Plan submitted for 4 revisions in this submittal.

Revision 1 covers: A4.2, A5.1, E0.3, E0.4, E0.5, E0.6, E0.7, E1.1, E1.2, E1.3, E2.1, E2.2, E2.3, FP.1, FP.2, M1.1, M1.2, M1.3, M1.4, P1.3, P1.4, P2.1, P2.2, P3.1, S.01, S1.2, S3.3, S4.2, S4.3, S4.4.

Revision 2 covers: A1.1, A1.2, A1.3, A1.4, A1.5, A1.6, A1.7, A2.1, A2.2, A3.1, A3.2, A3.4, A4.1, E0.2, E1.1, E2.4, S1.2, S1.3, S3.1, S4.2, S4.3.

Revision 3 covers:  A1.1, A1.2, A1.3, A1.4, A1.5, A1.6, A1.7, A3.3, A4.2, A5.1, E0.2, E0.3, E0.5, E0.6, E0.7, E0.8, E1.1, E1.2, E1.3, E2.1, E2.2, M1.1, M1.2, P1.1, P1.2.

Revision 4 covers: E0.2, E1.1, E1.2

It also included a letter signed and sealed by designer dated 2021 requesting a hold for engineering analysis.

Reviewed using FFPC 7th edition effective January 1, 2021.

Reviewer: 
V.Vitori 904 209 1748

 
To schedule fire inspections call 827-6842 (automated system). Questions about inspections please call 209-1740x1.
Review by the AHJ shall not relieve the applicant of the responsibility for compliance with the Code.

Comment 5 brought over from original building plan review.

Unable to locate atrium engineering analysis. Point out engineering analysis. 101:8.6.7(5)

NOTE: If a smoke control system is to be provided, make sure 101:8.6.7(6) and 101:9.3 are addressed.

Friday, August 13, 2021 Response to comments from Design Development indicate "The atrium space included in this project is limited to connecting two stories. In accordance with the exception as written in FBC paragraph 404.5, smoke control is not required for atriums that connect only two stories."

The Code is not requiring smoke control. I was just stating if it is to be provided point it out. What I am looking to check is compliance with your "atrium". Unfortunately I do not enforce or utilize the Building Code. If there is a corresponding section in FFPC you are welcome to provide it and show compliance with that section. Do you mean to call this a convenience opening? If so, show compliance with that section.

Wednesday, August 18, 2021 I met with Designer Scott Fraser. He is now going to call this an atrium and wants this space to follow 101:8.6.7.

Tuesday, August 24, 2021 Designer requested (via letter dated 8 18 21) a hold be added for engineering analysis (in accord with 101:8.6.7(6)) to be performed. Hold added at request of designer and oked by Plan Review Supervisor.

Tuesday, February 15, 2022 Multiple pages submitted as revision. Unable to locate where this has been confirmed this is to be an atrium. I will review this as an atrium.

5a) Confirm this is an atrium.

5b) Unable to locate engineering analysis to determine if smoke control system is required. Point out engineering analysis     (101:8.6.7(5)) and if needed provide engineered smoke control system in accord with 101:9.3 and 101:8.6.7(1)(b)  (101:8.6.7(6)).

5c) Looks like travel distance from 3rd floor to 1st floor, through atrium, to exit will be atleast 300'. Show compliance with 101:38.2.6.3. (101:8.6.7(2))

5d) Do not see FP pages updated addressing how storefront atrium glass is to be 1 hour fire resistance rated. 101:8.6.7(1)(c)

Revision Comment 2

Looking at page E0.3 I now see a 125kw diesel genset on concrete pad. An aboveground tank permit is required to be submitted for tanks over 60gals. Where on the site is this going? How many gallons?  A hold at 109 framing was added.

NOTE: This is not on the approved site plan. You will need to go back and revise the site plan showing the generator/tank addition.

Revision Comment 4

Remove provided pages from both plan sets (office and job) that were not revised (A.0, A3.5, A5.0, A5.2, A5.3, A5.4,R1, E0.1, E3.1, M0.1, M0.2, M2.1, M2.2, M2.3, M3.1, M3.2, FP1.1, FP1.2, FP1.3, P0.1, P0.2, P4.1, S1.1, S1.4, S2.1, S2.2, S3.2, S3.4, S3.5, S4.1 ) OR provide narrative and illustrate changes on plan pages.