Plan Review: 229 Issues Found

Summary: The door schedule on W45 specifies Door #1 with a door height of 7'-0". The structural sections on W42 consistently show the wall height above the upper slab as 6'-6", measured from T.O. SLAB EL. 368.50 to T.O.W. EL. 375.00. Section 5 explicitly dimensions this wall height as 6'-6" from the top of slab to the top of wall. Section 6 confirms the same elevations (T.O.W. EL. 375.00 and T.O. SLAB E...

Why it matters: This dimensional conflict would prevent construction of Door #1 as designed. The door opening (7'-0" minimum, plus frame header) exceeds the available wall height (6'-6") by at least 6 inches. Resolution requires either raising the top-of-wall elevation (which impacts structural design, reinforce...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the conflict between the 7'-0" door height specified for Door #1 in the Door Schedule on W45 and the 6'-6" available wall height (T.O.W. EL. 375.00 minus T.O. SLAB EL. 368.50) shown in Sections 5 and 6 on W42. Should the door height be reduced to fit within the ...

RFI draft: Please clarify the conflict between the 7'-0" door height specified for Door #1 in the Door Schedule on W45 and the 6'-6" available wall height (T.O.W. EL. 375.00 minus T.O. SLAB EL. 368.50) shown in Sections 5 and 6 on W42. Should the door height...

Summary: The Reinforcement Plan (W39) is titled with a Top of Slab (TOS) elevation of '368.00 & 368.50'. However, the corresponding structural sections detailed on sheet W36 (Sections 5, 6, and 8) clearly state that the Top of Slab elevation is '365.00'.

Why it matters: A 3-foot discrepancy in the base slab elevation will critically impact excavation depths, wall heights, concrete volume estimation, and coordination with underground piping and mechanical equipment elevations. This must be resolved before any earthwork or foundation construction begins.

Suggested next step: Please clarify the correct Top of Slab (TOS) elevation for the Headworks West WWTP structure. The Reinforcement Plan (W39) indicates TOS EL. 368.00 & 368.50, while Structural Sections 5, 6, and 8 on W36 indicate T.O. SLAB EL. 365.00. Which elevation is correct?

RFI draft: Please clarify the correct Top of Slab (TOS) elevation for the Headworks West WWTP structure. The Reinforcement Plan (W39) indicates TOS EL. 368.00 & 368.50, while Structural Sections 5, 6, and 8 on W36 indicate T.O. SLAB EL. 365.00. Which elevati...

Summary: Sheet W50 details BEAM 3 (B3) as a W10x22 with an overall length of 10'-6 1/4". However, on Sheet W48, the Hatch Framing Assembly Plan shows B3 as a member spanning between the two B2 beams, which are dimensioned at 5'-11" CL apart. Section 2 on W48 further confirms B3 connects between B2 beams with a centerline-to-centerline dimension of 6'-0". A beam fabricated at 10'-6 1/4" is nearly twice t...

Why it matters: This discrepancy will directly affect steel fabrication. If B3 is fabricated per the W50 detail at 10'-6 1/4", it will be far too long to install between the B2 beams in the hatch framing assembly. The beam would need to be reordered or field-modified, causing schedule delays and additional cost....

Suggested next step: Please clarify the correct length of Beam B3 (W10x22). Sheet W50 details B3 at 10'-6 1/4" overall length, but the Hatch Framing Assembly Plan and Section 2 on Sheet W48 show B3 spanning between two B2 beams at approximately 5'-11" to 6'-0" CL apart. Please confirm the correct ...

RFI draft: Please clarify the correct length of Beam B3 (W10x22). Sheet W50 details B3 at 10'-6 1/4" overall length, but the Hatch Framing Assembly Plan and Section 2 on Sheet W48 show B3 spanning between two B2 beams at approximately 5'-11" to 6'-0" CL apar...

Summary: Civil drawing W31 indicates an internal channel floor at 'EL. 368.50' and an internal wall at 'EL. 369.50'. However, Structural drawing W37 shows the interior structure with a base slab at 'T.O. SLAB EL. 365.00' and a central wall at 'T.O.W. EL. 367.00', completely omitting the EL. 368.50 floor and EL. 369.50 walls required by the Civil sections.

Why it matters: The civil and mechanical design relies on the channel floor at 368.50 and walls at 369.50 to mount screens and control water (W31 shows water levels up to 'WSEL. 370.41'). Building the structural walls to T.O.W. 367.00 as detailed in W37 would allow water to bypass the weirs by overflowing the wa...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the correct internal structural elevations for the Headworks WWTP. Should the structural drawings be updated to include the EL. 368.50 channel floor and EL. 369.50 walls, or do the civil/process elevations need revision?

RFI draft: Please clarify the correct internal structural elevations for the Headworks WWTP. Should the structural drawings be updated to include the EL. 368.50 channel floor and EL. 369.50 walls, or do the civil/process elevations need revision?

Summary: There is a significant discrepancy in the Top of Wall (T.O.W.) elevations between the building sections and the roof plan. Sheet W30 (Sections) indicates the Top of Wall elevations are at 'T.O.W. EL. 375.00' and 'T.O.W. EL. 372.00', and shows an exposed platform capped with a '1 1/2" ALUMINUM HANDRAIL W/ KICKPLATE'. Conversely, Sheet W46 (Roof Plan) indicates the supporting walls for the roof f...

Why it matters: This 12-to-14-foot difference is a critical structural and architectural conflict. If the primary concrete walls terminate at EL. 375.00 as shown in the sections, there is no supporting structure for the roof framing detailed at EL. 387.00/389.67 on the roof plan. This impacts structural design, ...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the correct Top of Wall elevations for the Headworks West WWTP. Do the primary concrete walls extend to EL. 387.00 and EL. 389.67 to support the roof framing (as shown on W46), or do they terminate at EL. 375.00/372.00 with a separate superstructure enclosure? P...

RFI draft: Please clarify the correct Top of Wall elevations for the Headworks West WWTP. Do the primary concrete walls extend to EL. 387.00 and EL. 389.67 to support the roof framing (as shown on W46), or do they terminate at EL. 375.00/372.00 with a separa...

Summary: Sheet W47 dictates that the W10x22 roof beam is installed on a 2/12 sloped roof, requiring vertically cut ends to mate against the pilaster connections, and is field-welded to a 1/4" Shear Transfer Plate (STP) per Section A. In contrast, the structural steel shop details on Sheet W49 show BEAM 2 (W10x22) with square 90-degree end cuts (no slope accommodation) and pre-drilled bolt holes at the e...

Why it matters: If the W10x22 beams are fabricated according to W49 with square ends and bolt holes, they will not match the 2/12 roof slope or mate correctly flush with the vertical supports detailed on W47. Furthermore, supplying bolted mounting clip angles conflicts with the engineered welded Shear Transfer P...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the fabrication and connection requirements for the W10x22 roof beams. Should the beams be fabricated with angled end cuts to match the 2/12 roof slope and field-welded to the Shear Transfer Plates as shown on W47 Detail 4 and Section A, or should they be fabric...

RFI draft: Please clarify the fabrication and connection requirements for the W10x22 roof beams. Should the beams be fabricated with angled end cuts to match the 2/12 roof slope and field-welded to the Shear Transfer Plates as shown on W47 Detail 4 and Secti...

Summary: The architectural window detail (Detail A) on sheet W45 specifies the window is installed in a 'CMU WALL'. However, structural Section 4 on sheet W35 shows reinforced concrete walls with #5 rebar at 12" O.C. each face and #3 stirrups at 9" O.C. centered over wall openings. These are fundamentally different wall construction types — CMU (concrete masonry unit) versus cast-in-place reinforced con...

Why it matters: This conflict affects the wall construction method, window rough opening framing, anchorage, and waterproofing details. Window installation in CMU requires different jamb, sill, and head conditions (e.g., bond beam lintels, masonry anchors) than installation in cast-in-place concrete block-outs (...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the wall construction type at the window locations in the Headworks West WWTP. The architectural window detail (Detail A, sheet W45) specifies 'CMU WALL', while structural Section 4 (sheet W35) shows reinforced concrete walls with rebar and stirrups over wall op...

RFI draft: Please clarify the wall construction type at the window locations in the Headworks West WWTP. The architectural window detail (Detail A, sheet W45) specifies 'CMU WALL', while structural Section 4 (sheet W35) shows reinforced concrete walls with r...

Summary: Drawing W44 (Building Details) requires exterior CMU walls to be anchored to the "CONCRETE WALL BELOW" using vertical dowels. Specifically, W44 specifies "#5's @ 24\" O.C. IN CONC. FILLED CELLS, TIED TO #5 DOWELS (TYP. ALL EXTERIOR WALLS)" with a "33\" LAP (TYP.)" and notes to lap bars "AT VERTICAL DOWELS THAT EXTEND OUT OF FOUNDATION". However, drawing W40 (Structural Sections) details the con...

Why it matters: Without dowels extending from the concrete wall to lap with the CMU wall reinforcement, the CMU exterior walls will not be structurally tied to the concrete foundation/wall below. This omission creates a weak interface susceptible to shear failure and contradicts the masonry reinforcement require...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the connection between the concrete walls at T.O.W. EL. 375.00 (W40) and the exterior CMU walls (W44). Provide the required dowel size, spacing, and projection length extending from the top of the concrete wall to lap with the CMU vertical reinforcement, and rev...

RFI draft: Please clarify the connection between the concrete walls at T.O.W. EL. 375.00 (W40) and the exterior CMU walls (W44). Provide the required dowel size, spacing, and projection length extending from the top of the concrete wall to lap with the CMU v...

Summary: Mechanical Section 5 on sheet W30 shows a "GRIT SCREW" sloping up from a hopper at "EL. 365.00" through the right side of the chamber. In direct contradiction, Structural Section 5 on sheet W42 specifies a concrete slab at "T.O. SLAB EL. 368.50" across the right side of this area, which would physically block the installation of the mechanical screw conveyor.

Why it matters: If the concrete slab is poured at EL. 368.50 as detailed in the structural drawings, it will intersect the path of the sloped grit screw conveyor. Resolving this during construction would require costly concrete cutting and structural remediation to accommodate the mechanical equipment and associ...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the structural slab requirements at Section 5. Should the slab at EL. 368.50 be omitted or modified to accommodate the sloped grit screw conveyor detailed on the mechanical drawings?

RFI draft: Please clarify the structural slab requirements at Section 5. Should the slab at EL. 368.50 be omitted or modified to accommodate the sloped grit screw conveyor detailed on the mechanical drawings?

Summary: While Section 5 of the civil drawings correctly shows "EL. 365.00" as the top of the concrete slab, Section 7 contradicts this by indicating the concrete foundation extends down to a bottom elevation of "EL. 365.00". Furthermore, the structural drawings consistently establish "EL. 365.00" as the Top of Slab ("T.O. SLAB EL. 365.00"), with a 12-inch thick footing extending below this level (creat...

Why it matters: This 12-inch vertical discrepancy in the primary structural datum is a critical conflict. If the concrete is poured with the top of the slab at EL. 365.00 per structural instructions, any mechanical equipment (weir gates, stop gates, grit screws) fabricated or placed assuming the slab's bottom is...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the intended datum for EL. 365.00. Should EL. 365.00 represent the Top of Slab (as shown in structural drawings and Civil Section 5) or the Bottom of Foundation/Slab (as shown in Civil Section 7)? Please update the respective drawings to ensure vertical coordina...

RFI draft: Please clarify the intended datum for EL. 365.00. Should EL. 365.00 represent the Top of Slab (as shown in structural drawings and Civil Section 5) or the Bottom of Foundation/Slab (as shown in Civil Section 7)? Please update the respective drawin...

Summary: Drawing W31 Section 8 depicts a 'FABRICATED SLIDE GATE' operator mounted at the top of an exterior concrete wall. The drawing also explicitly shows a CMU block wall extending upward from this same concrete wall, which aligns with Structural drawing W44's note that typical exterior walls ('TYP. ALL EXTERIOR WALLS') consist of a concrete-filled CMU block wall. However, the slide gate operator mec...

Why it matters: This represents a major coordination failure between the structural envelope and the process mechanical equipment. The slide gate cannot be installed or operated if the CMU wall is built directly behind it as detailed. The design must be revised to resolve this spatial conflict, potentially by of...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the spatial coordination at the exterior wall in Section 8 on Drawing W31. The slide gate operator is drawn physically clashing with the exterior CMU wall. Please provide revised details resolving this spatial conflict so the mechanical equipment and structural ...

RFI draft: Please clarify the spatial coordination at the exterior wall in Section 8 on Drawing W31. The slide gate operator is drawn physically clashing with the exterior CMU wall. Please provide revised details resolving this spatial conflict so the mechan...

Summary: Civil Section 3 details weir gates at 'NORMAL WEIR ELEV 374.00' and 'NORMAL WEIR ELEV 371.50', whereas Structural Section 3 does not show these openings and instead calls out a solid wall at 'T.O.W. EL. 375.00'. The elevations matching these weir openings ('EL. 374.00' and 'EL. 371.00') are instead detailed in Structural Section 4. Furthermore, Civil Section 4 calls out a wall terminating at 'T...

Why it matters: This severe inconsistency indicates that either the section callouts (3 and 4) are swapped between the Civil (W27) and Structural (W39) plans, or the wall profiles are entirely uncoordinated. Constructing based on the current structural sections would result in missing structural openings for the...

Suggested next step: Please clarify if the section cuts for Section 3 and Section 4 are swapped between the Civil (W27) and Structural (W39) plans. Confirm the correct locations for the weir gate openings (EL 371.00 to 374.00) and the wall terminating at EL 372.10.

RFI draft: Please clarify if the section cuts for Section 3 and Section 4 are swapped between the Civil (W27) and Structural (W39) plans. Confirm the correct locations for the weir gate openings (EL 371.00 to 374.00) and the wall terminating at EL 372.10.

Summary: The Structural Dimensional Plan (W33) indicates a top horizontal overall wall width of 34'-0" (dimensioned as 17'-0" from the centerline). In contrast, the Structural Plan (W38) details the top horizontal overall wall width for the same structure as 29'-0" (dimensioned as 14'-6" and 14'-6" from the centerline).

Why it matters: A 5'-0" variance in the primary structural width will cause severe coordination failures between the foundation layout, concrete formwork, and internal equipment placement. Constructing the basin to the incorrect width will lead to major rework and schedule delays.

Suggested next step: Please clarify the correct overall top width for the main Headworks structure. Should the wall-to-wall width be 34'-0" as dimensioned on the Structural Dimensional Plan (W33), or 29'-0" as dimensioned on the Structural Plan (W38)?

RFI draft: Please clarify the correct overall top width for the main Headworks structure. Should the wall-to-wall width be 34'-0" as dimensioned on the Structural Dimensional Plan (W33), or 29'-0" as dimensioned on the Structural Plan (W38)?

Summary: The roof framing details on drawing W47 specify that the roof beams bear on a "16"x8" CMU PILASTER CENTERED BENEATH W-BEAM WITH (4) #6 CONT. FROM SLAB (OR LINTEL BEAM) TO BOTTOM OF BEAM BEARING" and call out a masonry "BOND BEAM WITH (2) #5's CONT." at the top of the wall. Conversely, the overall building sections on drawing W41 (e.g., Section 3) detail these vertical load-bearing walls as cast...

Why it matters: Concrete Masonry Units (CMU) and Cast-In-Place (CIP) concrete require completely different trades, construction sequences, and detailing for structural steel embedments. If the primary building walls are poured as concrete per sheet W41, the masonry-specific roof connections on sheet W47 (which r...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the required structural material for the load-bearing walls and pilasters supporting the roof at the Headworks West WWTP. Are they intended to be CMU as detailed on sheet W47, or cast-in-place concrete as shown in the building sections on sheet W41? Please issue...

RFI draft: Please clarify the required structural material for the load-bearing walls and pilasters supporting the roof at the Headworks West WWTP. Are they intended to be CMU as detailed on sheet W47, or cast-in-place concrete as shown in the building secti...

Summary: The mechanical drawing (W27 Notes 6 & 7) explicitly specifies slide gates and stop gates sized for 3'-0" (36") wide channels. W27 shows these gates installed across multiple parallel flow channels. However, the structural dimensional plan (W33) details these corresponding parallel channels with varying internal widths, specifically 15", 3'-0", and 4'-0".

Why it matters: A mechanical stop gate specifically designed for a 36" wide channel physically cannot fit into a structural concrete channel dimensioned at 15" wide. Conversely, a 36" slide gate placed in a 48" (4'-0") wide channel will fail to span the opening. Note that the 2'-3" dimension on W33 is an overall...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the coordination between the mechanical gates and the structural channel dimensions. W27 (Notes 6 & 7) specifies 3'-0" (36") widths for the slide gates and stop gates. However, W33 dimensions the corresponding structural channels with varying internal widths, in...

RFI draft: Please clarify the coordination between the mechanical gates and the structural channel dimensions. W27 (Notes 6 & 7) specifies 3'-0" (36") widths for the slide gates and stop gates. However, W33 dimensions the corresponding structural channels wi...