Cape Coral Said No Structural Set: It Missed the Upload
We designed a new single-family home in Cape Coral for a contractor client: the home design sheets and the structural set. The structural set covers the foundation, the truss framing plan, the load-bearing walls, the truss tie-downs (the connectors that hold the roof to the walls) and the wind load calculations (how much wind force the house has to resist). On July 30 we sent the contractor the permit set as one PDF with 17 digitally signed sheets: eleven design sheets followed by six structural sheets, including the foundation plan and the roof framing plan.
The permit application went in on September 16. The City's review came back rejected by four reviewers: building, zoning, planning and stormwater. The building comment that stood out read, in short: no foundation plan, no typical wall section, and no structural set was submitted at this time.
We had signed that structural set in July.
What actually went wrong
The structural sheets did not make it into the upload to the City. The drawings existed, signed, in the same PDF the contractor had received from us. Somewhere between that email and the City's permit portal, the structural sheets dropped out.
The City also wrote that it did no review of the energy calculation, which was prepared by a separate firm, "due to the lack of a complete construction set."
There was a second structural comment, about the truss drawings. The City asked that the design professional of record (the engineer whose seal is on the job) either stamp and sign the truss layout and truss design drawings as reviewed and approved, or provide a separate letter approving them. The submitted truss package did not have that approval.
That one required real review work. On this job, roof trusses are designed by the truss manufacturer, not by us; our framing plan is what the manufacturer designs the trusses from. The manufacturer's engineer then seals each truss drawing. On this job the truss layout was dated August 4 and the 52 truss design drawings were sealed August 5, both after our structural set went out. The submitted package carried no approval from the engineer of record.
The rest of the rejection covered site plan and drawing items: lot dimensions on the site plan, the size and height of the equipment pad (the platform and slab the outdoor air-conditioning equipment sits on), an attic ventilation calculation, and a finished floor elevation (the height of the floor, measured against a sea-level datum) that read 10.6 feet in one place and 9.5 feet in another. The survey and the drainage plan items belonged to the contractor, who said he would handle them.
How we answered it
The contractor emailed us the rejection on October 16, along with the truss drawings and a request from the owner to change the house's position on the lot: an eight-foot setback (the distance from the property line) on the right side, the house moved back eight feet, and the driveway the same width down to the street.
We sent the full resubmittal to the contractor the next afternoon:
Revised design sheets. The house was moved on the site plan at the owner's request, and every revised item was marked with a revision cloud (a bubble drawn around each change). The site plan now shows the lot dimensions, the equipment pad size and height, and the driveway width at the street. The finished floor elevation reads 10.6 feet consistently across the project table, the site plan, the floor plan and the elevations. The attic ventilation calculation was added to the plans, with half the required vent area at the soffit (the underside of the roof overhang) and half at roof vents near the ridge.
The original structural sheets, bound in right behind the design sheets. Moving the house on the lot did not change the foundation or the framing, so the July sheets went back in as issued.
The truss package, reviewed by the engineer of record. We checked the truss layout and design drawings against our roof framing plan: the code basis, the 160 mph wind speed, the wind exposure, the roof pitch and the truss spacing. Every truss on the layout had a sealed drawing. The review result was "Reviewed As Noted," with conditions recorded in review notes on the layout, such as the connectors required at certain girder trusses (the heavier trusses that carry other trusses) and a note that the truss-to-truss hangers come from the truss manufacturer. One girder bearing (where the truss rests on the wall) showed 3,943 pounds of uplift, the wind force trying to lift the truss off the wall. The review stamp went on the package cover and on the layout.
A signed response letter that quotes each City comment and answers it, comment by comment, pointing to the sheet where the fix is.
Then we asked the contractor to upload all of it, plus the energy calculation, and to make sure the whole set went in this time. As of this writing we have not seen a City response to the resubmittal.
What this means for you
On this job, the first structural comment on the list was not about the drawings at all. It traced back to an upload. The truss comment traced back to an approval the City wanted from the engineer of record after the truss manufacturer finished its package.
On this Cape Coral job, the City required the engineer of record to approve the truss package. If you are building, ask whether your building department will want that approval, and if so, have your engineer review the package before it is uploaded.
What to do
Open the PDF you are uploading and count the sheets. Compare it to the sheet list you were sent. If the set has structural sheets, make sure every one of them is in the upload.
Send the truss package to your engineer when you have it. On this job the City required the engineer of record to review it and stamp it or write an approval letter.
Check that the same number reads the same everywhere. Finished floor elevation, setbacks and pad sizes appear on several sheets. On this job, one mismatch was its own rejection comment.
Send us the rejection report the day you get it, with every attachment the City returned, so we can start on every comment at once.
If you are planning a new home or an addition in Cape Coral, see our Cape Coral structural engineering page or our home addition engineering page. We offer unmatched turnaround times, and 5-7 day rush turnaround is available upon request for a premium fee.
FAQ
Why would the City say no structural set was submitted when the engineer drew one?
On this job, the structural sheets did not make it into the upload to the City's portal, and the City's comment said no structural set was submitted.
Who designs the roof trusses on a new home?
On this job, the truss manufacturer designed each truss from our framing plan. On this Cape Coral job, the City also required the engineer of record to approve the truss layout and truss drawings, by stamp or by letter.
Does moving the house on the lot mean new structural drawings?
Not always. On this job, moving the house did not change the foundation or the framing, so the original structural sheets went back in as issued. The site plan was revised.
What is a plan review response letter?
A letter that repeats each City comment and answers it, naming the sheet where the change is, so the plans examiner (the City's plan reviewer) can see where each fix is.
Questions about a permit rejection? Call Michael D. Stewart, P.E. at 239.292.7670 or contact us.
Comments