Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: T09CM01333
Parcel: 10705126B

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: COMMERCIAL NEW

Permit Number - T09CM01333
Review Name: COMMERCIAL NEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
05/28/2009 DAVE MANN FIRE REVIEW Approved
05/29/2009 ERIC NEWCOMB BUILDING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. GENERAL: MINIMUM 3/32" LETTERING IS REQUIRED ON ALL DRAWINGS (SEE DIMENSIONS ON SHEETS A-1, A-5, A-6, A-7, A-8/ DETAIL 5 ON SHEET A-14/ SHEET SGN/ SHEETS S-1, S-2, S-3, S-4).
2. GENERAL: ALL DEFERRED SUBMITTALS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, ERNIE DUARTE.
3. SHEET CS-1; PROJECT DATA: PROVIDE NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS FOR EACH BUILDING.
4. SHEET CS-1; ACCESSIBLE UNITS REQUIRED: WHILE THE 2006 IBC TABLE 1107.6.1.1 REQUIRES TWO TYPE A UNITS FOR THE TOTAL 37 UNITS ON THE SITE, SECTION 1107.6.2.1.1 STATES THAT "TYPE A UNITS SHALL BE DISPERSED AMONG THE VARIOUS CLASSES OF UNITS". PROVIDE AN EXPLANATION OF WHY ALL OF THE TYPE A UNITS ARE IN ONE BUILDING.
5. SHEET CS-1; CODE SUMMARY: LIST ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003.
6. SHEET CS-1; SHEET INDEX: SHEET S-1 SHOULD BE DESIGNATED AS A 2-STORY FOUNDATION PLAN.
7. SHEET CS-1; SHEET INDEX: SHEET S-4 SHOULD BE DESIGNATED AS A 1-STORY FOUNDATION AND FRAMING PLAN.
8. SHEET A-1; DOOR SCHEDULE A-15.1: DOOR B INTO THE BATHROOM AND BEDROOM OF TYPE A UNITS MUST MEET THE MINIMUM CLEAR WIDTH OF 32" AS REQUIRED BY ANSI 404.2.2. DOOR IS LISTED AS 2'-10" IN THE SCHEDULE. VERIFY CODE REQUIREMENT IS MET.
9. SHEET A-1; KEYNOTE 5: WHAT DETAIL IS THIS REFERENCED TO? REFER TO STRUCTURAL.
10. SHEETS A13.1/A13.2 (KEYNOTE 10); SHEET A13.3 (KEYNOTE 14): GIVE SPECIFIC DETAIL REFERENCE.
11. SHEET A-14; SECTION 2: ADJUST 3'-6" RAIL HEIGHT DIMENSION.
12. SHEET SGN: REVISE NUMBERING OF DESCRIPTIONS AND NOTES.
13. SHEET SGN; FOUNDATION NOTE 4: PROVIDE SOIL REPORT PER NOTE.
14. SHEET SGN; REINFORCEMENT NOTE AND STEEL REINFORCING NOTE 1(A): COORDINATE THESE NOTES.
15. SHEET S-1; CALCULATIONS: PAGES 143 A/B INDICATE POST AND FOOTING AT STAIR WALL, BUT THE PLAN DOES NOT SHOW EITHER. CLARIFY.
16. SHEET S-1: POSTS AND FOOTINGS INDICATED AT ALL STAIR LANDINGS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATIONS, AND NO FRAMING IS INDICATED AT THE ROOF OR FLOOR FRAMING PLANS. CLARIFY.
17. SHEET S-1; SHEET D-1 (DETAIL 13): PLAN CUT REFERS TO 14/D-1. THERE IS NO DETAIL14 ON SHEET D-1. CLARIFY.
18. SHEET S-1; SHEET D-1 (DETAIL 12): SECTION CUT 13/D-1 AT EACH STAIR IS INCORRECT (AT POSTS). VERIFY.
19. SHEET S-1; SHEET D-1 (DETAIL 13): SECTION CUT 14/D-1 AT EACH STAIR IS INCORRECT. VERIFY.
20. SHEET S-1 (DETAIL 7/D-1); SHEET S-2 (DETAIL 7/D-2): SECTION CUTS ARE THROUGH THE SAME WALL, BUT THE MASONRY VERTICAL REINFORCEMENT SPACING VARIES. CLARIFY.
21. SHEET S-2; CALCULATIONS: PAGE 140 OF THE CALCULATIONS INDICATES BEAM WH2 AS 2-2X10, BUT THE PLAN INDICATES 2-2X8. CLARIFY.
22. SHEET S-2; CALCULATIONS: PAGES 143A/B INDICATE FRAMING AT THE STAIR LANDING. THIS FRAMING IS NOT INDICATED ON THE PLAN. CLARIFY.
23. SHEET S-3; CALCULATIONS: PAGE 99 OF THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE BEAM HEADER BH3, BUT THE PLAN DOES NOT SHOW A BEAM IN THAT LOCATION. CLARIFY.
24. SHEET S-3; CALCULATIONS: PAGES 110 AND 111 OF THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE WINDOW HEADERS WH1 AND WH3 (AT THE INSET AREA IN THE UPPER EXTERIOR WALL) ARE 2-2X8, BUT THE PLAN INDICATES 2-2X6. CLARIFY.
25. SHEET S-3; CALCULATIONS: PAGE 125 OF THE CALCULATIONS INDICATES BEAM STF AS 2-6X12, BUT THE PLAN INDICATES 6X12. CLARIFY.
26. CALCULATIONS: PAGE 140 OF THE CALCULATIONS INDICATES WINDOW HEADER WH3 AS 2-2X8. THIS BEAM COULD NOT BE LOCATED ON CALCULATION PAGE 130. CLARIFY.
27. SHEET S-3; UPPER PLAN: THE SECTION INDICATED 7/D-3 ON THE EXTERIOR WALL IS INCORRECT. VERIFY.
28. SHEET S-4; CALCULATIONS: PAGE 31 OF THE CALCULATIONS INDICATES BEAM WH3 TO BE 5 1/8 X 10 1/2 GLB, WHILE THE PLAN INDICATES 2-2X6. CLARIFY.
29. SHEET S-4; CALCULATIONS: PAGE 36 OF THE CALCULATIONS INDICATES BEAM WH4 TO BE 5 1/8 X 10 1/2 GLB, WHILE THE PLAN INDICATES 2-2X8. CLARIFY.
30. SHEET S-4; CALCULATIONS: PAGE 36 OF THE CALCULATIONS INDICATES BEAM WH6 TO BE 2-2X6, WHILE THE PLAN DOES NOT CALL IT OUT. CLARIFY.
31. SHEET D-1 (DETAIL 9); CALCULATIONS: PAGE 165 OF THE CALCULATIONS INDICATES 2-#4 IN THE FOOTING, WHILE DETAIL INDICATES 1. CLARIFY.
32. SHEET D-1: DETAIL 12 IS USED TWICE. CLARIFY.
33. SHEET D-2; CMU WALL REINFORCING SCHEDULE: THE TYPICAL REINFORCING INDICATED #5 @ 32" O.C. IS INCORRECT. REVISE NOTE.
34. GENERAL: PROVIDE RESPONSE LETTER TO ALL COMMENTS FOR NEXT REVIEW CYCLE.
06/02/2009 ERIC NEWCOMB ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Denied 1. SEE BUILDING COMMENTS.
06/03/2009 ROBERT SHERRY MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Clarify how the energy compliance notes on sheet M-3 comply with the prescriptive requirements from Table 402.1.1, IECC 2006 for ceilings and fenestration or provide documentation to show that the energy performance of the building complies with the requirements of Section 404, IECC 2006. Coordinate the wall and ceiling construction with the architectural notes and sections on sheets A-1, A-3, A-4.1, and A-4.2.
2. Provide information to show that condensate will not form on the exterior of any duct and, in the case of ducts or plenums constructed of gypsum board, that the surface temperature of the gypsum board will remain above the airstream dew-point temperature. Reference: Sections 603.5.1 and 603.12, IMC 2006.
06/05/2009 RICK MYERS PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Show the pressure relief piping on the hot water discharge of the tankless water heater as required by the manufacturer's installation standards. 2. Reference section 608.3 2006 UPC, Any water system provided with a backflow preventer shall be provided with an approved, listed, and adequetely sized expansion tank or other approved device having a similar function to control thermal expansion. 3. Reference 710.1 2006 UPC, Where a fixture is installed on a floor level that is lower than the next upstream manhole cover of the public or private sewer, serving such drainage piping, shall be protected from backflow of sewage by installing an approved type backwater valve. 4.Reference 904.1 2006 UPC, ....Vent pipes from fixtures located upstream from backwater valves shall nt be used for meeting the cross-sectional area venting requirements of this section.
06/05/2009 JOHN WILLIAMS COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING Completed Impact Fee's Do Apply; Central District; 5,400 Square Foot 9 Room Hotel; $15,657.

Demolition Credits may be available for this permit.
06/08/2009 ROBERT SHERRY WATER REVIEW Denied 1. Tucson Water limits a 1-1/2" meter to a maximum demand of 50 GPM. Provide a letter from Tucson Water confirming that the use of a 1-1/2" water meter will be allowed for use with buildings A, C, and D (Sheets P-1 and P-5). Reference: Sections 610.2 and 610.12, UPC 2006.
2. Provide the listing information for the ABS pipe and fittings proposed for underground potable water piping (Sheet P-1). Reference: Section 604.1, UPC 2006.
06/08/2009 RAY MAJUTA ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied Project: 801 W Miracle Mile
T09CM01333
Ghost Lodge Ranch Blgd # 9


Electrcal Plans denied for the following:

1. Provide Lighting calculations to show compliance with The City of Tucson/Pima County Outdoor Lighting Ord # 10135.


Ray T Majuta
City of Tucson DSD
Elect Plan CK
6/06/09
520-837-4988
06/09/2009 GERRY KOZIOL WWM REVIEW Denied bld # 9 9 apartment units
2: need to permit on-site private with COT
3: need DEQ review & DEQ approval to construct 8" on-site private sewer.
4: need PCRWD 3rd floor review & approval to tap exsisting manhole - 740-6369
5: need copy of on-site private sewer for base map update
6: need wastewater 5th floor credit evaluation for demo of exsisting bldgs if applicable. 740-6602/740-6606
7: need copy of on-site plan for addressing for building number review- 740-6480.
06/19/2009 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: David Rivera
Principal Planner

PROJECT: T09CM01333 and T09CM01334
801 W Miracle Mile
Building Plan Review (Phase I only)
(Two new buildings to replace portions of existing buildings)

TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 19, 2009

Zoning has reviewed the building plans but cannot approve them at this time. The building plans must be approved by Structural review to ensure that the changes may not affect zoning requirements such as setbacks.

Zoning will review the building plans on the next submittal to ensure that any changes to teh site plan has not or does affect the building plans. As of this review consistency with the proposed size and height are similar but some information missing on the site plan will be reviewed for on the next submittal to ensure compliance for both plans.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
07/21/2009 DELMA ROBEY OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
07/21/2009 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed