Plan Review: 87 Issues Found

Summary: 23 index entries | 16 perfect matches | 0 mismatched | 7 missing Missing (7) — listed in drawing index but not found in the document: Structural: - S102 ROOF FRAMING PLAN - S301 FOUNDATION DETAILS - S302 FOUNDATION DETAILS - S303 FOUNDATION DETAILS - S402 TYPICAL FRAMING DETAILS - S403 TYPICAL ROOF FRAMING DETAILS - S501 MOMENT FRAME

Why it matters: Addressing this before construction prevents rework and supports code compliance.

Suggested next step: Review drawings and specifications to resolve before construction.

RFI draft: Please clarify: Drawing Index Audit: 7 missing, 0 mismatched out of 23 sheets

Summary: Detail 4 (Framed Wall Vent Penetration) calls for the installation of a "DRYER VENT COLLAR" and a "VENT CAP w/EXHAUST GRILL, WALL CAP, BACKDRAFT DAMPER & BIRD SCREEN". IFGC Section 614.1 requires that clothes dryer exhaust systems "convey the moisture and any products of combustion to the outside of the building" and be installed "in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions." Installing ...

Why it matters: The presence of a bird screen or grill on a clothes dryer exhaust will rapidly accumulate lint and significantly restrict airflow. This creates a severe fire hazard, reduces the dryer's efficiency, and will result in a failed mechanical inspection.

Suggested next step: Please revise Detail 4 to explicitly prohibit bird screens and exhaust grills on clothes dryer exhaust vent terminations. Specify a dryer-specific vent cap equipped with a backdraft damper only.

RFI draft: Please revise Detail 4 to explicitly prohibit bird screens and exhaust grills on clothes dryer exhaust vent terminations. Specify a dryer-specific vent cap equipped with a backdraft damper only.

Summary: The drawings detail an enclosed roof rafter assembly that completely lacks the required cross ventilation. Detail 6 indicates the ridge is entirely sealed ("SET IN 2 CONTINUOUS BEADS OF SEALANT & CAULKED VERTICALLY AT SEAMS"), and Detail 5 explicitly instructs to "FILL CAVITY WITH SPRAY FOAM INSULATION" at the eaves. This completely blocks any air path, directly contradicting the prescriptive r...

Why it matters: Trapping unvented air in an enclosed rafter space without an approved unvented-attic design pathway can lead to severe condensation, moisture buildup, and rot within the roof structure. This explicit sealing of all ventilation paths violates the prescriptive code baseline provided for roof ventil...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the roof ventilation approach. If the design intends to use a vented rafter space, revise the details to provide the required eave and ridge ventilation openings and remove the instruction to fill the eaves with spray foam. If an unvented assembly is intended, p...

RFI draft: Please clarify the roof ventilation approach. If the design intends to use a vented rafter space, revise the details to provide the required eave and ridge ventilation openings and remove the instruction to fill the eaves with spray foam. If an un...

Summary: The drawing legend defines a 'SMOKE / CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR' symbol. The plan shows this symbol placed in the Bedroom (above the stairs) and in the Living/hallway area, but no smoke/CO detector symbol is shown within the Primary Bedroom. The tile descriptions for the Primary Bedroom across two overlapping views (row 3 col 3 and row 4 col 3) consistently list only a ceiling fan, sloped recess...

Why it matters: This is a life-safety violation that will result in inspection failure. While the Electrical Notes include a general note to 'PROVIDE SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTION AS REQUIRED BY CODE,' the plan explicitly locates detector symbols in other rooms (Bedroom, Living area) but omits the Primary ...

Suggested next step: Request the designer add a smoke/carbon monoxide detector symbol within the Primary Bedroom on the electrical plan, in compliance with IRC R314.3 item 1, which requires smoke alarms in each sleeping room. Confirm the detector type and interconnection requirements per R314.4.

RFI draft: Request the designer add a smoke/carbon monoxide detector symbol within the Primary Bedroom on the electrical plan, in compliance with IRC R314.3 item 1, which requires smoke alarms in each sleeping room. Confirm the detector type and interconnect...

Summary: The Roof Notes specify both 'ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF INSTALLED AS PER MANUFACTURERS SPECS' and 'TYPICAL ROOF PITCH IS 1.5:12 UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.' Asphalt shingles require a minimum roof slope of 2:12 per IRC Section R905.2 and per all asphalt shingle manufacturers' installation instructions. The 1.5:12 typical pitch is well below this minimum. IRC R905.1 mandates that roof coverings shall be a...

Why it matters: Installing asphalt shingles at a 1.5:12 slope will result in water infiltration, premature failure of the roofing assembly, and voiding of manufacturer warranties. A building inspector would reject this installation. This would cause significant construction delays and cost overruns as either the...

Suggested next step: Request clarification from the design team: (1) Which roof areas are intended to receive asphalt shingles and which are intended for standing seam roofing? (2) Confirm that all asphalt shingle areas have a minimum roof slope of 2:12 (or 4:12 for standard application per manufa...

RFI draft: Request clarification from the design team: (1) Which roof areas are intended to receive asphalt shingles and which are intended for standing seam roofing? (2) Confirm that all asphalt shingle areas have a minimum roof slope of 2:12 (or 4:12 for s...

Summary: The ROOF FASTENING ZONE schedule specifies a panel edge nailing spacing of 12" on center and a panel field nailing spacing of 6" on center for Zone 1. This is structurally inverted; panel edges transfer diaphragm shear forces and require closer or equal fastener spacing compared to the interior panel field. Specifying 12" at the edges and 6" in the field is a definitive structural mistake that ...

Why it matters: If the roof sheathing is installed with 12" edge nailing and 6" field nailing as detailed, the roof diaphragm will lack the necessary shear capacity at the panel joints to safely resist and transmit lateral loads (such as wind and seismic forces) to the supporting walls. This violates the general...

Suggested next step: Please revise the ROOF FASTENING ZONE schedule for Zone 1 to correct the panel edge and field nailing spacing (e.g., specifying 6" on center for both edges and field, or 6" edges and 12" field) to ensure proper structural capacity and a safe load path.

RFI draft: Please revise the ROOF FASTENING ZONE schedule for Zone 1 to correct the panel edge and field nailing spacing (e.g., specifying 6" on center for both edges and field, or 6" edges and 12" field) to ensure proper structural capacity and a safe load ...

Summary: Details 5, 6, and 7 show interior stacked shear walls framed directly on top of a '1 1/2" LIGHT WEIGHT CONC. TOPPING' over a wood subfloor. The details specify attaching the double 2x continuous wall plate using '10d TOENAILS @ 6" O.C.'. A 3-inch 10d nail toenailed through a 1.5-inch wood plate cannot penetrate 1.5 inches of concrete to achieve the necessary structural embedment into the subflo...

Why it matters: This detail fails to transmit lateral loads to the supporting structural elements, violating IRC Sections R502.2.1 and R601.2. Attempting to drive standard 10d toenails through a 1.5-inch concrete topping will bend the nails or spall the concrete, causing immediate field work-stoppages, RFIs, and...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the interior stacked shear wall base connection. If the concrete topping is poured before framing, specify appropriate concrete anchors (e.g., powder-actuated fasteners or wedge anchors) instead of 10d toenails. Alternatively, detail the interior wall plates res...

RFI draft: Please clarify the interior stacked shear wall base connection. If the concrete topping is poured before framing, specify appropriate concrete anchors (e.g., powder-actuated fasteners or wedge anchors) instead of 10d toenails. Alternatively, detai...

Summary: Detail 4 specifies a 'TJI ROOF RAFTER W/ BIRDSMOUTH SEAT' and a 'TJI ROOF RAFTER BEYOND W/ BIRDSMOUTH SEAT'. TJI members are engineered wood I-joists. Cutting a birdsmouth into an I-joist requires notching the continuous bottom flange, which is the primary tension and compression chord of the member. Doing so destroys the structural integrity and load-bearing capacity of the joist. This directl...

Why it matters: If the TJI rafters are notched with birdsmouths during construction, they will be structurally compromised and highly prone to failure under dead and environmental loads. This will cause the framing to fail inspection and require a costly, time-consuming replacement of the damaged engineered raft...

Suggested next step: Please revise Detail 4 to eliminate the birdsmouth cut on the TJI roof rafters. Specify an approved bearing method that does not require altering the I-joist flanges, such as using a beveled bearing plate, variable pitch seat connectors, or an appropriate sloped hanger in acco...

RFI draft: Please revise Detail 4 to eliminate the birdsmouth cut on the TJI roof rafters. Specify an approved bearing method that does not require altering the I-joist flanges, such as using a beveled bearing plate, variable pitch seat connectors, or an app...

Summary: The lower level floor plan (A101) indicates a "2-POST CAR LIFT, LOCATION TBD" in the Garage. However, the building section (A301) specifies an "8" RADIANT CONCRETE SLAB" for the Garage floor. A 2-post car lift requires drilling structural anchors deep into the concrete floor, which fundamentally conflicts with an undefined ("TBD") lift location in a floor containing embedded radiant tubing.

Why it matters: Without a pre-coordinated, tubing-free structural zone in the radiant slab design, drilling anchors for the car lift will likely puncture the hydronic lines. This would cause water damage, destroy the radiant heating loop, and require costly slab demolition and repair.

Suggested next step: Please confirm the exact final location for the 2-post car lift. Coordinate with the Mechanical and Structural engineers to provide a designated tubing-free structural footing zone within the radiant slab for the lift anchors.

RFI draft: Please confirm the exact final location for the 2-post car lift. Coordinate with the Mechanical and Structural engineers to provide a designated tubing-free structural footing zone within the radiant slab for the lift anchors.

Summary: The exterior elevations on A200 depict a butterfly roof profile with a central v-shaped valley (sloping downwards towards the center) and a central open metal downspout. In contradiction, Transverse Section 2 on A301 illustrates a pitched roof with a central peak and slopes descending outward from the center.

Why it matters: This fundamental contradiction in roof geometry will cause major coordination issues between architectural massing, structural framing, and roof drainage plans. A butterfly roof requires internal valley drainage, whereas a pitched roof drains to the exterior eaves.

Suggested next step: Please clarify the intended primary roof profile. Should the roof be framed as a butterfly design with a central valley (as shown on the elevations), or as a pitched roof with a central ridge/peak (as indicated in Transverse Section 2)?

RFI draft: Please clarify the intended primary roof profile. Should the roof be framed as a butterfly design with a central valley (as shown on the elevations), or as a pitched roof with a central ridge/peak (as indicated in Transverse Section 2)?

Summary: The specification code summary states the proposed building height is 16'-10 1/5". However, the Guest House Stair Section (Section 1) on sheet A301 explicitly dimensions the building height per zoning at 22'-4", measured from the midpoint of existing grade to the roof midpoint. This is confirmed by the elevation markers on the section, which show the midpoint of existing grade at 7918'-11" and ...

Why it matters: This discrepancy directly affects zoning compliance review. While both 16'-10 1/5" and 22'-4" are under the maximum allowed height of 25'-0" for an accessory building, the specification's code summary would misrepresent the building height to the Authority Having Jurisdiction. If the actual build...

Suggested next step: Request clarification from the architect on the correct building height per zoning. The specification code summary states a proposed height of 16'-10 1/5", while Section 1 on A301 dimensions the building height per zoning at 22'-4". Please confirm which value is correct and re...

RFI draft: Request clarification from the architect on the correct building height per zoning. The specification code summary states a proposed height of 16'-10 1/5", while Section 1 on A301 dimensions the building height per zoning at 22'-4". Please confirm...

Summary: Detail 2 specifies a 'SIMPSON SB7/8x24 CAST-IN-PLACE ANCHOR BOLT' globally for all 'SIMPSON HOLDOWN AT "HD" LOCATIONS'. However, the HOLD-DOWN SCHEDULE requires a '1" DIA.' bolt for HD5 locations. Specifying a 7/8" bolt generally contradicts the schedule and would result in an undersized anchor bolt at HD5 locations.

Why it matters: Installing undersized anchor bolts at high-capacity holdown locations (HD5) compromises the structural shear wall assembly's uplift and overturning resistance, potentially leading to failure during seismic or high wind events and failing structural inspections.

Suggested next step: Please clarify the required anchor bolt diameter for holdowns. Detail 2 specifies a 7/8" anchor bolt for all "HD" locations, but the Hold-Down Schedule requires a 1" diameter bolt for HD5. Should Detail 2 be revised to specify anchor bolt sizes per the Hold-Down Schedule?

RFI draft: Please clarify the required anchor bolt diameter for holdowns. Detail 2 specifies a 7/8" anchor bolt for all "HD" locations, but the Hold-Down Schedule requires a 1" diameter bolt for HD5. Should Detail 2 be revised to specify anchor bolt sizes pe...

Summary: The Site Grading plan (C400) shows the driveway terminating at the North wall. However, the Architectural plan (A101) shows a solid North wall with no vehicle entry door for the Garage. Furthermore, the Foundation plan (S100) calls out a 'LOWER FND WALL @ O.H. DOOR' on the West wall of the Garage, a location where A101 shows only standard personnel doors and a window. S100 also calls out an 'O....

Why it matters: A garage intended for vehicles (evidenced by the 2-post car lift and vehicle outlines on A101) must have a functional vehicle entry door aligned with the driveway. The contradictory locations for overhead doors across S100, A101, and C400 will cause severe coordination issues during foundation fo...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the intended location for the garage vehicle overhead door. Update A101 to depict the overhead door, adjust the driveway layout on C400 if necessary, and correct the 'LOWER FND WALL @ O.H. DOOR' callouts on S100 to match the finalized design.

RFI draft: Please clarify the intended location for the garage vehicle overhead door. Update A101 to depict the overhead door, adjust the driveway layout on C400 if necessary, and correct the 'LOWER FND WALL @ O.H. DOOR' callouts on S100 to match the finaliz...

Summary: The architectural floor plan (A102) shows a central stairwell with stairs going down ("DN") from the main level. However, the structural main level floor framing plan (S101) shows this exact area framed solidly with continuous joists, completely omitting the required floor opening for the stairs.

Why it matters: If the floor is framed solid as detailed on the structural drawings, the main interior stairs cannot be installed. This requires a structural redesign to frame the stair opening with appropriate headers and trimmers, which could affect joist sizing and load paths.

Suggested next step: Please clarify if the interior stairs shown on A102 are correct. If so, provide an updated S101 framing plan detailing the required structural opening, headers, and trimmers for the stairwell.

RFI draft: Please clarify if the interior stairs shown on A102 are correct. If so, provide an updated S101 framing plan detailing the required structural opening, headers, and trimmers for the stairwell.

Summary: The Main Level Shear Plan (S202) shows a vertical shear wall labeled 'SW3' with 'HD4' hold downs at both ends on the far right side of the plan. However, the Lower Level Shear Plan (S201) does not indicate a corresponding shear wall or hold-downs in this location to continue the load path, instead depicting 'Two hollow square symbols (likely column footings or posts)' outside the building envel...

Why it matters: Shear walls and hold-downs require a continuous load path down to the foundation to adequately resist lateral forces and overturning moments. If the upper shear wall bears only on posts without proper hold-down anchorage or transfer detailing, the lateral force resisting system is compromised and...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the vertical load path for the SW3 shear wall and HD4 hold-downs located on the far right of the Main Level. Update the Lower Level Shear Plan to show the continuation of this shear wall and its hold-downs, or detail the necessary transfer structure required to ...

RFI draft: Please clarify the vertical load path for the SW3 shear wall and HD4 hold-downs located on the far right of the Main Level. Update the Lower Level Shear Plan to show the continuation of this shear wall and its hold-downs, or detail the necessary t...