Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Permit Number - T09CM02738
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/04/2010 | ERIC NEWCOMB | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 02/04/2010 | BETH GRANT | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Approved | |
| 02/04/2010 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/04/2010 | ERIC NEWCOMB | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/11/2010 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/11/2010 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: 2945 E. Speedway T09CM02738 Building Plan (3rd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 11, 2010 1. The building plans have been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 2. Zoning can not approve the building plan until the site plan is approved by all PDSD agencies. 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\t09cm02738.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: |
| 02/11/2010 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied | Fire comments: The new requirements are due to the area and occupant load increasing to over 100 occupants, fire sprinklers will be required. Refer to 2006 IFC, table 1004.1.1 for occupant loads, section 903.2.1.2 for sprinkler requirements. Additionally, allowable distance from existing fire hydrants is exceeded. Fire Department will accept fire sprinklers in lieu of new hydrant. Please show location and size of fire sprinkler supply line.Be advised that if kitchen cooking appliances locations have, or are going to be changed, kitchen exhaust hood fire suppression system may need to be revised. |
| 02/12/2010 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Comment not resolved. The plumbing plan and the kitchen plan show different gas loads and different equipment; coordinate the gas piping design with the kitchen design and determine the actual equipment being installed with the correct gas loads. Reference: Sections 103.2.3 and 1217.0, UPC 2006. 2. Comment not addressed; see plumbing specifications, Materials 1, F. The use of PEX as an alternate material for water piping will require a revision to the activity, including pipe sizing calculations. Reference: Sections 103.2.3 and 610.1, UPC 2006. 3. Comment not resolved; see detail 2/P2. Revise the detail of the water heater installation to correspond to the type of water heater specified. Include the flue height and show the flue termination. Reference: Sections 103.2.3, 605.5, 608.3, and 608.7 UPC 2006. 4. The branch piping sizes called out for the urinal flush valve will result in water velocities greater than 8 FPS. Limit the water velocity to less than 8 FPS for the copper piping. Reference: Section A 6.1, UPC 2006 and IS 3-2003, Section 2.6. 5. Clarify the waste and vent diagram; identify each fixture and, in the case of floor sinks, indicate which fixtures are being indirectly connected to them. Resize the drainage piping to conform to Table 7-5, UPC 2006. Reference: Section 703.2 and footnote 1, Table 7-3, UPC 2006. 6. Clarify the grease waste piping as shown in details 1 and 2, sheet P1. It is not clear what is connected to the grease waste system (e.g. the wash and the rinse compartments do not appear to be directly connected to the grease waste piping). Fixtures not identified in Chapter 8, UPC 2006 as being allowed to be indirectly wasted shall be directly wasted. 7. Provide a vent for each fixture trap (either an air admittance valve or a conventional vent). Reference: Sections 901.0 and 910.1, UPC 2006. Note: see also Section 801.3, UPC 2006. 8. Comment not resolved. The calculations for the gravity grease interceptor do not meet the minimum size criteria per Section 1014.3.6, UPC 2006. 9. Comment not addressed. Provide roof drainage calculations and plans. All roof areas shall be drained by roof drains, scuppers, or gutters. Show also, how the drainage for the existing roof is being affected by the new roofs. Reference: Section 1101.11.1, UPC 2006. |
| 02/12/2010 | BIANCA RAMIREZ | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Letter for Tier 1 not provided as promised by applicant. |
| 02/12/2010 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Comment not addressed; none of the submitted structural calculations relate to the roof top units. Provide structural calculations to verify that the existing roof is capable of supporting the additional dead load due to the installation of the new roof top unit and the relocated rooftop unit. Reference: Section 302.1, IMC 2006. 2. Revise the size of the common condensate drains serving RTU-1 plus RTU-3 and RTU-2 plus RTU-4 in accordance with Section 307.2.1, IMC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson. 3. Comment not resolved; no new ventilation calculations are shown on the drawings. The occupant load used to calculate the required ventilation is not necessarily the same as the occupant load used for calculating exiting requirements. The occupant load used for calculating the minimum required ventilation is to be based on Table 403.3, IMC 2003 or an approved engineering analysis of the specific occupancy type. Reference: Section 403.3, IMC 2006. 4. Comment not resolved; no new ventilation calculations shown on the drawings. Revise the ventilation calculations to include rooftop unit #2 (the "2.5- ton unit"). Reference: Sections 106.3.1, 403.3, and 403.3.2, IMC 2006. 5. Details 2/M2 and 3/M2 refer to sheets M3 and M4. Where are these sheets? Reference: Section 106.3.1, IMC 2006. 6. Revise the size of the grease ducts serving Type I hoods to provide a minimum velocity of 1500 feet per minute. Reference: Section 506.3.4, IMC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson. 7. Show that the locations of fans EF-1 and EF-2 comply with the requirements of Section 506.5.5, IMC 2006 with regard to the distance from the exhaust fans to the parapet. 8. Gas-fired convection ovens require Type I hoods, (curiously, shop drawing K7.2 shows a Type I hood for the dishwasher but a Type II hood for the convection oven). Note that sheet M1 shows the hood for the convection oven in a different location than the architectural drawings. If the hood will be located as shown on sheet A1.0, show how the clearance from the interior wall will comply with Section 507.9, IMC 2006. Reference: Section 507.2.1, IMC 2006. 9. The shop drawings for the Type I exhaust hoods (labeled KH-1, KH-2, and KH-3 on sheet M2) show supply air plenums with perforated diffusers on the front of the hoods. This is not consistent with the supply air diffusers shown on sheet M1. Clarify how make up air will be introduced into the area and, if the supply air plenums will not be used, provide information from the hood manufacturer that indicates that the diffusers shown on sheet M1 will not disrupt the operation of the hoods. Reference: Section 508.1, IMC 2006. 10. The air balance schedule shown on sheet M2 does not appear to indicate the total required exhaust rate for the building. The total exhaust rate shall include the restroom exhaust along with the hood exhaust. The total rate of make up air shall be approximately equal to the total exhaust rate. If the building has a negative pressure, provide information from the hood manufacturer that indicates that the negative pressure will not disrupt the operation of the hoods. Reference: Section 508.1, IMC 2006. 11. Where is make up air unit MAU-1 located? Reference: Section 106.3.1, IMC 2006. 12. Where is the smooth, cleanable, nonabsorbent, and noncombustible material that is supposed to be between the hood and the gypsum board indicated on the drawings? Reference: Sections 106.3.1 and 507.9, IMC 2006. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 02/16/2010 | DELMA ROBEY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 02/16/2010 | DELMA ROBEY | REJECT SHELF | Completed |