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 - T14CM01024
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/14/2014 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/14/2014 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: March 14, 2014 REVIEWER: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: T14CM01022 and T14CM01024 (Building Plan) SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received both building plan applications (T14CM01254 and T14CM01024). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the building plan applications at this time. The following items need to be addressed: BUILDING PLAN COMMENTS: 1) Engineering could not verify that the building plans was in compliance with the stamped approved Development Plan Package (DP13-0176). Please submit a copy of the stamped approved Development Plan Package with the next building plan submittal. 2) Engineering will re-review the building plans on the next submittal to insure compliance with the approved and stamped Development Plan Package. Additional comments may be forthcoming. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide the building plans with a copy of the last approved Development Plan Package (DP13-0176). Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the building plan reviews. For questions or to schedule an appointment I can be reached at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Planning & Development Services |
| 03/18/2014 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. COVER SHEET; SHEET INDEX: REMOVE THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FROM THIS SHEET. 2. COVER SHEET; SHEET INDEX (ARCHITECTURAL SHEETS): A REFERENCE SITE PLAN (SHEET 11) IS NOT INCLUDED WITH THESE DRAWINGS. PROVIDE. 3. SHEETS A3 AND A4; KEYNOTES: PROVIDE A NOTE ON THESE SHEETS INDICATING ALL KEYNOTES MAY NOT BE ON EACH SHEET. 4. SHEETS A3 AND A4; KEYNOTES: NOTES 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 2.3, 2.9, 2.10, 2.11, 2.12, 3.13, 3.14, 3.15, 3.17, 4.4, AND 4.5 WERE NOT LOCATED ON THESE SHEETS. REMOVE THEM FROM THE RESTROOM AND TICKET SALES BUILDING DRAWINGS. 5. SHEET A4: THE CITY OF TUCSON REQUIRES ALL LETTERING (UPPER AND LOWER CASE) TO BE A MINIMUM OF 3/32" IN HEIGHT. REVISE THE TYPICAL MOUNTING HEIGHTS FOR ACCESSIBILITY NOTES. 6. SHEET A5; MEN'S RESTROOM PLAN B: THE METAL URINAL SCREEN IS REFERENCED AS KEYNOTE 11. REVISE. 7. SHEET S3: THE CITY OF TUCSON REQUIRES ALL LETTERING (UPPER AND LOWER CASE) TO BE A MINIMUM OF 3/32" IN HEIGHT. REVISE THE SHEAR WALL SCHEDULE. 8. SHEET S3; DETAIL 1 (NOTE 1): IN THE KEYNOTE, INDICATE A DIAGRAM OF THE BENT BAR (36" LONG HORIZONTAL LENGTH?). 9. SHEET S3; DETAIL 1 (NOTE 7): INDICATE THE REINFORCING IS TOP AND BOTTOM. 10. SHEET S3; FOUNDATION KEYNOTES (NOTE 2): IS THERE REINFORCING TOP AND BOTTOM IN THIS FOOTING? VERIFY. 11. SHEET S4; DETAIL 1: KEYNOTE 9 WAS NOT LOCATED ON THE DETAIL. VERIFY. 12. GENERAL: PROVIDE A CODE REVIEW SHEET (FULL SIZE DRAWING) INTO THE SET, INCLUDING INFORMATION ON THE BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE, CONSTRUCTION TYPE, OCCUPANT LOAD, OCCUPANCY TYPE, APPLICABLE CODES, ETC. 13. GENERAL: STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS BY STEVEN HESS WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS SUBMITTAL. PROVIDE. 14. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| 03/19/2014 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Needs Review | Development Package approval required (DP13-0176). |
| 03/20/2014 | ERIC NEWCOMB | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Approved | |
| 03/26/2014 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Provide a site drawing showing the size, route, and slope of the building sewer and the location of its connection to the public sewer. Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012. 2. Provide the rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole and the first floor elevation. Determine the need for a backwater valve per Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 03/26/2014 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Provide energy code compliance calculations for the building envelope and the mechanical systems; use the climate zone for Tucson. 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 C103.2 and C401.2, International Energy Conservation Code 2012. 2. Full compliance with the 2012 IECC requires that an "additional efficiency package option" be selected per Section C406. Identify which of the three options has been selected. 3. Provide heating and cooling load calculations that justify the capacities of the heating and cooling equipment specified for the ticket sales room and for the restrooms. Reference: Sections C403.2.1 and C403.2.2, IECC 2012. |
| 03/26/2014 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Denied | Provide the site utility plan showing the location of the water meter and the reduced pressure backflow assembly on the drawings; indicate the size of the meter and of the reduced pressure backflow assembly. Reference: Chapter XXVII, Article V, Section 27-72, the Tucson Code, http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/sites/default/files/water/docs/backflow-ordinance.pdf |
| 04/02/2014 | LEERAY HANLY | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | provide information showing compliance with City of Tucson Outdoor Lighting Code (color temp < 3500K) |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/03/2014 | SHANAE POWELL | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 04/03/2014 | SHANAE POWELL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |