Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
Review Details: COMMERCIAL REVIEW - FULL v.3
Permit Number - TC-COM-1224-02394
Review Name: COMMERCIAL REVIEW - FULL v.3
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/16/2025 | Bldg Permits - Post Review Express | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 04/15/2025 | Commercial Building | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | A0.0 – Alternates identity a concrete mezzanine level above the hall and service area. Clearly define the scope of work per 2018 IBC section 107.2.1. The building data shows this as a two-story building, which contradicts the mezzanine. Mezzanine must comply with 2018 IBC section 505. Show the area limitation calculation per 2018 IBC section 505.2.1. Show mezzanine openness compliance per 2018 IBC section 505.2.3. A0.0 alternates regarding the mezzanine level area still shown. Although noted as “not approved,” this can be misleading. (Closed) The building sections of the mezzanine are missing. A0.0 alternates regarding the mezzanine level are still shown. Although noted as “not approved,” this can be misleading. (2018 IBC section 107.2.1) (Closed) A0.1 – Overhead hazard clearance and protection are shown but not provided at the mezzanine stairs. A0.0 alternates regarding the mezzanine level are still shown. Although noted as “not approved,” this can be misleading. (Closed) A protruding object is shown, but protection is not provided for drinking fountains. The designer’s response is missing. It is typical to respond to all comments. (Closed) The structural stair details for the mezzanine are missing. A0.0 alternates regarding the mezzanine level are still shown. Although noted as “not approved,” this can be misleading (2018 IBC section 107.2.1. (Closed) The minimum width or required capacity of the means of egress from any story of the building shall not be reduced along the path of egress travel until arrival at the public way per 2018 IBC section 1005.4. However, a single exit door is shown at grid D/1, reduce after a double door at storage room 117. The designer’s response is missing. (Closed) Show the size and distribution of the portable fire extinguisher per 2018 IBC section 906.3. Note F indicates a maximum travel distance of 75 feet to a fire extinguisher, but they seem further apart. Show a 75-foot radius line to verify the travel distance. (Closed) Show the distribution of existing occupants at multiple exits per 2018 IBC section 1005.5. “Where more than one exit, or access to more than one exit, is required, the means of egress shall be configured such that the loss of any one exit, or access to one exit, shall not reduce the available capacity or width to less than 50 percent of the required capacity or width.” The loss of the 6’0” door at grid 5/D reduces more than 50 percent of the required total capacity. (Closed) Show the required and provided common path of travel distances. The required common path of travel distance (feet) for A3 occupancy is still missing. The common path of travel is the portion of exit access travel distance measure from the most remote point of each room, area, or space to the point where occupants have separate and distinct access to two exits or exit access doorways (2018 IBC Chapter 2). This is not the same as the furthest travel distance to an exit. (Closed) Show the required and provided plumbing fixture calculations per 2018 IBC section 2902 for men and women separately, including water closets, lavatories, drinking fountains, and service sinks. A0.0 building data classifies the occupancy as B – office, but the primary use is calculated as A-3. The business occupancy use is 1 per 25 for the first 50 occupants and 1 per 50 for the remainder exceeding 50, according to the 2018 IBC table 2901.1. The service sink is still missing. A2.0 does not show a service sink in laundry room 118, but the plumbing plan does. Fix the discrepancy. (Closed) A2.0 and A0.0 – Show the occupancy of the adjacent space for adequate fire protection. The 2018 IBC table 508.4 shows and provided fire protection along grid A is still missing. (Closed) M-03 – Show roof equipment per 2018 IMC section 306.1. The access method for building inspectors and/or maintenance is still missing. (Closed) NEW COMMENTS: 1. Sheet A0.0 / Sheet Index / Incomplete drawing set was provided: Sheet index lists 29 pages but only 12 pages were provided. Please resubmit complete construction drawing set. 2. Sheet A0.0 / Building Data / Outdated applicable building code applied: 2024 International Fire Code City of Tucson amendment is used not 2018 IFC. Please provide updated applicable codes. 3. Sheet A2.0 / Note 19 Fire barrier wall / Wall type detail missing: Please provide specified 1 hour fire rated wall as prescribed in 2018 IBC Table 508.4. RESUBMITTAL DIRECTIONS: • All corrections must be clouded, delta numbered, with a brief explanation within the plan sheet or the title block of the sheet. For corrections or revision to whole plan sheets, you need only cloud the sheet number and provide the delta identification number, with a brief explanation of the change(s). • As part of the resubmittal, please collate all revised sheets into the electronic document (PDF) and submit a complete and full plan set. We cannot accept individual sheets in response to review comments, since the entire plan set is required for approval and permitting. • Please include with the resubmittal a separate response narrative, which is numbered or itemized to correspond to each of the noted plan review comments items. • This response narrative must clearly address how each issue was corrected or resolved and indicate where the information may be found within the construction documents. The response narrative must be typewritten, on letterhead noting the project name, with the Permit Application Number. Failure to provide this response narrative may result in review delays or rejection of the resubmittal. • Once all electronic construction documents (plan sheets, energy compliance certificates, reports, calculations, etc.) have been revised according to the above directions. Please resubmit the complete revised plan set with a separate copy of response narrative PDF through the municipality to complete the review. • Review of revised construction documents in response to this letter may take upwards of 5 (five) business days, depending on the size of the project and the volume of plans in queue at time of resubmittal. |
||
| 04/16/2025 | Fire New Construction | REVIEW COMPLETED | The project shall comply with all Building safety Requirements. | ||
| 04/03/2025 | PDSD Application Completeness Express | REVIEW COMPLETED |