HomeMy WebLinkAboutMISC EMAILJoe Cicio
From:
Joe Cicio
Sent:
Tuesday, March 20, 2018 3:44 PM
To:
'lighthousecontracting@live.com'
Cc:
Joe Cicio
Subject: Review Comments for Permit Number 1803-0407
Attachments: Report_FL_Review_Comments_Noncompliantjrf (1).pdf
Dear St Lucie County Permit Applicant,
Thank You for choosing to do business and invest in St Lucie County. St Lucie County is committed in
assisting you to navigate the building review process. Please know that county staff is committed to customer service
and part of that service is providing assistance and guidance with our processes. Please do not hesitate to contact us
further to discuss your building project as needed.
Please see the attached plan review comments which have been generated for your permit. As soon as
we receive the modified plans and any additional required documents back from the Design Professional, Contractor,
Fire Department or Owner we will forward the permit package to our permitting department for issuance.
Thank You
Joseyh. M. e icip
Plans Erarnmer II
Standard Buildunglnspector
Building Plans Eeamaner
One and Two PamilyDwelluiglnspectw-
One and Two FvndyPlans Examiner
St. Lucie CouratyPlannmgand DevelopulnentServices
772-462-1553
mo,e a zm�
aBES
- places -
�® m wnfk
SCANNED
BY
St. Lucie County
Please Note: Florida has very broad public records laws. Masi to communications to or from Courity-oofdals-regarding County business are public records
_ vailabl8 to.tha ubrc and media-u on re uesL ltis the olic of St: -Lucie Count that all Count records shall be open for personal inspection, examination and / P q P Y Y Y P P P
oJ. copying.Your a -mail communications will be subjoct to public disclosure unless an exemption applies to the communication. If you received this email In error,
dlease notify the sender by reply a -mail and delete all materials from all computers.
BREITENBACH ENGINEERING, INC
johnbach442@_gmaii.com
4853 SE Pilot Way, Stuart, Florida 34997
March 2, 2018
March 27. 2018 revised
To: Building Official, St. Lucie County, Building Division
2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida 34982
To: Don Wilks, Contractor
Lighthouse Contracting
601 Heritage Dr, #480
Jupiter, Florida 33458
Cell: (772) 834-4743
to
i1
%wMw-rnkell
Re: Structural Review of Window/Door Products and NOXs @
3120 N. Hwy All A, Unit 1502, Ft Pierce, FL 34949
Permit #1803-0407
Dear Mr. Wilks:
The window/door product submittals and NOA's were reviewed for compliance with the 2017 Florida
Building Code and the ASCE7-10. The submittals were found to be in compliance, specifically NOA
#15-0723.08, expiration 1/23/19.
Calculations where performed for this unit on the top floor for elevation 142', exposure "D", risk
category 2, and a un-factored design pressure of 54 psf was derived. Also at this elevation the
design pressure for Zone 4 is 66.5 psf and for Zone 5, 80.0 psf. These pressures are less than all
the various ratings for the window product submittals. The calculation is attached for your
information. All windows are in zone 4. Pages 2 & 3 attached.
Please give this letter along with your NOA information to the Building Department when submitting
for permit. See commentary on next page.
If you need further assistance, please call.
Sincerely,
>�`�p,REITENegC.,,
o FLOR�CP' C�
John D. Breitenbach, PE
FL PE #59770, FL SI #2072, Firm Reg. #26001
Via Mail: 3-copies, signed and sealed
file= 18025-3-Tiara Towers
3-2-18 Tiara Tower Letter.doo
BREITENBACH ENGINEERING, INC Page
Attn: Joe Cicio, Building Department
Commentary:
The previous letter had stated that windows met the pressure requirements of zone 4 and zone 5.
That means the NOA exceeds the worst condition and the wording is adequate.
Regarding zone classifications in high rise structures, this Engineer's opinion is that all windows and
doors above mid -height of the building should meet the requirements of Zone 5. The reasons are
that the.Code has logic and practical flaws that are best left to the local Engineer to adjust to the
actual conditions, and towards the conservative side:
1. The code does not have conditions for winds at 45 degrees to the structure. This can be
critical in long, but narrow buildings, and worse in high rises. Residential high rises can also
have breeze -ways and shapes that can further complicate typical Code classification.
2. The 45 degree wind can put all of Zone 4 (middle zone) into Zone 5 (corners) velocity
conditions. This is because the wind split at the comers causes the velocity to increase by
1.4 times down the sidewall. Plus, there is the upward velocity (additive) as the wind goes
upwards and over the roof.
3. This is a long and narrow building. The Code specifies an "a" distance from the corner for
zone 5. It is computed as .40*height, or .10*least width, whichever is the least. For this
building it is .10*64'=6.4'. This is a joke; realistically, the comer distance should be about 16'
for a building of this size.
4. On a long building, with a wind direction perpendicular long building, per the diagrams of the
Code, the Code says nothing about wind velocity or change of zone for the top floors as the
wind passes upwards and over the roof.
In summary, Zone 5 should include all windows and doors at least 16' from the comers, and the top
three floors of a high rise of this size. The Zone 3 for the roof should be just a applicable for the top
comers of high-rise buildings.
Going beyond windows and doors and the 45 degree wind issue, this critical condition can also
apply to the main structure in some configurations. There are failures in the records for lack of
design for the alternate wind directions.
By: J
end
3-2-18 Tiara Tower Letter.doc