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 - T15CM02281
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/14/2015 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/20/2015 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. SHEET S1.0; GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES (LOADS): THE PARKING LIVE LOAD IS LISTED AS 40 PSF. THE IBC TABLE 1607.1 ALSO LISTS NOTE a FOR CONCENTRATED LOADS. PLEASE INDICATE IN THE CALCULATIONS THAT THIS CONCENTRATED LOAD DESIGN HAS BEEN INVESTIGATED, AND THE 40 PSF UNIFORM LOAD CONTROLS THE DESIGN. 2. SHEET S1.0; GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES (LOADS): PLEASE PROVIDE ON THE DRAWINGS THE LOADS USED FOR THE MECHANICAL MEZZANINE DESIGN. 3. SHEET S1.6; COLUMN SCHEDULE: PLEASE VERIFY COLUMNS C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7, AND C8, AND THEIR LOCATIONS. THEY WERE NOT LOCATED ON THE PLANS AND MAY FALL UNDER A LATER REVIEW. 4. SHEETS S2.0, S2.1, S2.1A, S2.1B, S2.2, S2.2A, S2.3, S2.3A, S2.4, AND S2.4A: PLEASE ADD NORTH ARROWS TO THE PLANS. 5. SHEET S2.0 (FOUNDATION PLAN); SHEET S1.6 (COLUMN SCHEDULE): THE C9 BASE CONNECTION INDICATES ANCHORS AT THE SIXTH, SEVENTH, AND EIGHTH FLOORS, WHILE THE COLUMNS ARE INDICATED ON THE FOUNDATION PLAN (WEST OF GRID 1). PLEASE CLARIFY AND REVISE AS REQUIRED. 6. SHEET S2.0 (FOUNDATION PLAN); SHEET S2.1 (SLAB PLAN): THE SECOND LEVEL SLAB PLAN INDICATES A BLOCK WALL ALONG GRID 2.5 THAT EXTENDS SOUTH TO GRID D, WHILE THE FOUNDATION PLAN INDICATES THAT WALL ENDING AT GRID C. PLEASE CLARIFY. 7. SHEET S2.0; FOUNDATION KEYNOTES: NOTES 4 AND 6 WERE NOT LOCATED ON THE PLAN. PLEASE VERIFY. 8. SHEET S2.0 (FOUNDATION PLAN); SHEET S2.1 (SLAB PLAN): NOTE 12 ON SHEET S2.0 AND NOTE 2 ON SHEET S2.1 REFERENCE THE MASONRY WALL AT THE NORTHWEST ELEVATOR. DOES THE WALL REINFORCING CHANGE FROM THE FIRST LEVEL TO THE SECOND LEVEL AS INDICATED? PLEASE VERIFY. 9. SHEET S2.1; SLAB PLAN: KEYNOTE 4 AT THE SOUTHEAST STAIR INDICATES TO SEE A DETAIL. PLEASE ADD THE SPECIFIC DETAIL TO THAT NOTE. 10. SHEET S2.1; SLAB PLAN: JUST WEST OF GRID 1, A LINTEL LT1 (SEE DETAIL 123) IS CALLED OUT. WHERE IS THE LINTEL SCHEDULE LOCATED ON THE PLANS? PLEASE VERIFY. 11. SHEET S2.1A; KEYNOTES: NOTE 2 WAS NOT LOCATED ON THE PLAN. PLEASE VERIFY. 12. SHEET S4.0; DETAIL 104: NOTE 3 SHOULD POINT TO THE DOWELS. 13. SHEET S4.0; DETAIL 107: SHOULD NOTE 4 INDICATE 2-#5 TOP AND BOTTOM (AS SHOWN)? PLEASE VERIFY. 14. SHEET S4.0; DETAIL 109: PLEASE ADD NOTE 7 TO THE DRAWING. 15. SHEET S5.2; DETAIL 241: PLEASE REVISE THE TITLE FROM 'EXISTING MASONRY WALL'. 16. SHEET S5.3; DETAIL 258: PLEASE REVISE THE TITLE TO CONCRETE. 17. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEET 4: THE HOTEL FLOOR SIX COURTYARD INDICATES AN UNREDUCIBLE LIVE LOAD OF 160 PSF. PLEASE VERIFY THIS NUMBER AS THE DESIGN CIRTERIA ON SHEET S1.0 INDICATES THE ROOF USED FOR ASSEMBLY (SIXTH FLOOR) HAS A 100 PSF LIVE LOAD. 18. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEETS 5 AND 6 (HR): PLEASE INDICATE IN THE CALCULATIONS (SHEET 4) HOW THE DEAD LOADS OF 81 PSF (CH-ROOF), 66 PSF (DOAS ROOF), 36 PSF (CU-ROOF), AND 85 PSF (CEF-ROOF) WERE DERIVED. 19. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEETS 7 AND 8 (R): PLEASE INDICATE IN THE CALCULATIONS (SHEET 4) HOW THE DEAD LOADS OF 166 PSF (SPF- ROOF) AND 121 PSF (EPF-ROOF) WERE DERIVED. 20. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEETS 9 AND 10 (8): PLEASE INDICATE IN THE CALCULATIONS (SHEET 4) HOW THE DEAD LOAD OF 9 PSF (CORRIDOR AND STANDARD) WAS DERIVED. 21. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEETS 13 AND 14 (6): PLEASE INDICATE IN THE CALCULATIONS (SHEET 4) HOW THE DEAD LOADS OF 450 PSF (POOL) AND 40 PSF (POOLSIDE) WERE DERIVED. 22. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEETS 15 AND 16 (5): PLEASE INDICATE IN THE CALCULATIONS (SHEET 4) HOW THE DEAD LOADS OF 130 PSF (GENERATOR) AND 100 PSF (POOL EQUIPMENT) WERE DERIVED. 23. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEETS 17 AND 18 (4): PLEASE INDICATE IN THE CALCULATIONS (SHEET 4) HOW THE DEAD LOAD OF 200 PSF (WATER STORAGE) WAS DERIVED. 24. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEETS 19 AND 20 (3): PLEASE INDICATE IN THE CALCULATIONS (SHEET 4) HOW THE DEAD LOADS OF 200 PSF (BOILER), 150 PSF (SPF), AND 105 PSF (KITCHEN DONDENSORS) WERE DERIVED. 25. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEETS 21 AND 22 (2): PLEASE INDICATE IN THE CALCULATIONS (SHEET 4) HOW THE DEAD LOAD OF 15 PSF (PARKING-FC) WAS DERIVED. 26. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEET 80: PLEASE CLARIFY THE DESIGN GROUPS ON THIS DIAGRAM. THEY ARE HARD TO READ. INDICATE THE REFERENCE DESIGN GROUPS TO THE SIDES AND BACK OF THE ELEMENTS SHOWN ON SHEET 80. 27. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; SHEET 87: WHERE IS THIS WALL LOCATED? PLEASE PROVIDE A KEY PLAN IN THE CALCULATIONS. WHY ARE THE REMAINING LATERAL RESISTING WALLS NOT INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATIONS? PLEASE VERIFY. 28. GENERAL: THIS 'STRUCTURAL ONLY' REVIEW INCLUDES THE FOUNDATION PLAN UP THROUGH THE FIFTH LEVEL PARKING PLAN. THE SIXTH, SEVENTH, AND EIGHTH FLOOR LEVELS ALONG WITH THE ROOF PLAN WILL BE ARCHITECTURALLY AND STRUCTURALLY REVIEWED AT A LATER DATE, ALONG WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF THE GROUND THROUGH FIFTH LEVELS. 29. GENERAL: SUBSEQUENT REVIEWS COULD RESULT IN ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING. 30. GENERAL: PLEASE PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| 04/27/2015 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Provide details to show that the construction of the receptor for the mat wash will be made water tight. Reference: Section 417.5.2, IPC 2012. 2. Provide the rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole. Determine the need for a backwater valve per Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. 3. Provide the calculations used to determine the size of the proposed gravity grease interceptor. Reference: Section 1003.3, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 04/27/2015 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 04/27/2015 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: 151 E. Broadway Blvd. - Foundation and Parking T15CM02281 Building Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 28, 2015 1. The Foundation and Parking plan have been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 2. It appears that the plans match the approved development package but cannot be approved until approved by Frank Dillon, DRB, 3. Zoning will not approve until all other PDSD agencies have approved the building plan. 4. Until the above comments have been addressed and all other PDSD review agencies have approved the building plans zoning cannot approve. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956 |
| 04/27/2015 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Reduced pressure backflow prevention assemblies are required to be installed in locations accessible to Tucson Water. Verify that Tucson Water is in agreement with the location of the two new 3" reduced pressure backflow prevention assemblies being installed on the west side of the building. Reference: Chapter XXVII, Article V, Section 27-72, the Tucson Code |
| 04/28/2015 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/29/2015 | DAN SANTA CRUZ | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | #1. Please provide a concrete encased electrode (UFER) for the future Hotel service equipment as required per NEC 250.50. #2. Please provide for a Common Grounding Electrode System at the existing structure service equipment as required per NEC 250.58. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05/19/2015 | KROBLES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |