Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you can not find what you are looking for please submit a records request.
Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
Review Details: COMMERCIAL REVIEW - FULL v.2
Permit Number - TC-COM-0525-01018
Review Name: COMMERCIAL REVIEW - FULL v.2
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/29/2025 | Bldg Permits - Post Review Express | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 08/29/2025 | Commercial Building Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | August 26, 2025 2nd Review Lizard Rock Designs Attn: Carina Eichorst 1640 E. River Road, Suite 206 Tucson Arizona 85718 Re: CONGRESS STREET APARTMENTS NEW BUILDING City of Tucson Permit Number: TC-COM-0525-01018 Stantec Project Number: 185215066 Stantec File Number: TUC-25-061 Plan review for the project referenced above has been completed. This letter reflects comments to be addressed. PLEASE send all responses to comments back to the City through the permit portal! Responses sent directly to Stantec will be ignored. Also, please submit complete copies of all permit documents (i.e. plans, calculations, reports, etc.) even if they have not been changed. Please cloud and delta all changes and provide a letter with a written response to each of the comments indicating the action taken. The scope of this review covers the architectural, structural, plumbing, mechanical, and electrical designs as they relate to the codes adopted by the jurisdiction. All features were checked only to the extent allowed by the submittals provided. All portions of this project are assumed to meet or will meet other departmental requirements, conditions, and concerns before permit approval. Occupancy Group Construction Type Area (Square feet) Occupant Load Automatic Fire Sprinklers Fire Alarms R-2 V-A 32,812 170 Yes Yes B S-2 Separate Permits: Automatic fire sprinklers and fire alarm. Deferred Submittals: Wood trusses. Special Inspections: Earthwork, concrete, epoxy and expansion anchors, and fabricated systems and elements. ARCHITECTURAL COMMENTS Sheet G1.0 1. Addressed. 2. Previous Comment: Please indicate on this sheet that the automatic fire sprinkler system [2018 IBC Sec. 903] and fire alarm system [2018 IBC Sec. 907] are to be provided as part of this project and are to be submitted as a separate permit (not a deferred submittal). Still Required: The comment was addressed; however sprinklers and fire alarms have somehow also been added as “special inspections”. Sprinklers and fire alarms are not special inspections under 2018 IBC Chapter 17. Correct the notes. 3. Addressed. 4. Previous Comment: Note on this sheet that special inspection is required for earthwork, concrete, epoxy and expansion anchors, and fabricated systems and elements. Also, provide City of Tucson special inspection certificate(s) with Parts A and B completed. Make sure that the owner or their legal representative signs the form. Still Required: The certificate provided is acceptable except for one issue; the name of the inspector for soil has not been provided. Just indicating “Western Technologies” is not enough; we need the name of the qualified individual. Sheet G1.1 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. 3. Previous Comment: Lobby 100 (both north and south) is a continuation of the corridor and needs to be separated from the remainder of the building as a corridor with 1-hour fire partitions (2018 IBC Sec. 708) and a 1-hour horizontal assembly (2018 IBC Sec. 711). Office 126, Restroom 127, and C-Store 128, and Parcel 125 all need to be separated from the corridor per 2018 IBC Sec. 1020.6. Doors 125, 126, 127, and 128 all need to be 20 minute doors; currently Doors 125, 127, and 128 are shown as 20-minute doors while Door 126 is not shown as a fire rated door. The windows at Office 126 and S-Store 128 need to be 20-minute fire-rated assemblies per 2018 IBC Table 716.1(3). Still Required: The lobby walls have been indicated as fire-rated fire partitions; however the lobby ceiling has not been designated as a fire-rated horizontal assembly. 4. Addressed. 5. Previous Comment: Why are Doors 100A and 100B 20-minute fire rated assemblies? These doors are not within fire rated exterior walls, so why fire-rate the doors? Also, why is Door 122B a fire rated door? The exterior wall is not required to be fire rated. Still Required: The written response indicates that the doors have now been indicated as unrated, however Door 122B is still rated. Did you intend to leave Door 122B as a 90 minute fire rated door in an unrated wall? 6. Previous Comment: Why are Doors 100C and 100D 90-minute fire-rated assemblies? The walls they are in are not shown as fire rated. Stair 129 exits into a “exit court”, which at 10 feet wide and open to the sky does not need to be fire rated per 2018 IBC Sec. 1028.4, however a portion of this exterior area is not open to the sky and is narrower than 10 feet wide and cannot be considered an exit court. Now Stair 129 exits the building, but this exit does not constitute exit discharge because the area outside of this door is covered. The walls of this “covered area” need to be 2-hour fire rated exterior walls to match the fire rating of the stairs, and Doors 100C, 100D, and129B need to be 90 minute doors. The floor ceiling of this area also needs to be a horizontal assembly having a 2-hour fire-resistance. {This area functions almost like an exit passageway, maintaining the same level of protection from the interior exit stairs until the exit court has been reached.} Still Required: Sheet G1.1 shows the egress court width as 9’-9½” wide while Sheet A2.0 shows the same egress court being 10’-0” wide. Which is correct? If the egress court is less than 10’-0” the walls will need to before 1-hour fire rated per 2018 IBC Sec. 1028.4, and openings in those walls will need to be of 3/4-hours fire rated assemblies for 10 feet above the finished floor of the egress court. Sheet A2.2 1. Addressed. Sheets A2.3 and A2.4 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. 3. Addressed. Sheet A4.0 1. Addressed. Sheet A4.1 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. Sheet A6.0 1. Previous Comment: The fire partitions forming the corridors or dwelling unit separation walls do not extend to the bottom of the floor or roof deck, so do they stop at the bottom of the membrane of a fire-rated floor/ceiling or roof/ceiling assembly per 2018 IBC Sec. 708.4? The tops of these walls need to be detailed so that proper continuity can be determined. Further, how is 2018 IBC Sec.708.4.2 being addressed specifically regarding draftstops; again the detailing of the tops of these walls will determine compliance. Still Required: This comment has not been addressed, and no response could be found in the written response. Building Section B clearly shows the corridor walls on the 3rd floor stopping above the ceiling and not continuing to the roof deck. The same issue needs to be addressed with the fire partitions separating dwelling units. The plans are not clear. Sheet 8.0 1. Addressed. Sheet 8.1 1. Addressed. Sheet A9.0 1. Addressed. STRUCTURAL COMMENTS General 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. Sheet S1.5 1. Addressed. MECHANICAL COMMENTS Sheet M2.3 1. Addressed. PLUMBING COMMENTS There are no comments. ELECTRICAL COMMENTS General 1. Addressed. Sheet E1.1 1. Addressed. Sheet E2.2 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. Should you have any questions regarding the plan review comments, please contact the plan reviewer listed for the appropriate discipline. Plans reviewed by: Joel Svoboda, RA Senior Associate 520-545-7415 joel.svoboda@stantec.com |
||
| 08/29/2025 | Commercial Electrical Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | August 26, 2025 2nd Review Lizard Rock Designs Attn: Carina Eichorst 1640 E. River Road, Suite 206 Tucson Arizona 85718 Re: CONGRESS STREET APARTMENTS NEW BUILDING City of Tucson Permit Number: TC-COM-0525-01018 Stantec Project Number: 185215066 Stantec File Number: TUC-25-061 Plan review for the project referenced above has been completed. This letter reflects comments to be addressed. PLEASE send all responses to comments back to the City through the permit portal! Responses sent directly to Stantec will be ignored. Also, please submit complete copies of all permit documents (i.e. plans, calculations, reports, etc.) even if they have not been changed. Please cloud and delta all changes and provide a letter with a written response to each of the comments indicating the action taken. The scope of this review covers the architectural, structural, plumbing, mechanical, and electrical designs as they relate to the codes adopted by the jurisdiction. All features were checked only to the extent allowed by the submittals provided. All portions of this project are assumed to meet or will meet other departmental requirements, conditions, and concerns before permit approval. Occupancy Group Construction Type Area (Square feet) Occupant Load Automatic Fire Sprinklers Fire Alarms R-2 V-A 32,812 170 Yes Yes B S-2 Separate Permits: Automatic fire sprinklers and fire alarm. Deferred Submittals: Wood trusses. Special Inspections: Earthwork, concrete, epoxy and expansion anchors, and fabricated systems and elements. ARCHITECTURAL COMMENTS Sheet G1.0 1. Addressed. 2. Previous Comment: Please indicate on this sheet that the automatic fire sprinkler system [2018 IBC Sec. 903] and fire alarm system [2018 IBC Sec. 907] are to be provided as part of this project and are to be submitted as a separate permit (not a deferred submittal). Still Required: The comment was addressed; however sprinklers and fire alarms have somehow also been added as “special inspections”. Sprinklers and fire alarms are not special inspections under 2018 IBC Chapter 17. Correct the notes. 3. Addressed. 4. Previous Comment: Note on this sheet that special inspection is required for earthwork, concrete, epoxy and expansion anchors, and fabricated systems and elements. Also, provide City of Tucson special inspection certificate(s) with Parts A and B completed. Make sure that the owner or their legal representative signs the form. Still Required: The certificate provided is acceptable except for one issue; the name of the inspector for soil has not been provided. Just indicating “Western Technologies” is not enough; we need the name of the qualified individual. Sheet G1.1 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. 3. Previous Comment: Lobby 100 (both north and south) is a continuation of the corridor and needs to be separated from the remainder of the building as a corridor with 1-hour fire partitions (2018 IBC Sec. 708) and a 1-hour horizontal assembly (2018 IBC Sec. 711). Office 126, Restroom 127, and C-Store 128, and Parcel 125 all need to be separated from the corridor per 2018 IBC Sec. 1020.6. Doors 125, 126, 127, and 128 all need to be 20 minute doors; currently Doors 125, 127, and 128 are shown as 20-minute doors while Door 126 is not shown as a fire rated door. The windows at Office 126 and S-Store 128 need to be 20-minute fire-rated assemblies per 2018 IBC Table 716.1(3). Still Required: The lobby walls have been indicated as fire-rated fire partitions; however the lobby ceiling has not been designated as a fire-rated horizontal assembly. 4. Addressed. 5. Previous Comment: Why are Doors 100A and 100B 20-minute fire rated assemblies? These doors are not within fire rated exterior walls, so why fire-rate the doors? Also, why is Door 122B a fire rated door? The exterior wall is not required to be fire rated. Still Required: The written response indicates that the doors have now been indicated as unrated, however Door 122B is still rated. Did you intend to leave Door 122B as a 90 minute fire rated door in an unrated wall? 6. Previous Comment: Why are Doors 100C and 100D 90-minute fire-rated assemblies? The walls they are in are not shown as fire rated. Stair 129 exits into a “exit court”, which at 10 feet wide and open to the sky does not need to be fire rated per 2018 IBC Sec. 1028.4, however a portion of this exterior area is not open to the sky and is narrower than 10 feet wide and cannot be considered an exit court. Now Stair 129 exits the building, but this exit does not constitute exit discharge because the area outside of this door is covered. The walls of this “covered area” need to be 2-hour fire rated exterior walls to match the fire rating of the stairs, and Doors 100C, 100D, and129B need to be 90 minute doors. The floor ceiling of this area also needs to be a horizontal assembly having a 2-hour fire-resistance. {This area functions almost like an exit passageway, maintaining the same level of protection from the interior exit stairs until the exit court has been reached.} Still Required: Sheet G1.1 shows the egress court width as 9’-9½” wide while Sheet A2.0 shows the same egress court being 10’-0” wide. Which is correct? If the egress court is less than 10’-0” the walls will need to before 1-hour fire rated per 2018 IBC Sec. 1028.4, and openings in those walls will need to be of 3/4-hours fire rated assemblies for 10 feet above the finished floor of the egress court. Sheet A2.2 1. Addressed. Sheets A2.3 and A2.4 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. 3. Addressed. Sheet A4.0 1. Addressed. Sheet A4.1 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. Sheet A6.0 1. Previous Comment: The fire partitions forming the corridors or dwelling unit separation walls do not extend to the bottom of the floor or roof deck, so do they stop at the bottom of the membrane of a fire-rated floor/ceiling or roof/ceiling assembly per 2018 IBC Sec. 708.4? The tops of these walls need to be detailed so that proper continuity can be determined. Further, how is 2018 IBC Sec.708.4.2 being addressed specifically regarding draftstops; again the detailing of the tops of these walls will determine compliance. Still Required: This comment has not been addressed, and no response could be found in the written response. Building Section B clearly shows the corridor walls on the 3rd floor stopping above the ceiling and not continuing to the roof deck. The same issue needs to be addressed with the fire partitions separating dwelling units. The plans are not clear. Sheet 8.0 1. Addressed. Sheet 8.1 1. Addressed. Sheet A9.0 1. Addressed. STRUCTURAL COMMENTS General 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. Sheet S1.5 1. Addressed. MECHANICAL COMMENTS Sheet M2.3 1. Addressed. PLUMBING COMMENTS There are no comments. ELECTRICAL COMMENTS General 1. Addressed. Sheet E1.1 1. Addressed. Sheet E2.2 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. Should you have any questions regarding the plan review comments, please contact the plan reviewer listed for the appropriate discipline. Plans reviewed by: Joel Svoboda, RA Senior Associate 520-545-7415 joel.svoboda@stantec.com |
||
| 08/29/2025 | Commercial Mechanical Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | August 26, 2025 2nd Review Lizard Rock Designs Attn: Carina Eichorst 1640 E. River Road, Suite 206 Tucson Arizona 85718 Re: CONGRESS STREET APARTMENTS NEW BUILDING City of Tucson Permit Number: TC-COM-0525-01018 Stantec Project Number: 185215066 Stantec File Number: TUC-25-061 Plan review for the project referenced above has been completed. This letter reflects comments to be addressed. PLEASE send all responses to comments back to the City through the permit portal! Responses sent directly to Stantec will be ignored. Also, please submit complete copies of all permit documents (i.e. plans, calculations, reports, etc.) even if they have not been changed. Please cloud and delta all changes and provide a letter with a written response to each of the comments indicating the action taken. The scope of this review covers the architectural, structural, plumbing, mechanical, and electrical designs as they relate to the codes adopted by the jurisdiction. All features were checked only to the extent allowed by the submittals provided. All portions of this project are assumed to meet or will meet other departmental requirements, conditions, and concerns before permit approval. Occupancy Group Construction Type Area (Square feet) Occupant Load Automatic Fire Sprinklers Fire Alarms R-2 V-A 32,812 170 Yes Yes B S-2 Separate Permits: Automatic fire sprinklers and fire alarm. Deferred Submittals: Wood trusses. Special Inspections: Earthwork, concrete, epoxy and expansion anchors, and fabricated systems and elements. ARCHITECTURAL COMMENTS Sheet G1.0 1. Addressed. 2. Previous Comment: Please indicate on this sheet that the automatic fire sprinkler system [2018 IBC Sec. 903] and fire alarm system [2018 IBC Sec. 907] are to be provided as part of this project and are to be submitted as a separate permit (not a deferred submittal). Still Required: The comment was addressed; however sprinklers and fire alarms have somehow also been added as “special inspections”. Sprinklers and fire alarms are not special inspections under 2018 IBC Chapter 17. Correct the notes. 3. Addressed. 4. Previous Comment: Note on this sheet that special inspection is required for earthwork, concrete, epoxy and expansion anchors, and fabricated systems and elements. Also, provide City of Tucson special inspection certificate(s) with Parts A and B completed. Make sure that the owner or their legal representative signs the form. Still Required: The certificate provided is acceptable except for one issue; the name of the inspector for soil has not been provided. Just indicating “Western Technologies” is not enough; we need the name of the qualified individual. Sheet G1.1 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. 3. Previous Comment: Lobby 100 (both north and south) is a continuation of the corridor and needs to be separated from the remainder of the building as a corridor with 1-hour fire partitions (2018 IBC Sec. 708) and a 1-hour horizontal assembly (2018 IBC Sec. 711). Office 126, Restroom 127, and C-Store 128, and Parcel 125 all need to be separated from the corridor per 2018 IBC Sec. 1020.6. Doors 125, 126, 127, and 128 all need to be 20 minute doors; currently Doors 125, 127, and 128 are shown as 20-minute doors while Door 126 is not shown as a fire rated door. The windows at Office 126 and S-Store 128 need to be 20-minute fire-rated assemblies per 2018 IBC Table 716.1(3). Still Required: The lobby walls have been indicated as fire-rated fire partitions; however the lobby ceiling has not been designated as a fire-rated horizontal assembly. 4. Addressed. 5. Previous Comment: Why are Doors 100A and 100B 20-minute fire rated assemblies? These doors are not within fire rated exterior walls, so why fire-rate the doors? Also, why is Door 122B a fire rated door? The exterior wall is not required to be fire rated. Still Required: The written response indicates that the doors have now been indicated as unrated, however Door 122B is still rated. Did you intend to leave Door 122B as a 90 minute fire rated door in an unrated wall? 6. Previous Comment: Why are Doors 100C and 100D 90-minute fire-rated assemblies? The walls they are in are not shown as fire rated. Stair 129 exits into a “exit court”, which at 10 feet wide and open to the sky does not need to be fire rated per 2018 IBC Sec. 1028.4, however a portion of this exterior area is not open to the sky and is narrower than 10 feet wide and cannot be considered an exit court. Now Stair 129 exits the building, but this exit does not constitute exit discharge because the area outside of this door is covered. The walls of this “covered area” need to be 2-hour fire rated exterior walls to match the fire rating of the stairs, and Doors 100C, 100D, and129B need to be 90 minute doors. The floor ceiling of this area also needs to be a horizontal assembly having a 2-hour fire-resistance. {This area functions almost like an exit passageway, maintaining the same level of protection from the interior exit stairs until the exit court has been reached.} Still Required: Sheet G1.1 shows the egress court width as 9’-9½” wide while Sheet A2.0 shows the same egress court being 10’-0” wide. Which is correct? If the egress court is less than 10’-0” the walls will need to before 1-hour fire rated per 2018 IBC Sec. 1028.4, and openings in those walls will need to be of 3/4-hours fire rated assemblies for 10 feet above the finished floor of the egress court. Sheet A2.2 1. Addressed. Sheets A2.3 and A2.4 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. 3. Addressed. Sheet A4.0 1. Addressed. Sheet A4.1 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. Sheet A6.0 1. Previous Comment: The fire partitions forming the corridors or dwelling unit separation walls do not extend to the bottom of the floor or roof deck, so do they stop at the bottom of the membrane of a fire-rated floor/ceiling or roof/ceiling assembly per 2018 IBC Sec. 708.4? The tops of these walls need to be detailed so that proper continuity can be determined. Further, how is 2018 IBC Sec.708.4.2 being addressed specifically regarding draftstops; again the detailing of the tops of these walls will determine compliance. Still Required: This comment has not been addressed, and no response could be found in the written response. Building Section B clearly shows the corridor walls on the 3rd floor stopping above the ceiling and not continuing to the roof deck. The same issue needs to be addressed with the fire partitions separating dwelling units. The plans are not clear. Sheet 8.0 1. Addressed. Sheet 8.1 1. Addressed. Sheet A9.0 1. Addressed. STRUCTURAL COMMENTS General 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. Sheet S1.5 1. Addressed. MECHANICAL COMMENTS Sheet M2.3 1. Addressed. PLUMBING COMMENTS There are no comments. ELECTRICAL COMMENTS General 1. Addressed. Sheet E1.1 1. Addressed. Sheet E2.2 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. Should you have any questions regarding the plan review comments, please contact the plan reviewer listed for the appropriate discipline. Plans reviewed by: Joel Svoboda, RA Senior Associate 520-545-7415 joel.svoboda@stantec.com |
||
| 08/29/2025 | Commercial Plumbing Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | August 26, 2025 2nd Review Lizard Rock Designs Attn: Carina Eichorst 1640 E. River Road, Suite 206 Tucson Arizona 85718 Re: CONGRESS STREET APARTMENTS NEW BUILDING City of Tucson Permit Number: TC-COM-0525-01018 Stantec Project Number: 185215066 Stantec File Number: TUC-25-061 Plan review for the project referenced above has been completed. This letter reflects comments to be addressed. PLEASE send all responses to comments back to the City through the permit portal! Responses sent directly to Stantec will be ignored. Also, please submit complete copies of all permit documents (i.e. plans, calculations, reports, etc.) even if they have not been changed. Please cloud and delta all changes and provide a letter with a written response to each of the comments indicating the action taken. The scope of this review covers the architectural, structural, plumbing, mechanical, and electrical designs as they relate to the codes adopted by the jurisdiction. All features were checked only to the extent allowed by the submittals provided. All portions of this project are assumed to meet or will meet other departmental requirements, conditions, and concerns before permit approval. Occupancy Group Construction Type Area (Square feet) Occupant Load Automatic Fire Sprinklers Fire Alarms R-2 V-A 32,812 170 Yes Yes B S-2 Separate Permits: Automatic fire sprinklers and fire alarm. Deferred Submittals: Wood trusses. Special Inspections: Earthwork, concrete, epoxy and expansion anchors, and fabricated systems and elements. ARCHITECTURAL COMMENTS Sheet G1.0 1. Addressed. 2. Previous Comment: Please indicate on this sheet that the automatic fire sprinkler system [2018 IBC Sec. 903] and fire alarm system [2018 IBC Sec. 907] are to be provided as part of this project and are to be submitted as a separate permit (not a deferred submittal). Still Required: The comment was addressed; however sprinklers and fire alarms have somehow also been added as “special inspections”. Sprinklers and fire alarms are not special inspections under 2018 IBC Chapter 17. Correct the notes. 3. Addressed. 4. Previous Comment: Note on this sheet that special inspection is required for earthwork, concrete, epoxy and expansion anchors, and fabricated systems and elements. Also, provide City of Tucson special inspection certificate(s) with Parts A and B completed. Make sure that the owner or their legal representative signs the form. Still Required: The certificate provided is acceptable except for one issue; the name of the inspector for soil has not been provided. Just indicating “Western Technologies” is not enough; we need the name of the qualified individual. Sheet G1.1 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. 3. Previous Comment: Lobby 100 (both north and south) is a continuation of the corridor and needs to be separated from the remainder of the building as a corridor with 1-hour fire partitions (2018 IBC Sec. 708) and a 1-hour horizontal assembly (2018 IBC Sec. 711). Office 126, Restroom 127, and C-Store 128, and Parcel 125 all need to be separated from the corridor per 2018 IBC Sec. 1020.6. Doors 125, 126, 127, and 128 all need to be 20 minute doors; currently Doors 125, 127, and 128 are shown as 20-minute doors while Door 126 is not shown as a fire rated door. The windows at Office 126 and S-Store 128 need to be 20-minute fire-rated assemblies per 2018 IBC Table 716.1(3). Still Required: The lobby walls have been indicated as fire-rated fire partitions; however the lobby ceiling has not been designated as a fire-rated horizontal assembly. 4. Addressed. 5. Previous Comment: Why are Doors 100A and 100B 20-minute fire rated assemblies? These doors are not within fire rated exterior walls, so why fire-rate the doors? Also, why is Door 122B a fire rated door? The exterior wall is not required to be fire rated. Still Required: The written response indicates that the doors have now been indicated as unrated, however Door 122B is still rated. Did you intend to leave Door 122B as a 90 minute fire rated door in an unrated wall? 6. Previous Comment: Why are Doors 100C and 100D 90-minute fire-rated assemblies? The walls they are in are not shown as fire rated. Stair 129 exits into a “exit court”, which at 10 feet wide and open to the sky does not need to be fire rated per 2018 IBC Sec. 1028.4, however a portion of this exterior area is not open to the sky and is narrower than 10 feet wide and cannot be considered an exit court. Now Stair 129 exits the building, but this exit does not constitute exit discharge because the area outside of this door is covered. The walls of this “covered area” need to be 2-hour fire rated exterior walls to match the fire rating of the stairs, and Doors 100C, 100D, and129B need to be 90 minute doors. The floor ceiling of this area also needs to be a horizontal assembly having a 2-hour fire-resistance. {This area functions almost like an exit passageway, maintaining the same level of protection from the interior exit stairs until the exit court has been reached.} Still Required: Sheet G1.1 shows the egress court width as 9’-9½” wide while Sheet A2.0 shows the same egress court being 10’-0” wide. Which is correct? If the egress court is less than 10’-0” the walls will need to before 1-hour fire rated per 2018 IBC Sec. 1028.4, and openings in those walls will need to be of 3/4-hours fire rated assemblies for 10 feet above the finished floor of the egress court. Sheet A2.2 1. Addressed. Sheets A2.3 and A2.4 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. 3. Addressed. Sheet A4.0 1. Addressed. Sheet A4.1 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. Sheet A6.0 1. Previous Comment: The fire partitions forming the corridors or dwelling unit separation walls do not extend to the bottom of the floor or roof deck, so do they stop at the bottom of the membrane of a fire-rated floor/ceiling or roof/ceiling assembly per 2018 IBC Sec. 708.4? The tops of these walls need to be detailed so that proper continuity can be determined. Further, how is 2018 IBC Sec.708.4.2 being addressed specifically regarding draftstops; again the detailing of the tops of these walls will determine compliance. Still Required: This comment has not been addressed, and no response could be found in the written response. Building Section B clearly shows the corridor walls on the 3rd floor stopping above the ceiling and not continuing to the roof deck. The same issue needs to be addressed with the fire partitions separating dwelling units. The plans are not clear. Sheet 8.0 1. Addressed. Sheet 8.1 1. Addressed. Sheet A9.0 1. Addressed. STRUCTURAL COMMENTS General 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. Sheet S1.5 1. Addressed. MECHANICAL COMMENTS Sheet M2.3 1. Addressed. PLUMBING COMMENTS There are no comments. ELECTRICAL COMMENTS General 1. Addressed. Sheet E1.1 1. Addressed. Sheet E2.2 1. Addressed. 2. Addressed. Should you have any questions regarding the plan review comments, please contact the plan reviewer listed for the appropriate discipline. Plans reviewed by: Joel Svoboda, RA Senior Associate 520-545-7415 joel.svoboda@stantec.com |
||
| 08/29/2025 | Design Review Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Plans to match IID Design Package approved on 8/28/2025. | ||
| 08/25/2025 | Site Engineering Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Permit: TC-COM-0525-01018 Location: 701 W CONGRESS ST Review Date: 8/25/25 Site Engineering Comments: 1. Final Site Engineering approval of permit TC-COM-0525-01018 cannot occur until the development package TD-DEV-0325-00069, is approved 2. A separate floodplain use permit with elevation certificate for the structure proposed will be required. The FPU permits so far have been for the demolition work, and work associated with the Development package. So, this New FPU permit will be the third associated with this project and will involve going through the elevation certificate process Please start a new FUP at our permit application web page: https://tdc-online.tucsonaz.gov/#/home If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Marco Contreras Marco.contreras@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 08/27/2025 | Site Zoning Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | FROM: PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: TC-COM-0525-01018 - TD-DEV-0325-00069 701 W CONGRESS ST. – C-3 Multifamily(2nd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 27, 2025 COMMENTS: Resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. This site is located in the C-3 zone (UDC 4.7.22). Multifamily is an approved use in the zone (UDC Table 4.8-4). 1. Zoning has reviewed the building plans for compliance with development package (DP) TD-DEV-0325-00069 and although the plans appear to be in compliance until the following comments are addressed and the DP is approved by all review agencies Zoning cannot approve the building permit. 2. The floor area listed under Building Data does not match what is shown on the DP, coordinate so that the plans match. The Unified Development Code (UDC) can be found at: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Codes/Zoning-Code. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Zone1.desk@tucsonaz.gov. |
||
| 08/27/2025 | Fire New Construction Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 08/06/2025 | PDSD Application Completeness Express | REVIEW COMPLETED |