| Date |
Text |
| 2022-08-06 11:13:20 | ****CORRECTIONS**** |
| | |
| | SAMANTHA HILL |
| | BUILDING PLANS EXAMINER |
| | [email protected] |
| | 561-805-6724 |
| | |
| | FBC = FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, 7TH EDITION (2020) |
| | FBC B = FBC BUILDING |
| | FBC EB = FBC EXISTING BUILDING |
| | FBC A = FBC ACCESSIBILITY |
| | FBC EC = FBC ENERGY CONSERVATION |
| | FBC R = FBC RESIDENTIAL |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW IS INCLUDED BELOW FOR REFERENCE. |
| | |
| | PREVIOUS REVIEW COMMENT #3, # 5 - THE CIVIL PAGE WITH |
| | STRUCTURAL INFORMATION IS STILL NOT SIGNED AND SEALED. |
| | BUILDING OFFICIAL HAS REVIEWED THIS DOCUMENT AND IF |
| | STRUCTURAL INFORMATION IS SHOWN AND SPECIFIED, IT NEEDS |
| | TO BE SIGNED AND SEALED AS AN UNLICENSED INDIVIDUAL |
| | (FS471, FS481) CANNOT SPECIFY THIS INFORMATION. THIS |
| | CAN BE REQUESTED TO BE DELETED, BUT THEN THE OTHER SITE |
| | PLAN NEEDS TO BE REVISED TO SHOW LENGTH OF WALL. |
| | |
| | PREVIOUS REVIEW COMMENT #1 - THE ENGINEERING CALCS |
| | STILL REFER TO ASCE7-10. IF ENGINEER WANTS TO PROPOSE |
| | USING THIS OUTDATED REFERENCE (FBC B SPECIFIES USE OF |
| | ASCE7-16) HE NEEDS TO SUBMIT A LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE |
| | BUILDING OFFICIAL FOR CONSIDERATION. |
| | |
| | AFTER REVIEWS HAVE PASSED, A PAPER ORIGINAL WILL BE |
| | REQUIRED. THIS CAN BE A PROVISO ITEM. |
| | |
| | PREVIOUS LIST: |
| | |
| | 1. ORIGINAL COMMENT - FBC B 1609, REVISE PLAN TO |
| | INCLUDE WIND DESIGN CRITERIA. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW, AN EMAIL WITHIN THE CALCULATIONS WAS |
| | INCLUDED WHICH STATED TO USE 54.0 PSF. PLEASE REVISE TO |
| | CLARIFY PER FBC B 1603.1.4 WHICH STATES THAT "THE |
| | FOLLOWING INFORMATION RELATED TO WIND LOADS SHALL BE |
| | SHOWN" - ULTIMATE WIND SPEED, NOMINAL WIND SPEED, RISK |
| | CATEGORY, WIND EXPOSURE, CLADDING. |
| | |
| | THIS APPEARS TO BE EXPOSURE D - IF ENGINEER HAS |
| | DESIGNED TO A DIFFERENT EXPOSURE CLASSIFICATION, PLEASE |
| | HAVE HIM EMAIL ME PRIOR TO RESUBMITTING TO DISCUSS. |
| | |
| | THE ENGINEER STATES THAT ASCE7-10 WAS USED FOR THE |
| | DESIGN. SEE FBC B CHAPTER 35, ASCE7-16 IS REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | 2. ORIGINAL COMMENT - FBC B 1612, IT IS NOT CLEAR WHICH |
| | FLOOD ZONE THE PROPOSED WALL IS LOCATED IN. THE |
| | PROPOSED WALL IS TO EITHER MEET OUR FREEBOARD OF 2, OR |
| | IT IS TO BE DESIGNED TO RESIST FLOOD LOADS UP TO BASE |
| | FLOOD ELEVATION PLUS 2'. WHEN REVISING THE PLAN, BE |
| | CLEAR IF THE ELEVATIONS SPECIFIED ARE NGVD29 OR NAVD88. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW, BUILDING OFFICIAL HAS DETERMINED THAT |
| | FREEBOARD DOES NOT NEED TO APPLY. MY CONVERSATIONS WITH |
| | MICHAEL SPRUCE, PE INDICATED THAT HE IS AWARE THAT THIS |
| | NEEDS TO RESIST FLOOD LOADS TO BASE FLOOD ELEVATION OF |
| | WHAT APPEARS TO BE 7' (FLOOD LINE IS NOT SHOWN BUT |
| | APPEARS TO BE 7' NAVD88). I WAS UNABLE TO LOCATE |
| | RESISTANCE TO FLOOD LOADS ADDRESSED ON THE STRUCTURAL |
| | ENGINEER'S PLANS. THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER NEEDS TO |
| | INCORPORATE THIS DESIGN CRITERIA INTO HIS PLAN, SEE FBC |
| | B 1612.4 WHICH STATES: |
| | |
| | 1612.4 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION. |
| | THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES |
| | LOCATED IN FLOOD HAZARD AREAS, INCLUDING COASTAL HIGH |
| | HAZARD AREAS AND COASTAL A ZONES, SHALL BE IN |
| | ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 5 OF ASCE 7 AND WITH ASCE 24. |
| | |
| | REVISE PLAN TO SHOW COMPLIANCE. THE ENGINEERING SHOULD |
| | INCLUDE THE ELEVATIONS AND SHOULD INDICATE COMPLIANCE |
| | TO DESIGN FLOOD ELEVATION. SEE ASCE-24 SECTION 1.5. |
| | |
| | 3. FBC 107, REVISE THE PLAN TO CLARIFY WALL LENGTH. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW ? ADDRESSED; SEE ITEM 5 BELOW. IF THIS PAGE |
| | IS REMOVED THE INFORMATION SHOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO |
| | THE SITE PLAN. |
| | |
| | 4. DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY AN ENGINEER AND SUBMITTED FOR |
| | PUBLIC RECORD ARE TO BE SIGNED, SEALED, DATED |
| | ORIGINALS. PLEASE UPLOAD DIGITALLY SIGNED PLANS. IF THE |
| | ENGINEER DOES NOT HAVE A DIGITAL SIGNATURE, PLEASE HAVE |
| | HIM SEND ME AN EMAIL SO WE CAN DISCUSS OPTIONS. |
| | |
| | 2ND REVIEW - SINCE THE ENGINEER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT HE |
| | DOES NOT HAVE A DIGITAL SIGNATURE, ORIGINAL PAPER |
| | SIGNED AND SEALED ENGINEERING WILL BE REQUIRED AFTER |
| | ALL REVIEWS HAVE PASSED. A SCAN OF SIGNED AND SEALED |
| | ENGINEERING IS NOT CONSIDERED ?ORIGINAL ENGINEERING? BY |
| | FLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, SEE FLORIDA |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 61G15-23.002. |
| | |
| | NEW COMMENT: |
| | |
| | 5. FLORIDA STATUTE 471, A NEW PAGE WAS SUBMITTED NAMED |
| | "FLAGLER TOWERS - MOCKUP LOCATION". THIS PAGE PROVIDES |
| | STRUCTURAL INFORMATION, THEREFORE SHOULD BE PREPARED BY |
| | A DESIGN PROFESSIONAL. EITHER HAVE THIS PAGE SIGNED AND |
| | SEALED, AND INCLUDE THE TITLE BLOCK OF THE ENGINEER |
| | TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE DESIGN, OR INCORPORATE |
| | THE INFORMATION INTO THE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS PREPARED |
| | BY THE ENGINEER. THE SITE PLAN WHICH SIMPLY SHOWS THE |
| | LOCATION IS OK, BUT THE NEW PAGE INCLUDES STRUCTURAL |
| | AND FLOOD RELATED INFORMATION. IT APPEARS THAT THIS |
| | PAGE IS TO SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH FBC B 1612.4, BUT IS |
| | NOT PREPARED BY A DESIGN PROFESSIONAL, AND DOES NOT |
| | STATE THAT IT WILL RESIST FLOOD LOADS TO 7? NAVD88, |
| | ONLY STATES THAT THE TOP OF THE FOOTER WILL BE AT 7?. |
| | |
| | |
