Plan Review: 89 Issues Found

Summary: 41 index entries | 38 perfect matches | 0 mismatched | 3 missing Missing (3) — listed in drawing index but not found in the document: Structural: - S200 Lower Level Post Plan - S210 Mid Lower Level Decking Plan - S223 Main Level Partition Plan

Why it matters: Addressing this before construction prevents rework and supports code compliance.

Suggested next step: Review drawings and specifications to resolve before construction.

RFI draft: Please clarify: Drawing Index Audit: 3 missing, 0 mismatched out of 41 sheets

Summary: General Note 24d specifies default Class B tension lap splice lengths as: #4=24", #5=30", #6=36", #7=42". However, the drawing's own Tension Lap Splice Length table, calculated per ACI 318-14 for 4000 psi normalweight concrete (the specified design strength per the Concrete Mixture Schedule and Note 4a), shows that the minimum Class B splice lengths even for the most favorable condition (Other ...

Why it matters: If contractors follow the general note as the default directive for lap splices, all splices would be undersized relative to ACI 318-14 Class B requirements. The #7 bar splice deficiency of 22% is particularly severe and could compromise structural bond capacity at splice locations, potentially l...

Suggested next step: Request the structural engineer of record to reconcile the default lap splice lengths in General Note 24d with the Tension Lap Splice Length table on the same sheet and with ACI 318-14 Class B tension lap splice requirements. Clarify whether the note values should be revised t...

RFI draft: Request the structural engineer of record to reconcile the default lap splice lengths in General Note 24d with the Tension Lap Splice Length table on the same sheet and with ACI 318-14 Class B tension lap splice requirements. Clarify whether the n...

Summary: Detail 7 'Roof Strap Bracing' explicitly specifies that the strap bracing is to be attached to the 'Bottom of Each Purlin.' AISI S100-16 Section I6.4.1 requires that anchorage devices for purlin roof systems with top flange connected to metal sheathing 'shall connect to the purlin at or near the purlin top flange.' The standing seam roof panels are connected to the top flanges of purlins via co...

Why it matters: Connecting the lateral bracing at the bottom flange rather than the top flange (or both flanges) significantly reduces the effectiveness of the bracing system in preventing purlin lateral-torsional buckling and lateral translation. The standing seam roof clips provide limited lateral restraint co...

Suggested next step: Request that the structural engineer of record revise Detail 7 'Roof Strap Bracing' to show the strap bracing connection at or near the purlin top flange in compliance with AISI S100-16 Section I6.4.1, or alternatively at or near both flanges per Section I6.4.2. Clarify which ...

RFI draft: Request that the structural engineer of record revise Detail 7 'Roof Strap Bracing' to show the strap bracing connection at or near the purlin top flange in compliance with AISI S100-16 Section I6.4.1, or alternatively at or near both flanges per ...

Summary: General Note 24d states that reinforcing lap splices shall be "ACI Class B Splices (including dowels) using the following lengths: #4 Bars: 24", #5 Bars: 30", #6 Bars: 36", #7 Bars: 42"." However, the Tension Lap Splice Length table on the same sheet, which is calculated per ACI 318, shows that the absolute minimum Class B splice length for 4,000 psi concrete (Other Bars, Case 1—the most favora...

Why it matters: If reinforcement is detailed and placed per the simplified Note 24d values, particularly for #7 bars (42" instead of the minimum 54" required for Class B), the lap splices will not develop adequate reinforcement capacity per ACI 318. This poses a structural safety risk and would likely be flagged...

Suggested next step: Request the structural engineer revise Note 24d lap splice lengths to be consistent with ACI 318 Class B splice requirements as shown in the project's own Tension Lap Splice Length table. Specifically, confirm the correct minimum Class B splice lengths for #4 through #7 bars a...

RFI draft: Request the structural engineer revise Note 24d lap splice lengths to be consistent with ACI 318 Class B splice requirements as shown in the project's own Tension Lap Splice Length table. Specifically, confirm the correct minimum Class B splice le...

Summary: Post Plan Note 1 states interior framing uses '4" x 2 1/2" x 16ga Posts @ 2'-0" o.c.' However, the note on the shear wall descriptions states 'All Interior Post Are NC6 Unless Otherwise Tagged,' and the Post Schedule (Mid Level) New shows NC6 as 4" x 2 1/2" at 12ga. This is a direct contradiction: Note 1 calls for 16ga interior posts while the post schedule and shear wall note designate 12ga po...

Why it matters: This conflict affects the vast majority of interior framing in the building (2,831 posts). If the wrong gauge is fabricated and shipped to the job site, it would result in significant material waste, re-ordering delays, and potential structural inadequacy if the lighter 16ga members are installed...

Suggested next step: Request the structural engineer of record clarify the correct gauge for interior posts (NC6): is the intended gauge 12ga as shown in the Post Schedule (Mid Level) New, or 16ga as stated in Post Plan Note 1? Please revise the conflicting document to ensure consistency, and conf...

RFI draft: Request the structural engineer of record clarify the correct gauge for interior posts (NC6): is the intended gauge 12ga as shown in the Post Schedule (Mid Level) New, or 16ga as stated in Post Plan Note 1? Please revise the conflicting document t...

Summary: Detail 10 shows a structural parapet brace transferring lateral wind loads into the building's standing seam roof covering using an S-5 clamp attached to the panel seam. Under IBC Section 1604.2, building components must be designed to safely support factored loads without exceeding strength limit states. The thin-gauge metal seam of a standing seam roof is tested and designed as a weather cove...

Why it matters: Using the roof seam to resist concentrated lateral and uplift forces from the parapet brace will likely cause the seam to fail, tear, or pull the concealed roof clip out of the purlin. This creates a high risk of simultaneous structural failure of the parapet and catastrophic weather protection f...

Suggested next step: Revise the parapet brace detail so the brace structurally connects directly to the building framing (e.g., the purlin) independent of the standing seam roof panels, and provide an appropriate flashed roof penetration detail.

RFI draft: Revise the parapet brace detail so the brace structurally connects directly to the building framing (e.g., the purlin) independent of the standing seam roof panels, and provide an appropriate flashed roof penetration detail.

Summary: The parapet diagonal brace channel sections are specified with identical member sizes (1 1/2" x 1 5/8" x 18ga) on both sheets but with conflicting maximum spacing. S900 Detail 10 (Parapet Brace Detail) specifies the channel sections at 48" o.c. (U.N.O) (Max.), while S901 Detail 1 (Parapet On Roof) specifies the same channel sections at 24" o.c. (U.N.O) (Max.). Both details depict the same diago...

Why it matters: This is a critical structural discrepancy. A 48" o.c. spacing provides half the number of braces compared to 24" o.c. spacing. Since parapet braces resist wind uplift and lateral loads on the parapet wall, using the wrong spacing could result in either an under-designed parapet (structural failur...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the correct maximum spacing for the 1 1/2" x 1 5/8" x 18ga parapet brace channel sections. S900 Detail 10 specifies 48" o.c. (Max.) while S901 Detail 1 specifies 24" o.c. (Max.) for what appears to be the same parapet brace assembly. Which spacing governs, and s...

RFI draft: Please clarify the correct maximum spacing for the 1 1/2" x 1 5/8" x 18ga parapet brace channel sections. S900 Detail 10 specifies 48" o.c. (Max.) while S901 Detail 1 specifies 24" o.c. (Max.) for what appears to be the same parapet brace assembly...

Summary: The bottom-left exterior dimensions shown on the Post Plan (S211) denote '21' - 0"' and '52' - 0"'. The Partition Plan (S212) shows dimensions of '21' - 1 1/2"' and '51' - 10 1/2"' for the exact same exterior boundary segment.

Why it matters: A 1.5-inch dimensional discrepancy along the primary exterior wall will cause layout conflicts between the structural framing footprint and the partition layouts, affecting the entire grid alignment and unit spacing.

Suggested next step: Please verify and confirm the correct bottom-left exterior dimensions. Should the layout follow the 52'-0" / 21'-0" string shown on S211, or the 51'-10 1/2" / 21'-1 1/2" string shown on S212?

RFI draft: Please verify and confirm the correct bottom-left exterior dimensions. Should the layout follow the 52'-0" / 21'-0" string shown on S211, or the 51'-10 1/2" / 21'-1 1/2" string shown on S212?

Summary: Plan detail 4 on sheet S500 calls out a 'W12X22' beam and references section '13 S810' for the 'HSS Columns Above W- Beams' connection. Detail 13 on sheet S810 illustrates this continuous bearing connection specifying a '1/2" Plate. Width to Match Width of Beam' secured with '(4) - 3/4"Ø A325 Bolts (2 Each Side)' spaced at '3"' from the centerline on each side (resulting in a 6" total bolt gaug...

Why it matters: If this connection is fabricated as detailed, the specified 6" bolt gauge will place the bolt holes completely outside the 4.03" wide flange of the W12x22 beam, making the structural connection impossible to construct. To resolve this, the engineer must either increase the beam size to a shape wi...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the connection design for the HSS columns bearing on W12x22 beams at grid CC.9-HH. Detail 13/S810 specifies a 6" bolt gauge (3" from centerline) and a plate width matching the beam, but the W12x22 beam flange is only ~4" wide. Should the beam size be increased, ...

RFI draft: Please clarify the connection design for the HSS columns bearing on W12x22 beams at grid CC.9-HH. Detail 13/S810 specifies a 6" bolt gauge (3" from centerline) and a plate width matching the beam, but the W12x22 beam flange is only ~4" wide. Shoul...

Summary: The parapet brace diagonal channel sections are specified with conflicting maximum spacing on two different detail sheets. On sheet S900, Detail 10 (Parapet Brace Detail) specifies '1 1/2" x 1 5/8" x 18ga Channel Sections @ 48" o.c. (U.N.O) (Max.)'. On sheet S901, Detail 1 (Parapet On Roof) specifies the identical member — '1 1/2" x 1 5/8" x 18ga Channel Sections @ 24" o.c. (U.N.O) (Max.)'. Bot...

Why it matters: Parapet brace spacing directly governs the lateral resistance of the parapet wall against wind loads. If the contractor follows the 48" o.c. spacing from S900, the parapet may be under-braced compared to the engineer's intent if 24" o.c. is the correct requirement, potentially leading to a struct...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the correct maximum spacing for the 1 1/2" x 1 5/8" x 18ga parapet brace channel sections. Sheet S900 Detail 10 specifies 48" o.c. maximum while Sheet S901 Detail 1 specifies 24" o.c. maximum for what appears to be the same diagonal bracing element. Which spacin...

RFI draft: Please clarify the correct maximum spacing for the 1 1/2" x 1 5/8" x 18ga parapet brace channel sections. Sheet S900 Detail 10 specifies 48" o.c. maximum while Sheet S901 Detail 1 specifies 24" o.c. maximum for what appears to be the same diagonal...

Summary: The overall horizontal dimensions ('Out To Out Of Steel' and 'Out To Out Of Finish') conflict significantly across the Main Level plans. The Framing Plan (S213) indicates '252' - 0"' to steel and '252' - 1 1/2"' to finish at both the top and bottom. The Decking Plan (S220) indicates '251' - 10 1/2"' to steel at the top, but '252' - 0"' to steel at the bottom. The Post Plan (S221) indicates '251...

Why it matters: These inconsistencies range from minor fractions of an inch to over 21 feet. The building footprint dimensions must be absolutely consistent across framing, decking, and post layouts to ensure correct foundation placement, structural grid alignment, and building envelope detailing. Proceeding wit...

Suggested next step: Please confirm the correct overall horizontal dimensions for the Main Level 'Out To Out Of Steel' and 'Out To Out Of Finish'. The Framing Plan (S213), Decking Plan (S220), and Post Plan (S221) contain multiple conflicting dimensions ranging from 251'-10 1/2" to 273'-0" for the...

RFI draft: Please confirm the correct overall horizontal dimensions for the Main Level 'Out To Out Of Steel' and 'Out To Out Of Finish'. The Framing Plan (S213), Decking Plan (S220), and Post Plan (S221) contain multiple conflicting dimensions ranging from 2...

Summary: The Framing Plan (S202) locates the Revision 1 12'-0" Box Header (NBH2) between vertical grids TT and UU. However, the Post Plan (S211) and Partition Plan (S212) locate the revised 12'-0" vestibule entry doors and associated partition modifications between vertical grids EE.9 and FF.

Why it matters: This conflict means the structural header intended to support the new wide opening is being framed in the wrong bay (shifted significantly along the exterior wall), while the architectural/partition opening has no designated structural header above it.

Suggested next step: Please clarify the correct grid location for the revised vestibule and 12'-0" opening. Should the NBH2 header on S202 be shifted to grids EE.9-FF to align with the Post and Partition plans?

RFI draft: Please clarify the correct grid location for the revised vestibule and 12'-0" opening. Should the NBH2 header on S202 be shifted to grids EE.9-FF to align with the Post and Partition plans?

Summary: The General Notes (S010) explicitly state that the Basic Seismic Force Resisting System is 'Structural Steel Systems Not Specifically Detailed For Seismic Resistance'. However, the Main Level Post Plan (S221) designates the lateral force resisting system as 'Shear Walls' (SW-1, SW-2, SW-3) constructed using Cold-Formed Metal Framing (16ga posts and 14ga/16ga tracks) with 29ga Galvalume panels. ...

Why it matters: Specifying an incorrect Basic Seismic Force Resisting System creates a fundamental conflict in the basis of design. Hot-rolled structural steel systems and cold-formed steel sheet shear walls are governed by different design codes (AISC vs. AISI), utilize different Response Modification Coefficie...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the intended Basic Seismic Force Resisting System. If the building utilizes cold-formed steel shear walls (SW-1, SW-2, SW-3) for lateral resistance, please update the Design Seismic Information in the General Notes to correctly identify the system and associated...

RFI draft: Please clarify the intended Basic Seismic Force Resisting System. If the building utilizes cold-formed steel shear walls (SW-1, SW-2, SW-3) for lateral resistance, please update the Design Seismic Information in the General Notes to correctly iden...

Summary: Detail 10 ('Parapet Brace Detail') incorrectly illustrates a primary structural bracing member anchored to a non-structural cladding element. The detail indicates that the '1 1/2" x 1 5/8" x 18ga Channel\nSections @ 48" o.c. (U.N.O) (Max.)' connect to the standing seam roof using an 'S-5 Clamp Attached\nOver Concealed Roof\nClip @ Roof Purlin'. According to standard structural practice, lateral...

Why it matters: If constructed as detailed, the high lateral wind loads on the parapet (noted in the specification as up to -87.9 psf for leeward parapets) will be transferred directly into the roof panel seam. This improper load path can cause the standing seam to unlatch or the concealed clips to fail, potenti...

Suggested next step: Please revise Detail 10 to establish a proper structural load path. The parapet brace should penetrate the roof panel (with appropriate pitch pocket or flashing detail) and anchor directly to the structural purlin below, rather than relying on an S-5 clamp attached to the floa...

RFI draft: Please revise Detail 10 to establish a proper structural load path. The parapet brace should penetrate the roof panel (with appropriate pitch pocket or flashing detail) and anchor directly to the structural purlin below, rather than relying on an ...

Summary: The Purlin Schedule on sheet S224 specifies all Z-purlins (Z1 through Z9) with a flange width of 2". Per AISI S100-16 Section I6.2.1, the R-factor reduction method for flexural members having one flange through-fastened to deck or sheathing requires the flange width to be no less than 2.125 in. (54.0 mm) per condition (e). The specified 2" flange width is 1/8" less than the code minimum of 2.12...

Why it matters: This affects all 448 Z-purlins in the roof system (Z1 through Z9 combined: 34+60+4+38+120+166+4+4+18). If the purlin design was based on the R-factor method from Table I6.2.1-1 (the standard industry approach for through-fastened metal roof systems), the entire roof purlin design may be non-compl...

Suggested next step: Please confirm the design method used for the Z-purlin roof framing. The Purlin Schedule specifies a 2" flange width for all Z-purlins, which does not meet the minimum 2.125" flange width required by AISI S100-16 Section I6.2.1(e) for the R-factor reduction method. If the R-fa...

RFI draft: Please confirm the design method used for the Z-purlin roof framing. The Purlin Schedule specifies a 2" flange width for all Z-purlins, which does not meet the minimum 2.125" flange width required by AISI S100-16 Section I6.2.1(e) for the R-factor...