| Date |
Text |
| 2023-02-17 10:57:56 | NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (R3) SECOND BUILDING REVIEW |
| | COMMENTS |
| | CODE: FBC 7TH EDITION (2020) AND CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | PERMIT #22060913 |
| | 922 AVON RD |
| | 3RD REVIEW (BY: ROBERT MCDOUGAL) |
| | ROBERT MCDOUGAL, CBO |
| | COMMERCIAL COMBINATION PLANS EXAMINER |
| | (561) 805-6714 |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
| | NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (R3) SECOND BUILDING REVIEW |
| | COMMENTS |
| | CODE: FBC 7TH EDITION (2020) AND CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | PERMIT #22060913 |
| | 922 AVON RD |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 1- OK |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 2- PROVIDE ENERGY CALCULATIONS AS REQUIRED BY 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: [ COMMENTS NOT ADDRESSED.] |
| | ENERGY CALCULATIONS SUBMITTED: |
| | A)THE BUILDING'S OWNER, THE OWNER'S ARCHITECT, OR OTHER |
| | AUTHORIZED AGENT LEGALLY DESIGNATED BY THE OWNER SHALL |
| | CERTIFY AT THE OWNER/AGENT LINE AT THE BOTTOM OF FORM |
| | THAT THE BUILDING IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE, AS |
| | PER SECTION 553.907, FLORIDA STATUTES, PRIOR TO |
| | RECEIVING THE PERMIT TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION OR |
| | RENOVATION AS REQUIRED BY SECTION R103.1.1.2 FBC-ENERGY |
| | CONSERVATION. |
| | |
| | B)PROVIDE COMPLETE INFORMATION ON TOP OF FORM, |
| | INCLUDING BUILDER'S NAME. SEC. R101.5.1.1.2 FBC-ENERGY |
| | CONSERVATION. |
| | |
| | C) OK |
| | |
| | D) WINDOWS ORIENTATION AND AREA DON'T MATCH PLANS. |
| | REVISE AS REQUIRED. SEC. R101.5.1.1.2 FBC-ENERGY |
| | CONSERVATION. |
| | |
| | E)BUILDER TO COMPLETE THE ENERGY PERFORMANCE LEVEL |
| | (EPL) DISPLAY CARD. SEC. R405.4.3 FBC-ENERGY |
| | CONSERVATION. |
| | |
| | 3- OK. |
| | |
| | 4- WIND LOAD SCHEDULE. |
| | A)OK. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | B)ROOF DIAGRAM SHOWN UNDER THE WIND LOAD SCHEDULE |
| | DOESN'T CORRESPOND TO ROOF TYPE SHOWN ON PLANS |
| | SUBMITTED. SEE FIGURE R301.2(7) FBC-RESIDENTIAL OF |
| | CURRENT CODE AND REVISE AS REQUIRED TO MATCH PROPOSED |
| | ROOF TYPE. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE: [ NOT RESOLVED. THE ROOF WINDLOAD SCHEDULE |
| | AND DIAGRAM ON S.3 IS ILLEGIBLE.] |
| | ROOFS DIAGRAMS SHOWN ON NEW SHEET S.3 DON'T MATCH |
| | CURRENT CODE REVISED FIGURE R301.2(7) FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | REVISE AS REQUIRED. SHOW ALL NEW ZONES. |
| | |
| | 5- GUEST HOUSE DIMENSIONS FLOOR PLAN: |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: [ NOT RESOLVED.] |
| | A)ENTRY DOOR DOESN'T COMPLY WITH THE MIN. CLEAR WIDTH |
| | OF 32" AS REQUIRED BY SEC. R311.2 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | REVISE AS REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE: |
| | COORDINATE WITH ITEM 5(B) BELOW. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | B) PROVIDE DOOR AND WINDOW SCHEDULE (NOTE: INCLUDE |
| | INTERIOR DOORS). SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE: [ NOT RESOLVED.] |
| | DOORS/WINDOWS SHOWN ON THE DOOR/WINDOW SCHEDULES ARE |
| | NOT KEYED ON THE FLOOR PLAN. CLEARLY KEY THEM ON BOTH |
| | TO AVOID CONFLICTS/CONFUSION. IT LOOKS LIKE THE ENTRY |
| | DOOR IS SPECIFIED AS 32" X84" ALU DOOR. THIS DOOR |
| | DOESN'T COMPLY WITH THE REQUIRED EGRESS DOOR. ALSO, |
| | NEED TO REVISE THE DOOR OPENING DIMENSION SHOWN ON THE |
| | GUEST HOUSE DIMENSION FLOOR PLAN. |
| | NOTE: COORDINATE INFORMATION ON GUEST HOUSE DIMENSION |
| | FLOOR PLAN, DOOR AND WINDOW SCHEDULES (CHECK SIZES) AND |
| | NEW PLAN VIEW ON SHEET S.1 TO AVOID MORE |
| | CONFLICTS/DELAYS. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | C) NEED BATHROOM WITH MAXIMUM POSSIBLE PRIVACY AND A |
| | DOOR THAT PROVIDES 29" MIN. CLEAR OPENING AS REQUIRED |
| | BY SEC. R320.1.1 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE: [ NOT RESOLVED.] |
| | 30" DOOR DOESN'T COMPLY. REVISE AS REQUIRED. NEED DOOR |
| | THAT PROVIDES 29" MIN. CLEAR OPENING. REVISE AS |
| | REQUIRED. TYPICALLY 32" DOORS ARE THE ONES COMPLYING. |
| | |
| | 6- OK |
| | |
| | 7- GUEST HOUSE ROOF FRAME DETAIL PLAN. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | D)SPECIFY ROOF SHEATHING NAILING SPECIFICATIONS TO |
| | COMPLY WITH NEW 2020 FBC-RESIDENTIAL SPECIFICATIONS. |
| | SPECIFY THICKNESS, NAIL TYPE, SIZE AND SPACING. NOTE: |
| | NEED TO USE RING SHANK NAILS. 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. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE: [ NOT RESOLVED.] |
| | SPECIFICATIONS SHOWN ON THE COMPONENT AND CLADDING |
| | PRESSURE ZONES ON SHEET S.3. DON'T COMPLY WITH TABLE |
| | R803.2.3.1 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. REVISE AS REQUIRED. |
| | NTE: COORDINATE WITH ITEM 4(B) ABOVE. |
| | |
| | 8-12 OK. |
| | |
| | 13- OK. |
| | |
| | 14- OK |
| | |
| | 15- OK. |
| | |
| | 16- PRODUCT APPROVALS |
| | PROVIDE PRODUCT APPROVAL AS REQUIRED BY FAC 61G20-3.001 |
| | FOR: |
| | (NOTE: THIS MAY BE SUBMITTED LATER AS A DEFERRED |
| | SUBMITTAL. PROVIDE COMPLETE INFORMATION FOR REVIEW |
| | PRIOR TO INSTALLATION TO AVOID CONFLICTS/DELAYS. ALL |
| | PRODUCT APPROVALS NEED TO BE APPROVED IN WRITING BY |
| | DESIGNER OF RECORD PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL): |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | A)FLAT ROOF. AND, CLEARLY MARK WHICH APPROVED ASSEMBLY |
| | IS GOING TO BE INSTALLED TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE WITH THE |
| | DESIGN PRESSURES OF SEC. R301.1 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | NOTE: IF THE SELECTED ASSEMBLY DOESN'T MEET THE DESIGN |
| | PRESSURES FOR ALL ROOF ZONES, THEN SIGNED AND SEALED |
| | RAS 117 CALCULATIONS ARE REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | RESPONSE: [ NOT RESOLVED. THE C & C PRESSURES SPECIFIED |
| | ON SHEET S.1 FOR THE DOORS AND WINDOWS ARE QUITE HIGH |
| | FOR A BULDING LESS THAN 15 FT IN HEIGHT. ] |
| | REPEAT COMMENT. NOT ADDRESSED AND CONTRACTOR IS NOT |
| | SPECIFYING IF SUBMITTING NOW OR LATER AS DEFERRED |
| | SUBMITTAL. |
| | |
| | B)SLIDING GLASS DOORS THAT MEET THE DESIGN PRESSURES |
| | CALCULATED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD ON REVISED S.1 |
| | DRAWING. |
| | |
| | C)SINGLE HUNG WINDOWS THAT MEET THE DESIGN PRESSURES |
| | CALCULATED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD ON REVISED S.1 |
| | DRAWING. |
| | |
| | D)ENTRY DOOR THAT MEET THE DESIGN PRESSURES CALCULATED |
| | BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD ON REVISED S.1 DRAWING. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 17- 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: [ NOT RESOLVED.] |
| | REPEAT COMMENT. |
| | |
| | NEW COMMENTS BASED ON REVISED DRAWINGS: |
| | 18- OK |
| | |
| | WHEN RESUBMITTING, A TRANSMITTAL LETTER LISTING THE |
| | ORIGINAL REVIEW COMMENT WITH A DESCRIPTION OF WHERE AND |
| | HOW THE COMMENT WAS ADDRESSED 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] |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
