Plan Review: 110 Issues Found

Summary: 18 index entries | 14 perfect matches | 4 mismatched | 0 missing Mismatched (4): S0.1: Expected: GENERAL NOTES (S0.1) | Actual: Structural Notes (S0.1)(p1) S1.6: Expected: TYPICAL CFS WALL DETAILS (S1.6) | Actual: Typical CFS Non-Bearing Wall Details (S1.6)(p8) S3.1: Expected: STRUCTURAL SECTIONS & ELEVATION (S3.1) | Actual: Section & Elevations (S3.1)(p12) S4.1: ...

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: 0 missing, 4 mismatched out of 18 sheets

Summary: The "T1 & T2 Truss Loading Diagram" specifies a single "PARAPET DESIGN WIND LOAD = 62.4 PSF ULT" with arrows pointing to the left. A specific note dictates "* NOTE: ARROWS INDICATE THE DIRECTION OF LOADING." However, ASCE 7-16 Section 26.5.1 requires that "The wind shall be assumed to come from any horizontal direction." Furthermore, Section 27.3.4 establishes differing net pressure coefficient...

Why it matters: Truss web members are highly sensitive to load reversals. A web member designed for tension under a leftward parapet wind load may experience significant compression when the wind blows from the opposite direction (the leeward condition). Failing to specify and design for wind loads in both direc...

Suggested next step: Please provide the parapet design wind load for the opposite wind direction to ensure the truss is designed for force reversals, or clarify if the provided 62.4 PSF ultimate load is meant to be evaluated symmetrically for both windward and leeward conditions.

RFI draft: Please provide the parapet design wind load for the opposite wind direction to ensure the truss is designed for force reversals, or clarify if the provided 62.4 PSF ultimate load is meant to be evaluated symmetrically for both windward and leeward...

Summary: Details D and E show out-of-plane wall anchorage relying on wood ledgers subjected to cross-grain tension. In Detail E, roof joists connect to the "2x6 LEDGER" via "SST LU" hangers, and the ledger is screwed to the studs. In Detail D, ceiling joists connect to the "2x6 LEDGER" via "SST A35 EA JOIST", and the ledger is screwed to the wall studs. When out-of-plane forces pull the wall away from t...

Why it matters: If the ledger splits along the grain under wind or seismic out-of-plane forces, the wall will detach from the roof or ceiling diaphragm. This severs the continuous load path required by the building code and could lead to partial or full collapse of the wall.

Suggested next step: Please revise the wall anchorage details to provide a direct mechanical connection (e.g., tension ties, straps, or specific wall anchorage brackets) between the roof/ceiling joists and the wall studs or blocking, bypassing the ledger to eliminate cross-grain tension.

RFI draft: Please revise the wall anchorage details to provide a direct mechanical connection (e.g., tension ties, straps, or specific wall anchorage brackets) between the roof/ceiling joists and the wall studs or blocking, bypassing the ledger to eliminate ...

Summary: Detail 2 (Gable End Truss) explicitly severs the lateral load path for high-capacity shear walls. The detail directs that the skewable top connector used to anchor the wall to the roof system for 'SW4' and above is 'PLACED BELOW CLG NAILER'. However, the note for attaching the truss to this nailer states '16d EN, TRUSS BTM CHORD TO CLG NAILER PER SHEARWALL SCHED (NOT REQ'D @ "SW-4" & ABOVE)'. B...

Why it matters: ASCE 7-16 Section 12.1.3 mandates that a continuous load path be provided to transfer forces from their point of application to the final point of resistance. Breaking the connection between the roof's collector element (the gable end truss) and the vertical shear walls (at the ceiling nailer) du...

Suggested next step: Revise Detail 2 to provide a continuous, positive structural load path for shear walls SW-4 and above. Clarify whether the skewable top connector should be attached directly to the truss bottom chord instead of below the ceiling nailer, or specify an adequate connection (e.g.,...

RFI draft: Revise Detail 2 to provide a continuous, positive structural load path for shear walls SW-4 and above. Clarify whether the skewable top connector should be attached directly to the truss bottom chord instead of below the ceiling nailer, or specify...

Summary: The drawing design criteria specifies Seismic Design Category D and designates 'Ordinary Steel Moment Frames' with R=3.50 as the tower's lateral force-resisting system (LFRS). Per CBC Section 2205.2.1.2, structures assigned to SDC D, E, or F must be designed and detailed in accordance with AISC 341, with limited exceptions only as permitted in ASCE 7 Table 15.4-1. Per ASCE 7-16 Table 12.2-1 (re...

Why it matters: This is a fundamental seismic system selection error that would result in plan check rejection by Sacramento County. It would require a complete redesign of the tower's lateral force-resisting system to a higher-ductility system such as Special Steel Moment Frames (R=8.0) or Intermediate Steel Mo...

Suggested next step: Request the Structural Engineer to clarify the tower lateral force-resisting system type. Specifically: (1) Confirm whether the tower is classified as a nonbuilding structure that qualifies for exceptions per ASCE 7 Table 15.4-1, and if so, provide the supporting justification...

RFI draft: Request the Structural Engineer to clarify the tower lateral force-resisting system type. Specifically: (1) Confirm whether the tower is classified as a nonbuilding structure that qualifies for exceptions per ASCE 7 Table 15.4-1, and if so, provid...

Summary: CBC Section 2105.2 mandates that the minimum specified compressive strength (f'm) for all masonry construction shall be 2,000 psi. While Concrete Masonry Unit Note 1 correctly lists an f'm of 2,000 psi, Note 2 explicitly allows the use of concrete block units with a minimum compressive strength of 1,900 psi. Under the standard masonry unit strength method, the overall system compressive strengt...

Why it matters: If the contractor procures and installs the specified 1,900 psi concrete blocks, the resulting masonry system will not physically be capable of meeting the 2,000 psi f'm minimum required by the building code and the structural design assumptions. This will result in an under-strength structural a...

Suggested next step: Revise Concrete Masonry Unit Note 2 to require concrete block units to have a minimum compressive strength of 2,000 psi (or higher) to ensure the constructed assembly can achieve the required f'm of 2,000 psi in accordance with CBC Section 2105.2.

RFI draft: Revise Concrete Masonry Unit Note 2 to require concrete block units to have a minimum compressive strength of 2,000 psi (or higher) to ensure the constructed assembly can achieve the required f'm of 2,000 psi in accordance with CBC Section 2105.2.

Summary: Detail 4 states there are "NO DEPTH RESTRICTIONS ON TRENCHES OR DEEPENING OF FOOTINGS OUTSIDE THIS ZONE" (beyond a horizontal distance of '4xb'). Permitting an adjoining footing or trench of unlimited depth just outside this zone would allow a line drawn between the lower edge of the existing footing and the bottom of the new deep excavation to have a slope steeper than 30 degrees. This directl...

Why it matters: Allowing contractors unlimited excavation depth near foundations without requiring an extension of the 2H:1V restriction line or a site-specific engineering analysis creates a severe risk of undermining the foundation's bearing strata. This could lead to a localized collapse or differential settl...

Suggested next step: Remove the note allowing "no depth restrictions" outside the 4xb zone. Revise Detail 4 to extend the 2H:1V restriction line indefinitely, or add a note requiring engineering analysis and shoring for any excavations that fall below the 2H:1V line regardless of the horizontal di...

RFI draft: Remove the note allowing "no depth restrictions" outside the 4xb zone. Revise Detail 4 to extend the 2H:1V restriction line indefinitely, or add a note requiring engineering analysis and shoring for any excavations that fall below the 2H:1V line r...

Summary: Detail 6A specifies a staggered nailing pattern at panel joints with a typical edge distance of 3/8 inch and an additional '3/8" MIN, 1/2" MAX NAIL STAGGER'. Detail 6C permits this staggered nailing configuration over a '2x MIN HORIZ OR VERT FRAMING MEMBER'. According to CBC 2304.2, structural capacities and geometric layouts must be based on net actual dimensions. A nominal 2x member is 1.5 in...

Why it matters: Because the staggered fasteners will miss or blow out the edge of the 1.5-inch wide framing member, the structural sheathing will be inadequately attached at the panel joints. This drastically reduces the shear capacity of the wall and poses a high risk of structural failure during wind or seismi...

Suggested next step: Please confirm that nominal 3x minimum framing members (2.5-inch actual width) are required at all shearwall panel joints where a staggered edge nailing pattern is specified. Revise Detail 6C to require a 3x minimum member to ensure a complete load path and prevent fastener bl...

RFI draft: Please confirm that nominal 3x minimum framing members (2.5-inch actual width) are required at all shearwall panel joints where a staggered edge nailing pattern is specified. Revise Detail 6C to require a 3x minimum member to ensure a complete loa...

Summary: Detail 13 shows a shear wall holdown ('SST HOLDOWN PER PLAN') attached to a 4x post, with its anchor rod passing entirely through a horizontal wood nailer ('4x NAILER PER 4|S1.5') before connecting to the steel wide-flange beam ('W BM PER PLAN'). Wood is subject to vertical cross-grain dimensional changes (shrinkage) as it dries, whereas the steel anchor rod will not shrink. As the 4x nailer sh...

Why it matters: If left uncorrected, the holdown connection will loosen post-construction as the wood nailer dries and shrinks. During a seismic or high-wind event, the shear wall will experience initial uplift and impact loading as it takes up the slack on the loose anchor rod. This sudden impact can cause conn...

Suggested next step: Please revise Detail 13 to eliminate the holdown anchor rod passing through cross-grain wood. Provide a detail where the holdown or its anchor rod bears directly on the steel beam (or a welded steel standoff), bypassing the wood nailer entirely, to ensure a tight and continuou...

RFI draft: Please revise Detail 13 to eliminate the holdown anchor rod passing through cross-grain wood. Provide a detail where the holdown or its anchor rod bears directly on the steel beam (or a welded steel standoff), bypassing the wood nailer entirely, t...

Summary: Detail 2 specifies that the 16d nailing between the truss bottom chord and the ceiling nailer is 'NOT REQ'D @ "SW-4" & ABOVE'. Instead, it calls for a skewable top connector to be '(PLACED BELOW CLG NAILER)'. Placing the connector below the nailer means it connects the wall top plate to the ceiling nailer. Omitting the 16d nails leaves the gable end truss bottom chord with no specified connecti...

Why it matters: Omitting the mechanical connection between the truss and the ceiling nailer at higher shear wall designations (SW-4 and above) breaks the required continuous load path for lateral wind and seismic forces. This violates the building code requirement for a complete load path and can lead to a failu...

Suggested next step: Clarify the shear transfer connection between the gable end truss bottom chord and the 2x ceiling nailer for shear walls SW-4 and above. Revise the detail to ensure the skewable top connector directly connects the truss to the wall plate or provide the required fasteners to co...

RFI draft: Clarify the shear transfer connection between the gable end truss bottom chord and the 2x ceiling nailer for shear walls SW-4 and above. Revise the detail to ensure the skewable top connector directly connects the truss to the wall plate or provid...

Summary: The drawing designates the tower's lateral force-resisting system (LFRS) as 'Ordinary Steel Moment Frames' with R = 3.50 in Seismic Design Category D. CBC Section 2205.2.1.2 requires structures assigned to SDC D, E, or F to be designed and detailed in accordance with AISC 341, with the only exception referencing ASCE 7 Table 15.4-1 (applicable to nonbuilding structures). Critically, the excepti...

Why it matters: This is a fundamental structural system selection issue that will require redesign of the tower's LFRS (likely to at least an intermediate or special steel moment frame). This will impact member sizes, connections, detailing, foundation design, and potentially the architectural layout. The plan c...

Suggested next step: Request the Structural Engineer to verify and revise the tower's lateral force-resisting system to a system permitted for Seismic Design Category D per ASCE 7-16 Table 12.2-1 and CBC Section 2205.2.1.2 (e.g., Intermediate Steel Moment Frame or Special Steel Moment Frame). Upda...

RFI draft: Request the Structural Engineer to verify and revise the tower's lateral force-resisting system to a system permitted for Seismic Design Category D per ASCE 7-16 Table 12.2-1 and CBC Section 2205.2.1.2 (e.g., Intermediate Steel Moment Frame or Spe...

Summary: Drawing Note XIII.7 states that cleanouts must be provided for "each lift or pour of grout where such lift or pour of grout is in excess of 5'-4\" in height." This wording permits individual grout lifts to exceed 5'-4". However, CBC Section 2104.2.4 explicitly restricts grouting to be done in "lifts not exceeding 4 feet (1219 mm) or 5 feet 4 inches (1651 mm) for 10-inch (254 mm) nominal or wide...

Why it matters: Allowing lifts to exceed the code maximum can result in improper consolidation of grout, internal voids, and blowouts. This compromises the structural integrity of the masonry wall system and will likely be flagged by a special inspector, leading to costly demolition and rework.

Suggested next step: Revise Note XIII.7 to clarify that while a grout pour may exceed 5'-4" (with proper cleanouts and approved admixtures), individual grout lifts shall never exceed 4 feet (or 5'-4" for 10-inch nominal or wider units) in accordance with CBC Section 2104.2.4.

RFI draft: Revise Note XIII.7 to clarify that while a grout pour may exceed 5'-4" (with proper cleanouts and approved admixtures), individual grout lifts shall never exceed 4 feet (or 5'-4" for 10-inch nominal or wider units) in accordance with CBC Section 2...

Summary: Details 7 and 8 incorrectly specify wood fasteners for structural connections to steel wide-flange beams ('W BM PER PLAN'). Detail 7 specifies '#10x3" WS' (wood screws) to attach the wood blocking that supports ceiling joists to the web of the steel beam. Detail 8 specifies an 'SST A34' framing anchor, which is designed to be nailed into wood, to connect a 2x6 wood stud to the bottom flange of ...

Why it matters: Wood screws and standard sheet-metal wood framing anchors cannot penetrate or securely fasten into structural steel members. These unconstructible connections fail to provide a viable load path, directly violating the CBC requirement that structural systems must use methods based on rational mech...

Suggested next step: Please clarify and revise the fastening methods for the wood-to-steel connections in Details 7 and 8. Specify appropriate connection hardware, such as through-bolts, welded tabs, PAFs, or structural self-drilling metal fasteners rated for the thickness of the steel beam's web ...

RFI draft: Please clarify and revise the fastening methods for the wood-to-steel connections in Details 7 and 8. Specify appropriate connection hardware, such as through-bolts, welded tabs, PAFs, or structural self-drilling metal fasteners rated for the thic...

Summary: Detail C specifies an uplift connection at the top of the 2x6 roof studs using SST ML28 hardware, indicating the studs are subject to tension/uplift. However, the base of the stud relies only on "(2) #10 x 3" WS EA STUD TYP" to connect to the horizontal member. Under uplift, the base connection must resist withdrawal forces. Fastening vertical studs to a horizontal base member without side-grai...

Why it matters: The 2018 NDS Section 12.2.2.3 strictly prohibits loading wood screws in withdrawal from end grain, explicitly assigning a capacity of Ceg=0.0. Utilizing wood screws as the primary tension tie at the base breaks the continuous uplift load path, rendering the connection highly susceptible to failur...

Suggested next step: Please revise Detail C to specify an approved structural uplift connector (e.g., a framing angle or strap) at the base of the 2x6 wood studs, ensuring a continuous load path that does not rely on wood screws in end-grain withdrawal.

RFI draft: Please revise Detail C to specify an approved structural uplift connector (e.g., a framing angle or strap) at the base of the 2x6 wood studs, ensuring a continuous load path that does not rely on wood screws in end-grain withdrawal.

Summary: The Tower Framing Elevation on sheet S4.1 calls out section detail 10 on S5.2 at the base of the (N) HSS4x4x1/4 column. However, Detail 10 on S5.2 illustrates this base connection as an HSS column anchored to a steel wide-flange beam ('W BM PER PLAN'). The base of the Tower Framing Elevation does not indicate a steel beam; instead, adjacent framing in the same elevation (Detail 6) shows the str...

Why it matters: If the HSS column is intended to bear on a concrete footing, Detail 10/S5.2 is an incorrect reference and a base plate detail with anchor bolts (such as Detail 4 or 5 on S4.1) should likely be used. If the column is intended to bear on a steel wide-flange beam, the Tower Framing Elevation and fou...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the base connection for the (N) HSS4x4x1/4 column in the Tower Framing Elevation. Should the column bear on a concrete footing (requiring a detail similar to 4/S4.1 or 5/S4.1), or does it bear on a steel wide-flange beam as shown in Detail 10/S5.2? If a steel be...

RFI draft: Please clarify the base connection for the (N) HSS4x4x1/4 column in the Tower Framing Elevation. Should the column bear on a concrete footing (requiring a detail similar to 4/S4.1 or 5/S4.1), or does it bear on a steel wide-flange beam as shown in...