Ontario CA Commercial Plan Review: 77 Issues Found

Summary: 20 index entries | 17 perfect matches | 2 mismatched | 1 missing Mismatched (2): T-1: Expected: COVER SHEET SITE (T-1) | Actual: SITE PLAN (T-1)(p1) WSWH1: Expected: STRONGWALL DETAILS (WSWH1) | Actual: STRONG-WALL® WSWH ANCHORAGE DETAI (WSWH1)(p16) Missing (1), listed in drawing index but not found in the document: SWWH: - SWWH2 STRONGWALL DETAILS

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: Sheet A-6 building sections consistently call out the floor diaphragm sheathing as '5/8" PLYWOOD (CDX) T&G UNBLOCKED P.I. INDEX 13/16' in both Section A and Section B. However, Sheet S-1 Wood Framing Note 10B specifies floor sheathing as '5/8" PLYWOOD, (T&G) … INDEX #32/16'. The span rating 13/16 and 32/16 designate different structural panel products with different load-carrying capacities. A 32/16 rated panel is significantly stronger than a 13/16 rated panel.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: Foundation Detail 9 on S-2 specifies "HARDY FRAME" details on sheet HFX1.2 and a standard "P.T. BOT. PLATE" base connection for the pre-fab shear walls. However, the foundation plan on S-2 points to sheet "WHWH1" (a typo for WSWH1) for a WSW-24x8 panel. Sheets WSWH1 and WSWH2N.T.S. contain details exclusively for the competing Simpson "STRONG-WALL WSWH" system, which does not use a treated bottom plate but instead sits directly on the foundation secured with heavy bearing plates and heavy hex nuts.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The foundation plan on S-2 explicitly specifies 1 1/8" diameter standard anchor bolts for the WSW-24x8 shear wall. However, the manufacturer's details and schedules for the Simpson Strong-Wall (WSWH) on sheets WSWH1 and WSWH2N.T.S. mandate the use of proprietary 1" diameter high-strength anchor bolts (WSWH-AB) for all WSWH24 panels.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The drawing specifies 3/4" CDX plywood for floor sheathing, utilizing 8d nails at 6" O.C. for edges and 12" O.C. for the field. The structural specification requires 5/8" Plywood (T&G), utilizing larger 10d nails throughout, spaced at 6" O.C. for edges and 10" O.C. for the field.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The drawing's Vent Note 1 specifies mesh openings with a maximum of 1/4" for attic ventilation openings. The specification Section 504.10.2, which specifically governs vents installed on a sloped roof such as dormer vents, requires that mesh openings 'shall not exceed 1/8 inch (3.2 mm).' The drawing's dormer vents (Key Note 4: '12 X 24 HALF ROUND DORMER VENT') are sloped-roof vents that fall directly under Section 504.10.2. The 1/4" maximum shown on the drawing is twice the allowed 1/8" maximum, a clear and measurable conflict.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The drawing contains multiple calculation and sizing errors that result in severely undersized gas piping. First, the 'GAS LOAD CALCULATIONS' compute a total new load of 531,000 BTUH, but incorrectly conclude 'WE NEED 1 1/4" GAS PIPE', which only has a maximum capacity of 528,000 BTUH according to the provided schedule. Second, the actual Gas Plan contradicts this calculation by showing a '3/4" GAS' main line entering the building from the gas meter. Third, the load calculation indicates the Gas Range Stove requires 137,000 BTUH (which requires a minimum 3/4" pipe), but the Gas Plan shows a '1

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The drawing shows a new construction residence with an attached private garage labeled '(N) GARAGE'. The Electrical Plan 1st Floor details all garage electrical provisions including fluorescent lights, GFCI outlets, an AFCI receptacle for a garage door opener, and switching circuits, but does not show any raceway originating at the service panel terminating in the garage for EV charging, nor a reserved 40-ampere 208/240-volt dedicated branch circuit space in the panel. Section 4.106.4.1 mandates that for each dwelling unit with an attached private garage, a listed raceway (not less than trade

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The window schedule on drawing A-3 specifies Window C as a 3'-0" × 3'-0" vinyl slider window (quantity 2). The proposed 2nd floor plan shows Window C assigned to both (N) Bedroom #4 and (N) Bedroom #5. The drawing's own legend defines emergency egress window requirements as 20" minimum clear width and 5.7 sq ft minimum net clear opening. A standard horizontal slider window with a 3'-0" (36") nominal width provides a maximum clear opening width of approximately half the nominal width minus frame, roughly 16" to 17", which is less than the required 20" minimum clear width. The resulting net clear

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The drawing contains mathematical mistakes in the calculated seismic parameters under the 'DESIGN CRITERIA' schedule. It lists S(s) = 1.50 and F(a) = 1.20, which mathematically results in an S(ds) of 1.20 (calculated as 2/3 × S(s) × F(a)), but the table incorrectly states S(ds) = 1.50. Similarly, it lists S(1) = 0.60 and F(v) = 1.70, which should yield S(d1) = 0.68, but the table incorrectly states S(dl) = 0.60. Furthermore, the listed Seismic Response Coefficient C(s) = 0.154 directly conflicts with the stated S(ds) = 1.50 and R = 6.5 values (1.50 / 6.5 = 0.231).

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The legend on the electrical plan specifies a '200 AMP ELECTRICAL PANEL.' Section 150.0(s) requires all single-family residences with electrical service greater than 125 amps to comply with BESS-ready requirements, including Section 150.0(s)3 which mandates the main panelboard have a minimum busbar rating of 225 amps. The 200A panel shown on the drawing does not meet this requirement. No BESS system is shown installed, so the exception to Section 150.0(s) does not apply.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The Title 24 energy model lists both 'Slab-on-Grade' (Area: 1136 sqft) and 'Slab-on-Grade 2' (Area: 96 sqft) as having an exposed 'Perimeter (ft)' of exactly 0.1. It is mathematically and physically impossible for slabs of these areas to have a perimeter of 0.1 ft.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The structural Design Criteria lists a general 'FLOOR LL = 40 PSF'. However, specification section 16-311 requires that any floor areas adjacent to bookstacks or potentially available for future bookstack installation must be designed to the same floor load standards as the bookstacks themselves (which typically require much higher loads, such as 150 PSF). A blanket 40 PSF floor live load is inadequate for library stack areas and violates the specification.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The site plan shows a lot width of only 43.30 feet (PL 43.30') and a property depth of 155.00 feet. The front setback from the property line to the new porch is dimensioned as 26'-2", which is less than 30 feet. Horizontal dimensions near the new garage area show 4'-1" from the property line, far less than 30 feet. Section 608.2 of the specification requires "a minimum 30-foot setback for all buildings from property lines and the center of a road." All shown setbacks for new construction (new garage at 423 SQ. FT., new porch at 70 SQ. FT., new addition at 96 SQ. FT.) are significantly less tha

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The drawings indicate a total floor area of 858 sq. ft. for the new addition, yet specify a Forced Air Unit (FAU) with a massive 137,000 BTUH capacity. This extreme oversizing demonstrates the equipment was not selected according to ANSI/ACCA 3 Manual S, directly violating the HVAC sizing methodology required by CALGreen Section 4.507.2.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft: