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: RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - T04CM00284
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/22/2004 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Denied | Needs WW IWC - Tom Tomchak review of photo operation 579-5771. Need 8th floor WW credit evaluation 740-6500 |
| 06/23/2004 | Robert Sherry | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Comment not addressed. Provide structural calculations and details to show that the exhaust hoods are supported in accordance with Section 507.6, IMC 2000. SHOW HOW THE HOOD IS TO BE SUPPORTED FROM THE BUILDING STRUCTURE. 2. Provide occupant loads based on Table 403.3, IMC 2000. Revise the total amount of outside air provided by RTU10 to account for multiple spaces being served by a common unit. Revise the outside air setpoints for RTU-1 and RTU-10 to provide the required quantities of outside air. Indicate the type of occupancy used to determine the required quantities of outside air for the mezzanine. Reference Section 403, IMC 2000. |
| 06/23/2004 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. The water pressure and water pipe sizing calculations are incomplete. Include the static lift from the water meter to the highest water outlet. Resize the water pipes as required. Note: specify the size of the water meter that is being installed. Reference Appendix A, UPC 1994. 2. Use the fixture units shown in Tables 6-3 and A-2 (1994 UPC). Reference Section 610.1, UPC 1994. 3. Comment not addressed. Provide the rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole and the first floor elevation. Determine need for backwater valve per Section 710.1, UPC 1994. THE DOCUMENTATION OF THE RELATIVE ELEVATIONS WAS NOT INCLUDED WITH THE SUBMITTED PAPERWORK. 4. The 6" building sewer was shown as having a slope of 0.5% on sheet C4 of the original submittal. No information has been provided to explain why a slope of less than ¼" is required. As shown, the combination waste and vent terminates near D.5-1, where it connects to the building drain serving the restroom area of the store. The requirement to increase the size of the drain pipes in a combination waste and vent system stops at the end of the combination waste and vent system. Revise the slope of the 6" building sewer to comply with Section 718.1, UPC 1994. Provide information to justify using a 6" building sewer rather than a 4" building sewer. 5. Provide information to show that the method used for the natural gas pipe sizing calculations complies with the intent of the Code. Reference Section 301.2.2, UPC 1994. THE APPENDIX TO GASWORKS WAS NOT INCLUDED WITH THE SUBMITTED PAPERWORK. |
| 06/29/2004 | Doug Laakso | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | .. T04CM00284 .. 3925 E GRANT ROAD .. DGL .. THIRD REVIEW COMMENTS .. .. #1 THROUGH #3 .. 7/7/04 .. (PRIOR COMMENTS DATED .. 6/2/04) .. Please resubmit two COMPLETE sets of current drawings and documentation for review and a set/s of the prior reviewed drawings and documents for reference. S1. See prior comment #S1 , readability is required for review and record of structural calculations , pages # : 69, 70 ,71, and 105 are not readable , please resolve. [ S1. See prior comment #S26, though the page numbers may have changed these corrections still need to be made, so review may be completed. ( S26. Provide readable Structural Calculations , Please make pages #8,9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 19, 20, 25, 27, 29, 31, 33, 34 and 39 readable.)] S2. See prior comment #S7 , page #106 of structural calculations indicates 666# per joist vs 400# required in note #15 on drawing #S3 at 4 adjacent joists near line E between lines 3 and 3.7 , verify and resolve. [S7. See prior comment #S34, explain transformer loading ( my understanding is each transformer weighs 1000 pounds, seeming to exceed the 400#/joist loading per Note #15 on S3, also clarify the support system from the steel joist ). ( S34. Provide calculations for support of miscellaneous equipment, including suspended electrical transformer 7/E3, canopy 6/S5.2, jib crane A4, satellite dish 5/A4.1, flagpole 15/A2.1, etc per IBC Sec 1621.)] S3. See prior comment #S8 , provide Inspection Program as required. [S8. See prior comment #S36 ,ref comment #S37,please provide Inspection Program. ( S36. Provide Inspection Program for each type of Special Inspection Required, per Uniform Administrative Code (1997), Sec 302.5. S37. Special Inspection required for : 1. Soils 2. Concrete 3. Masonry 4. Epoxy anchors 5. Expansion anchors 6. Field Welding 7. Shop welding 8. High-strength bolting 9. Seismic per 7/S0 schedule As noted.)] S4. See prior comment #S9 , the minimum splicing of existing walls to new walls at four locations where this occurs is doweling with existing size , number , and location of dowels with proper lap splice length at : 1. Top of existing wall 2. Level of existing roof 3. Intermediate bond beam/s 4. Top of stem wall 5. Footing of existing wall or equivalent structural connections fully justified by structural calculations for all applicable forces. [S9. See prior comment #S38, provide requested information.( S38. Fully detail structural connections of new construction to Existing construction at wall footings, roof to existing walls, new masonry wall to existing masonry wall at footing, stem wall, horizontal bond beams, including top of wall, roof line and intermediate.)] Please provide response letter addressing these comments. Questions? Call Douglas Laakso, Structural Plans Examiner COT- DSD, At (520) 791-5550 x 1111. |
| 07/13/2004 | Linda Buczynski | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | TRANSMIT ORIGINAL DRAWINGS WITH NEXT SUBMITTAL. PLEASE CALL AT 791-5550 X1106 OR EMAIL AT LBUCZYN1@CI.TUCSON.AZ.US IF YOU CARE TO DISCUSS. "Provide transformer weight for evaluation by Structural Plans Examiner, who may require more information on Detail 7/E3." This comment was made on the first and second submittal. This comment is not yet resolved. The Building/Structural Plans Examiner has made the following comments: "[S7. See prior comment #S34, explain transformer loading ( my understanding is each transformer weighs 1000 pounds, seeming to exceed the 400#/joist loading per Note #15 on S3, also clarify the support system from the steel joist )." "( S34. Provide calculations for support of miscellaneous equipment, including suspended electrical transformer 7/E3…" Also note the following requirement: "Please resubmit two COMPLETE sets of current drawings and documentation for review and a set/s of the prior reviewed drawings and documents for reference." When the above requirements are met, the Electrical Plans will be approved. All other previous Electrical review comments have been correctly addressed. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/14/2004 | SUE REEVES | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 07/14/2004 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |