| Date |
Text |
| 2021-04-16 14:34:00 | NO CHANGES SINCE THE LAST REVIEW - |
| | |
| | SAMANTHA HILL |
| | BUILDING PLANS EXAMINER |
| | [email protected] |
| | 561-805-6724 |
| | |
| | 1. A NEW AFFIDAVIT WAS SUBMITTED, BUT DOES NOT REFER TO |
| | THE VERSION NUMBER FOR EACH PAGE AND DOES NOT REFER TO |
| | SHOP DRAWINGS, PRODUCT APPROVALS, ETC. (SEE PREVIOUS |
| | PRIVATE PROVIDER REVIEW). THE AFFIDAVIT ONLY LISTS PLAN |
| | PAGES AND SURVEY. AFFIDAVIT REFERS TO 16 PAGES, BU |
| | TTHERE ARE 17 PAGES IN THE PROJECTDOX UPLOAD AS WELL AS |
| | MANY SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS. SOME PLANS WERE SUBMITTED |
| | THREE TIMES; NOT CLEAR WHICH OF THE VERSIONS WERE |
| | REVIEWED BY THE PRIVATE PROVIDER AS WE DID NOT GET A |
| | NEW AFFIDAVIT WITH VERSION NUMBERS FOR EACH REVIEW. |
| | |
| | FOR EXAMPLE: |
| | COVER SHEET A1 (WHICH INCLUDES WIND DESIGN CRITERIA, |
| | GENERAL NOTES, ETC.) IS DIGITALLY SIGNED 12/14/20. THIS |
| | WAS 2ND VERSION, NO SHOP DRAWING REVIEW BY UNIVERSAL |
| | ENGINEERING. |
| | SHEET A3 INCLUDES A SHOP DRAWING REVIEW, DIGITALLY |
| | SIGNED 11/8. |
| | SHEET E1 IS NOT DIGITALLY SIGNED, IS VERSION 3 DATED |
| | 1/9/21, NO SHOP DRAWING REVIEW BY UNIVERSAL. |
| | |
| | IF AN AFFIDAVIT WAS PROVIDED EVERY CYCLE, OR SHOP |
| | DRAWING REVIEW WAS DONE EVERY CYCLE, THE VERSION |
| | REVIEWED WOULD BE CLEARER (BUT WOULD BE 100% CLEAR WITH |
| | EITHER A SHOP DRAWING REVIEW OR AN AFFIDAVIT REFERRING |
| | TO VERSION DATE). AS SUBMITED, I CANNOT DETERMINE WHICH |
| | SUBMITTALS WERE REVIEWED BY THE PRIVATE PROVIDER. |
| | REVIEW OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE |
| | BEEN DONE. |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
