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.3
Permit Number - TC-COM-0624-01215
Review Name: COMMERCIAL REVIEW - FULL v.3
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/03/2025 | Bldg Permits - Post Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 01/03/2025 | Commercial Structural | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Please submit your revised documents and provide a letter with a written response letter addressing each of the comments indicating how the Building Review comments were addressed. Additionally, please submit complete copies of all permit documents (i.e. plans, calculations, reports, etc.) even if they have not been changed. Please, on the next submittal please provide separate PDF’s for each type of document. For example, • Comment Response • Plan set – Construction drawings • Structural Calcs • Mechanical Calcs • Special Inspection forms • Additional Supporting documents – ICC ES reports, and manufacturers installation guides, etc. 6DR2. The above code requirement only applies to buildings on the same lot, to use this code section for this building would require an appeal from the Building Official. • Please demonstrate this with a section drawing of all three buildings, to include the buildings on either side and the proposed new building to show the required vertical and horizontal separation. Indicate the elevation change from the adjacent existing roofs to the lowest elevation of the openings. Provide the adjacent roofing materials and the fire-resistive ratings of the adjacent lower roofs. 107.2.1 This solution would only work through a successful appeal to the Building Official process. 6FR2. The openings in Exterior Walls are regulated by 705.8 and Table 705.8, and openings are not allowed in walls located on property lines. The openings in the covered Deck areas are governed by this code section. 6FR2A. Please provide a separate opening percentage analysis for each of the exterior walls for the two wall lines adjacent to the property lines running approximately North to South 1. Tested and Approved glazed wall assemblies with a 1-hour fire resistive rating would be allowed in cases where openings are not permitted due to Fire Separation Distance. IBC 602 2. Alternative solutions configuration would only work through a successful appeal to the Building Official process. Please submit an Appeal to the Building Official for the openings in the Exterior Walls less than 10 feet from the property line. The submitted appeal was only covering the stairway within 10 feet of the property line. 9. Please provide an engineering analysis indicating the Porcelanosa tile, support pedestals will support the live load of 100psf for assembly areas. IBC 1607.1 Structural Comments • 17. Sheet S1.4: Please coordinate the Footing Schedule with the structural calculations so the information is consistent throughout the construction documents. IBC 107.2.7 For example, Footing schedule Marks F3, F4, F6, F7 do not appear to match the structural calculations. Additionally, calculations were not found for Moment Frame footings F8 and F9. If these are within the calcs, please direct me to the location. • This comment remains and is expanded: Sheet S1.4 of the construction drawings provides a Footing Schedule and the structural calcs contain the design and calculations for each Footing. However, the Footing Schedule on Sheet S1.4 and the Identified calculations do not appear to match. For example, • Sheet S1.4 Calcs pages 84-107 F1 1’x4” CONT. 3’- 4” min wide This is a new footing & notes indicate to Extend existing footing 1’-4” min F2 3’-8” CONT. 1’-4” CONT. F3 3’-8” CONT. 4’-0” SQUARE F4 3’-4” SQUARE 3’-8” CONT. F5 2’-0” SQUARE 2’-8” SQUARE F6 3’-4” SQUARE 2’-8”x3’-8” F7 4’-0” SQUARE 3’-8” CONT. F8 2'-8" X 3'-8" No Calculations F9 2'-8" SQUARE No Calculations Additionally, the Key Plan on page 55 of the Calculations and Sheet S2.0 do not show the same footing callouts, as well as some Callouts for the Columns are not the same when the two drawings are compared. • 18. Sheet S1.4: Please coordinate the Shear Wall Schedule with the structural calculations so the information is consistent throughout the construction documents. IBC 107.2.7 For example, Shear Wall 3 is shown on the foundation plan; however, SW3 could not be found in the structural calculations. This comment remains and is restated Additionally, the Key Plan on page 55 of the Calculations and Sheet S2.0 do not show the same Shear Walls, Notable SW3 NEW COMMENT FROM THIRD REVIEW: Calculations page 75 shows C2 as HSS6x6x3/16, with the Column Schedule Sheet S1.4 showing W 6 X 25. Please review the Structural Calculations and the construction to ensure they are consistent, and both show the same information. IBC 107.2.1 NEW COMMENT FROM THIRD REVIEW: Both the Architect and the Structural Engineer submitted Special Inspection Certificates with different information on each. I have approved the form submitted by the Structural Engineer as it appeared to match the required special inspections. The special inspection for the membrane over the wood deck was not included as yet. Please contact me if you have any questions about these comments. Mark Masek Plans Examiner – Building Safety Planning and Development Services | City of Tucson main 520.837.4994 email mark.masek@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 12/12/2024 | PDSD Application Completeness | REVIEW COMPLETED |