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: COMMERCIAL - TI
Permit Number - T11CM00422
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - TI
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/16/2011 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/28/2011 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. SHEET X1.1; CODE ANALYSIS: UNDER 'PROJECT AREA', THE DRAWING INDICATES 9318 SF CONSISTING OF 1504.7 SF AT THE MAIN FLOOR, 90.3 SF AT THE PATIO, AND 203 SF AT THE MEZZANINE (THESE TOTAL 1798 SF). CORRECT THE SF AS REQUIRED. 2. SHEET X1.1; CODE ANALYSIS: WILL FOOD AND/OR DRINK BE SERVED ON THE PATIO? VERIFY. 3. SHEET A1; FLOOR AND MEZZANINE PLANS: PER THE 2006 IBC, SECTION 1009.1 (EXCEPTION 1), THE STAIR MUST HAVE A CLEAR WIDTH (BETWEEN HANDRAILS) OF 36". THE UPPER PORTION OF THE STAIR DOES NOT APPEAR TO MEET THIS CRITERIA. VERIFY AND INDICATE ON THE PLAN. 4. SHEET A1; MEZZANINE PLAN: KEYNOTE 16 INDICATES THE HANDRAIL EXTENDS 12" MINIMUM PAST THE TOP TREAD (PER 2006 IBC, SECTION 1012.5, IT IS 12" BEYOND THE TOP RISER). THIS DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE THE CASE ON THE DRAWING. VERIFY. 5. SHEET A1 (MEZZANINE PLAN); SHEET S1 (MEZZANINE FRAMING PLAN): THE ARCHITECTURAL SHEET INDICATES A NEW 6" METAL STUD WALL TO BE LOCATED 10" CLEAR FROM THE FACE OF THE EXISTING COLUMN, WHILE THE STRUCTURAL PLAN INDICATES THE NEW BEAM (W10X15) WHICH IS LOCATED 9" FROM THE CENTERLINE OF THE EXISTING COLUMN. COORDINATE PLANS. 6. SHEET A1; MEZZANINE PLAN: THE TWO SECTIONS CUT ON THIS PLAN ARE UNCLEAR. REVISE. 7. SHEET A1 (KEYNOTE 5); SHEET D1 (DETAIL 6): KEYNOTE 5 INDICATES THE TOP OF THE RAILING AT 38", WHILE DETAIL 6 INDICATES THE TOP OF THE RAIL AT 36". CLARIFY. 8. SHEET A1; KEYNOTE 17: THE NOTE READS THAT THE HANDRAIL IS TO EXTEND 11" PAST THE BOTTOM TREAD, WHILE THE 2006 IBC, SECTION 1012.5 INDICATES THE HANDRAIL TO EXTEND A MINIMUM OF 12" BEYOND THE RISER. REVISE. 9. SHEET A1; MAIN FLOOR PLAN: INDICATE THE MOP SINK (IN THE STORAGE ROOM 102) ON THE PLAN. 10. SHEET D1; DETAIL 7B: A NOTE INDICATES THE METAL PLATE IS FLUSH WITH THE CONCRETE, BUT THE DRAWING INDICATES OTHERWISE. CLARIFY. 11. SHEET S1 (GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES); SPECIAL INSPECTIOIN CERTIFICATE: THE CERTIFICATE INDICATES ONLY SPECIAL INSPECTIONS FOR WELDING AND FIREPROOFING, WHILE THE PLANS INDICATE 3000 PSI CONCRETE AND HIGH STRENGTH BOLTS. INCLUDE THESE ON THE CERTIFICATE. 12. SHEET S1 (FOUNDATION PLAN); SHEET S3 (DETAIL 212): THE DETAIL IS CUT AT A LANDING, BUT THE DETAIL INDICATES STAIR TREADS AND RISERS. REVISE THIS DETAIL AND COORDINATE THE LANDING LOCATION WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS (SHEET A1). 13. SHEET S1 (FOUNDATION PLAN); SHEET S2 (DETAIL 103): THE DETAIL 103 CUT AT THE STAIR LANDING INDICATES THE STAIR STRINGER IS SUPPORTED ON THE SLAB ON GRADE. REVISE THE DETAIL. HOW IS THE END OF THIS STAIR BEAM SUPPORTED? 14. SHEET S1 (MEZZANINE FRAMING PLAN); SHEET S3 (DETAIL 213): SEE COMMENT 5. VERIFY THE LOCATION OF THE NEW BEAM WITH RESPECT TO THE EXISTING COLUMN, AND REVISE THE DETAIL AS REQUIRED. 15. SHEET S1 (MEZZANINE FRAMING PLAN); SHEET S3 (DETAIL 201): IS THE DETAIL 201 CUT ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE MEZZANINE CORRECT? AN EXISTING BEAM IS INDICATED ON THE PLAN BUT NOT SHOWN ON THE DETAIL. CLARIFY. 16. SHEET S1; MEZZANINE FRAMING PLAN: AT THE NORTH PORTION OF THE MEZZANINE, PROVIDE A DETAIL INDICATING HOW THE NEW FLOOR JOISTS CONNECT TO THE EXISTING BEAM (SIMILAR TO DETAIL 204). 17. SHEET S3; DETAIL 208: A NOTE STATES 'MEZZANINE FRAMING NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY'. IS THERE MEZZANINE FRAMING IN THIS AREA? CLARIFY. 18. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| 04/05/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/05/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | Clarify the installation of multiple flow control devices for the hydromechanical grease interceptor; the manufacturer recommends the installation of a single flow control device for multiple fixture installations. Reference: Section 1003.3.4.2, IPC 2006. |
| 04/05/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Show how the fan coils are being connected to the building structure. Reference: Section 302.1, IMC 2006. 2. The new rooftop unit, HP-1, appears to be located within 10 feet of a roof edge that is elevated more than 30 inches above the adjoining grade. Provide guards for the equipment per Section 304.10, IMC 2006. 3. Item 14 on the kitchen equipment schedule (K2.1) calls out a microwave oven but the kitchen equipment specifications refer to a full-size convection oven which features a broiling mode and has a water connection for steam (Equipex model FC-100G). Clarify what type of appliance is to be installed and, if the convection oven/broiler is the desired appliance, explain why a Type I hood will not be required. Reference: Section 507.2, IMC 2006. |
| 04/06/2011 | RAY MAJUTA | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | T11CM00422 245 E Congress #193 New Restaurant The electrical plans have been denied for the following: 1. Sheet E-2, the lighting plan ground floor , light circuits are going to Panel A.The panel schedule shows them going to Panel M. 2. The water heater is not shown on the power plan. Ray T Majuta, Elect Pln Ck, PDSD, C of Tuc, 4/09/11, Ray.Majuta@tucsonaz.gov |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/19/2011 | GERARDO BONILLA | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 04/19/2011 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |