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

Permit Number: T09CM03304
Parcel: 132130730

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: COMMERCIAL NEW

Permit Number - T09CM03304
Review Name: COMMERCIAL NEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/04/2010 ROBERT SHERRY WATER REVIEW Approved
01/05/2010 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Provide plans sealed by an Arizona Registrant (sheets C-2.1 and C-2.2). Reference: Arizona Revised Statutes 32-125, Board of Technical Registration Rules R4-30-304.
2. Provide justification for constructing an 8" building sewer with only 313 connected fixture units. Reference: Section 717.0, UPS 2006.
3. A separate plumbing permit and plans approved by the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality are required for the installation of private manholes for the building sewer system.
4. The rim elevation of private sanitary manhole BCS#3 (2498.35) is less than 12" below the first floor elevation (2499.00). Provide a backwater valve prior to CO#1 per Section 710.1, UPC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson.
5. Coordinate the water service to the building with the civil. Sheets C-2.1 and C-2.2 indicate a different entrance point for the water service, a 3" meter and 3" copper service pipe. (Note that the location of the 3" meter, 3" reduced pressure backflow preventer, and the location of the service entrance that agrees with the civil drawings is shown on the background of P-1.1.)
6. Provide listing information for the Zurn "ZARB-1025-2" fitting used with the indirect waste receptor, D-9. Show how the installation depicted in detail 30/P-4.2 complies with Sections 411.1 and 804.1, UPC 2006. Clarify the nature of the "perforated vent cap" and indicate how it relates to the drain system. Reference: Sections 103.2.3 and 401.1, UPC 2006.
7. Provide information to show that the hub drains shown in details 16, 70, and 71/P-4.2 comply with Sections 411.1 and 804.1, UPC 2006.
8. Provide a MSDS sheet for the Kay Chemical detergent called out in the Fresh Line Equipment Schedule to show that it is a low hazard substance. Reference: Sections 103.2.3, 218.0 (Pollution), and 602.3, UPC 2006.
9. Provide listing information for the detergent injection box to show how it provides backflow protection. Reference: Section 603.1, UPC 2006.
10. Provide listing information for the "Watts NN9-CD" specified in the Fresh Line Equipment Schedule. Reference: Section 603.1, UPC 2006.
11. If the pressure boosting system shown in detail 44/P-4.2 is to be installed, provide a low-pressure cut-off switch prior to the pump inlets. Reference: Section 609.8, UPC 2006.
12. Include all fixtures (e.g. include equipment noted on the Fresh Line and the Food Service schedules) when calculating the total demand and determining pipe sizes. Reference: Section 610.1, UPC 2006.
13. Verify the water pressure used to calculate the pipe sizes. (According to Tucson Water, the range of water pressures available from the Park Avenue side of the property is 52 - 59 PSI; the range from the 36th Street area is approximately 1 PSI higher.) Reference: Sections 103.2.3 and 610.1, UPC 2006.
14. The branch piping sizes called out for the flush valves (1" for the water closets and ¾" for the urinals) 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.
15. Provide upper terminal cleanouts on horizontal drainage pipes exceeding 5 feet in length (horizontal drain lines serving sinks and urinals require cleanouts regardless of length). Reference: Section 707.4, UPC 2006.
16. Provide overflow roof drains for each roof drain location (sheet P-5.1 does not show overflow drains for 16 of the 22 roof areas). Reference: Section 1101.11.2, UPC 2006.
17. Revise the design of the combination waste and vent system for the bakery to comply with the provisions of Section 910.0, UPC 2006.
18. The minimum sizes for the roof drains shall be per the 2006 UPC, not the IPC. Note that the minimum roof drain sizing (the size of each roof drain outlet, not the outer diameter of the roof drain) is based on a storm of 60-minutes duration and a 100-year return period, i.e. 3" per hour for Tucson. Reference: Sections 1101.11.1, 1105.0, 1106.0, and Table D-1, UPC 2006.
19. Condensate drains may not terminate with a direct connection to a rain water leader. Condensate drains may terminate over a roof drain or gutter if the roof drain or gutter terminates at or above grade in an area capable or absorbing the condensate flow without surface drainage. Reference: Section 307.2.1, IMC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson and Sections 311.4 and 807.2, UPC 2006.
01/08/2010 RAY MAJUTA ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied Project 3434 S Kino Pwy,
Costco
T09CM03304

The electrical plans for this project have been denied for the following items:

1.The Outdoor Lighting Calculations provided are incorrect.
The calculation must provide the square footage of the property involved,note the area in, note which option to be used, all outdoor fixtures even ones used on the building are used to figure in the calculation. Noticed no 'P' fixtures as per site plan used in the calculation.This calculation to be sealed by EE.
2. Provide a fault current calculation on the electrical plans showing the faults from the service on through to the panels.
3. The equipment ground from the utility transformer to the main service not allowed per utility.
4.If the tap box for the future tie into the generator is to be installed under this permit, provide information of type of enclosure and terminals, and size.
5. Sheet E-2, provide panel and circuit designations for battery chargers and fork lift receptacles on power plan.
6. Sheet E-4, circuit H2-47 has 21 H fixtures,14 J fixtures,5 D fixtures, and 4 C fixtures.Total approx 20.7 amps with no continuous duty added?
7. Switchboards MSB and MDP do not appear to comply with clearance requirements of 2005 NEC 110-26.C.2, The panic hardware required on this same section is to be noted on the electrical plan.
8. Sheet E-4, identify circuit P-8,37 and 39, in the Photo Center Power Plan, There also appears to be 2 -50 amp 208/v receptacles in this area un-named.
9. Sheet E-8, Identify the circuits for Compressor Racks A,B,C,D, and Condensor M-5, on the electrical plans , they can be on other plans but they are to be included on the electrical plans.
10.Sheet E-2, Identify the panel and circuits for P-2 circuits 1-6 on power plans.
11. All circuits in Panel P-3 except for circuits 56 through 66 are not shown on the power plans, include in the electrical plans.
12. All circuits in panel P-5 are not in the electrical plans, they are to be drawn in the electrical plans sealed by the EE.
13.Sheet E-9 Panel P-C, could not locate circuits 12,14,16,18,on power plans.
14.Sheet E-9, Panel P-9, could not locate circuits 51--63 on power plan.

Include all circuits on electrical plans not on any other plans.

Ray T Majuta
Elect Pln Ck
PDSD, City of Tucson,
1/11/10
Ray.Majuta@tucsonaz.gov
01/12/2010 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Cosco 3434 S. Kino Pkwy
T09CM03304 & T09CM03305
Building Plan (1st Review)

TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 11, 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. The building plans appear to be in compliance with the last submitted Development package. At this time the Development package has not been approved by all PDSD agencies therefore zoning cannot approve the building plants.

3. Zoning will re-review the building plan on the next submittal to insure compliance with the approved and stamped Development Package. 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\t09cm03304.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED:
01/14/2010 ELIZABETH LEIBOLD ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied Submit approved copy of Development plan planview sheets with resubmittal. Once plans can be shown to match approved Development Plans, approval form Engineering will be provided.
12/17/2009 DAVE MANN FIRE REVIEW Approved
12/18/2009 RONALD BROWN BUILDING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. There are additional fees for deferred submittals. Please provide a letter of Deferred Submittals summary to:
Mr. LeeRay Hanly
Chief Inspector
Planning and Development Services Department
Please include the steel stair deferred submital from the structural documents.
2. At detail 16/G2.02 please show grab bar as depicted per detail 9/G2.02.
3. Please provide a copy of the final approved site plan.
4. Please provide a summary of the occupancy load calculations.
5. As per the 2006 IBC, Table 2902.1, there is required 1 drinking fountain per every 1000 people. For a total of 4,134 people, 5 are required. I find only three shown on the plans.
Please clarify the descrepancy.

STRUCTURAL REVIEW COMMENTS:

6. SHEETS SD2.02/S6.1; TRELLIS AND SHADE STRUCTURES: PROVIDE STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR THE TWO TRELLIS STRUCTURES AND THE SHADE STRUCTURE.
7. SHEET SD2.02; SHEET S6.1: SHEET SD2.02 INDICATES TWO SHADE STRUCTURES, WHILE SHEET S6.1 INDICATES ONE. CLARIFY.
8. SHEET S2.3 (MEAT COOLER PLAN); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (MP.4): THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE THE COLUMNS ARE HSS8X8X3/8, WHILE THE PLAN INDICATES HSS8X8X5/16. CLARIFY.
9. SHEET S0.2: PROVIDE STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR THE LIGHT POLE FOUNDATION.
10. GENERAL: PROVIDE THE STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS AND DRAWINGS FOR THE METAL BUILDING (BUTLER). ENW ENGINEERS TO VERIFY FOOTING SIZES PER BUTLER CALCULATIONS.
11. GENERAL: ALL DEFERRED SUBMITTALS (STAIR/METAL BUILDING) MUST BE APPROVED BY LEERAY HANLY AT THE CITY OF TUCSON DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PRIOR TO PLAN REVIEW.
12. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS.


END OF REVIEW
12/18/2009 RONALD BROWN ZONING HC REVIEW Denied Reference the building review for comments.
12/22/2009 GERRY KOZIOL WWM REVIEW Denied NEED TO SHOW LOCATION & METHOD OF CONNECTION TO PUBLIC SEWER FOR ENTIRE SITE(THE BRIDGES-BLOCK 1-16) NEED TO PERMIT ON-SITE PRIVATE SEWER. NEED COPY OF ON -SITE PRIVATE SEWER. NEED DEQ REVIEW & APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT ON-SITE PRIVATE SEWER.
NEED WASTEWATER/ INDUSTRIAL CONTROL REVIEW & APPROVAL OF FOOD SERVICE/ TIRE INSTALL/ PHOTO CENTER- tON TOMCHAK 443-6200 5025 W INA RD

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
02/02/2010 CPIERCE1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed