---
id:
aliases: []
title: 2026-01-22
tags:
  - authorship/original
  - destiny/permanent
  - status/draft
  - type/daily
dg-publish: true
---
# 2026-01-22

## 2026-01-22 09:55

The lighting drawings for
450-460 James Robertson Parkway Phase II
(fka James Roberston Pkwy Mixed Use Development)
show occupancy sensors serving electrical rooms.
I knew this was understood to be prohibited,
but could not have provided a code reference.

[[nfpa-70_110_requirements#110.26(D) Illumination.|110.26(D)]]
is the relevant section.

## 2026-01-22 11:58

### 463 Davison Contract Dates

[[463-davison-ave-ne]]

Effective date: [[2026-01-21]]

* [x] Escrow deposit due by [[2026-01-26]]
* [ ] Loan application submitted by [[2026-01-26]]
* [ ] Inspection period ends [[2026-01-28]]
* [ ] Loan approval due by [[2026-02-11]]
* [ ] Title commitment due by [[2026-02-27]]

Closing: [[2026-03-04]]

## 2026-01-22 14:56

### Accurate Budget Vs. Accurate BOM

#### Quote

> [!quote] Joel Jansen [[2026-01-15#2026-01-15 13:27]] (pp.)
> I'd rather have an accurate budget than an accurate BOM.

#### Context

#### Analysis

It may be counterintuitive to BOM-oriented estimators
(typical of those with an electrical background),
but deviating from ~~common practice~~
to make an assembly "more accurate"
(read: to make the estimate BOM
more closely resemble the construction BOM),
may make the budget _less_ accurate.

The review and adjustment process is based on ~~common practice~~,

Our assemblies do not include screws
It would be more accurate to the BOM to add them,
but we budget for that cost in the summary,
so to do so would be double dipping.

Though not stated as such,
we budget for takeoff-to-install deviations the same way.

\

An organization's takeoff database
ought to include exactly what is necessary for takeoff
at the acceptable level of detail, and nothing else.
It ought to be assumed by estimators that the previous is true,
and that acceptable takeoff of any scope
must be possible with the contents of the database.
