Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: T02CM05355
Parcel: 116182240

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: COMMERCIAL NEW

Permit Number - T02CM05355
Review Name: COMMERCIAL NEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/03/2003 RAUL PALMA BUILDING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied City of Tucson, Development Services
BUILDING AND STRUCTURAL COMMENTS

1) Hood and Shaft---draw a detail to scale and show all dimensions.
See sheet 12 of plans.
2) Deepen the footing to existing footing level and attach with epoxy
at 24" o. c.
3) Sheet 6, detail 3---What is referance no. 10 refer to?
01/06/2003 GERRY KOZIOL WWM REVIEW Approved
01/14/2003 TRINI VALENCIA MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1.Provide energy calculations complying with commercial building application.
2. Hood system shown on sheet 6 and 12 conflict. Please clarify.
3. Grease hood shall have a smooth surface, clean-outs and sloped in accordance with section 506 of the IMC. Revise plans
4. Provide outside air calculations for proposed addition.
5. Indicate method and size of combustion air for proposed hot water heater.
01/14/2003 TRINI VALENCIA PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Indicate supplying gas pressure and pipe lengths for proposed gas system.
2. Provide water pipe sizes, lengths, and line loss calculations.
3. The water heater is to have an approved listed expansion device. Revise plans to reflect the required device.
4. Indicate a trap-priming device is to be used on proposed floor drains. Reference section 1007.0 UPC/ State Plumbing Code.
5. Grease Trap to be sized in accordance with Table 10-2 UPC/SPC.
6. Gas piping to be wrapped with 2 layer of 20-mil tape, not one layer of 10 mil as specified. Section 1211.7 UPC
7. Three compartment sink to be indirectly drained. Revise plans. Reference section 801.2 UPC
01/14/2003 MARTIN HAEBERLE WATER REVIEW Approved
02/06/2003 DOUG WILLIAMS FLOODPLAIN REVIEW Denied
11/27/2002 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Denied Zoning will approve the building plan after building plans have been approved by the commercial revuiewrs. The site plan must be approved prior to approval of the building plans.
12/17/2002 LINDA BUCZYNSKI ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied TRANSMIT ORIGINAL DRAWINGS WITH NEXT SUBMITTAL.

The Code of the Sate Board of Technical Registration ARTICLE 3. REGULATORY PROVISIONS. 32-143 Exceptions, states:
A registrant under this chapter may engage in practice in another category regulated pursuant to this chapter only to the extent that the person is qualified and to the extent that the work may be necessary and incidental to the work of the registrant's profession on a specific project. This exception does not apply to public works projects.

Based upon my review and in accordance with the State Board of Technical Registration Rules, this plan should be designed and sealed by an Arizona registered professional electrical engineer.


1. Change the wording by the existing riser diagram from "< AFC" to "> AFC".
2. Submit lighting fixture schedule and fixture cut sheets.
3. Note that Panel A feeds Subpanel B. Thus, on the Subpanel A schedule, the description for the 2-P CB needs to be changed from "Conn to Subpanel A" to "Conn to Subpanel B."
4. In all cases, identify the panel as well as the circuit number. For example, SF-1 is shown on the Electrical Plan as being on Circuit 12, but the panel is not specified. Should read "A-12." Comment is typical, please recheck all work.
5. In all cases, recheck the panel as well as the circuit number. For example, patio receptacles are shown on the Electrical Plan as being on Panel A, but they are on panel B. Fountain receptacle is on B-5, not A-1. Comment is typical, please recheck all work.
6. EC pump shall take a fused receptacle. Show interlock of exhaust with supply clearly on diagram. Coolers shall have combination disconnect/starters. Can not have two switched unless double pole. See NEC 430-74.
7. Clarify which equipment is new and which is existing. SF-1 is shown as new on Electrical Plan but new on panel schedule. Comment is typical, please recheck all work.
8. Receptacle to feed fountain is questionable. Check to verify if this is the intent.
9. Panel schedules are shown as 120/208 volts. Incorrect for a 240 volt service. TEP does not do 208 single phase.
10. Arrowhead on existing electrical riser diagram points to the grounding system with a note containing this wording: "Underground service per power company specs". The grounding system is not a service. The conduit coming from the top of Panel A appears to indicate an overhead service, not underground. Clarify. And note that unless the existing service is overhead, one may not install a new overhead service. There is no NEC 250-81,83.
11. Note on service conductors "3 #3/10". Do you mean "3 3/0"?
12. Why (2) 200 A meters. Only one service to a building unless permitted under NEC 230-2 (a) through (d).
13. Note on
14. Note on service with "20/240 volts". Do you mean "120/240?". Note points to the wrong compartment. This work shall not take place in TEP enclosure.
15. Conduit to Panel B with wording "(AL), but conductors are not aluminum in next line: "2 # 1/0 CU". Please clarify.
12/24/2002 JIM EGAN FIRE REVIEW Approved

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
02/10/2003 TAMI ACHONG OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed