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: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Permit Number - T14CM06498
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/31/2014 | LEERAY HANLY | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 11/03/2014 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. PREVIOUS COMMENT 5; SHEET A0.01; CODE ANALYSIS CHAPTER 10 (COMMON PATH OF EGRESS TRAVEL): THE DRAWINGS INDICATE THE LONGEST COMMON PATH OF TRAVEL IN THE BUILDING IS 100'-0", WHILE THE IBC TABLE 1014.3 INDICATES 75' IS THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED ("ALL OTHERS" OCCUPANCY). ADDRESS THIS ISSUE. 2. PREVIOUS NOTE 13; SHEET A1.40: KEYED NOTE 22 REFERENCES A SIGN AT THE ELECTRICAL ROOM. THAT ROOM (AND NOTE 22) ARE NOT SHOWN ON THIS SHEET. CLARIFY. 3. PREVIOUS NOTE 14; SHEETS A1.42 AND A1.43: BOTH SHEETS CONTAIN VERBIAGE AND NUMBERS THAT STILL DO NOT MEET THE CITY OF TUCSON REQUIREMENTS OF A MINIMUM OF 3/32" IN HEIGHT (UPPER AND LOWER CASE). REVISE. 4. PREVIOUS NOTE 15; SHEET A1.46: THIS SHEET CONTAINS VERBIAGE AND NUMBERS THAT STILL DO NOT MEET THE CITY OF TUCSON REQUIREMENTS OF A MINIMUM OF 3/32" IN HEIGHT (UPPER AND LOWER CASE). REVISE. 5. SHEET A3.10; DETAIL 07: THE CITY OF TUCSON REQUIRES ALL LETTERING (UPPER AND LOWER CASE) TO BE A MINIMUM OF 3/32" IN HEIGHT. REVISE THE VERBIAGE. 6. PREVIOUS COMMENT 16; SHEET A4.01 (DETAILS 08 AND 09): AT THE METAL STUD BRACES, THE SIZE AND QUANTITY OF CONNECTORS AT THE VERTICAL STUDS WERE NOT PROVIDED. IN ADDITION, A DETAIL OF THE BRACE CONNECTION TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE ABOVE WAS NOT INCLUDED. 7. PREVIOUS COMMENT 18; SHEET A4.11 (DETAILS 04, 05, 09, AND 11): AT THE METAL STUD BRACES, THE SIZE AND QUANTITY OF CONNECTORS AT THE VERTICAL STUDS WERE NOT PROVIDED. IN ADDITION, A DETAIL OF THE BRACE CONNECTION TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE ABOVE WAS NOT INCLUDED. 8. SHEET S-101; ELEVATION 4: A BOXED NOTE INDICATES TO REFERENCE THE ARCHITECT FOR GATE DETAILS. THOSE DETAILS WERE NOT LOCATED. COORDINATE WITH THE ARCHITECT. 9. SHEET S-101 (SECTION 2); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (CMU6): THE WALL FOOTING IN THE CALCULATIONS INDICATES A 16" THICKNESS, WHILE THE SECTION INDICATES A 1'-3" FOOTING THICKNESS. CLARIFY. 10. GENERAL: PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| 11/06/2014 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 11/06/2014 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Comment not resolved; the minimum font height is 3/32" for all of the characters, even the lower case characters. See M-2 and M-4. [Initial comment: Revise the font size used on the drawings to a minimum height of 3/32-inch (i.e. both upper and lower case fonts must be at least 3/32" high). Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012.] |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/14/2014 | SHANAE POWELL | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 11/14/2014 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | REJECT SHELF | Completed |