| Date |
Text |
| 2021-02-09 16:58:24 | BUILDING AUDIT COMMENTS |
| | NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (R3). |
| | CODE: FBC 6TH EDITION (2017) AND CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | PERMIT #20121148 |
| | |
| | 1-ENERGY CALCULATIONS: |
| | A)ENERGY CALCULATIONS FORM IS REQUIRED TO BE CERTIFIED |
| | AT THE BOTTOM OF THE FORM BY THE OWNER, THE OWNER'S |
| | ARCHITECT OR OTHER AUTHORIZED AGENT LEGALLY DESIGNED BY |
| | THE OWNER PRIOR TO RECEIVE THE PERMIT AS REQUIRED BY |
| | SEC. R103.1.1.2 FBC-ENERGY CONSERVATION, 7TH EDITION |
| | (2020). |
| | |
| | B)PROVIDE COMPLETE AND CORRECT INFORMATION ON TOP OF |
| | FORM. OWNER'S NAME DOESN'T MATCH OWNER'S NAME SHOWN ON |
| | THE PERMIT APPLICATION. REVISE AS REQUIRED. AND, |
| | PROVIDE THE BUILDER'S NAME. SEC. R101.5.1.1.2 |
| | FBC-ENERGY CONSERVATION. |
| | |
| | C) BUILDER TO SIGN THE ENERGY PERFORMANCE LEVEL (EPL) |
| | DISPLAY CARD SUBMITTED. SEC. R405.4.3 FBC- ENERGY |
| | CONSERVATION. |
| | |
| | 2- PROPOSED LAYOUT SHOWN ON THE SURVEY SUBMITTED AND |
| | PROPOSED LAYOUT SHOWN ON THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN |
| | SHEET SP-1 DON'T MATCH. REVISE ALL THE SETBACKS AS |
| | REQUIRED TO MATCH. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | NOTE: ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN IS THE ONE THAT WAS |
| | APPROVED BY ZONING. ANY CHANGES WILL NEED TO BE RE-SENT |
| | TO ZONING FOR REVIEW/APPROVAL. |
| | |
| | 3- DRAINAGE PLAN DRAWING C-1 SUBMITTED: |
| | A) COORDINATE WITH ITEM #2 ABOVE TO AVOID |
| | CONFLICTS/DELAYS. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | B) OWNER INFORMATION, ZONING INFORMATION (38 -LAKE |
| | WORTH BEACH?) IS INCORRECT. REVISE AS REQUIRED. SEC. |
| | 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | C) DRAINAGE PLAN SHOULD BE UPLOADED TO PROJECTDOX IN |
| | THE "DRAWINGS" FOLDER NO IN THE "SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS" |
| | FOLDER AS REQUIRED BY CITY GUIDELINES FOR DIGITAL PLAN |
| | REVIEW. SEC. 107.2.1.3 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | NOTE: PLEASE COORDINATE WITH PERMIT LIBRARIAN TO MOVE |
| | THIS DRAWING TO THE DRAWINGS FOLDER SO THEY CAN BE |
| | VERSIONED WITH THE REVISED DRAWING. |
| | |
| | 4- SURVEY SUBMITTED: |
| | A)SURVEY SHOULD BE UPLOADED TO PROJECTDOX IN THE |
| | "DRAWINGS" FOLDER NO IN THE "SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS" |
| | FOLDER AS REQUIRED BY CITY GUIDELINES FOR DIGITAL PLAN |
| | REVIEW. SEC. 107.2.1.3 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | NOTE: PLEASE COORDINATE WITH PERMIT LIBRARIAN TO MOVE |
| | THIS DRAWING TO THE DRAWINGS FOLDER. |
| | |
| | B) CLARIFY WHY THE SURVEY SUBMITTED WAS NAMED "LILIAC |
| | COURT-SITE PLAN-DRIVEWAY DIST SITE PLAN" INSTEAD OF |
| | SURVEY OR BOUNDARY SURVEY (CONSTRUCTION LAYOUT) AS |
| | DESCRIBED BY THE SURVEYOR ON SURVEY SUBMITTED. |
| | CLARIFY/REVISE AS REQUIRED. PROPER NAMING OF THE |
| | DRAWINGS/DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED HELPS FOR PROPER RECORDS |
| | RETENTION MANAGEMENT. SEC. 107.2.1.3 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | 5- TYPICAL WALL SECTION ON SHEET A-3 SPECIFIES 10" |
| | FOOTING DEPTH. ACCORDING TO SEC. R403.1.4 |
| | FBC-RESIDENTIAL EXTERIOR FOOTING REQUIRES 12" MIN. |
| | DEPTH. REVISE AS REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | 6- ROOF FRAMING PLAN ON SHEET S-2: |
| | A) MISSING SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONNECTORS AT THE HIP |
| | ENDS ON THE SOUTH SIDE. SEC. R301.1 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | B) CLARIFY WHY THE TRUSS CONNECTOR SPECIFIED FOR THE |
| | HIP GIRDER TRUSS ON THE SOUTH SIDE IS THE SAME |
| | CONNECTOR SPECIFIED FOR ALL OTHER ROOF TRUSSES. |
| | TYPICALLY, HIP GIRDER TRUSSES SUPPORT HIGHER UPLIFT |
| | LOADS. HIP GIRDER TRUSS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SAME |
| | ROOF FRAMING PLAN SPECIFY A DIFFERENT CONNECTOR. |
| | CLARIFY REVISE AS REQUIRED. SEC. 107.2.1.2 CITY |
| | AMENDMENTS. SEC. R301.1 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | 7- EXTERIOR DOORS: |
| | TYPE OF EXTERIOR DOORS TO BE INSTALLED IS NOT CLEAR. |
| | CLARIFY IF USING THERMATRU FIBERGLASS DOORS OR ALUMINUM |
| | FRENCH DOORS. BOTH PRODUCT APPROVALS WERE SUBMITTED. |
| | EITHER ONE CAN BE USED, BUT NEED TO CONFIRM WHICH ONE |
| | IS GOING TO BE INSTALLED. IF USING THE ALUMINUM FRENCH |
| | DOORS, THEN THE ENERGY CALCULATIONS NEED TO BE REVISED |
| | ACCORDINGLY. REVISE/CLARIFY AS REQUIRED. |
| | SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | NOTE: ALSO CLARIFY WHY SUBMITTING PRODUCT APPROVAL FOR |
| | OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR. THERE IS NO GARAGE IN THIS HOUSE. |
| | |
| | |
| | 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] |
