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
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Permit Number - T10CM00802
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/12/2010 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied | Fire Comments: Please provide a comment letter describing how each comment has been addressed. Provide the following data on the site plans. Comments based on OC201. Please indicate existing fire hydrant location(s), with dimensions to buildings and/or property lines. Refer to City of Tucson amendments to the 2006 International Fire Code (section 508) for spacing and location requirements. The new hydrant is too far from the back of the elephant house and the the Ranger Station if it is not sprinklered. The distance is measured around the buiding. Not as the crow flies. |
| 07/12/2010 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Reviewed submittal as to compliance with Eric's previous accessibility comments. The ERD building is not shown on any of the Civil drawings, architectural floor plans, mechanical drawings, electrical drawings and the ERD floor plan as to it's location. Please identify clearly identify where it is located on all relative drawings of this construction drawing package. |
| 07/13/2010 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Denied | need PCRWRD site plan review- 3rd floor- Engineering 740-6500. need PCRWRD/IWC review- Tom Tomchak - 5025 W Ina Rd - 443-6200. need PCRWRD review of air release manhole off 6" and 20" per pc-201 |
| 07/13/2010 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Reid Park Zoo Elephant Exhibit T10CM00802 Building Plan (2nd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 13, 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 could not verify that the building plan was in compliance with the approved site plan.. Please submit two copies of the approved and stamped site plan with the next building plan submittal. 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\t10cm00802.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: |
| 07/16/2010 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/22/2010 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/22/2010 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Comment not resolved. Detail 209 still calls for the condensate drain from the water heater to be terminated in the landscaping. Plumbing plan 1P101 (and keynote #11) calls for a direct connection of the condensate waste pipe to the tailpiece of a sink. Condensate from a fuel-fired appliance shall be drained to an indirect waste receptor; See Section 814.1, UPC 2006. Reference: Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006. 2. The "DC-2" double check valve assembly does not appear to be specified on the drawings. Double check valve assemblies are not listed for use in preventing backflow in health-hazard situations and in the case of the various stock watering devices (e.g. the Nelson Drinker), individual points of use shall be separately protected from backflow conditions. Reference: Sections 103.2.3 and 602.3 and Table 6-2, UPC 2006. 3. Comment not resolved; considering that this is an assembly occupancy, the fixture units for the water closets account for over half of the total fixture units in the building. Calculate the water demand for a system that is predominately for flushometer valves. Reference: Section A2.1, UPC 2006. 4. Comment not resolved. Show how the calculations shown on sheet 1P101 result in a sand separator that performs at least as well as one sized per the requirements of Section 1016.2, UPC 2006. See also Section 301.2, UPC 2006. Show the minimum slope for the waste pipe serving the interceptor (i.e. will the drain pipe be sized to be self-cleaning). Reference: Section 1003.1, UPC 2006. 5. Comment not resolved; scupper #2 is shown as only 4" high. Reference: Sections 1101.11.1 and 1101.11.2.1, UPC 2006, and Section 1611.1, IBC 2006. 6. With only one downspout, the 4"x 4" gutter serving the 1413 square foot ERD roof is too small. See Table 11-3, UPC 2006 to select the correct gutter size. Reference: Sections 103.2.3 and 1101.11.1, UPC 2006. |
| 07/22/2010 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Comment not resolved; provide a copy of the documentation exempting this building from complying with the Sustainable Energy Standard. Provide energy code compliance calculations for the building envelope and the mechanical equipment. Provide sufficient detail on the drawings to compare the energy compliance of the building envelope with the energy code compliance calculations. 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, International Energy Conservation Code 2006. 2. Comment not resolved; the mechanical drawings still do not match with the architectural drawings the infrared heaters and both versions still appear to be mounted too close to combustible materials. Clarify the location of the low-intensity infrared heaters and indicate the required minimum clearance from combustibles. The architectural section (1/1A-301) indicates a different location within the clerestory area than the mechanical plan, 1M-102, that appears to provide inadequate clearance. |
| 07/23/2010 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/06/2010 | RAY MAJUTA | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/10/2010 | CPIERCE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 09/10/2010 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |