Civic Campus / Commons: 115 Issues Found

Summary: 28 indexed pages | 14 match | 14 minor mismatch | 0 mismatch | 0 missing Minor Mismatch (14): A-100: Expected: BASEMENT AND FOUNDATION PLAN (A-100) | Actual: BASEMENT AND FOUNDATION FLOOR PLAN (A-100)(p3) | Reason: Same sheet number; title differs only by the added word 'FLOOR'. A-201: Expected: STILLWATER AVENUE FACADE...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft: 📄 A-000 Schedule Text: DRAWING INDEX — page 1

Summary: The window schedule note on sheet A-301 states 'ALL WINDOW OPENINGS WILL BE LIMITED TO 4' MAX.' while simultaneously, windows H, I, and K are described as meeting egress code (e.g., '3'-0'X5'-6' MEETS EGRESS CODE'). Emergency escape and rescue openings require a net clear opening far greater than 4 inches. Per IEBC Section 702.5.1, window...

Why it matters: This conflict creates a direct life-safety concern. If windows are constructed with a permanent 4-inch opening restriction, occupants in dwelling units will not have code-compliant emergency escape and rescue openings, which will be flagged during plan review or field inspection. This will likely result in permit denial or stop-work orders,...

Suggested next step: Request the architect clarify whether the 4' maximum window opening is intended to be achieved via an ASTM F2090-compliant releasable window opening control device per IEBC Section 702.5.1 that allows the window to fully open for emergency escape and rescue after release. If so, request the window schedule note be revised to specify the...

RFI draft: Request the architect clarify whether the 4' maximum window opening is intended to be achieved via an ASTM F2090-compliant releasable window opening control device per IEBC Section 702.5.1 that allows the window to fully open for emergency escape and rescue after release. If so, request the...

Summary: The window schedule includes a blanket note stating 'ALL WINDOW OPENINGS WILL BE LIMITED TO 4' MAX.' At the same time, windows H, I, and K are explicitly designated as meeting egress code (e.g., '3'-0'X5'-6' MEETS EGRESS CODE'). A single-hung window limited to a 4-inch sash travel provides a net clear opening of approximately 3 ft × 0.33 ft =...

Why it matters: This conflict is a life-safety issue. In a Group R-2 occupancy with sleeping rooms requiring emergency escape and rescue openings per Section 1031.2, occupants would be unable to escape or be rescued through windows permanently limited to a 4-inch opening. This will likely be flagged during plan review and could delay permitting. Additionally,...

Suggested next step: Request clarification from the architect on the intent of the 4' maximum window opening note as it applies to windows designated as meeting egress code (Windows H, I, and K). If the 4' limit is for fall protection, confirm that ASTM F2090-compliant window-opening control devices with emergency release mechanisms will be specified for all...

RFI draft: Request clarification from the architect on the intent of the 4' maximum window opening note as it applies to windows designated as meeting egress code (Windows H, I, and K). If the 4' limit is for fall protection, confirm that ASTM F2090-compliant window-opening control devices with emergency...

Summary: The window schedule contains a blanket note stating 'ALL WINDOW OPENINGS WILL BE LIMITED TO 4' MAX.' At the same time, windows H, I, and K are each noted as 'MEETS EGRESS CODE,' indicating they are intended to serve as emergency escape and rescue openings. Per IFC Section 1031.2.1, emergency escape and rescue openings shall be operational from...

Why it matters: If constructed as specified with a permanent 4-inch opening limit, sleeping rooms in this residential occupancy would lack required emergency escape and rescue openings. This life-safety deficiency would be identified during plan review or field inspection, resulting in rejected permits or failed inspections. Corrective measures after...

Suggested next step: Request the architect to clarify the intended operation of windows designated as meeting egress code (types H, I, and K) given the blanket 4-inch maximum opening limitation. Specifically, confirm whether ASTM F2090-compliant window-opening control devices with a release mechanism are intended, and if so, revise the window schedule note to...

RFI draft: Request the architect to clarify the intended operation of windows designated as meeting egress code (types H, I, and K) given the blanket 4-inch maximum opening limitation. Specifically, confirm whether ASTM F2090-compliant window-opening control devices with a release mechanism are intended,...

Summary: Detail 2/A303, titled '2-HR RATED WALL - UCL Des U301,' contains directly contradictory stud spacing specifications within the same detail. The left-side graphic callout clearly labels the studs as '2X4 @ 16' O.C.' while the right-side written specification text states the wallboard is applied to 'each side of 2X4 wood studs spaced 24' o.c.' A...

Why it matters: This discrepancy will require an RFI to the architect before any 2-hour rated walls per this detail can be framed, causing direct construction delays. If the contractor proceeds with the incorrect stud spacing, the completed assembly will not match the tested/listed UCL Design U301 configuration, resulting in fire inspection failure, potential...

Suggested next step: Request the architect to clarify the correct stud spacing for the 2-HR RATED WALL per UCL Design U301 (Detail 2/A303). Confirm whether studs are to be spaced at 16' O.C. or 24' O.C. in accordance with the tested assembly, and issue a revised detail with consistent specifications on both the graphic callout and the written specification text.

RFI draft: Request the architect to clarify the correct stud spacing for the 2-HR RATED WALL per UCL Design U301 (Detail 2/A303). Confirm whether studs are to be spaced at 16' O.C. or 24' O.C. in accordance with the tested assembly, and issue a revised detail with consistent specifications on both the...

Summary: Detail 10/A303 on sheet A-303 specifies the 2-HR Rated Column Enclosure (UL Des X528) with '2 LAYERS 5/8' SHEETROCK BRAND GYPSUM PANELS, ULTRACODE CORE, AROUND COLUMN.' However, Detail 6/A304 on sheet A-304 specifies the identical assembly (same UL Design X528, same title) with '2 LAYERS 3/4' SHEETROCK BRAND GYPSUM PANELS, ULTRACODE CORE,...

Why it matters: The UL Design X528 listing has specific material thickness requirements to achieve the 2-hour fire rating. Using the wrong panel thickness could void the UL listing and result in a non-compliant fire-rated assembly. This discrepancy will cause confusion during construction and could lead to a failed fire inspection. The 1/8' per layer...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the correct gypsum panel thickness for the 2-HR Rated Column Enclosure per UL Design X528. Detail 10/A303 specifies 2 layers of 5/8' Sheetrock Brand Gypsum Panels while Detail 6/A304 specifies 2 layers of 3/4' Sheetrock Brand Gypsum Panels. Which thickness is correct per the UL listing requirements? Please revise the conflicting...

RFI draft: Please clarify the correct gypsum panel thickness for the 2-HR Rated Column Enclosure per UL Design X528. Detail 10/A303 specifies 2 layers of 5/8' Sheetrock Brand Gypsum Panels while Detail 6/A304 specifies 2 layers of 3/4' Sheetrock Brand Gypsum Panels. Which thickness is correct per the UL...

Summary: Detail 4/A306, titled 'SCUPPER: 12' WIDE - OVERFLOW CONTROL DETAIL,' shows a 1 1/2' dimension at the scupper opening through the parapet. This is the only height-related dimension shown for the scupper gap in the detail. Section 1108.3 of the 2021 IPC requires secondary (emergency) scuppers to have an opening dimension of not less than 4 inches...

Why it matters: An undersized secondary overflow scupper compromises the emergency drainage system. If the primary roof drains fail or are blocked, the undersized scupper may not pass sufficient flow, leading to water ponding that exceeds the structural design capacity of the roof. This is a life-safety concern as excessive ponding can lead to progressive...

Suggested next step: Request the architect to revise the overflow scupper detail (4/A306) to provide a minimum opening height of 4 inches in accordance with IPC Sections 1108.3 and 1106.5. The scupper width must also be verified to be equal to or greater than the circumference of the roof drain sized for the area served. Coordinate with the structural engineer to...

RFI draft: Request the architect to revise the overflow scupper detail (4/A306) to provide a minimum opening height of 4 inches in accordance with IPC Sections 1108.3 and 1106.5. The scupper width must also be verified to be equal to or greater than the circumference of the roof drain sized for the area...

Summary: The window schedule on sheet A-301 explicitly states all windows shall be vinyl-framed: 'ALL WINDOWS TO BE VINYL WITH U-VALUE 0.30 OR LOWER, SINGLE HUNG.' However, Specification Section 085413 on page 397 is titled 'FIBERGLASS WINDOWS' and its scope states the section includes 'Fiberglass-framed windows, factory glazed.' These are two...

Why it matters: This conflict will cause confusion during bidding and procurement. Contractors pricing vinyl windows will submit significantly different bids than those pricing fiberglass windows. The installation details on A-308, which reference Pella manufacturer details, and the related spec sections for spray foam sealants, rough carpentry blocking, and...

Suggested next step: Please clarify whether residential windows shall be vinyl-framed as indicated in the Window Schedule on A-301, or fiberglass-framed as specified in Section 085413. If fiberglass is intended, please revise the drawing window schedule accordingly. If vinyl is intended, please revise the specification section to match. Also confirm that the stated...

RFI draft: Please clarify whether residential windows shall be vinyl-framed as indicated in the Window Schedule on A-301, or fiberglass-framed as specified in Section 085413. If fiberglass is intended, please revise the drawing window schedule accordingly. If vinyl is intended, please revise the...

Summary: The basement floor plan shows the Community Room (711 SF, 49 occupants at 15 SF/person) with its only exit access routed through Kitchenette E via double doors tagged B1. The Community Room is bounded by exterior foundation walls on the north and east, the Stair 1A enclosure on the west, and Kitchenette E on the south. The only doors shown from...

Why it matters: This violation would be flagged during plan review, requiring redesign of the Community Room egress path. A direct exit access doorway from the Community Room to the corridor or directly into the interior exit stairway enclosure must be provided, bypassing the Kitchenette. This could require reconfiguration of the Kitchenette, Storage, and/or...

Suggested next step: Request the architect to revise the floor plan to provide at least one exit access doorway from the Community Room that does not pass through Kitchenette E, in compliance with Section 1016.2 item 5. Consider providing a direct door from the Community Room to the corridor or to the Stair 1A enclosure.

RFI draft: Request the architect to revise the floor plan to provide at least one exit access doorway from the Community Room that does not pass through Kitchenette E, in compliance with Section 1016.2 item 5. Consider providing a direct door from the Community Room to the corridor or to the Stair 1A...

Summary: The code notes state 'ALL EXTERIOR WALLS ARE LOCATED MORE THEN 15' AWAY FROM LOT LINES AND ARE PERMITTED 75% WINDOWS IN FULLY SPRINKLERED BUILDING,' with openings calculated per Table 705.8 based on fire separation distance. However, the zoning analysis on the same sheet shows proposed side setbacks of '0' AND 10'' from lot lines. With fire...

Why it matters: If the building facade is designed with 75% window area on the side walls at 0' and 10' fire separation distances, this would violate IBC exterior wall opening limitations per Section 705 and Table 705.8. This discrepancy would be identified during plan review, requiring significant facade redesign on the affected walls, potential structural...

Suggested next step: Request clarification on the actual fire separation distances for all exterior walls, particularly the side walls at 0' and 10' setbacks from lot lines. Provide revised exterior wall opening calculations per IBC Table 705.8 for each exterior wall face based on the correct fire separation distances and revise the facade design accordingly.

RFI draft: Request clarification on the actual fire separation distances for all exterior walls, particularly the side walls at 0' and 10' setbacks from lot lines. Provide revised exterior wall opening calculations per IBC Table 705.8 for each exterior wall face based on the correct fire separation...

Summary: On sheet A-203, the Eastern (Rear) Elevation and both building sections show Grade/First Floor at EL. 34.8' and Second Floor at EL. 44.8', which implies only a 10'-0' floor-to-floor height (44.8 − 34.8 = 10.0'). However, the dimensioned floor-to-floor height from Grade/First Floor to Second Floor is explicitly shown as 14'-0' on the same...

Why it matters: This 4'-0' discrepancy cascades through every floor elevation above the first floor: if the Second Floor should be at EL. 48.8' (not 44.8'), then Third Floor should be EL. 58.8' (not 54.8'), Fourth Floor EL. 68.8' (not 64.8'), and Roof EL. 79.5' (not 75.5'). The conflict between elevation labels and dimensioned heights affects structural...

Suggested next step: Request the architect confirm the correct floor-to-floor height from Grade/First Floor to Second Floor: is it 14'-0' (as dimensioned and consistent with the 44'-8' overall height, the 11'-0' parking ceiling, and the 24-riser stair) or 10'-0' (as implied by EL. 34.8' to EL. 44.8')? Provide corrected floor elevation labels for Second Floor...

RFI draft: Request the architect confirm the correct floor-to-floor height from Grade/First Floor to Second Floor: is it 14'-0' (as dimensioned and consistent with the 44'-8' overall height, the 11'-0' parking ceiling, and the 24-riser stair) or 10'-0' (as implied by EL. 34.8' to EL. 44.8')? Provide...

Summary: Detail 4/A304 (Garage Column Enclosure Detail, Typical) calls out the fire-rated column enclosure as 'UL X528 One layer of 5/8' EXTERIOR USGX OR SHX BOARD BY US GYPSUM furred from column by 1 5/8'Ga CM 1001 (41.3 mm) steel studs at each corner.' However, Section 6/A304, titled '2-HR RATED COLUMN ENCLOSURE - UL Des X528,' shows the same UL...

Why it matters: If a contractor installs only one layer of 5/8' gypsum board per Detail 4/A304 instead of the two layers of 3/4' gypsum panels specified in Section 6/A304, the steel column enclosure will not achieve the required 2-hour fire-resistance rating. This would result in a failed fire inspection, requiring demolition of the non-compliant enclosure and...

Suggested next step: Request the architect to clarify and reconcile the gypsum board specification for the UL Design X528 2-hour rated garage column enclosure between Detail 4/A304 and Section 6/A304. Confirm whether the correct specification is 2 layers of 3/4' gypsum panels as shown in Section 6/A304, and revise Detail 4/A304 accordingly to ensure compliance with...

RFI draft: Request the architect to clarify and reconcile the gypsum board specification for the UL Design X528 2-hour rated garage column enclosure between Detail 4/A304 and Section 6/A304. Confirm whether the correct specification is 2 layers of 3/4' gypsum panels as shown in Section 6/A304, and revise...

Summary: The basement floor plan states a total occupant load of 102 persons (32 for Meeting Room + 49 for Community Room + 21 for Office Space), yet the plan shows only two water closets and two lavatories in the entire basement level—one set in the BATHROOM room and one set in the H/C TOILET room. Per IPC Section 403.1, plumbing fixtures shall be...

Why it matters: This significant fixture deficiency would be flagged during plan review and could require major floor plan redesign to add additional restroom facilities. Adding restrooms after construction begins would cause substantial delays and cost overruns involving rerouting of plumbing waste and water supply lines, cutting through foundation slabs,...

Suggested next step: Request the architect to review the minimum plumbing fixture requirements per IPC Section 403.1 and Table 403.1 for the total basement occupant load of 102 persons (81 assembly + 21 business). Provide additional water closets and lavatories as required for both male and female occupants. If fixtures on other floors are intended to supplement...

RFI draft: Request the architect to review the minimum plumbing fixture requirements per IPC Section 403.1 and Table 403.1 for the total basement occupant load of 102 persons (81 assembly + 21 business). Provide additional water closets and lavatories as required for both male and female occupants. If...

Summary: The Office Space Plumbing Fixtures Schedule specifies the shower head and control as 'Delta T17238 Lahara Monitor 17 Series Dual Function Pressure Balanced Shower Trim Package... - Less Rough-In Valve' with the explicit specification 'Pressure Balanced: No.' Section 412.3 of the 2021 IPC requires that individual shower valves shall be...

Why it matters: This is a critical safety issue. Pressure-balanced or thermostatic shower valves are required to prevent scalding injuries caused by sudden changes in water pressure or temperature. Installing the specified non-pressure-balanced shower trim without a compliant valve will fail plumbing inspection, requiring valve replacement, potential wall...

Suggested next step: Request the architect/engineer to specify a compliant shower valve assembly that meets Section 412.3 requirements, including a balanced-pressure, thermostatic, or combination balanced-pressure/thermostatic rough-in valve conforming to ASSE 1016/ASME A112.1016/CSA B125.16 or ASME A112.18.1/CSA B125.1, rated for the 1.75 GPM flow rate of the...

RFI draft: Request the architect/engineer to specify a compliant shower valve assembly that meets Section 412.3 requirements, including a balanced-pressure, thermostatic, or combination balanced-pressure/thermostatic rough-in valve conforming to ASSE 1016/ASME A112.1016/CSA B125.16 or ASME A112.18.1/CSA...

Summary: The drawing dimensions the proposed driveway at 18'-0' wide. This driveway runs along the north edge of the site and is the only vehicular access connecting the public street to the parking area and east portions of the facility. Section 503.2.1 requires fire apparatus access roads to have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet. The...

Why it matters: A driveway that does not meet the 20-foot fire apparatus access road width will be rejected during fire department plan review, delaying permits. Widening the driveway from 18 feet to 20 feet will affect the site grading, retaining wall design, and potentially the building setback along the north edge. This directly impacts civil site work and...

Suggested next step: Request the civil engineer and architect to confirm whether the proposed driveway is intended to serve as the fire apparatus access road. If so, the driveway must be widened to a minimum 20 feet per IFC Section 503.2.1. Coordinate with the fire code official regarding any modifications to the site layout required to achieve compliant access.

RFI draft: Request the civil engineer and architect to confirm whether the proposed driveway is intended to serve as the fire apparatus access road. If so, the driveway must be widened to a minimum 20 feet per IFC Section 503.2.1. Coordinate with the fire code official regarding any modifications to the...