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 - T08CM02919
Review Name: COMMERCIAL NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/29/2008 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied | The demo address and the address on the plans do not match. Please clarify. A third set of plans and an underground tank application is required for a tank permit. A separate submittal may be required if the tank cannot be added to this Activity Number. |
| 09/02/2008 | JOHN WILLIAMS | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Completed | Impact Fee's Do Apply on 112 Square Foot Clerk Facility under canopy; Central District; $401.68 |
| 09/04/2008 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Fry's Fuel Center - 555 E. Grant Road T08CM02919 Building Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 4, 2008 1. The building plan has been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 2. Zoning could not verify that the building plan was in compliance with the approved site plan. Please submit two copies of the approved and stamped site, landscape, and NPPO plans with the next building plan submittal. 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\t08cm02919 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents |
| 09/05/2008 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | Reference Building Folder |
| 09/05/2008 | RONALD BROWN | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 6 SEPT 2008 T08CM02919/FRYS FUEL CENTER REVIEWED BY RON BROWN STRUCTURAL AND H/C REVIEW 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1 DENIED: SEE COMMENTS BELOW I. SHEET 1 OF 77 A. Provide the Code Analysis Data Form completely filled out and as part of the documents. B. The address on the plans does not match the address on the application. II. SHEET 17 OF 77 A. Need to provide Counter Accessible height of 2'-10" a.f.f. max. Insure transaction drawer is also accessible. III. SHEET 18 OF 77 A. Need to provide Kiosk Counter Accessible height of 2'-10" a.f.f. max. Insure transaction drawer is also accessible. B. Obtain Kiosk placement permit for the State of Arizona. IV. SHEET 20 OF 77 A. Insure accessibility for all pump stations as per 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1, Section 309. V. SHEET T OF 77 A. Note wind design for 90 mph per IBC 2006, Figure 1609. B. Snow load design for 0 psf per IBC 2006, Figure 1608.2. VI. SHEET 32 OF 77 A. General note 1 does not agree with geotechnical investigation dated April 2, 2008. Verify/modify. B. Foundation note 2 is incorrect per geotechnical investigation. Verify/modify. VII. SHEET 34 OF 77 A. Sections A/B/C should be titled E2. Verify. B. Sections A/B must have continuous member at outside edge of deck. Verify. C. Sections A/B: Is the fascia panel supported from the roof deck? Provide calculations indicating deck adequacy for this condition. VIII. SHEET 36 OF 77 A. All sections on sheet are denoted E1. Clarify. B. See comment VII C above. C. Section A needs to show the connection of the header to the purlin. IX. SHEET 37 OF 77 A. Design code reference to 2006 IBC. X. CALCULATIONS A. Concerning item 7 under design loads (roof ponding stability) for the kiosk, the calculated value for Id = 0.235 in4/ft > 0.666 is not correct. Does roof system therefore require further investigation? Verify. B. Where is the lateral diaphragm analysis at the roof deck, including connections to framing members? Verify. END OF REVIEW |
| 09/08/2008 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | Show that the overflow scuppers comply with Section 1101.11.2.1, UPC 2006 or that the roof is capable of supporting the additional rain load if the primary roof drainage is blocked. Reference: Sections 1101.11.1 and 1101.11.2.1, UPC 2006, and Section 1611.1, IBC 2006. |
| 09/09/2008 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 09/09/2008 | RSHERRY1 | WWM | REVIEW | Passed | No plumbing fixtures connected to the public sewer system. |
| 09/09/2008 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/17/2008 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/02/2008 | STANTEC | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | Plan review for the above-referenced project has been completed, per the 2006 IBC, IMC, UPC, IECC, ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003, the 2005 NEC, all with local amendments, and the Tucson Outdoor Lighting Code. This letter reflects comments to be addressed with a written response to each of the noted items indicating the action taken. In order to facilitate a shorter back-check time, we request that you please provide revised plans and calculations, clouding any changes that have been made. SCOPE OF REVIEW: The scope of this review covers Electrical. All features were checked only to the extent allowed by the submittal provided. All portions of the project are assumed to meet or will meet other departmental requirements, conditions and concerns before permit approval. GENERAL: Some of the text in the set is too small; the City of Tucson requires that text be a minimum of 1/8" tall. Please review all plans and correct all undersized text to the minimum standards required by the City. You can appeal text between 3/32” tall and 1/8” tall. Text smaller than 3/32” tall cannot be appealed.} ELECTRICAL: The outdoor lighting calculation indicates that the lighting level is greater than 100,000 lumens per acre; therefore a special inspection certificate needs to be provided for outdoor lighting [Outdoor Lighting Code Sec. 16]. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/08/2008 | DELMA ROBEY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 10/08/2008 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |