The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About288694_2_Corrections.docxTENANT IMPROVEMENT PLAN CHECK COMMENTS COMMENTS Planning & Building Agency Building Safety Division 20 Civic Center Plaza P.O. Box 1988 (M-19) Santa Ana, CA 92702 (714) 647-5800 www.santa-ana.org PLAN CHECK NO: 104110786 PROJECT ADDRESS: 1327 N Main St PLAN CHECK ENGINEER: So, AnsonTEL:714 647-5830 EMAIL: aso@santa-ana.orgFAX:714 647-5897 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V B OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION(S): B, S-1 PLAN CHECK DATES: REMARKS/RECHECK ITEMS: APPLICATION 6/14/2022 INITIAL REVIEW 6/24/2022 EXPIRATION 12/11/2022 RECHECKS: 1. PROJECT APPLICANT CONTACT PERSON: 2. HaciKaraasaan 3. TEL: (714)454-4305 FAX: VALUATION: $75,000.00 EMAIL: ampleconstruction@gmail.com FLOOD ZONE: X-0602320163J APPLICABLE CODE: 2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC) WITH CITY OF SANTA ANA AMENDMENTS IMPORTANT NOTICE: OBTAIN PLANNING DIVISION’S CLEARANCE PRIOR TO BUILDING PLAN CHECK RESUBMITTAL. All items noted on this plan check report must be addressed. If you feel that an item is not applicable to your project, note “N/A” and discuss the reason with the plan checker.Please indicate the sheet number and detail to the right of each correction, or note the number on the plans where the correction is made. Resubmit marked original, calculations and this correction sheet. A separate sheet for response may be used.Resubmit 2corrected sets of plans.Meetings between the project applicant/designer and the plan reviewer shall be by appointment only. Please call (714) 647-5830 for an appointment.Sheet A1.0The texts on the aerial photo are upside down. Please fix the texts.First Plan Review Comment: The site plan shows six keynotes; however, there are no descriptions on those keynotes.Second Plan Review Comment: Keynotes descriptions are now provided. Keynote #3 is identified as ‘existing truncated domes’. However, keynote #3 is pointing toward a post on the site plan. In addition, please correct the typo on keynote #5. First Plan Review Comment:On the site plan, show the north arrow that indicates orientation of the building.Second Plan Review Comment: The north arrow is shown. However, the orientation of the site is incorrect.What is the New Loading Area on the east side of the building?Provide the following information under Project Data:First Plan Review Comment:Floor area of the tenant improvement – Under Legal Description, the total square footage is 3,500. However, the floor plan on sheet A1.0 shows a 4,356 square-foot building.Second Plan Review Comment: The plan shows a total area of 4,464 square-foot building. This floor area does not match the area on the floor plan.The type of construction - See 2019 California Building Code, Chapter 6 for details.The occupancy groups – The floor plan shows offices, a commercial kitchen room, and a utility room. The use of these spaces do not appear to be an assembly space (A-2) as indicated under Legal Description. Please revise the occupancy groups as Business (B), Factory (F-1), and Storage (S-1).First Plan Review Comment:Sprinkler: yes or no?Second Plan Review Comment:Note #2 indicates ‘no fire sprinkler’. However, note #6 indicates ‘Fire Sprinkler under Separate Permit’. Is a fire-sprinkler system being proposed in this building?Delete the third paragraph under Project Description and Summary: “All existing conditions are prior work assumed to be compliant…” Provide the following note under Project Data:” The contractor is responsible to retrofit all code violations for all the work done without permits.”The numbers on the Flood Zone appears to be incorrect. Please verify.Under Sheet Index on sheet A0.0, A1.0, and A2.0, please delete the word “existing” and replace it with the word “proposed”. Work-done without permit does not constitute an “existing” condition. The purpose of this plan review and issuance of the building permit document the tenant improvementcompare to the building before the illegal constructions.Under the Keynotes section, note one, two, three, and four are empty. There are total of six keynotes on the site plan.First Plan Review Comment:Under Scope of Work, please revise the spelling from “walking cooler” to “walk-in cooler”. Please correct the spelling throughout the construction document.Second Plan Review Comment: This item remains outstanding.First Plan Review Comment: In city of Santa Ana, the Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing (MEP) plans are reviewed separately from the architectural and structural plans. Please submit the MEP plans for all work-done without permits.Second Plan Review Comment:Remove the MEP sheets from the architectural and structural plans. Submit a separate MEP plans to the counter. In addition, omit all the MEP sheets on the Sheet Index.Sheet A1.0Provide a wall legend to show different wall type. The plan shows a wall lines with shaded hatch, unhatched wall lines, and unhatched wall lines with various thickness. Identify the existing wall and proposed wall. Reference the framing detail at the appropriate locations.First Plan Review Comment: On the floor-plan room diagram, relabel “Order and Pick Up” with “Commercial Kitchen”.Second Plan Review Comment:This item remains outstanding.On the floor-plan room diagram, relabel “Utility Room” with “Storage Room”.First Plan Review Comment: The floor plan shows four dining tables between the walk-in coolers and the stainless steel worktables. Are the dining tables for the customers or employees? Will there be tenant serving food or drinks in this facility? The equipment floorplan suggests that this is a food-preparation facility, not a restaurant.Second Plan Review Comment:No Response - The item remains outstanding.Enlarge the text size on the keynotes.Keynote #1 indicates separate tenant under this permit. Obtain Planning division’s clearance on separate address and show the separate address or suite number on the plan.Walk-in Cooler and Walk-in Freezer (Plan Check comment #22, 23, 24)First Plan Review Comment:Provide structural calculations and plans for the proposed walk-in coolers and walk-in freezer. The panels used must be HCD approved, have a current ICC report, other similar recognized third party approval, or designed by a qualified civil engineer registered with the State of California.Second Plan Review Comment:See a list of comments below for walk-in coolerProvide all pages of the Research Report (RR) 25747 on the plan. Sheet A-3 shows connection details. However, a complete framing and foundation plan are required.Provide information on a thermal barrier as described in the research report item #5 on page 2. Provide design of the panels as described in the research report item #7A, 7B, and 7C on page 2.Show location of the base connection as described in the research report item #7E.Locations of connectors must be detailed on approved plans, the spacing of connections shall be calculated for this project but not less than two per width of panel.Specify the type of fire retardant roof covering as required by the research report item #9.First Plan Review Comment:Provide the following information for egress requirements: the door size, door net opening width, door opening force, door hardware, door hardware height, door operations, and bolt locks.Door size – specify the width and height of the door. Door net-opening width – specify the clear opening width of the doorway measured between the face of the door and the stop, with the door open 90 degrees.Door opening force – provide the following note on the plan:” The force for pushing or pulling open interior swinging egress doors, other than fire doors, shall not exceed 5 pounds. These forces do not apply to the force required to retract latch bolts or disengage other device that hold the door in a closed position.”Door hardware – specify the type of door hardware. For example -handle, pull, latches and lock.Door hardware height – specify the door hardware height.Door operation – provide the following note on the plan: “Egress doors shall be readily openable from the egress side without the use of key or special knowledge or effort.”Bolt locks – provide the following note on the plan: “Manually operated flush bolts or surface bolts are not permitted.”Second Plan Review Comment: The walk-in cooler’s door hardware, hardware height, and door operation are not on the plan.First Plan Review Comment:Specify the thermal resistance, R-value, of the walk-in cooler/freezer’s walls, ceiling, door, and floor.Second Plan Review Comment: This item remains outstanding.First Plan Review Comment: What type of materials are stored in the 856 square-foot “utility room” besides the water heaters and the electrical panel?Second Plan Review Comment:This item remains outstanding.Sheet A2.0Specify ceiling height.Sheet A6.0Identify existing walls and proposed walls.Provide structural connection detail between sill plate of the wall and the slab-on-grade.Provide structural connection detail between the top of the wall and the ceiling.Show the assembly of the walls and ceiling with the R-value at the walk-in cooler and walk-in freezer.Sheet A7.1Remove all city handouts on sheet A7.1. These handouts are outdated.ADDITIONAL SECOND PLAN REVIEW COMMENTSOn the title sheet, remove the West Covina Fire Department notes. This project is located in city of Santa Ana.The title sheet shows accessibility signage details. Specify the location of these details on the site plan.On the title sheet, clearly identify the use of this facility as a commercial kitchen, not a restaurant.On the floor plan, graphically remove the tables and chairs. The removal of tables and chairs imply there is no dining area in the commercial kitchen.On the floor plan, omit the room label “Order and Pick Up” and label the room as “kitchen”.IMPORTANT NOTICE: OBTAIN PLANNING DIVISION’S CLEARANCE PRIOR TO BUILDING PLAN CHECK RESUBMITTAL.[END]