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 Number: T11CM01094
Parcel: 12710017D

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL

Permit Number - T11CM01094
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
05/25/2011 RONALD BROWN BUILDING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Special Inspection Certifications must be submitted and approved prior to permit issuance.
2. The following doors need to be schedule to not receive a door closer or otherwise provide a 12" clearance on the strike side as required by ANSI, Section 404.2.3.1 (b):
121, 134, and 127.
3. Please provide a appeal to the building for door numbers 116, 117 and 129 for code non-compliance.
END OF REVIEW
06/06/2011 RAY MAJUTA ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Approved
06/08/2011 GERRY KOZIOL WWM REVIEW Denied NEED ADDRESSING REVIEW
NEED WW PLUMBING DEMO DRAWINGS FOR CREDIT IF APPLICABLE
06/13/2011 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: San Raphael Medical PLaza
T11CM01094
Building Plan (2nd Review)

TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 13, 2011


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 Development plan has been approved.

3. Zoning will re-review the building plan on the next submittal to insure compliance with the approved Development 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\t11cm01094.doc
06/21/2011 ROBERT SHERRY WATER REVIEW Denied Comment not addressed. Show the location of the existing water meter and reduced pressure backflow preventer for the building water service.
06/21/2011 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Comment not addressed. The demand for the new work is about 44 GPM which will result in a velocity of over 11 feet per second in the existing 1-1/4" water supply pipe. [Original comment: Show how the new water piping relates to the existing water supply system and show that the additional connections do not cause the existing piping to be overloaded (note the excessive pressure drop across the existing water meter - 9 PSI). Reference: Section 101.5.1, UPC 2006.]
2. Comment not addressed. Provide a design for the mounting shelf for the water heater along with structural calculations to show that the water heater is safely supported. Reference: Sections 310.0 and 314.5, UPC 2006.
3. Comment not resolved; see comment #1. The submitted water pressure calculations do not support the size of water piping to the fixtures. Reference: Section 610.1, UPC 2006.
4. Comment not addressed. The branch piping sizes called out for the flush valves will result in water velocities greater than 8 FPS. Limit the water velocity to less than 8 FPS for the copper piping. Reference: Sections 610.12 and A 6.1, UPC 2006 and IS 3-2003, Section 2.6.
5. Comment not addressed. Provide calculations to support the scupper design or Revise the size of the provided scuppers to comply with the requirements of Section 1101.11.2.1, UPC 2006. Reference: Sections 1101.11.1 and 1101.11.2.1, UPC 2006.
6. Comment not addressed. The height of the overflow is 4" above the inlet to the primary roof drain; provide structural calculations to show that the roof can support the weight of water that will accumulate if the primary roof drain is blocked. Reference: Section 1101.11.2, UPC 2006 and Section 1611.1, IBC 2006. (Note that the specified model number for the Froet roof drain is incorrect.)
7. Comment not addressed. Revise the overflow drain on the specified combination roof drain and overflow drain to include a strainer. Reference: Section 1105.2, UPC 2006.
8. Comment not resolved. The conductor material and slope are shown but the size of the conductors is incorrect and no route or termination points are shown. [Original comment: Provide a design for the roof drain conductors; i.e. show the material, sizes, routes, terminations, and slopes of the conductors. Reference: Chapter 11, UPC 2006.]
06/21/2011 ROBERT SHERRY MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied Comment not addressed. Provide energy code compliance calculations for the building envelope (the correct climate zone is 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. Reference: Sections 101.4 and 104.2, International Energy Conservation Code 2006.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
06/23/2011 CPIERCE1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
06/23/2011 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed