Plan Review Details - Permit 09100214
Plan Review Stops For Permit 09100214
Review Stop B BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No 4 Status P Date 2010-03-09 Cont ID  
Sent By rmcdouga Date 2010-03-09 Time 13:16 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rmcdouga Date 2010-03-09 Time 13:16 Sent To  
Notes
2010-03-09 13:16:57PROCESS PLANS
Review Stop B BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No 3 Status P Date 2010-03-08 Cont ID  
Sent By rmcdouga Date 2010-03-08 Time 15:49 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rmcdouga Date 2010-03-08 Time 15:49 Sent To  
Notes
2010-03-08 15:55:32REVISIONS REQUIRED
  
 1) REVISE LIFE SAFETY PLAN TO SHOW THE TRAVEL DISTANCE
 FROM THE MOST REMOTE POINT ON THE BALCONY.
  
 2) SUBMIT CURB WATER-PROOFING DETAILS AS SPECIFIED IN
 DETAIL 2 NOTE #3 ON S-1.
  
 3) REVISE SHEETS S-1 AND S-2 TO INCORPORATE THE
 HANDWRITTEN CORRECTIONS AND WITHOUT THE WHITE-OUT.
Review Stop B BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No 2 Status F Date 2009-12-02 Cont ID  
Sent By rmcdouga Date 2009-12-02 Time 09:41 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rmcdouga Date 2009-12-02 Time 06:54 Sent To  
Notes
2009-12-02 08:42:392007 FBC W/2009 REVISIONS
 LEVEL 2 ALTERATION
  
 DENIED BY BUILDING
  
 1) ITEM #3 FROM THE FIRST REVIEW HAS NOT BEEN
 ADDRESSED. TWO EXITS ARE REQUIRED FROM THE SPACE PER
 FBC 1015.1 AND THERE ARE TWO EXIT STAIRS ARE PROVIDED.
 THE PATH OF EGRESS TRAVEL SHOULD NOT BE THROUGH THE
 RECEPTION AREA (SEE FBC 1014.2 EGRESS THROUGH
 INTERVENING SPACES). THE PATH OF TRAVEL SHOULD BE
 TOWARD EACH EXIT FROM CORRIDOR 164 AS THIS PROVIDES TWO
 SEPARATE AND DISTINCT PATHS OF EGRESS TRAVEL TO THE TWO
 EXITS AND REDUCES THE COMMON PATH OF TRAVEL LENGTH (100
 FT MAXIMUM IN SPRINKLERED BUILDING). PLEASE REVISE THE
 EXIT LIGHT LOCATIONS ON SHEET A-3. CHANGE THE EXISTING
 EXIT SIGNS AND ADD NEW ONES SUCH THAT THE OCCUPANTS ARE
 DIRECTED TO THE TWO EXITS BY APPROVED SIGNS READILY
 VISIBLE FROM ANY DIRECTION OF EXIT ACCESS (SEE FBC
 1006.3 FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS).
  
 2) THE TRAVEL DISTANCE INDICATED ON THE LIFE SAFETY
 PLAN WHICH STARTS IN CORRIDOR 164 IS NOT CORRECT. THE
 TRAVEL DISTANCE IS FROM THE FARTHEST ACCESSIBLE POINT
 TO THE ENCLOSED EXIT STAIRS. SEE FBC 1016.1. IN THIS
 INSTANCE IT WOULD START FROM THE MOST REMOTE POINT OF
 THE BALCONY OR THE MOST REMOTE POINT OF THE MOST REMOTE
 ROOM IF THE BALCONY IS NOT ACCESSIBLE FROM THE ROOMS.
  
 3) THE EXISTING 20 MINUTE DOOR TO THE COMMON CORRIDOR
 IS REQUIRED TO BE CHANGED TO SWING IN THE DIRECTION OF
 EGRESS TRAVEL IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH FBC 1008.1.2. SEE
 FBC EXISTING BUILDING 705.1 AND 705.2 (EXCEPTION 2).
  
 4) PROVIDE STRUCTURAL DETAILS AND DRAWINGS FOR THE
 PROPOSED ROOF TOP UNIT SCREEN ENCLOSURE SPECIFIED ON
 SHEET A-4. SPECIFY ALL CONNECTIONS, ANCHORS, ETC. TO
 RESIST WIND LOADS AS REQUIRED BY FBC 1604.9 AND 1605.1.
  
 ROBERT MCDOUGAL
 BLDG. PLAN REVIEW
 (561)805-6714
 [email protected]
Review Stop B BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No 1 Status F Date 2009-10-15 Cont ID  
Sent By rmcdouga Date 2009-10-15 Time 07:50 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rmcdouga Date 2009-10-15 Time 07:01 Sent To E
Notes
2009-10-15 07:50:402007 FBC W/2009 REVISIONS
 LEVEL 2 ALTERATION
  
 DENIED BY BUILDING
  
 1) SPECIFY THE SIZES OF THE TWO NEW DOORS. DOOR SIZE
 SHALL COMPLY WITH FBC 1008.1.1 AND 11-4.13.5.
  
 2) SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH FBC 1008.1.2, WHICH REQUIRES
 THE DOORS TO SWING IN THE DIRECTION OF TRAVEL. THE TWO
 NEW DOORS SWING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION WHEN THE
 DIRECTION OF TRAVEL IS TOWARD THE NEAREST OF THE TWO
 REQUIRED STAIR EXIT ENCLOSURES.
  
 3) THE EGRESS TRAVEL PATHS FROM THE AREA WERE THE NEW
 WALLS AND DOORS ARE ENCLOSING APPEAR TO BE INCORRECT
 BASED ON THE LOCATION OF EXIT LIGHTS AND DIRECTIONAL
 ARROWS ON SHEET A-3. THE PATHS INDICATED APPEAR TO
 DIRECT THE OCCUPANTS TO TRAVEL AWAY FROM THE STAIR EXIT
 ENCLOSURES AND THROUGH THE RECEPTION AREA. EGRESS
 THROUGH INTERVENING SPACES DOES NOT ALLOW EGRESS
 THROUGH A ROOM THAT CAN BE LOCKED TO PREVENT EGRESS.
 THE COMMON PATH OF TRAVEL LENGTH CAN NOT BE EXCEEDED.
 PLEASE REVISE SO THAT THE PATH OF TRAVEL FROM THE
 ENCLOSED AREA WILL BE FROM THE CENTER OF THE AREA
 TOWARD EACH OF THE EXIT STAIR ENCLOSURES.
  
 4) SHOW THE LONGEST TRAVEL DISTANCE FROM AREA THAT IS
 BEING ENCLOSED TO THE NEAREST EXIT STAIR ENCLOSURE ON
 THE LIFE SAFETY PLAN ON A-3.
  
 ROBERT MCDOUGAL
 BLDG. PLAN REVIEW
 (561)805-6714
 [email protected]
Review Stop E ELECTRICAL
Rev No 1 Status P Date 2009-10-15 Cont ID  
Sent By btrobaug Date 2009-10-15 Time 08:06 Rev Time 0.00
Received By btrobaug Date 2009-10-15 Time 07:58 Sent To  
Notes
***NONE***
Review Stop FIRE FIRE DEPARTMENT
Rev No 3 Status P Date 2010-03-09 Cont ID  
Sent By mawillia Date 2010-03-09 Time 11:45 Rev Time 0.00
Received By mawillia Date 2010-03-09 Time 10:17 Sent To B1
Notes
2010-03-09 11:44:58*****APPROVED*****
  
 PLAN SHEETS A-1, A-2, A-3, AND E1 WERE STAMPED,
 INITIALED, AND DATED.
Review Stop FIRE FIRE DEPARTMENT
Rev No 2 Status F Date 2009-12-07 Cont ID  
Sent By mawillia Date 2009-12-07 Time 11:54 Rev Time 0.00
Received By mawillia Date 2009-12-07 Time 11:36 Sent To  
Notes
2009-12-07 11:40:00*****PARTIAL APPROVAL*****
  
 THE PREVIOUS FIRE COMMENTS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED; HOWEVER
 THE APPROPIATE PLAN SHEETS TO BE FIRE-STAMPED WHEN THE
 BUILDING EXAMINER'S COMMENTS HAVE BEEN SATISFIED.
  
 CAPT. MICHAEL A. WILLIAMS
 FIRE PLAN REVIEW
 561-805-6722
Review Stop FIRE FIRE DEPARTMENT
Rev No 1 Status F Date 2009-10-20 Cont ID  
Sent By mawillia Date 2009-10-20 Time 12:18 Rev Time 0.00
Received By mawillia Date 2009-10-20 Time 11:34 Sent To  
Notes
2009-10-20 12:16:58*****DENIED*****
  
  
 1. ON SHEET A-3, LIFE SAFETY PLAN, TWO SEPARATE SETS OF
 EXIT STAIR ENCLOSURES ARE SHOWN WITH BOTH IDENTIFIED AS
 STAIR #1. PLEASE EXPLAIN.
  
 2. NO PATH OF EGRESS TRAVEL SHOWN FOR ONE OF THE TWO
 EXIT STAIR ENCLOSURES.
  
 3. ADDRESS THE BUILDING EXAMINER'S COMMENTS.
  
  
 TO EXPEDITE THE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS, INCLUDE A RESPONSE
 LETTER INDICATING HOW/WHERE EACH COMMENT WAS ADDRESSED
  
  
 CAPT. MICHAEL A. WILLIAMS
 FIRE PLAN REVIEW
 561-805-6722
Review Stop I INCOMING/PROCESSING
Rev No 3 Status N Date 2010-02-18 Cont ID  
Sent By lmartine Date 2010-02-16 Time 11:50 Rev Time 0.00
Received By lmartine Date 2010-02-16 Time 11:50 Sent To  
Notes
2010-02-18 11:51:12B--18
Review Stop I INCOMING/PROCESSING
Rev No 2 Status N Date 2009-11-17 Cont ID  
Sent By btrobaug Date 2009-11-17 Time 16:23 Rev Time 0.00
Received By btrobaug Date 2009-11-17 Time 16:23 Sent To  
Notes
2009-11-17 16:34:49B 10
Review Stop I INCOMING/PROCESSING
Rev No 1 Status N Date   Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 2009-10-27 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By lmartine Date 2009-10-13 Time 17:47 Sent To  
Notes
2009-10-13 17:48:33****************EXPEDITED******************
 B--12
Review Stop M MECHANICAL (A/C)
Rev No 3 Status P Date 2010-03-04 Cont ID  
Sent By hmoser Date 2010-03-04 Time 14:49 Rev Time 0.00
Received By hmoser Date 2010-03-04 Time 14:49 Sent To  
Notes
2010-03-04 15:04:28ON PAGE S-1 IS THE ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS DESIGN FOR A
 CAGE AROUND THE A/C UNITS . A LETTER IS ON THE WAY
 PLAN REVIEW BY HAROLD MOSER 561-805-6732
Review Stop M MECHANICAL (A/C)
Rev No 2 Status F Date 2009-12-14 Cont ID  
Sent By hmoser Date 2009-12-14 Time 14:49 Rev Time 0.00
Received By hmoser Date 2009-12-14 Time 14:49 Sent To  
Notes
2009-12-14 15:28:38MECHANICAL PLANS DENIED .
 COMMENT # 3 SECTION 301.12 FBC (M) MUST BE SATISFIED
 ,OR REFER TO SECTION 104.11 FBC ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS
 DESIGN AND METHODS
 PLAN REVIEW BY HAROLD MOSER 561-805-6732
Review Stop M MECHANICAL (A/C)
Rev No 1 Status F Date 2009-10-27 Cont ID  
Sent By rregueir Date 2009-10-27 Time 17:44 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rregueir Date 2009-10-27 Time 17:31 Sent To  
Notes
2009-10-27 17:44:38REVIEW #: 1ST
 ACTION: DENIED
  
 FBC 2007 CODE FAMILY W/ 2009 SUPPLEMENTS
 FBC CH.1 AS AMENDED BY THE CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH
  
 1. MECHNAICAL PLAN SHOWS NEW RTU MOUNTED ON ROOF CURB.
 STRUCTURAL PLAN SHOWS RTU SEVERAL FEET ABOVE THE ROOF
 SURFACE ON A FIELD-FABRICATED STAND. WHICH IS CORRECT?
 PLEASE CORRELATE MECHANICAL AND STRUCTURAL PLANS. ALSO,
 STRUCTURAL DETAIL PROVIDES NO INFORMATION ON ATTACHMENT
 OF THE RTU TO THE STAND FOR WIND RESISTANCE. SHOW HOW
 RTU IS TO BE ATTACHED TO SUPPORT BEAMS IN ACCORDANCE
 WITH FBC-M 301.12.
  
 2. SHOW ANY ROOFTOP DUCTWORK ASSOCIATED WITH THIS
 INSTALLATION WITH DETAILS, INSULATION REQUIREMENTS
 DRY-IN DETAIL. FBC-B 106.1.1.
  
 3. PROVIDE MANUFACTURER'S DATA SHOWING RTU IS DESIGNED
 FOR WIND RESISTANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH FBC-M 301.12.
  
 4. PROVIDE MOTORIZED VOLUME DAMPER WITH SHUTOFF DAMPER
 CONTROLS ON NEW RTU IN ACCORDANCE WITH FBC-B
 13-409.AB.3.3.
  
 5. RTU SHALL HAVE DUCT SMOKE DETECTOR ON SUPPLY AND
 RETURN DUCTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH FBC-M 606.2.2.
  
 6. IS A MOTORIZED DAMPER REQUIRED TO PREVENT THE SUPPLY
 AIR FROM EXISTING AHU-5 FROM BACK-FEEDING INTO THE RTU
 WHEN THE RTU IS NOT IN USE? PLEASE CLARIFY.
  
 IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CONTACT:
 RONALD J. REGUEIRO
 561.805.6719
 [email protected]
Review Stop Z ZONING
Rev No 2 Status P Date 2009-11-30 Cont ID  
Sent By eschneid Date 2009-11-30 Time 15:32 Rev Time 0.20
Received By eschneid Date 2009-11-30 Time 15:32 Sent To  
Notes
***NONE***
Review Stop Z ZONING
Rev No 1 Status F Date 2009-10-23 Cont ID  
Sent By eschneid Date 2009-10-23 Time 16:12 Rev Time 0.50
Received By eschneid Date 2009-10-23 Time 16:12 Sent To  
Notes
2009-10-23 16:23:44FAILED
  
 1) PROVIDE THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING.
  
 2) PROVIDE DETAILS ON THE HEIGHT OF THE NEW AC
 EQUIPMENT, TO INCLUDE THE MOUNTING RACK, FROM THE ROOF.
  
 3) ROOFTOP MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE SCREENED.
 PROVIDE AN ELEVATION DRAWING OF THE NEW AC EQUIPMENT,
 TO INCLUDE THE MOUNTING RACK, AS IT SITS ON THE ROOF
 THAT SHOWS HOW IT WILL BE SCREENED.
  
 CONTACT ERIC SCHNEIDER @ (561) 822-1446.


Account Summary | Usage Policy | Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2005 – 2014, SunGard Pentamation, Inc & City of West Palm Beach, FL – All Rights Reserved