My Wolf fan (purchased at the end of 2007) was made for Wolf by Broan according to Wolf. A few other Wolf fans were also made by Broan as of 2007. I cannot assert anything with respect to other Wolf fans or more modern Wolf fans. Contact Wolf for fan curves for their fans you might be interested in and compare them to Broan fan curves published on their web site. Basically what one buys when buying a hood and fan from Wolf is the comfort of knowing that compatibility has been established and no electrical hacking is going to be necessary to make a doit yourself scheme function. Wolf could impose additional reliability requirements on Broan, for example, but may not need to; a NuTone upblast roof fan I have used for my kitchen since the '70s is still fully functional today. So at least at one time the NuTone branch of Broan could build reliable devices. Using a circuit architecture that I am pretty sure GE published in the late 1960's or early 1970's, it is possible to control the amount of power available on a line by excising part of the sinusoidal voltage available. (The circuit actually allows part of the sinusoid.) While I can address the transfer functions and other details of triacs and diacs (once I recheck old literature), the circuitry to support them is pretty simple. This information is probably on line. These same circuits are used on lighting controls. The main difference between motor controls and similar lighting controls is that motor controls click on to full power, with rotation to lower power, and lighting controls do the opposite. More complex lighting controls also exist, such as zero-crossing switching, and have advantages in reduced electrical noise. These schemes could also be used for motor control, but are not in the case of my hood. By continuous I mean the the control rotates smoothly between full power to perhaps 10% power (have not measured this) over about 270-degrees of rotation. Ignoring quantum mechanics and grain boundaries, the resolution of the rotary potentiometer that is used for control is effectively infinite between those limits. The phase angle that turns on power each half cycle is adjusted by the control angle to fall between perhaps 5-degrees (out of 180) to perhaps 160 degrees. Turning on even later in the phase cycle would send power to the motor at too low a level for it to keep running. Is "infinite" a brand name? Induction motors of the type used by many fans can ususally be controlled over a reasonable range by phase angle control. They can also be controlled by variable frequency control, but this will be more limited as they are typically permanent capacitor split phase and designed for a single frequency. The Wolf hood control is mounted in the hood and is wired to the motor on the roof. I have seen its guts and that is why I know it is diac-triac type. Other control locations are possible, including wall controls. In that case a hood that does not contain a fan control would be appropriate. kas

It appears to be a carpenter's mistake since the intention of the design is clearly stated on the drawings. Perhaps the windows were installed before the door arrived. IMHO there is no reason to replace anything other than the narrow "picture frame" molding; it's really out of place here. Option A (cheapest) Raise the door head trim and find a way to fill the resulting gap. I would also fill the gap between the door and window jamb trims because these narrow strips of wall look amateurish to me. Option B (best) Use 3/8" or 1/2" flat trim that spans from opening to opening, then add a decorative band molding around the outer perimeter of the entire assembly. The flat part of the trim would be a bit larger at the door head but it would look fine since it's at a door not a window. If the carpenter is good he could add a cove, bevel or bead at the inner edges. That is the way triple openings have been detailed for hundreds of years so I'm surprised the architects or the builder didn't suggest it.

I believe the eves can be detailed to make them blend and be a non-issue. It will require only a fraction as much attention as would be required if the plate is left out. When detailing something like this I've found useing a clean effecient break often turns out better than trying to hide it. Actually the roof surface deserves more attention than things we have discussed. All in a day's work for good roofers,possible forever pita if botched. Without looking at the overall plan,a 1 1/2" step flash carried across roof from facia to facia comes to mind. You are being smart by dealing with it now on paper rather than dealing with it as it go's along. You indicated new slab is already in place,if it still must be poured,what can go wrong if a 1 1/2" brick ledge is used to rest bottom plate on?

Thanks everyone for your comments. I did find out there is room to raise the door. After removing the trim and a little drywall, I found that there is about two inches between the top of the door and the header. So maybe rasing the door is a option, we will see. Although I haven't decided what to do as yet, the deck is over 700 square feet and I wont be removing and rebuilding it over the 1/2 inch difference between deck boards and door threshold. I'm sure I can find a solution that satisfies both the safety and cosmetic concerns. That said... thank you again for the comments and I am still open to any creative solutions someone may have to offer.