| Date |
Text |
| 2017-02-15 14:37:23 | 600 OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD |
| | TRACKING #17020270 |
| | PERMIT #16090562 |
| | REVIEW COMMENTS - FIRE DEPARTMENT |
| | |
| | REVISED DRAWINGS DO NOT SHOW A PROPOSED 19'X19' CANOPY |
| | (FIRE SPRINKLER PROTECTION OR INTUMESCENT PAINT). |
| | |
| | PLANS INDICATE A 72" TALL WOOD STORAGE STRUCTURE |
| | ADJACENT TO THE GRILL. THIS STORAGE UNIT WILL NEED TO |
| | BE NON-COMBUSTIBLE OR RELOCATED. |
| | |
| | |
| | FROM THE EMAIL CHAIN 02/14/17: |
| | MY INTERPRETATION IS THAT THE 10 FEET APPLIES TO THE |
| | HORIZONTAL (TRIANGLE SIDE B) DISTANCE. FOR THE REASON |
| | BEING THAT OVERHEAD STRUCTURES ARE NOT PERMITTED AT ALL |
| | EVEN IF THEY WERE LOCATED 10 FEET ABOVE THE HEAT SOURCE |
| | PER NFPA 1. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I APPRECIATE THE OUT |
| | OF THE BOX THOUGHT PROCESS AND UTILIZING THE |
| | PYTHAGOREAN THEOREM. IS THE STRUCTURAL COLUMN HOLDING |
| | UP THE NEW TRELLIS/ROOF NON-COMBUSTIBLE? IF IT IS, I |
| | WOULD CONSIDER ALLOWING YOUR CURRENT DISTANCES BE |
| | UTILIZED IF WE CAN APPLY A LISTED INTUMESCENT PAINT OR |
| | SIMILAR. LET ME KNOW YOUR THOUGHTS. WESLEY JOLIN |
| | |
| | FOR A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT I AM REQUESTING |
| | BELOW IS AN EMAIL FROM THE CLIENT INTERPRETING HOW THE |
| | DISTANCE IS CALCULATED FROM THE GRILL TO THE EDGE OF |
| | CANOPY. PLEASE ADVISE. HERE IS THE CANOPY LAID OUT AS |
| | PER THE 19?X19? OVERALL DIMENSIONS. AS YOU CAN SEE IF |
| | WE SHIFT THE CANOPY 10? AWAY FROM THE GRILL THE CANOPY |
| | WILL NOT BE CENTERED OVER THE 2 COLUMNS. THE CANOPY |
| | WOULD HAVE TO GET SMALLER SO IT WILL HAVE A SYMMETRICAL |
| | LOOK. PLEASE ADVISE. |
| | JONATHAN L. UZCATEGUI, LEED AP BD+C |
| | |
| | WESLEY JOLIN |
| | ASSISTANT FIRE MARSHAL |
| | WEST PALM BEACH FIRE RESCUE |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
