Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Permit Number - T10CM02221
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/24/2011 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Building plan will be reviewed once all site plan comments have been addressed. No site plan submitted under 2nd review. |
| 08/26/2011 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | PREVIOUS COMMENTS: 1. DID NOT VERIFY. 2. DID NOT REVISE. 3. DID NOT REVISE. 4. THE STAIR AND HANDRAIL NOTE ARE STILL ON THE DRAWINGS. 5. DID NOT REVISE. 6. OK. 7. DID NOT REVISE. 8. NO SPECIFICATIONS PROVIDED. 9. REFERENCE THE DETAILS ON THE PLAN. 10. THE STAIR IS STILL ON THE DRAWINGS. 11. THE STAIR IS STILL ON THE DRAWINGS. 12. THE STAIR IS STILL ON THE DRAWINGS. 13. DID NOT REVISE. 14. THE NOTE IS STILL ON THE DRAWINGS. 15. DID NOT REVISE. 16. THE SECOND FLOOR FRAMING IS STILL ON THE DRAWINGS. THE BEAM IN QUESTION (B1) IS A ROOF BEAM. INDICATE ON THE PLAN. 17. THE SECOND FLOOR FRAMING IS STILL ON THE DRAWINGS. 18. DID NOT REVISE. 19. DID NOT REVISE. 20. THE SECOND FLOOR FRAMING IS STILL ON THE DRAWINGS. 21. DID NOT REVISE. THE DRAWINGS DO NOT MATCH THE CALCULATIONS. 22. DID NOT REVISE. 23. DID NOT REVISE. 24. THE SECOND FLOOR FRAMING IS STILL ON THE DRAWINGS. 25. DID NOT REVISE. 26. OK. 27. DID NOT REVISE. 28. DID NOT REVISE. 29. DID NOT REVISE. 30. DID NOT REVISE. 31. DID NOT REVISE. 32. DID NOT REVISE. THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE PLYWOOD. 33. DID NOT REVISE. 34. DID NOT REVISE. 35. DID NOT REVISE. 36. DID NOT REVISE. 37. NO REPLY. 38. DID NOT REVISE. 39-45. NO REPLY. 46. PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. 47. NEW COMMENT: REVISE ALL DRAWINGS THAT INDICATE A SECOND FLOOR (PLANS, NOTES, DETAILS, ELEVATIONS, ETC.). |
| 08/26/2011 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Denied | need capacity evaluation by kurt stemm- 3rd floor- 740-6607 need WW/IWC review of greasse interseptor by Tom Tomchak- 443-6200 5025 W Ina RD need 5rd floor credir evaluation clarify water lines from restrooms to sewer |
| 08/29/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Comment not addressed. Provide a letter from Tucson Water confirming that the use of a 1" water meter will be allowed for this project (48 fixture units equates to a demand of 28 GPM). 2. No site plan submitted. Show the location of the backflow preventer (RP) on the site plan. |
| 08/29/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | No new mechanical plans or envelope energy calculations have been submitted. Refer to the original comments: 1. Provide energy code compliance calculations using the current code (Zone 2, Pima County < 4,000 feet). 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. Coordinate the drawing notes with the details, e.g. details 6, 7, 8, and 11 on sheet 7 call for R-38 blown-in insulation but the notes on sheet 3 call for R-30 insulation and the sections on sheet 10 call for R-38 batt insulation; the exterior walls are called out as 8" CMU with a 4" furr-out but the notes call for 5-1/2", R-19 insulation. Reference: Sections 101.4 and 104.2, International Energy Conservation Code 2006. 2. Provide the installed weight of the rooftop equipment. Reference: Section 106.3.1, IMC 2006. 3. Provide a mechanical design for the proposed building addition that clearly shows that the installation will comply with the requirements of Sections 302, 307, 309, 401, and 601, IMC 2006. Reference: Section 106.3.1, IMC 2006. 4. Provide a design for the proposed Type I hood installation that clearly shows that the installation will comply with the requirements of Sections 302, 506, 507, and 508, IMC 2006. Reference: Section 106.3.1, IMC 2006. |
| 08/31/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. According to the title sheet, the 2006 International Plumbing Code with Local Amendments is to be used for this activity. If this is the decision, remove all references to the 2006 IRC and to the 2006 UPC on the remaining drawings. 2. Revise the waste and vent isometrics to coordinate with the plumbing plans. Clarify which plumbing is existing (e.g. restrooms?) versus new work. The waste and vent diagram for the restrooms does not appear to indicate any extension of the building drain to a building sewer. Reference: Section 106.3.1, IPC 2006. 3. Comment not resolved; coordinate the plumbing plans with the waste and vent diagram, removing all pencil entries. If the floor sink that was shown in the west section of the kitchen is now a mop sink, provide hot and cold water service to it. Reference: Section 106.3.1 and 607, IPC 2006. [Original comment: Provide the minimum plumbing facilities (e.g. a service sink) required by Table 2902.1 and Section 2902.2, IBC 2006, for an assembly (A2) occupancy.] 4. Comment not addressed. Clearly indicate the materials (e.g. Type M Copper, Schedule 40 PVC, etc) to be used in the proposed plumbing systems for this activity. Reference: Sections 106.3.1, 303, 402, 605, 702, 902, and 1102, IPC 2006; Section 403, IFGC 2006. 5. Comment not addressed; there are no bath groups in this activity and the water distribution system shall be designed for the minimum available pressure. Revise the water calculations and the water supply and waste fixture-unit schedules on sheets 13 and 14 to coordinate with the submitted plans. Reference: Sections 106.3.1 and 604, IPC 2006. 6. Comment not addressed. Provide a site plumbing drawing that clearly shows the building sewer (route, size, material, and locations of cleanouts) and how it relates to the proposed building drains. Reference: Section 106.3.1, IPC 2006. 7. Comment not addressed. The maximum flow rates for plumbing fixtures shall be consistent with ARS Title 45, Chapter 1, Article 12. (See text at: http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ArizonaRevisedStatutes.asp). In addition, Accessible metering faucets shall remain open for a minimum of 10 seconds. Reference: Section 606.4, ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003. 8. Comment not addressed. Show how the temperature of the hot water supply to the public lavatories is controlled. Reference: Section 416.5 and 607, IPC 2006 and Section 504.3, IECC 2006. 9. New kitchen equipment sheet not submitted; comment not addressed. Appliances (e.g. soda dispensers, ice makers, etc) to be directly connected to the water supply system that do not have listed, integral backflow preventers or integral air gaps conforming to ASME A112.1.2 require backflow prevention. Specify the type of backflow prevention device required for each water connection. Reference: Sections 608.1 and 608.3, IPC 2006. 10. Comment not resolved. The specified grease interceptor is not listed for exterior installation and does not have a 2" inlet or outlet. [Original comment: Specify the proposed grease interceptor (type, manufacturer, model, and listings) and show which fixtures are to be connected to the interceptor. Reference: Sections 103.2.3 and 1014.0, UPC 2006.] 11. Comment not resolved. Clarify the roof drainage shown on sheet 8. The east side of the existing pitched roof appears to have no drainage. Indicate from where all of the sections on sheet 10 have been taken. Reference: Section 106.3.1, IPC 2006. [Original comment: Clarify the roof drainage shown on sheet 8. The west side (?) of the existing pitched roof appears to have no drainage. Provide a north arrow on all building plans and indicate from where all of the sections on sheet 10 have been taken. Reference: Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006.] 12. Comment not addressed. Provide roof drainage calculations and plans. Provide overflow protection for the roof. Include the effect of side walls draining onto the roof in the calculations. Reference: Sections 1101.11 and 1106.0, UPC 2006. |
| 08/31/2011 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Airport Inn Expansion T10CM02221 Building Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 8, 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 can not approve the building plan until the site plan has been approved. 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\t10cm02221.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: |
| 09/06/2011 | GBONILL1 | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Needs Review | |
| 09/06/2011 | GBONILL1 | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Needs Review |