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 - T09CM00797
Review Name: COMMERCIAL NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/08/2009 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/08/2009 | JOHN WILLIAMS | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Completed | Impact Fee's Do Apply; West District; 5,104 Square Feet Retail Building; $28,167.95 |
| 04/09/2009 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Denied | quiktrip (D08-0051) issued with grease interceptor need PCRWRD 3RD Floor review & approval- fronts 15" public sewer- Karen Sanson/ Roy Montoya 740-5369 |
| 04/10/2009 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: April 10, 2009 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: T09CM00797 (Building Plan) SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received the building plan (T09CM00797) for the above referenced property. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the building plan application at this time. The following items need to be addressed: BUILDING PLAN COMMENTS: 1) Engineering could not verify that the building plan was in compliance with the stamped approved Development Plan (D08-0051). Please submit two copies of the stamped approved Development Plan, landscape, and NPPO plans with the next building plan submittal. 2) Engineering will re-review the building plan on the next submittal to insure compliance with the approved and stamped Development Plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide the building plan with a copy of the last approved Development Plan. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the building plan review. For questions or to schedule an appointment I can be reached at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division COT Development Services |
| 04/13/2009 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. SHEET A6.1; DETAIL A4: REFERENCE TO DETAIL G6-A6.1 SHOULD BE G4? VERIFY. 2. SHEET S1.1; CALCULATIONS SHEET 3: THE CONCRETE BASIS FOR DESIGN IN THE CALCULATIONS IS 3000 PSI FOR SLABS AND FOUNDATIONS, WHILE THE GENERAL NOTES IN THE DRAWINGS INDICATE A CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 4000 PSI. CLARIFY. 3. SHEET S1.1; CALCULATIONS SHEET 3: THE BOLTS BASIS FOR DESIGN IN THE CALCULATIONS IS A307. ADD A HIGH STRENGTH BOLT SPECIFICATION TO THE CALCULATIONS TO MATCH THE GENERAL NOTE FOR BEAM AND COLUMN CONNECTIONS. 4. SHEET S1.1; CALCULATIONS SHEET 3: THE REINFORCEMENT BASIS FOR DESIGN IN THE CALCULATIONS IS 60 KSI FOR #6 AND LARGER, AND 40 KSI FOR #5 AND SMALLER, WHILE THE GENERAL NOTES IN THE DRAWINGS INDICATE GRADE 60 FOR ALL BARS. CLARIFY. 5. SHEET S2.1; CALCULATION SHEETS F1 AND F6: THE WALL REFERENCED AS W4 IN THE CALCULATIONS DOES NOT MATCH THE FOUNDATION PLAN. CALL OUT THE WALL REINFORCING AND FOOTING SIZE ON THE PLAN TO MATCH THE CALCULATIONS (8" BLOCK WITH #5 AT 16" OC AND 3'-3" WIDE X 12" FOOTING WITH 4-#5). VERIFY. 6. SHEET S2.1; SECTION M1/M1A: REVISE THE NOTE UNDER THE FOOTING TO READ '2'-0" AT M1A' TO MATCH PLAN. VERIFY. 7. SHEET S3.1; ROOF FRAMING PLAN: LOCATE THE COLUMNS FOR THE MECHANICAL SCREEN IN THE EAST/WEST DIRECTION. 8. SHEET S5.1 (DETAIL LP1); SHEET E0.1 (DETAIL N12): THE ELECTRICAL SHEET SHOULD REFERENCE STRUCTURAL FOR THE LIGHT POLE FOOTING. 9. SHEET S4.1 (DETAIL K9); CALCULATIONS: DID NOT FIND A CALCULATION FOR THE TRASH ENCLOSURE WALL AND FOOTING. CLARIFY. |
| 04/14/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/15/2009 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 04/15/2009 Development Services Department Zoning Review Section Terry Stevens Lead Planner Comments: 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 and until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 2. Zoning could not verify that the building plan was in compliance with the approved development plan. Please submit two copies of the approved and stamped development, 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 site/development plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming. |
| 04/16/2009 | RAY MAJUTA | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/20/2009 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Show that the floor of the restroom slopes toward the floor drain. Reference: Section 411.2, UPC 2006. 2. Clarify how the CW shut off valve for the building is accessible at all times. Reference: Section 605.2, UPC 2006. 3. Clarify how the flow control device for the hydromechanical grease interceptor is readily accessible and complies with the installation requirements of the manufacturer. Reference: Sections 310.4 and 1014.2.1, UPC 2006. 4. Clarify how a direct connection of the creamer machine drains to the indirect waste manifold (Detail M12/P2.1) complies with the requirements of Section 801.2.3, UPC 2006. |
| 04/20/2009 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/20/2009 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/21/2009 | CPIERCE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 04/21/2009 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |