Southeast Asia Mixed-Use: 18 Issues Found

Summary: The sheet title includes the 36th floor, and the plan explicitly labels a 'DRY RISER' at the lift lobby/core. By-law 230 limits a dry riser to buildings whose topmost occupied floor is more than 18 metres but less than 30 metres above the fire appliance access level, while By-law 231 requires a wet riser when the topmost occupied floor is more...

Why it matters: This is a fundamental fire protection code compliance issue for a high-rise building. If left uncorrected, it can cause fire authority rejection and require major redesign and rework of the riser system and associated fire protection infrastructure.

Suggested next step: Please confirm the required firefighting riser system for the building. If the building includes occupied floors up to the 36th floor, revise the plans and all related fire protection documents to replace the indicated dry riser with the required wet riser system.

RFI draft: Please confirm the required firefighting riser system for the building. If the building includes occupied floors up to the 36th floor, revise the plans and all related fire protection documents to replace the indicated dry riser with the required wet riser system.

Summary: The Bedroom 1 elevations are inconsistent between the two documents. One document shows 'BEDROOM 1 -2' and 'BEDROOM 1 -3' with '2300', while the other shows the same elevations with '2900'. This is a 600 mm difference in the overall elevation height.

Why it matters: If different versions are used in the field, the vertical relationship of switches, plug points, door heads, and fitted elements in Bedroom 1 can be installed incorrectly and may require rework.

Suggested next step: Please confirm whether the Bedroom 1 elevations are 2300 or 2900 overall and issue one coordinated dimension for construction.

RFI draft: Please confirm whether the Bedroom 1 elevations are 2300 or 2900 overall and issue one coordinated dimension for construction.

Summary: The same LIVING/DINING -2 elevation is dimensioned differently between the two documents. One document shows '5375\n2900\n1200\n110\nLIVING/DINING -2', while the other shows '5375\n2400\n1200\nLIVING/DINING -2'. This is a 500 mm difference in elevation height.

Why it matters: A 500 mm discrepancy on the living/dining elevation can alter coordination of switch and plug points with wall heads, openings, and interior finishes, increasing the risk of incorrect installation.

Suggested next step: Please confirm whether LIVING/DINING -2 is 2900 or 2400 overall and reissue the coordinated elevation.

RFI draft: Please confirm whether LIVING/DINING -2 is 2900 or 2400 overall and reissue the coordinated elevation.

Summary: On the residential unit plan 'UNIT TYPE B / B(M) (1405 SQFT)', the note '*REFER TO DWG NO.2304 / WD /203' is used. The supplied drawing evidence for the related sheet is drawing no. 'WD/203-2', titled 'CW TANK 1 & 2 AND PUMP ROOM DETAIL - SECTION A-A', and the section content includes 'CW PUMP ROOM'. This confirms a cross-reference problem, but...

Why it matters: If left unresolved, the contractor cannot reliably determine what detail is intended when following '*REFER TO DWG NO.2304 / WD /203' from the Type B unit plan. The missing sheet suffix and the unrelated supplied WD/203-2 content increase the risk that the wrong detail will be used or that the intended detail will be missed entirely.

Suggested next step: Please confirm the exact target drawing for '*REFER TO DWG NO.2304 / WD /203' on 'UNIT TYPE B / B(M) (1405 SQFT)'. If the intended reference is not drawing 'WD/203-2' titled 'CW TANK 1 & 2 AND PUMP ROOM DETAIL - SECTION A-A', revise the callout to the correct drawing number including the required sheet suffix/detail identifier.

RFI draft: Please confirm the exact target drawing for '*REFER TO DWG NO.2304 / WD /203' on 'UNIT TYPE B / B(M) (1405 SQFT)'. If the intended reference is not drawing 'WD/203-2' titled 'CW TANK 1 & 2 AND PUMP ROOM DETAIL - SECTION A-A', revise the callout to the correct drawing number including the...

Summary: The unit plan note states '100mm THK. BRICK WALL WITH SKIM COAT TO ENG. DETAIL'. On page 36, the bathroom detail includes the callout 'BT-01', and the unit bathroom legend defines BT-01 as '100MM THK. BLOCK WALL WITH 5MM THK. SKIM & PAINTED ON EXTERNAL SIDE & WALL TILES FINISHED INTERNALLY'. That gives two different wall materials for a 100mm...

Why it matters: Brick and block are different substrates, so the 100mm wall backing is not consistently defined between the plan note and the bathroom detail. If this is not clarified before construction, the installed wall may not match the intended bathroom detailing, tile backing, and waterproofing preparation.

Suggested next step: Please confirm whether the 100mm wall associated with BT-01 is intended to be brick or block, and revise either the unit plan note or the BT-01 bathroom legend/detail so one wall material is used consistently.

RFI draft: Please confirm whether the 100mm wall associated with BT-01 is intended to be brick or block, and revise either the unit plan note or the BT-01 bathroom legend/detail so one wall material is used consistently.

Summary: The unit plan note states '100mm THK. BRICK WALL WITH SKIM COAT TO ENG. DETAIL'. On the bathroom detail sheet, BT-01 is defined as '100MM THK. BLOCK WALL WITH 5MM THK. SKIM & PAINTED ON EXTERNAL SIDE & WALL TILES FINISHED INTERNALLY', and BT-01 is called up in the bathroom section set. The 100 mm wall construction is therefore not consistent...

Why it matters: Brick wall and block wall are different construction systems. If this is not clarified before construction, the contractor could build the bathroom-related 100 mm walls with the wrong material, affecting wall weight, wet-area detailing, openings/stiffeners, and finish build-up.

Suggested next step: Please confirm whether the 100 mm walls associated with bathroom detail BT-01 shall be brick wall as noted on the unit plan, or block wall as defined in the bathroom legend, and confirm which drawing/detail governs for construction.

RFI draft: Please confirm whether the 100 mm walls associated with bathroom detail BT-01 shall be brick wall as noted on the unit plan, or block wall as defined in the bathroom legend, and confirm which drawing/detail governs for construction.

Summary: The unit plan explicitly sends this area to '*REFER TO DWG NO.2304 / WD /202' but the same plan note states '100mm THK. BRICK WALL WITH SKIM COAT TO ENG. DETAIL.' On the referenced private utility detail, the plans call up 'PU-01,' and the legend defines PU-01 as '125MM THK. BLOCK WALL WITH 12MM THK. SKIM & PAINTED ON BOTHSIDES.' This is a...

Why it matters: This affects wall thickness, material procurement, opening sizes, room clear dimensions, and coordination with structure and finishes. If the contractor follows different sheets for the same referenced assembly, the utility-room construction will not be consistent.

Suggested next step: Please confirm whether the WD /202-referenced utility-room walls are to be built as 100 mm brick with skim coat or as PU-01 125 mm block wall, and revise the drawings so one wall type and thickness governs.

RFI draft: Please confirm whether the WD /202-referenced utility-room walls are to be built as 100 mm brick with skim coat or as PU-01 125 mm block wall, and revise the drawings so one wall type and thickness governs.

Summary: The drawing calls out “900mm HEIGHT MS RAILING TO DETAIL,” and the elevation leaders identify this as a balcony railing location. By-law 116 requires balcony edge protection to be “not less than 1 metre in height.” The shown 900 mm railing is below the minimum required guard height.

Why it matters: This is a code-compliance and occupant-safety issue for accessible balcony edges. If fabricated as shown, the balcony guard detail would require redesign and installed railings could require rework, affecting approval and handover.

Suggested next step: Please confirm that all balcony edge protection at the locations tagged “900mm HEIGHT MS RAILING TO DETAIL” will be revised to a minimum 1000 mm compliant guard height, or provide a code-compliant alternative detail demonstrating compliance with By-law 116.

RFI draft: Please confirm that all balcony edge protection at the locations tagged “900mm HEIGHT MS RAILING TO DETAIL” will be revised to a minimum 1000 mm compliant guard height, or provide a code-compliant alternative detail demonstrating compliance with By-law 116.

Summary: The finishes legend identifies a dedicated 'VENTILATION' line in the room data table, and the 'DIGITAL NOMAD ROOM' room data shows 'NV' on that line. The sections on this sheet place the room at 'LOWER GROUND FLOOR 1 FFL 50.90' below 'GROUND FLOOR LEVEL FFL 54.20'. The specification requires basement and other enclosures below ground level used...

Why it matters: If this is not corrected, the room can be permitted or built with a non-mechanical ventilation designation for a lower-ground occupied work room, which can trigger code comments, redesign of the room data, and late mechanical revisions for fresh-air and air-change compliance.

Suggested next step: Please confirm the ventilation strategy for the 'DIGITAL NOMAD ROOM' at 'LOWER GROUND FLOOR 1'. Revise the room data to a mechanical ventilation basis and provide the code-compliant ventilation criteria of not less than 6 air changes per hour and the required fresh-air rate.

RFI draft: Please confirm the ventilation strategy for the 'DIGITAL NOMAD ROOM' at 'LOWER GROUND FLOOR 1'. Revise the room data to a mechanical ventilation basis and provide the code-compliant ventilation criteria of not less than 6 air changes per hour and the required fresh-air rate.

Summary: The main unit plans use the note '*REFER TO DWG NO.2304 / WD /201' for the kitchen detail. However, the kitchen detail sheets in this set are identified as 'WD/ 201-1' and 'WD / 201-2', and their titles show that they apply to different unit-type groups. The unsuffixed 'WD /201' callout therefore does not match the actual kitchen-detail sheet...

Why it matters: If this is not corrected, cabinetry, wet-area build-up, and kitchen electrical set-out could be taken from the wrong detail sheet during pricing, coordination, or site installation.

Suggested next step: Please confirm the correct kitchen detail reference for each applicable unit type and revise the unit-plan note from 'WD /201' to the specific sheet number(s) that should be followed.

RFI draft: Please confirm the correct kitchen detail reference for each applicable unit type and revise the unit-plan note from 'WD /201' to the specific sheet number(s) that should be followed.

Summary: The finish legend is not coordinated for laminated timber flooring. Document 0 shows the skirting abbreviation as 'LTF : LAMINATED TIMBER FLOORING', while Document 1 shows the same finish description as 'LT : LAMINATED TIMBER FLOORING'. The same finish is therefore assigned two different abbreviations across the drawing set.

Why it matters: If finish tags or schedules use one abbreviation and field staff read another, the legend can be interpreted inconsistently and the wrong finish may be ordered, installed, or recorded in closeout documents.

Suggested next step: Please confirm the correct finish abbreviation for laminated timber flooring in the finish legend—'LTF' or 'LT'—and revise all related legends, finish tags, and schedules to use one standard abbreviation.

RFI draft: Please confirm the correct finish abbreviation for laminated timber flooring in the finish legend—'LTF' or 'LT'—and revise all related legends, finish tags, and schedules to use one standard abbreviation.

Summary: Doc 0 identifies the bedroom 'ALUMN. FRAMED CASEMENT WINDOW & FIXED GLASS PANEL' serving 'TYPE A1 : BEDROOM 2', 'TYPE A2 : BEDROOM 1', 'TYPE B1 & B3 : BEDROOM 1', and 'TYPE B2 : BEDROOM 4' as 'W13', while Doc 1 identifies the same window type and location matrix as 'W7'.

Why it matters: If plan callouts, shop drawings, or procurement use different window tags for the same assembly, the wrong schedule entry could be referenced during ordering or installation.

Suggested next step: Please confirm whether this bedroom casement/fixed window type should be scheduled as W13 or W7, and revise all related schedules and callouts to one consistent identifier.

RFI draft: Please confirm whether this bedroom casement/fixed window type should be scheduled as W13 or W7, and revise all related schedules and callouts to one consistent identifier.

Summary: BEDROOM 2 -2 is not coordinated between the two documents. One document shows '215', '175', and '1200' for the dimension sequence at BEDROOM 2 -2, while the other shows '215', '125', and '1200' for the same elevation. This changes the set-out by 50 mm.

Why it matters: A 50 mm set-out discrepancy is enough to shift an outlet or switch relative to adjacent door or joinery lines, which can create finish conflicts and rework during installation.

Suggested next step: Please confirm whether the BEDROOM 2 -2 set-out should be 175 or 125 and revise the drawing to one consistent value.

RFI draft: Please confirm whether the BEDROOM 2 -2 set-out should be 175 or 125 and revise the drawing to one consistent value.

Summary: The plan note '*REFER TO DWG NO.2304 / WD /202' does not match the referenced sheet identification 'WD/202-1' for 'PRIVATE UTILITY ROOM DETAIL - FLOOR PLAN'. The callout omits the '-1' suffix, so the drawing reference and the actual sheet number are inconsistent.

Why it matters: This can cause reviewers or site staff to search for a separate WD /202 sheet or overlook the correct private utility room detail sheet, creating coordination delays and a risk of using the wrong detail.

Suggested next step: Please confirm whether the '*REFER TO DWG NO.2304 / WD /202' callout should be revised to sheet 'WD/202-1' 'PRIVATE UTILITY ROOM DETAIL - FLOOR PLAN', or issue the separate WD /202 sheet if that is intended to be a different drawing.

RFI draft: Please confirm whether the '*REFER TO DWG NO.2304 / WD /202' callout should be revised to sheet 'WD/202-1' 'PRIVATE UTILITY ROOM DETAIL - FLOOR PLAN', or issue the separate WD /202 sheet if that is intended to be a different drawing.

Summary: The unit plan callout states '*REFER TO DWG\nNO.2304 / WD /202'. The compared detail page is identified as 'WD/202-5' with the title 'PRIVATE UTILITY ROOM DETAIL - FLOOR PLAN'. The cross-reference is not exact, so the callout does not match the actual sheet number of the detail page.

Why it matters: An imprecise sheet reference can send reviewers and the site team to the wrong drawing or cause the intended private utility detail to be overlooked during coordination and construction.

Suggested next step: Please confirm whether the intended reference on the unit plan should be revised to WD/202-5, or identify the correct WD /202 sheet that is meant to be used.

RFI draft: Please confirm whether the intended reference on the unit plan should be revised to WD/202-5, or identify the correct WD /202 sheet that is meant to be used.