Plan Review: 146 Issues Found

Summary: 72 index entries | 31 perfect matches | 4 mismatched | 37 missing Mismatched (4): CVR: Expected: COVER SHEET (CVR) | Actual: Cover Sheet (Page 1)(p1) C2.0: Expected: DEMOLITION PLAN (C2.0) | Actual: DEMOLITION PLAN (D1.0)(p7) S2.0: Expected: BUILDING SECTIONS (S2.0) | Actual: BUILDING SECTIONS (A3.0)(p16) P2.2: Expected: PLUMBING PLANS (P2.2) | Actual: ROOF ...

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: 37 missing, 4 mismatched out of 72 sheets

Summary: The drawing shows a measured dimension of 5'-4 3/4" between a VTR (vent through roof) and an existing rooftop unit's outside air intake opening. The drawing's own red annotation confirms this condition: 'Which side is the outside air opening? Does not meet 10' requirement.' Section 401.4 Item 2 of the 2024 IMC requires that mechanical and gravity outdoor air intake openings be located not less ...

Why it matters: This violation would be flagged during plan review and could halt permitting. If built as shown, the plumbing vent effluent (sewer gases) would discharge directly adjacent to the RTU's fresh air intake, introducing noxious contaminants into the building's ventilation supply. Relocating either the...

Suggested next step: Request the design team relocate the 2" VTR to achieve a minimum 10-foot horizontal separation from the RTU outside air intake opening per IMC Section 401.4 Item 2, or confirm the exact location of the RTU's outside air intake and provide a revised roof plan demonstrating code...

RFI draft: Request the design team relocate the 2" VTR to achieve a minimum 10-foot horizontal separation from the RTU outside air intake opening per IMC Section 401.4 Item 2, or confirm the exact location of the RTU's outside air intake and provide a revise...

Summary: On sheet A2.1, the South Elevation (A4) shows grid lines in the sequence A, XA, XB, B, XC, XD from left to right, placing grid line B between grids XB and XC. On sheet A2.2, the South Elevation - Existing Building (A4) shows grid lines in the sequence XA, XB, XC, B, XD from left to right, placing grid line B between grids XC and XD. The relative positions of grid lines B and XC are swapped betw...

Why it matters: Grid lines define the primary structural layout and are referenced by all disciplines for element placement. An incorrect grid line position on either sheet could lead to misaligned structural columns, foundations, wall framing, and MEP rough-ins during construction. This discrepancy must be reso...

Suggested next step: Clarify the correct position of grid line B relative to grid lines XB, XC, and XD. Confirm whether grid B is between XB and XC (as shown on A2.1 South Elevation) or between XC and XD (as shown on A2.2 South Elevation - Existing Building). Update all affected elevation drawings...

RFI draft: Clarify the correct position of grid line B relative to grid lines XB, XC, and XD. Confirm whether grid B is between XB and XC (as shown on A2.1 South Elevation) or between XC and XD (as shown on A2.2 South Elevation - Existing Building). Update a...

Summary: Elevation A4 on sheet A2.2 is explicitly titled 'SOUTH ELEVATION - EXISTING BUILDING' and correctly uses the column grid lines corresponding to the South face ('XA', 'XB', 'XC', 'B', 'XD'). However, it incorrectly depicts window types 'SF05' and 'SF07 SF08 SF07'. According to floor plan A1.0, these specific windows are located on a North-facing recessed courtyard wall. The actual South exterior...

Why it matters: This direct contradiction between the elevation's title/grid lines and its depicted windows creates significant construction confusion. If the elevation is interpreted as the true South facade, the contractor will incorrectly frame and install the courtyard's window layout on the main South face,...

Suggested next step: Clarify the intent of Elevation A4 on A2.2. It is titled as the South Elevation and uses South wall grids, but incorrectly depicts the 'SF05' and 'SF07/SF08' window groupings that belong to a North-facing courtyard wall. Please update the South Elevation to show the correct 'S...

RFI draft: Clarify the intent of Elevation A4 on A2.2. It is titled as the South Elevation and uses South wall grids, but incorrectly depicts the 'SF05' and 'SF07/SF08' window groupings that belong to a North-facing courtyard wall. Please update the South El...

Summary: The Cast-in-Place Concrete note #6 directs construction to be in accordance with ACI 318-05 (R-05), specifically referencing 'Chapter 3 for Standards for Tests & Materials, Chapters 4, 5, 6 & 7 for Construction Requirements.' General note #1 states design and construction shall be in accordance with the 2024 edition of the IBC, which references ACI 318-19 as the applicable concrete design and c...

Why it matters: This obsolete code reference will likely be flagged during plan review by the building official, causing permitting delays. During construction, contractors and inspectors would be referencing outdated material standards and construction requirements from ACI 318-05 that differ from ACI 318-19, p...

Suggested next step: Request that the Engineer of Record update Cast-in-Place Concrete note #6 to reference the correct edition of ACI 318 (ACI 318-19, consistent with the 2024 IBC referenced in General note #1) and the corresponding chapter numbers for materials (Chapters 19, 20), concrete produc...

RFI draft: Request that the Engineer of Record update Cast-in-Place Concrete note #6 to reference the correct edition of ACI 318 (ACI 318-19, consistent with the 2024 IBC referenced in General note #1) and the corresponding chapter numbers for materials (Cha...

Summary: Section F9 details an 18"×18" concrete pier (Ag = 324 sq in.) reinforced with (8) #5 vertical bars (As = 8 × 0.31 = 2.48 sq in.). This yields a longitudinal reinforcement ratio of 2.48/324 = 0.0077, or 0.77%. ACI 318-14 Section 10.6.1.1 requires that the area of longitudinal reinforcement be at least 0.01Ag = 3.24 sq in. The provided 2.48 sq in. is approximately 23% deficient. Section 10.1.1 co...

Why it matters: This deficiency would be flagged during plan review and could delay permit issuance. If constructed as shown, the pier would have insufficient steel to resist bending that may exist regardless of analytical results, and to prevent yielding of reinforcement under sustained service loads due to cre...

Suggested next step: Request the structural engineer verify the longitudinal reinforcement for the 18"×18" concrete piers in Sections F9 and F10. The current (8) #5 bars provide 2.48 sq in., which is below the 0.01Ag = 3.24 sq in. minimum per ACI 318-14 Section 10.6.1.1. Clarify whether the bars s...

RFI draft: Request the structural engineer verify the longitudinal reinforcement for the 18"×18" concrete piers in Sections F9 and F10. The current (8) #5 bars provide 2.48 sq in., which is below the 0.01Ag = 3.24 sq in. minimum per ACI 318-14 Section 10.6.1...

Summary: The Cast-in-Place Concrete Note 6 specifies construction to be in accordance with 'ACI 318-05 (R-05),' which is an edition of ACI 318 published nearly 20 years ago. However, General Note 1 on the same sheet states the project is designed per the 2024 IBC. Section 1901.2 of the 2024 IBC requires that structural concrete be designed and constructed in accordance with 'ACI 318,' which refers to th...

Why it matters: This discrepancy would almost certainly be flagged during plan review by the building official, leading to permit issuance delays. If construction proceeds using ACI 318-05 provisions, concrete work—including mix designs, reinforcement detailing, anchorage, and durability requirements—may not com...

Suggested next step: Request the Structural Engineer of Record update Cast-in-Place Concrete Note 6 to reference the current edition of ACI 318 as required by 2024 IBC Section 1901.2, update the welded wire reinforcing standard from ASTM A82/A185 to the current ASTM A1064, and confirm that all con...

RFI draft: Request the Structural Engineer of Record update Cast-in-Place Concrete Note 6 to reference the current edition of ACI 318 as required by 2024 IBC Section 1901.2, update the welded wire reinforcing standard from ASTM A82/A185 to the current ASTM A...

Summary: The Roof Plumbing Plan explicitly shows a vent through roof (VTR) located only 5'-4 3/4" from an existing rooftop unit's outside air opening. The drawing's own red annotation confirms this condition: 'Which side is the outside air opening? Does not meet 10' requirement.' with a dimensioned distance of 5'-4 3/4". Per IBC Section 2801.1, the International Mechanical Code governs the design and in...

Why it matters: This violation would introduce plumbing vent exhaust gases (including sewer gases) into the HVAC outside air supply of the RTU, directly impacting indoor air quality and occupant health. This would be flagged during plan review and rejected by the building department, causing permit delays. If bu...

Suggested next step: Request the plumbing engineer relocate the VTR to achieve a minimum 10-foot horizontal separation from all RTU outside air intake openings. The engineer should confirm the location of outside air openings on all existing RTUs ((E)RTU-1 through (E)RTU-6) and verify that all VTR...

RFI draft: Request the plumbing engineer relocate the VTR to achieve a minimum 10-foot horizontal separation from all RTU outside air intake openings. The engineer should confirm the location of outside air openings on all existing RTUs ((E)RTU-1 through (E)...

Summary: The Area Occupancy Schedule calculates the occupant load for the 'COMMUNITY ROOM' (Assembly Group A-3) using a load factor of 15 (unconcentrated seating), yielding 113 occupants. However, the floor plan clearly depicts the room configured with concentrated rows of chairs without tables. Per the IBC, concentrated assembly areas without fixed seats must be calculated using a factor of 7 net.

Why it matters: Undercalculating the occupant load by using the unconcentrated factor for a concentrated seating layout drastically reduces the design occupant load (from ~242 to 113). This deficiency impacts the required egress capacity, the required number of exits, and the minimum required plumbing fixtures, ...

Suggested next step: Clarify the intended use and seating configuration for the Community Room. If concentrated row seating will be utilized as drawn, revise the occupant load factor to 7 net and update the total occupant load, egress capacity, and plumbing fixture calculations accordingly. If the...

RFI draft: Clarify the intended use and seating configuration for the Community Room. If concentrated row seating will be utilized as drawn, revise the occupant load factor to 7 net and update the total occupant load, egress capacity, and plumbing fixture ca...

Summary: The plumbing demolition plan contains a leftover internal drafter's note explicitly stating to show pipe extensions "EVEN IF YOU'RE KINDA GUESSING" to ensure the project is bid. Building code Section 3303.1 requires the submission and approval of construction documents for demolition work. Construction documents based on admitted guesswork do not accurately represent the work to be performed an...

Why it matters: Issuing construction documents with admitted guessed quantities or locations fundamentally undermines the reliability of the drawings. When actual field conditions inevitably differ from the "guessed" extensions, it will lead to contractor confusion, immediate RFIs during bidding, and significant...

Suggested next step: Please verify the actual existing piping extents through field investigation or record drawings. Remove the internal drafter communication regarding "guessing" from the plans, and update the demolition drawings to reflect accurate, verifiable dimensions and extents prior to is...

RFI draft: Please verify the actual existing piping extents through field investigation or record drawings. Remove the internal drafter communication regarding "guessing" from the plans, and update the demolition drawings to reflect accurate, verifiable dime...

Summary: The drawing indicates a "VTR" located "5'-4 3/4"" from an RTU and includes an internal design note explicitly stating "Does not meet 10' requirement." Project General Note 1 mandates that "ALL WORK PERFORMED SHALL COMPLY WITH CURRENT FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL CODES AND ORDINANCES.", including the "2024 INTL. MECHANICAL CODE" and "2021 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE". The drawing's acknowledged failure to...

Why it matters: Failing to maintain a minimum 10-foot clearance between a plumbing vent and an outside air intake allows sewer gases to be drawn into the building's ventilation system. This poses a severe health and odor hazard and will result in a failed building inspection.

Suggested next step: Please revise the routing of the VTR to ensure it terminates at least 10 feet from the RTU outside air intake to comply with code requirements, and remove the internal review note from the construction drawings.

RFI draft: Please revise the routing of the VTR to ensure it terminates at least 10 feet from the RTU outside air intake to comply with code requirements, and remove the internal review note from the construction drawings.

Summary: The POLE BASE DETAIL explicitly illustrates the grounding connections to the pole lug as a "STRANDED #10 GROUND WIRE FROM LUG TO FIXTURE(S)" and a "#6 GROUND WIRE CLAMPED TO 5/8\" X 10' LONG COPPER ROD". The assembly detail incorrectly isolates the metal pole by failing to connect the enclosure to the branch circuit equipment grounding conductor.

Why it matters: NEC 250.86 requires metal enclosures for other than service conductors to be connected to the equipment grounding conductor. Relying solely on a local ground rod instead of an equipment grounding conductor prevents fault current from having a low-impedance path back to the source. This creates a ...

Suggested next step: Please revise the POLE BASE DETAIL to explicitly require the branch circuit equipment grounding conductor to be routed with the circuit conductors and bonded to the pole's ground lug, in compliance with NEC 250.86.

RFI draft: Please revise the POLE BASE DETAIL to explicitly require the branch circuit equipment grounding conductor to be routed with the circuit conductors and bonded to the pole's ground lug, in compliance with NEC 250.86.

Summary: The architectural building sections show T.O. FRMG. CONNECTOR at elevation 108'-10", while the structural building section B2 shows CONNECTOR ROOF at elevation 108'-2 3/4". This represents a 7-1/4" discrepancy for the same connector roof element between the existing building and the new addition. Both sections reference the same grid line system (grids 1, 2, 3) confirming they depict the same a...

Why it matters: A 7-1/4" discrepancy in the connector roof elevation will directly affect steel fabrication, roof framing, and the interface between the existing structure and the new addition. If structural steel is fabricated to the lower elevation (108'-2 3/4") and the architectural design expects 108'-10", t...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the correct elevation for the connector roof between the existing building and the new addition. The architectural drawings indicate T.O. FRMG. CONNECTOR at 108'-10" while the structural drawings indicate CONNECTOR ROOF at 108'-2 3/4". Which elevation is correct...

RFI draft: Please clarify the correct elevation for the connector roof between the existing building and the new addition. The architectural drawings indicate T.O. FRMG. CONNECTOR at 108'-10" while the structural drawings indicate CONNECTOR ROOF at 108'-2 3/...

Summary: The column schedule on sheet AS1.1 lists all six column base plate elevations at 100'-1", while canopy elevations C1 and C2 show T.O. SLAB at 100'-0". This results in a 1-inch vertical change in level at each of the six column base plate locations within the entry canopy walking surface. The C2 Canopy Elevation shows a door in the adjacent masonry wall, and detail C3 is labeled 'ENTRY CANOPY GU...

Why it matters: If constructed as drawn, six steel base plates protruding 1 inch above the finished slab would create non-compliant changes in level and tripping hazards along the accessible route to the building entrance. This would likely be cited during an ADA compliance inspection, requiring costly post-cons...

Suggested next step: Coordinate with Structural to resolve the 1-inch discrepancy between the column base plate elevation (100'-1") and the T.O. Slab (100'-0"). Confirm whether base plates are intended to be recessed flush with or below the finished walking surface to comply with ADA Section 403.4...

RFI draft: Coordinate with Structural to resolve the 1-inch discrepancy between the column base plate elevation (100'-1") and the T.O. Slab (100'-0"). Confirm whether base plates are intended to be recessed flush with or below the finished walking surface to...

Summary: The "ADA TYPICAL DETAIL TOILET" specifies a clear floor space with a width of 4'-8" (56 inches) measured perpendicular from the side wall, and a depth of 5'-0" (60 inches) extending from the rear wall. Code Section 604.3.1 explicitly requires a minimum clearance of 60 inches measured perpendicular from the side wall and 56 inches measured perpendicular from the rear wall. The drafter appears to...

Why it matters: Providing a 56-inch clearance width instead of the required 60 inches will prevent proper wheelchair maneuvering and side transfer at the toilet. If constructed as drawn, this will result in a failed accessibility inspection, potentially requiring costly demolition and relocation of side walls, p...

Suggested next step: Please revise the clear floor space dimensions in the ADA Typical Detail for the toilet to specify a minimum width of 60 inches (5'-0") measured perpendicular from the side wall, and a minimum depth of 56 inches (4'-8") measured perpendicular from the rear wall, to comply with...

RFI draft: Please revise the clear floor space dimensions in the ADA Typical Detail for the toilet to specify a minimum width of 60 inches (5'-0") measured perpendicular from the side wall, and a minimum depth of 56 inches (4'-8") measured perpendicular from...