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: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Permit Number - T12CM00722
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/20/2012 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: ALOFT Hotel T12CM00722 Building Plan (2nd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 20, 2012 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 package has been approved. 3. Zoning will re-review the building plan on the next submittal to insure compliance with the approved development package. 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 |
| 04/20/2012 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/20/2012 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 05/01/2012 | RONALD BROWN | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. The deferred submittal summary to the building official has been received; 2 May 2012. 2. Submittal of the Special Inspectors Certification when the permit is picked up is acceptable. Please submit the two part certification form to the Structural Code Reviewer for approval prior to that. 3. Because door number 120B is indicated to be a required exit as per the electrical drawing E101, emergency exit sign location, the loading ramp must meet accessible slopes required by ICC ANSI 117.1, Section 405. With a 25" elevation difference, the 20' length does not provide for a maximum slope of 1:12. It needs another 5' of length to comply. a. An alternate solution to this problem would be to remove the exit sign from door 120B and provide a sign on the door that it is for loading dock access only. Door 120A provides the emergency access required for this corridor. END OF REVIEW |
| 05/02/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 05/02/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Comment not resolved; no detail has been added to sheet P001.[Original comment: Provide a detail showing that there is an indirect connection for the sanitizing compartments of the 3-compartment sinks and a direct waste connection for the wash and rinse sections of the 3-compartment sinks. Reference: Section 802.1, IPC 2006.] 2. Comment not resolved; no detail has been added to sheet P001. [Original comment: Provide a detail showing that the installation of the open hub drains meets the requirements of Section 802.3.2, IPC 2006.] 3. Comment not resolved; the submitted calculations indicate that a head of 4" above the weir of the scupper is required to pass the design rainfall rate (70 GPM for the 2262 square feet). Considering that the weir of the scupper is located approximately 8.6" above the primary roof drain, provide calculations to show that the roof structure can accommodate the accumulated water if the primary roof drains are plugged. Reference: Section 1611.1, IBC 2006. [Original comment: Provide roof drainage calculations and plans. Show that the overflow drainage channels and the emergency scuppers are adequately sized. Reference: Sections 1101, 1106 and 1107, IPC 2006.] |
| 05/03/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. The explanatory letter from Cagley & Associates adequately addresses the 60- to 86-pound fan coils being installed but does not address the larger fan coils with weights up to 323-pounds. Please address the installation of these larger fan coils. [Original comment: Show how the fan coils are being connected to the building structure and provide calculations to show that the building structure is not being adversely affected. Reference: Section 302.1, IMC 2006.] 2. Provide trap seal primers to the hub drains being used for the condensate drains per Section 1002.4, IPC 2006. [Original comment: Condensate drains may not terminate over a roof drain unless the roof drain terminates at or above grade in an area capable of absorbing the condensate flow without surface drainage. Reference: Section 307.2.1, IMC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson.] 3. The combustion air openings shown on sheet M100 connect two indoor spaces on the same story. Each opening shall have a minimum of 1 square inch per 1,000 BTUH of the total appliance rating in the space per Section 304.5.3.1, IFGC 2006. Two permanent openings, communicating directly or via ducts to the outdoors may have a minimum of 1 square inch per 4,000 BTUH of the total appliance rating in the space per Section 304.6.1, IFGC 2006. [Original comment: Revise the combustion air openings for the pool equipment room to comply with the sizing requirements of Sections 304.5.3.1 and 304.10, IFGC 2006.] |
| 05/11/2012 | DAN SANTA CRUZ | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 05/17/2012 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Denied | NEED WW/IWC REVIEW OF 30LF GREASE INTERCEPTOR AND ELEVATOR SUMP SP2 THAT DISCHARGES OVER AN EXISTING SUMP PIT AND A 2" VISTIBULE HUB DRAIN FOR A WATER FEATURE |