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 - T10CM03349
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/20/2011 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 01/20/2011 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Passed | Reference Builing Folder for comments |
| 01/24/2011 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 01/24/2011 | RAY MAJUTA | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 01/31/2011 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Denied | NEED TO PROVIDE APPROVED REVISED DP (WW APPROVED) NEED CAPACITY EVALUATED AND/OR POINT AND METHOD OF CONNECTION (PMOC) APPROVED BY PCRWRD DEV LIAISON UNIT- 3RD FL PWB- 740-6534 CONSTRUCTING IN OR OVER AN EASEMENT IS PROHIBITED UNLESS PRIOR PERMISSION HAS BEEN OBTAINED FROM PARTY RESPONSABLE FOR THAT EASEMENT BACK WATER VALVE MAY BE REQUIRED IF FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION IS NOT 12" ABOVE FLOOD RIM OF THE CLOSEST UPSTREAM MANHOLE NEEDS IWC REVIEW/APPROVAL- TOM TOMCHAK- 443-6200- 5025 W INA RD DUMPSTER/REFUGE AREAS WITH DRAINS SHALL BE PITCHED CURBED, WALLED AND/OR COVERED SO NOT TO ALLOW EXCESS RAIN WATER TO BE ROUTED INTO THE SANITARY SEWER. |
| 02/01/2011 | RONALD BROWN | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | PREVIOUS COMMENTS 2 AND 3: 1. The details provided for both exhaust hoods are not sufficient. Please provide complete detail structural design connection details with complete structural calculations. PREVIOUS COMMENT 5: 2. A letter addressed to the building offical, Mr. Ron Boose must be sent summarizing all submittal items being deferred including the roof trusses. T10CM03349 ROADHOUSE RESTAURANT STRUCTURAL REVIEW 02-07-11 1. SHEET S1; STRUCTURAL NOTES (FOUNDATION AND BACKFILLING): NOTE 1 INDICATES A SOIL REPORT WAS USED. PROVIDE THAT REPORT FOR THE CITY OF TUCSON REVIEW. 2. SHEET S2 (FOUNDATION PLAN); SHEET S4 (DETAIL 10): THE SECTION CUT AT GRIDS A.8 AND 1, AND GRIDS E AND 1, INDICATES A DETAIL 10/S4, BUT SHEET S4 INDICATES THAT SECTION IS NOT USED. CLARIFY. 3. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS: IT APPEARS THERE ARE CALCULATIONS BETWEEN SHEETS 12A AND 43A THAT ARE MISSING (STEEL FRAMING). PROVIDE. 4. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. END OF COMMENTS |
| 02/01/2011 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | Zoning cannot approve the building plans until approval of the development plan. Compliance with the DP plans is required. D10-0039 |
| 02/03/2011 | BETH GRANT | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Completed | |
| 02/04/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Denied | Comment not resolved. The Utility Plan, C5.0, shows a backflow preventer located immediately downstream of the water meter but detail 1/P6 shows a 2" reduced pressure backflow prevention assembly located inside of the mechanical room. In addition, a 1-1/2" water meter is still called out on sheet C5.0 and no 2" water meter is mentioned on the plumbing drawings. [Reduced pressure backflow prevention assemblies for the domestic water service are required to be installed directly after the water meter. Reduced pressure backflow prevention assemblies are also required to be installed in locations accessible to Tucson Water. Reference: COT Backflow Prevention Ordinance, http://www.tucsonaz.gov/water/docs/backflow-ord.pdf ] |
| 02/04/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Comment not resolved. All plumbing fixtures and fittings shall be listed or labeled by a nationally-recognized, accredited conformity assessment company (e.g. UL, ETL, UPC, etc). UL94V-1 is a burn rate test only for the combustible materials used in the roof drain. ASME A112.6.4-2003 is the typical standard for roof, deck, and balcony drains. Reference: Section 301.1.1, UPC 2006. [Provide the manufacturer's listing information for the flex-i-drain roof drains. Reference: Section 301.1.1, UPC 2006.] 2. Comment not addressed; no calculations found on the drawings. In addition, clarify the note on the riser diagram on sheet P5 calling for a ¾" cold water drop to a reduced pressure backflow prevention assembly which then serves a 1-1/4" supply to the Piranha system. [Provide water pressure and water pipe sizing calculations. Include the demand and water velocities resulting from the inclusion of the Piranha fire suppression system in the domestic water distribution system. Reference: Sections 610.1 and 610.12, UPC 2006.] 3. Comment not resolved. The circuit vent at the bar area does not include the size of the horizontal branch drain, the size of the downstream vertical vent, and there is no upstream circuit vent as defined in Section L 7.0, UPC 2006. [Provide a vent for each fixture trap. Reference: Sections 901.0 and 910.1, UPC 2006.] 4. Comment not addressed; no calculations found on the drawings. [Provide calculations to show how the size of the gravity grease interceptor was determined. Reference: Section 1014.3.6.1, UPC 2006.] |
| 02/04/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Comment not resolved. The termination of the roof drains has not been determined because there is no storm sewer system for them to connect with. Approved terminations for condensate drains can be found in Section 307.2.1, IMC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson. [Condensate drains may not discharge directly onto the roof. See Section 307.2.1, IMC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson for approved condensate drain terminations.] 2. Comment not resolved; the referenced detail, 20/M4 is not shown. [Clarify the duct construction noted in keynote #13 on sheet M1. Reference: Sections 506.3 and 506.4, IMC 2006.] 3. Comment not resolved. No structural details showed how the hood supports are to be attached to the roof structure. [Provide structural details to show how the Type I and Type II hoods are connected to the building structure. Reference: Sections 302.1 and 507.6, IMC 2006.] 4. Comment not resolved; no listing information for the hoods was found in the submittal. [Provide the listing information for the Type I hoods. Reference: Sections 507.1 (exception 1) and 507.13, IMC 2006.] |
| 02/17/2011 | ELIZABETH LEIBOLD | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Development package must be approved before Engineering will be able to approve building plans. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 02/24/2011 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 02/24/2011 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |