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 - T07CM02181
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/20/2008 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Denied | 1:ALOFT TUCSON 2:NEEDS WASTEWATER 8TH FLOOR CREDIT EVALUATION-YVONNE @740-6500 3:NEEDS WASTEWATER/IWC REVIEW (GREASE INTERCEPTOR/GARAGE DRAINS, ETC) TOM TOMCHAK @ 579-5771 4:NEEDS WASTEWATER DESIGN REVIEW OF EJECTOR SYSTEMS- TERRY CURLEY 740-8207 |
| 02/26/2008 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | In the clouded section of MFP 100 a double check valve is shown. A single check should be good for this installation. In the clouded section of E 401 A a Type 1 hood alarm is shown; there is no Type 1 hood on the mechanical. Separate permits will be requires for the alarm and fire sprinklers. |
| 03/04/2008 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Needs Review | |
| 03/04/2008 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/04/2008 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Needs Review | |
| 03/12/2008 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: T07CM02181 Building Plan (4th Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 12, 2008 1.The building plan has been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until it has been approved by the all DSD Sections and until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 2.The lot combo for the existing three (3) parcels must be completed prior to approval of the building plan. Provide copies of the approved Pima County Combo Request and the recorded Covenant Regarding Development and Use of Real Property with the next submittal. 3.Provide a copy of the stamped and approved site plan. Zoning will re-review the building plan on the next submittal to insure compliance with the approved and stamped site plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\grading\t07cm02181-4th.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents |
| 03/13/2008 | 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. Mechanical Engineer has clarified circuit requirements MCA and MOCP, for AC units. THIS COMPLIES WITH COMMENT MADE ON THE REVIEWS OF 6/6/07 1/10/08. Provide conductor size for AC-2 and AC-5. Reference Sheet E-101M. 2. Please supply coordination study and/or other information as necessary to demonstrate compliance with NEC 620.62. COMMENT MADE ON REVIEW OF 1/10/08 AND DISCUSSED IN THE MEETING OF 2/20/08. It is noted that 2 separate feeders go directly to each disconnecting means, but the feeder to Panel EM-B is a single feeder which supplies both disconnecting means, albeit not directly. So each disconnecting means overcurrent protective device would have to be coordinated with the main to Panel EM-B and the 400A CB in Panel MDP-1. Following the same reasoning with the path to the generator, the disconnect overcurrent protective devices concerned would be coordinated with the main to Panel EM-B, the main to Panel EM-MDP, and the Generator CB. 3. Two elevators are shown on the Riser Diagram and Panel EM-B. Circuits EM-40,42, 65, 67, 71, and 73 provide for Car Lights and HVAC for Cars 1, 2, and 3. Elevator Machine Room on Sheet E-100P has disconnects for a total of 3 elevators, and there are three elevator pits on this sheet. Please clarify. 4. Provide a detail for the pole and foundation for Fixture GG THIS COMMENT WAS MADE ON THE REVIEWS DATED 6/6/07, 10/25/07 AND 1/10/08. Did not find this on the plans. Looked on STLG sheets, site plans, structural drawings, etc. 5. Please note that annotations of 20' pole and 100W Metal Halide for Fixture GG shall be maintained on Sheet STLG-200, and all others which may apply. 6. Add Fixtures GB and GC to the calculations for the Tucson Lighting Code. This is a swimming pool fixture and a wall uplight. Reference Sheet E-101L and Comment #2 from the review of 1/10/08. 7. Fixtures GD and GC are missing from the lighting fixture schedule and lighting code calculations. 8. On the lighting code calculations, Sheet STLG-200, note that "TOTAL SHIELDED + UNSHIELDED" should be 52,676 lumens, not 18,116. 9. Fire Pump Main on the Riser Diagram has been annotated to be rated at 42K, but according to Keynote B this is rated 100K. Please clarify. 10. Building Load Summary on Riser Diagram, reference comment from previous review. Plans Examiner gets different values, like a total of 4233A for the entire facility. However, the loads appear to be more properly allocated to their respective panels, and such panel schedules have now been arranged in a manner which facilitates their evaluation on the basis of the respective disconnecting means. Electrical Plans Examiner is reasonably satisfied that MDP-1 and MDP-2 are OK. Vertical bus is OK as well with the application of NEC 2005 Code changes in 220.42 and 220.44. However, the following needs to be done: remove the Building Load Summary, and correct the connected load on the Vertical Bus to read "1374.29 KW" (not 685.00) and correct the demand load on the Vertical Bus to read "1022.27 KW" (not 618.90). 11. Provide the fault current rating of the Fire Pump ATS and Fire Pump Controller. It appears that there are over 35,000A AFC at the switch. Please review the basis of the 30,000A result, and provide the rating of this cabinet and switch. PROVIDE FAULT CURRENT RATING OF THIS SWITCH. IT APPEARS THAT AFC HERE IS 36,814 BY A CONSERVATIVE METHOD, AND THIS IS AT THE 30' CITED ON THE LINE DIAGRAM, NOT THE 19' REFERENCED IN CERTAIN RESPONSES TO PREVIOUS COMMENTS. Still not resolved. No fault current rating at Fire Pump ATS and Controller. There are 45,075A available according to the note just left of them on the Riser Diagram, which is out of range according to the 37,773A calculated by the Electrical Engineer and the review comment referenced above. 12. Please provide fault current rating at ATS-EM. It appears that there is greater than 40K available at this point. COMMENT REMAINS. FAULT CURRENT RATING IS NOW PROVIDED AT TRANSFER SWITCH, BUT NOT THE RATING OF THIS SWITCH. 13. Please provide fault current rating at ATS-EM-B. It appears that there is greater than 26K available at this point. COMMENT REMAINS. FAULT CURRENT RATING IS NOW PROVIDED AT TRANSFER SWITCH, BUT NOT THE RATING OF THIS SWITCH. |
| 03/14/2008 | BETH GRANT | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Needs Review |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03/25/2008 | VFLORES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 03/25/2008 | SHANAE POWELL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |