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 - T11CM01952
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - TI
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/24/2011 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/28/2011 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/01/2011 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 07/01/2011 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 development plan. Please submit two copies of the approved and stamped development, 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/development plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming. |
| 07/07/2011 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. SHEET A2.0; NOTES: NOTE 2 REFERENCES A SHEET A12.0. THERE IS NO SHEET A12.0. REVISE. 2. SHEET A2.0; FLOOR PLAN (KEYNOTE A03.06): THE KEYNOTE INDICATES TRUNCATED DOMES AT ONE END OF THE RAMP. THESE ARE NOT REQUIRED ON THE RAMP, BUT ON THE SIDEWALK WHERE THE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ENTERS THE TRAFFIC FLOW (SEE SHEET A1.0). VERIFY. 3. SHEET A2.0; FLOOR PLAN: PROVIDE INFORMATION ON THE DRAWING FROM THE 2006 IBC, SECTION 1010, CONCERNING THE RAMP SURFACE, SLOPE, CROSS SLOPE, WIDTH, AND HANDRAILS. 4. SHEET A2.1; FLOOR PLAN: PER THE ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003, TABLE 403.5, THE CLEAR WIDTH OF THE SIDEWALK MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 36". PROVIDE DIMENSIONS ON THE PLAN INDICATING THE DOOR SWINGS LEAVE 36" CLEAR WIDTH OF SIDEWALK, AND FOLLOWS SECTION 1005.2, AND THE NEW BUILT-OUT COLUMNS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING LEAVE A MINIMUM OF 36" SIDEWALK WIDTH. 5. SHEET A5.1; WEST ELEVATION: CALL OUT THE RAMP ON THE ELEVATION. 6. SHEET S0.1 (STANDARD STRUCTURAL NOTES); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (PAGE 16): THE FOUNDATION NOTE 2E (GENERAL) ON SHEET S0.1 INDICATES AN ALLOWABLE SOIL PRESSURE OF 1500 PSF WAS USED IN THE DESIGN, WHILE THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE 2000 PSF. CLARIFY AND REVISE AS REQUIRED. 7. SHEET S1.1 (FOUNDATION PLAN); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (PAGE 18): THE FOUNDATION PLAN (NOTE 10) INDICATES THE GATE PIER IS 12" CMU X 2'-8" LENGTH, WHILE THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE A 23.625" X 15.625" (24"X16") PIER. CLARIFY AND REVISE AS REQUIRED. 8. SHEET S1.1 (FOUNDATION PLAN); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (PAGE 30): THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE THE WEST SHEAR WALL IS 7' LONG AND REQUIRES A SIMPSON S/HTT14 HOLDOWN AT EACH END. THIS IS EXISTING WALL, AND THE PLAN INDICATES A S/HTT14 HOLDOWN AT ONE END, BUT A S/HD8S AT THE OTHER END. CLARIFY. IS THE EXISTING WALL NAILING ADEQUATE? 9. SHEET S1.1 (FOUNDATION PLAN); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (PAGE 31): THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE THE NORTH AND SOUTH SHEAR WALLS AND THEIR RESPECTIVE HOLDOWNS. THE HOLDOWNS INDICATED IN THE CALCULATIONS ARE FOR THE EXISTING NORTH WALL ONLY. IS THAT WALL NAILING ADEQUATE? ARE THE SOUTH WALL HOLDOWNS DESIGNED SIMILAR TO THE NORTH WALL? CLARIFY. 10. SHEET S3.1; FRAMING PLAN: THE SECTION CUT 5/S4.1 (ON THE EXISTING EAST WALL) INDICATES "SIMILAR". WHY IS IT SIMILAR, AND WHERE IS 5/S4.1 CUT? CLARIFY. 11. SHEET S4.1; DETAIL 10: REFERENCE THE TOP OF THE MASONRY COLUMN. 12. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; PAGE 20: IS THIS RETAINING WALL AND FOOTING DESIGN INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS? CLARIFY. 13. GENERAL: ALL DEFERRED SUBMITTALS MUST BE APPROVED IN WRITING BY RON BOOSE OR LEERAY HANLY BEFORE THOSE SUBMITTALS WILL BE REVIEWED. 14. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| 07/11/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/11/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Provide energy code compliance calculations for the building addition (envelope) using the climate zone for 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. 2. Revise the sequence of operation for the restroom exhaust fans so that all of the air supplied to the restrooms will be exhausted. Reference: Section 403.2.1 (4), IMC 2006. |
| 07/13/2011 | RICK MYERS | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. CLARIFY WHICH CODE THIS PROJECT IS TO BE REVIEWED UNDER. SEE COVER SHEET WHICH INDICATES THE 2006 IPC. SHEET P-2.1 PLUMBING GENERAL NOTES NUMBER ONE INDICATES 2006 UPC.. 2, SHOW HOW THE WATER HEATER STAND, LOCATED ABOVE THE MOP BASIN, BUT BELOW THE LAY-IN CEILING TILES, AT 8' 3". WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH THE USE OF THE MOP BASIN. 3. SHOW HOW THE WATER HEATER STAND IN DETAIL 3 P-2.1 IS CONNECTED TO THE STRUCTURE ABOVE. PROVIDE CALCULATIONS TO SHOW THAT THE "STRUCTURE ABOVE" WILL SUPPORT THE WEIGHT. 4. SHOW HOW THE POTABLE WATER IS TO BE STERILIZED. 5. SHOW HOW VACUUM RELIEF HAS BEEN ACHIEVED ON THE ELEVATED WATER. |
| 07/18/2011 | RAY MAJUTA | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | T11CM01952 3566 E Speedway Bl Electrical Plans denied, 1. Mechanical Plans Examiner requires sequence of operation for restroom fans, when air supplied -- air to be re- moved. 2006 IMC, 403.2.1.(4).. involves electrical. 2. Fill in blank loads in VA column at panel. Ray T Majuta Elect Pln CK,PDSD, City of Tucson, 7/18/11 Ray.majuta@tucsonaz.gov |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/19/2011 | CPIERCE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 07/19/2011 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |