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 - T11CM00662
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - TI
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/04/2011 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/14/2011 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. SHEET g1.2; CODE ANALYSIS: PROVIDE VERBIAGE IN THE ANALYSIS INDICATING ADEQUACY OF THE EXISTING PLUMBING FIXTURES FOR THE 70 ADDITIONAL OCCUPANTS, AND THAT THE LOCATION OF THE TOILET FACILITIES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 2902.4.1 OF THE 2006 IBC. 2. SHEET s2.0 (COLUMN SCHEDULE); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS: DID NOT LOCATE THE STEEL COLUMN C1 DESIGN IN THE CALCULATIONS. VERIFY. 3. SHEET s2.0 (FOOTING SCHEDULE); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS: DID NOT LOCATE THE FOOTING F2 DESIGN IN THE CALCULATIONS. VERIFY. 4. SHEET s2.0 (LEDGER SCHEDULE); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS: DID NOT LOCATE THE STEEL LEDGER DESIGN IN THE CALCULATIONS. VERIFY. 5. SHEET s2.0 (FOUNDATION PLAN); DETAIL 111: A NOTE 3 ON THE FOUNDATION PLAN INDICATES JOINT FILLER AT THE EXISTING BUILDING, WHILE DETAIL 111 DOES NOT INDICATE THE FILLER. VERIFY. 6. SHEET s4.0 (DETAIL 208); SHEET 1a5.1 (DETAIL 11): THE LOCATION OF THE TS6X2 THAT RUNS PARALLEL TO THE WALL VARIES ON THESE TWO DETAILS. COORDINATE. 7. SHEET 1a5.4; DETAIL 2: IS THERE A SITE WALL ON THIS PROJECT AS DETAILED HERE? NO FEE WAS INCLUDED FOR THIS. VERIFY. 8. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| 03/16/2011 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 03/24/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | Revise the size of the scupper for the 1460-square foot portion of the addition to comply with the requirements of Section 1101.11.2.1, UPC 2006. Refer also to Section 1106.4, UPC 2006. |
| 03/24/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/24/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | Revise the energy code analysis, coordinating the building components used in the analysis with those shown on the drawing. Specifically, the roof construction in the report is shown as "other" but no supporting documentation has been provided (see footnote 'b' on the submitted COMcheck Envelope Compliance Certificate). Reference: Section 502, IECC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 03/31/2011 | RAY MAJUTA | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/05/2011 | CPIERCE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 04/05/2011 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |