| Date |
Text |
| 2016-06-17 17:00:44 | RESIDENTIAL (R3) ALTERATION SECOND BUILDING REVIEW |
| | CHECKLIST. |
| | CODE: FBC 5TH EDITION (2014). |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 1- BRING PLANS TO PALM BEACH COUNTY (2300 N. JOG RD.) |
| | FOR IMPACT FEES ASSESSMENT. BRING BACK COUNTY STAMPED |
| | PLANS AND COPY OF THE PAID RECEIPT IF FEES ARE DUE. |
| | COUNTY IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE OF THE UNIFIED LAND |
| | DEVELOPMENT CODE. |
| | RESPONSE: OK. TALKED TO FRED. NO DOING THE ADDITION. |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | 2- SHEET D-1: |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | A) DRAINAGE PLAN: PROVIDE COMPLIANCE WITH THE OVERFLOW |
| | SCUPPERS AS REQUIRED BY SEC. R903.4.1 OF |
| | FBC-RESIDENTIAL, 5TH EDITION (2014). |
| | RESPONSE: |
| | SHEET D-1 WAS REMOVED. SCOPE OF WORK IS NOT CLEAR NOW. |
| | LEFT SIDE ELEVATION AND REAR ELEVATION ON SHEET A-2 |
| | WERE REVISED. NOW THEY SHOW A PITCHED ROOF AT THE REAR |
| | PART OF THE BUILDING. BUT, THERE IS A NOTE ON LEFT SIDE |
| | ELEVATION THAT READS: "EXIST. ROOF TRUSSES TO BE |
| | REMOVED AND REPLACED W/NEW FLAT DECK ROOF TO MATCH |
| | EXISTING". IS IT A FLAT ROOF OR PITCHED ROOF? IF |
| | PITCHED ROOF, THEN SPECIFY ROOF PITCH. ROOF PITCH LESS |
| | THAN 4;12 REQUIRES TWO LAYERS OF UNDERLAYMENT. ON THE |
| | OTHER HAND, THE NEW FLAT ROOF NEEDS TO COMPLY WITH THE |
| | SCUPPERS REQUIREMENTS AS REQUESTED ORIGINALLY. PLEASE |
| | COORDINATE ALL THE INFORMATION AS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE |
| | CLEAR SCOPE OF WORK. SEC. 107.2.1 CITY AMENDMENTS. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 3- ROOF FRAMING PLAN: SPECIFY ALL CONNECTORS FOR |
| | TRUSSES, ROOF RAFTERS, LEDGERS, BEAMS AND COLUMNS, ETC. |
| | SEC. R801.2 OF FBC-RESIDENTIAL, 5TH EDITION (2014). |
| | RESPONSE: |
| | SHEET D-1 WAS REMOVED. IF THERE ARE ANY NEW ROOF |
| | TRUSSES, THEN NEED TO PROVIDE ALL THE STRUCTURAL |
| | INFORMATION. SEC. R301.1 FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 4- PROVIDE COMPLETE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE ROOF |
| | SHEATHING ON THE NEW ADDITION AND AREA TO HAVE NEW ROOF |
| | TRUSSES SHOWING COMPLIANCE WITH THE TYPE OF NAIL AND |
| | SPACING REQUIRED BY SEC. R803.2.3.1 OF FBC-RESIDENTIAL, |
| | 5TH EDITION (2014). |
| | RESPONSE: |
| | SHEET D-1 WAS REMOVED. IF THERE ARE ANY NEW ROOF |
| | TRUSSES, THEN NEED TO PROVIDE ALL THE STRUCTURAL |
| | INFORMATION, INCLUDING THE ROOF SHEATHING. SEC. R301.1 |
| | FBC-RESIDENTIAL. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 5- DESIGNER OF RECORD TO SPECIFY THE DESIGN PRESSURES |
| | FOR ALL EXTERIOR DOORS AND WINDOWS. SEC. R301 OF |
| | FBC-RESIDENTIAL, 5TH EDITION (2014). |
| | NOTE: PRODUCT APPROVALS WILL BE REVIEWED WHEN |
| | INFORMATION IS PROVIDED. |
| | RESPONSE: |
| | SCOPE OF WORK IS NOT CLEAR. CLEARLY IDENTIFY WINDOWS |
| | AND DOORS THAT ARE GOING TO BE REPLACED. NOTE: THERE IS |
| | A RED TAG ON THIS PROPERTY FOR WORK WITHOUT PERMIT. THE |
| | SCOPE OF WORK INCLUDES WINDOWS. SEE BELOW FOR RED TAG |
| | DESCRIPTION: |
| | |
| | "PERMITS ARE NEEDED FOR DEMO, FRAMING, WINDOWS, LATH. |
| | STOP WORK ORDER ISSUED 6/3/15." ISSUED BY BUILDING |
| | INSPECTOR ART LANGE |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 6- SPECIFY SIZE AND TYPE OF EXISTING BEDROOM WINDOWS |
| | AND SPECIFY THE ACTUAL SIZE OF THE PROPOSED CASEMENT |
| | WINDOW (SEE PRODUCT APPROVAL SUBMITTED) TO VERIFY |
| | COMPLIANCE WITH THE EGRESS REQUIREMENTS OF SEC. 704 OF |
| | FBC-EXISTING BUILDING, 5TH EDITION (2014). |
| | RESPONSE: |
| | SCOPE OF WORK IS NOT CLEAR. COORDINATE WITH ITEM #5 |
| | ABOVE AND PROVIDE THE REQUIRED INFORMATION ON PLANS. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 7- PROVIDE PRODUCT APPROVAL (2 COPIES) AS REQUIRED BY |
| | FAC 61G20-3.002(33) FOR: |
| | A) CASEMENT WINDOWS SPECIFIED ON PLANS. |
| | CLARIFY IF BEDROOMS CASEMENT WINDOWS WILL HAVE MULLION |
| | AS SHOWN ON REAR AND SIDE ELEVATION ON SHEET A-2. NOTE: |
| | CASEMENT WINDOWS WITH MULLIONS DON'T COMPLY WITH |
| | EGRESS. |
| | RESPONSE: |
| | SCOPE OF WORK IS NOT CLEAR. COORDINATE WITH ITEM #5 AND |
| | #6 ABOVE AND PROVIDE THE REQUIRED INFORMATION ON PLANS. |
| | |
| | B) ARCHED "INSWING" ENTRY DOOR AS SHOWN ON PLANS. |
| | RESPONSE: |
| | SCOPE OF WORK IS NOT CLEAR. COORDINATE WITH ITEM #5 AND |
| | #6 ABOVE AND PROVIDE THE REQUIRED INFORMATION ON PLANS. |
| | |
| | C) WINDOW MULLIONS AS SHOWN ON PLANS. AND, SPECIFY SIZE |
| | TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE WITH THE DESIGN PRESSURES. SEC. |
| | R301 OF FBC-RESIDENTIAL, 5TH EDITION (2014). |
| | RESPONSE: |
| | SCOPE OF WORK IS NOT CLEAR. COORDINATE WITH ITEM #5 AND |
| | #6 ABOVE AND PROVIDE THE REQUIRED INFORMATION ON PLANS. |
| | |
| | D) ALL USP AND SIMPSON STRUCTURAL CONNECTORS SPECIFIED |
| | ON PLANS AND DETAILS. PROVIDE ONLY THE FLORIDA PRODUCT |
| | APPROVAL COVER PAGE AND PAGE SHOWING THE SPECIFIED |
| | CONNECTOR OR ARCHITECT TO LIST THE FLORIDA PRODUCT |
| | APPROVAL NUMBER NEXT TO EACH SPECIFIED CONNECTOR. |
| | RESPONSE: |
| | SCOPE OF WORK IS NOT CLEAR. COORDINATE WITH ITEM #3 |
| | ABOVE. |
| | |
| | ORIGINAL COMMENT: |
| | 8- ARCHITECT 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: |
| | SCOPE OF WORK IS NOT CLEAR. COORDINATE WITH ITEM #5 AND |
| | #6. ARCHITECT TO APPROVE ALL PRODUCT APPROVALS THAT ARE |
| | GOING TO BE USED. PLEASE REMOVE ANY PRODUCT APPROVAL |
| | THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE USED. |
| | |
| | NOTE: PLANS WILL BE ROUTED TO HISTORIC FOR REVIEW ONCE |
| | THE REQUIRED CHANGES ARE DONE ON PLANS AND PRODUCT |
| | APPROVALS TO BE USED ARE IDENTIFIED. |
| | |
| | ***PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSE LETTER ADDRESSING EACH |
| | COMMENT TO EXPEDITE THE REVIEW PROCESS. |
| | ***PLEASE INSERT ANY REVISED DRAWING AND REMOVE OLD |
| | DRAWINGS. SUBMIT OLD DRAWINGS FOR REFERENCE. DON'T |
| | STAPLE OLD DRAWINGS. |
| | |
| | IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT |
| | JULIO GOMEZ |
| | COMMERCIAL COMBINATION PLANS EXAMINER |
| | DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT |
| | (561)805-6712 |
| | [email protected] |
