Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Permit Number - T14CM08365
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/11/2015 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/13/2015 | BETH GRANT | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Approved | |
| 02/23/2015 | KEN VAN KARSEN | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 03/03/2015 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Provide manufacturer's published literature that indicates that the hot water distribution piping configuration using the specified mixing valve as shown in the water heater schematic on sheet P2.1 is compliant with the requirements of the ASSE 1070 listing. [Initial comment: Provide tempered water for the lavatories and public hand-washing sinks in restrooms using approved devices conforming to ASSE 1070. Reference: Sections 416.5 and 607.1.2, IPC 2012.] 2. Comment not addressed. [Initial comment: Verify the rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (the rim elevations and inverts shown on sheet C1 appear to be incorrect) 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.] 3. Show how the overflow scuppers were sized (e.g. what was the assumed head on the scupper) and how was the scupper width determined. On sheet A4.1 the downspouts are 4" x 6" but on sheet P1.3 they are 2-1/2" x 4-1/2"; coordinate the size of the downspouts (note that the size 2-1/2" x 4-1/2" does not occur in Table 1106.2 (2), IPC 2012). [Initial comment: Provide roof drainage and hydraulic size calculations for the scuppers for the new roof over the service area based on the 100-year hourly rainfall rate for Tucson, 3" per hour. Show how overflow protection for the roof is to be provided. Reference: Sections 1101.7, 1106.1, 1106.4, and 1108.3, IPC 2012, and Sections 1611.1 and 1611.3, IBC 2012.] 4. Recalculate the total gas load. Based on the specified gas input values for the seven new rooftop units and the three existing space heaters, the new total load should be 790 CFH, not 728 CFH. [Initial comment: Verify the basis for the gas pipe sizes; using Table 402.4 (1), IFGC 2012 with a developed length of 200 feet shows that many of the pipes are undersized. If Table 402.4 (2), IFGC 2012 is used, only the existing pipe serving RTU-2 and RTU-3 is undersized. Check also the total gas load shown on sheet P1.2: the mechanical schedule shows a total connected load of 790 CFH. Reference: Section 402.3, IFGC 2012.] |
| 03/04/2015 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Coordinate the component descriptions used in the COMcheck envelope analysis for the addition with the information shown on the drawings (e.g. the insulation of the new roof and walls). Provide the supporting documentation for the fenestration U-values and the SHGC (see footnote c, Section 3 of COMcheck). [Initial comment: Provide energy code compliance calculations for the additions (new construction) to the building envelope; use the climate zone for Tucson. Provide sufficient detail on the drawings to evaluate the energy compliance of the additions to 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 C101.4.3, C101.5, and C103.2, International Energy Conservation Code 2012.] 2. Coordinate the component descriptions used in the COMcheck envelope analysis for the building alteration with the information shown on the drawings (e.g. the roof insulation). Provide the supporting documentation for the fenestration U-values and the SHGC (see footnote b, Section 3 of COMcheck). [Initial comment: Demonstrate energy code compliance for the alterations to the existing building envelope based on the current code. Reference: Sections C101.4.3, C101.5, and C103.2, International Energy Conservation Code 2012.] 3. The NFRC certification numbers (CPD#) have not been included in this submittal. Factory-manufactured windows are required to have certificates attesting to their compliance to NFRC Standards 100 and 200 and can be provided by the manufacturer or found at www.nfrc.org. For site assembled commercial products, the NFRC component modeling approach program enables commercial window manufacturers to produce bid reports to prove energy performance prior to being awarded a job and provide finalized label certificates once the product has been installed. Fenestration performance reports based on AAMA 507 are based on energy simulations only (no actual testing) and are not acceptable. [Initial comment: Provide NFRC fenestration product ratings for the U-factor and the SHGC values on COMcheck or use the appropriate default U-factor and SHGC values from Tables C303.1.3 (1), C303.1.3 (2) and C303.1.3.(3), IECC 2012. Reference: Section C303.1.3, IECC 2012.] 4. Verify that the exterior design temperatures used for the load calculations were 104Fdb/66Fwb. Reference: Section C302.2, IECC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. [Initial comment: Provide heating and cooling load calculations that justify the capacities of the heating and cooling equipment specified for the project. Reference: Sections C403.2.1 and C403.2.2, IECC 2012.] |
| 03/04/2015 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | |
| 03/11/2015 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03/31/2015 | SHANAE POWELL | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 03/31/2015 | SHANAE POWELL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |