Date : JANUARY 25, 2023

Project : PROPOSED TWO-STOREY RESIDENCE WITH ATTIC

Address : LOT 19, BLK 31, 49 LIMASAWA COR. SAN GREGORIO ST., MAGALLANES VILLAGE, MAKATI CITY
Owner : MR. & MRS. DERICK CALIXTO
Subject : REQUEST FOR APPROVAL MONITORING (RFA) 12/12

REQUEST FOR APPROVAL

DATE TRANSMITTED RELEASED RESPONSE
NO DICIPLINE ITEM TO BE CLARIFIED CURRENT STATUS
TO DESIGN TEAM TO GENCON

SANITARY/ Proposed rerouting of Sanitary and Storm Drain Layout due to deletion
RFA-001 11-May-22 19-May-22 CLOSED
PLUMBING of septic tank and relocation of tapping point as per recommendation.

Proposed drawing for the additional stiffener columns and footing due
RFA-002 STRUCTURAL 04-Jun-22 22-Jun-22 CLOSED
to stair's landing beam has no structure to connect with

Request to proceed adjustment of steel beams and planted columns as

per given advance copy of Architectural drawing prior to the setback
rwquirement.
STRUCTURAL/ a.) MBR area -Steel beam 2B-2, B-3 to move 775mm or 2.24m from GL F
RFA-003 09-Jun-22 15-Jun-22 CLOSED
ARCHITECTURAL b.) MBR area -3 sets CB-3 and 1 pc B-2, to cut excess 775mm.
c.) MBR area - to move 2 sets planted columns (PC-2)
Her WIC - PC-2 to move 757mm or 650mm from GL E along with CHB
partition.

Proposed steel column filler (column I-beam)

1. Proposed steel column filler at parent's roof gutter WF 12x4x#22 at
ARCHITECTURAL / 430mm height to enabl connection thru 2B1 & 2B2 at GL E.
RFA-004 01-Jul-22 01-Aug-22 CLOSED
STRUCTURAL 2. 500mm dicrepancy between plan A.6.0 @3.5m height and section
ceiling height A5.0 @3.0m height of parents room. We used the 3.0
height on the above drawing.

1. Proposed 4sets of stiffener column (200mmx250mm) to imbed the

RFA-005 STRUCTURAL bolt prior to the connection of rafter instead of CHB at MBR and 18-Jul-22 01-Aug-22 CLOSED
parent's room roof rafters.

1. Proposed drain pipe/doownspout route to enable clear the MBR and

parent's room ceiling.
STRUCTURAL/
RFA-006 2. Proposed location of roof gutter floor drain due to placing it at center 18-Jul-22 01-Aug-22 CLOSED
PLUMBING
will affect the cove lights ceiling on drain pipe clean out at MBR and
parent's room.

Proposed Formworks for Roofdeck soffit bottom I-beams

RFA-007 STRUCTURAL Diagonal forms will require multiple wood cutting and bracing 13-Aug-22 09-Sep-22 CLOSED
connections, while typical forms will be much sturdy and easy to install.
Proposed PC3 twist location to enable 3rd floor planted column be
RFA-008 STRUCTURAL 07-Oct-22 12-Oct-22 CLOSED
connected at Roofdeck beam (B-3)

Proposed stiffener slab on skylight opening

RFA-009 STRUCTURAL 1. Proposed stiffener slab (SS1 & SS2) for the opening to support 22-Oct-22 02-Nov-22 CLOSED
skylight framework

To provide concrete slab on steel decking to close the open area above
MBR's T & B as per request of sir Derrick Calixto, this is had been
RFA-010 STRUCTURAL discussed at Whatsapp during the site inspection Engr. Chris from Engr. 22-Oct-22 02-Nov-22 CLOSED
Bow's team recommended to provide 2 pcs additional steel beams to
hold the slab.

Propose additional steel beams on extended slab at attic general

storage area

RFA-011 STRUCTURAL With regard with the extended slab at attic general storage as per 04-Nov-22 17-Nov-22 CLOSED
construction bulletin #3 issued yesterday November 3, 2022, we
propose to use steel beam W10X5 3/4X25 (B-4, available on site) for its
framing to hold the slab not to leave it cantilever.

PLUMBING/ Proposed drain pipe layout on the concrete ledges and planter box at
RFA-012 04-Nov-22 15-Nov-22 CLOSED
SANITARY 2nd and 3rd floor as per request on the general Construction Bulletin #3

In related to RFI #25 regarding the reinforcement details of canopy, we

RFA-013 STRUCTURAL propose to use steel beam WF-12x14x14 (R-1, available on site) for its 26-Jan-23 OPEN
framing to hold the slab.
 SITE INSTRUCTION DATE
CONSULTANT/OWNER's
NO RECIEVED S. I. REMARKS
FEEDBACK

APPROVED AS NOTED

APPROVED

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Kindly proceed with revised
structural framing plan
dated June 15, 2022

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
2. Ceiling ht. of parent's
room is 3.0m. See attached
reflected ceiling plan for
your reference.

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
200x250 (4-16ø) ; Ties 10ø
@0.20m O.C.

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Reinforcement details to
follow.

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
APPROVED (Please follow
the revised details)
APPROVED (See attached
comment)

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
APPROVED (Ok, slab
stiffener will be used)

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Please see approved beam
location in page 2.

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Use B2 & B4 in framing.
Please see attached framing
details for the extended slab
at attic general storage.

APPROVED
Date : JANUARY 25, 2023
Project : PROPOSED TWO-STOREY RESIDENCE WITH ATTIC
Address : LOT 19, BLK 31, 49 LIMASAWA COR. SAN GREGORIO ST., MAGALLANES VILLAGE, MAKATI CITY
Date : 24/01/2023
Subject : REQUEST FOR INFORMATION MONITORING (RFI) 24/31

REQUEST FOR APPROVAL

DATE TRANSMITTED TO RELEASED RESPONSE TO
NO DICIPLINE ITEM TO BE CLARIFIED CURRENT STATUS
DESIGN TEAM GENCON

29/06/2022
RFI-001 STRUCTURAL Extended depth of footing due to swimming pool and cistern. 02-Nov-21 29-Jun-22
CLOSED

Discrepancy in FCD plans from actual site condition.

1. Left and rear side has an existing common perimeter fence that had
enchroached on our property line, which will result in not having the
correct correct set back when we construct our perimeter fence. Hence, 29-Jun-22
RFI-002 ARCHITECTURAL this reflects to have our line at right side to be within the sidewalk area. 28-Mar-22 29-Jun-22
2. Point 1 to point 2 differs in length from plan 21.34m , while the existing CLOSED
and survey is 20.56m. (-78cm)
3. Point 8 to point 1 differs in legth from plan 31.25m, while the existing
and survey is 32.0m. (+75cm)

Notations from MVA approved plan states "MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE

BUILDING HEIGHT REGULATIONS IS 9.0M MEASURED FROM THE HEIGHEST
SIDE WALK LEVEL FRONTING THE PROPERTY LOT OF THE APEX OF THE
ROOF." 28/03/2021 07-Apr-22
RFI-003 ARCHITECTURAL 07-Apr-22
CLOSED
From FCD PLAN the elevation is 9.50M which refelects to be negative 20cm
in taking the highest level we are having 9.30M only.
This is for your review and advice.

1. Driveway obstruction. Please refer on the drawings provided.

RFI-004 STRUCTURAL 2. Please provide or indicate a splicing point location details on column and 22-Nov-21 OPEN
beam for I-beam connections.

1. Can we provide an alternative Wide Flange scheduling for I-beams from

FOLLOW UP TO ENGR.
WF 12X6.5X31 and WF 12X6.5X35 as the nearest I-beam specs were
RFI-005 STRUCTURAL 24-Nov-21 ALDRIN / ENGR. JAY THE
requiring for. Please give us an advice for this as we are now processing the
RESPONSE
purchase of materials.

Cistern tank obstruction to foundation.

1. As per Structural Plan, the depth of footing from FFL to bottom
FOLLOW UP TO ENGR.
foundation is 2 meter and perimeter footing with 1M in depth which can
RFI-006 STRUCTURAL 24-Nov-22 ALDRIN / ENGR. JAY THE
affect on the cistern tank foundation which was on a 2.3M as shown on the
RESPONSE
sectioning details on the drawing.

A site inspection conducted with MVA to verify the location and depth of
sewer line and drainage line connection.
Below are the following query relating to sewer and drainage line
connection:
1. Septic tank is not allowed in the village. (Deletion of septic tank)
2. As per on response to RFI-1 (Swimming pool foundation and building
foundation obstruction), the length of the swimming pool will follow the A-
PLUMBING/ 4.08 blow-out drawing which is from gridline 2-10. The drainage and septic
RFI-007 06-Dec-22 CLOSED
SANITARY tank at as we relocate to gregorrio side will be below the swimming pool.
what will be its depth considering its slope will be affected. On the actual
measurement of the manhole depth of sewer, it's approximately at 2.4M
depth of our connection.
3. On the RFI-2 (Discrepancy on FCD plan to actual) which was based on the
actual site measurement of perimeter, RFI-1 will violate the setback of 3m
as what MVA also noted on the site visit and concerned layout for the
sewer line and drainage will be below of the swimming pool.

There is a discrepancy on the Structural & Architectural detail for CS1, CS2.
May we confirm as to which detail is to govern. If Architectural, we would
like to request for a reinforcement detail.
2. We would like to verify as to which Steel beam are be filled with concrete
and those without. As per
the structural plans, we have identified those with and without. We would
STRUCTURAL/
RFI-008 like to confirm this prior to 07-Mar-22 11-Apr-22 CLOSED
ARCHITECTURAL
proceeding. Attached is a KEY PLAN and sections for your review and
evaluation.
4.0 For the Steel beam connections: May we request for you to Provide us a
reinforcement detail of
concrete beam. Please Note that Bottom flange of CB3 & CB2 will be
exposed below ceiling line (CF2)
 1. Discrepancy on location of Electrical room between Architectural and
Electrical Plans.
located at ground floor below main stair landing on Architectrual dwg,
ELECTRICAL/
RFI-009 while its at storage room on Electrical dwg. 21-Mar-22 05-Apr-22 CLOSED
ARCHITECTURAL
1.1 If to follow location at Ground floor below staircase the head room will
only be 1.28m. Requires to bend prior
to access.

ARCHITECTURAL/ Discrepancy on structural plans that are affected due to change in elevation
RFI-010 11-May-22 19-May-22 CLOSED
STRUCTURAL at 3rd floor storage room, master's bedroom, and concrete gutter.

ARCHITECTURAL/ PC-2 vertical I-beam is exposed (6.0 cm nosing) at 3rd floor loctaed along
RFI-011 11-May-22 19-May-22
STRUCTURAL GL E/between 5&6 CLOSED

As we understand from the issued drawing, there will be double framing at

storage area, we plotted the above structural plan by cross referencing on
Architectural detailed sections and elevation requirements. Thus, found out
some concerns on the following items below.
1. There will be exposed steel beams at den/art work storage (CB-1, 2B-1).
1.1 Exposed below ceiling line 2B3 in y-axis can not be connected on 283 x-
axis due to its affected in following the elevation of roof gutter.
RFI-012 STRUCTURAL 2. In following the elevation of roof gutter at MBR the steel beams 01-Jul-22 01-Aug-22 CLOSED
connections thru storage area will not fully be connected-varies 30mm in
elevation between B-1 MBR & 2B-1 storage.
3. In following elevation of roof at MBR there will be no beam to hold the
concrete gutter from PC-2 to grid line F. Due to 284 is a continuous beam
from the elevation of attic level.
4. Is s-3 (slab) at MBR still necessary? it will be off the concrete gutter area
as R-1 (rafter) shall be installed diagonally.

Beam discrepancy at 3rd floor/attic level. See attached drawing on our

query as per issued resolution last August 1, 2022. Still has discrepancy on
steel beam connection between 2B-2 and 2B-3's. We resend another query
RFI-012.1 STRUCTURAL for this matter due to we were unable to connect each beams as reflected 05-Aug-22 25-Aug-22
CLOSED
on our shop drawing/call outs, kindly provide us section drawing with
levation to enable us undertand fully th ebeam connections without loosing
the other end.

RFI-012.2 STRUCTURAL Additional steel beam 2B-6 is extended thru open area connected to 2B-4. 30-Aug-22 09-Sep-22 CLOSED

RFI-013 ARCHITECTURAL Discrepancy on elevation of storage room plan and section 01-Jul-22 11-Jul-22 CLOSED

500mm discrepancy on elevation ceiling height of master's bedroom,

RFI-014 ARCHITECTURAL 01-Jul-22 11-Jul-22 CLOSED
3.0m from section, while 3.5m from plan.

Roof deck beam query (Beams with no schedule)

1. Beams that has no ID on plan
a. 2 pcs along GL D/6'-9'
b. 3 pcs along GL 8/Cto E'
RFI-015 STRUCTURAL 06-Jul-22 01-Aug-22 CLOSED
2. CB-2 with 400mm beam depth, near GL 9 between B& C above roof
garden eaves shall be exposed below ceiling line.
3. Verification - do we still have to retain steel deck slab at GL 4-5 & B-C
despite having the rest of the area as conventional slab?

Majority of drain pipes at slab soffit of roofdeck has no space to fit in

considering the given ceiling height at 2.4om. Most of pipings shall be
PLUMBING / exposed below ceiling line due to steel beams depth at 250 & 300mm. The
RFI-016 18-Jul-22 01-Aug-22 CLOSED
ARCHITECTURAL ceiling clearance that will be left from 20mm to 70mm, hence the drain
pipe diameter is 110mm with 2% slope. To consider as well the gypsum
board and its framing which requires 70 to 80mm.

1. The recommended hole is placed 250mm from mid point of the I-beam's
length, majority of our drain pipe layout (9 areas) are near the
support/columns, kindly provide us final plumbing layout in compliance
with the structural requirement prior to sleeve provision.
2. As per specified in plumbing plans our piping slopes should be 2%
(General notes item 5). Due to limited space to fit in the pipes at concrete
slab we tried 1% slope only on our sections, however following the slope
STRUCTURAL/ FOLLOW UP TO ENGR.
RFI-016.1 will still rrsult conflict to other trades prior to complete assembly. 13-Aug-22
PLUMBING ALDRIN
2.1 Pipe shall obstruct on slab's bottom formworks.
2.2 The recommended 75mm clearance from the I-beam flange shall never
be met. Clearance will vary depending on the length of pipe from 7m to
15m with the slope requirement.
2.3 Pipe shall obstruct on bottom bars of slab and concrete "slab score"
2.4 Some pipes will pass through I-beam's flange.
2.5 Pipe clean out shall be placed at top slab.

Some of drain pipes at slab soffit of roofdeck has no space to fit in

considering the given ceiling height at 2.4om. Most of pipings shall be
PLUMBING / exposed below ceiling line due to steel beams depth at 250 & 300mm. The
RFI-017 18-Jul-22 01-Aug-22 CLOSED
ARCHITECTURAL ceiling clearance that will be left from 20mm to 70mm, hence the drain
pipe diameter is 110mm with 2% slope. To consider as well the gypsum
board and its framing which requires 70 to 80mm.
 The recommended hole is placed 250mm from mid point of the I-beam's
length, some of our drain pipe layout (7 areas) area near the
support/columns, kindly provide us final plumbing layout in compliance
with the structural requirement prior to sleeve provision.
2. As per specified in plumbing plans our piping slopes should be 2%
(General notes item 5). Due to limited space to fit in the pipes at concrete
slab we tried 1% slope only on our sections, however following the slope
will still rrsult conflict to other trades prior to complete assembly.
PLUMBING / FOLLOW UP TO ENGR.
RFI-017.1 2.1 The recommended 75mm clearance from I-beam flange shall never be 13-Aug-22
STRUCTURAL ALDRIN
met due to slope requirement. Clearance will vary depending on the length
of pipe from 7m to 21m (main collector pipe 160mm diameter)
2.2 Some pipes will pass through I-beam's flange.
2.3 If 2% slope will be followed the plumbing pipes shall be exposed below
ceiling line.
3. The recommended maximum diameter of the hole is 100mm wherein
the given size of drain pipes are 160mm (main collector pipe) and 32mm to
110mm (branch pipings)

1. Plumbing plans does not have floor drains and drain pipes on ledges and SHOPDRAWING AND
RFI-018 PLUMBING planter box. Section drawing reflects as drop flooring with zocalo. Are we 18-Jul-22 RESPONSE FR. ENGR.
required to provide drainage system in these areas? ALDRIN

GROUND
FLR. ARCHITECTURAL Discrepancy on MVA's approved plan 01-Aug-22 OPEN
Activity.

Slab and framing details of cantilever slab at Roofdeck area

RFI-019 STRUCTURAL 13-Aug-22 09-Sep-22 CLOSED
Verification - clouded arae has no slab and framing detail. We assume this
area to have a drop wall as reflected at rear elevation dwg.

Discrepancy on Architectural Plan and Architectural cross section

CLOSED
RFI-020 ARCHITECTURAL 13-Aug-22 16-Aug-22
Verification - reflected roof eaves on roof plan was terminated along
between GL E&F, while at cross section thru 'B'

Verification - reflected sky light connection on Architectural Plan was steel

beams.
ARCHITECTURAL/
RFI-021 21-Sep-22 11-Oct-22 CLOSED
STRUCTURAL
Kindly provide us detail of skylight framing incorporating the steel beams
and concrete.

Koi pond reinforcement details

RFI-022 STRUCTURAL 04-Oct-22 12-Oct-22 CLOSED
Query: kindly provide us a reinforcement details for koi pond.

Reinforcement details for koi pond

RFI-O22.5 STRUCTURAL 12-Oct-22 13-Jan-23 CLOSED

Verification - Discrepancy on Architectural Plan and Reinforcement details
of koi pond.

Query on termination joints between our steel beams and roof deck
concrete slab.

As reflected on the detail of roof deck, the steel beam's top flanges and top
of concrete slab are flushed. We worry for possibility of water leak on all
RFI-023 ARCHITECTURAL 02-Nov-22 17-Nov-22 CLOSED
joints due to different surface substrates. Sometimes concrete does not
bond well on metal surfaces and has tendency to crack.

2. Will the bostik polyurethane waterproofing be able to protect the whole

area considering multiple joints between metal and concrete?

Discrepancy on Architectural Roof plan and architectural cross section

RFI-024 ARCHITECTURAL 09-Nov-22 13-Dec-22 CLOSED
Verification - reflected roof eaves on roof plan was terminated along GL F &
F'

Discrepancy on Architectural and Structural Detail of canopy

ARCHITECTURAL/
RFI-025 03-Dec-22 OPEN
STRUCTURAL Verification - on which detail are we going to follow? if Architectural, we
would like to request a reinforcement detail.
 SITE INSTRUCTION DATE

NO CONSULTANT/CLIENT's FEEDBACK RECIVED S. I. REMARKS

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
- Foundation must be deeper in order to
avoid coincing with pool
- Swimming pool span will follow A-4.08
detail

See revised Architectural Plan dated June

10, 2022

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Please see attached revised FCD plans.

Department of Environmental Services

permit on-going. Awaiting owner's
payment to proceed

See reponse to RFA-001

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
1.) Architectural detail shall govern for the
design intent, verify structural for the slab
detail.
Please see revised Architectural detail
below. (A-5.01)
2). The structural plan will prevail for steel
beams in question, kindly disregard
concrete
filled beams on the architectural drawings.
3). The structural plans will prevail for
slabs in question- ALL T&B slabs will be
concrete slabs.
4). Please see attached detail
5). Please see resolved beams below
 COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Please see attached drawings reflecting
the revised Architectural plans with a 2m
ceiling height for the Electrical Room.
Revised Electrical plans to follow.

See response to RFI-012.2

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Just rotate horizontally

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
1. Please see attached storage framing
plan.
2. See attached section.

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Please see attached file for the revised
structural framing at the concerned area.

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
See attached framing plans.

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
200mm DISCREPANCY ON ELEVATION - FFL
OF STORAGE AREA
7.10m from section drawing, while 7.30m
from plan.
(This item is related on steel beam's RFI at
3rd floor)
RESPONSE:
Please see attached revised Reflected
Ceiling Plan reflecting the 7.10m FFL of
Storage Area.

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Please see attached revised reflected
ceiling plan reflecting the 3.0m ceiling
height of the master's bedroom.

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
1. See plan
2. Maintain CB-2 sizes, for discussion
3. If conventional designate (S-2)

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
- Maintain sizes of the beam and do pipe
sleeve if possible.
- See attached details of sleeve for beam
for your reference.

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Please maintain sizes of the beam. Do pipe
sleeve if possible.
 From Viber convo
As per Arch. Vlad advice to hold the
pouring of concrete for ground floor.

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
See CS2 details for the slab design

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Please follow the roof plan.

See attached cross section thru "B"

reflecting the adjusted roof eave.

See conctruction Bulletin No. 02

Skylight shall now be relocated above the
Main Stairs (previously at the Master’s
T&B).

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Please see attached drawing for the
reinforcement details.

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Please see attached drawing for the
reinforcement details.

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Concrete roof deck slab and steel beams
shall be flushed as shown in the details.
Intended waterproofing details shall be
followed to ensure moisture protection.
Use solabit W-1 + sikabit W15 for the first
layer, followed by concrete topping with
welded wire mesh for the 2nd layer, and
sarnafil for the 3rd layer (outermost).

COMMENTED BY NGDC:
Section shall be followed for the
termination of the roof eave in concern.
Kindly see revised roof plan & the roof
eave framing detail provided by the
structural consultant for your reference.

7 weeks pending response from Design

team