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: COMMERCIAL NEW
Permit Number - T05CM01570
Review Name: COMMERCIAL NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/18/2005 | JIM EGAN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 05/26/2005 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Terry Stevens FOR: David Rivera Lead Planner Principal Planner PROJECT:T05CM01570 4654 S 16th Av Apartments Site Plan/Building Plan/Handicap Site Transmittal date: 1st Review 5/26/05 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with redlines and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. Zoning has reviewed the building plans but cannot approve them at this time. Zoning will re-review the building plans on the next submittal providing the stamped and approved Tentative Plat / Development Plan is included with the building package. 2. The maximum building height is 25' as per LUC Sec. 3.2.3.1.F in a R2(RCP6) zone. As per LUC Sec. 3.2.7.2.A the vertical distance is measured from design grade elevation to the middle of the highest gable of a pitched or hip roof. Using detail 0.4/A6.2R and a 6" measurement from grade to finished floor, the distance from grade to the midpoint of the gable is 26'-11"which exceeds the maximum allowable height. Revise all elevations, cross sections, details etc. to meet the required max. 25' height. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 791-5608 ext. 2000. |
| 06/01/2005 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. The total flow for the private sewage collection system for this project is in excess of 3000 gallons per day. The design for the system must be submitted to the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality for their approval prior to obtaining a permit for constructing the sewage collection system from the City of Tucson. Reference A. R. S. 49-104 (B) (13). 2. City of Tucson Ordinance 1802 requires a reduced pressure backflow preventer assembly to be located immediately after the water meter, with no additional intermediate valves. In addition, a water shut off valve is required for each building entrance (refer to Section 605.3, UPC 1994). Show how the proposed design addresses these two issues. 3. Provide water pressure and water pipe sizing calculations. Include the pressure drops for special equipment (e.g. mixing valves) in the calculations. Reference Appendix A, UPC 1994. 4. Provide the sizing calculations for the thermal expansion tank and show the tank size on the drawing. Reference Section 608.3, UPC 1994 with AZ State amendments. 5. Coordinate the fixture symbols shown in the plumbing fixture schedule on sheet P-5 with the fixture descriptions and with the plumbing plans. (e.g. see SS-1, SK-3, FD-1) Reference Section 103.2.3, UPC 1994. 6. Coordinate the apartment descriptions shown on sheets P-1 and P-2 with the enlarged plans shown on sheets P-3 and P-4. 7. Show how the floor drain, FD-1, is capable of accepting the discharge of a temperature and pressure relief valve without splashing or flooding. Reference Section 804.1, UPC 1994. 8. Provide justification for the use of a combination waste and vent system in room 132 (Maintenance). Reference Section 910.1, UPC 1994. 9. Show that the combination waste and vent system in room 132 has been designed in accordance with the requirements of Section 910.0, UPC 1994. 10. Coordinate the sizes of the floor drains shown in detail R1/P3 with the plumbing floor plan. 11. Show that the "hub drains" noted on sheet P-3 and detail 3/P1 comply with Sections 410.1 and 804.1, UPC 1994. 12. Coordinate the labels used for the details shown on sheet P-3 (e.g. R2/P3) 13. Wet vents cannot be used for fixtures located on different stories (see detail R4/P3). Reference Section 908.1, UPC 1994. 14. The drain from an elevator sump may not be connected to the sanitary sewer system. Reference Section 306.1, UPC 1994; contact Pima County Industrial Wastewater Control at (520) 579-5771 for guidance. 15. Provide upper terminal cleanouts on horizontal drainage pipes exceeding 5 feet in length (horizontal drain lines serving sinks require cleanouts regardless of length). Reference Section 707.4, UPC 1994, as amended by the State of Arizona. 16. Provide listing information for the two-way cleanout fitting shown in detail 9/P5. Reference Sections 301.1.1 and 707.4 (4), UPC 1994. 17. Provide water supply isometrics. Reference Section 103.2.3, UPC 1994. |
| 06/01/2005 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/03/2005 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Revise the energy code calculations for the actual project area, Pima County, < 4000 feet elevation. 2. Provide calculations demonstrating adequate ventilation. Reference Section 401, IMC 2000. 3. Provide information on the sequence of operation for the restroom exhaust to show that recirculation of the air from the public restrooms will not occur. Reference Section 403.2.1, IMC 2000. 4. A Type I or Type II Hood, depending on the type of cooking appliance, is required in the kitchen (room 118). Reference Section 507.2.2 IMC 2000. 5. Show the locations of fire dampers for protection of ducts and penetrations of fire resistive walls. Reference Section 607, IMC. |
| 06/07/2005 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Denied | cannot drain elevator pit to sewer. needs to permit on-site private sewer. needs DEQ review/approval of on site private sewer. |
| 06/09/2005 | LINDA BUCZYNSKI | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | Plans shall be designed, sealed, signed and dated by an Engineer registered in the State of Arizona, see 302.2.1 4 (4) in the City of Tucson Amendments to the Uniform Administrative Code, http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Codes___Ordinances/Building_Codes/1997_Administrative_Amendments.pdf. |
| 06/20/2005 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Tom Herlihy SUBJECT: Placita Del Rio (S04-038) Site Plan Submittal Engineering Review REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach ACTIVITY NUMBER: T05CM01570 SUMMARY: The Site Plan, a copy of the Tentative Plat, and other documents were received by Engineering. Development Services Department Engineering Division has completed the review of the Site Plan and does not recommend approval at this time, due to outstanding Tentative Plat conditions of approval as well as the revised spillway design. Note that the following comments shall be addressed for the Site Plan as well as the Grading Plan review of the project: SITE PLAN COMMENTS: 1) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No.11-01: Further erosion protection for the basin slopes and other areas will need to be shown on the Drainage Report exhibit. 2) DS Sec.2-02.2.2.C: A revised Drainage Report is required for the spillway at the drainage outlet at the northwest corner of the project. Include calculations and discussion of the outflow and required energy dissipation and erosion protection. Assure that the correct flowrate is used for the spillway. A Drainage Construction and Maintenance Easement is needed for any proposed offsite drainage improvements, as well as a copy of the permission correspondence from Tucson Water if the construction is proposed out of the project boundaries. 3) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.J: Regarding basin requirement for rezoning condition 18, the Drainage Report shall provide details and calculations for a sediment trap or other sediment control device that has provision for total drainage. 4) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.16: The hydraulic grade line analysis for stormwater drainage pipe system was provided in the revised drainage report. The Tentative Plat shows invert elevations that do not exactly match this analysis. The data from the revised Drainage Report must be reflected in the Grading Plan review submittal and in any drainage exhibits. State whether this has been completed in response letter. 5) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C: Assure all easements as listed in the Title Report Schedule B and other documents submitted are clearly drawn and labeled on the Tentative Plat and Site Plan. Specifically include labeling the utility easement width for overhead power lines crossing south of Block B, per TEP right-of-way easement docket 6961 page 550, that was included with the prior submittal. State whether this has been completed in response letter. Submit a revised Drainage Report with any revised exhibits, discussions, and calculations, additional copies of pertinent correspondence, as well as a response letter showing that the above comments were addressed. Call me at 791-5550, extension 2204 if you would like to set up a meeting or if you have any questions. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Development Services |
| 06/22/2005 | RAUL PALMA | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | City of Tucson, Development Services BUILDING AND STRUCTURAL COMMENTS 6/21/0 1) Door no. 137 shall swing in the direction of exit. At first floor. 2) Wood framing members including wood sheathing which are less than 8" from exposed earth shall be naturally durable or preservative treated wood. 3) Sheet A4.1 and A4.2R show units identified as types A,B and E. What Do they mean? Clarify! Are you referring to accessible units? But what about the E unit? 4) Detail 0.4/FRI shows an approved roof/floor fire-rated detail with wood joists, however, the floor framing shows trusses. Therefore, either show wood joists for the floor framing or provide an approved roof/floor fire-rated detail showing trusses. 5) Sheet S-1 of the general notes specifies 2000 IBC instead of 2003 IBC. Rectify! 6) Regarding the lateral analyses design, specify as to which governs,wind or siesmic. 7) Provide a schematic diagram(road map) in calc`s showing all designed structural members including roof and floor diaphragms, and shear walls. 8) Resubmit plans for re-review. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/17/2005 | JMORALE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 08/17/2005 | ANGIE SHOFFSTALL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |