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 - T12CM04730
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/08/2012 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/09/2012 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. SHEET A2.9: REMOVE THE CLOUDS FROM THIS SHEET. THIS IS A FIRST CITY OF TUCSON REVIEW AND SHOULD NOT HAVE ADDENDUMS. 2. SHEET A4.2; ROOF PLAN GENERAL NOTES: NOTE 4 REFERENCES SHEET A4.1 FOR ROOF DETAILS. REVISE THE NOTE. 3. SHEET A5.7; DETAIL 7: A NOTE AT THE CANOPY INDICATES "FLASHING, PAINTED. REFER TO STRUCTURAL". THE FLASHING SHOULD NOT BE REFERENCED TO THE STRUCTURAL. REVISE. 4. SHEET A5.8; SECTION 9: A NOTE AT THE TOP OF THE WALL INDICATES "REFER TO SHEET A4.4 FOR TYPICAL PARAPET DETAIL". REVISE THE SHEET REFERENCE (THERE IS NO SHEET A4.4). 5. SHEET A5.8; SECTION 9: A NOTE AT THE FLOOR INDICATES "REFER TO CIVIL FOR FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION" (TWO LOCATIONS). SHOULD THE FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION BE REFERENCED TO THE ARCHITECTURAL? VERIFY. 6. SHEET A7.1; ELEVATION 7B: THE CITY OF TUCSON REQUIRES ALL LETTERING (UPPER AND LOWER CASE) TO BE A MINIMUM OF 3/32" IN HEIGHT. REVISE THE SECTION CUTS. 7. SHEET S1.2 (FOUNDATION PLAN); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (SHEET 47): THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE FOOTINGS AT THE SOUTH CANOPY TO BE 2'-6" X 3'-6" (F4), BUT THE PLAN AND THE FOOTING SCHEDULE DO NOT CALL OUT THIS FOOTING. VERIFY. 8. SHEET S1.2; FOUNDATION KEYNOTES: NOTES 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, AND 18 WERE NOT FOUND ON THE PLAN. VERIFY. 9. SHEET S3.2 (ROOF FRAMING PLAN); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (SHEET 37): THE BEAMS B3 AND B4 IN THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE W10X12 STEEL BEAMS, WHILE THE PLAN DOES NOT CALL OUT A BEAM, INDICATING A MASONRY LINTEL BEAM. VERIFY. 10. SHEET S3.2; FRAMING KEYNOTES OR PLAN NOTE: INDICATE IN THE KEYNOTES OR ON THE FRAMING PLAN TO SEE SHEET S4.1, DETAIL 6, FOR TYPICAL MASONRY LINTELS, OR SHEET S4.2, DETAIL 3, FOR TYPICAL METAL STUD LINTELS. 11. SHEET S3.2 (FRAMING PLAN); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (SHEET 49): THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE A HSS6X2X 3/16 TOP BEAM AT THE WINDOW SUPPORTS. WHERE DOES THAT BEAM SHOW UP ON THE PLAN? VERIFY. 12. SHEET S3.2; FRAMING KEYNOTES: NOTES 9, 13, 14, 15, AND 17 WERE NOT FOUND ON THE PLAN. VERIFY. 13. SHEET S3.2; ROOF FRAMING PLAN: SECTION 1/S4.3 CUT THROUGH THE INTERIOR WALL ON GRID 9 IS LOCATED WHERE JOISTS ARE PARALLEL TO THE WALL, WHILE THE SECTION INDICATES JOISTS PERPENDICULAR TO THE WALL. VERIFY. 14. SHEET S3.2 (ROOF FRAMING PLAN); SHEET S4.1 (SECTION 3): SECTION 3/S4.1 CUT THROUGH AN INTERIOR WALL OPENING ON GRID 9 INDICATES A GLU-LAM BEAM BEARING ON A C.M.U. WALL, WHILE THE LINTEL ON THE PLAN HAS NO DESIGNATION. WHERE IS THIS LINTEL REFERENCE? VERIFY. 15. GENERAL: ALL DEFERRED SUBMITTALS MUST BE APPROVED IN WRITING BY RON BOOSE (BUILDING OFFICIAL) BEFORE THOSE SUBMITTALS WILL BE REVIEWED. RON.BOOSE@TUCSONAZ.GOV. 16. GENERAL: SHEET A0.2 INDICATES A FLAG POLE FOUNDATION DETAIL. ARE STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS SUBMITTED FOR THIS DESIGN? VERIFY. 17. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| 08/10/2012 | BETH GRANT | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Approved | |
| 08/20/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/21/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Section 403.3, IMC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson allows the use of the ASHRAE 62-1-2004 ventilation calculation procedure provided that the default occupant densities and combined outdoor air rates are used. 2. Provide energy code compliance calculations for the new classroom building envelope (i.e. do not combine the classroom building with parts of other buildings). Provide sufficient detail on the drawings to evaluate the energy compliance of the additions to 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, 101.4.3, and 104.2, International Energy Conservation Code 2006. 3. Show the size of the condensate drains on the plans. Reference: Section 307.2.1, IMC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 08/21/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Clarify the reason for the installation of the seismic loops for the water and gas piping at the junction of the classroom building and the new lobby for the gym. According to detail 21/S2.1, the two walls are built upon the same footing so they cannot move independently of one another. Reference: Section 106.3.1, IPC 2006. 2. Provide a design for the mounting shelf for the water heater or specify a listed water heater support. Show how the proposed mounting shelf is to be connected to the building structure along with structural calculations to show that the water heater is safely supported. Reference: Sections 106.3.1 and 301.2, IPC 2006. 3. Provide an approved anti-siphon device (e.g. vacuum relief valve) for storage-type water heaters located above any fixture outlets. Reference: Section 504.1, IPC 2006. 4. Provide a watertight pan of galvanized steel (minimum 24-gage) or other approved material under the water heater with a drain to an approved location. Reference: Section 504.7, IPC 2006. 5. This building appears to be receiving all new water service from a new 3" water meter and backflow preventer and is not dependent upon any existing, unknown piping. Designing a water distribution system solely based upon water velocity can result in inadequate water pressure or flow rates at the fixtures. Provide water pressure and water pipe sizing calculations. Reference: Sections 604.1 and 604.3, IPC 2006. 6. Revise the horizontal roof drain and overflow drain located at the southwest corner of the building; the maximum capacity of a 4" diameter drain at a slope of ΒΌ" per foot is 2506 square feet of roof area. Reference: Section 1106.3, IPC 2006. |
| 08/24/2012 | RAY MAJUTA | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/27/2012 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Denied | 1. AMPHITHEATER MIDDLE SCHOOL RENOVATIONS - INCLUDES NEW CLASSROOMS, ADMIN BLDG ADDT, RESTROOM ADDT, GYM REMODEL, CLASSRM T.I. AND KITCHEN REMODEL - COT PERMITS T12CM04730, T12CM04731, T12CM04732, T12CM04733, T12CM04735 AND T12CM04414 2. CONNECTIONG TO EXISTING ON SITE PRIVATE SEWER 3. INSTALLATION OF 3" WATER METER PER UTILITY PLAN C4.0 4. NEED TO PROVIDE INFO PIROR TO PAYMENT FROM WATER PROVIDER FOR REMOVAL OR REPLACEMENT OF WATER METERS FOR CREDIT IF APPLICABLE |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/27/2012 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |