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: T09CM02126
Parcel: 11901075C

Address:
3398 S 6TH AV

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: COMMERCIAL NEW

Permit Number - T09CM02126
Review Name: COMMERCIAL NEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
08/11/2009 DAVE MANN FIRE REVIEW Approved
08/13/2009 ERIC NEWCOMB ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Denied 1. SEE BUILDING COMMENTS.
08/13/2009 ERIC NEWCOMB BUILDING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. SHEET G-0.3; SHEET S-1.0: CHANGE CONCRETE NOTE ON SHEET G-0.3 TO MATCH SHEET S-1.0.
2. SHEET G-0.3; SHEET S-1.0: CHANGE STEEL REINFORCING NOTE ON SHEET G-0.3 TO MATCH SHEET S-1.0.
3. SHEET A0.0; DETAIL 8: VERTICAL GRAB BAR REQUIRED PER ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003, FIGURE 604.5.1 (PER A-4.3).
4. SHEET A0.0 (DETAIL 8); SHEET A-4.3 (DETAIL 4): LOCATE TOILET PAPER DISPENSER PER ANSI, FIGURE 604.7.
5. SHEET A-0.2 (SECTION A); SHEET S-6.0 (TRASH ENCLOSURE PLAN): ARCHITECTURAL INDICATES 5" DIAMETER PIPE BOLLARD, WHILE STRUCTURAL INDICATES 4" DIAMETER. CLARIFY.
6. SHEET A-0.3 (DETAIL 11); SHEET S-6.0 (TRASH ENCLOSURE FRONT ELEVATION): ARCHITECTURAL INDICATES 18" DIAMETER FOOTING AT BOLLARD WHILE STRUCTURAL INDICATES 2'-0" DIAMETER. CLARIFY.
7. SHEET A-0.3; DETAIL 4: CITY OF TUCSON REQUIREMENT OF 7'-0" CLEAR DIMENSION FROM FINISH GRADE TO BOTTOM OF 'RESERVED PARKING' SIGN. ADD THIS DIMENSION AND ADJUST 'VAN ACCESSIBLE' SIGN.
8. SHEET A-1.0; MEN'S ROOM URINAL: VERIFY URINAL MEETS ANSI SECTION 605.3 TO BE POSITIONED FOR FORWARD APPROACH.
9. SHEET A-1.0; FLOOR PLAN: VERIFY THE VESTIBULE BETWEEN THE RESTROOMS MEETS ANSI SECTION 304.3.1 FOR TURNING CIRCLE.
10. SHEET A-1.3 (DETAIL 3); SHEET S-1.0 (DETAIL 11): COORDINATE ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL DETAILS.
11. SHEET S-1.0; STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS: THE CONCRETE GENERAL NOTES INDICATE THE SLAB ON GRADE CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 3000 PSI, WHILE THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE 2500 PSI. CLARIFY.
12. SHEET S-6.0; TRASH ENCLOSURE PLAN: REVISE THE SECTION CUT 4/S-5 (NOT USED). SPECIFIY MASONRY WALL FOOTING SIZE AND REINFORCMENT.
13. GENERAL: ALL DEFERRED SUBMITTALS MUST BE APPROVED BY LEERAY HANLY.
14. GENERAL: LETTERING ON ALL SHEETS MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 3/32" IN HEIGHT (SEE SHEET S-1.0).
15. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL COMMENTS.
08/13/2009 BETH GRANT COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING Approved
08/20/2009 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Approved
08/25/2009 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. See sheet P-4.0 detail nine. Cuber drain and ice bin drain may not be combined. 2. Three compartment sink to be directly connected. Indirect waste is limited to sanitizing bowl and/or vegetable prep bowl. 3. Coordinate detail twelve on sheet P-4.0, 3/4" gas supply with detail two on sheet P-3.0 which shows 11/4" gas to tankless water heater. 4. Water heater set above fixture outlets to have a vacuum relief valve. Reference 608.7 2006 UPC. 5. Show how the potable water system is to be sterilized. Reference 609.9 2006 UPC. 6. Show how the floor is to be sloped to the drains in the restrooms. Reference 411.4 2006 UPC. 7. Provide site utility plan showing continuation of sewer and water, as noted on sheet P-2.0 8. Shoe how the tankless water heater located in the attic is to be made accessible.
08/25/2009 ROBERT SHERRY MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Revise the font size used on the drawings to a minimum of 3/32-inch (upper and lower case; shop drawings and COMcheck printouts exempted). Reference: Section 106.1.1, IBC 2006.
2. Provide energy code compliance calculations. Reference: Sections 101.4 and 104.2, International Energy Conservation Code 2006.
3. Clarify the construction shown in detail 3/A-1.2. Reference: Sections 106.3.1 and 507.9, IMC 2006.
4. Provide justification for using "Dining rooms" instead of "Cafeteria, fast food" for the ventilation calculations. Reference: Section 403.3, IMC 2006.
5. Revise the enclosing shaft (sheet M-3.0) for the grease duct to provide a minimum separation of 6" between the duct and the shaft. Reference: Section 506.3.10, IMC 2006.
6. Show that the "1-hour" duct wrap detail on sheet M-3.0 will comply with ASTM E 2336. Reference: Section 506.3.10 (1), IMC 2006.
7. Clearance reduction for "protected combustibles" (see sheet M-3.0) shall be per Section 308, IMC 2006.
8. Coordinate the hood designs shown on sheets M-3.0 and M-4.0 with respect to dimensions and air flow quantities. Reference: Section 106.3.1, IMC 2006.
08/25/2009 ROBERT SHERRY WATER REVIEW Denied 1. Revise the site utility plan to show the location of the reduced pressure backflow assembly on the drawings, specify the reduced pressure backflow assembly being installed, and indicate the size of the assembly. Reference: COT Ordinance 9976, http://www.tucsonaz.gov/water/docs/backflow-ord.pdf
2. Include the location of the water meter on the site utility plan. Coordinate the water service requirements on sheet P-0.1 and the water service diagram (4/P3.0). Confirm the size of the proposed water meter; Tucson Water limits a 1" meter to a maximum demand of 25 GPM.
08/28/2009 RAY MAJUTA ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied Project: Panda Express, T09CM02126
New Restaurant
The Electrical Plans have been denied for the following,

1. Sheet E2.0, the fixtures by the rear door have not been circuited, referring to the exit and outdoor lights.
2. Cannot locate circuit A-10, it is shown on panel schedule ,cannot locate on power plan.


Ray T Majuta
Elect Pln Ck
PDS City of Tucson
8/31/09
Ray.Majuta@tucsonaz.gov
08/31/2009 GERRY KOZIOL WWM REVIEW Denied PANDA EXPRESS-ISSUED W/ GREASE INTERCEPTOR
NEED PCRWRD 5TH FL CREDIT EVALUATION FOR EXSISTING BLDG DEMO- LIZ @ 740-6602
NEED CIVAL UTILITY PLAN SHOWING LOCATION/METHOD OF CONNECTION TO PUBLIC SEWER
NEED PCRWRD/IWC REVIEW & APPROVAL OF GREASE INTERCEPTOR- TOM TOMCHAK- 443-6200 5025 W INA RD
09/02/2009 TERRY STEVENS ZONING REVIEW Denied 09/02/2009

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.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
09/21/2009 CPIERCE1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed