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: T13CM02593
Parcel: 11621302B

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: COMMERCIAL - NEW

Permit Number - T13CM02593
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
05/06/2013 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Approved
05/08/2013 RONALD BROWN BUILDING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied SHEET G1.1
1. Several of the adopted building codes listed are incorrect; i.e. Arizona State Fire code, 2006 IFC, 1998 ICC/ANSI, Arizona State Handicapp Revised Statutes and the 1994 ADAAG.
a. Please reference the Planning and Development Services Department's website for the correct City of Tucson adopted building code listings, revise the drawing accordingly and resubmit.
SHEET A2.1
2. As per the 2012 IBC, Section 1018.4, the length of a dead end corridor shall not exceed 50' in length. The following corridors are non-compliant: 1016 plus 1004, 1012 plus 1004 and 1035. Please revise and resubmit.
3. Please provide an occupany load for rooms 1029 Pharmacy, 1088 Group Room and 1108 Centering. If the occupancy load is 50 or more, please provide two exits.
4. Insure panic hardware for all required exit doors as per the 2012 IBC, Section 1008.1.9.4 and as per Section 1008.1.9.8 for security exit over ride.
5. Verify accessible door jamb clearance at door 1123 for the push side.
SHEET A2.2
6. Corridors 2105 plus 2096 are non compliant with the 2012 IBC, Section 1018.4, the length of a dead end corridor shall not exceed 50' in length.
7. Show 1 hour rated wall references at the mechanical shaft located North by North west of the elevator lobby.
SHEET A3.3.
8. Please explain how detail 7/A3.3 complies with the 2012 IBC, Section 1607.14; 5 psf lateral load.

STRUCTURAL REVIEW COMMENTS
ERIC NEWCOMB

9. SHEET S1.4 (DETAIL 28); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS: PROVIDE THE FOUNDATION DESIGN FOR THE LIGHT POLE.
10. SHEET S2.0; FOUNDATION PLAN: AT GRIDS C AND 1, THERE IS A FOOTING 13'-0" SQUARE (F6) AND A FOOTING F8 (3'-0" SQUARE) ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. ENLARGE A PLAN DETAIL OF THIS AREA TO INDICATE HOW THE FOOTING WILL BE CONSTRUCTED.
11. SHEET S2.0; FOUNDATION KEYNOTES: NOTES 4, 5, AND 8 WERE NOT LOCATED ON THE PLAN. VERIFY.
12. SHEET S2.0; FOUNDATION PLAN: THERE ARE TWO NOTE 6'S NEAR GRID B AND BETWEEN GRIDS 9 AND 10. IS THIS THE CORRECT LOCATION FOR THAT NOTE? VERIFY.
13. SHEET S2.1 (SECOND LEVEL PLAN); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (SECOND FLOOR LOW ROOF): THE FIRST BEAM WEST OF THE ELEVATOR IS DESIGNATED AS A W24X55 IN THE CALCULATIONS, BUT A W18X50 ON THE PLAN. CLARIFY.
14. SHEET S2.1; SECOND LEVEL PLAN: ON THE PLAN, NOTE 8 IS INDICATED BETWEEN GRIDS 1 AND 2 AND GRIDS B AND C, AND BETWEEN GRIDS 3 AND 3.1 AND GRIDS G.5 AND H. IS THIS CORRECT AT THOSE LOCATIONS? VERIFY. IS NOTE 8 SHOWN ON THE PLAN IN THE CORRECT LOCATION?
15. SHEET S3.0; FOUNDATION DETAILS: THE SOIL REPORT INDICATED A 2'-0" DEPTH TO THE BOTTOM OF THE FOOTING. SEVERAL DETAILS INDICATED AN 18" DEPTH. CLARIFY.
16. SHEET S3.0; DETAIL 122: REVISE THE TITLE TO DETAIL 104. VERIFY.
17. SHEETS S3.0 AND S3.1; DETAILS 102, 106, 110, 113, 114, 120, AND 123: PROVIDE A DIMENSION OR NOTE FROM FINISH SLAB/GRADE TO THE TOP OF THE FOOTING.
18. SHEET S3.0; DETAIL 108: NOTE 7 DOES NOT APPEAR ON THE DETAIL. PROVIDE.
19. SHEET S3.0; DETAIL 109: REVISE NOTE 5.
20. SHEET S3.0; DETAIL 110: NOTE 6 INDICATES TO MATCH AND LAP VERTICAL REINFORCING. CLARIFY.
21. SHEET S4.0; DETAIL 216: THE DETAIL INDICATES A NOTE 3 THAT POINTS TO A BEARING ANGLE. REVISE THE NOTE.
22. SHEET S4.2; DETAIL 244: THE DETAIL INDICATES A NOTE 2 THAT POINTS TO A STEEL BEAM. REVISE THE NOTE.
23. SHEET S5.0; DETAIL 319: NOTE 3 INDICATES A #4 CONTINUOUS. CLARIFY.
24. SHEET S5.0; DETAIL 319: IS NOTE 8 CORRECT? VERIFY.
25. SHEET S5.1; DETAIL 323: THE DETAIL INDICATES A NOTE 2 THAT POINTS TO A STEEL BEAM. REVISE THE NOTE.
26. SHEET S5.1; DETAIL 323: REMOVE NOTES 7, 8, 9, AND 10.
27. SHEET S6.0 (STAIRS); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (STAIR LANDING BEAM SSB2): THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE A STAIR LANDING BEAM AS A C10X15.3. WHERE IS THIS BEAM LOCATED? VERIFY.
28. SHEET S6.0 (STAIRS); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (EDGE STAIR STRINGER SUPPORT): THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE AN EDGE STAIR STRINGER SUPPORTING SSB2 AS A C12X20.7. WHERE IS THIS BEAM LOCATED? VERIFY.
29. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; GRAVITY COLUMN DESIGN SUMMARY: IN THE CALCULATIONS, PROVIDE A KEY PLAN INDICATING THE VARIOUS COLUMNS AS CURRENTLY LOCATED BY COLUMN LINES.
30. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; CONTINUOUS FOOTING MATERIAL PROPERTIES: THE SOIL CAPACITY INDICATED ON THIS PAGE IS 4.00 KSF. THIS VALUE IS REPEATED IN SEVERAL FOOTING CALCULATIONS, RATHER THAN THE 2800 PSF. CLARIFY.
31. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS: PROVIDE A KEY PLAN IN THE CALCULATIONS FOR THE FRONT CANOPY DESIGN.
32. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS: PROVIDE A KEY PLAN IN THE CALCULATIONS FOR THE STAIR BEAM DESIGN (CALCULATIONS INDICATE SIX BEAMS).
33. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS: NEAR THE END OF THE CALCULATIONS, THERE ARE COLUMNS AND BEAMS DESIGNED FOR VARIOUS CANOPIES. WHERE ARE THESE CANOPIES INDICATED ON THE PLAN?
34. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS.
35. GENERAL: PLEASE NUMBER THE CALCULATION PAGES IN THE FUTURE AS IT HELPS WITH THE REVIEW.
05/09/2013 KEN BROUILLETTE FIRE REVIEW Denied please update page g 1.1 with correct fire code for the city of tucson (2012) and remove the Arizona Fire Code .
05/15/2013 RAY MAJUTA ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied T13CM02593
El Rio Health Clinic

1.Sheet E1.2, circuits for pole lighting HV2A 19,21,23 and
25,27,29 listed as spares in panel schedule.
2. Sheet E3.3, circuits to VAV 5-25, (LVID-2,4,6) listed in panel schedule as circuits for 2 (Elev cab lts), 4 (Elev cab lts), 6 (Elev pit ).
3. Sheet E6.1- fault current for Panels having a fault current higher than 10 KAIC, will they have fully rated breakers as well or will a Series System be used ?
4. Provide a notation on Sheet E6.1, that the Main Service is to have a Performance Test on Ground Fault Protection System, and a written record to be provided to AHJ Inspector
prior to energizing , per 2011 NEC 230.95.C.
5. Sheet E6.1, per 2011 NEC 620.62, a Selective Coordination Study to be provided to AHJ Inspector on Elevator feeder prior to energizing . This can be accomplished by either providing the study or notation on plan indicating study to be given to Inspector prior to energizing.

Ray T Majuta
Elect Plan Review
PDSD, Tucson
5/17/2013
Ray.Majuta@tucsonaz.gov
05/16/2013 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Show the use of a 2" reduced pressure principle backflow prevention assembly with a flow rate of 114 GPM is being applied in a manner consistent with the manufacturer's instructions (i.e. with a water velocity of approximately 12 FPS through the assembly). Reference: Section 303.2, IPC 2012.
2. Provide tempered water for the lavatories and exam sinks using approved devices conforming to ASSE 1070. Reference: Section 607.1.2, IPC 2012.
3. Provide a cleanout at the base of each waste stack. Reference: Section 708.3.4, IPC 2012.
4. Show the sizes for the horizontal roof drain pipes for the roof drains serving areas of 299 and 3250 square feet.
5. Revise the sizes of the 4" horizontal roof drain pipes that are serving areas greater than 2506 square feet or increase the slope of the pipes to ΒΌ" per foot. Reference: Table 1106.3, IPC 2012.
05/16/2013 ROBERT SHERRY WATER REVIEW Approved
05/22/2013 TERRY STEVENS ZONING REVIEW Denied Zoning has reviewed the building plan but cannot approve until the other reveiwers have given approval approved. This reveiw can be done over the counter by setting an appointment with me.
05/24/2013 ROBERT SHERRY MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Coordinate the envelope energy code analysis with the components used for the building envelope; clearly show that the building components used in the analysis are identified on the drawings. Reference: Section C303.1, IECC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.
2. Provide the commissioning plan for the building. Reference: Section C408.2.1, IECC 2012.
3. Verify that the cooking appliances being installed under the Type I hood are being provided with the clearance to combustibles required by their listing. Reference: Section 301.7, IMC 2012.
4. Revise the structural calculations and details to show that the Type I hood is supported from the building structure in accordance with Section 507.6, IMC 2006, which specifies the structure must support the hood and the weight of a person working on the hood. Reference: Section 302.1, IMC 2012.
5. Show that the hood installation complies with Section 507.9, IMC 2012 with regard to a smooth, cleanable, non-absorbent, and non-combustible material installed between the hood and the wall, and extending 18" beyond the hood.
6. Show that combustible materials (e.g. cabinets) are not located within 18" of the Type I hood. Reference: Section 507.9, IMC 2012.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
06/06/2013 CPIERCE1 REJECT SHELF Completed