| Date |
Text |
| 2015-05-15 07:41:40 | RESIDENTIAL (R3) ADDITION, THIRD BUILDING REVIEW |
| | COMMENTS. |
| | CODE: 2010 FBC |
| | |
| | NOTE: ENGINEER IS INFORMED VIA THIS CHECKLIST THAT ONE |
| | SET OF PLANS WILL BE FORWARDED TO THE BOARD OF |
| | ENGINEERS FOR REVIEW. |
| | |
| | 1- SHEET S-1: PROVIDE COMPLETE DETAILS AND |
| | SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE COLUMNS THAT ARE LOCATED AT THE |
| | OPENING BELOW THE NEW STAIRWAY. THERE ARE SPECS FOR |
| | COLUMN C3 BUT NO INFORMATION FOR THOSE COLUMNS. SEC. |
| | R301.1 OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | 2- SHEET S-2: |
| | A) COLUMN BASE CONNECTOR LCB66 SPECIFIED FOR ALL LVL |
| | BEAMS DOESN'T WORK. ALSO, ANOTHER COLUMN BASE CONNECTOR |
| | CB7-7.5 WAS SPECIFIED. THIS ONE DOESN'T WORK EITHER. |
| | WHY ARE THERE TWO DIFFERENT COLUMN CONNECTORS?. SEC. |
| | R301.1 OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | B) COLUMN BASE CONNECTOR CB66 SPECIFIED FOR ALL 6X6 |
| | GUARDRAILS POSTS DOESN'T WORK FOR THE PROPOSED |
| | INSTALLATION. SEC. R301.1 OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | C) DETAIL C/S2: DIMENSIONS FOR THE STEEL BRACKET ARE |
| | INCOMPLETE AND THE 4 1/2" DIMENSIONS DOESN'T WORK FOR |
| | THE SIZE OF THE LVL BEAM. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | D) THERE ARE NOT SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE TOP BEAMS OF |
| | THE NEW WALLS FOR THE NEW STAIRWAY. SEC. R301.1 OF 2010 |
| | FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | E) INFORMATION SHOWN ON SECTION/DETAIL A/S2 DOESN'T |
| | MATCH LOCATION KEYED ON THE 2ND FLOOR LAYOUT. SEC. |
| | 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | F) THERE IS A NOTE ON THE FLOOR FRAMING PLAN STATING |
| | "SEE TRUSS COMPANY ENGINEERED ATTACHED". WHERE IS IT?. |
| | SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | G) PROVIDE GUARDRAIL COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION AND |
| | INSTALLATION DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHOWING |
| | COMPLIANCE WITH THE LIVE LOADS REQUIRED BY TABLE R301.5 |
| | AND SEC. R312 OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. THERE ARE NOT |
| | DETAILS SHOWING CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION. |
| | |
| | H) HANDRAIL L DETAIL PROVIDED DOESN'T SEEM TO MATCH |
| | PROPOSED INSTALLATION. THIS TYPE OF DETAIL IS TYPICAL |
| | FOR STAIRWAYS WITH NO SIDE WALLS. REVISE CLARIFY AS |
| | REQUIRED. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | I) STAIRS DETAILS: (1) SIZE OF TREAD DOESN'T COMPLY |
| | WITH SEC. R311.7.4.1 OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | (2) NOSING DETAIL DOESN'T COMPLY WITH SEC. R311.7.4.3 |
| | OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | (3) SPECIFY BEAM SIZE. SEC. R301.1 OF 2010 |
| | FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | (4) SECTION A IS NOT CLEAR. WHERE IS THIS SECTION TAKEN |
| | AT?. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | (5) HOW IS THE STRINGER ATTACHED TO THE TOP BEAM?. SEC. |
| | R301.1 OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | J) DETAIL B/S2: (1) WHERE IS THIS SECTION TAKEN AT?. |
| | SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | (2) PROVIDE COMPLETE FASTENING SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE |
| | INSTALLATION OF THE 1 X 6 WOOD DECKING AND 1 X 6 |
| | CYPRESS CEILING. SEC. R301 OF 2010 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | NOTE: CYPRESS CEILING FASTENING: CLARIFY HOW ARE 8D |
| | FINISH NAILS FASTENED AT 12" O.C. IF THE FLOOR JOISTS |
| | ARE SPACED AT 16" O.C.?. IS THERE ONLY ONE NAIL PER T & |
| | G ATTACHED TO THE 2X12 JOIST?. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY |
| | AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | (3) CLARIFY IF DECK IS GOING TO BE DESIGNED WITHOUT |
| | WATERPROOFING. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. OTHERWISE, |
| | PROVIDE COMPLETE INFORMATION INCLUDING PRODUCT APPROVAL |
| | AND SIGNED AND SEALED RAS 117 CALCULATIONS IF REQUIRED. |
| | DCA RULE 9N-3. |
| | |
| | (4) VERTICAL REINFORCEMENT SHOWN DOESN'T MATCH |
| | INFORMATION SHOWN ON COLUMN SCHEDULE. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY |
| | AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | 3- ENGINEER IS USING OLD SEAL. NEED TO USE CURRENT SEAL |
| | WITH THE WORDING "LICENSE" NOT "CERTIFICATE". SEC. |
| | 61G15-23.001. F.A.C. REPEAT COMMENT. ENGINEER USED OLD |
| | SEAL AGAIN. |
| | |
| | 4- IT'S NOT CLEAR WHY SUBMITTING PRODUCT APPROVALS FOR |
| | SINGLE HUNG WINDOWS, WINDOW MULLIONS. THE PLANS DON'T |
| | SHOW ANY SCOPE OF WORK OF NEW WINDOWS OR WINDOW |
| | REPLACEMENT. IF THERE IS GOING TO BE WINDOW |
| | REPLACEMENT, THEN REVISE PLANS AS REQUIRED SHOWING |
| | AREAS OF WORK. SPECIFY SIZE SIZE AND TYPE OF EXISTING |
| | WINDOWS AND PROPOSED WINDOWS. SEC. 604 OF 2010 |
| | FBC-EXISTING BUILDING. REVISE VALUATION DECLARED IN THE |
| | PERMIT APPLICATION ACCORDINGLY. REPEAT COMMENT. |
| | |
| | 5- VALUATION DECLARED IN THE PERMIT APPLICATION IS TOO |
| | LOW. VALUATION TO INCLUDE ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, |
| | CONTRACTOR'S OVERHEAD AND PROFIT AND DESIGN |
| | PROFESSIONAL FEES AS REQUIRED BY SEC. 109.3 CITY |
| | AMENDMENTS TO FBC. PROVIDE COPY OF SIGNED CONTRACT. |
| | |
| | *** PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSE LETTER ADDRESSING EACH |
| | COMMENT TO EXPEDITE THE REVIEW PROCESS.... |
| | |
| | IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT |
| | JULIO GOMEZ |
| | COMMERCIAL COMBINATION PLANS EXAMINER |
| | DEVELOPMENT SERVICE DEPARTMENT |
| | (561)805-6712 |
| | [email protected] |
