8/21/2025 - Permit reviewed. Comments issued.

1. Please provide a letter from the Owner indicating who they will be hiring to provide the special inspections for this project. The special inspectors must be licensed by the MOA in the types of inspections to be performed.

2. Reference sheet S2.1 and S3.1. Continuous ties are required from diaphragm chord to diaphragm chord for the out-of-plane anchorage of CMU walls. Subdiaphragms can be used, but they must have an aspect ratio of no greater than 2.5:1 and these subdiaphragms must have sufficient capacity to transfer the out-of-plane loads to the vertical lateral resisting elements. While the joists can be used in the plan side-to-side direction it's not clear what is being use in the plan up-and-down direction. It appears there is one bay of blocking, but this would not meet the max aspect ratio allowance. There also doesn't appear to be a tie from the roof joists or blocking to the top of wall for the out-of-plane forces. Please clarify. Where a subdiaphragm is created the chord must be checked for the tension/compression developed in the chord from the out-of-plane loads.

3. Reference the roof joist design for uplift. This calculation indicates the roof joists are continuously braced. For the uplift condition they appear to be unbraced. Please clarify or revise.

4. There are fiberglass structural members and sections. There doesn't appear to be a fiberglass design standard. Typically an approved third party report would be required for these items. Please clarify. It appears that load tables from the manufacturer have been attached to the calculations. These typically haven't been accepted. Please also note there are connections of these beams. It appears the fiberglass has been ignored for this design. Please also note that the connection design appears to only cover the reaction from the dead and live load and does not appear to consider any out-of-plane load from the hydrostatic or hydrodynamic loading from the water being stored or any load from the out-of-plane anchorage of the CMU walls. Please clarify.

5. It is not clear that where the tank wall is being checked that hydrodynamic pressures are being considered. There appears to be only hydrostatic pressures shown. Also, the tank lid needs to be tied to the CMU walls and there should be a support shown on the wall design in Enercalc at this location. See also comment 4.

6. The new tank bottom slab does not appear to be directly tied to the existing wall, but the design appears to assumed this. Please clarify. Please note that where ever this support is, this connection needs to be designed.

7. No design for the existing wall extension has been provided. Please provided. Please show the reinforcement across the extension can transfer the required shear and moments. It also does not appear as if the wall extension has been detailed. Please provide or clarify.