| Date |
Text |
| 2017-08-11 13:21:21 | ****CORRECTIONS**** |
| | |
| | SAMANTHA HILL |
| | BUILDING PLANS EXAMINER |
| | [email protected] |
| | 561-805-6724 |
| | |
| | 1. G101, THE PROPOSED NEW 3 HOUR WALL IS NOT SHOWN ON |
| | THIS PLAN. REVISE TO INCLUDE, AND ALSO INCLUDE ANY |
| | OTHER RATINGS REQUIRED DUE TO INTERSECTION, SEE |
| | COMMENTS FOR 17060343. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW, RATING DUE TO INTERSECTION IS NOT SHOWN. I |
| | CHECKED SHEET G101 FILED WITH REVISION 17060343 WHICH |
| | WAS SUBMITTED ON THE SAME DAY, AND WAS GOING TO VOID |
| | THE SHEET FILED WITH THIS REVISION IF THE OTHER ONE HAD |
| | THE REQUESTED CHANGE. HOWEVER, THERE IS ANOTHER ISSUE |
| | WITH THIS PAGE WHICH AFFECTS BOTH REVISIONS. |
| | |
| | SHEET G101 SUBMITTED WITH REVISION NUMBER 17060343 IS |
| | SIGNED & SEALED DATED 7/2/17. IT INCLUDES REVISIONS |
| | 1,2,4,5,10,30 AND 32 DATED 6/6/17. |
| | |
| | SHEET G101 SUBMITTED WITH REVISION NUMBER 17060328 IS |
| | SIGNED & SEALED DATED 7/2/17. IT INCLUDES REVISIONS 1, |
| | 10, AND 11. |
| | |
| | IT IS NOT CLEAR WHY ONE IS UP TO REVISION 32 AND HAS AN |
| | EARLIER DATE THAN THE ONE WHICH INCLUDES REVISION 11. |
| | WHY IS REVISION 11 NOT INCLUDED IN THE VERSION |
| | SUBMITTED WITH 17060343? WHY DID THE ARCHITECT SIGN AND |
| | SEAL TWO DIFFERENT SHEETS G101? (THESE ARE HYPOTHETICAL |
| | QUESTIONS, NO NEED TO RESPOND IN WRITING.) |
| | |
| | PLEASE CORRELATE. IT IS OK, BUT NOT PREFERABLE, FOR THE |
| | SAME SHEET TO BE SUBMITTED WITH TWO DIFFERENT |
| | REVISIONS, BUT THEY DO NEED TO BE THE SAME. BOTH SHEETS |
| | SHOULD BE THE SAME AND INCLUDE ALL INFORMATION WHICH |
| | WAS INCORPORATED INTO ALL REVISIONS. |
| | |
| | PLEASE VERIFY THAT OTHER SHEETS ARE ALSO CONSISTENT. |
| | |
| | 2-3. OK |
| | |
