Plan Review: 202 Issues Found

Summary: 97 index entries | 85 perfect matches | 1 mismatched | 11 missing Mismatched (1): S5.83M: Expected: FACTORY BUILT WALL FRAMING DETAILS (S5.83M) | Actual: FACTORY BUILT WALL FRAMING DETAILS (S5.84M)(p88) Missing (11) — listed in drawing index but not found in the document: Structural: - S5.72 SITE BUILT ROOF DETAILS - S5.81M FACTORY BUILT DETAILS (TYPICAL) - S5.85M FA...

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: 11 missing, 1 mismatched out of 97 sheets

Summary: The drawings designate the lower podium structure's Seismic Force-Resisting System as a 'SPECIAL REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEARWALL'. However, the Cast-in-Place Concrete notes state that 'USE OF AN ACCEPTABLE ADHESIVE, SURFACE RETARDANT, PORTLAND CEMENT GROUT OR ROUGHENING THE SURFACE IS NOT REQUIRED UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS' for construction joints. This directly contradicts ACI 31...

Why it matters: A blanket note exempting the contractor from roughening construction joints places the burden of explicitly detailing every single roughened joint on the drawings. If a joint detail lacks the explicit note, the joint will likely remain un-roughened, violating code requirements. Un-roughened joint...

Suggested next step: Please revise the 'CONSTRUCTION JOINTS' note to explicitly require that contact surfaces of all construction joints in the special reinforced concrete shear walls be roughened, in compliance with ACI 318-19 Section 18.10.10.1.

RFI draft: Please revise the 'CONSTRUCTION JOINTS' note to explicitly require that contact surfaces of all construction joints in the special reinforced concrete shear walls be roughened, in compliance with ACI 318-19 Section 18.10.10.1.

Summary: The elevated slab plan specifies several limiting slab thicknesses, including a "10.5\" PT SLAB", a "12\" PT SLAB", and a courtyard area constrained to a "MAX 13\" SLAB THICKNESS". However, the post-tensioning tendon profiles (dimensioned from the bottom of the slab to the centroid of the strands per Note 12) designate heights such as 19 1/2", 21", and 23" within these exact areas. For example,...

Why it matters: Detailing reinforcement outside the physical boundaries of the concrete member means the required concrete cover cannot be achieved, leaving the tendons exposed and rendering the structure unbuildable as drawn. This indicates a severe coordination error between the slab thickness design and the t...

Suggested next step: The specified post-tensioning tendon profiles (e.g., 21", 23") physically exceed the maximum designated slab thicknesses (10.5", 12", and 13") in multiple areas, placing the strands outside the concrete member. Please clarify the intended slab thicknesses or revise the tendon ...

RFI draft: The specified post-tensioning tendon profiles (e.g., 21", 23") physically exceed the maximum designated slab thicknesses (10.5", 12", and 13") in multiple areas, placing the strands outside the concrete member. Please clarify the intended slab thi...

Summary: The 'DOUBLE STUD DETAIL' (9/S5.51) and 'TYPICAL JAMB DETAIL' (8/S5.51) specify uniform connector spacing along the full length of the built-up members (e.g., '(2) #10 SCREWS @ 24" OC 2" EACH SIDE OF CENTER LINE' and '#10 SCREW @ 24" OC'). However, AISI S100 Section I1.2 strictly requires that the ends of built-up compression members be connected by a continuous weld equal to the maximum member ...

Why it matters: Omitting the dense end connections allows the individual stud sections to act independently at the member ends, altering the effective slenderness ratio. This significantly reduces the axial load-carrying capacity of jambs and other built-up compression elements, posing a high risk of buckling fa...

Suggested next step: Revise the built-up member details (including 8/S5.51 and 9/S5.51) to explicitly require end connections that satisfy the spacing and length criteria specified in AISI S100 Section I1.2 for compression members.

RFI draft: Revise the built-up member details (including 8/S5.51 and 9/S5.51) to explicitly require end connections that satisfy the spacing and length criteria specified in AISI S100 Section I1.2 for compression members.

Summary: Detail 8 specifies a mullion assembly using 10-inch deep studs ('1000S200-54') that are to be attached to a 6-inch deep track ('600T125-54'). Additionally, the assembly is intended to be supported by an '8x8x3/8 EMBED PLATE'. A 10-inch deep stud assembly physically cannot fit inside a 6-inch deep track. Furthermore, a 10-inch deep mullion will overhang an 8-inch square embed plate, meaning the ...

Why it matters: This severe dimensional detailing error will cause a work stoppage during framing installation. The fabricated 6-inch tracks will be completely unusable with the 10-inch studs. If the 8x8 embed plates are cast into the concrete floors prior to identifying this discrepancy, they will be undersized...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the correct web depth for the mullion framing. If a 10-inch mullion is structurally required, update the top and bottom tracks to 1000T125-54 and increase the embed plate dimensions to a minimum of 10"x10" (or 12"x10") to accommodate the studs and fasteners.

RFI draft: Please clarify the correct web depth for the mullion framing. If a 10-inch mullion is structurally required, update the top and bottom tracks to 1000T125-54 and increase the embed plate dimensions to a minimum of 10"x10" (or 12"x10") to accommodat...

Summary: The 'SHEARWALL HOLDOWN STACK SCHEDULE' specifies that 'HD-1' holdowns require '(12)2x6' compression studs at Level 2. However, the framing plan calls out 'HD-1' holdowns at the ends of several shearwalls designated as type 'W7' (e.g., MSW-1 31'-5"). According to the 'MODULAR WALL FRAMING SCHEDULE', 'W7' walls are constructed with '(3)2x4 @ 16" OC' framing, meaning their bottom plates are nomina...

Why it matters: If constructed as drawn, the (12) 2x6 compression stud packs will overhang the W7 2x4 bottom plates by 2 inches. This prevents full bearing of the critical overturning compression loads, potentially leading to plate crushing and shearwall failure during a seismic or wind event. Additionally, the ...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the framing and holdown requirements for the W7 shearwalls (e.g., MSW-1 31'-5"). The plans specify HD-1 holdowns, which require (12)2x6 compression studs, on W7 walls that are framed with 2x4s. This violates CBC 2304.3.1 as the 2x6 studs will overhang the 2x4 bo...

RFI draft: Please clarify the framing and holdown requirements for the W7 shearwalls (e.g., MSW-1 31'-5"). The plans specify HD-1 holdowns, which require (12)2x6 compression studs, on W7 walls that are framed with 2x4s. This violates CBC 2304.3.1 as the 2x6 ...

Summary: The framing plan indicates that modular shearwalls such as MSW-5* are constructed as 2x4 walls, explicitly calling out stud packs like "(4) 2x4" at the wall ends where holdowns are located. However, the Shearwall Holdown Stack Schedule specifies that the holdowns located at these wall ends (e.g., HD-1) require 2x6 compression studs (e.g., "(12)2x6" at Levels 2 and 3). Because the walls are fram...

Why it matters: If 2x6 compression studs are installed on a 2x4 bottom plate, they will overhang the plate by 2 inches. This lack of full bearing prevents the holdown boundary elements from safely transferring extreme overturning compression forces into the lower floor plates or foundation, leading to a high ris...

Suggested next step: Please resolve the discrepancy between the 2x4 wall framing callouts on the plan and the 2x6 compression stud requirements in the holdown schedule. Clarify if the affected shearwalls (e.g., MSW-1, MSW-5*) should be reframed entirely as 2x6 walls with 2x6 bottom plates, or if t...

RFI draft: Please resolve the discrepancy between the 2x4 wall framing callouts on the plan and the 2x6 compression stud requirements in the holdown schedule. Clarify if the affected shearwalls (e.g., MSW-1, MSW-5*) should be reframed entirely as 2x6 walls w...

Summary: The 'SHEARWALL HOLDOWN STACK SCHEDULE' mandates specific compression stud sizes for Level 4 (e.g., HD-1 requires (9)2x6 and HD-4 requires (8)2x4). However, the floor plan explicitly calls out much smaller, contradictory stud packs at these same locations (e.g., calling out "(8) 2x4" near HD-1 and "(4) 2x4" near HD-4). Furthermore, the schedule requires 2x6 compression studs for HD-1, but the pl...

Why it matters: This pervasive conflict in specified member sizes violates CBC 1603.1, which requires construction documents to clearly show the size and section of structural members. By providing geometrically impossible and mutually exclusive sizes, the documents are ambiguous and unbuildable. If the contract...

Suggested next step: Clarify the correct compression stud sizes for all Level 4 holdowns. Reconcile the framing plan callouts with the Shearwall Holdown Stack Schedule. Ensure all walls housing 2x6 compression posts (such as W5) are redesigned or furred out to at least a 2x6 wall depth to geometri...

RFI draft: Clarify the correct compression stud sizes for all Level 4 holdowns. Reconcile the framing plan callouts with the Shearwall Holdown Stack Schedule. Ensure all walls housing 2x6 compression posts (such as W5) are redesigned or furred out to at leas...

Summary: The 'MODULAR WALL PLANS' elevation shows a 6-level structure with 5 levels of wood modular walls (Levels 2 through Roof) over a podium, meaning the Level 2 bearing walls support four floors and a roof. The cross-section detail confirms horizontal floor and ceiling framing ('MOD FLOOR' and 'MOD CEILING') at the modular mating lines, which contributes to cross-grain shrinkage. Per CBC 2304.3.3, w...

Why it matters: Cumulative cross-grain wood shrinkage across 5 stories of modular construction can easily exceed 1 to 2 inches. If static holdowns and nailed straps are used without shrinkage take-up devices, the entire seismic tie-down system will become slack or the straps will buckle, severely compromising th...

Suggested next step: Provide the required wood shrinkage analysis per CBC 2304.3.3. Revise the shearwall holdown stack details to replace static nailed straps and standard holdowns with a continuous tie-down system that incorporates shrinkage-compensating take-up devices (such as an ATS system) to...

RFI draft: Provide the required wood shrinkage analysis per CBC 2304.3.3. Revise the shearwall holdown stack details to replace static nailed straps and standard holdowns with a continuous tie-down system that incorporates shrinkage-compensating take-up devi...

Summary: The 'MODULAR WALL FRAMING SCHEDULE' defines W1 (Mateline) and W4 (Laundry/Trash) walls as 2x4 framing. On the Level 6 plan, these 2x4 walls are designated as shearwalls (e.g., MSW-1) and are assigned HD-1 holdowns. However, the 'SHEARWALL HOLDOWN STACK SCHEDULE' requires (4)2x6 compression studs for HD-1 at Level 6. Installing 5.5-inch wide 2x6 compression studs into a 3.5-inch wide 2x4 wall wi...

Why it matters: If the 2x6 compression studs do not have full bearing on the bottom plate, the overturning uplift and compression loads from the shearwall cannot be safely transferred to the supporting structure below, compromising the seismic force-resisting system. Furthermore, the protruding 2x6 studs will in...

Suggested next step: Please clarify if the W1 and W4 walls assigned with HD-1 holdowns should be upgraded to 2x6 framing, or if a different holdown utilizing 2x4 compression studs should be specified to match the wall depth.

RFI draft: Please clarify if the W1 and W4 walls assigned with HD-1 holdowns should be upgraded to 2x6 framing, or if a different holdown utilizing 2x4 compression studs should be specified to match the wall depth.

Summary: Detail 3 instructs to "PROVIDE LTP4 CLIPS UNDER SHEAR STRIP" at double-sided shear locations. Installing metal lateral tie plates and their protruding fastener heads directly beneath a structural wood sheathing panel creates a gap and localized hard points. Nailing the sheathing tightly over this uneven surface induces bending stresses in the panel and prevents flush seating of the sheathing na...

Why it matters: A shear strip installed over metal hardware will not bear tightly against the framing, severely degrading its capacity to transfer shear forces. This improper load path installation directly compromises the primary lateral force-resisting system.

Suggested next step: Revise the detail to ensure the shear strip is installed directly and tightly against the wood framing. If LTP4 clips are required, specify that they must be installed over the outside face of the sheathing, or detail the framing such that the hardware does not interfere with ...

RFI draft: Revise the detail to ensure the shear strip is installed directly and tightly against the wood framing. If LTP4 clips are required, specify that they must be installed over the outside face of the sheathing, or detail the framing such that the har...

Summary: The drawing details direct the contractor to "CUT OUT BEARING PLATE AT HOLDOWN LOCATIONS, REINSTALL INSET AS SHOWN." This conflicts with CBC Section 2304.3.1, which requires that studs (such as the "FACTORY INSTALLED STUD PACK") have full bearing on a bottom plate or sill that has a width at least equal to the width of the studs. Interrupting and reinstalling the bearing plate inset deprives th...

Why it matters: The holdown stud pack transfers significant concentrated tension and compression loads from the building's lateral force-resisting system. Without full and continuous bearing on a properly sized bottom plate, the studs or the inset plate may crush or settle under load, compromising the structural...

Suggested next step: Please revise the holdown connection details to maintain a continuous bearing plate or provide an alternative bearing method (e.g., a continuous steel bearing plate) that ensures the holdown stud pack has full bearing across its entire width, in compliance with CBC Section 230...

RFI draft: Please revise the holdown connection details to maintain a continuous bearing plate or provide an alternative bearing method (e.g., a continuous steel bearing plate) that ensures the holdown stud pack has full bearing across its entire width, in c...

Summary: Detail 11 illustrates the joint connection between 'MODULE A' and 'MODULE B' at a '3-HOUR WALL'. The detail specifies bridging the module gap with a '22 GA ALUMINUM STRIP' and a noncombustible or exterior gypsum panel. However, an aluminum strip covering a gap does not constitute an approved fire-resistant joint system. CBC 715.1 requires joints in fire-resistance-rated walls to be protected by...

Why it matters: Aluminum has a low melting point (~1220°F) and will fail prematurely in a 3-hour fire event, which reaches temperatures around 1925°F. Without a properly tested and approved fire-resistant joint system (e.g., specific fire caulk, mineral wool packing, etc. as tested per ASTM E1966 or UL 2079), th...

Suggested next step: Please specify a tested and approved fire-resistant joint system (e.g., a UL-listed assembly) for the joints between modules at 3-hour walls that complies with CBC 715.1. Ensure the system is compatible with the adjacent wall assemblies.

RFI draft: Please specify a tested and approved fire-resistant joint system (e.g., a UL-listed assembly) for the joints between modules at 3-hour walls that complies with CBC 715.1. Ensure the system is compatible with the adjacent wall assemblies.

Summary: Detail 9 provides an option for 'TYPE 3 CONSTRUCTION' exterior walls and directs the builder to 'SEE 11/S5.61S' at 3-hour wall locations. Detail 11 depicts this 3-hour exterior wall using 'MODULE A' and 'MODULE B', which are combustible wood-framed modular units (fastened with '8d NAILS'). Under CBC 602.3, Type III construction requires exterior walls to be constructed of noncombustible materia...

Why it matters: Combustible framing cannot be used to construct a 3-hour exterior wall in a Type III building. Attempting to use wood modules at these locations represents a fundamental violation of construction type fire safety limits. This will result in plan rejection by the building official or, if discovere...

Suggested next step: Please review the required fire-resistance rating for exterior walls in Type III construction. Since CBC 602.3 prohibits wood framing (including FRT) in exterior walls rated over 2 hours, please revise the design to specify noncombustible materials for the 3-hour exterior wall...

RFI draft: Please review the required fire-resistance rating for exterior walls in Type III construction. Since CBC 602.3 prohibits wood framing (including FRT) in exterior walls rated over 2 hours, please revise the design to specify noncombustible material...

Summary: The drawing instructs the contractor to field-bend a continuous steel holddown strap up to 90 degrees out of the way before the top module is set, and then bend it back to lay flat against the holddown post for attachment. Bending a structural steel tension strap 90 degrees and then re-bending it flat causes severe plastic deformation, work hardening, and fatigue at the hinge line. This degrade...

Why it matters: A holddown strap that has been compromised by field bending and rebending will have significantly reduced tension capacity. Under seismic or wind overturning forces, the strap could prematurely fail at the bend line, leading to severe structural damage or separation of the modular stack.

Suggested next step: Submit an RFI to the Structural Engineer of Record (SEOR) requesting an alternative mateline holddown connection that does not require field-bending the tension strap 90 degrees. Consider a two-piece tension tie system, threaded rod with shrinkage compensators, or alternative ...

RFI draft: Submit an RFI to the Structural Engineer of Record (SEOR) requesting an alternative mateline holddown connection that does not require field-bending the tension strap 90 degrees. Consider a two-piece tension tie system, threaded rod with shrinkage...