2014-09-25 15:51:21 | ****PROVISO**** |
| ****ISSUED AT CONTRACTOR'S RISK**** |
| ****REVISION REQUIRED PRIOR TO FIRST INSPECTION**** |
| |
| SAMANTHA HILL |
| BUILDING PLANS EXAMINER |
| [email protected] |
| 561-805-6724 |
| |
| FS 471, SEE THE LETTER WRITTEN BY DOUG KUBOSH AND |
| SIGNED AND SEALED BY CHRISTOPHER PLY DATED 9/17/2014. |
| DOUG KOBOSH, GENERAL MANAGER OF ALLIANCE COMPOSITES, IS |
| NOT LICENSED TO PRACTICE ENGINEERING. THE LETTER SHOULD |
| BE WRITTEN BY THE ENGINEER, NOT AN UNLICENSED |
| INDIVIDUAL. IF THIS INDIVIDUAL IS LICENSED, IT IS NOT |
| CLEAR WHY HE DID NOT SIGN AND SEAL THE LETTER AND |
| CALCS. |
| |
| SEE FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 61G15 23.002, TITLE |
| BLOCK REQUIREMENTS. IS THE ENGINEER PRACTICING |
| ENGINEERING THROUGH ALLIANCE COMPOSITES INCORPORATED, |
| AND THIS NAME AND ADDRESS SERVE AS A TITLE BLOCK? IF HE |
| IS, AN ENGINEERING BUSINESS NUMBER IS REQUIRED; REVISE |
| TO INCLUDE THE CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION. |
| |
| IF THE ENGINEER IS NOT PRACTICING ENGINEERING THROUGH |
| ALLIANCE COMPOSITES INCORPORATED AND THIS IS NOT HIS |
| TITLE BLOCK, PROVIDE A TITLE BLOCK ON THE REVISED |
| LETTER. |
| |
| LETTER STATES THAT THE DESIGN IS BASED ON TYPE 2 SOIL |
| CONDITIONS. IT IS NOT CLEAR WHAT SOILS CLASSIFICATION |
| METHOD WRITER IS REFERRING TO. ENGINEER IS TO REVIEW |
| SOILS REPORT AND REFER TO SOILS REPORT IN THE LETTER. |
| |
| THE LETTER STATES THAT CALCULATIONS INDICATE COMPLIANCE |
| WITH FBC 2010 AND ASCE 7 10. |
| |
| CALCULATIONS FOR POLE TYPE B2 STATE THAT CALCS ARE |
| BASED ON ASCE 7 10 AND THAT RESULT IS TEST LOAD. |
| REGARDING THE CALCULATIONS, IT IS UNCLEAR HOW TEST LOAD |
| CORRELATES WITH THE SPEC FOR THE POLE, OR HOW THIS |
| SHOWS THAT THE PROPOSED POLE WILL RESIST THE DESIGN |
| WIND LOADS. CALCS DO NOT PROVIDE A CONCLUSION. |
| |
| STRESS CALCS (TENON OR SIDE ARM MOUNT), WIND FORCE ON |
| POLE AND WIND FORCE ON LUMINAIRE, DATED 10/27/09 BUT |
| SEALED 9/5/2014 ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AASHTO 2009. SEE |
| DEC STATEMENT, CANNOT USE THIS EXEMPTION FOR LIGHT |
| POLES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY (DOT ONLY). |
| |
| POLE SPECIFICATIONS TYPE B2 DECLARES 180MPH BUT CALCS |
| USE 142.3MPH. NEITHER STATE ULTIMATE OR ASD AS REQUIRED |
| BY FBC 1603.4.1. HEIGHT ON 2ND PAGE IS SHOWN AS 30FT |
| BUT TEST HEIGHT IS 29 FT; POLE TYPE C IS 20FT BUT TEST |
| HT = 14FT. CALCS INCLUDE AN IMPORTANCE FACTOR OF .77 |
| BUT FIRST PAGE STATES IT COMPLIES WITH 180 MPH DESIGN |
| CRITERIA. EXPOSURE CLASSIFICATION NOT INCLUDED. SEE FBC |
| 1603.1.4 REGARDING WIND DESIGN INFORMATION REQUIRED. |
| |
| POLE TYPE B2 WAS USED AS AN EXAMPLE. THE OTHER THREE |
| POLES HAVE SIMILAR ISSUES WITH THE CALCULATIONS. SPECS |
| FOR THE LIGHT FIXTURES WERE NOT PROVIDED. |
| |
| REVISE THE LETTER AND CALCULATIONS AND SUBMIT AS A |
| REVISION ALONG WITH THE LIGHT FIXTURE SPECS. THIS IS |
| ISSUED AT CONTRACTOR'S RISK. |
| |
| |