Single-Family Residence: 13 Issues Found

Summary: 14 index entries | 5 perfect matches | 9 mismatched | 0 missing Mismatched (9): A1: Expected: SITE PLAN | Actual: PROPOSED SITE PLAN (p2) A2: Expected: DEMOLITION PLAN | Actual: DEMOLITION FLOOR PLAN (p3) D1: Expected: DETAILS | Actual: ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS (p6) P1: Expected: SANITARY DEMOLITION PLAN | ...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft: 📄 CS Schedule Text: DRAWING INDEX — page 1

Summary: The Site Data table on sheet A1 lists 'FLOOD ZONE 12099C1178G.' However, 12099C1178G is a FIRM (Flood Insurance Rate Map) panel number, not a flood zone designation. Per ASCE 7-22 Section 5.2, flood zones are designated using specific alpha-numeric codes such as A-Zones (A, AE, A1-30, A99, AR, AO, or AH) or V-Zones (V, VE, VO, or V1-30) for...

Why it matters: Without the actual flood zone designation, it cannot be determined whether the building is within a Special Flood Hazard Area requiring compliance with ASCE 7-22 Section 5.3.1 flood load design, Section 5.3.2 erosion and scour provisions, and associated requirements of ASCE/SEI 24. For a canal-adjacent residential property in South Florida,...

Suggested next step: Request the design team confirm the actual FEMA flood zone designation (e.g., AE, VE, X, etc.) for the property from FIRM panel 12099C1178G and update the Site Data accordingly. If the property is within a Special Flood Hazard Area, confirm that the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) and Design Flood Elevation (DFE) have been established and that the...

RFI draft: Request the design team confirm the actual FEMA flood zone designation (e.g., AE, VE, X, etc.) for the property from FIRM panel 12099C1178G and update the Site Data accordingly. If the property is within a Special Flood Hazard Area, confirm that the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) and Design Flood...

Summary: Sheet D1 contains two different details both numbered 9/D1: the TUB WALL DETAIL (showing a DensSHIELD® tile backer assembly at a bathtub edge) and the FRAMED WALL PLASTER DETAIL (showing a metal stud interior partition with gypsum wall board on a concrete floor slab). The proposed floor plan on sheet A3 includes a callout bubble reading '9'...

Why it matters: During construction, the framing crew and tile installers at the BATH tub wall will not know whether to follow the TUB WALL DETAIL (DensSHIELD® tile backer with flexible sealant at the tub lip) or the FRAMED WALL PLASTER DETAIL (standard 1/2' gypsum wall board on metal studs). Applying the wrong assembly at the tub surround could result in...

Suggested next step: Request that the architect renumber one of the two Detail 9 entries on sheet D1 (the FRAMED WALL PLASTER DETAIL appears to be the candidate for renumbering to Detail 8, which is missing from the sequence) and confirm which detail is intended at the BATH tub wall location referenced as 9/D1 on the A3 floor plan.

RFI draft: Request that the architect renumber one of the two Detail 9 entries on sheet D1 (the FRAMED WALL PLASTER DETAIL appears to be the candidate for renumbering to Detail 8, which is missing from the sequence) and confirm which detail is intended at the BATH tub wall location referenced as 9/D1 on...

Summary: On A3, Keyed Note 14 explicitly requires a curbless shower sloped to “a linear drain”. However, the master “WET AREA” on the floor plan depicts a central square (point) floor drain with multiple slope callouts to the center, and the plan points to Detail 4/D1. Detail 4/D1 illustrates a single drain body connected to a vertical pipe below the...

Why it matters: This affects drain rough-in location, slab recessing, waterproofing detailing, and tile slope layout. If built per the plan/detail (point drain) while the note requires a linear drain, the installation may not match design intent and could require rework after waterproofing/tile is complete.

Suggested next step: Confirm whether the master wet area is intended to use a linear drain or a point drain. Revise Keyed Note 14 and/or the floor plan symbols and Detail 4/D1 to match the selected drain type (including drain location, slope directions, and waterproofing interface).

RFI draft: Confirm whether the master wet area is intended to use a linear drain or a point drain. Revise Keyed Note 14 and/or the floor plan symbols and Detail 4/D1 to match the selected drain type (including drain location, slope directions, and waterproofing interface).

Summary: The Plumbing Schedule lists the tub waste as 1 1/2' and the shower (SHR) waste as 2'. However, the sanitary plan/riser graphics depict 3' piping/branches associated with the tub and SHR connections. This is a direct conflict in required waste pipe sizing for these fixtures.

Why it matters: Conflicting waste sizes can lead to incorrect rough-in and inspections failures (undersized/oversized piping, incorrect fittings, and rework). It also affects slab penetrations and coordination with structural trench/opening work.

Suggested next step: Please confirm the intended waste pipe sizes for the TUB and SHR connections and revise either the Plumbing Schedule or the sanitary plan/riser diagrams so all sheets match (including any transitions/reducers if 3' mains are intended with smaller fixture arms).

RFI draft: Please confirm the intended waste pipe sizes for the TUB and SHR connections and revise either the Plumbing Schedule or the sanitary plan/riser diagrams so all sheets match (including any transitions/reducers if 3' mains are intended with smaller fixture arms).

Summary: The Architectural Proposed Floor Plan calls for a 'FREE STANDING OUTDOOR SHOWER' at the Side Patio (Keyed Note 12). However, both the Sanitary Plumbing Plan (P2) and Water Supply Plan (P3) fail to route any sanitary drainage or hot/cold water supply lines to this outdoor shower location.

Why it matters: Failing to pipe the outdoor shower will result in missing underground/in-wall rough-ins for both water supply and sanitary waste, rendering the fixture unusable and causing rework after the exterior patio slab is poured.

Suggested next step: Please coordinate the plumbing drawings to provide hot/cold water supply and a sanitary drain connection for the freestanding outdoor shower at the Side Patio, as required by the architectural drawings.

RFI draft: Please coordinate the plumbing drawings to provide hot/cold water supply and a sanitary drain connection for the freestanding outdoor shower at the Side Patio, as required by the architectural drawings.

Summary: Sheet A3 lists the conditioned floor area as 'EXISTING A/C AREA 3087 SF' while the electrical service load calculation on sheet E1 is based on '2636 sq. ft. @ 3 watts sq. ft 7908 watts'. These are conflicting area values for the same residence and will change the computed general load and downstream service demand math.

Why it matters: If the electrical load calc is using an understated square footage, the calculated dwelling load may be underreported, potentially affecting feeder/service sizing, panel capacity, and permit review acceptance of the load calculations.

Suggested next step: Confirm the correct floor area to be used for the NEC dwelling unit load calculation and revise the electrical 'SERVICE LOAD CALCULATIONS' to match the project’s documented A/C area (or clearly identify what spaces are intentionally excluded and why).

RFI draft: Confirm the correct floor area to be used for the NEC dwelling unit load calculation and revise the electrical 'SERVICE LOAD CALCULATIONS' to match the project’s documented A/C area (or clearly identify what spaces are intentionally excluded and why).

Summary: Detail 1/S2 contains contradictory instructions for preparing the existing slab before pouring the new 4' concrete topping slab. The note requires the contractor to 'BUSH HAMMER EXISTING SLAB TO ROUGHEN SURFACE', which is a standard practice strictly used to create a mechanical bond between old and new concrete. However, the exact same note...

Why it matters: If a bonded topping is required, the vapor barrier must be omitted. If an unbonded topping is intended, the labor-intensive bush hammering process is entirely unnecessary. This creates an impossible condition for the contractor and could lead to incorrect installation or wasted labor.

Suggested next step: Please clarify if the new 4' topping slab at the existing shower recess is intended to be a bonded or unbonded topping. If bonded, confirm that the 6 mil vapor barrier should be omitted. If unbonded, confirm that bush hammering the existing slab is not required.

RFI draft: Please clarify if the new 4' topping slab at the existing shower recess is intended to be a bonded or unbonded topping. If bonded, confirm that the 6 mil vapor barrier should be omitted. If unbonded, confirm that bush hammering the existing slab is not required.

Summary: On the architectural floor plan (Sheet A3), the lower-right bathroom is labeled 'BATH', while the plumbing sanitary and water supply plans label the corresponding bathroom as 'GUEST BATH'. Also, Sheet A3 labels the remodeled bathroom as 'NEW BATH3', while the plumbing plans label it 'BATH3'. These inconsistent room identifiers can cause...

Why it matters: If room naming is not consistent across disciplines, the contractor/inspector can misapply fixture counts, rough-in locations, and tie-in points (especially where there are multiple bathrooms), leading to rework and delays.

Suggested next step: Please confirm the correct bathroom naming convention to be used consistently across A3, P2, and P3 (e.g., is 'BATH' intended to be 'GUEST BATH'?), and confirm whether 'NEW BATH3' and 'BATH3' refer to the same room. Update sheet labels accordingly for coordination.

RFI draft: Please confirm the correct bathroom naming convention to be used consistently across A3, P2, and P3 (e.g., is 'BATH' intended to be 'GUEST BATH'?), and confirm whether 'NEW BATH3' and 'BATH3' refer to the same room. Update sheet labels accordingly for coordination.

Summary: The Architectural plan defines separate adjacent spaces for 'WC' (Water Closet) and 'CL' (Closet). The Electrical plan correctly places an exhaust fan symbol in the WC, but the Mechanical plan calls for an exhaust fan (EF-1) in the CL.

Why it matters: Installing an exhaust fan in a standard closet instead of the adjacent water closet violates building code requirements for bathroom ventilation and will require field rerouting of mechanical ductwork and electrical connections.

Suggested next step: Please confirm the exhaust fan labeled EF-1 near the 'CL' on the Mechanical Plan should be relocated to the adjacent 'WC' as shown on the Electrical Plan, and update the mechanical duct routing accordingly.

RFI draft: Please confirm the exhaust fan labeled EF-1 near the 'CL' on the Mechanical Plan should be relocated to the adjacent 'WC' as shown on the Electrical Plan, and update the mechanical duct routing accordingly.

Summary: On the proposed floor plan (A3), the window opening at the top (north) wall of the WET AREA is identified with a hexagonal tag 'A', which per the symbols legend denotes a WINDOW TYPE. However, the window schedule on the same sheet lists only one window mark: '1' (FROSTED GLASS, 6'-0' × 5'-0', IMPACT RESISTANT), with no entry for mark 'A'. The...

Why it matters: This tagging inconsistency may cause confusion during window procurement and installation. The contractor will be unable to match the plan window tag 'A' to a schedule entry, potentially delaying the order of the impact-resistant frosted glass unit. For permitting review, the inconsistent tagging between plan and elevation could prompt reviewer...

Suggested next step: Request that the architect clarify the correct window type mark for the WET AREA window opening on the A3 floor plan. Confirm whether the hexagonal tag should read '1' (to match the window schedule and rear elevation on A4) instead of 'A', and update the affected drawing accordingly.

RFI draft: Request that the architect clarify the correct window type mark for the WET AREA window opening on the A3 floor plan. Confirm whether the hexagonal tag should read '1' (to match the window schedule and rear elevation on A4) instead of 'A', and update the affected drawing accordingly.

Summary: The Mechanical Plan shows an exhaust fan (EF-3) located inside the Master Bath Wet Area, and EF-1 in Bath 3. The Electrical Plan correctly provides a matching exhaust fan symbol (half-shaded circle), circuit, and switching for Bath 3. However, for the Master Bath, the Electrical Plan shows the exhaust fan symbol located outside the Wet Area in...

Why it matters: A location discrepancy between the mechanical and electrical plans could lead to the exhaust fan being roughed-in at the incorrect location. This would fail to provide dedicated ventilation for the Wet Area as intended by the mechanical design, potentially leading to moisture issues and rework.

Suggested next step: Please clarify the intended location for the Master Bath exhaust fan (EF-3). Should it be installed inside the Wet Area per the Mechanical Plan, or in the main Master Bath space per the Electrical Plan? Please update the drawings to coordinate.

RFI draft: Please clarify the intended location for the Master Bath exhaust fan (EF-3). Should it be installed inside the Wet Area per the Mechanical Plan, or in the main Master Bath space per the Electrical Plan? Please update the drawings to coordinate.

Summary: The Proposed Floor Plan tags the exterior gate at the Side Patio with a circular door tag '2', which aligns with the Exterior Door Schedule that lists Mark '2' as a Swing Fence Gate. However, the Rear Elevation points to this proposed fence gate with a circular tag '5'. The Interior Door Schedule identifies Mark '5' as an interior raised panel...

Why it matters: Referencing an interior door mark for an exterior gate on the elevation creates a contradiction between the plan/schedule and the elevation, which could lead to errors in door and hardware ordering.

Suggested next step: Please confirm that the tag on the Rear Elevation for the composite board fence gate should be updated from '5' to '2' to align with the Floor Plan and Exterior Door Schedule.

RFI draft: Please confirm that the tag on the Rear Elevation for the composite board fence gate should be updated from '5' to '2' to align with the Floor Plan and Exterior Door Schedule.

Summary: Architectural keyed notes for toilet demolition explicitly include drain line relocation as part of the scope, while the plumbing demolition plan note instructs to cut and cap existing sanitary lines from existing fixtures. These instructions conflict on whether existing sanitary piping is to be relocated versus cut/capped during demolition.

Why it matters: Demolition sequencing and slab trenching/patching expectations differ significantly depending on whether drains are merely capped for later rework versus relocated during the demolition phase. This can impact inspection readiness and coordination with structural slab repair details.

Suggested next step: Clarify the intended demolition-phase treatment of existing toilet sanitary piping: should lines be cut and capped only, or relocated as part of demolition? If relocation is required, identify the affected fixtures/lines and whether slab trenching/patching is part of this demolition scope.

RFI draft: Clarify the intended demolition-phase treatment of existing toilet sanitary piping: should lines be cut and capped only, or relocated as part of demolition? If relocation is required, identify the affected fixtures/lines and whether slab trenching/patching is part of this demolition scope.