Foundational Services Plan Review: 29 Issues Found

Summary: Site Note 16 on CS100 mandates that 'ALL BOLLARDS THE CONTRACTOR PROVIDES SHALL MEET ASTM F2656 FS30 STATIC ANTI-RAM BARRIER RATING.' ASTM F2656 FS30 requires a bollard to arrest a 15,000 lb vehicle traveling at 30 mph within 30 inches of penetration. However, Detail 7 on CD500 (PIPE BOLLARD) specifies a 3' diameter standard pipe post, concrete...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The site plan shows the proposed east-side parking area with a perpendicular offset dimension of 12.0' from the building's east perimeter to the B612 concrete curb and gutter demarcating the parking area. This 12.0' dimension is well below the 25-foot minimum standoff distance required by Table 3-1 for Essential and Ancillary facilities (50...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The utility plan shows a circular patient drop-off drive immediately adjacent to the Foundational Services Outpatient Clinic building, with only a covered canopy structure between the vehicular travel lane and the building face. Using the drawing's graphic scale (0–20'–40'), the distance from the drop-off curb (where vehicles stage) to the main...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The Emergency Power Utility Plan shows two 'GENERATOR' units positioned to the right of and outside the 'NEW SWITCH GEAR BUILDING' footprint, depicted as standalone outdoor equipment. Section 5.6.3.1 of the specification explicitly requires that 'All generators must be installed inside a building compliant with this Design Manual (i.e.,...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The grading plan shows a patient drop-off lane and vehicular circulation area located directly at the building entrance of the FOUNDATIONAL SERVICES OUTPATIENT CLINIC (FFE=925.50). The 8.0% accessible ramps connect the vehicular surface (spot elevation 924.30) to the building entrance sidewalk level (spot elevation 925.30), yielding a...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: Detail 7 ('PIPE BOLLARD') specifies a '3' DIAMETER STANDARD PIPE POST' with only a 1'-6' embedment in a 9' footing to protect canopy columns. However, Specification Section 4.2.8.1 requires columns at covered drop-offs to be protected by 'anti-ram barriers'. A 3-inch pipe with shallow embedment is a standard traffic delineator and structurally...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The Demolition Plan directs the contractor to 'SEE SHEET CE100 FOR EROSION CONTROL & BMP MEASURES.' However, the base maps used across these sheets conflict regarding existing utilities. The Demolition Plan displays existing utility lines labeled 'PER PLAN STEAM TUNNEL' and 'SCANNED STEAM TUNNEL'. The Erosion & Sediment Control Plan completely...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The Landscape Restoration Plans (LP100 and LP101) depict proposed trees and shrubs planted directly over or adjacent to proposed underground utility lines shown on the Utility Plan (CU100). Specifically, a cluster of two trees labeled 'Qb 2' (Swamp White Oaks) is placed in the native grass area immediately next to the Post Indicator Valve,...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The existing 'Vacated Utility Tunnel' (also labeled 'Utility Tunnel (D)') has conflicting Top of Tunnel and Bottom of Tunnel elevations recorded across the survey and utility plans.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The existing buildings located south of the new clinic footprint along Red Cross Drive are labeled inconsistently. The westernmost building in this cluster is labeled 'BUILDING 13' on the Utility Plan, but the identical footprint is labeled 'BUILDING 9' on the Emergency Power Utility Plan. Similarly, the adjacent building to the east is labeled...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The Existing Conditions Survey (SV100) clearly identifies 'BUILDING 25' and a 'BUS STOP SHELTER'. However, the Demolition Plan (CD100) completely omits these structures from the drawing, providing instructions for 'REMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT (TYP.)' in the area but failing to address the demolition of the building and shelter. The Site Plan...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The Grading Plan note #8 references a geotechnical report prepared by 'BRAUN INTERTEC DATED JULY 8, 2925,' while the SWPPP specification on sheet CE101 identifies the geotechnical report as being prepared by 'TERRACON DATED 1/10/2025.' These are two different geotechnical firms and two different report dates, creating a direct contradiction...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The site plan shows a concrete drive apron and patient drop-off area on the northwest side of the building with walkway and setback dimensions of 18.4' and 27.0', indicating vehicular drive lanes are approximately 18 to 27 feet from the building face. Section 4.3.1 requires drop-offs and staging areas for vehicles to be separated from the...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: The grading plan depicts a main entrance drop-off lane immediately abutting the clinic and indicates exposed critical utility connections (PH Gas, PH Telco) adjacent to vehicular parking areas. However, no anti-ram vehicle barriers (such as bollards or hardened walls) are specified or shown to protect these vulnerable areas, which violates the...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Summary: Detail 7 (Pipe Bollard) shows the bollard extending 3'-6' above finished grade. The specification Section 3.5.1 requires that passive crash protection barriers such as bollards have a maximum height of three (3) ft. (1 m). The drawing's 3'-6' height exceeds this maximum by 6 inches. This is the project's standard bollard detail and would be...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft: