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 - BLDG/FIRE/ZONING/ENG
Permit Number - T14CM02580
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - BLDG/FIRE/ZONING/ENG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/06/2014 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Be advised double swing gate shown on sheet S1.1 may not meet egress requirements of 2012 IBC. Unable to determine location of gate(s) from plans. |
| 05/23/2014 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. SHEET S1.0; FOUNDATION PLAN: THE 'THICKENED SLAB LEGEND' INDICATES FOOTINGS F0 AND F1, WHILE THE PLAN INDICATES F1 AND F2. CLARIFY. 2. SHEET S1.1 (FRAMING PLANS); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (PAGES 4 AND 13): THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE COLUMNS M14, M21, M28, AND M34 TO BE A HSS6X6X1/4, WHILE THE FRAMING PLAN INDICATES A C1 (HSS6X6X3/16). CLARIFY. 3. SHEET S1.1 (FRAMING PLANS); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (PAGE 4): THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE A COLUMN M29. THIS COLUMN HAS NO DESIGNATION ON THE PLAN. VERIFY. 4. SHEET S1.1 (FRAMING PLANS); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (PAGES 4 AND 13): THE CALCULATIONS INDICATE COLUMNS M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, M6, M8, M9, M10, M11, M12, M13, M15, M16, M17, M18, M19, M20, M22, M23, M24, M25, M26, M27, M30, M31, M32, M33, AND M34 TO BE A HSS6X6X1/4, WHILE THE FRAMING PLAN INDICATES A C1 (HSS6X6X3/16). CLARIFY. 5. SHEET S1.1; STAIR/RAILING DETAIL: A DETAIL CUT 5A/SD AT THE STRINGER IS NOT CORRECT, OR NEEDS TO BE ADDED TO THE DETAIL SHEET. VERIFY. 6. SHEET SD; DETAIL 3: THE COLUMNS INDICATED ON THE DETAIL ARE DENOTED AS 6X6X1/4. THAT COLUMN SIZE IS NOT USED ON THIS PROJECT. CLARIFY. 7. SHEET SD; STRUCTURAL DETAILS: THE CITY OF TUCSON REQUIRES ALL LETTERING (UPPER AND LOWER CASE) TO BE A MINIMUM OF 3/32" IN HEIGHT. REVISE THE DIMENSIONS AND TEXT. 8. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; PAGES 110 AND 111: THE CONCRETE STRENGTH LISTED IN THE CALCULATIONS IS 4000 P.S.I., WHILE THE STRUCTURAL NOTES ON SHEET SD INDICATE 2500 P.S.I. FOR THE FLOOR SLAB AND FOUNDATIONS. CLARIFY. 9. GENERAL: PROVIDE A COVER SHEET THAT INCLUDES A PROJECT NARRATIVE, CODE ANALYSIS (OCCUPANCY TYPE, OCCUPANCY LOAD, PLUMBING FIXTURE REQUIREMENTS, ETC.), OR ADD A REFERENCE NOTE TO AN APPROVED ACTIVITY NUMBER THAT INCLUDES THIS INFORMATION. 10. GENERAL: PROVIDE AN EXISTING BUILDING FLOOR PLAN INDICATING THE LOCATION OF THE NEW MEZZANINE IN THE EXISTING BUILDING, OR ADD A REFERENCE NOTE TO AN APPROVED ACTIVITY NUMBER THAT INCLUDES THIS INFORMATION. 11. GENERAL: CHECK THE COLUMNS INDICATED IN THE CALCULATIONS AND VERIFY THE COLUMNS SHOWN ON SHEET S1.1 ARE LISTED CORRECTLY. 12. GENERAL: THE CALCULATIONS FOR THE STEEL STAIRS WERE NOT LOCATED IN THIS SUBMITTAL. PROVIDE. 13. GENERAL: THE FOOTING DESIGN (AS SHOWN ON SHEET S1.0) FOR THE NEW STEEL COLUMNS WAS NOT LOCATED IN THIS SUBMITTAL. PROVIDE. 14. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05/29/2014 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |