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

Permit Number: T12CM07961
Parcel: 10408095C

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: COMMERCIAL - NEW

Permit Number - T12CM07961
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/10/2013 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Provide gas pipe sizing calculations demonstrating conformance to Section 402.1 and 402.3, IFGC 2006.
2. Provide a fixture description for the semi-circular wash-up sinks. Note that the water fixture units and the drainage fixture units are based on the number of faucets for each sink. Reference: Section 402, IPC 2006.
3. Show how the installation of the emergency shower/eyewash complies with the requirements of ISEA Z358.1 with regard to the water temperature and the location of the shutoff valve.
4. Provide tempered water for the lavatories using approved devices conforming to ASSE 1070. Reference: Section 416.5, IPC 2006.
5. If the shower does not have a pre-fabricated receptor, provide details to show that the construction of the receptor complies with the requirements of Section 417.5.2, IPC 2006.
6. Show that the back-to-back installation of water closets (detail 6/PL700) complies with the requirements of Section 706.3, IPC 2006.
7. Clarify the reason for the traps for the floor drains that discharge to the sand/oil separator. How are the traps to be self-scouring? The sand/oil separator functions as the trap with the drain pipes from the floor drains functioning as closed troughs. Reference: Section 1002.2, IPC 2006.
8. Provide a vent for the sand/oil interceptor. Reference: Section 1003.9, IPC 2006.
01/11/2013 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. Show the balancing data for the exhaust of room 114 (Ladies Locker Room).
3. Provide a design for the source-capture exhaust system for operating motor vehicles or submit a request to the building official for a deferred submittal. Reference: Section 502.14, IMC 2006.
01/11/2013 ROBERT SHERRY WATER REVIEW Approved
01/17/2013 RAY MAJUTA ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied T12CM07961
700 W Wetmore

This project to be under the 2005 NEC

1. Sheet ESL-101A, the 2012 Outdoor Lighting Code does not have a table allowing 300,000 lumens, choose an option
with the correct value.
2. Sheet ESL-101A, indicate which lights are to be used for Security.
3. Sheet EP-701, Transformer FOT-2 150 KVA shows a 300 amp OCD at MDB-1, should be sized at 125% of 180 amps which equals 180 amps, the OCD should be 225 amps per 450.3.A.
4. Sheet EP-104, indicate on sheet doors in electrical room are to comply with 110.26.C, for panic hardware or equal.
5. Sheet CEP-101, indicate that doors are to comply with
110.26.C, for panic hardware or equal.
6. Sheet EP-401 shows the transformers to be installed above the panels, what type of clearance will the panels have regarding 112.26, E and F?
7.Sheet EP-701, please indicate GFP testing of service to comply with 230.95.C.
8. Sheet CEP-701, indicate that the service is to be GFP and testing to comply with 230.95.C.
9 Sheet CEP-101, the panel va values in CWL-1 totals do not reflect input in Panel CWH-1.
10.Provide AIC value of MDB-1, MDB-2, and FODB-1 and FODB-2 next to them on one line.
11.Sheet CEP-101, Panel va values in CWL-1 totals do not reflect input into Panel CWH-1 cir 2,4 and 6.
12.Sheet CEP-601, indicate AIC rating of Panel CWH-1 in it's schedule.
13. Sheet CEP-601, Panel CWH-1 circuit 2,4,6 has 100 amp CB, Sheet CEP-701 shows a 90 amp CB.
14.Sheet CEP-701, feeders from MDB-2 has 400 amp circuit breaker to Panel CWH-1, the 4-350 kcmil are rated for 310 amps.
15. Sheet CEP-701, feeders from 90 amp CB in Panel CWH-1 to Transformer CWT-1 are #6's good for 65 amps.
16. Sheet CEP-701, feeder from Transformer CWT-1 to Panel CWL-1 4 # 2's good for 115 amps gooing to a 200 amp CB.
17. The ground electrode conductor for Transformer would be too small if the conductors for item #16 are increased.
18. Sheet CEP-701, the fault current analysis for Panel CWL-1 shows 13,092, list the AIC value on the panel.
19. The Blimp Storage bldg should have it's own system ground since it is a detached bldg.

Provide a response sheet concerning these items and how each addressed.

Ray T Majuta
Elect Plan Review
PDSD, C of Tucson
1/17/2013
Ray.Majuta@tucsonaz.gov
01/30/2013 CHAD AMATEAU WWM REVIEW Reqs Change 1: NEED TO SUBMIT DP FOR PCRWRD APPROVAL - CHAD AMATEAU- 740-6547
2: NEED CAPACITY REVIEW - KURT STEMM - 740-6607
3: NEED PCRWRD/TWC REVIEW OF SAND & OIL INTERCEPTORS
4: NEED PCRWRD/IWC REVIEW OF LIFT STATION - 3035 W EL CAMINO DEL CERRO
5: NEED DEQ REVIEW OF THE ON-SITE PVT SEWER WITH LIFT STATION
6: NEED TO SHOW THE SIZES, LOCATION AND SERIAL NUMBER OF ALL EXISTING WATER METERS ON THE PROPERTY TO REMAIN, WITH DATES OF INSTALLATION. NEED TO SHOW THE SIZE, LOCATION AND SERIAL NUMBER OF ALL WATER METERS.
NEED TO INDICATE THE SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL PROPOSED WATER METERS, PER SEWER CONNNECTION FEE CALCULATION.
12/20/2012 RONALD BROWN ADA REVIEW Passed
12/26/2012 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Denied PDSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Precision Toyota of Tucson
T12CM07961
Building Plan (1st Review)

TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 26, 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 a 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
12/26/2012 KEN BROUILLETTE FIRE REVIEW Approved
12/27/2012 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Approved
12/28/2012 ERIC NEWCOMB BUILDING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. SHEET AS102; SITE PLAN: KEYNOTE 27 IS NOT CORRECTLY LOCATED ON THE PLAN (GAS LINE IS EAST OF NOTE). VERIFY.
2. SHEET AS501; DETAIL 1: A CMU NOTE INDICATES TO GROUT CELLS AT STEEL LOCATIONS. PROVIDE THE REINFORCING SIZE AND SPACING, OR REFERENCE A STRUCTURAL NOTE/DETAIL (SB103).
3. SHEET AR103; FLOOR PLAN: KEYNOTE 1 ON THE PLAN BETWEEN GRIDS 12 AND 13 IS POINTING TO A TIRE CARRIER. REMOVE THE NOTE FROM THAT LOCATION.
4. SHEET AR103; FLOOR PLAN: THERE ARE NO SPLASH BLOCKS INDICATED ON THE PLAN (KEYNOTE 8). REVISE.
5. SHEET AR103; FLOOR PLAN: KEYNOTE 26 (BETWEEN GRIDS 12 AND 13 AND NORTH OF GRID A) INDICATES A NEW LADDER. IS THIS SHOWN IN THE CORRECT LOCATION?
6. SHEET AR106; KEYNOTES: KEYNOTE 6 WAS NOT LOCATED ON THE PLAN. VERIFY.
7. SHEET AR107; KEYNOTES: KEYNOTES 10 AND 11 WERE NOT LOCATED ON THE PLAN. VERIFY.
8. SHEET AR401 (ENLARGED PLANS 1 AND 2); SHEET AR402 (ELEVATION 14): THIS ROLL-IN TYPE SHOWER MUST MEET ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003, SECTION 608 REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING COMPARTMENT DIMENSIONS, GRAB BARS, CONTROL LOCATIONS, AND HANDSHOWER LOCATIONS. SHOW THAT INFORMATION ON THE DRAWINGS.
9. SHEET AR402; KEYNOTES: THERE ARE TWO KEYNOTES NUMBERED 20. REVISE.
10. SHEET AR504; DETAIL 19: PROVIDE THE SIZE AND QUANTITY OF CONNECTORS AT THE TOP OF THE PARTITION AND AT THE ROOF STRUCTURE.
11. SHEET SB001 (GENERAL SOIL BEARING); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (SHEET 2): THE NOTE ON SB001 INDICATES AN ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARING PRESSURE OF 2000 PSF AT 1'-6" DEPTH, WHILE THE CALCULATION INDICATES A 2.5 KSF BEARING PRESSURE USED IN THE FOOTING DESIGN. CLARIFY.
12. SHEET SB003; STEEL COLUMN SCHEDULE: IN THE 'BASE CONNECTION' COLUMN OF THE TABLE, GIVE SPECIFIC DETAIL REFERENCES FOR BASE PLATE SIZES AND ANCHORS.
13. SHEET SB003; STEEL COLUMN SCHEDULE: REMARKS FOR THE C4 COLUMN INDICATE 'PARTS MEZZANINE'. THERE ARE C4 COLUMNS AT THE WEST END OF THE BUILDING. REVISE THE SCHEDULE NOTE.
14. SHEET SB102 (FOUNDATION PLAN); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (SECTION 5, SHEET 4): THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE THE COLUMN FOOTING AT GRIDS B AND 8 IS A 7'-6" SQUARE FOOTING (FOOTING F5). CLARIFY. SHOULD THIS BE DESIGNATED AS THE FOOTING AT GRIDS B AND 9?
15. SHEET SB102; KEYNOTES: KEYNOTES 4, 5, 6, 11, 12, 14, 16, AND 17 WERE NOT LOCATED ON THE PLAN. VERIFY.
16. SHEET SB102; KEYNOTES: THE REFERENCE TO DETAIL 15/SJ501 IN KEYNOTE 23 IS NOT CORRECT. REVISE.
17. SHEET SB103; KEYNOTES: KEYNOTES 3, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, AND 18 WERE NOT LOCATED ON THE PLAN. VERIFY.
18. SHEET SB104; FOUNDATION PLAN (GRID 1A): A DETAIL CUT INDICATING 9/SF501 IS NOT CORRECT. REVISE.
19. SHEET SF106; FRAMING PLAN: INDICATE THE EXTENT OF THE 44LH11 JOISTS BETWEEN GRIDS A AND B (ARROWHEADS ARE MISSING TO SHOW WHERE 14 EQUAL SPACES ENDS AND 9 EQUAL SPACES BEGINS). THERE ARE NOT 23 EQUAL SPACES INDICATED BETWEEN GRIDS 1 AND 8. THE SAME CONDITION EXISTS BETWEEN GRIDS B AND C.
20. SHEET SF107; KEYNOTES: KEYNOTE 9 WAS NOT LOCATED ON THE PLAN. VERIFY.
21. SHEET SF108; KEYNOTES: COMPLETE THE DETAIL REFERENCE IN KEYNOTE 4.
22. SHEET EL501; POLE BASE: WERE STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS INCLUDED FOR THE LIGHT POLE FOUNDATION? VERIFY.
23. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SECTION 3 (SHEET 1): THE ROOF FRAMING KEY PLAN NEEDS TO BE EXPANDED TO INDICATE ALL FRAMING.
24. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS: THE DESIGN OF THE SOUTH LOW ROOF FRAMING (SHOWN ON SHEET SF103) WAS NOT LOCATED IN THE CALCULATIONS. VERIFY.
25. GENERAL: ALL DEFERRED SUBMITTALS MUST BE APPROVED IN WRITING BY RON BOOSE (BUILDING OFFICIAL) BEFORE THOSE SUBMITTALS WILL BE REVIEWED. RON.BOOSE@TUCSONAZ.GOV.
26. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS.
12/31/2012 BETH GRANT COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING Approved

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
02/22/2013 CPIERCE1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed