HomeMy WebLinkAbout293758_2_Corrections.docxRESIDENTIAL PLAN CHECK
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:
102112333
PROJECT ADDRESS:
2025 S Cypress Ave
PLAN CHECK ENGINEER:
So, AnsonTEL:714
647-5830
EMAIL:
aso@santa-ana.orgFAX:714
647-5897
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:
V B
OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION(S):
R-3
PLAN CHECK DATES:
REMARKS/RECHECK ITEMS:
APPLICATION
10/11/2022
INITIAL REVIEW
11/9/2022
EXPIRATION
4/9/2023
RECHECKS:
1.
PROJECT APPLICANT CONTACT PERSON:
2.
Daniel Talman
3.
TEL:
(760)518-8002
FAX:
VALUATION: $35,000.00
EMAIL:
dan@ggrihomes.com
FLOOD ZONE: X-0602320276J
Note: Numbers in parenthesis (unless otherwise noted) refer to code sections of the 2019 California Residential Code (CRC); 2019 California Building Code (CBC); CMC = 2019 California Mechanical Code; CPC = 2019 California Plumbing Code; CEC = 2019 California Electrical Code; T = Table; ICC = International Code Council.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 S-0On the site plan, relabel building #2 as existing garage.On the site plan, identify the rectangular shape between the garage and the primary residence.On the site plan, cross-reference the primary residence to the foundation plan on sheet S-1.Under General Requirement #1, in addition to the ‘2019 California Building Code’ reference, include ‘2019 California Residential Code’ as applicable code.=Sheet S-1First Plan Review Comments:Show location of the foundation vents on the foundation plan or elevation drawings. Ventilation size and location shall meet section R408.1. Second Plan Review Comments: Foundation plan indicates six under-floor ventilation openings (12” x 18”) covered by EZRVENT or corrosion resistance wire mesh. On the manufacture website, the largest foundation ventilation size is 5” x 14”. Please specify a model number that meets the opening size requirement. In addition, provide information regarding the manufacture’s net opening area of the chosen model. The minimum net area of ventilation openings shall be not less than 1 square foot for each 150 square feet of under-floor space area. Provide calculations to show code compliance.Specify the material of the ventilation vents which meets one of the listed material in section R408.2.Show location of the under-floor access location and size, which meets the requirements of section R408.2.Show location and length of the shear walls.Identify all hold-down locations and cross-reference the structural detail.Additional Comments on Structural SafetyFirst Plan Review Comments:The Engineer On Record shall address the following questions and comments:How is the danger of building collapse being addressed?Detail A on sheet S-1 shows a minimum 18-inch under-floor space and a minimum 18-inch deep footing. Due to a limited space between the raised floor and the grade, what is the maximum excavation depth to accommodate workers and foundation formwork underneath the floor?Provide means and method to support the building and excavation.How can workers avoid hitting underground utility lines and pipes during excavation work?What types of protective systems are used to protect workers from cave-ins or building collapse?What are the requirements for safely installing and removing protective systems?What means of access and egress are provided?Where is the excavation access location, width, and depth?Note on plan: “The Engineer On Record shall certify the safety conditions before commence of construction.”Response 14.a through 14.i:With respect to plan checker’s concerns, these comments are about construction methods and construction safety, not structural safety. Contractor would be responsible for safety of construction and people at a construction site, not design engineer. Please see item 6 and 11 under “General Requirements” on sheet S-0.For instance, if contractor/homeowner was using a crane for lifting the existing building, for putting it at the side, and for returning it back after repair of foundation these questions/concerns were not raised from beginning.Second Plan Review CommentsThe entire foundation of this building was removed without the benefit of shoring plans, design, nor a building permit. It does not inspire confidence that any workers can safely perform the foundation work without any safety measures. It is common practice that engineers design a shoring plans to ensure that working conditions are safe. The engineer on record shall address comment number 14 prior to the issuance of building permit.[End of Comments]