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 - NEW
Permit Number - T12CM03758
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/26/2012 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/27/2012 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | Will stamp building plan approved after final approval of DP12-0066. JG |
| 06/28/2012 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/03/2012 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Burger King - 8702 E. Broadway T12CM03758 Building Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 3, 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 |
| 07/10/2012 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. SHEET G-1; LIST OF DRAWINGS: DELETE THE LIST OF SITE DRAWINGS, SHEETS 1 OF 9 THROUGH 9 OF 9, FROM THIS SET. 2. SHEET A-1; FLOOR PLAN: DOES CORRIDOR 103 MEET THE FIRE RESISTANCE RATING REQUIRED BY THE IBC SECTION 1017? VERIFY. 3. SHEET A-1; FLOOR PLAN: DO THE TWO EXITS IN THE DINING AREA 100 MEET THE SEPARATION DISTANCE REQUIRED BY THE IBC SECTION 1015.2.1? VERIFY (EXIT IN THE STORAGE ROOM 108 CAN NOT BE ALLOWED PER THE IBC SECTION 1014.2). 4. SHEET A-1 (KEYNOTES); SHEET A-3 (DETAIL 5): KEYNOTE 14 INDICATES A CAN WASH, WHILE DETAIL 5/A-3 INDICATES A MOP SINK. CLARIFY. 5. SHEET A-1 (KEYNOTES); SHEET A-9: KEYNOTE 15 REFERENCES SHEET A-9 FOR THE OFFICE WINDOW. CALL OUT THE SPECIFIC DETAIL ON SHEET A-9. 6. SHEET A-1; FLOOR PLAN: NEAR THE CREW SPACE 107, THERE IS A KEYNOTE 11A. THERE IS NO 11A REFERENCED IN THE KEYNOTES. VERIFY. 7. SHEET A-1; KEYNOTES: KEYNOTE 24 REFERENCES DETAIL 8/5 FOR A GUARDRAIL. VERIFY THE DETAIL REFERENCE. 8. SHEET A-1 (FLOOR PLAN); SHEET A-3.1 (DETAIL 8): DETAIL 8 IS REFERENCED IN THE N.W. CORNER OF THE BUILDING. THE PLAN INDICATES A WALL POP-OUT, WHILE THE DETAIL INDICATES NO POP-OUT. CLARIFY. 9. SHEET A-1 (FLOOR PLAN); SHEET A-6 (SECTION 3.1): THE SECTION CUT ON THE PLAN INDICATES 4/A-6, WHILE THE SECTION INDICATES 3.1. CLARIFY. 10. SHEET A-2; NORTH ELEVATION: CLEAR UP THE SECTIONS/WALL MATERIAL REFERENCES AROUND THE ELEVATION TITLE. 11. SHEET A-3; CROSS SECTION 1: DETAIL 1/A-4 IS REFERENCED ON THIS SECTION. IS THAT REFERENCE CORRECT? VERIFY. 12. SHEET A-3; DETAIL 5: PROVIDE THE ANCHOR SIZE AND LENGTHS FOR THE STEEL ANGLE (OR REFERENCE A DETAIL OR NOTE). 13. SHEET A-4; DETAIL 5: PROVIDE CONNECTION INFORMATION FOR THE BLOCKING TO THE TRUSSES AND THE STUDS TO THE BLOCKING (OR REFERENCE A DETAIL OR NOTE). 14. SHEET A-4; DETAIL 5: REMOVE THE UPPER NOTE FOR THE 5/8" GYPSUM BOARD. 15. SHEET A-5; ROOF PLAN: KEYED NOTE 4 WAS NOT LOCATED ON THE PLAN. VERIFY. 16. SHEET A-6; SECTION 1: DETAIL 4/A-7 IS REFERENCED ON THIS SECTION AT THE ROOF. IS THAT REFERENCE CORRECT? VERIFY. 17. SHEET A-6; SECTION 1: DETAIL 9/A-7 IS REFERENCED ON THIS SECTION AT THE AWNING. REVISE (THERE IS NO DETAIL 9/A-7). 18. SHEET A-6; SECTION 1: DETAIL A/A-8 IS REFERENCED ON THIS SECTION AT THE WINDOW HEADER. REVISE (THERE IS NO DETAIL A/A-8). 19. SHEET A-6; SECTION 1: DETAIL 8/A-7 IS REFERENCED ON THIS SECTION AT THE WINDOW SILL. REVISE. 20. SHEET A-6; SECTIONS 1, 2, AND 3: DETAIL 3/A-7 IS REFERENCED ON THESE SECTIONS AT THE WALL SILL PLATE. REVISE. 21. SHEET A-6; SECTION 3.1: DETAIL 6/A-7 IS REFERENCED ON THE SECTION AT THE FOUNDATION. REVISE. 22. SHEET A-7; DETAIL 2: EXTEND THE 7" MINIMUM DIMENSION TO THE WALL (NEAR TOP OF THE LADDER). 23. SHEET A-7; DETAIL 5: REVISE THE NOTE CONCERNING THE AWNING SHOP DRAWINGS (REMOVE 'CITY OF SIERRA VISTA). 24. SHEET A-8; DETAIL 2: DETAIL 3/A.6 IS REFERENCED ON THE DETAIL AT THE WALL. REVISE. 25. SHEET A-8; DETAIL 13: THE CITY OF TUCSON REQUIRES ALL LETTERING (UPPER AND LOWER CASE) TO BE A MINIMUM OF 3/32" IN HEIGHT. REVISE. 26. SHEET S1.3; DETAILS 125 AND 126: DO WE HAVE MASONRY ON THIS ACTIVITY NUMBER? THE TRASH ENCLOSURE AND TYPICAL MASONRY WALL REINFORCEMENT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE SITE REVIEW. NO SITE DRAWINGS WERE PROVIDED. 27. SHEET S-2; GENERAL FOUNDATION NOTES: NOTE 1 REFERENCES SHEETS S100 AND S101 FOR STRUCTURAL NOTES. REVISE (S-1 AND S-1.1). 28. SHEET S-2; FOUNDATION PLAN NOTES: NOTE 11 WAS NOT FOUND ON THE PLAN. VERIFY. 29. SHEET S-3; GENERAL ROOF FRAMING NOTES: NOTE 1 REFERENCES SHEETS S100 AND S101 FOR STRUCTURAL NOTES. REVISE (S-1 AND S-1.1). 30. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEETS 24 AND 26: SHEAR WALL DSW1.1 ON SHEET 26 WAS NOT LOCATED ON SHEET 24. VERIFY (DSW1?). 31. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| 07/11/2012 | BETH GRANT | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Approved | |
| 07/16/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/17/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Revise the font size used on the drawings to a minimum of 3/32-inch (all upper case). Reference: Section 106.1.1, IBC 2006. 2. Clarify note 13 on sheet P-2; show the route and termination of the proposed piping. How does note 13 relate to the water filter system? Reference: Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006. 3. Coordinate the plumbing plans and riser diagrams. Show all of the cleanouts on the riser diagrams. Reference: Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006. 4. Correct the pipe sizes for the natural gas system per Table 12-8, UPC 2006. 5. The branch piping sizes called out for the water closet flush valves (1/2" on the plumbing schedule and 1" on the water supply riser diagram) 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. 6. Clarify the types of backflow protection valves to be used; the water supply riser diagram shows all of the appliance connections having a reduced pressure principle backflow prevention assembly but the notes show different types of backflow preventers for the appliances. The type of backflow prevention device for the drip irrigation system is not specified. Reference: Sections 103.2.3 and 603.0, UPC 2006. 7. The specified temperature mixing valve (Watts model N170-M2) is an obsolete product that is no longer available. The replacement product (Watts model N170-M3) is ASSE 1017 listed but is not listed for tempering water temperature at fixtures. Reference: Section 310.4, UPC 2006. 8. Coordinate delivery temperatures shown in detail 2/P.4 with the plumbing plans and the water supply riser diagram. Reference: Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006. 9. Show that the indirect plumbing waste piping complies with the requirements of Section 803.0, UPC 2006 with respect to length. 10. Provide vent piping of sufficient size to comply with Section 904.1, UPC 2006. Vents located upstream from pumps, ejectors, backwater valves, or other devices that obstruct the free flow of gases between the building sewer and the outside atmosphere shall not be used for meeting the required cross-sectional vent area. Show the size and route of the required vent on the plumbing plan (see detail 9/P.4) 11. Revise the installation of the air admittance valve for the hand sink, 62A, to comply with the manufacturer's installation instructions. Reference: Sections 310.4 and 909.2.2, UPC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson. 12. Revise the size of the primary scuppers to comply with the size requirements of Section 1101.11.2.1, UPC 2006. |
| 07/18/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Provide energy code compliance calculations for the building envelope; use 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. The building sections clearly show batt insulation in the roof cavity but do not specify its R-value. Also, no continuous roof insulation is shown on the drawings even though it is included in the calculations. Verify the projection factors used for the various windows; detail 5/A7 shows a window with a projection factor of only 0.58, not 1.00. Reference: Sections 101.2 and 104.2, International Energy Conservation Code 2006. 2. Provide calculations demonstrating adequate ventilation. Reference: Section 403.3, IMC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson. 3. Provide information on the sequence of operation for the restroom exhaust fan to show that all of the air supplied to the restrooms will be exhausted. Reference: Section 403.2.1 (4), IMC 2006. 4. The fan schedule on sheet M-0 indicates that EF-1 will move 1300 CFM but the air balance schedule on the same sheet specifies only 1000 CFM for EF-1. Determine the required exhaust flow rate for the listed hood and coordinate the two schedules. Revise the size of the grease duct for EF-1 if needed, to provide a minimum velocity of 1500 feet per minute. Reference: Sections 507.1 and 506.3.4, IMC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 07/23/2012 | RAY MAJUTA | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | T12CM03758 8702 E Broadway Bl Restaurant Burger King Provide a compliance calculation per 2012 City of Tucson Outdoor Lighting Code which includes site lighting, outdoor building mounted lighting and LED building lighting. The Outdoor Lighting Ordinance can be found on Tucson Web site . Go to Departments,Developement and Planning, codes and ordinances, then to 2012 ODLC.(Required per C of T Submittal Requirements.) 2. Sheet E-1 circuitd A-24 and 27 run into each other ? 3. Sheet E-3 indicates Seperate Contractor to install Panel D, would this be a part of a kitchen assembly ? Will the same contractor be responsible for installing the circuits listed in the panel ? Provide futher information on this. Ray T Majuta Electrical Plan Review PDSD, City of Tucson 7/23/2012 Ray.Majuta@tucsonaz.gov |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/27/2012 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |