Self-Storage Facility: 247 Issues Found in Pre-Permit Review

The project

A self-storage facility project requiring comprehensive multi-discipline coordination including structural, electrical, mechanical, plumbing, fire protection, and architectural systems. The project included composite floor systems, fire protection systems, electrical distribution, and strict compliance requirements for IBC 2021, IFC 2021, and various referenced standards. Critical issues included jurisdiction errors (NYC vs NJ), occupancy classification mistakes, obsolete code references, and numerous drawing vs specification conflicts.

Project type

Self-Storage · commercial · multi-discipline

Codes referenced: 2021 International Building Code · 2021 International Fire Code · Structural loads 7-16 · AISC 360 · TMS 402/602-16 · NFPA 70 (NEC) · NFPA 13

Critical findings (39)

1. Fillet welds shown as 1/16" but specification minimum fillet weld is 3/16"

   Structural

   Critical

   Multiple details on this sheet call out fillet welds as "1/16"" (e.g., track/plate welds at suspended stud conditions). The project specification explicitly states a minimum fillet weld size of 3/16". The drawing's 1/16" weld size directly contradicts the specification minimum.

2. Conflicting structural loads standard years: 2010 vs 2016

   Code Compliance

   Critical

   Multiple versions of the IBC-referenced structural loads standard are referenced in this document. Found references to year(s) 2010 alongside 2016. The 2016 edition (Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures) was selected as the applicable code since it is the latest edition, but older version(s) are still referenced on some sheets.

3. Drawing references NYC authorities (FDNY, DOB) but specification requires New Jersey jurisdiction

   Fire Protection

   Critical

   The drawing's general note #1 references NYC Buildings Bulletin 2020-012 and requires notifications to FDNY (Fire Department of New York) and DOB (NYC Department of Buildings) for sprinkler system disconnection. However, the specification clearly states the project must comply with 2021 NJ Building Code and JCMUA (Jersey City Municipal Utilities Authority) requirements, indicating this is a New Jersey project, not a New York City project.

4. Occupancy Classification Error - Storage Facility Incorrectly Classified as Group B Instead of Group S-1

   Fire Protection · Code: 2021 International Building Code

   Critical

   The project is explicitly named 'Maple Shade Storage' indicating it is a self-service storage facility. Per IBC Section 311.2, 'Self-service storage facility (mini-storage)' is classified as Storage Group S-1, which is a moderate-hazard storage occupancy. However, the drawing's sprinkler design criteria explicitly states 'BUILDING IS CLASSIFIED IN 'B' OCCUPANCY GROUP (LIGHT HAZARD) WITH INCIDENTAL STORAGE SPACES.' For a facility whose primary purpose is storage (as indicated by the project name), the storage spaces cannot be considered 'incidental' - the building should be classified as S-1.

5. Penetration Firestopping Specifies Non-Listed Sealant Instead of Listed Firestop System

   Fire Protection · Code: 2021 International Building Code

   Critical

   The pipe installation detail through rated walls specifies sealing annular spaces with 'mineral wool and sealed... with a non-hardening compound similar or equal to DUXSEAL.' Duxseal is a duct sealing compound, not a UL-listed penetration firestop system. IBC Section 714.2 explicitly requires that 'A listed penetration firestop system shall be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's installation instructions and the listing criteria.'

6. Sidewall sprinkler detail shows 1" NPT/nipple but sprinkler schedule requires 1/2" NPT connection

   Fire Protection

   Critical

   The sidewall sprinkler head detail depicts a 1" NPT connection and a 1" nipple at the sprinkler head connection. The project sprinkler head schedule requires 1/2" NPT sprinkler connections (including for concealed sidewall), creating a direct conflict in connection sizing.

7. Standpipe/riser size is inconsistent between floor plans and riser diagram

   Fire Protection

   Critical

   The ground floor sprinkler plan calls for a 2-1/2" standpipe continuing up to the roof, while the second-floor plan calls out a 4" standpipe up/down. The riser diagram, however, identifies standpipe/SD risers as 6" and 4". These sizes contradict each other for what appears to be the same vertical standpipe/riser system that must align through floors and terminate at the roof manifold.

8. Stairwell fixture type S lacks emergency battery backup required for exit stairway illumination

   Electrical · Code: 2021 International Fire Code

   Critical

   The luminaire schedule designates fixture type 'S' (Lithonia WC-2-32-MVOLT-GEB101S-NY) specifically for stairwell landings, but this fixture does not include emergency battery backup capability. The schedule explicitly shows fixture 'AE' includes 'STRIP WITH EMERGENCY BATTERY' for corridor applications, while the stairwell fixture 'S' has no such emergency capability listed. This creates a gap where the designated stairwell landing lighting would not function during a power failure.

9. A-400 Sections Show Inconsistent Roof/Story Heights (Section 6 vs Section 2)

   Architectural

   Critical

   On sheet A-400, Section 6 shows level markers of GROUND FLOOR = 0' and ROOF = 11'-0", indicating a single-story height. On the same sheet, Section 2 shows GROUND FLOOR = 0', SECOND FLOOR = 17'-7", THIRD FLOOR = 27'-7", and ROOF = 37'-7" (with an ELEVATOR BULKHEAD at 43'-7"), indicating a multi-story building. If these sections are intended to represent the same building/continuous portion, the elevations are incompatible (e.g., Section 6 roof at 11'-0" is below Section 2 second floor at 17'-7").

10. Contradictory Exterior Wall System Definition

    Structural

    Critical

    The Engineering Requirements on sheet S-0.2 explicitly state that the design assumes the architectural wall systems will primarily consist of "THIN–BRICK WITH COLD–FORMED METAL FRAMING". However, the First Floor Plan on sheet S-1.1 indicates the perimeter walls are Masonry Walls (MW1) "ABOVE" the slab and (MW2) "BELOW", which contradicts the metal framing assumption.

11. Incompatible Lighting Fixture Voltage Specification (347V)

    Electrical

    Critical

    The Luminaire Schedule on E-100.00 specifies Fixture Type 'C' with a model number indicating 347 Volts (Canadian standard). The project is located in New Jersey, USA (standard 120/277V), and the General Notes/Legend specify 120/277V controls. 347V fixtures are incompatible with the building's voltage system.

12. Anchor Bolt Clearance Interference at Column Base

    Structural · Code: 2021 International Building Code

    Critical

    The base plate detail creates a physical interference that makes installation impossible. The detail specifies a 10" wide base plate supporting an HSS6x6 column (6" nominal width). If centered, the column leaves 2" of plate extension on each side. The dimension string locates the anchor bolt centerline at 2" from the plate edge. This aligns the center of the 3/4" diameter anchor bolt exactly with the face of the HSS column. This provides zero clearance for the nut and washer, violating AISC 360 installation and tightening clearance requirements.

13. Incorrect Referenced Standard (2010 edition) for IBC 2021 Project

    Structural · Code: 2021 International Building Code

    Critical

    The drawing indicates the project is designed to 'IBC 2021' (Note 1) but explicitly lists the 2010 edition as the procedure for Wind Loads (Note 6f, 6g) and Earthquake Loads (Note 7d). IBC 2021 adopts the 2016 edition. The use of the 2010 edition is obsolete for a 2021 IBC project and may result in incorrect wind pressures (particularly on roof components) and seismic forces due to significant changes between the standards.

14. Composite Slab Concentrated Load Capacity Below Code Minimum

    Structural · Code: 2021 International Building Code

    Critical

    Steel Deck Note 10 states that composite slabs are capable of supporting a maximum concentrated load of only 600 pounds. IBC Section 1607.4 requires floors to be designed to support the concentrated live loads given in Table 1607.1. For most occupancies, the minimum required concentrated load is significantly higher than 600 pounds (e.g., 2,000 lbs for Office, 1,000 lbs for Hospitals/Schools, 3,000 lbs for Garages). Limiting the slab capacity to 600 lbs creates a direct code violation for floor loading capability.

15. Reference to Obsolete Masonry Standards and Inspection Criteria

    Structural · Code: 2021 International Building Code

    Critical

    The drawing notes explicitly require masonry design, construction, and inspection to conform to ACI 530-13, ACI 530.1-13, and ACI 530.1-05. These are obsolete standards. IBC 2021 Section 2101.2 mandates compliance with TMS 402 (Building Code Requirements for Masonry Structures) and TMS 602 (Specification for Masonry Structures). The current adopted edition is the 2016 edition (TMS 402/602-16). Additionally, the drawing specifies 'Level C' Quality Assurance, a term from the 2005/2008 standards that no longer exists in TMS 602-16 (which uses Quality Assurance Levels 1, 2, and 3).

16. Contradictory Bond Beam Continuity Requirements

    Structural · Code: 2021 International Building Code

    Critical

    The drawings contain conflicting requirements regarding the continuity of bond beams at control joints, which jeopardizes the continuous load path required for the lateral force-resisting system. The Wall Sections/Elevations explicitly call for a 'CONT. BOND BEAM' (Continuous), implying it functions as a diaphragm chord or collector. However, Detail 5 Note 2 strictly requires that 'BOND BEAMS SHALL BE DISCONTINUOUS AT WALL JOINT.' Additionally, a plan note in Detail 5 exempts 'CHORD REINFORCING' from termination, creating a triple conflict.

17. Missing Fastener Quantity for Strap Brace Termination

    Structural · Code: 2021 International Building Code

    Critical

    Detail 1 (TYPICAL IN-PLACE BRACING DETAIL), specifically 'B DETAIL', fails to specify the number of fasteners required at the strap end termination. The callout simply reads '#10 SMS' without a quantity. Since 'A DETAIL' (intermediate connection) specifies '#10 SMS EA. STUD' (singular), a contractor may interpret Detail B as also requiring only a single screw. A single #10 screw is structurally insufficient to develop the tension capacity of a '1 1/2" x 18GA STRAP' used for bracing, leading to immediate connection failure under load.

18. Missing Concrete Screw Embedment Depth

    Structural · Code: 2021 International Building Code

    Critical

    Detail E specifies a 3/8" diameter concrete screw with "EMBED" but fails to provide the numerical embedment depth value. The text reads "W/ EMBED @ 2'-8" O.C.", indicating the spacing but omitting the depth required to achieve the necessary structural capacity. Without this value, the anchor installation is undefined and its capacity cannot be verified.

19. Incomplete Jamb Stud Schedule Data

    Structural · Code: 2021 International Building Code

    Critical

    The Jamb Stud Schedule in Detail A provides prescriptive stud sizes based solely on "MAX ALLOWABLE OPENING WIDTH" (6'-0" and 12'-0"). It fails to specify the maximum wall height and wind pressure/load for which these sizes are valid. Cold-formed steel stud capacity is critically dependent on unbraced length (height) and lateral load. Additionally, the schedule creates a design gap for openings between 12'-0" and 14'-0" (referenced in Note 2) where no stud size is defined.

20. Impossible Footing Dowel Geometry Violating Concrete Cover Requirements

    Structural · Code: 2021 International Building Code

    Critical

    The detailing for the wall-to-footing connection creates a geometric impossibility that violates code-mandated concrete cover requirements. Section 4 specifies #5 dowels with '2'-6" EA. LEG' (30 inches). One leg of this L-shaped dowel must extend horizontally into the footing to transfer loads. However, the Footing Schedule defines the width of footing WF1 as '2'-6" WIDE' (30 inches). It is physically impossible to install a 30-inch transverse horizontal bar leg within a 30-inch wide footing while maintaining *any* concrete cover at the ends of the bar, let alone the minimum cover required by code (typically 3 inches for concrete cast against earth).

Sample high priority findings (11 total)

1. Luminaire schedule notes reference NYC building code for a New Jersey project

   Electrical

   High

   The project title block identifies the location as '2817-2819 Route 73, Maple Shade, NJ.' However, the luminaire schedule notes specify compliance with 'SECTION 27-382 B.C.' (a NYC Building Code section) and require 'NYC APPROVED LIGHTING FIXTURES.'

2. Plumbing Legend Shows Two Different Symbols Both Labeled "LAVATORY" Without Differentiation

   Plumbing

   High

   The Plumbing Legend on this sheet displays two distinct graphical symbols both labeled identically as "LAVATORY". One symbol appears as a circular/oval basin symbol, while a separate entry later in the legend shows a square fixture symbol, also labeled "LAVATORY" with no qualifier or distinction between them. This creates ambiguity about which symbol should be used to represent lavatories on the floor plans.

3. Line-type conflict: same dash-dot line shown for existing ductwork and for items to be removed

   Mechanical

   High

   The LINE REPRESENTATION legend shows the same dash-dot repeating line style for both "EXISTING DUCTWORK" and "EXISTING PIPING, DUCTWORK OR EQUIPMENT TO BE REMOVED." This is an explicit internal conflict in the legend because one line type is assigned two different meanings.

4. Slab on Grade Concrete Strength (4000 PSI) Contradicts Specification (5000 PSI)

   Structural

   High

   Drawing note 19 specifies 4,000 PSI normal weight concrete for slab on grade construction. However, the structural specification on S-0.0 requires 5,000 PSI for slabs. The slab schedule on this sheet identifies structural slabs on grade (S1 - 12" Structural Slab on Grade) that would fall under the 'SLABS' category in the specification requiring 5000 PSI concrete.

5. Shaft Enclosure Joints Show Metal Closure Instead of Required Fire-Resistant Joint System

   Structural · Code: 2021 International Building Code

   High

   The typical interior shaft wall section specifies a '12GA CLOSURE CONNECTION TO CMU W/PAF, TYP' at the intersection of the CMU shaft wall and floor/deck assembly. Per IBC Section 713.9, joints in shaft enclosures must comply with Section 715. Section 715.3 requires joints in or between fire-resistance-rated assemblies to be protected by 'an approved fire-resistant joint system designed to resist the passage of fire.' A 12-gauge metal closure plate attached with powder-actuated fasteners is not an approved fire-resistant joint system.

6. Incorrect Code Reference "ASIC" Should Be "AISC" in Typical Anchor Rod Section

   Structural

   High

   The Typical Anchor Rod Section detail shows "PER ASIC REQUIREMENTS" which is an incorrect reference. The specification clearly identifies the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) as the governing code for structural steel work. "ASIC" is not a recognized code body.

7. Invalid Bolt Connection Type 'SLIP-OPTICAL' Specified Instead of 'SLIP-CRITICAL'

   Structural

   High

   Drawing note 5 specifies that 'ALL BOLTS FOR SHEAR PLATES SHALL BE DESIGNED AS SLIP-OPTICAL'. 'SLIP-OPTICAL' is not a recognized connection type in structural engineering or the RCSC Specification for Structural Joints. The correct term is 'SLIP-CRITICAL'. As written, this contradicts the specification requirement that bolted connections be designed per the RCSC Specification, which only defines snug-tight, pretensioned, and slip-critical connection types.

8. Foundation stepping note permits footing slope steeper than IBC maximum (2H:1V vs 10H:1V max)

   Structural · Code: 2021 International Building Code

   High

   The structural general foundation notes instruct that foundation elements may be stepped at a maximum slope of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical (50% slope). IBC limits the permitted slope of the bottom surface of footings to 1 vertical in 10 horizontal (10% slope).

9. Fillet weld size 1/8" shown in typical metal deck detail is below 3/16" minimum specification

   Structural

   High

   The typical metal deck detail shows a weld callout of "1/8 AT 1/2" TYP. ADJACENT TO CUT WEB" for the angle reinforcement at deck openings. This indicates a 1/8" fillet weld size. The specification clearly states that the minimum fillet weld size shall be 3/16". Since 1/8" (0.125") is less than 3/16" (0.1875"), this is a direct contradiction of the minimum weld size requirement.

10. Corner/Intersection Bar Lap Length in Schedule (24" for #4) Less Than Specification Required 2'-6" Minimum

    Structural

    High

    The specification requires corner bars at all wall corners and intersections to have 2'-6" (30 inches) minimum laps. However, the lap splice length schedule shows #4 bars with only 24" lap length, and the corner reinforcement details reference this schedule with the note 'LAP LENGTH SEE SCHEDULE TYP'. For 8" non-bearing CMU walls that use #4 horizontal reinforcement per specification, the corner bars matching this reinforcement would have only 24" laps per the schedule, which is 6 inches less than the required 30" minimum.

Issue categories

Structural

Anchor bolts, composite slabs, masonry standards, weld sizes, shear studs, concrete strength, and structural code compliance

Fire Protection

Sprinkler systems, firestopping, occupancy classification, standpipe sizing, and fire code compliance

Electrical

Voltage incompatibilities, fire pump room violations, emergency lighting, circuit assignments, and electrical code compliance

Plumbing

Storm sewer connections, pipe sizing, and plumbing coordination

Mechanical

Ductwork representation, HVAC coordination, and mechanical systems

Architectural

Building elevations, wall systems, occupancy classification, and architectural coordination

Code Compliance

IBC 2021 compliance, structural loads version conflicts, jurisdiction errors, and building code violations

Document Coordination

Drawing vs specification conflicts, contradictory requirements, and document coordination issues

Value delivered

• 247 issues surfaced before permit submission
• 39 critical permit-blocking issues identified
• Jurisdiction errors caught (NYC vs NJ references)
• Occupancy classification error corrected (Group B vs S-1)
• Obsolete code references identified (2010 structural loads, ACI 530-13, etc.)
• Fire protection violations caught (non-listed firestop, wrong NFPA standards)
• Electrical code violations identified (voltage incompatibilities, fire pump room violations)
• Structural conflicts resolved (weld sizes, anchor bolts, composite slabs, masonry standards)