City of Richmond

A city address is usually permitted by the city, not the county — but not always, and some authorities keep building and hand electrical to someone else. Getting this wrong costs the whole submittal, because every requirement below belongs to whoever actually holds jurisdiction. Check the overlays in the same pass: an HOA, a historic district, a windstorm certification or a system-size cap can reshape the design, and all of them are cheaper to find now than after the array is laid out.

• Is this authority the AHJ for residential solar at this address? Yes 95% · adopting ordinance
• What does this authority permit itself, and what does it delegate? Both (Building & Electrical) — no delegation to the county; the Building Division's single permit application covers building and electrical trades on one form, and Richmond's own Fire Prevention Services Division (not Contra Costa County Fire Protection District) separately reviews/signs off fire-related items. 85% · permit application form
• Is a permit required for a residential rooftop PV system? Yes 95% · fee schedule
• Is there a separate electrical permit, or is it combined? Combined — one 'Building Regulations Permit Application' form covers Building, Electrical, Plumbing and Mechanical scopes under a single permit number (checkboxes, not separate applications). 70% · permit application form
• Is a HOA or architectural approval required first? No — none of the City's solar submittal checklists, Standard Plans, or SolarAPP+ eligibility criteria list HOA or architectural review as a submittal item. 60% · checklist
• Is there a historic-district review? Yes, for historic-register properties — SolarAPP+ page: applicants must obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Planning Division before submitting through SolarAPP+ if the site is on the Richmond Historic Register, and the installation must meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. 90% · department page
• Is a wind or windstorm certification required? No — no third-party wind/windstorm certification program was found; the Building Division's own Jurisdictional Datasheet treats wind only as a design-load input (per current CBC and the ASCE Hazard Tool), not a separate certification. 55% · department handout
• Is a Specific Use Permit or Council approval ever required? Not for standard residential rooftop PV — the only elevated-review trigger found is the historic-register Certificate of Appropriateness (Planning Division sign-off, q25); no Specific Use Permit or City Council approval requirement was found in any of the reviewed solar materials. 55% · department page
• Is there a system-size cap on residential generation? No hard cap — 10 kW AC is the threshold that qualifies a system for the expedited/SolarAPP+ and 'Simplified' Standard Plan tracks; systems above that size are not capped or prohibited, they are simply routed to the 'Comprehensive Standard Plan' full-engineering review track instead. 75% · checklist

Several authorities require the electrical permit to be pulled by a licensed electrician, or require the contractor to be registered with them BEFORE applying. Registration is not same-day. This is second on the list rather than fourth because it is the step most likely to stop the job before the drawings matter.

• Who is allowed to pull the electrical permit? Either — a licensed contractor (state Contractors License Law, BPC Ch.9 Div.3) or the property owner acting as owner-builder (BPC §7044) may sign the 'Who's Doing the Work' section and pull the permit. 75% · permit application form
• Must the contractor be registered with this authority before applying? Yes — a current City of Richmond Business Tax Certificate (Business License) is a listed precondition (alongside a valid CSLB license) before SolarAPP+ will generate an instant permit. 80% · department page
• Is a homeowner permitted to self-install and self-permit? Yes — the generic Building Regulations Permit Application includes an owner-builder declaration (BPC §7044) as an alternative to a licensed contractor, and 'Obtaining Permits' confirms permits may issue to 'property owners or their authorized agents and licensed contractors.' 70% · department page

Almost everywhere wants a site plan, a one-line or three-line electrical diagram, equipment cut sheets with listings, and a structural attachment detail. Build it against the published checklist rather than the last jurisdiction you worked in — the checklist is what the reviewer marks against.

• What documents make up a complete submittal? SolarAPP+ track: SolarAPP+ approval documents (named 'SolarAPP+ Approval Documents') + a signed 'PAF Permit Application', uploaded to iMS, referencing the SolarAPP+ Approval ID. Standard track: a completed Solar PV Standard Plan (or full engineered plans for larger/non-conforming systems) plus the items on the Residential Solar PV Plan Submittal Checklist (site/roof plan, electrical plan with single-line diagram, structural plan, equipment cut sheets) and the Eligibility Checklist. 85% · department page
• How many copies, and in what format? Historically 'three complete sets of plans on 11” x17” paper' per the still-linked 2015 Residential Solar PV Plan Submittal Checklist; current practice is electronic-only submittal through the iMS Digital Plan Room (the City states eTRAKiT 'is no longer in service' and permitting moved to iMS), so the paper-copy count appears superseded by practice even though the checklist itself has not been updated. 55% · checklist (dated 2015, still linked)
• Is a site plan required, and what must it show? Yes — a site diagram/roof plan is required showing panel/module arrangement, string counts, conduit runs, existing/new equipment, skylights/vents, north arrow, lot dimensions, distance to adjacent structures, dimensioned access pathways, and disconnect locations; the Standard Plan additionally requires a standalone 'Roof Layout Diagram' showing pathways, disconnect locations and roof-access points. 85% · standard plan / checklist
• Is a one-line / three-line diagram required? Yes — the Solar PV Standard Plan supplies four numbered single-line diagram templates (no-combiner, combined-strings, and two-inverter variants) that must be completed and attached. 90% · standard plan
• Are string and conductor calculations required? Yes — the Standard Plan's Steps 1-15 require Voc/Isc string calculations, max system DC voltage, source-circuit/PV-output conductor sizing tables, and inverter-output OCPD/conductor sizing. 90% · standard plan
• Is a structural PE stamp required, and at what threshold? Not required for a conventionally-framed wood-frame 1- or 2-story single-family dwelling (state BPC §5537 exemption); a licensed engineer's or architect's stamp IS required for any portion of the racking/roof-attachment design that deviates from conventional framing under Title 24 (BPC §5537(b)/§6737.1(b)). 85% · department handout
• Is an electrical PE stamp required, and at what threshold? Not required if a licensed electrical (or C-46 solar) specialty contractor designs and installs their own work (BPC §5536.1(a)/§6737.3 exemption); otherwise electrical plans must be signed/stamped by a licensed electrical engineer (BPC §6735.3/§6735.4). 85% · department handout

Most authorities now take the whole application through a portal, and several states cap or constrain what a residential solar permit may cost. Check whether plan check is billed separately before you quote the job.

• Which permit portal does this authority use? iMS — the City's permitting/inspection portal (replaced eTRAKiT); SolarAPP+ is used specifically for automated review and instant permitting of eligible residential rooftop PV, with the resulting approval then referenced into an iMS permit application. 90% · department page
• Can the whole application be completed online? Yes — SolarAPP+ eligible systems can be designed, reviewed and instantly permitted entirely online, then filed into iMS; non-eligible systems can also apply and pay through iMS, though an in-person appointment option remains available. 80% · department page
• What does a residential solar permit cost? $450 flat ("Solar Structure - Residential System"), approved fee effective 1-Jul-2025. 90% · fee schedule
• How is the fee calculated? Flat 90% · fee schedule
• Is there a separate plan-check fee? Possibly yes — the same Master Fee Schedule separately lists a Fire Department plan-review fee 'PR-3.5 Solar Photovoltaic Power Systems (CFC 105.7.21)' at $683, in addition to the $450 Building permit fee; it is not stated on the schedule whether Fire Prevention applies this to ordinary small rooftop residential systems or reserves it for larger/commercial-scale reviews. 60% · fee schedule

Interconnection is a separate process from the permit and usually the longer pole. Where the utility does not depend on the permit being issued, running both at once is the single biggest saving available on a residential job.

• What is the stated plan-review turnaround? Instant/same-day approval for SolarAPP+-eligible systems via the automated code-compliance engine. No published business-day turnaround figure was found for the standard (non-SolarApp) residential solar plan-review track. 55% · department page
• How long is an issued permit valid before it expires? 180 days to commence work after issuance (state CBC/CRC §105.5, adopted by reference and not amended on this point); Richmond's local addition (Ord. 01-26 N.S., new §105.5.2) allows re-activation of an expired permit at half the original fee if the lapse has not exceeded one year. 60% · adopting ordinance
• Which utility handles interconnection here? PG&E (Pacific Gas & Electric) — confirmed from a City page: Richmond joined MCE (Marin Clean Energy), a Community Choice Aggregation electricity supplier, in 2012, but MCE's own project documentation on the City's site states MCE 'has submitted interconnection applications with PG&E' — i.e., PG&E remains the interconnecting distribution utility even for CCA-supplied accounts; MCE sets no interconnection rules. 90% · department page (city-hosted)
• Where does the utility sit in the sequence? After permit (with the underlying interconnection application filed in parallel) — PG&E's Greenbook states local ordinances require the applicant to obtain the AHJ's permit AND final inspection approval before PG&E will connect/energize service (Electric/Gas Rule 11 & 16); the Rule 21 interconnection application itself can be submitted in parallel with the city permit process, but PG&E's actual connection/PTO step follows the AHJ's final. 75% · utility interconnection manual

The NEC edition a jurisdiction enforces is often a cycle behind the newest one published, and local amendments sit on top of it. Rapid shutdown, conductor sizing and labelling all change between editions, so the edition in force is the first thing to establish, not the last.

• Which NEC edition is in force? 2023 NEC, incorporated as the California Electrical Code (Title 24, Part 3) as part of the 2025 California Building Standards Code cycle adopted by Richmond via Ordinance 01-26 N.S. (effective no sooner than Jan 1, 2026). 70% · adopting ordinance
• Which building code edition is in force? 2025 California Building Standards Code (Title 24), adopted by City Council Ordinance No. 01-26 N.S. on March 3, 2026, effective no sooner than January 1, 2026 as mandated by the state. 95% · adopting ordinance
• Which fire code edition is in force? 2025 California Fire Code (Title 24, Part 9) and 2025 California Wildland-Urban Interface Code (Part 7); the local-amendment ordinance had its first reading March 24, 2026 and second reading April 7, 2026. 85% · department page
• Are there local amendments to any of the above? Yes — Building: RMC 6.02.030 amends CBC Chapter 1 admin provisions (enforcement-agency designation, plan-review/permit expiration timing, investigation and reinspection fees, an ADU/residential legalization amnesty program, Board of Appeals composition, and several Appendix Q emergency-housing fire/life-safety additions). Fire: local amendments to the 2025 CFC/WUI code (e.g., RMC 8.16.040 fire-sprinkler trigger for Group R-3 substantial additions, RMC 8.16.080 Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone provisions) referenced on the Fire Prevention page and Building Datasheet. 90% · adopting ordinance
• What is the installation judged against? The adopted 2025 CEC (NEC-based, Title 24 Part 3), CRC §R331, and CFC, plus manufacturer listing/installation instructions (CEC 110.3, 690.4(D)); for permitting purposes, systems are checked against either the City's Solar PV Standard Plan (≤10kW, simple central/string or microinverter, no storage) or a fully engineered 'Comprehensive Standard Plan' for larger/non-conforming systems. 80% · standard plan

Ridge setbacks and roof access pathways are fire-service requirements and they constrain the array layout. They are the most common cause of a redesign after the fire department comments on a plan set.

• What ridge setback and access pathways are required? Clear roof access pathways are required and must be diagrammed on the roof-layout plan (per CRC R331.2 and CFC 605.11.1, both cited directly in the City's own Standard Plan markings page); the specific pathway-width/ridge-setback dimensional tables are set out in CFC §605.11 itself, which is ICC-copyrighted text not reproduced on any Richmond city page and could not be extracted. 55% · standard plan

Which rapid-shutdown rule applies follows directly from the NEC edition in force, and the initiation device has to be at a location the fire service can reach and identify. This is inspected, and it is labelled.

• Is rapid shutdown required, and to which NEC edition? Yes — rapid shutdown (CEC Article 690.12) is required as part of the fully-adopted 2025 CEC (Title 24 Part 3, based on the 2023 NEC), which Richmond adopted by reference without exception; the City's Standard Plans do not separately restate 690.12 language because they assume listed/labeled inverters already provide it. 65% · adopting ordinance

The NEC sets a baseline for permanent markings at the service equipment and the disconnecting means. On top of that, an authority may specify its own wording, and the utility may specify more again. Where any of them writes its own text, a generic off-the-shelf label set will not pass — this is the detail most often fixed on a return visit.

• Which placards does this authority require at the service equipment? Per the City's own Standard Plan: WARNING – Photovoltaic Power Source (at junction/combiner boxes and every 10 ft of conduit), WARNING – Inverter Output Connection/do-not-relocate OCPD, WARNING – Dual Power Sources (AC disconnect rating plaque), PV System AC Disconnect and PV System DC Disconnect rating placards, electric-shock-hazard placards for ungrounded conductors/ground-fault/do-not-touch-terminals, and a CEC 705.12 permanent power-source directory/plaque. Separately, PG&E's Greenbook requires an engraved placard on the metering equipment for any supply-side/line-side-tap AC disconnect (utility-level, not AHJ). 90% · standard plan
• Does the authority specify placard wording of its own? Yes — the Standard Plan reproduces the exact CEC-mandated placard wording (e.g., 'WARNING PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER SOURCE', 'WARNING DUAL POWER SOURCES...') as the template the City expects to be installed verbatim. 85% · standard plan
• Does it specify letter height, colour or material? Guidance, not a hard local mandate: the Standard Plan cites ANSI Z535.4 for label design and states 'a phenolic plaque with contrasting colors between text and background would meet the intent of the code,' with '20 point (3/8") should be considered the minimum' letter height; no type size is strictly mandated. 85% · standard plan
• Is a site plan / facility map placard required, and what must it show? Yes — a Roof Layout Diagram is required showing the arrangement of all panels/modules, clear access pathways, and the approximate locations of electrical disconnecting means and roof access points. 85% · standard plan
• Does the UTILITY specify placards beyond the AHJ's? Yes — PG&E's Greenbook (TD-7001M-06, §6.3) requires an engraved placard/signage on the metering equipment indicating a line/supply-side connection whenever a fusible AC disconnect is installed ahead of the customer's main breaker. 85% · utility interconnection manual
• Where must the labels be placed? At the inverter, at each junction/combiner box and along conduit runs (every 10 ft), and at the PV AC and DC disconnects per the City's Standard Plan; additionally, per PG&E, on the metering equipment itself whenever a supply-side/line-side-tap AC disconnect is used. 85% · standard plan

Where the AC disconnect must sit relative to the meter is usually the utility's rule, not the building department's. Battery storage frequently carries its own permit, its own inspection and its own fire conditions.

• Where must the AC disconnect be, relative to the meter? No AC disconnect required where the PV system connects on the load side of a self-contained, socket-based meter panel rated ≤320A single-phase; an AC disconnect (fusible, with an engraved supply-side placard) IS required where the interconnection is on the supply/line side ahead of the main breaker and after the meter, or for any transformer-rated/non-self-contained meter panel. 85% · utility interconnection manual
• Must equipment be on a specific approved list? No City-specific approved-equipment list — equipment need only be listed/labeled for its PV application under the state CEC (110.3, 690.4(D)), which the Standard Plan cites; no separate Richmond-maintained approved-products list was found. 70% · standard plan
• Are batteries permitted, and under what conditions? The expedited SolarAPP+ / 'Simplified' Standard Plan tracks explicitly require the system be 'utility interactive and without battery storage' (Eligibility Checklist item D); systems with batteries/ESS are excluded from those tracks and must go through the standard (non-expedited) permitting process. The Fire Master Fee Schedule separately lists a distinct 'Battery Systems' operational-permit fee and plan-review fee, indicating Fire Prevention treats battery storage as its own reviewed hazard class. 70% · checklist
• Is there a separate ESS permit or inspection? Yes, apparently — the Master Fee Schedule lists a separate Fire 'Battery System Storage' operational permit ($192, OP19-55) and a distinct 'Battery Systems' plan-review fee ($749, PR-9), both apart from the $450 residential solar building fee, implying a separate ESS-specific permit/review step. 70% · fee schedule
• Is there a local rule on service upgrades or busbar sizing? No local amendment found beyond the unamended state rule — Ordinance 01-26's local-amendments section (RMC 6.02.030) addresses only Chapter 1 administrative provisions; busbar/feeder sizing for PV interconnection follows the standard (unamended) CEC 705.12(D)(2) 120%/100% rule, which the City's own Standard Plan reproduces verbatim in its Table 4. 70% · adopting ordinance
• Is a specific mounting system or attachment spacing required? No single mandated spacing figure — the City's checklist/Standard Plan require submission of the racking manufacturer's product-evaluation/structural design, embedment-bolt style/diameter/length/spacing, and bonding/grounding instructions for Building Official review, rather than prescribing one fixed spacing; any attachment method that deviates from conventional framing triggers the PE/architect stamp described in q13. 70% · checklist

Booking is a portal, a phone call or an email depending on the authority, and the notice required is rarely zero. Book before the work is finished rather than after — the lead time, not the work, is usually what sets the date.

• How is an inspection booked? Portal (iMS) or Phone (510-447-1156, touch-tone automated menu) or Text (866-535-4016, keyword commands SCHEDULE/RESCHEDULE/CANCEL/RESULTS). 90% · department page

Some authorities inspect their own solar work; some delegate it, and a few do not inspect the PV equipment itself at all. Who is coming determines what they will look at.

• Does this AHJ perform its own final solar inspection? Yes — Richmond's own Building Division (Community Development Department) performs the building/electrical final inspection; Richmond's own Fire Department (Fire Prevention Services Division, Chief Aaron Osorio, 440 Civic Center Plaza) separately signs off where its stamp appears on the approved plans. No delegation to the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District was found — unlike Concord, Richmond operates its own full-service fire department covering its own city limits, so the CCCFPD-to-city delegation arrangement established for Concord does not apply here. 90% · department page
• If delegated, to whom? N/A — not delegated; the City's own Building Division and its own Fire Department both retain their respective inspection roles. 90% · department page

A rough-in or mid-roof inspection, where one is required, has to happen before the work it covers is closed up. Missing a stage means opening something back up, and it is the most expensive kind of correction.

• Which inspections are required, and in what order? Building/electrical rough and final inspections are scheduled via iMS/phone/text; if the approved plan set carries an approval stamp from another agency (Fire, Planning, Health, Engineering, or a Sanitary District), that agency's sign-off must appear on the permit card BEFORE the Building Division will conduct its final inspection. 75% · department page

The approved plan set, the permit, and the equipment listings should be on site and reachable. Inspectors routinely verify that installed equipment matches what was approved, and that the labels are the ones the plan set promised.

• Is there a published inspection checklist? Yes, functionally — the Eligibility Checklist and the Standard Plan's Markings page serve as the published pre-inspection compliance criteria that must be attached to the submittal; no separate, standalone document titled 'final inspection checklist' was found. 60% · checklist
• Does the inspector verify labels and listings? Yes (inferred from published materials, not a direct department statement) — the Standard Plan's entire 'Markings' page and the Eligibility Checklist's requirement that 'all required markings and labels are provided' exist specifically as the criteria a field inspector checks against at final. 60% · checklist

Passing gives you a final or an equivalent sign-off. That is not the same as permission to operate: PTO comes from the utility, and who tells the utility the inspection passed varies. A system left switched off for weeks is usually waiting on this handover.

• What is issued on pass? Final (Building Division final inspection approval on the permit); no standalone 'green tag' or separate 'Certificate of Occupancy' terminology was found for solar-only permits (a CofO is a separately-fee'd item in the Master Fee Schedule, listed as 'requested separate from orig. permit,' suggesting it is not automatically issued for a solar retrofit). 55% · department page
• Who notifies the utility for PTO? Installer/applicant — PG&E's Greenbook describes the interconnection/NEM process in terms of the 'applicant' submitting the Rule 21 application and needing to show AHJ permit/final-inspection compliance before PG&E will connect service; no Richmond page states that the City itself notifies PG&E on the customer's behalf. 55% · utility interconnection manual
• Is there a re-inspection fee? $203 (Re-Inspection Fee Per Address, approved fee effective 1-Jul-2025) under the Building/Community Development section of the Master Fee Schedule. 75% · fee schedule