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 - T13CM04494
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/24/2013 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Toilet rooms shall not open directly into a room used for the preparation of food for service to the public. Reference: Section 1210.4, IBC 2012. 2. Complete the notes for the pressure reducing valve in detail 13/M6.5 and in the plumbing fixture specifications on sheet M9.2. Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012. 3. Verify the developed pipe lengths to each of the gas loads; the developed length from the meter to AC-7, for example, is approximately 195-feet, not the 140-feet shown on detail 13/M6.3. Reference: Section 402.4, IFGC 2012. 4. Verify the size of the gas branch pipe connecting AC-5; based on a developed length of 300 feet, it is too small. Reference: Table 402.4(2), IFGC 2012. 5. The developed length of the hot water supply piping serving the can wash appears to be greater than fifty feet from the recirculating hot water system; provide a method for maintaining the temperature of the hot water supply to the can wash. Reference: Section 607.2, IPC 2012. 6. If the finished floor elevation of the proposed student center is below or less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole in the public sewer, provide a backwater valve in the building sewer. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. 7. Show how storm water is to be prevented from entering the sanitary drain system at the can wash, P-K-5. Reference: Section 1101.3, IPC 2012. |
| 07/24/2013 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/25/2013 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied | Please provide an overall site plan that indicates the location of fire department access and the location of any existing and proposed fire hydrants. The required fire flow is 3250 GPM for three hours but can be reduced to 1500 GPM for 2 hours based on the installation of the fire sprinkler system. We have met witht he engineering firm and have issues regarding the location of the fire department turnaround, FDC and that the proposal is for a dead end fire line serving the fire hydrants. We would like to see a looped system for the fire hydrants and a seperate tap for the fire line. The location of the FDC may be required to be remote. The FDC is usually located on the address side of the building and visible from the fire department access. The front of this building (lobby) is shown from a side that does not have any existing or proposed fire hydrants. We need to discuss this project further with the design team. thanks Ken Brouillette |
| 07/25/2013 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Revise the energy code analysis for the building envelope, coordinating the building components used in the analysis with those shown on the drawing (e.g. include doors in the calculations). The information on the drawings shall, as a minimum, include U-factors of the doors and fenestration components along with the SHGC for the glazing. Reference: Sections C303.1, C103.2, and C401.2, International Energy Conservation Code 2012. 2. The component description of the roof in the envelope compliance certificate is "other" and footnote (b) on the certificate indicates that supporting documentation is required. Provide the documentation of the U-factor for the roof assembly. Reference: Section C103.2, IECC 2012. 3. Complete the Envelope and the Mechanical Compliance Certificates by checking the appropriate line items in the requirements checklists. 4. Provide automatic shutoff dampers for the outdoor air supply and exhaust ducts. Reference: Section C403.2.4.4, IECC 2012. 5. Clarify how excess outside air relief from the building is to be accomplished. Reference: Section C403.3.1.1.4, IECC 2012. |
| 08/01/2013 | RONALD BROWN | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | SHEET A0.2 1. City of Tucson minimum actual lettering size for both upper and lower case is 3/32". Please revise the following non-compliant drawings and resubmit: A0.2, A2.0, A2.3, A8.3, A8.4, S1.2 and all MPE drawings that utilized architectual background floor plans. SHEET A0.2 2. Show the occupancy load calculations and total. SHEET A2.0 3. As per the 2012 IBC, Section 1210.4, a toilet room may not open directly into a kitchen area such as toilet room 107. 4. As per The 2012 IBC, Section 904, a section of the Snack Bar service window must be accessible. Reference details 3/A7.5, 1/A7.7, and I/A12.0. SHEET A11.0 5. Provide accessible room signage as required by the 2012, IBC, Section 1110.1 SHEET ID8.0 6. Coordinate accessible urinal location with detail 1/A8.3. SHEET ID8.1 7. Provide vertical grab bars at details 3, 8, 12 and 17. 8. Provide grab bars at details A and C. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS 9. Show DB-10 and 11 on Beam Key Plan. 10. Provide a roof framing Key Plan showing joist design, ledger design, header design and lintel design. 11. Provide Key Plan for the East Canopy Design. END OF REVIEW |
| 08/05/2013 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: T13CM04494 1545 E Copper Street Salpointe Student Center Buildings TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 5, 2013 DUE DATE: August 20, 2013 COMMENTS: 01. Zoning has reviewed the plans but cannot approve them at this time. While the building plans appear to be consistent with the development package site plan zoning cannot approve the building plans until the development package is approved. 02. If any changes are made to the development package site plan that affects the design of the building whether height, GFA etc changes to the building or site plan must be made as required for consistency between the plans. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. |
| 08/06/2013 | RAY MAJUTA | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | T13CM04494 1545 E Copper St Salpointe School, New Student Center 1. Sheet E0.0, Outdoor Lighting Code, appears Option 3 area E3 used, allowing; Shielded 33.65 acres x 175,000 lu = 5,888,750 lu Un-shielded 33.65 acres x 11,000 lu = 370,150 lu existing shown as Shielded = 61,403 lu Un-shielded = 400,000 lu how were values obtained ? The unshielded is already over the allowed value. Where were the RA1 and RA2 fixtures relocated from ? Which fixtures are considered under roof ? Verify all new outdoor fixtures to have rated color temperature not to exceed 3,500 K. 2. Sheet E2.0, provide an exit light for the Chapel and an additional emergency light in the Chapel or indicate why as shown is sufficient. 3. Sheet E6.0, question regarding the feed thur feeders which go to Panels K-2 and K-3. Panels K-2 and K-3 have only one set of 4 250MCM AL CU bond conductors to them both, the Panels have 200 amp overcurrent devices, these panels can allow together a load over 200 amps when the conductors will only carry 205 amps. Should there be two sets of conductors all the way through ? Ray T Maajuta Elect Plan Review PDSD, Tucson 8/08/2013 Ray.Majuta@tucsonaz.gov |
| 08/08/2013 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Will provded approval upon approval of the DP13-0131. JG |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/05/2013 | CPIERCE1 | REJECT SHELF | Completed |