCH |
| | REVIEW THE PLANS ARE REJECTED FOR THAT CODE VIOLATION, |
| | A FEE OF FOUR TIMES THE AMOUNT OF THE PROPORTION OF THE |
| | PERMIT FEE ATTRIBUTED TO PLANS REVIEW. |
| | |
| | 1ST ROUND OF COMMENTS. NOTES INDICATE THAT ALL SOILS |
| | BEARING ARE TO BE INSPECTED & APPROVED BY A |
| | GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. IN UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING |
| | GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT SUBMITTED THE SOILS |
| | ENGINEER FOUND IN (3) SOILS SAMPLES ORGANIC SOILS |
| | CONTENTS RANGING FROM 10.6 TO 67.6 PERCENT AND FROM A |
| | DEPTH OF 6 FEET TO 12 FEET BELOW GRADE. WE HAVE NO |
| | DOCUMENTATION FROM THE CONTRACTOR OR SOILS ENGINEER |
| | THERE WILL BE A ONSITE |
| | SOILS ENGINEER DURING THE REMOVAL OF THE ORGANIC SOILS, |
| | AND REPLACED WITH A GOOD QUALITY FILL ACCORDING TO THE |
| | SPECIFICATIONS AND PROCEDURES OUTLINED IN THE SITE |
| | PREPARATION SECTION OF THE SUBMITTED SOILS REPORT. |
| | BASED ON THE SOILS ENGINEERS RECOMMENDATION FOR |
| | DEWATERING OF THE BUILDING SITE , OVER EXCAVATION, |
| | PLACEMENT OF FILL THERE SHALL BE QUALIFIED PERSONNEL |
| | AND EQUIPMENT TO MONITOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE |
| | BUILDING PAD AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 4.5 OF THIS |
| | REPORT. FBC-B 1803.4 QUALIFIED REPRESENTATIVE & |
| | 1803.5.8 COMPACTED FILL MATERIALS. |
| | |
| | 9B) BUILDING PROVISO, DEFERRED SUBMITAL: CONTRACTOR TO |
| | FURNISH THE DE-WATERING PLAN AND BE REVIEWED BY THE |
| | DESIGN PROFESSIONAL OF RECORD AND THEIR SHOP DRAWING |
| | STAMP OF APPROVAL ON THE DOCUMENT BEFORE BEING |
| | FORWARDED TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. |
| | THE SECOND ISSUE WITH THE PREPARING FOR DE-MUCKING IS A |
| | DE-WATERING PLAN. TO DATE NO PLAN/ REPORT HAS BEEN |
| | SUBMITTED PROVIDING A METHOD OF DEWATERING & |
| | CALCULATIONS FOR THE APPROPRIATE SYSTEM AND ARE THE |
| | SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. DEPENDING ON THE |
| | TIME OF YEAR THE WATER TABLE WOULD BE 2 FT. TO 4 FT. |
| | BELOW GRADE AND ORGANIC MATERIALS WERE FOUND IN BORING |
| | # 3 TO A DEPTH OF 12 FEET BELOW GRADE. THE SUBMITTED |
| | SOILS REPORT REQUEST THAT THE GROUND WATER SHOULD BE |
| | CONTROLLED TO A DEPTH OF AT LEAST 2 FEET BELOW THE |
| | BOTTOM OF THE EXCAVATION DURING THE ENTIRE DEMUCKING |
| | OPERATION. 1803.5.4 GROUND-WATER TABLE. |
| | |
| | 10A) SEMI-COMPLIED. 2ND REQUEST. SHEETS A-1.2.01 VERSES |
| | SHEET S-2.01. THE RESPONSE INDICATES THE INTENT OF THE |
| | PLANS BUT THE RESPONSE DOES NOT GO OUT TO BE PART OF |
| | THE PERMITTED SET OF DOCUMENTS. PLEASE SHOW THE FINISH |
| | GRADE AND ROUGH GRADE AT ALL OF THE EGRESS DOORS. THE |
| | RESPONSE INDICATES THERE IS TO BE SAND SET PAVER AT |
| | DOOR EXITS 1 & 2 WITH THE DECK TERMINATING ? INCH BELOW |
| | FINISH FLOOR. THIS IS NEW WORK AND MUST MEET THE |
| | REQUIREMENTS OF 303.2 AND 303.3 OF THE 2014 FBC-ACCESS. |
| | CODE. SHEET A-6.2.01 THE DOOR SCHEDULE FOR THE 3 EGRESS |
| | DOORS ( 100, 102 & 105) ALL HAVE HARDWARE TYPE # 1. NO |
| | DOOR THRESHOLD IS SPECIFIED, PLANS INDICATE THE BALANCE |
| | OF HARDWARE BY DOOR MANUFACTURER, THE DOOR HARDWARE |
| | WOULD NOT BE IDENTIFIED UNTIL THE DOOR PRODUCT APPROVAL |
| | WAS SUBMITTED AND THE CONTRACTOR WILL NEED TO IDENTIFY |
| | THE THRESHOLD FOR ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENT 404.2.5 |
| | 2014 FBC-ACCESSIBILITY CODE. |
| | 1ST ROUND OF COMMENTS. PLEASE REVIEW SHEETS A-1.2.01 |
| | VERSES SHEET S-2.01 FOR ACCESSIBLE EXITS. SHEET S-2.01 |
| | SHOWS: |
| | EXIT # 1 TO BE -0FT. 4 INCHES BELOW FINISH FLOOR |
| | SIGNAGE REQUIRED, WHERE THE ACCESSIBLE EGRESS IS |
| | LOCATED. |
| | 2014 FBC-ACCESSIBILITY CODE 216.3 DIRECTIONAL AND |
| | INFORMATION SIGNS AND 216.4 MEANS OF EGRESS. |
| | EXIT # 2 TO BE -0 FT. 03/4 INCH BELOW FINISH FLOOR |
| | COMPLY WITH ACCESS. CODE 303.2. |
| | EXIT # 3 TO BE HEIGHT UNKNOWN, NOT SHOWN ON PLANS. |
| | 107.2.1.3 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | 10B) SEE COMMENT ABOVE. THE CARD ROOM # 103 HAS AN |
| | OCCUPANT LOAD > THAN 50 REQUIRING (2) EXITS. PLEASE |
| | SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH 2014 FBC-ACCESSIBILITY CODE 207.1 |
| | ACCESSIBLE MEANS OF EGRESS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE 2003 |
| | IBC SECTION 1007. 2003 IBC-B 1007.1. WHERE 2 OR MORE |
| | MEANS OF EGRESS IS REQUIRED BY SECTION 1014.1 OR 1018.1 |
| | FROM ANY ACCESSIBLE PORTION OF THE SPACE SHALL BE |
| | SERVED BY NOT LESS THAN TWO ACCESSIBLE MEANS OF EGRESS. |
| | |
| | 11) BUILDING PROVISO DEFERED SUBMITTAL: THE CONTRACTOR |
| | HEDRICK BROTHER HAS SUBMITTED A REQUEST FOR DEFERRED |
| | SUBMITTALS PER 2014 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE W 2014 WEST |
| | PALM BEACH AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, |
| | CHAPTER 1, ADMINISTRATION 107.3.4.2 DEFERRED |
| | SUBMITTALS; |
| | 1) WOOD TRUSSES- SHOP DRAWINGS AND ENGINEERING SHEETS |
| | OF TRUSSES |
| | 2) ALUMINUM LOUVERS |
| | 3) EXTERIOR WINDOWS AND DOORS |
| | 4) ROOFING ASSEMBLIES |
| | FBC 107.3.4.1 PRODUCT APPROVALS. THOSE PRODUCTS WHICH |
| | ARE REGULATED BY THE DCA RULE 9N-03 SHALL BE REVIEWED |
| | AND APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE DESIGNER OF RECORD PRIOR |
| | TO SUBMITTAL FOR JURISDICTIONAL APPROVAL. FL |
| | 61G1-23.015 (2) THE ARCHITECT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR |
| | SUPERVISING AND REVIEWING ALL PROJECT DATA, REPORTS, |
| | SHOP DRAWINGS ETC.. |
| | |
| | 12)COMPLIED. SHEET A-3. 2014 FBC-ACCESSIBILITY CODE |
| | 404.2.6. |
| | |
| | 13) 2014 FBC-ENERGY CODE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS C401.2 |
| | BUILDINGS CAN COMPLY WITH ASHRAE 90.1-2010(2014) ENERGY |
| | CONSERVATION, ENERGY GAUGE SUMMIT V5.20 INPUT DATA |
| | REPORT, MATERIALS USED: |
| | |
| | 13A) 2ND REQUEST. WALLS EXTERIOR, THE INPUT REPORT |
| | INDICATES ON EXTERIOR WALLS, 8 INCH CMU WITH 3/4 INCH |
| | ISO (ISO, (POLYISOCYANURATE INSULATION) BETWEEN @24 |
| | INCHES O.C. AND 1/2 INCH GYPSUM. THE PLANS SHEETS |
| | A-3.1.01 & A-3.1.02. NOW SHOW 1.5 INCH R-6.5 BATT |
| | INSULATION AS MANUFACTURED BY OWENS CORNING OR APPROVED |
| | EQUAL. THIS IS A DISCREPANCY IN PLANS 107.2.1.3. 2014 |
| | WEST PALM BEACH AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA BUILDING |
| | CODE, CHAPTER 1, ADMINISTRATION 107.2.1.3: W.P.B. |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE CODE/2014 DRAWINGS & SPECIFICATIONS |
| | SHALL CONTAIN INFORMATION, SUCH INFORMATION SHALL BE |
| | SPECIFIC TO THE TECHNICAL CODES "SHALL NOT BE CITED AS |
| | A WHOLE OR IN PART, NOR THE TERM "LEGAL" OR ITS |
| | EQUIVALENT BE USED AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR SPECIFIC |
| | INFORMATION". |
| | |
| | 13B) COMPLIED. ROOFING INSULATION. |
| | |
| | 13C)2ND REQUEST. IN THE INPUT DATA REPORT FOR EACH |
| | ELEVATION THERE ARE DISCREPANCIES IN THE AMOUNT OF |
| | WINDOWS, THE SIZE OF THE OPENINGS FOR EACH ELEVATION. |
| | ONE SET OF PLANS MARKED UP. |
| | 1ST RESPONSE. THE INPUT REPORT INDICATES A TOTAL OF |
| | 772.4 SQUARE FEET WHEN THE GLAZED AREAS ARE TOTALED. |
| | FROM THE ELEVATIONS THE TOTAL GLAZED OPENINGS |
| | (INCLUDING DOORS) IS 1141 (APPROXIMATELY) SQUARE FEET? |
| | WHY SUCH A DISCREPANCY? 107.2.1.3 ADDITIONAL |
| | INFORMATION IS REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | 14) IMPACT FEES. BEFORE A PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT, MAY BE |
| | ISSUED, IMPACT FEES MUST BE PAID TO PALM BEACH COUNTY. |
| | THE ACTUAL PERMIT SET OF PLANS MUST BE STAMPED BY THAT |
| | OFFICE, AND A COPY OF THE PAID RECEIPT ATTACHED TO THE |
| | PERMIT APPLICATION. PLEASE CALL (561)233-5025 FOR MORE |
| | INFORMATION. |
| | |
| | 15) WHEN RESUBMITTING PLANS PLEASE INDICATE THE |
| | REVISION & REMOVE ANY VOIDED SHEETS & REPLACE ANY PAGES |
| | AS NECESSARY. A TRANSMITTAL LETTER LISTING THE ORIGINAL |
| | REVIEW COMMENT NUMBER, WITH A DESCRIPTION OF THE |
| | REVISION MADE, IDENTIFYING THE SHEET OR SPECIFICATION |
| | PAGE WHERE THE CHANGES CAN BE FOUND WILL HELP TO |
| | EXPEDITE YOUR PERMIT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ANTICIPATED |
| | COOPERATION. |
| | |
| | A THOROUGH REVIEW CANNOT BE MADE AT THIS TIME, AS A |
| | RESULT OF THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED |
| | ADDITIONAL COMMENTS MAY APPEAR THAT WERE NOT PART OF |
| | THIS REVIEW. |
| | |
| | JAMES A. WITMER BN, PX, CBO |
| | SENIOR COMMERCIAL COMBINATION PLANS EXAMINER |
| | CONSTRUCTION SERVICES DIVISION/ DEVELOPMENT SERVICES |
| | DEPARTMENT |
| | 401 CLEMATIS ST. |
| | WEST PALM BEACH. FL 33402 |
| | TEL: 561-805-6715 |
| | FAX: 561-805-6676 |
| | E-MAIL: [email protected] |
| | |
| | |
