Laserfiche WebLink
the elevations and plans/sections;the intended construction overall is not sufficiently developed to review.FThe <br /> notes provided in the drawings for the trusses to not address the structural comments provided. <br /> i. The drawings do not provide sufficient information for the construction of the deck, including but not limited to <br /> the vertical and seismic attachments required. <br /> j. The drawings do not provide sufficiently detailing and connection requirements for the deck guards. This <br /> includes providing adequate framing in the deck to resist the guard loads. <br /> k. The drawings do not include a fastener schedule as required per the structural comments. The use of <br /> proprietary hardware appears necessary at multiple locations but has not been specified. <br /> 2. No additional comment. <br /> Architectural <br /> 1. The original comment has generally been addressed. However, additional smoke and CO alarms are required <br /> outside the second floor bedroom. <br /> 2. Various components of the insulation are not clear, notably due to conflicting details as noted above. The roof <br /> insulation is not specified in the details. The typical fenestration (i.e., windows and doors)thermal ratings have not <br /> been revised for consistency with the selected energy credits(i.e., Umax=0.20). <br /> 3. Roof baffles are not specified in the sections or details. <br /> 4. The typical notes do not provide clear ventilation requirements. <br /> 5. The selected credits are not clear and appear to be inconsistent. It is also noted that Fuel Credit 2 is selected. This is <br /> a ducted heat pump that must comply with performance requirements of the commercial energy code as <br /> specified. The designer should review these requirements and verify that this system is intended. The performance <br /> requirements specified for this system should be listed in the drawings; references to the energy code table for the <br /> performance requirements does not satisfy this comment. Alternatively, a different heating system should be <br /> selected. <br /> 6. The performance requirements for the whole house system have not been specified. <br /> Architectural Comments 7 through 9 do not require additional action. <br /> Structural <br /> The structural comments have generally not been sufficiently addressed. See additional comments above in addition to <br /> the original comments. The drawings should be revised to address all comments. All code references should be <br /> reviewed to verify compliance. <br /> The drawings include details(e.g., pages 9 and 10, etc.)that are apparently obtained from a professional designer(e.g., <br /> Design Build Services, Inc.,etc.)that is not understood to be associated with this project. While not a code violation,this <br /> may constitute an unlawful use of intellectual property without the designer's permission. It is recommended that this <br /> information be removed or the original designer's permission obtained to reproduce in this drawing set. <br /> The review of this project will recommence once revised construction-level drawings addressing all comments has been <br /> resubmitted. Thank you. <br /> 2 <br />