Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Permit Number - T11CM01744
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/10/2011 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | The site plan must be approved first. |
| 06/13/2011 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied | Fire Comments: Sheets A1.0, A1.2, A1.6 1. Clearly show the H4 occupancy area on the plans. 2. Panic hardware is required on doors 118 a and B. The doors must swing out. See IFC Section 1008.1. Sheet A1.7 1. The wall sections for the H/F separation shall be symetrical per IBC 703.2.1. |
| 06/15/2011 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Denied | NEED TO BUILD PUBLIC SEWER- NEED PUBLIC SEWER CONSTRUCTION PERMIT- NEED HOLD HARMLESS LETTER NEED 3RD FLOOR REVIEW OF CAPACITY & LOCATION/METHOD OF CONNECTION TO PUBLIC SEWER- CHAD- 740-6547 NEED WASTEWATER IWC REVIEW OF SANDOIL INTERCEPTOR- 5025 W INA RD- TOM TOMCHAK- 443-6200 NEED TO CONNECT4"BACK WASH FINES SEPARATION TANK WITH 4" OUTLET & TRENCH DRAIN"B" TO SEWER WITH A DIVERTER VAVLE TO RECLAIIM WASTE IRRIGATION SYSTEM- DEQ- 243-7400 NEED PCRWRD REVIEW FOR WATER VOLUME & SOLIDS DISCHARGED INTO PUBLIC SEWER FOR WATER PURIFICATION PLANT |
| 06/21/2011 | BETH GRANT | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Completed | |
| 06/21/2011 | SREEVES1 | WATER | REVIEW | Needs Review | CANNOT BE REVIEWED UNTIL APPROVED SET RETURNED FROM 2ND PARTY |
| 06/23/2011 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 06/23/2011 Development Services Department Zoning Review Section Terry Stevens Lead Planner Comments: 1. The building plan has been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until it has been approved by the Engineering, and Landscape Review Sections and until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 2. Zoning could not verify that the building plan was in compliance with the approved site plan. Please submit two copies of the approved and stamped site, landscape, and NPPO plans with the next building plan submittal. 3. Zoning will re-review the building plan on the next submittal to insure compliance with the approved site plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming. |
| 06/24/2011 | STANTEC | 2ND PARTY REVIEW | REVIEW | Denied | June 24, 2011 To: Ron Boose, Building Official City of Tucson Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue, First Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701 Re: Culligan Water - New Warehouse City of Tucson No. T11CM01744 Stantec Project No. 816-30015 (11-013) Plan review for the above-referenced project has been completed, per the 2006 IBC, IMC, IPC, IECC, ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003, the 2005 NEC, all with local amendments, and the Tucson Outdoor Lighting Code. This letter reflects comments to be addressed with a written response to each of the noted items indicating the action taken. In order to facilitate a shorter back-check time, we request that you please provide revised plans and calculations, clouding any changes that have been made. SCOPE OF REVIEW: The scope of this review covers Architectural, Structural, Plumbing, Mechanical and Electrical. All features were checked only to the extent allowed by the submittal provided. All portions of the project are assumed to meet or will meet other departmental requirements, conditions and concerns before permit approval. GENERAL: " There are no general comments to be addressed CIVIL: " On Civil Sheet 1 of 4 there is a reference to a handicap ramp in front of the building; the reference indicates to look at a detail on Sheet 4 of 4. There is no ramp detail at this location. Please correct. Also, Keynote 14 on Sheet 3 of 4 indicates the location of truncated domes; the location is incorrect [ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 Sec. 406.13]. Truncated dome strips need to be 24" wide and are placed along the curb line adjacent to the parking area. ARCHITECTURAL: " The code analysis on Sheet T1 indicates that a combination of "separated uses" and "non-separated uses" is being applied. The analysis also implies that the "non-separated uses" applies to the office and mezzanine only. Should the F-2 Occupancy "processing plant" also be included in the list of "non-separated uses" [2006 IBC Sec. 508.3.2]? The H-4 Occupancy is the only occupancy required to be separated from all of the other uses by fire barriers [2006 IBC Sec. 508.3.2.3 Exception and Sec. 508.3.3.4.1]. Please clarify on the code analysis. " The code analysis on Sheet T1 indicates that there is an H-4 Occupancy "chemical storage" room, and we have received MSDS sheets for caustic soda and hydrochloric acid. What are the quantities of these stored materials? It is difficult to determine if the maximum quantities per control area have been exceeded without knowing the maximum quantities to be stored [2006 IBC Table 307.1 (2)]. " Exit doors from all "H" Occupancies require panic hardware [2006 IBC Sec. 1008.1.9]. Door 118B serves as the exit from Bulk Chemical Room 118 and requires panic hardware; the current panic hardware set indicated on Sheet A1.6 does not include panic hardware. " Wall Sections 2 and 8 on Sheet A1.7 are suppose to show sections through the required fire barriers surrounding the Bulk Chemical Room 118. Wall Section 2 indicates that it is a 2-hour fire rated assembly, however there is no indication that this is a listed UL assembly or a prescriptive assembly [2006 IBC Table 720.1(2)]. Also, why is this assembly 2 hours? This exterior wall is not a 2-hour fire barrier required to separate occupancies [2006 IBC Sec. 706.6]; it should be a 1-hour exterior wall [2006 IBC Sec. 705] required because of the distance to property line [2006 IBC Table 602]. Wall Section 8 does not indicate that it is a required 2-hour fire barrier [2006 IBC Sec. 508.3.2 and Sec. 706.3.8] and again there is no indication that this is a listed UL assembly or a prescriptive assembly [2006 IBC Table 720.1(2)]. And last, the fire barriers currently shown imply they are providing fire protection from only one side; i.e. there is gypsum board only on one side of the wall. For fire barriers the assembly must protect from fire on either side of the wall. For the exterior wall, since the distance to property line is greater than 5 feet protection is only required on the inside face of the wall [2006 IBC Sec. 704.5]. {Also, Sheet A1.0 shows both a Wall Section 8 and a Wall Section 8B; what does the "B" mean?} " The exiting on the mezzanine does not work. The mezzanine requires two exits because the common path of egress travel would be more than 100 feet for only one exit [2006 IBC Sec. 505.3]. The stair from the mezzanine to the inside of the production warehouse is adequate for one of the exits, however the exterior stair from the lunch room is not because the exit access travels through an intervening room [2006 IBC Sec. 1014.2]. Exit access to this second "exit" from an office on the mezzanine requires going out into the corridor, through a door into the multi-purpose room, then through the folding partition into the lunch room and through the "exit" to the exterior stairs. {A possible solution would be to eliminate Storage Room 210, add a door at the end of the corridor at the exterior wall, and relocate the stair to this door. On a slightly related topic, check Keynote 10 on Sheet A1.3.} " Provide detailing of the stairs to show code compliance [2006 IBC Sec. 1009]; specifically dimension the stair tread rise and run, guard rails including heights and openings, hand rails including heights, diameter, and mounting clearances. " There are no dimensions shown for the exterior stairs; they scale 9'-8" wide which puts the stairs within 8 feet of the property line. Any dimension less than 10 feet and the stairs need to be fire rated [2006 IBC Table 602]. {The stair width could be decreased to the minimum required by code to avoid this issue [2006 IBC Sec. 1009.1 and Sec. 1005.1].} STRUCTURAL: " Provide the geotechnical report referenced in the structural general notes on the plans and in the structural calculations (Speedie Associates Report No. 110198SA, dated March 10, 2011). If the geotechnical report requires engineered fill than a special inspection certificate will also be required. " Sheets E1 and E10 of the metal building shop drawings indicate that along Grid Line 7a there is to be a cross brace between Grid Lines F and G at the exterior wall. Sheet A1.0 of the building plans indicates there is a large roll-up door at this location which serves the maintenance shop. Please coordinate. {Noted that there are no sizes given for the roll-up doors on this project.} " The column positions for the metal building frames shown on Sheet E1 of the metal building shop drawings do agree with the column positions shown on the floor plan on Sheet A1.0. Please coordinate. {Review Grid Lines 7 through 10.} " Page 14 of the structural calculations indicates that Footing F3-3 is to have (6) #5 reinforcing bars in each direction in this pad footing; the footing schedule on Sheet S1.1 indicates (3) #5's in each direction. Please clarify. " The general notes on Sheet S0.1 indicate ladder type horizontal reinforcing is to be provided in masonry walls; what is the spacing? None of the masonry details indicates this reinforcing. MECHANICAL: " There are no mechanical comments to be addressed. PLUMBING: " Civil Sheet 3 of 4 is missing the rim elevation for new Public Manhole # 1 on Gunter Road, however based on the surrounding spot elevations it appears that the manhole's rim elevation will be slightly higher than the finish floor elevation of the new building. A back water valve is required [2006 IPC Sec. 715.1 as amended]. " Provide a vacuum relief valve for the storage-type water heater (located above the fixture outlets [2006 UPC Sec. 608.7]. Reference Detail 211 on Sheet P2.1 ELECTRICAL: " The one-line diagram on Sheet E6.0 shows a transformer (T-3) serving Panel DSA (a 120/240v-1ø-3w panel); stepping down the voltage to 120/240v-3ø-3w. On Sheet E5.0 Panel DSA is listed twice; once as a single phase panel and once as a 3 phase panel. It looks the panel nomenclature should be removed when it is listed the second time (there is a reference to the "bottle washer" at this locations). Please clarify. -End of Review- If you have any questions, please call (520) 750-7474. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Joel Svoboda Associate JES:jes Attachments: none |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/20/2011 | SUE REEVES | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 07/20/2011 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |