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.1
Permit Number - TC-COM-1124-02168
Review Name: COMMERCIAL REVIEW - FULL v.1
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12/10/2024 | Water - PDSD | APPROVED | |||
| 12/10/2024 | Bldg Permits - Post Review Express | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 12/02/2024 | External Reviewers - SAFEBuilt | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Structural(S) Reviewer Madeline Nelson mnelson@safebuilt.com Denied Reason: Date Completed : 11/29/2024 7:16:56 PM 1. UPDATES: For project updates, please submit sheets with all changes clearly marked in revision clouds. Please provide a written response to each comment; updates without a clear response to all comments may not be reviewed. If you have any questions regarding the comments, you may contact me directly. Updates may result in additional comments. 2. GENERAL - SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA: The Seismic Design Category indicated on the structural calculation package, Page 1 of 55, does not match the structural general notes on Sheet S1.0. Please confirm if the structure has been designed for loads consistent with Seismic Design Category "B" per S1.0 or Category "D" per the structural calculation package. 3. GENERAL - LATERAL DESIGN, CABLE BRACES: Based on Plan Note 7 on Sheet S2.0 and Notes 2 & 3 on Sheet S2.1, the lateral design against wind in the north-south direction and the roof diaphragm design rely on cable braces that have thus far not been specified. Please provide, at minimum, a size of these braces and a location for where they shall be attached to each column element. (Detail 205 does not specify the connection's location relative to the roof diaphragm or foundation.) Calculations will be required to confirm the forces being resisted by the cables, as well as checking the cables for tensile forces. Lastly, please confirm that the anchor bolts at all "braced frames" have been design for uplift of these cables. 4. S3.0 - FOUNDATION DESIGN: The typical foundation detail provided on S3.0 appear to conflict with information provided elsewhere in the construction set. Please confirm the design at the following locations and revise to show consistent information: i. Details 103, 104 & 105 indicate that the depth of the exterior grade beams ("concrete turndowns") shall be dictated by the footing schedule on Sheet S1.5. This schedule calls for a 12" deep continuous foundations. However, the geotechnical engineer specifies that in order to achieve a soil bearing capacity of 2,000 psf, foundations must bear a minimum of 1'-6" below adjacent finished grade. Refer to the general notes, "Foundations", Note 1 on Sheet S1.0. Please either revise the foundations to match the recommendations of the geotechnical report, or revise the structural general notes to reflect the reduced capacity for shallower foundations. ii. Details 103, 104 & 105 also call out continuous, longitudinal reinforcement that conflicts with the reinforcement called out in the Foundation Schedule on Sheet S1.5. Please confirm which sheet controls and resubmit. iii. Detail 102 does not show hairpin rebar (ie. "drag elements") at the building moment frame columns. It is therefore assumed that the slab-on-grade is not being relied upon to stabilize the columns and that the building relies on soil passive pressure acting on the spread footing to stabilize the foundation. Please confirm this is acceptable at the maximum shear reaction (12 kips per structural calculation package Page 40 of 55), and revise the structural general notes to state the maximum soil passive pressure assumed in the foundation design. 5. S4.0 - NEW OPENING AT EXISTING MASONRY WALL: Details 208 & 209 show a new structural steel lintel installed in an existing masonry wall. The maximum opening size is 12'-0" and the proposed lintel is a 1/4" thick bent plate (8" x 7 1/2" x Continuous). Please provide calculations to support this member size over the proposed span. Note: In both details, the lintel appears to be fastened to the existing wall with epoxied anchors (not specified, See Detail 208, Note 4). If anchors are recommended to provide stability, please provide a minimum size and spacing. 6. S4.0 - PIPE SUPPORTS: Details 210 & 211 show new supports for pipes or electrical conduit to be installed by others. It is understood that the Unistrut elements are being specified by the contractor/MEP engineer. However, Detail 211 is calling out structural support via 8" light gauge channels that do not appear on plan or in the structural elevations. Please specify a member size for these elements and provide all connection information at wind girts/roof elements/foundations as required. 7. S4.1 - PIPE SUPPORTS: Detail 217 shows additional supports for pipes or conduit to be installed by others. For this application, supports are free-standing, and therefore must be designed by an engineer for all design loads, including lateral stability under wind/seismic events. Please provide member sizes, base plates, anchor bolts and connections as required for gravity and lateral stability at free-standing pipe supports. 8. GENERAL - HIGH PILE STORAGE RACKS: The Architectural Renderings on Sheet A0.1 indicate the installation of high pile storage racks (appearing to exceed 8'-0" in height). In accordance with Section 2209 of the 2018 IBC, design of cantilevered steel storage racks must be completed in accordance with RMI ANSI/MH 16.3 and construction documents are required to be prepared by a professional engineer and submitted for review. The design drawings shall indicate how the racks are anchored to the building foundation and the configuration of each rack selected by the owner or owner’s representative. The submittal shall include a representative detail of the rack placard required by RMI/ANSI MH 16.1. 9. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS, BASE PLATE DESIGN: Please refer to the base plate calculations provided on Page 51 of 55 of the calculations package. The bolt layout shown in the calculations does not match the structural Detail 14 on Sheet S1.4. Placing the bolts so close to the flanges, as opposed to 4" o.c. per the detail reduces the moment arm applied to the base plate, should the column be subject to uplift forces. The calculations are therefore unconservative. Please revise them to show the correct bolt layout and include the effects of wind load, similar to the anchor bolt checks. Building(B) Reviewer Andrew Bevis abevis@safebuilt.com Approved Reason: Date Completed : 11/25/2024 4:41:15 PM Mechanical(M) Reviewer Jorge Valido jvalido@safebuilt.com Denied Reason: Date Completed : 11/25/2024 2:37:29 PM 1. General - Provide Heat Load Calculations. Show all ventilation Cooling and Heating loads. - 2023 FBC 8th Edition Energy Conservation Code Section C403.2.1 Calculation of heating and cooling loads. Electrical(E) Reviewer Ron Ross rross@safebuilt.com Approved Reason: Date Completed : 11/25/2024 10:30:44 AM Plumbing(P) Reviewer Perry Hendershott phendershott@safebuilt.com Denied Reason: Date Completed : 11/17/2024 4:19:57 PM First Plumbing Review: 1). Plan Page A1.2: Missing Gutter & downspout sizing calculations. Add Gutter & downspout sizing calculations.-2018 IPC 1106.3, 1106.6 2). General: Missing route illustrations and distance to restrooms & High/Low drinking fountain that services this Building. Add the route illustrations and distance to restrooms & High/Low drinking fountain that services this Building.-2018 IPC 403.3.1, 403.3.3, 403.5 3). General: Plans missing fixture count totals for all correlated spaces. Add fixture count totals for all correlated spaces. - 2018 IPC 403.1 4). Plan Pages M5.3 & M6.1: Lift station Details missing shut off valve & check Valve. Add shut off valve & check Valve to lift station Detail. -2018 IPC 712.2 5). Mechanical Plans: Missing Acid Neutralizing device detail & location. Add Acid Neutralizing device detail & location. -IPC 2018 803.1, 803.2 6). Plan Page M2.3: Hose bib missing Shut off valve. Add Shut off valve on hose bib piping. -2018 IPC 606.2 |
||
| 11/26/2024 | Site Engineering | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | 1. The associated development package TD-DEV-0924-00253 must be approved before this building permit can be approved. Mike Ortiz michael.ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 12/06/2024 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: TC-COM-1124-02168 - TD-DEV-0924-00253 3350 E VALENCIA RD. – I-1 Open Lab Area (Warehouse) (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 6, 2024 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 I-1 zone (UDC 4.7.29). Research and Product Development is an allowed use in the zone (UDC Table 4.8-5), subject to Use Specific Standard 4.9.13.Q. 1. Zoning has reviewed the building plans for compliance with Development Package (DP) TD-DEV-0924-00253 and although it appears the plans are consistent with each other until the DP is approved by all review agencies Zoning cannot approve this building permit. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Zone1.desk@tucsonaz.gov. |
||
| 11/29/2024 | Fire New Construction | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 11/13/2024 | PDSD Application Completeness Express | REVIEW COMPLETED |