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 - TI
Permit Number - T14CM00680
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - TI
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/20/2014 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | DELETED DOORS MUST COMPLY WITH 2012 IFC, SECTION 504.2 |
| 02/21/2014 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. SHEET A0.2; EXIT PLAN: ARE THE NUMBERS (25) LISTED BELOW THE EXIT DESIGNATIONS A REFERENCE TO THE NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS EXITING AT THAT LOCATION? IF SO, THERE ARE 90 TOTAL OCCUPANTS PER SHEET A0. CLARIFY. 2. SHEET A1.2; PLAN KEYNOTES: NOTES 6 AND 37 WERE NOT LOCATED ON THE PLAN. VERIFY. 3. SHEET A2.2; DETAIL 2: INDICATE THE SIZE AND SPACING OF THE HORIZONTAL MEMBER AT THE BOTTOM OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. IN ADDITION, PROVIDE A CONNECTION TYPE. 4. SHEET A2.2; DETAIL 4: PROVIDE A DETAIL FOR THE CONNECTION OF THE VERTICAL METAL STUDS TO THE STRUCTURE ABOVE. 5. SHEET A2.2; DETAIL 6: THE CITY OF TUCSON REQUIRES ALL LETTERING (UPPER AND LOWER CASE) TO BE A MINIMUM OF 3/32" IN HEIGHT. REVISE. 6. SHEET A 3.1; DETAIL 3: THE CITY OF TUCSON REQUIRES ALL LETTERING (UPPER AND LOWER CASE) TO BE A MINIMUM OF 3/32" IN HEIGHT. REVISE. 7. SHEET A5.1; ELEVATIONS 9 THROUGH 15: ARE THESE ELEVATIONS INDICATED ON A PLAN? VERIFY. 8. SHEETS A5.1 AND A5.2; KEYNOTES: ADD A NOTE INDICATING ALL KEYNOTES MAY NOT BE LOCATED ON THIS SHEET. 9. SHEETS A5.1 AND A5.2; KEYNOTES: NOTES 14, 15, 24, 25, 27, AND 28 WERE NOT LOCATED ON THESE SHEETS. VERIFY. 10. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| 02/24/2014 | ERIC NEWCOMB | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Passed | |
| 02/26/2014 | CPIERCE1 | WWM | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 03/07/2014 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/07/2014 | LEERAY HANLY | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 03/12/2014 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Revise the mechanical design as required to avoid using the corridor as a return air duct (HP-1, HP-3, and HP-5). Reference: Section 601.2, IMC 2012. 2. Provide balancing data for the exhaust grilles in restrooms 112 and 128. Reference: Section 403.7, IMC 2012. 3. Clarify the balancing data for HP-2 and HP-4; the sum of the outside air plus the return air appears to be significantly less than the supply air for each unit. Reference: Section 403.7, IMC 2012. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03/17/2014 | CPIERCE1 | REJECT SHELF | Completed |