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: T09CM01636
Parcel: 10706027E

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: COMMERCIAL NEW

Permit Number - T09CM01636
Review Name: COMMERCIAL NEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/22/2010 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Approved
01/25/2010 RONALD BROWN BUILDING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied GENERAL
1. The minimum height of lettering is 3/32"; upper and lower case. Please revise and resubmit sheet nos. A/2.6 and 1D/MFL.1.
2. Please submit an approved site plan.
3. Please submit a complete occupant load analysis, calculation and provide a total written summary. Please provide an appeal to Mr. LeeRay Hanley explaining the deviation from the 2006 IBC load requirements as per Sectioon 1004 and Table 1004.1 as stated in your occupant load analysis for plumbing fixtures on sheet AO.2.
END OF REVIEW
01/26/2010 RONALD BROWN ADA REVIEW Denied SHEET NOS. 5.3 AND 5.4:
1. As per City policy any deviation from the basic 1994 ADAAG is not allowed, "please remove vertical grab bars as shown on detail nos.:
4, 5 and 6 A/5.4; and 3, 4, 6, 8 and 9 /A5.4.
2. Please show a shower grab bar as per ADAAG, Section 4.21 and Figures 35 and 37. This is at detail nos. 1, 12 and 13/A5.3 and 10/A5.4.
3. Detail 10/A5.3 is not he same design as shown on the floor plan detail 1/A2.0. Please revise the detail to reflect the actual shower design and show compliance with ADAAG Section 4.21 and figures 35 (b) and 37 (b).
GENERAL
4. Show signage detail to comply with ADAAG Section 4.3

END OF REVIEW
01/28/2010 ROBERT SHERRY WATER REVIEW Approved Activity is in the Flowing Wells Water District.
01/28/2010 ROBERT SHERRY MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Provide energy code compliance calculations for the building envelope and for the building mechanical equipment. Provide sufficient detail on the drawings to evaluate the energy compliance of the building envelope. The information shall, as a minimum, include U-factors of the envelope systems and fenestration components, along with the R-values of the insulation and the SHGC for the fenestration. Reference: Sections 101.4 and 104.2, and Chapter 5, International Energy Conservation Code 2006.
2. Revise the insulation specified for the chilled water and heating water piping to comply with the requirements of Section 503.2.8, IECC 2006.
3. Provide heating and cooling load calculations that justify the capacities of the heating and cooling equipment specified for the project (e.g. the chilled water system identifies approximately 469 tons of load, including 150 tons for a future building, but the system provides 560 tons of capacity). Reference: Section 503.2, IECC 2006.
4. Show how the remote chillers are being supported (not shown on architectural drawings) and if a luminaire and a power receptacle are located near the chiller. Reference: Sections 302.1, 306.3, and 306.3.1, IMC 2006.
5. Detail 125/M6-2 indicates the presence of a secondary condensate drain for a fan coil unit; where does this occur? Reference: Sections 106.3.1 and 307.2.3 IMC 2006.
6. Provide calculations demonstrating adequate ventilation for the building. Reference: Section 401.2, IMC 2006.
7. Clarify how the design of the exhaust for the batteries in the UPS room complies with the requirements of Section 502.4, IMC 2006.
8. Provide calculations to show that the specified expansion tank for the heating hot water system meets the requirements of Section 1009.2, IMC 2006.
01/29/2010 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: T09CM01636
Building Plan (1st Review)

TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 29, 2010

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 has reviewed the building plan and although it appears that the plan will meet the requirements shown on the site plan, due to the number of denials from other PDSD agencies Zoning cannot approve the plans at this time.

3. Due to the number of denials from other PDSD agencies Zoning will re-review the plans 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\t09cm01636.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED:
02/01/2010 DAVE MANN FIRE REVIEW Denied Fire Comments:

Sheet A0.2 The walkin cooler must have sprinklers. The Exception in 2603 is only for unsprinklered buildings.

Sheet A7.1 Show the rise of the stairs to the second landing.

Sheet FP-02
1. Justify use of standard sprinklers on Room 235. See note on Sheet A0.2. Should they be dry pendents?

2. Justify use of Ordinary Hazard for movable shelving. Do the shelves in Room 212 contain electric motors?
02/01/2010 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Provide a connection to the drainage system of the building for the emergency eyewashes or showers. Reference: Section 304.0, UPC 2006.
2. Provide backflow protection between the domestic water system and process water treatment systems, equipment, and to appliances that do not have listed integral backflow preventers or integral air gaps. Clearly indicate on the drawings to which pipes the appropriate identification labels shall be applied. Reference: Section 602.0, UPC 2006.
3. Clarify general notes B and C to ensure that the slope of the horizontal drainage piping complies with the requirements of Section 708.0, UPC 2006 (i.e. drainage piping 3" and smaller shall have a minimum slope of ΒΌ" per foot).
4. Provide structural justification for the use of a horizontal vent that does not rise vertically to a minimum of 6" above the flood rim of a fixture before it offsets horizontally, as shown in detail 222. Reference: Section 905.3, UPC 2006.
5. Clarify how the island venting design shown in detail 220 complies with the requirements of Sections 706.2 and 909.0, UPC 2006.
6. Clarify the term "acid vent" that is applied to the foot vent in detail 220. Reference: Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006.
7. Clarify how the oil/water separator, S/O-1, shown on sheet PL-ULM (and detailed as a sand/oil separator in details 232) will be vented and have the water seal protected. Show that the unit is capable of handling the required flow rate. Reference: sections 1016.3 and 1017.1, UPC 2006.
8. Clarify how the oil/water separator, S/O-2, shown on sheet PL-ULE (and detailed as a sand/oil separator in details 233) will be vented and have the water seal protected.
9. The height of the overflow weirs for the roof drainage is set at 3.5" above the low point of the roof. Provide structural calculations that verify that the roof can support the weight of water that will accumulate if the primary roof drain is blocked. Reference: Section 1101.11.2, UPC 2006 and Section 1611.1, IBC 2006.
10. Clarify how the "Solar Tank" relates to the domestic hot water system, i.e. does it contain a heat exchanger. Reference: Section 603.4.4, UPC 2006.
11. Clarify the design basis for the medium pressure gas piping. The pipe sizes appear to be based on 2PSI gas with a pressure drop of 1 PSI, not 0.5 PSI. Reference: Table 402.4 (3), IFGC 2006.
12. Provide specifications and details to show how the fire-rating will be preserved at the combustible and non-combustible piping penetrations of fire-resistance-rated partitions and the fire-resistance-rated floor-ceiling assembly. Reference: Section 1502.0, UPC 2006.
02/01/2010 RAY MAJUTA ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied PROJECT: T09CM01636
1306 W MIRACLE MILE
NEW POLICE CRIME LAB

The electrical plans have been denied for the following:

1. Circuit 1H2.2 shows S4 fixtures along with S7 fixtures, S4-120volt, S7- 277volt, Sheet ES.1.
2.FX fixture (Sheet ES.1) not on fixture schedule.
3. Sheet E6.1, shows a wall in front of the MDP (main service) as being approx 5'3", as per 2005 NEC, 110-26.C.2, the distance required is not met.
4.Show on Sheet E6.1 that the doors out of the electrical room require panic hardware or equivalent, as per same section above.
5. Sheet E6.1 on Distribution Panel DPBB does not have Panel PL1 in it, as Sheet E6.10 for total load on Panel DPBB.
6. Sheet E6.1 DP DPM1 only has a 450 amp fuse for Trans-3, but shows 3 sets of 400 MCM at 1005 amps, is this correct , possibly for future?
7. Are ATS' 3 wire or 4 wire ?
8. How will conductors which tie into MDP coming from 800 amp ATS tie in ? Will this connection be on the primary
side ? Has the termination for this been addressed ?


Ray T Majuta, PSDS, City of Tucson,
Elect Pln Ck, 2/1/10,
Ray.Majuta@tucsonaz.gov
02/01/2010 GERRY KOZIOL WWM REVIEW Denied

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
02/25/2010 GERARDO BONILLA OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
02/25/2010 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed