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 - T12CM07013
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/16/2012 | RAY MAJUTA | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 11/20/2012 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. SHEET G1.0; CODE ANALYSIS: THE OCCUPANT LOAD IS LISTED AS 9 OCCUPANTS PER BUILDING FOR A FIVE BED UNIT. INDICATE ON THE DRAWINGS WHERE THE ADDITIONAL 4 OCCUPANTS PER BUILDING COME FROM. 2. SHEET C1.1: ARE THE COMMUNITY BUILDING AND VA TRANSITIONAL HOUSING FUTURE PROJECTS? INDICATE ON THE DRAWINGS. 3. SHEET A1.1; SITE PLAN: PROVIDE A NORTH ARROW ON THE PLAN. 4. SHEET A1.1; SITE PLAN: AN ELEVATION INDICATOR ON THE NORTH WALL OF BUILDING 1 IS ILLEGIBLE. REVISE. 5. SHEET A1.1; ROOF PLAN: A DETAIL 4/A6.2 IS CUT ON THE WEST SIDE OF BUILDING 1. THIS IS A FOUNDATION DETAIL. CLARIFY. 6. SHEET A1.2; PAVING PLAN KEYNOTES: NOTE 3.02 INDICATES CONTROL JOINT LOCATIONS ARE ON THE PLAN. PROVIDE A PLAN NOTE FOR JOINT SPACING, AND PROVIDE A JOINT DETAIL (OR A JOINT DETAIL REFERENCE). 7. SHEET A1.2; PAVING PLAN KEYNOTES: NOTE 4.02 INDICATES A CMU WALL. PROVIDE A WALL AND FOUNDATION DETAIL (OR A FOUNDATION DETAIL REFERENCE). 8. SHEET A1.3; UNIT FLOOR PLAN: IT APPEARS THE DOORS FOR THE ADA TOILET, SHOWER, AND MECHANICAL ROOM REDUCE THE REQUIRED WIDTH OF THE HALL TO LESS THAN HALF THE REQUIRED WIDTH (PER THE IBC SECTION 1021.2 EXCEPTION) FOR THE EXIT PASSAGEWAY. VERIFY. 9. SHEET A1.3; UNIT FLOOR PLAN: AN ELEVATION INDICATOR ON THE NORTH WALL IS ILLEGIBLE. REVISE. 10. SHEET A2.1; ELEVATION 1: THE TITLE INDICATES BUILDING 1 NORTH ELEVATION. IN ADDITION, THE ELEVATION INDICATORS ON SHEET A1.1 ARE ON THE SOUTH WALL OF BUILDING 3 AND THE WEST WALL OF BUILDING 2. REVISE THE TITLE. 11. SHEET A2.1; ELEVATION 2: THE TITLE INDICATES BUILDING 1 EAST ELEVATION. IN ADDITION, THE ELEVATION INDICATORS ON SHEET A1.1 ARE ON THE NORTH WALL OF BUILDING 2 AND THE WEST WALL OF BUILDING 3. REVISE THE TITLE. 12. SHEET A2.1; ELEVATION 3: THE TITLE INDICATES BUILDING 1 SOUTH ELEVATION. IN ADDITION, THE ELEVATION INDICATORS ON SHEET A1.1 ARE ON THE EAST WALL OF BUILDING 2 AND THE NORTH WALL OF BUILDING 3. REVISE THE TITLE. 13. SHEET A2.1; ELEVATION 4: THE TITLE INDICATES BUILDING 1 WEST ELEVATION. IN ADDITION, THE ELEVATION INDICATORS ON SHEET A1.1 ARE ON THE SOUTH WALL OF BUILDING 2 AND THE EAST WALL OF BUILDING 3. REVISE THE TITLE. 14. SHEET A3.1; BUILDING SECTION A: A DETAIL 3/A3.1 IS REFERENCED IN THE BATH/HALL. REVISE THE DETAIL REFERENCE. 15. SHEET A3.1; ALL BUILDING SECTIONS: THE FOOTINGS INDICATED BY DETAILS 3/A6.2, 4/A6.2, AND 8/A6.2 DO NOT MATCH THOSE DETAILS ON SHEET A6.2. REVISE. 16. SHEET A4.1; ELEVATIONS 11 AND 13: INDICATE THE DIMENSIONS FOR THE GRAB BAR LOCATIONS FROM THE FLOOR AND FROM THE WALL, AND THE LENGTH OF THE GRAB BARS PER THE ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003, SECTION 608. 17. SHEET A4.1; ELEVATION 12: INDICATE THE DIMENSIONS FOR THE GRAB BAR LOCATIONS FROM THE FLOOR AND FROM THE WALL, AND THE LENGTH OF THE GRAB BARS PER THE ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003, SECTION 608. 18. SHEET S1.1; GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES: THE FOUNDATIONS NOTE INDICATES NO SOILS REPORT WAS USED FOR THE FOOTING DESIGN. REVISE THIS NOTE (A GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION BY PATTISON EVANOFF INDICATES 2000 PSF SOIL BEARING AT 1'-6" DEPTH). 19. SHEET S1.5; SHEAR WALL SCHEDULE: IN THIS SCHEDULE, EITHER PROVIDE THE WALL STUD SIZE OR ADD A SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO THE STRUCTURAL GENERAL NOTES FOR THE STUD SIZE. 20. SHEET S2.1 (FOUNDATION PLANS); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (SHEET 25): THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE FOOTING F3 TO BE 2.33' SQ. X 12" THICK, WHILE THE PLAN (AND SCHEDULE ON SHEET S1.5) INDICATE THAT THE FOOTING IS A 2'-0" SQUARE X 12" THICK. COORDINATE. 21. SHEET S3.1 (ROOF FRAMING PLAN); SHEET S5.1 (DETAIL 210): DETAIL 210 WAS NOT FOUND ON THE FRAMING PLANS ON SHEET S3.1. VERIFY. 22. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEET 1: THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE AN ALLOWAGLE SOIL BEARING PRESSURE OF 1500 PSF PER THE IBC. A GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION BY PATTISON EVANOFF INDICATES AN ALLOWABLE BEARING PRESSURE OF 2000 PSF AT 1'-6" DEPTH. REVISE THE CALCULATION NOTES AND FOOTING DESIGN AS REQUIRED. 23. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| 11/21/2012 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner Zoning Review Section PROJECT: T12CM07012, T12CM07013, T12CM07014 3700 S Calle Polar Transitional Housing TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 21, 2012 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with redlines and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. 1. Zoning has reviewed the building plans for the compliance with the development package (DP) site plan. The building plans appear to in substantial compliance with the unapproved DP Site plan but Zoning cannot approve the building plans at this time. Zoning will approve the building plans once the DP Site Plan has been approved by all reviewers. 2. Clarify if the building plans for the 1,702 and 4520 square foot buildings are to be submitted under separate permit applications. If these two buildings are not to be submitted fro review at this time annotate on the site plan that these two buildings are future buildings. 3. The site plan include in the building plan set must match the DP Site Plan. If the development is to be phased indicate on the site plan the phase lines. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised plans and any additional requested documents |
| 11/26/2012 | 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. Reference: Sections 101.4 and 104.2, International Energy Conservation Code 2006. 2. Condensate drains may not terminate with a direct connection to an inaccessible bathtub overflow. Show that the bathtub overflow is accessible. Reference: Section 307.2.1, IMC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson and Sections 311.4 and 807.2, UPC 2006. |
| 11/26/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 11/26/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Provide a site drawing showing the size and route of the building water supply along with the location and size of both the water meter and the reduced pressure backflow preventer assembly. Reference: Section 106.3.1, IPC 2006. 2. Provide site drawing showing the size, route, slope, and the connection point of the building sewer to the private sewer collection system. Reference: Section 106.3.1, IPC 2006. 3. Provide tempered water for the lavatories using approved devices conforming to ASSE 1070. Reference: Section 416.5, IPC 2006. 4. Show that the construction of the shower floor and the shower walls complies with the requirements of Sections 417.4.1 and 417.5, IPC 2006. 5. Provide the first floor elevation and the rim elevation of the next upstream manhole of the private sewer collection system. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2006 as amended by the City of Tucson. 6. The water pressure calculations indicate a maximum water velocity of 6 FPS within the building and a maximum friction allowance of 17.7 PSI/100 feet. Verify that the use of ½" PEX will comply with these values for the bathtub and for the clothes washers. Reference: Section 604.1 and 604.3, IPC 2006. 7. Note 1 on detail 1/P3.1 indicates that, "PEX piping shall not be used within 5'- 0" of water heater", Clarify exactly where the water distribution manifolds are located. |
| 11/29/2012 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 11/29/2012, Development Package has not been approved yet. |
| 12/03/2012 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Denied | 1: APARTMENT BUILDING #1- ESPERANZA EN ESCALANTE - PHASE 2- DP12-0207 - ADOH TRANSITIONAL HOUSING - NEED DP APPROVAL 2: NEEED TO CLARIFY SIZE, LOCATION AND METER NUMBER OF WATER METERS THAT WILL SERVE EACH BUILDING FOR SEWER CONNECTION FEE CALCULATION - (NEED COT PLUMBING APPROVAL) NEED TO CLARIFY ONE - 1" WATER METER FOR 3-BUILDINGS PER DRAWING P1.2 3: NEED TO PERMIT ON-SITE PRIVATE SEWER WITH MANHOLES WITH DEQ - DAVID AMASH - 243-7400 - 33 N STONE 7TH FLOOR - BANK OF AMERCIA BUILDING 4: NEED COPY OF ON-SITE PRIVATE SEWER FOR BASE MAP UPDATE - CONNECTING TO EXISTING ON SITE PRIVATE SEWER |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12/21/2012 | SHANAE POWELL | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 12/21/2012 | CPIERCE1 | REJECT SHELF | Completed |