| Date |
Text |
| 2017-05-22 07:59:40 | ****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 |
| | |
| | REVIEW #2 (FIRST RESUBMITTAL) |
| | |
| | 1. THE PERMIT FOR THE SHELL IS NOT ISSUED. THIS PERMIT |
| | CANNOT BE ISSUED UNTIL THE SHELL IS ISSUED (17021163). |
| | THIS PERMIT WILL BE ISSUED AT RISK; RESPONSIBILITY FOR |
| | A CODE COMPLIANT PROJECT IS ON APPLICANTS FOR THE TWO |
| | PERMITS AND THEY ARE TO WORK TOGETHER TO RESOLVE ANY |
| | ISSUES. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW, A LETTER OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT SIGNED BY BOTH |
| | CONTRACTORS WILL BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE. |
| | SHELL IS NOT YET ISSUED AT THE TIME OF THIS REVIEW. |
| | |
| | 2. A CURSORY REVIEW OF THE (ENERGY CALC) INPUT DATA |
| | REPORT WAS DONE. CLARIFY THE FOLLOWING: |
| | WALLS - 3 SHOWN, IT APPEARS THAT THE FOURTH WALL IS NOT |
| | IN THE REPORT |
| | WALLS OR WINDOWS - SOME WINDOWS ON THE PLAN ARE TO HAVE |
| | DRYWALL INSTALLED ON THE INSIDE. CLARIFY HOW THIS IS |
| | HANDLED ON THE PLAN; ARE THESE AREAS ACCOUNTED FOR AS |
| | WINDOWS? |
| | DOORS - NONE SHOWN; ARE ALL EXTERIOR DOORS GLAZED? ARE |
| | THEY INCLUDED IN THE WINDOWS OR FENESTRATION NUMBERS? |
| | FENESTRATION - 1 PANE SHOWN; CLARIFY WHAT THIS ITEM IS. |
| | ROOF - R19 INSULATION SPECIFIED AND TOTAL R VALUE OF |
| | 22.6 - SEE NOTE 7 SHEET A4.0 FOR SHELL PERMIT; NOTE |
| | SPECIFIES INSULATION TO ACHIEVE R19, PLEASE CORRELATE |
| | (EITHER REVISE THE INPUT DATA REPORT AND ENERGY CALC TO |
| | SPEC TOTAL R19 FOR ROOF, OR REVISE SHELL PERMIT TO |
| | SPECIFY R19 BOARD). |
| | |
| | 3. REVISE PLAN TO SHOW INFORMATION REGARDING AMOUNT OF |
| | RADIATION AND DESIGN OF WALLS TO SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH |
| | ALL REQUIREMENTS OF FBC B 465, FAC 64E-5, FS 404 (AS |
| | APPLICABLE). NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION PROVIDED TO |
| | DETERMINE CODE COMPLIANCE. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW, INFORMATION FROM DOH WAS PROVIDED. REVISE |
| | PLAN TO STATE AMOUNT OF RADIATION PROPOSED ("<200 KVP" |
| | IS ACCEPTABLE IF THAT IS THE CASE) AND REVISE PLAN TO |
| | PROVIDE A DETAIL FOR THE LEAD LINED WALLS, OR REVISE W3 |
| | AND W5 (SHEET A1) TO CLARIFY LEAD INSTALLATION |
| | REQUIREMENTS. DETAILS STATE "LEAD @ X-RAY ROOM" BUT |
| | DOES NOT SPECIFY LEAD THICKNESS OR HEIGHT. |
| | |
| | NEW COMMENT: |
| | |
| | THE PAGES WHICH WERE REVISED TO ADDRESS COMMENTS FROM |
| | FIRST REVIEW ARE NOT SEALED BY THE ARCHITECT. DOCUMENTS |
| | PREPARED BY AN ARCHITECT AND SUBMITTED FOR PUBLIC |
| | RECORD ARE TO BE SIGNED, SEALED, DATED ORIGINALS FS481. |
| | |
| | FOR INSTANCE, SEE A2, I2, I3, CHECK ALL. |
| | |
| | |
| | |
