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 - T08CM00837
Review Name: COMMERCIAL NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/28/2008 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/28/2008 | RONALD BROWN | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | SHEET CV 1. PROVIDE TOTAL OCCUPANT LOAD CALCULATIONS INCLUDING NUMBER OF ROOM OCCUPANTS 2. VERTICAL SHAFT FIRE RATINGS TO BE 1 HOUR AS PER 2006 IBC 707.4 SHEET A-0.1 3. DETAIL NOS. 1 AND 9, ADD VERTICAL GRAD BAR AS PER ANSI 117.1, 604.5.1 607.4.1 AND/OR 607.4.2 4. DETAIL 2, SHOW CLEAR SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR FIXTURES 5. DETAIL 4, SHOW SPOUT HEIGHT FOR STANMDING USERS SHEET A-0.2 6. DETAIL 1, ADD MODIFIED TO UL REFERENCE 7. DETAILS 2, 4, 6, 7, AND 15 DELETE REFERENCE TO UL ASSY SHEET A2.1 8. CHANGE OCCUPANCY TYPE "R3" TO READ "R1" SHEET A-2.3 9. CLARIFY NOTE 4 REFERENCE TO WALL TYPE "9" SHEET A-2.4 10. SHOW LAUNDRY CHUTE VENT PLUS POOL EQUIPMENT ROOM VENT SHETT A-2.5 11. SHOW ALL FOUR VERTICAL SHAFTS RATED ENCLOSURES SHEETS A-2.6 AND A-2.7 12. SHOW ALL FOUR VERTICAL SHAFTS RATED ENCLOSURES 13. AT KEYED SYMBOLS FOR ONE AND TWO HOUR RATING, REFERENCE SAME ON SHEET 2.5 SHEET A-4.0 14. MEN'S ROOM ENTRANCE TOO NARROW, REFERENCE ANSI 404.2.3.1 15. TRASH RECEPTICLE PROTRUSION FROM WALL CAN NOT BE MORE THAN 4", ANSI 307.2 SHEET A-4.3 16. DETAILS 8 AND 9: TOILET ELEVATIONS REFERENCE INCORRECT, CAN NOT FIND CORRECT ELEVATION DETAIL SHEET A-5.1 17. INSURE THAT ALL DOORS LOCATED IN RATED WALLS HAVE APPROPRIATE FIRE RATINGS SHEET A-6.1 18. DETAIL 4: DETAIL SHOWS METAL STUD CONSTRUCTION, IS THIS CORRECT? SHEET A-6.5 19. DETAIL 2: INTERIOR PARTITIONS ARE NOTE WITH 2 HOUR RATING AND UPPER CHUTE DOORS TO BE 1.5 HOUR RATED. SHOULD THIS NOT BE 1 HOUR AND 3/4 HOUR DOORS. RATE THE LOWER LEVER CHUTE DOOR ASSY SHEET A-8.5 AND A-8.6 20. INSULATE ALL EXPOSED LAVORATORY PIPES IN DETAILS 3, 10, 11, AND 13 //1 AND 2 SHEET A-9.0 21. DETAIL 3, SHOW ROLLING SHUTTER AS BEING FIRE RATED STRUCTURAL NOTES 22. SHEET A2.1; PLAN: R3 DESIGNATION ON THE WEST PORTION OF THE BUILDING SHOULD BE R1. VERIFY. 23. SHEET A0.1; DETAIL 1: VERTICAL GRAB BAR IS REQUIRED. PAPER DISPENSER LOCATION NEEDS TO FOLLOW ANSI A117.1. VERIFY. 24. SHEET A6.1; DETAIL 4: METAL STUD REFERENCES SHOULD BE REMOVED. VERIFY. 25. SHEET S1.0; KEYED NOTES #6: DID NOT FIND PLAN REFERENCE LOCATION. VERIFY. 26. SHEET S5.0; SECTION 2: WHERE IS THIS SECTION CUT ON THE PLAN? VERIFY. 27. SHEET S2.0; FRAMING PLAN: THE SECTION CUT ON THE NORTH WALL BETWEEN GRIDS F AND G SHOULD BE 2/S6.0. VERIFY. 28. SHEET S3.0; FRAMING PLAN: SECTION CUT ON THE SOUTH WALL BETWEEN GRIDS A AND B SHOULD BE 2/S6.0. VERIFY. 29. SHEET S7.0; SECTION 6: WHERE IS THIS SECTION REFERENCED? VERIFY. 30. SHEETS A2.2/A2.3; KEYED NOTES: NOTE 7 IS NOT INDICATED ON THE PLANS. VERIFY. 31. SHEETS S2.0/S3.0: INDICATE POOL CHASE OPENING PER ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. REVISE FRAMING AS REQUIRED. VERIFY. 32. SHEETS S2.0/S3.0: INDICATE LAUNDRY CHUTE OPENING PER ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. REVISE FRAMING AS REQUIRED. VERIFY. 33. SHEET S4.0; CALCULATIONS PAGE 47; FRAMING PLAN: BEAMS AT THE ENDS OF THE EAST/WEST CORRIDOR CALLED OUT AS 2-2X8 ON THE DRAWING, WHILE THE CALCULATIONS LIST 2-2X12. CLARIFY. 34. CALCULATIONS PAGE 59: WHY IS THE Fy = 50 KSI WHEN WOOD BEAMS ARE INCLUDED? CLARIFY. 35. GENERAL CALCULATIONS: IS THE LOADING FROM THE VARIOUS MECHANICAL UNITS ON THE ROOF COVERED BY THE 5 PSF MISCELLANEOUS DEAD LOAD PLACED ON THE ROOF? CLARIFY. 36. SHEET S3.2; EAST END STAIRWELL: REMOVE NOTE 10. 37. SHEET S2.2: EAST END STAIRWELL: REMOVE NOTE 12. 38. SHEET S2.2; FLOOR PLAN: BEAMS RUNNING IN THE N/S DIRECTION BETWEEN GRIDS B AND C; C AND D; T AND U; U AND V; V AND W ALL NOTED IN CALCULATIONS AS STEEL BEAMS, BUT WOOD BEAMS ARE SHOWN ON PLANS. CLARIFY. 39. SHEET S2.2; FLOOR PLAN: ON THE SOUTH WALL JUST EAST OF GRID LINE U, A W18X35 BEAM IS NOTED. CLARIFY. 40. SHEET S2.2; FLOOR PLAN: THE CANOPY FRAMING DRAWING INDICATES BEAM 4 (WOOD) IN 4 LOCATIONS. CALCULATIONS CALL FOR A W12X26 BEAM. CLARIFY. GENERAL NOTES: 41. ALL LETTERING FONT SIZE TO ME 1/8" MINIMUM |
| 03/31/2008 | JOHN WILLIAMS | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Completed | Impact Fee's Do Apply; East District; 60,706 Square Feet Hotel with 101 Rooms; $124,634 |
| 04/03/2008 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Denied | 1. A reduced pressure principle backflow prevention assembly is required to be installed on the domestic water service for this facility, not a double check valve assembly. Reference: COT Ordinance 9976 2. Reduced pressure backflow prevention assemblies are required to be installed in locations accessible to Tucson Water. Reference: COT Ordinance 9976, http://www.tucsonaz.gov/water/docs/backflow-ord.pdf 3. Note: Tucson Water will allow the use of a 3" water meter for demands up to 350 GPM. Contact Bill Tilghman at Tucson Water (520-791-5080 x 1287) for additional information regarding new services. |
| 04/09/2008 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Revise the font size used on the drawings to a minimum of 1/8-inch (all upper case). (A 3/32" font may be allowed with an appeal to the building official.) Reference: Section 106.1.1, IBC 2006. 2. Show how the temperature of the hot water supply to the public lavatories (L-3 and L-4) is controlled. Reference: Section 413.1, UPC 2006 and Section 504.3, IECC 2006. 3. Provide information to show that the shower and tub/shower control valves conform to the requirements of ASSE 1016. Reference: Section 418.0, UPC 2006. 4. Show the locations of the 31 domestic dishwashers indicated on the water and waste calculation schedules but not shown on the plumbing plans or riser diagrams. Reference: Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006. 5. The plumbing fixture schedule calls for one trench drain for each of the two commercial clothes washers but only one is shown on the plumbing plans and riser diagrams. Provide the discharge flow of the washers (GPM) and clarify the number of trench drains being installed. Reference: Sections 103.2.3 and 702.0, UPC 2006. 6. The minimum acceptable slope for waste piping smaller than 4" is ΒΌ" per foot (see P3.0). Reference Section 708.0, UPC 2006. 7. Neither the Watts model 009-QT-S (RPBP-1) nor the Watts model 709-OSY (BFP-1) is a double check valve backflow preventer. 8. Show strainers for the roof drains (detail 2/P4.0). Reference: Section 1105.2, UPC 2006. 9. The design of the water heater piping, with valves located between the water heaters and the expansion tanks, makes it impossible for the expansion tank to accommodate the thermal expansion of the water in the water heater, as intended by Section 608.3, UPC 2006 (detail8/P4.0). 10. Water heater WH-5 is classified as a boiler (200 MBH input and greater) and will require review by the Arizona State Boiler Inspector. See Article 4, Arizona Boilers and Lined Hot Water Heaters, at: http://www.azsos.gov/public_services/Title_20/20-05.htm 11. Revise the size of the gas piping serving the spa and pool and the common gas pipe downstream of WH-4 per Table 12-8, UPC 2006. 12. Provide sizing calculations for the thermal expansion tanks for the water heaters. Reference: Sections 103.2.3 and 608.3, UPC 2006. 13. Show how the pipe support intervals noted in detail 10/ P4.0 comply with the requirements of Section 314.0, UPC 2006. 14. Provide information to show that the installation and termination of the five concentric vents for the water heaters are per the manufacturer's recommendations. Reference: Section 510.2.5, UPC 2006. 15. Revise the size of the roof and overflow drains to comply with the requirements of Table 11-1, UPC 2006. The maximum allowable roof area for a 3" roof drain is 2,147 square feet with a rainfall rate of 3" per hour. Reference: Section 1106.0 and Table D-1, UPC 2006. 16. Revise the vent fixture units for a water closet (combined venting schedule/P5.1) to correspond to Table 7-3, UPC 2006. 17. Show the minimum dimensions for connection of vertical to horizontal drainage pipes requiring suds relief. Reference: Section 711.0, UPC 2006. |
| 04/11/2008 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Revise the font size used on the drawings to a minimum of 1/8-inch (all upper case). (A 3/32" font may be allowed with an appeal to the building official.) Reference: Section 106.1.1, IBC 2006. 2. Provide energy code compliance calculations for the building envelope. Reference: Section 101.4, International Energy Conservation Code 2006. 3. Condensate drains may not terminate over a roof drain or gutter unless the roof drain or gutter terminates at or above grade in an area capable or absorbing the condensate flow without surface drainage (see keynote #1, P1.4). Similarly, other condensate drains (e.g. PTAC units) terminating at grade shall be in an area capable or absorbing the condensate flow without surface drainage. Reference: Section 307.2.1, IMC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 04/18/2008 | LINDA BUCZYNSKI | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | TRANSMIT ORIGINAL DRAWINGS WITH NEXT SUBMITTAL. PLEASE CALL AT 520.837.4907 OR EMAIL AT Linda.Buczynski@tucsonaz.gov IF YOU CARE TO DISCUSS. 1. Revise the font size used on the drawings to a minimum of 1/8-inch (all upper case). Reference Section 106.1.1, IBC 2006. 2. For all poles greater than 30' in height, that pole and its foundation shall have a detail and calculations prepared by a Registered Structural Engineer. 3. Demonstrate compliance with the Tucson Lighting Code, http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Codes___Ordinances/Tucson_Lighting_Code.pdf. 4. Provide disconnecting means for EFs 8, 10, and 18 on Sheet E2.1L. EF-16 on Sheet E2.2L. EF-17 on E2.3L. EF1-EF-4 on E2.4. 5. Provide electrical power for the uncircuited loads by Stair A, Sheet E2.1A. 6. On Sheet E2.1P, Keynote 5 indicates irrigation controller for load on Ckt 1A-4. This circuit powers Unit 100 on the panel schedule. Please clarify. 7. Apply date to seal on plans. Sheet E2.4. 8 Mechanical calls for maximum fuse sizes for the CU units. Specify such fuse sizes on Sheet E2.4. 9. PTHP-1 MOCP is 15A, not 20A. Typical. 10. Provide specifications for Pool Equipotential Bonding. Reference NEC 620.26. 11. Could not find Equipment BP-1 on the plans. Reference Sheet E5.1 Riser Diagram. 12. On Panel EL Ckts 2 and 6, please clarify the description to read "Elevator Car Lights and Receptacle." 13. Panel M2 on the Riser Diagram is apparently Panel M. 14. For service load calculations, please correct "NEC Table 220.11" to read "NEC Table 220.42." 15. Use of NEC Table 220.42 is to be limited to lighting loads, whereas the calculation on the plans lumps lighting and receptacles powering loads such as hair dryers, microwaves, refrigerators, and lighting loads in areas of the hotel not within guest rooms. Please isolate lighting loads for the purpose of using this table. It is acceptable to include general use receptacles for application of Table 220.42. Apply 125% demand factor to lighting loads not within guest rooms. Also please note that Panel P, which appears to have only 645VA of connected load, has 28821VA according to the service load calculations. 16. This is not a Code issue, but I believe that Tucson Electrical Power Company does not allow service entrance conductor larger than 500 MCM. You might check with the Developer for the area. 17. Provide size of Main Bonding Jumper. Size per NEC 250.28 (D). 18. The "C" factor for (8) 600 MCM would be 224,264, not 155,295. The "C" factor for 4/0 is 15082, not 12844. Correct for these conduit runs and for all others which may apply. Please note that in TEP's standard SR-510, the maximum available fault current for any 120/208V service is 75,100A. So unless the Developer for this area has informed you differently, 75,100A may be as good a figure as that of assuming infinite bus. |
| 04/22/2008 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Tucson Hampton Inn and Suites T08CM00837 Building Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 22, 2008 1. The building plan has been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until it has been approved by the Engineering, and Landscape Review Sections. 2. Zoning acknowledges that the building plan as submitted is in compliance with the provided approved development plan. 3. 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\t08cm0837.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents |
| 04/24/2008 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Denied | NEEDS TO SHOW LOCATION/METHOD OF CONNECTION TO PUBLIC SEWER - NEEDS WW 8TH FL REVIEW OF LOCATION OF CONNECTION TO PUBLIC SEWER |
| 05/07/2008 | BIANCA RAMIREZ | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Building permit cannot be approved until grading plan has been stamped and approved. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05/15/2008 | GERARDO BONILLA | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 05/15/2008 | SHANAE POWELL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |