| Date |
Text |
| 2022-05-23 18:48:57 | RESIDENTIAL(R3) SECOND BUILDING REVIEW COMMENTS |
| | CODE: FBC 7TH EDITION (2020) AND CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | PERMIT #22010709 |
| | |
| | ARCHITECTS-ENGINEERS |
| | FLORIDA STATUTE 553.80(2)(B): |
| | ARCHITECTS WITH RESPECT TO EVALUATION OF DESIGN |
| | PROFESSIONALS DOCUMENTS, IF A LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINDS IT |
| | NECESSARY, IN ORDER TO ENFORCE COMPLIANCE WITH THE |
| | FLORIDA BUILDING CODE AND ISSUE A PERMIT, TO REJECT |
| | DESIGN DOCUMENTS REQUIRED BY THE CODE THREE OR MORE |
| | TIMES FOR FAILURE TO CORRECT A CODE VIOLATION |
| | SPECIFICALLY AND CONTINUOUSLY NOTED IN EACH REJECTION, |
| | INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, EGRESS, FIRE PROTECTION, |
| | STRUCTURAL STABILITY, ENERGY, ACCESSIBILITY, LIGHTING, |
| | VENTILATION, ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING, AND GAS |
| | SYSTEMS, OR OTHER REQUIREMENTS IDENTIFIED BY RULE OF |
| | THE FLORIDA BUILDING COMMISSION ADOPTED PURSUANT TO |
| | CHAPTER 120, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHALL IMPOSE, EACH |
| | TIME AFTER THE THIRD SUCH REVIEW THE PLANS ARE REJECTED |
| | FOR THAT CODE VIOLATION, A FEE OF FOUR TIMES THE AMOUNT |
| | OF THE PROPORTION OF THE PERMIT FEE ATTRIBUTED TO PLANS |
| | REVIEW |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 1-PROVIDE ENERGY CALCULATIONS AS REQUIRED BY SEC. 1106 |
| | FBC-EXISTING BUILDING AND SEC. R101.5 FBC-ENERGY |
| | CONSERVATION. |
| | NOTE: PLEASE MAKE SURE FORM IS PROPERLY SIGNED BY ALL |
| | REQUIRED PARTIES AND IS COORDINATED WITH PLANS TO AVOID |
| | CONFLICTS/DELAYS. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | A)FORM R402-2020 IS REQUIRED TO BE CERTIFIED AT THE |
| | BOTTOM 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. |
| | |
| | B)THERE IS NOT SKYLIGHT INSTALLED IN THIS ADDITION. |
| | REVISE AS REQUIRED. |
| | SEC. R101.5.1.1.2 FBC-ENERGY CONSERVATION. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 2- FOUNDATION PLAN DOESN'T SPECIFY FOOTING SIZE. |
| | ENGINEER OF RECORD NEEDS TO PROVIDE FOOTING DETAIL AND |
| | SPECIFICATIONS. SEC. R401.2 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | DETAIL 8/S2 DOESN'T SEEM TO APPLY TO THIS PROJECT. |
| | FOOTING TYPE DOESN'T MATCH ONE SHOWN ON WALL SECTION |
| | DETAIL 6/S2. REVISE AS REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 3- ROOF FRAMING PLAN DETAIL 2/S3 AND HOUSE BATH SOUTH |
| | SIDE VIEW DETAIL 5/S4 ARE INCOMPLETE. ENGINEER OF |
| | RECORD TO PROVIDE COMPLETE DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS |
| | FOR HAND FRAMED ROOF SYSTEM. SPECIFY TOP RAFTERS |
| | SPACING AND STRUCTURAL CONNECTORS, CONNECTION TO 2X8 |
| | RIDGE, 2X4 OUTRIGGERS SPACING AND CONNECTORS. NEED TO |
| | SPECIFY BOTTOM CHORD OF HAND FRAMED ROOF SYSTEM AND |
| | STRUCTURAL CONNECTORS AT EACH END. NEED TO SPECIFY |
| | FRAMING AND CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING ROOF. |
| | SEC. R301.2.1 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | DETAIL 5/S2, 6/S2 AND 12/S2 ARE INCOMPLETE AND ARE NOT |
| | CLEAR. ALSO, THESE DETAILS NEED TO BE COORDINATED. NEED |
| | TO PROVIDE COMPLETE DETAILS SHOWING CONNECTORS AT THE |
| | END OF EACH STRUCTURAL FRAMING MEMBER. WHY DETAIL 12/S2 |
| | SPECIFIES 2"X6" TOP BEAM?. |
| | NOTE: THERE IS NOT SHEET LABELED S-2. SEE DRAWINGS |
| | SUBMITTED AND REVISE DRAWINGS LABELING AS REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 4- PROVIDE COMPLETE GABLE END CONSTRUCTION. IS MASONRY |
| | OR WOOD FRAMED. PROVIDE COMPLETE DETAILS AND |
| | SPECIFICATIONS. SEC. R601.2 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. SEC. |
| | R301.2.1 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | DETAILS 4/S2 AND 7/S2 ARE INCOMPLETE AND ARE NOT CLEAR. |
| | DETAIL 7/S2 IS FOR CMU FENCE CONSTRUCTION. NEED |
| | COMPLETE DETAIL FOR THE GABLE END WALL. SPECIFY ALL |
| | FRAMING MEMBERS AND CONNECTORS. PROVIDE COMPLETE |
| | INFORMATION FOR WALL CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING EXTERIOR |
| | AND INTERIOR FINISHES. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 5- STRUCTURAL PLANS DON'T SPECIFY TIE BEAM AND LINTEL. |
| | ENGINEER NEEDS TO SPECIFY MASONRY TIE BEAM AND WINDOW |
| | LINTEL. ALSO, SPECIFY MASONRY REINFORCEMENT AT THE END |
| | OF EACH OPENING. SEC. R601.2 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. SEC. |
| | R606.10 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | DETAILS 2/S2 AND 3/S2 ARE INCOMPLETE. SIZE OF BEAM AND |
| | LINTEL IS NOT SPECIFIED. CLARIFY WHY THE VERTICAL |
| | REINFORCEMENT AT THE ENDS OF WINDOW OPENING DOESN'T GO |
| | ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE FOUNDATION. WHAT ARE THE #3X1' |
| | FOR AND WHAT IS THE SPACING? |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 6- ENGINEER TO SPECIFY ATTACHMENT OF ADDITION TO THE |
| | EXISTING BUILDING. SPECIFY CONNECTIONS AT FOOTING, |
| | WALLS, ETC. SEC. R301.1 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS NEED TO BE ON DRAWINGS |
| | SUBMITTED. |
| | |
| | 7- TITLE SHEET: REVISE WIND LOAD SCHEDULE: |
| | A)OK. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | B)REVISE ROOF AREAS TO MATCH CURRENT ASCE 7-16 AND |
| | FIGURE R301.2(7) FBC-RESIDENTIAL REVISED ROOF AREAS. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | REPEAT COMMENT. SEE FIGURE R301.2(7) FBC-RESIDENTIAL |
| | AND REVISE ROOF DIAGRAM AND ROOF AREAS. |
| | |
| | C)OK. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | D)THE "AREA OF COMPONENTS" NEEDS TO BE REVISED. |
| | COMPONENTS AND CLADDING LOADS ARE BASED ON THE |
| | EFFECTIVE WIND AREA. SEE FOOTNOTE "A" OF TABLE |
| | R301.2(2) FBC-RESIDENTIAL AND REVISE AS REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | REPEAT COMMENT. SEE TABLE R301.2(2)FBC-RESIDENTIAL AND |
| | REVISE AS REQUIRED. |
| | ALSO, CHECK ROOF TYPE AND PITCH. |
| | |
| | E)OK. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 8- PROVIDE PARTIAL FLOOR PLAN OF EXISTING HOUSE |
| | IDENTIFYING ROOM WHERE PROPOSED ADDITION IS GOING TO BE |
| | BUILT. NEED TO VERIFY EGRESS COMPLIANCE IF THE ROOM IS |
| | A BEDROOM. SEC. R310.2.1 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. ENGINEER OF |
| | RECORD NEEDS TO SPECIFY HOW COMPLYING WITH THE EGRESS |
| | REQUIREMENTS. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | DETAIL 10/S2 DOESN'T APPLY TO THE REQUESTED ITEM. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 9- PLANS DON'T PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT OPENING ON |
| | EXISTING MASONRY WALL TO ALLOW FOR NEW BATHROOM DOOR. |
| | PROVIDE DETAIL AND SPECIFICATIONS. |
| | SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | DETAIL 3/S2 DOESN'T APPLY TO THE REQUESTED ITEM. |
| | |
| | 10- PARTIALLY DONE. SEE ITEM #5 ABOVE. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 11- ENGINEER OF RECORD NEEDS TO DEPICT THE BUILDING |
| | THERMAL ENVELOPE AND SPECIFY INSULATION MATERIALS AND |
| | THEIR R-VALUES. |
| | SEC. R103.2 FBC-ENERGY CONSERVATION. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | DETAIL 6/S2 IS INCOMPLETE AND IT IS NOT CLEAR. ONLY THE |
| | ATTIC INSULATION WAS SPECIFIED. INFORMATION FOR WALL |
| | INSULATION WAS NOT GIVEN. |
| | ALSO, THIS WALL SECTION SHOWS WOOD FRAMED AND CONCRETE |
| | BLOCK EXTERIOR WALL CONSTRUCTION. NO CLEAR WHY. THIS |
| | WALL DOESN'T SHOW CONTINUITY OF LOAD PATH EITHER. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 12- ROOF NEEDS CROSS VENTILATION AS REQUIRED BY SEC. |
| | R806.1 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. ENGINEER TO SPECIFY VENT SIZE |
| | AND SPACING. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | WALL SECTION DETAIL 6/S2 SPECIFIES ALUMINUM VENTED |
| | SOFFIT. WALL SECTION DOESN'T SHOW HOW IT IS INSTALLED. |
| | PROVIDE INSTALLATION DETAIL SPECS. ALSO, PRODUCT |
| | APPROVAL IS REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 13-WIND RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR SOFFITS: ENGINEER OF |
| | RECORD TO PROVIDE COMPLETE DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS |
| | FOR THE SOFFIT CONSTRUCTION SHOWING COMPLIANCE WITH |
| | SEC. R704 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | DETAIL 6/S2 DOESN'T PROVIDE INSTALLATION DETAILS. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 14- ENGINEER OF RECORD TO REVIEW AND APPROVE IN WRITING |
| | (NOT SIGNING AND SEALING) ALL PRODUCT APPROVALS AS |
| | REQUIRED BY SEC. 107.3.4.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE TO ENGINEER'S RESPONSE LETTER: |
| | NOT ADDRESSED. DRAWINGS WITH ORIGINAL SEAL/SIGNATURE |
| | AND PRODUCT APPROVALS ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. |
| | ENGINEER TO REVIEW/APPROVED ALL PRODUCT APPROVALS. |
| | |
| | NEW COMMENTS BASED ON SUBMITTED INFORMATION: |
| | 15- PROVIDE PRODUCT APPROVAL AS REQUIRED BY FAC |
| | 61G20-3.001 FOR: |
| | A) ALUMINUM VENTILATED SOFFIT SPECIFIED ON PLANS. |
| | |
| | 16- REVISED PLANS DON'T SPECIFY ROOF SHEATHING. PROVIDE |
| | ROOF SHEATHING NAILING SPECIFICATIONS TO COMPLY WITH |
| | NEW 2020 FBC-RESIDENTIAL SPECIFICATIONS. NEED NAIL |
| | TYPE, SIZE AND SPACING. NEED TO USE RING SHANK NAILS |
| | AND ROOF SHEATHING NEEDS TO BE NAILED AT 4 INCHES O.C. |
| | IN THE FIELD AND EDGES AS REQUIRED BY SEC. R803.2.3.1 |
| | AND TABLE R803.2.3.1 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | 17- REVISED PLANS DON'T SPECIFY ROOFING UNDERLAYMENT. |
| | PROVIDE SPECIFICATIONS SHOWING HOW COMPLYING WITH THE |
| | NEW 2020 CODE REQUIREMENT FOR ROOFING UNDERLAYMENT. |
| | SEC. R905.1.1.1 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | NOTE: CLEARLY SPECIFY WHICH METHOD OF SEC. R905.1.1.1 |
| | FBC-RESIDENTIAL IS GOING TO BE USED. AND PROVIDE |
| | PRODUCT APPROVAL AS REQUIRED BY F.A.C. 61G20-3.001 |
| | |
| | WHEN RESUBMITTING, A TRANSMITTAL LETTER LISTING THE |
| | ORIGINAL REVIEW COMMENT WITH A DESCRIPTION OF THE |
| | REVISION MADE WILL HELP TO EXPEDITE THE REVIEW PROCESS. |
| | 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] |
