| Date |
Text |
| 2021-01-25 16:05:09 | GOOD AFTERNOON MATTHEW, |
| | |
| | FIRST OF ALL I WANT TO APOLOGIZE FOR NOT GETTING BACK |
| | TO YOU EARLIER. I WAS DISCUSSING THIS ISSUE WITH ROBERT |
| | BROWN AND I WAS DOING SOME RESEARCH TO VERIFY WHICH |
| | BUILDING CODE WAS THIS BUILDING BUILT UNDER. THE REASON |
| | FOR THIS IS THAT THERE ARE SOME DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE |
| | 1979 AND THE 1982 STANDARD BUILDING CODES AND I WANTED |
| | TO BE SURE WHICH BUILDING CODE TO APPLY IN THIS |
| | DISCUSSION. BOTH BUILDING CODE EDITIONS ADDRESS THE |
| | ISSUE WITH THE IMPACT GUARDRAILS BUT THE MAIN |
| | DIFFERENCE IS THE DESIGN STANDARDS. THE 1979 CODE |
| | REQUIRES IMPACT GUARDRAILS CAPABLE OF WITHSTANDING AN |
| | IMPACT OF NOT LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY (150) |
| | POUNDS PER LINEAL FOOT, WHILE THE 1982 CODE REQUIRES |
| | IMPACT GUARDRAILS CAPABLE OF WITHSTANDING AN IMPACT OF |
| | NOT LESS THAN TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED (2,500) |
| | FOOT-POUNDS. |
| | |
| | BASED ON MY RESEARCH 777 S. FLAGLER DR. BUILDING WAS |
| | BUILT UNDER THE 1982 EDITION. SEE ATTACHED ?CERTIFICATE |
| | OF CODE CONFORMANCE BY ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER |
| | AFFIDAVIT?. |
| | THEREFORE, THE IMPACT GUARDRAILS NEED TO COMPLY WITH |
| | THE 2,500 FOOT-POUND IMPACT. |
| | |
| | ROBERT BROWN AND I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH YOUR |
| | INTERPRETATION. SECTION 412.7(D) OF THE 1982 SBC |
| | REQUIRES TWO THINGS. PEDESTRIAN GUARDRAILS AND IMPACT |
| | GUARDRAILS. FIRST SENTENCE CALLS FOR PEDESTRIAN |
| | GUARDRAILS WHEN THE DROP EXCEEDS 3 FEET . AND, THE |
| | SECOND SENTENCE CALLS FOR IMPACT GUARDRAILS AT THE |
| | PARKING AREAS. NOTE THAT THE IMPACT GUARDRAILS ARE ONLY |
| | REQUIRED AT THE PARKING AREAS NO AT THE PEDESTRIAN OR |
| | VEHICULAR ACCESS. |
| | TO BETTER ILLUSTRATE THIS POINT, PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AT |
| | THE PHOTO YOU SENT ME EARLIER SHOWING A CAR PARKED |
| | BEHIND THE GUARDRAIL. THIS PHOTO CLEARLY SHOWS THE |
| | GUARDRAIL THAT NEEDS TO BE DESIGNED AS AN IMPACT |
| | GUARDRAIL AT THE PARKING AREA. THEREFORE, ALL THE |
| | GUARDRAILS THAT ARE IN FRONT OF THE PARKED CARS NEED TO |
| | BE DESIGNED AS IMPACT GUARDRAILS. |
| | |
| | THANK YOU |
| | |
| | JULIO GOMEZ |
| | COMMERCIAL COMBINATION PLANS EXAMINER |
| | DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT |
| | BUILDING DIVISION |
| | (561)805-6712 |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | *****NOTE: |
| | ALL THE COMMENTS FROM FIRST REVIEW STILL APPLY. |
| | |
| | |
| | NOTE: SEC. 702.6 FBC-EXISTING BUILDING. ALL NEW WORK |
| | SHALL COMPLY WITH THE MATERIALS AND METHODS |
| | REQUIREMENTS IN THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. |
| | |
| | 1- GUARDRAIL DRAWINGS WERE UPLOADED TO PROJECTDOX AS A |
| | SINGLE PDF. ALL DRAWINGS NEED TO BE UPLOADED |
| | INDIVIDUALLY IN THE DRAWINGS FOLDER AS REQUIRED BY THE |
| | CITY GUIDE FOR DIGITAL PLAN REVIEW. ALSO, DRAWINGS NEED |
| | TO FOLLOW THE FILE NAMING GUIDELINES. SEE THE CITY |
| | QUICK START GUIDE: DIGITAL PLAN REVIEW. |
| | SEC. 107.2.1.3 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | NOTE: PLEASE CONTACT ME IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT |
| | THIS. |
| | |
| | 2- SHEET F-1: |
| | A)REVISE THE APPLICABLE CODES. "THE ALUMINUM DESIGN |
| | MANUAL 2015" CAN NOT BE USED FOR THIS PROJECT. THE |
| | ALUMINUM DESIGN MANUAL IS NOT FOR GUARDRAILS. ALSO, |
| | THIS GUARDRAIL IS TO BE INSTALLED IN A PARKING GARAGE |
| | NOT IN A RESIDENTIAL BUILDING. THIS IS A VEHICLE |
| | BARRIER. ENGINEER NEEDS TO DESIGN IN ACCORDANCE WITH |
| | SEC. 4.5.3 OF ASCE 7-10 AS REQUIRED BY SEC. 1607.8.3 |
| | FBC 6TH EDITION (2017). |
| | |
| | B) CURRENT CODE UNDER WHICH THE MASTER PERMIT WAS |
| | ISSUED IS THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE SIXTH EDITION |
| | (2017) NOT FBC 2020. CHAPTER 553 F.S. REVISE AS |
| | REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | 3- SHEET F-2: |
| | A) REVISE THE DESIGN LOADS AND ALUMINUM NOTES. SEE ITEM |
| | #2 ABOVE. NEED TO COMPLY WITH SEC. 4.5.3 OF ASCE 7-10 |
| | AS REQUIRED BY SEC. 1607.8.3 FBC 6TH EDITION (2017). |
| | |
| | 4-REVISE SHEETS F-3 THRU F-7 TO COMPLY WITH SEC. 4.5.3 |
| | OF ASCE 7-10 AS REQUIRED BY SEC. 1607.8.3 FBC 6TH |
| | EDITION (2017). |
| | |
| | 5- ENGINEER TO REVISE CALCULATIONS SUBMITTED: |
| | A) THIS GUARDRAIL IS TO BE INSTALLED IN A PARKING |
| | GARAGE NOT IN A RESIDENTIAL BUILDING (R-2). THIS IS A |
| | VEHICLE BARRIER. ENGINEER NEEDS TO DESIGN IN ACCORDANCE |
| | WITH SEC. 4.5.3 OF ASCE 7-10 AS REQUIRED BY SEC. |
| | 1607.8.3 FBC 6TH EDITION (2017). |
| | |
| | B) CURRENT CODE IS THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE SIXTH |
| | EDITION (2017) NOT FBC 2020. |
| | CHAPTER 553 F.S. |
| | |
| | 6- REVISED DRAWINGS AND CALCULATIONS TO BE |
| | REVIEWED/APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD |
| | PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL T THIS OFFICE. SEC. 107.3.4 CITY |
| | AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | 7- DRAWINGS AND CALCULATIONS SUBMITTED: |
| | |
| | FS471, DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY AN ENGINEER AND SUBMITTED |
| | FOR PUBLIC RECORD ARE TO BE SIGNED, SEALED, DATED |
| | ORIGINALS. A SCAN OF A SIGNED PLAN IS NOT CONSIDERED AN |
| | ORIGINAL. THE PLANS UPLOADED HAVE AN IMAGE OF A |
| | SIGNATURE AND SEAL BUT ARE NOT DIGITALLY SIGNED. |
| | |
| | ALSO, THE CALCULATIONS SUBMITTED DON'T HAVE THE |
| | ENGINEER'S SEA/SIGNATURE AND COMPLETE INFORMATION. |
| | |
| | EITHER UPLOAD TO PROJECTDOX DRAWINGS AND CALCULATIONS |
| | WITH DIGITAL SIGNATURE OR DROP OFF ORIGINAL SIGNED AND |
| | SEALED PAPER ORIGINALS WITH A WET SIGNATURE TO CITY |
| | HALL. |
| | |
| | |
| | WHEN RESUBMITTING, 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. |
| | |
| | PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME IF YOU HAVE ANY |
| | QUESTIONS REGARDING THESE COMMENTS, |
| | JULIO GOMEZ |
| | COMMERCIAL COMBINATION PLANS EXAMINER |
| | DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT |
| | BUILDING DIVISION |
| | (561)805-6712 |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
| | |
