Arizona County Plan Review: 192 Issues Found

Summary: 29 index entries | 0 perfect matches | 28 mismatched | 1 missing Mismatched (28): 1: Expected: COVER SHEET (ALL ELEVATION OPTIONS) | Actual: COVER SHEET (ALL ELEVATION OPTIONS) PLAN 5643 (p1) 2.0: Expected: FOUNDATION PLAN (OPTION 'A') (ELEVATION OPTIONS A,B,&C) | Actual: FOUNDATION PLAN PLAN #5543 (ELEVATION A,B & C) (p3) 2.1: Expected: FOUNDATION PLAN (OPTION 'B') (ELEVA...

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: 1 missing, 28 mismatched out of 29 sheets

Summary: The Insulation note on the Cover Sheet specifies minimum ceiling insulation as R-20 (5.5" spray foam). The project is located in Maricopa County, Arizona, which is Climate Zone 2B per 2018 IECC Table R301.1. Per 2018 IECC Table R402.1.2, the prescriptive minimum ceiling insulation R-value for Climate Zone 2 is R-38. Even the reduced allowance for ceilings without attic spaces (footnote g of Tab...

Why it matters: This insulation deficiency would result in energy code inspection failure and prevent issuance of a certificate of occupancy. If discovered after drywall or interior finishes are installed, corrective work would require removal of finishes to access the ceiling assembly, causing significant const...

Suggested next step: Request clarification on ceiling insulation R-value compliance. The specified R-20 ceiling insulation does not meet the 2018 IECC prescriptive requirement of R-38 for Climate Zone 2. Confirm whether an alternative compliance path (total UA trade-off per Section R402.1.5, perfo...

RFI draft: Request clarification on ceiling insulation R-value compliance. The specified R-20 ceiling insulation does not meet the 2018 IECC prescriptive requirement of R-38 for Climate Zone 2. Confirm whether an alternative compliance path (total UA trade-o...

Summary: The drawing's Insulation note explicitly specifies a minimum of R-20 at ceilings (5.5" spray foam). Per 2018 IRC Section N1102.1.2, the building thermal envelope must meet the requirements of Table N1102.1.2 for the applicable climate zone. This project is in Maricopa County, Arizona (Climate Zone 2B). Even under the most favorable code reductions allowed by Sections N1102.2.1 and N1102.2.2, th...

Why it matters: This is a significant energy code violation that will cause the project to fail plan review and energy inspections. The shortfall from R-30 (minimum) or R-38 (standard for Climate Zone 2) is substantial and would result in non-compliant construction requiring costly remediation—either increasing ...

Suggested next step: Confirm the required ceiling insulation R-value per 2018 IRC Table N1102.1.2 for Climate Zone 2B (Maricopa County). The minimum ceiling R-value is R-38 per prescriptive path, with R-30 permitted as an alternative only under the conditions described in Sections N1102.2.1 and N1...

RFI draft: Confirm the required ceiling insulation R-value per 2018 IRC Table N1102.1.2 for Climate Zone 2B (Maricopa County). The minimum ceiling R-value is R-38 per prescriptive path, with R-30 permitted as an alternative only under the conditions describe...

Summary: The cover sheet plumbing note requires the water-heater temperature/pressure relief valve discharge to run to the exterior and terminate between 6 inches and 24 inches above finish grade. The IRC requires the relief-valve discharge to "Discharge through an air gap located in the same room as the water heater" and to "Terminate not more than 6 inches" above the floor or waste receptor flood leve...

Why it matters: If installed per the note, the installation can fail inspection for relief-valve discharge configuration and require rework of hard piping, potentially impacting water heater setting, wall/finish penetrations, and schedule. This is a life-safety item tied to scalding/overpressure protection, so i...

Suggested next step: Revise the water heater T&P relief discharge requirements to comply with IRC P2804.6.1, including providing the required air gap in the same room as the water heater and revising the termination height criteria to meet the code maximum (not more than 6 inches above the floor o...

RFI draft: Revise the water heater T&P relief discharge requirements to comply with IRC P2804.6.1, including providing the required air gap in the same room as the water heater and revising the termination height criteria to meet the code maximum (not more t...

Summary: IRC Section R314.3 item 1 requires smoke alarms to be installed "In each sleeping room." The electrical plan shows smoke detector (SD) hexagon symbols placed only in hallways and corridors outside bedrooms. A detailed review of the electrical devices shown in each bedroom confirms that no SD symbol is located inside the Master Bedroom, Bedroom #3, Bedroom #4, or Bedroom #5. The Master Bedroom t...

Why it matters: This is a life-safety deficiency that will cause the electrical rough-in and final inspections to fail. If not corrected before drywall, adding hardwired, interconnected smoke alarm wiring inside finished bedroom ceilings will require opening up completed ceiling assemblies, causing significant r...

Suggested next step: Request the electrical designer confirm placement of smoke alarms inside each sleeping room (Master Bedroom, Bedroom #3, Bedroom #4, and Bedroom #5) in compliance with IRC R314.3 item 1, and issue a revised electrical plan showing the SD symbols within each of these rooms with...

RFI draft: Request the electrical designer confirm placement of smoke alarms inside each sleeping room (Master Bedroom, Bedroom #3, Bedroom #4, and Bedroom #5) in compliance with IRC R314.3 item 1, and issue a revised electrical plan showing the SD symbols w...

Summary: Sheet 6.1 (Framing Plan Option 'B') shows two section cut lines referencing Sheet 7.1: one labeled 'A/7.1' and another labeled 'B/7.1'. However, Sheet 7.1 (Building Section Plan) only contains BLDG. SECTION 'C' and BLDG. SECTION 'D'. There are no sections labeled 'A' or 'B' anywhere on Sheet 7.1. The section cut lines on the framing plan therefore point to non-existent sections on the reference...

Why it matters: This cross-reference mismatch means the framing contractor and building inspector cannot verify the roof framing conditions, bearing connections, and wall-to-roof transitions shown on the framing plan against the intended building sections. Without correctly referenced building sections, critical...

Suggested next step: Request clarification on the section cut references on Sheet 6.1: Are the section cut lines labeled 'A/7.1' and 'B/7.1' intended to reference BLDG. SECTION 'C' and BLDG. SECTION 'D' on Sheet 7.1, respectively? If so, please revise the section cut labels on Sheet 6.1 (or the se...

RFI draft: Request clarification on the section cut references on Sheet 6.1: Are the section cut lines labeled 'A/7.1' and 'B/7.1' intended to reference BLDG. SECTION 'C' and BLDG. SECTION 'D' on Sheet 7.1, respectively? If so, please revise the section cut ...

Summary: Sheet 2.0 (Foundation Plan) Keynote 2 specifies an allowable soil bearing of 1500 PSF at 18" below finished grade. Sheet D5 (Post-Tension Details) consistently specifies 1250 PSF minimum soil bearing capacity across multiple details (Details 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 6A, 9, 9A, 10, 11) and in its foundation design notes. Since D5 explicitly references the Foundation Plan (sheet 2.0) for footing sizes and ...

Why it matters: Soil bearing capacity is a fundamental design parameter that directly governs footing sizes, slab thicknesses, and overall foundation adequacy. A 250 PSF discrepancy (1500 vs 1250 PSF) could mean the post-tension slab was designed for a less capable soil condition while the conventional footing k...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the design allowable soil bearing capacity for this project. Sheet 2.0 Keynote 2 states 1500 PSF while Sheet D5 post-tension notes and details consistently state 1250 PSF. Which value governs, and do any footing sizes, slab dimensions, or reinforcement schedules...

RFI draft: Please clarify the design allowable soil bearing capacity for this project. Sheet 2.0 Keynote 2 states 1500 PSF while Sheet D5 post-tension notes and details consistently state 1250 PSF. Which value governs, and do any footing sizes, slab dimensio...

Summary: Sheet 2.0 (Foundation Plan) Keynote 1 calls for a 4" concrete slab at 3000 PSI. Sheet D5 (Post-Tension Details) foundation notes state the design is for a concrete strength of 3500 PSI with a minimum 28-day strength of 3500 PSI. Since D5 provides post-tension details applicable to the same Foundation Option 'A' shown on sheet 2.0, and multiple D5 details reference the Foundation Plan for dimens...

Why it matters: Concrete compressive strength is a critical specification that affects structural capacity, post-tensioning force transfer, anchorage design, and mix design. The 500 PSI difference (3000 vs 3500 PSI) will result in different concrete mix designs, testing criteria, and potentially different costs....

Suggested next step: Please clarify the required concrete compressive strength for the slab-on-grade. Sheet 2.0 Keynote 1 specifies 3000 PSI while Sheet D5 post-tension notes specify a minimum of 3500 PSI at 28 days. Which strength governs the concrete mix design, and should the Foundation Plan ke...

RFI draft: Please clarify the required concrete compressive strength for the slab-on-grade. Sheet 2.0 Keynote 1 specifies 3000 PSI while Sheet D5 post-tension notes specify a minimum of 3500 PSI at 28 days. Which strength governs the concrete mix design, and...

Summary: Sheet 2.1 identifies the work as “FOUNDATION OPTION 'B'” for elevations D/E/F and specifies a conventional slab: “1. 4” (3000 PSI) CONCRETE SLAB OVER 4” ABC FILL.” Sheet 2.2 also labels the work as “FOUNDATION OPTION 'B'” for elevations D/E/F, but the plan calls out a post-tensioned slab: “9 1/4" THK. P.T. SLAB (f'c = 3500 PSI) W/ 1/2" DIA. TENDONS”. Additionally, the D3 detail sheet is explici...

Why it matters: Choosing the wrong foundation system (conventional vs post-tension) affects structural design, inspection requirements, tendon layout/installation, concrete mix, reinforcing/anchor details, and cost/schedule. Construction could proceed with incompatible details (e.g., conventional slab edge/footi...

Suggested next step: Confirm which foundation system governs for “FOUNDATION OPTION 'B'” for Elevation Options D, E, and F: (1) conventional 4" (3000 PSI) slab-on-grade or (2) 9 1/4" (3500 PSI) post-tensioned slab. Provide the correct governing sheet(s) and clarify whether sheets 2.1 and D3/D4 det...

RFI draft: Confirm which foundation system governs for “FOUNDATION OPTION 'B'” for Elevation Options D, E, and F: (1) conventional 4" (3000 PSI) slab-on-grade or (2) 9 1/4" (3500 PSI) post-tensioned slab. Provide the correct governing sheet(s) and clarify wh...

Summary: The foundation plan general note specifies "ALL SILL BOLTS ARE 1/2" DIAMETER @ 48" O.C." and Keynote 4 also specifies "1/2" DIAMETER x 10" ANCHOR BOLTS @ 48" O/C". However, the Structural Notes on Sheet 1, Note H under Frame Construction, requires "5/8" DIA. ANCHOR BOLTS AT 48" O.C." for all sole plates at exterior walls. The drawing calls for a 1/2" diameter bolt while the specification requir...

Why it matters: Anchor bolts transfer lateral (wind and seismic) and uplift forces from the wood framing to the concrete foundation. Using 1/2" bolts instead of the specified 5/8" bolts reduces the shear and tension capacity of the sill plate-to-foundation connection. This could result in non-compliance with the...

Suggested next step: Request clarification from the structural engineer on the correct anchor bolt diameter for sill/sole plate connections. The foundation plan notes specify 1/2" diameter while the structural general notes require 5/8" diameter. Ask the engineer to confirm the correct size and is...

RFI draft: Request clarification from the structural engineer on the correct anchor bolt diameter for sill/sole plate connections. The foundation plan notes specify 1/2" diameter while the structural general notes require 5/8" diameter. Ask the engineer to c...

Summary: Detail 10 (CONC. FTG / FRAMED COLUMN) specifies '1/2" DIA. ANCHOR BOLTS' and Detail 15 (CONC FTG / EXT WALL THEATER) also specifies '1/2" DIA. ANCHOR BOLTS' for the pressure-treated sole plate anchorage at exterior wall conditions. Both details depict exterior wall configurations with weep screed and exterior finish notes. However, the General Structural Notes require 5/8" diameter anchor bolts...

Why it matters: Using 1/2" diameter anchor bolts instead of the specified 5/8" diameter reduces the shear and tension capacity of the anchorage connection between the wood framing and the concrete foundation. This directly affects the lateral load path, particularly under wind and seismic loading. The reduced ca...

Suggested next step: Request the structural engineer confirm the correct anchor bolt diameter for exterior wall sole plates. The structural specification calls for 5/8" diameter anchor bolts while Details 10 and 15 show 1/2" diameter. Clarify which diameter governs, and if 5/8" is correct, revise ...

RFI draft: Request the structural engineer confirm the correct anchor bolt diameter for exterior wall sole plates. The structural specification calls for 5/8" diameter anchor bolts while Details 10 and 15 show 1/2" diameter. Clarify which diameter governs, a...

Summary: Multiple exterior wall foundation details on this sheet specify 1/2" diameter anchor bolts for exterior sole plate anchorage, whereas the structural specification Note H requires 5/8" diameter anchor bolts at exterior walls. Detail 1 (CONC FTG / EXT WALL) calls for "1/2" DIA. ANCHOR BOLTS" with "3/16" x 1 1/2" MIN. WASHERS," Detail 2 (CONC FTG / EXT WALL) calls for "1/2" DIA. ANCHOR BOLTS" with...

Why it matters: Anchor bolt diameter is a critical structural element for transferring lateral (seismic and wind) loads from the wood framing to the concrete foundation. Using 1/2" bolts instead of the specified 5/8" bolts reduces the shear and tension capacity of the connection. Given the project's seismic desi...

Suggested next step: Request the structural engineer clarify the correct anchor bolt diameter for exterior wall sole plates. The structural notes specify 5/8" diameter anchor bolts with 2" washers per Note H, while all exterior wall foundation details (Details 1, 2, and 4) show 1/2" diameter bolts...

RFI draft: Request the structural engineer clarify the correct anchor bolt diameter for exterior wall sole plates. The structural notes specify 5/8" diameter anchor bolts with 2" washers per Note H, while all exterior wall foundation details (Details 1, 2, a...

Summary: Detail 19 (CONCR. SLAB TO STEP) calls out '#4 BAR CONT. W 12" MIN. OVERLAP' for the continuous reinforcing bar through the stepped slab condition. The structural specification requires lap splices in concrete to be a minimum of 48 bar diameters. For a #4 bar (0.5" nominal diameter), 48 bar diameters equals 24". The detail's 12" minimum overlap is only half the required lap splice length.

Why it matters: An inadequate lap splice length means the reinforcing bars cannot develop their full tensile capacity at the splice location. At a stepped slab condition where the concrete must resist bending and shear at the step, insufficient splice length could result in a reinforcing bond failure. This is a ...

Suggested next step: Request clarification from the Structural Engineer on the required minimum overlap/lap splice length for the #4 continuous bars shown in Detail 19. The structural notes specify 48 bar diameters minimum for lap splices (24" for #4 bars), but the detail shows only 12" minimum ov...

RFI draft: Request clarification from the Structural Engineer on the required minimum overlap/lap splice length for the #4 continuous bars shown in Detail 19. The structural notes specify 48 bar diameters minimum for lap splices (24" for #4 bars), but the de...

Summary: Detail 14 (CONCR. SLAB TO STEP) specifies '#4 BAR CONT. W 12" MIN. OVERLAP' for the reinforcing bar splice at the slab-to-step connection. The General Structural Notes under Reinforcing Steel require lap splices in concrete to be 48 bar diameters minimum. For a #4 bar (nominal diameter 0.5"), the minimum required lap splice length is 48 × 0.5" = 24". The detail shows only 12" of overlap, which ...

Why it matters: An insufficient lap splice length can result in a bond failure between the rebar and concrete at the splice location, compromising the continuity of the reinforcement through the stepped slab section. This could lead to cracking or structural failure at the step under service or ultimate loads. T...

Suggested next step: Request the structural engineer confirm the required lap splice length for the #4 continuous bar in Detail 14 (CONCR. SLAB TO STEP). The structural specification requires lap splices to be 48 bar diameters minimum (24" for #4 bars), but the detail shows only 12" minimum overla...

RFI draft: Request the structural engineer confirm the required lap splice length for the #4 continuous bar in Detail 14 (CONCR. SLAB TO STEP). The structural specification requires lap splices to be 48 bar diameters minimum (24" for #4 bars), but the detail...

Summary: The PT slab notes on the drawing specify ASTM A615 Grade 40 (Fy = 40 ksi) for all bars #4 and smaller, while the structural specification requires ASTM A615 Grade 60 (Fy = 60,000 PSI) for ALL bars regardless of size. Many details on this sheet call for #4 bars (e.g., (1) #4 CONT. REBAR at slab edges, (2) #4 CONT. BAR at footings, #4 x48" LONG REBAR at holdowns, (4) #4 VERT. at columns). Using G...

Why it matters: If Grade 40 bars are installed where Grade 60 is required, the reinforcement will have only 67% of the specified yield capacity. This directly affects the structural adequacy of all foundation elements utilizing #4 bars, including edge beams, interior footings, and holdown anchorage zones. This d...

Suggested next step: Request clarification from the structural engineer on the required reinforcing steel grade for #4 and smaller bars. The PT slab notes specify ASTM A615 Grade 40 while the General Structural Notes specify ASTM A615 Grade 60 for all bars. Confirm which grade governs and whether ...

RFI draft: Request clarification from the structural engineer on the required reinforcing steel grade for #4 and smaller bars. The PT slab notes specify ASTM A615 Grade 40 while the General Structural Notes specify ASTM A615 Grade 60 for all bars. Confirm wh...