Plan Review: 32 Issues Found

Summary: 47 index entries | 36 perfect matches | 9 mismatched | 2 missing Mismatched (9): MR2.1: Expected: MECHANICAL DEMOLITION PLAN (MR2.1) | Actual: MECHANICAL DEMOLTION PLAN (MR2.1)(p15) CS: Expected: COVER SHEET (CS) | Actual: CS (CS)(p1) FD2.1: Expected: FIRE PROTECTION DEMOLITION PLAN (FD2.1) | Actual: FIRE PORTECTION DEMOLITION PLAN (FD2.1)(p9) F2.1: Expected: FIRE...

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: 2 missing, 9 mismatched out of 47 sheets

Summary: The Mechanical Demolition Plan (MR2.1) Key Notes 2 and 3 direct the contractor to "DRAWING M2.2" for VAV box and ductwork new locations under the Mechanical New Work Plan. However, the actual Mechanical New Work Plan in the drawing set is sheet M2.1, not M2.2. This is a direct cross-reference mismatch between the demolition plan and the new work plan sheet number.

Why it matters: During construction, the contractor performing demolition work will look for a sheet M2.2 to find the new locations for the relocated VAV boxes and reused ductwork. If M2.2 does not exist, this will cause confusion and potential delays. If M2.2 does exist as a separate sheet, it creates ambiguity...

Suggested next step: Please confirm the correct drawing reference for the Mechanical New Work Plan showing relocated VAV box and ductwork locations. MR2.1 Key Notes 2 and 3 reference "Drawing M2.2" but the Mechanical New Work Plan is titled as sheet M2.1. Should the references on MR2.1 be correcte...

RFI draft: Please confirm the correct drawing reference for the Mechanical New Work Plan showing relocated VAV box and ductwork locations. MR2.1 Key Notes 2 and 3 reference "Drawing M2.2" but the Mechanical New Work Plan is titled as sheet M2.1. Should the r...

Summary: The Low Voltage Symbol Legend on sheet E4.0 describes the Calendar Panel (CP) as: 'INSTALLED IN THE FUTURE BY TENAN'T AV CONTRACTOR. NO ROUGH-IN REQUIRED.' and directs the reader to 'SEE KEY NOTE 10 ON SHEET E4.1 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.' However, Key Note 10 on sheet E4.1 explicitly requires rough-in work: 'EXTEND 3/4" CONDUIT FROM CABLE TRAY TO ABOVE CEILING ADJACENT TO LOCATION OF FUTURE ...

Why it matters: This contradiction creates ambiguity for the electrical contractor regarding whether conduit and cabling infrastructure must be provided at each CP location. The low voltage plan on E4.1 shows CP symbols with Key Note 10 called out at multiple conference rooms. If the contractor follows the legen...

Suggested next step: Please clarify whether the Calendar Panel (CP) locations require rough-in (3/4" conduit from cable tray and 10 ft. of coiled Cat 6 plenum rated cable) as described in Key Note 10 on E4.1, or whether no rough-in is required as stated in the Low Voltage Symbol Legend on E4.0. Pl...

RFI draft: Please clarify whether the Calendar Panel (CP) locations require rough-in (3/4" conduit from cable tray and 10 ft. of coiled Cat 6 plenum rated cable) as described in Key Note 10 on E4.1, or whether no rough-in is required as stated in the Low Vol...

Summary: The proposed floor plan on sheet A1.1 includes a general construction note for new partitions specifying 'NEW 3.5", 25 GAUGE STEEL FRAMING 16"O.C. WITH 5/8" GWB (BREAK SIDE) TO 6" ABOVE FINISHED CEILING.' However, Typical Wall Section 6 (wall type A) on sheet A1.1 specifies 'TYPICAL 3 5/8" (MIN) 25 GAUGE STEEL FRAMING 16" O.C. WITH 5/8" GWB (BOTH SIDES) TO 6" ABOVE FINISHED CEILING' for the sam...

Why it matters: If GWB is installed on only one side instead of both, the wall will have significantly reduced fire resistance, acoustic performance, and structural rigidity. The stud size discrepancy (3.5" vs 3 5/8") could result in ordering non-standard framing members or incorrect stud sizing. These inconsist...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the intended steel stud framing size for new Type A partitions — is it 3-1/2" as noted on the proposed floor plan, or 3 5/8" (MIN) as shown in Typical Wall Section 6 and Wall Section 2? Additionally, please confirm whether GWB should be applied on both sides of ...

RFI draft: Please clarify the intended steel stud framing size for new Type A partitions — is it 3-1/2" as noted on the proposed floor plan, or 3 5/8" (MIN) as shown in Typical Wall Section 6 and Wall Section 2? Additionally, please confirm whether GWB shoul...

Summary: The legend on sheet F2.1 indicates that new concealed sprinklers should 'MATCH EXISTING'. Conversely, the 'SPRINKLER TYPE' detail on sheet F1.1 explicitly specifies the concealed sprinkler head as a 'TYCO SERIES RFII "ROYAL FLUSH" 1/2" NPT'.

Why it matters: If the existing building sprinklers are a different make or model, the contractor cannot both 'match existing' and install the specified Tyco heads. This creates ambiguity in procurement and may lead to non-uniform aesthetic finishes in the ceilings.

Suggested next step: Please clarify if new concealed sprinklers should match the existing building sprinklers or if the specified Tyco Series RFII heads should be provided regardless of the existing conditions.

RFI draft: Please clarify if new concealed sprinklers should match the existing building sprinklers or if the specified Tyco Series RFII heads should be provided regardless of the existing conditions.

Summary: Note 2 on sheet F2.1 states the 'EXISTING SPRINKLER SYSTEM IS DESIGNED BASED ON PIPE SCHEDULE METHOD.' However, general Note 4 on sheet F1.1 requires that 'THE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM SHALL BE DESIGNED AND HYDRAULICALLY CALCULATED...'. It is unclear if the new additions can continue using the existing pipe schedule method or if the system modifications mandate full hydraulic calculations.

Why it matters: Hydraulic calculations require a water supply flow test and extensive engineering work, which has significant cost implications. Contractors need to know if the pipe schedule method is acceptable for the modifications or if the entire modified system must be modeled and calculated per Note 4.

Suggested next step: Please clarify if the sprinkler system modifications can be sized using the pipe schedule method matching the existing system, or if hydraulic calculations must be provided for the new work as stated in Note 4 on sheet F1.1.

RFI draft: Please clarify if the sprinkler system modifications can be sized using the pipe schedule method matching the existing system, or if hydraulic calculations must be provided for the new work as stated in Note 4 on sheet F1.1.

Summary: Drawing E3.2 General Note 2 instructs the contractor to provide inverters for the North and South egress lights 'AS SHOWN IN BASE BID ON E3.1'. The control diagrams on E3.1 specifically designate type 'F2' fixtures for this emergency egress lighting. However, the Alternate #1 lighting plan on E3.2 completely replaces the open office lighting layout with type 'F1', 'G', and 'G1' fixtures, omitti...

Why it matters: Without a clear designation of which fixtures serve as emergency egress lighting in the Alternate #1 layout, the contractor will not know how to wire the emergency inverters. This will likely lead to inadequate egress illumination, failed life safety code inspections, and field delays due to requ...

Suggested next step: Please clarify which specific fixtures in the Alternate #1 and Alternate #2 lighting plans should be designated as emergency egress lighting and connected to the inverters, since the 'F2' fixtures utilized in the Base Bid are either omitted or completely relocated in the alter...

RFI draft: Please clarify which specific fixtures in the Alternate #1 and Alternate #2 lighting plans should be designated as emergency egress lighting and connected to the inverters, since the 'F2' fixtures utilized in the Base Bid are either omitted or com...

Summary: The Low Voltage Symbol Legend on E4.0 provides incorrect detail cross-references for multiple symbols used on the E2.1 plans. The 'DATA OUTLET' symbol references Detail 1, but Detail 1 is actually for a 'VOICE AND DATA OUTLET'. The 'VOICE AND DATA OUTLET' symbol references Detail 2, but Detail 2 is actually a 'DATA OUTLET'. Additionally, the 'COMPUTER CONSOLE' (CC) symbol references Detail 3, w...

Why it matters: If the contractor follows the legend's cross-references, they will install the wrong outlet configurations, backboxes, and cabling for Data, Voice/Data, and Computer Console locations. This will lead to costly rework and schedule delays during the low voltage trim-out phase.

Suggested next step: Please issue a revised Low Voltage Symbol Legend on E4.0 that correctly points the Data Outlet to Detail 2, the Voice and Data Outlet to Detail 1, and the Computer Console (CC) Outlet to Detail 4.

RFI draft: Please issue a revised Low Voltage Symbol Legend on E4.0 that correctly points the Data Outlet to Detail 2, the Voice and Data Outlet to Detail 1, and the Computer Console (CC) Outlet to Detail 4.

Summary: In CONFERENCE 113 on the floor plan, there is an annotation for '4 EQ. PANELS' (windows) along the exterior wall, and an elevation tag '5/A1.1' located in the room. Elevation 5/A1.1 depicts a solid wall of full-height built-in cabinetry ('12" DEEP BASE DECO-FORM CABINETS') and a 'TV LOCATION', which would obstruct the window panels if installed on the exterior wall.

Why it matters: If the millwork shown in the elevation is intended for Conference 113, the elevation tag on the floor plan is likely pointing toward the wrong wall (the exterior window wall instead of an interior solid partition). This coordination error can lead to improper millwork fabrication or installation ...

Suggested next step: Please confirm which wall in Conference 113 should receive the built-in cabinetry and TV shown in Elevation 5/A1.1, and verify if the elevation tag on the floor plan should be adjusted away from the exterior window wall.

RFI draft: Please confirm which wall in Conference 113 should receive the built-in cabinetry and TV shown in Elevation 5/A1.1, and verify if the elevation tag on the floor plan should be adjusted away from the exterior window wall.

Summary: Sheet M2.1 Key Note 6 instructs to route the DSAC-1 condensate drain and 'RE-CONNECT TO EXISTING LINE (COL GRID 4/B).' However, the Ductless A/C Unit Flow and Control Diagram on Sheet M6.1 Key Note 1 states 'ROUTE CONDENSATE TO LOCAL FLOOR SINK.' These specify two different and mutually exclusive termination points for the same condensate drain serving the ductless split system in Server Room 109.

Why it matters: This conflict will cause confusion during installation. The contractor cannot simultaneously reconnect to an existing condensate line at column grid 4/B and route to a local floor sink. The correct termination point must be determined to properly coordinate plumbing connections, verify existing c...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the intended termination point for the DSAC-1 condensate drain. Should it be reconnected to the existing line at COL GRID 4/B per M2.1 Key Note 6, or routed to a local floor sink per M6.1 Control Diagram Key Note 1? Please revise the conflicting document accordi...

RFI draft: Please clarify the intended termination point for the DSAC-1 condensate drain. Should it be reconnected to the existing line at COL GRID 4/B per M2.1 Key Note 6, or routed to a local floor sink per M6.1 Control Diagram Key Note 1? Please revise th...

Summary: The Panel E schedule on sheet E5.1 lists the panel ampere rating as 125A with an MCB main breaker. However, the Partial Riser Diagram on the same sheet shows Panel E rated at 100A. Additionally, the Panel 2LC schedule shows a 3-pole, 125A sub-feed breaker at circuits 69/70 feeding Panel E, which is consistent with the 125A schedule rating but contradicts the 100A riser diagram designation. This...

Why it matters: This discrepancy affects panel procurement, feeder conductor sizing, and overcurrent protection coordination. If Panel E is 100A, a 125A sub-feed breaker in Panel 2LC would exceed the panel bus rating, potentially creating a safety hazard. If Panel E is actually 125A, the riser diagram is incorre...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the correct ampere rating for new Panel E. The Panel E schedule states 125A MCB and the Panel 2LC schedule shows a 125A/3-pole sub-feed breaker, but the Partial Riser Diagram indicates Panel E as 100A. Please confirm the correct rating and revise all affected do...

RFI draft: Please clarify the correct ampere rating for new Panel E. The Panel E schedule states 125A MCB and the Panel 2LC schedule shows a 125A/3-pole sub-feed breaker, but the Partial Riser Diagram indicates Panel E as 100A. Please confirm the correct rat...

Summary: The Sanitary Waste and Vent Plumbing Plan (P2.1) Note 4 directs the contractor to "TERMINATE WATER HEATER DRAIN PIPING AT JANITOR'S SINK." However, there is no Janitor's Sink listed in the "PLUMBING FIXTURES & EQUIPMENT SCHEDULE" on drawing P1.1.

Why it matters: Without a specified Janitor's Sink in the fixture schedule, the contractor will not know what manufacturer, model, or trim specifications to procure and install. This leads to missing scope, procurement delays, and RFIs during construction.

Suggested next step: Please clarify the location of the Janitor's Sink intended for the water heater drain termination and add the corresponding fixture specifications to the Plumbing Fixtures & Equipment Schedule on P1.1.

RFI draft: Please clarify the location of the Janitor's Sink intended for the water heater drain termination and add the corresponding fixture specifications to the Plumbing Fixtures & Equipment Schedule on P1.1.

Summary: Electrical Key Note 1 on E3.1 requires emergency inverters in the Open Office Area to be installed 'ABOVE ACCESSIBLE CEILING GRID' and remote test panels to be 'FLUSH IN ADJACENT CEILING TILE'. However, the Architectural Reflected Ceiling Plan A1.2 designates this same area as an 'EXPOSED CEILING'.

Why it matters: If the Open Office Area has an exposed structure ceiling as shown on the Architectural plans, the specified installation method for the emergency inverters and test panels (above grid and flush in tile) is impossible. A surface-mounted or remotely located solution will be required to coordinate w...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the ceiling type in the Open Office Area. If it is an exposed ceiling as shown on A1.2, please provide a revised installation detail and location for the emergency inverters and remote test panels specified in E3.1 Key Note 1.

RFI draft: Please clarify the ceiling type in the Open Office Area. If it is an exposed ceiling as shown on A1.2, please provide a revised installation detail and location for the emergency inverters and remote test panels specified in E3.1 Key Note 1.

Summary: The electrical demolition plan instructs the complete demolition of an existing VAV box, requiring the removal of wiring back to the source. However, the mechanical demolition plan only provides instructions to relocate an existing VAV box and does not contain any key notes directing the mechanical contractor to completely demolish a VAV box.

Why it matters: If the mechanical contractor is not instructed to physically remove the VAV box and its associated ductwork, but the electrical contractor disconnects and removes its power feed per the electrical plan, the unit will be left abandoned in place without power. Alternatively, if the intent is to rel...

Suggested next step: Please clarify the scope regarding the existing VAV boxes. Are any VAV boxes to be completely demolished as indicated by ED2.1 Key Note 3, or are they all being relocated per MR2.1 Key Note 2? Please update the mechanical or electrical demolition plans to align the scope acros...

RFI draft: Please clarify the scope regarding the existing VAV boxes. Are any VAV boxes to be completely demolished as indicated by ED2.1 Key Note 3, or are they all being relocated per MR2.1 Key Note 2? Please update the mechanical or electrical demolition ...

Summary: The Fire Alarm Riser Diagram specifically identifies devices using designations '15 HS' (Horn/Strobe) and '15 S' (Strobe). In contrast, the Power and Fire Alarm Plan entirely omits 'HS' devices, showing only '15 S' and '30 S' designations along with 'F' designations for other devices (e.g., '15cd F', '110cd F').

Why it matters: If '15 HS' devices are required as indicated on the riser diagram, their locations must be explicitly detailed on the floor plan to ensure proper coverage, installation, and compliance with NFPA 72. If '15 HS' devices are not used, the riser diagram is incorrect and misleading.

Suggested next step: Please confirm if '15 HS' (Horn/Strobe) devices are required for this project. The Power and Fire Alarm Plan (E2.1) does not show any 'HS' devices, though it does show '15 S', '30 S', and 'F' devices. Update either the Fire Alarm Plan to clearly indicate the locations of the '...

RFI draft: Please confirm if '15 HS' (Horn/Strobe) devices are required for this project. The Power and Fire Alarm Plan (E2.1) does not show any 'HS' devices, though it does show '15 S', '30 S', and 'F' devices. Update either the Fire Alarm Plan to clearly i...