Plan Review: 65 Issues Found

Summary: 81 index entries | 14 perfect matches | 26 mismatched | 41 missing Mismatched (26): A001: Expected: TITLE SHEET (A001) | Actual: INDEX (A001)(p1) A001F: Expected: FIRE DEPARTMENT SITE PLAN (A001F) | Actual: FIRE DEPARTMENT WATER & ACCESS (A001F)(p2) A002: Expected: MALIBU GENERAL NOTES (A002) | Actual: CITY OF MALIBU RES GEN NOTES (A002)(p3) A003: Expected: TYPE V...

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: 41 missing, 26 mismatched out of 81 sheets

Summary: General Note 18 on the cover sheet states that water-resistant gypsum backing board complying with ASTM C840 shall be used as a base for tile or wall panels for tub, shower, or water closet compartment walls. However, CBC Section 2509.2 explicitly requires that materials used as a base for wall tile in tub and shower areas shall be of materials listed in Table 2509.2 (ASTM C1178 glass mat gypsu...

Why it matters: If a contractor follows Note 18 as written and installs water-resistant gypsum backing board (commonly known as 'green board') behind tile in tub and shower areas, the gypsum will deteriorate from moisture exposure, leading to tile failure, mold growth, and water damage to the wall framing. This ...

Suggested next step: Request that Note 18 be revised to clearly distinguish the requirements for tub/shower areas from water closet compartment walls. For tub and shower areas, the note should specify that tile backing materials must comply with CBC Table 2509.2 (e.g., cement backer board per ASTM...

RFI draft: Request that Note 18 be revised to clearly distinguish the requirements for tub/shower areas from water closet compartment walls. For tub and shower areas, the note should specify that tile backing materials must comply with CBC Table 2509.2 (e.g....

Summary: Detail 6 (TERRACE GUARD GLASS) specifies '1/2" tempered glass (42" above finish floor), typ.' for the guardrail. Section 2407.1 requires that glass used in a guard 'shall be laminated glass constructed of fully tempered or heat-strengthened glass.' The drawing calls for tempered glass but does not specify laminated construction, which is a direct violation of the code requirement. The exception...

Why it matters: This is a life-safety issue. Non-laminated tempered glass in a guard application will completely shatter upon breakage and fall as small fragments, potentially injuring occupants below. This will fail plan check and field inspection. Laminated glass is a fundamentally different product than monol...

Suggested next step: Request the architect to revise Detail 6 (TERRACE GUARD GLASS) to specify laminated glass constructed of fully tempered or heat-strengthened glass in compliance with CBC Section 2407.1. Confirm the laminate interlayer type (e.g., PVB or SGP) and total glass makeup (e.g., two p...

RFI draft: Request the architect to revise Detail 6 (TERRACE GUARD GLASS) to specify laminated glass constructed of fully tempered or heat-strengthened glass in compliance with CBC Section 2407.1. Confirm the laminate interlayer type (e.g., PVB or SGP) and t...

Summary: The 'WALL SECTION' details for both raised floor and slab-on-grade construction specify 'R-30 BATT. INSUL.' installed between the sloped '2x ROOF RAFTERS'. Below these rafters, flat ceiling joist framing is shown, creating an enclosed attic space. The framing notes state that 'ENCLOSED ATTICS... SHALL HAVE CROSS VENTILATION'. However, placing the primary thermal insulation at the roof rafter le...

Why it matters: Because the attic is ventilated with outside air, insulation placed at the roof line will be bypassed by the airflow entering through the eave vents. This leaves the conditioned space below the uninsulated ceiling fully exposed to unconditioned air, resulting in severe thermal loss, failing manda...

Suggested next step: Please revise the building section details to correctly indicate the R-30 mandatory insulation at the ceiling joist level for vented attic configurations, or specify an unvented attic design if the insulation is to remain at the roof rafters, to comply with CEnC Section 150.0(...

RFI draft: Please revise the building section details to correctly indicate the R-30 mandatory insulation at the ceiling joist level for vented attic configurations, or specify an unvented attic design if the insulation is to remain at the roof rafters, to c...

Summary: The 'Gas Demand Table' indicates a Total Developed Length (TDL) of 200 FT and a total demand of 1215 CFH, sizing the residential gas service at 2-1/2". However, the provided 'GAS SIZING TABLE' is explicitly based on a 'TDL = 100'', which states a 2-1/2" pipe provides 1270 CFH. Because the actual run is 200 FT, the flow capacity of the 2-1/2" pipe will be significantly less than 1270 CFH and wil...

Why it matters: Sizing gas lines using a sizing table meant for a shorter run overestimates the pipe's carrying capacity. This results in severely undersized gas piping, which can cause insufficient gas pressure to appliances, equipment malfunction, safety hazards, and failure during inspection.

Suggested next step: Please provide gas sizing calculations based on the actual TDL of 200 FT. Verify if the 2-1/2" gas service line provides sufficient capacity for the 1215 CFH total demand at 200 FT, and revise the service pipe size if necessary.

RFI draft: Please provide gas sizing calculations based on the actual TDL of 200 FT. Verify if the 2-1/2" gas service line provides sufficient capacity for the 1215 CFH total demand at 200 FT, and revise the service pipe size if necessary.

Summary: The Wall Section: Slab-on-Grade Construction detail explicitly specifies a "6 MIL VAPOR BARRIER" beneath the concrete slab. Section R506.2.3 of the 2022 California Residential Code requires a minimum 10-mil vapor retarder conforming to ASTM E1745 Class A. The drawing specification of 6 mil is 40% thinner than the code-required minimum of 10 mil, which is a direct and measurable code violation.

Why it matters: If the contractor follows this detail and installs a 6-mil vapor barrier, it will fail inspection under Section R506.2.3. Correcting this after the slab is poured would require demolition and replacement of the concrete slab, resulting in significant cost overruns and project delays. Since this i...

Suggested next step: Request that the designer revise the slab-on-grade wall section detail to specify a minimum 10-mil vapor retarder conforming to ASTM E1745 Class A in accordance with Section R506.2.3, and correct the code reference from R506.2.2 (base course) to R506.2.3 (vapor retarder).

RFI draft: Request that the designer revise the slab-on-grade wall section detail to specify a minimum 10-mil vapor retarder conforming to ASTM E1745 Class A in accordance with Section R506.2.3, and correct the code reference from R506.2.2 (base course) to R...

Summary: The drawing shows a bedroom in the middle-left area of the floor plan (identified by bed and nightstand outlines). However, there is no smoke/carbon monoxide detector (SD CM) symbol shown inside the sleeping room itself, only one in the adjacent hallway. CRC Section R314.3 requires a smoke alarm to be installed inside each sleeping room.

Why it matters: Omitting a required smoke alarm inside a sleeping room is a critical life safety violation. If missed, this will result in a failed final inspection and will require post-drywall electrical rework to add the necessary wiring and device.

Suggested next step: Please revise the reflected ceiling plan to add a combination smoke/carbon monoxide detector (SD CM) inside the bedroom to comply with CRC Section R314.3.

RFI draft: Please revise the reflected ceiling plan to add a combination smoke/carbon monoxide detector (SD CM) inside the bedroom to comply with CRC Section R314.3.

Summary: The drawing details the unvented roof assembly as 'R60 4" closed + R38, see T24 2x12'. A standard nominal 2x12 framing member has an actual depth of 11.25 inches. Applying 4 inches of air-impermeable closed-cell spray foam leaves only 7.25 inches of available cavity space. To achieve an R-38 rating, any air-permeable insulation (such as fiberglass or mineral wool batt) requires a minimum thickn...

Why it matters: Attempting to construct this assembly will result in failed Title 24 energy code inspections due to the compressed insulation underperforming its rated R-value. Correcting this in the field will require costly structural redesign (e.g., deeper framing such as 2x14 or 2x16) or a complete change in...

Suggested next step: Please revise the roof framing depth or insulation strategy. An R-38 batt physically cannot fit into the remaining 7.25" of a 2x12 rafter cavity after 4" of closed-cell foam is installed. Consider increasing the rafter size, adding continuous rigid insulation above the roof de...

RFI draft: Please revise the roof framing depth or insulation strategy. An R-38 batt physically cannot fit into the remaining 7.25" of a 2x12 rafter cavity after 4" of closed-cell foam is installed. Consider increasing the rafter size, adding continuous rigi...

Summary: Form 195 on drawing A001F lists the project square footage as 5,858 sf. However, the architectural Total Development Square Footage (TDSF) is listed as 5,765 sq. ft. on A001F, which perfectly matches the sum of the proposed areas indicated on A200 (4,665 sf for the main house + 1,100 sf for the guest garage).

Why it matters: Fire flow availability and access requirements are evaluated by the Fire Department based directly on the square footage listed in Form 195. Discrepancies between the architectural area calculations and the fire department application can invalidate the approved access and water flow requirements...

Suggested next step: Please verify the total proposed square footage. Update Form 195 on A001F to accurately reflect 5,765 sf, or revise the architectural area schedules and volumetric studies if the 5,858 sf figure is the accurate total.

RFI draft: Please verify the total proposed square footage. Update Form 195 on A001F to accurately reflect 5,765 sf, or revise the architectural area schedules and volumetric studies if the 5,858 sf figure is the accurate total.

Summary: The Title-24 energy calculations on sheet N-2 model the domestic hot water system with 2 NEEA Heat Pump water heaters (Rheem XE80T10HS45U0, 80-gallon tank units located in the garage). However, the Plumbing Equipment Schedule on sheet P-0.0 specifies 3 Navien NPE-240S2 tankless gas water heaters at 200 CFH each. These are fundamentally different systems: electric heat pump with storage tank ver...

Why it matters: This conflict has critical implications for Title-24 energy compliance and permitting. The CF1R energy performance calculations were run assuming heat pump water heaters, which have significantly different energy characteristics than gas tankless units. If gas tankless water heaters are actually ...

Suggested next step: Please clarify which water heating system is to be installed: the Rheem XE80T10HS45U0 NEEA heat pump water heaters (2 units, 80-gallon) as shown in the Title-24 CF1R energy calculations on N-2, or the Navien NPE-240S2 tankless gas water heaters (3 units) as shown in the Plumbi...

RFI draft: Please clarify which water heating system is to be installed: the Rheem XE80T10HS45U0 NEEA heat pump water heaters (2 units, 80-gallon) as shown in the Title-24 CF1R energy calculations on N-2, or the Navien NPE-240S2 tankless gas water heaters (3...

Summary: There is a direct contradiction within the electrical drawings regarding the main service size. The Load Calculations summary concludes with a requirement to provide a 200A service, whereas the Single Line Diagram and Main Panel schedule both specify a 400A main panelboard.

Why it matters: This conflict directly impacts the utility service application, service entrance conductor sizing, and switchgear procurement. Ordering the incorrect service equipment will cause significant cost and schedule delays.

Suggested next step: Please clarify the required main electrical service size. Should the service be 200A as indicated in the load calculation summary, or 400A as shown on the Single Line Diagram and Main Panel 'A' schedule?

RFI draft: Please clarify the required main electrical service size. Should the service be 200A as indicated in the load calculation summary, or 400A as shown on the Single Line Diagram and Main Panel 'A' schedule?

Summary: The Vent Through Roof detail (Detail 2/P-3.0) states to 'LOCATE VTR MINIMUM THREE FEET FROM PROPERTY LINE'. However, Plumbing Note 10 on the specification sheet P-0.0 requires plumbing vents to terminate 'NOT LESS THAN 10' FROM OR AT LEAST 3' ABOVE ANY OPENABLE WINDOW, DOOR OPENING, AIR INTAKE, VENT SHAFT, ADJACENT BUILDING, AND PROPERTY LINE.' The drawing's 3-foot horizontal setback from the p...

Why it matters: A vent terminating only 3 feet from a property line instead of the required 10 feet could violate the 2022 CPC code requirements referenced in the project notes, potentially causing permitting rejection. It also poses health and nuisance concerns from sewer gases being discharged near an adjacent...

Suggested next step: Request the engineer clarify and correct the VTR property line setback dimension on Detail 2/P-3.0 to match the 10-foot minimum required by Plumbing Note 10 on P-0.0, or provide justification for the reduced distance.

RFI draft: Request the engineer clarify and correct the VTR property line setback dimension on Detail 2/P-3.0 to match the 10-foot minimum required by Plumbing Note 10 on P-0.0, or provide justification for the reduced distance.

Summary: The drawing's Glazing Notes item 1.g states safety glazing is required where "the bottom exposed edge of the glazing is less than 36 inches above the plane of the adjacent walking surface of stairways, landings between flights of stairs and ramps." Similarly, Glazing Notes item 1.h states the height threshold as "less than 36 inches above the landing" at the bottom of a stairway. However, 2022 ...

Why it matters: If the contractor or glazing subcontractor follows the drawing notes as written, non-safety glazing could be installed in stairway-adjacent locations between 36 inches and 60 inches above the walking surface, which are hazardous locations per the building code. This would result in a code violati...

Suggested next step: Request that the Architect revise Glazing Notes items 1.g and 1.h to replace the 36-inch height threshold with the code-required 60-inch threshold per CBC Sections 2406.4.6 and 2406.4.7 for safety glazing adjacent to stairways, landings, ramps, and bottom stairway landings.

RFI draft: Request that the Architect revise Glazing Notes items 1.g and 1.h to replace the 36-inch height threshold with the code-required 60-inch threshold per CBC Sections 2406.4.6 and 2406.4.7 for safety glazing adjacent to stairways, landings, ramps, an...

Summary: Detail 11 (TYPICAL FLAT ROOF + DECK DRAIN DTL) includes a note stating that if the parapet is less than 2" above the drain, overflow is not required. However, CBC Section 1502.2 requires secondary (emergency overflow) roof drains or scuppers wherever the roof perimeter construction extends above the roof in such a manner that water will be entrapped if the primary drains allow buildup for any r...

Why it matters: If this note is followed during construction, secondary overflow drains or scuppers could be omitted on roof areas where parapets are less than 2" above the drain. Should the primary drain become blocked, water would accumulate on the roof with no designed secondary drainage path. This creates a ...

Suggested next step: Request the architect to revise Detail 11 to remove the note exempting secondary overflow when the parapet is less than 2" above the drain. Confirm that secondary (emergency overflow) roof drains or scuppers are provided at all roof drain locations where any perimeter construc...

RFI draft: Request the architect to revise Detail 11 to remove the note exempting secondary overflow when the parapet is less than 2" above the drain. Confirm that secondary (emergency overflow) roof drains or scuppers are provided at all roof drain location...

Summary: The general structural notes specify a default concrete compressive strength of 2,500 PSI, with 3,000 PSI limited only to CIP piles and grade beams. This is a residential fire rebuild project (Group R-3 occupancy). Per CBC Section 1904.1 Exception, concrete in basement walls, foundation walls, exterior walls, and other vertical surfaces exposed to weather in R-3 occupancies shall have a minimum...

Why it matters: Concrete placed at only 2,500 PSI in foundation walls, stem walls, and exterior walls of this R-3 occupancy structure would fail building inspection and would need to be removed and replaced, causing significant construction delays and cost overruns. This deficiency would be caught during plan ch...

Suggested next step: Request the structural engineer revise the general concrete note to specify a minimum compressive strength of 3,000 PSI for all concrete in basement walls, foundation walls, exterior walls, and other vertical surfaces exposed to weather, in compliance with CBC Section 1904.1 E...

RFI draft: Request the structural engineer revise the general concrete note to specify a minimum compressive strength of 3,000 PSI for all concrete in basement walls, foundation walls, exterior walls, and other vertical surfaces exposed to weather, in compli...