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: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - DP21-0189
Review Name: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/04/2022 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Installing a backwater valve as you propose by the building and upstream of a grease interceptor is not advisable. First, the grease-laden effluent will cause fouling of the backwater valve resulting in frequent maintenance issues, including possible failure of the valve to prevent sewer back-ups into the building. Second, the proposed location of the backwater valve will not protect the drain at the trash enclosure. Positioning the backwater valve downstream of the grease interceptor will avoid these problems. [Initial comment: The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (2472.87) is less than 12" below the first floor elevation (2473.00). Provide a backwater valve per Section 714.1, IPC 2018, as amended by the City of Tucson.] [Initial comment: Provide the rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole. Determine the need for a backwater valve per Section 714.1, IPC 2018, as amended by the City of Tucson.] 2. The purpose of the pipe length limitations of Section C404.5, IECC 2018 is to limit the volume of cold water that has to be displaced before hot water reaches the hot water outlet. Table C404.5.1, IECC 2018 limits a 2" pipe to a maximum of four-feet from the hot water source to the termination of the hot water supply pipe. A ½" pipe, on the other hand, has a maximum length of 43-feet from the hot water source to the termination of the hot water supply pipe. [Initial comment: Keynote #5 calls out, "1-inch each hot and cold water connection" to the trash enclosure and the plan shows a pipe length of 33-feet. The distance noted in Table C404.5.1, IECC 2018, is measured from the hot water source to the appliance. For a 1-inch pipe, the maximum distance is 13-feet.] [Initial comment: Explain how the hot water service to the trash enclosure will comply with Section C404.5, IECC 2018.] 3. The purpose of the pipe length limitations of Section C404.5, IECC 2018 is to limit the volume of cold water that has to be displaced before hot water reaches the hot water outlet. Table C404.5.1, IECC 2018 limits a 2" pipe to a maximum of four-feet from the hot water source to the termination of the hot water supply pipe. A ½" pipe, on the other hand, has a maximum length of 43-feet from the hot water source to the termination of the hot water supply pipe. [Initial comment: The hot water supply to the hand washing station near the south order board needs to comply with the distance requirement of Table C404.5.1, IECC 2018.] [Initial comment: Clarify what appears to be 1-inch hot and cold water supplies (C15, domestic water note #5) to the south order board. Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 2018.] |
| 01/06/2022 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Email from: COTDSDPermits To: Heather Roberts Thu 1/6/2022 3:38 PM REVIEW NOTICE Returned for Corrections: DP21-0189 DESCRIPTION: Site/Grading - Raising Canes Chicken Fingers restaurant with double drive-thru. 1800 W VALENCIA RD Fee Balance: $0 (zero) Thank you for the payment. YOUR NEXT STEPS 1. SEE REVIEW COMMENTS and documents on PRO: www.tucsonaz.gov/pro (If information is not available, check back later after data transfers to PRO.) - Home page, Activity Search, enter the Activity/Permit Number - Permits - click on blue tab to see different sections - Reviews section - click on REVIEW DETAILS - Documents section - click on VIEW 2. UPLOAD A RESUBMITTAL and include: 1) Comment Response Letter (your response to REQUIRES CHANGE comments) 2) Plan Set (all pages, full set, even if no changes were made) 3) Any other documents requested by review staff Please title your FOURTH submittal documents according to this example: 4_Comment Response Letter FILEDROP for your Resubmittal https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp - Select "Existing Application" - In the "Permit Number" field, enter the number and, if applicable, any notes for our staff Thank you. Sharon Beasley, Building Permit Specialist City of Tucson, Planning and Development Services Email: COTDSDpermits@TucsonAz.gov (disregard the email response that will be sent automatically) |
| 01/06/2022 | SBEASLE1 | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Reqs Change | Email from: David.Stiffey@TucsonAz.gov To: CDRC Thu 1/6/2022 2:27 PM Please correct the Sight Visibility Triangle "dimensions" sheet C05. Sight Visibility Triangle dimensions are incorrect. Per the COT Technical Manual 10-01.5.3 and "Figure 16- page 251" When there is a raised median in the arterial street, the "Near side" SVT is to be 20’ X 345’ and the far side is the "Pedestrian triangle" 20’ X 30" David Stiffey City of Tucson Transportation and Mobility |
| 11/26/2021 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 12/23/2021 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Approved |