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 - T05CM01570
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/14/2005 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. The energy calculations have inadequate data for review. Provide complete documentation to demonstrate that the buildings comply with the requirements of Section 101.3, IECC 2000. Reference Sections 102.1 and 104.2, IECC 2000. 2. The submitted ventilation calculations do not appear to correlate with the project submitted. The calculations do not address the beauty shop, laundry room, kitchen, library, craft room, or the lobby. There are eleven air handling units serving very different occupancies but this is not evident from the calculations or the air unit schedule. Reference Sections 403.3 and 403.3.2, IMC 2000. 3. The presence of a backdraft damper on a restroom exhaust fan is not an issue. If the exhaust fans for the public restrooms operate intermittently, the air from the air conditioning systems will be recirculated in the building. 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. The installation of a range in the kitchen (room 118) necessitates the installation of a Type I Hood. Reference Section 507.2.2 IMC 2000. 5. Comment not addressed for the area separations and other fire partitions. Show the locations of fire dampers for protection of ducts and penetrations of fire resistive walls. Reference Section 607, IMC. 6. Provide independent ventilation or an independent air conditioning system for the elevator machine rooms. Reference Section 3006, IBC 2003. |
| 09/16/2005 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. The submitted water pressure calculations do not include the pressure drops for the water meter or the reduced pressure backflow preventer. Calculate the water demand using the fixture units shown in Tables 6-3 or A-2. Limit the water velocity in copper pipe to no more than 8 feet per second. Reference Section 610.3 and Appendix A, UPC 1994 and IAPMO IS 3-93. 2. The sizing information provided for the thermal expansion tank does not correspond to the situation depicted in the drawings. The chart does not accommodate two 120-gallon water heaters and is designed for only a 50-degree Fahrenheit temperature rise. Reference Section 608.3, UPC 1994 with AZ State amendments. 3. Limit the trap arm lengths per Table 10-1, UPC 1994. (e.g. the 4" trap arm in room 132 and the 2" trap arm in room 125). Reference Section 910.1, UPC 1994. 4. Coordinate the sizes of the floor drains shown in detail R1/P3 with the plumbing floor plan. 5. Show that the "hub drains" noted on sheet P-3 and detail 3/P1 comply with Sections 410.1 and 804.1, UPC 1994 (i.e. the 3" x2" reducer may not be located in the floor). 6. The hub drain on the second floor in detail R4/P3 is shown as draining into the trap arm of the hub drain on the first floor. Please revise. Reference Section 908.1, UPC 1994. |
| 09/22/2005 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/27/2005 | 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. |
| 10/03/2005 | RAUL PALMA | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | |
| 10/07/2005 | LINDA BUCZYNSKI | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | TRANSMIT ORIGINAL DRAWINGS WITH NEXT SUBMITTAL. PLEASE CALL AT 791-5550 X1106 OR EMAIL AT Linda.Buczynski@tucsonaz.gov IF YOU CARE TO DISCUSS. 1. On Title Sheet, please change the wording "2000 NEC" to read "2002 NEC." 2. Minimum font size is 1/8". Enlarge as necessary. 3. Panel Schedule MDP is set up to include Meter Centers #1, #2, and #3. According to the Electrical Riser Diagram, The disconnects for these Meter Centers are powered as separate service disconnects by the TEP transformer. Please clarify, and address any other review comments below which may apply. 4. Provide a separate branch circuit for the Elevator Equipment Room lighting and receptacles. Reference NEC 620.23 (A). 5. Provide a separate branch circuit for the Elevator car lights and other loads per NEC 620.22 (A), with OCPD(s) located in Elevator Equipment Room, or justify otherwise. Disconnect per 620.53. 6. Provide a separate branch circuit for the hoistway pit lighting and receptacles. Reference NEC 620.24. 7. All 3 phases of Panel P1, Section 2, exceed its 225A capacity. 8. Phase B of Panel C1 exceeds its 225A capacity. 9. Please explain demand factors used in panel load calculations, which also transfer to Electrical Load Summary. 10. Conduit and conductor specifications on Electrical Load Summary are not consistent with those on the Electrical Riser Diagram, and a third instruction is specified on the First Floor Electrical Power Plan. 11. Table 220.32 allows its demand factors only to be applied to loads calculated according to the other provisions of 220.32 itself, not the already "discounted" loads allowed in 220.30. Additionally, for the purpose of this calculation, it appears that the appropriate load to satisfy 220.32 (c) (5) is 6800 VA for the AHU on Ckt 10,12. 12. For Main #1, size the Grounding Electrode Conductor. Since Main #1 serves as the Service Disconnect, this is where the Main Bonding Jumper shall be located. NEC 250.24 (B), 250.28. Same for Mains #2 & #3. 13. Show the location of Main #1 on the plans. Same for Mains #2 & #3. 14. Elevation of Main Distribution Panel depicts it next to Meter Center #1. Plans show Meter Center #2 to be next to MDP. Please clarify. 15. Main #3 is indicated twice on Electrical Riser Diagram, once as the disconnect to Meter Center #3, and again as the disconnect to MDP. Please clarify. The 600A Main #3 is on the line side of the 1200A Main #4. Please clarify. According to load calculations for MDP high phase is 4526A; both 1200A and 600A appear to be undersized. (2) (1000 MCM) would have ampacity of (2) (545) = 1090A < 4526. 16. Since the intent is to bring more than one service to this building, provide specific wording on the plans for the placards required by NEC 230.2 (E). 17. Contact Tucson Electric Power Company for the available fault current at the service transformer. 18. Plot the location of the TEP transformer on the scaled Power Plan. 19. Provide Available Fault Current(s) at all relevant points of the system. Show fault calculations as applicable. 20. On Panel C1, Ckts 19,21 and 27,29 have the same VA count, for ACUs of notably different capacity. Please clarify and correct, for these circuits, and all others which apply. 21. Demonstrate compliance with the Tucson Lighting Code, http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Codes___Ordinances/Tucson_Lighting_Code.pdf. 22. On Sheet E4, correct "C1(73,75)" to read: "P1(73,75)". 23. On Sheet E4, please indicate P1(18,20) for EWH-1. 24. On Sheet E-7, specify the grounding of the telephone system per NEC 800.40. 25. Add Fixture G to the Lighting Fixture Schedule. This fixture is being utilized on Sheet E-3. 26. Fill in the electrical load on the panel schedule for Ckt M-18. 27. Provide Lighting Fixture Cut Sheets for Fixtures EE, L and CC. Note that Per 2000 IECC, 805.5, any exterior fixture shall have a source efficacy of at least 45 lumens per watt. |
| 10/24/2005 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | . |
| 10/24/2005 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | TO: Tom Meehan SUBJECT: Placita Del Rio (S04-038) Site Plan Re-submittal Engineering Review REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach ACTIVITY NUMBER: T05CM01570 SUMMARY: The resubmittal package with the revised grading plan sheets and the revised drainage report including the revised spillway design were received by Engineering. Development Services Department Engineering Division has completed the review and recommends approval. Call me at 791-5550, extension 2204 if you have any questions. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Development Services |