Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Permit Number - T16CM02286
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/06/2016 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. SHEET A1.0 (FLOOR PLAN); SHEET A2.0 (FLOOR PLAN); SHEET A3.0 (FLOOR PLAN): THE PUBLIC SIDE OF THE SEPARATION LINE BETWEEN PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SHOULD INCLUDE THE RESTROOM (ROOM 6) AND THE HALL (AREA 7). PLEASE REVISE. 2. SHEET A1.0; FLOOR PLAN: A SIGN SHOULD BE PLACED ON THE PUBLIC SIDE ABOVE THE BARN DOOR (KEYNOTE 9) INDICATING 'EMPLOYEES ONLY', OR SOMETHING SIMILAR. PLEASE INDICATE ON THE DRAWINGS. 3. PREVIOUS COMMENT 12; SHEET A4.2; DETAIL 13: PLEASE INDICATE ON THE DETAIL THE SIZE AND QUANTITY OF CONNECTORS AT THE VERTICAL ANGLE FRAME TO THE WALL BLOCKING. 4. GENERAL: PLEASE PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| 06/07/2016 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 06/07/2016 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. The Watts model 007 specified on the Plumbing Fixture Schedule on sheet P2.1 is listed to ASSE 1015, not the required ASSE 1022. [Initial comment: Water supply connections to beverage dispensers (e.g. coffee makers, etc.) shall be protected with backflow preventers conforming to ASSE 1022. Reference: Section 608.16.1, IPC 2012.] 2. The Kitchen Equipment Schedule on sheet A4.1 has not been revised to show an indirect drain connection for K-1. [Initial comment: The Kitchen Equipment Schedule on sheet A4.1 calls for a 0.5" direct drain connection for the side rinse spray (K-1); show how this is to be accomplished. Reference: Section 702.1, IPC 2012.] 3. The Kitchen Equipment Schedule on sheet A4.1 has not been revised to show a direct drain connection for K-13. [Initial comment: Provide a direct connection for the bar sink (K-13). Reference: Sections 301.3 and 802.1, IPC 2012.] 4. General Note 22 on sheet P1.1 has not been revised to call for a trap for indirect waste lines with a developed length greater than 30-inches (30") when measured horizontally or greater than 54-inches (54") in total developed length. [Initial comment: Correct General Note 22 on sheet P1.1 to comply with the requirements of the 2012 IPC. Indirect waste piping that has a developed length greater than 30-inches (30") when measured horizontally or greater than 54-inches (54") in total developed length shall be trapped. Exception: indirect waste piping conveying only clear-water waste (e.g. effluent from a sanitizing compartment) does not require a trap. Reference: Section 802.2, IPC 2012.] 5. The installation of the hydromechanical grease interceptor shows a horizontal vent that cannot physically rise 6" above the flood rim of the grease interceptor without becoming a tripping hazard. The distance from the grease interceptor to the vent fitting can however be a maximum of 12-feet which can resolve this issue. A cleanout will be required immediately downstream of the interceptor. Reference: Sections 708.3.1 and 909.1, IPC 2012. [Initial comment: Verify if an existing grease interceptor is currently in place to prevent the discharge of fats, oil, and grease into the public sewer. If a grease interceptor is not in place, show how the public sewer is to be protected from harmful discharges. Reference: Section 1003.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.] 6. Detail 1/P2.1 has not been revised to show the sediment trap located downstream of the appliance shut off valve. (Also, the detail shows the vacuum relief valve with a shut-off valve located between the vacuum relief valve and storage tank, a situation not allowed per the manufacturer's installation instructions.) [Initial comment: Revise detail 1/P2.1 to show the location of the sediment trap downstream of the appliance shut off valve. Reference: Section 408.4, IFGC 2012.] |
| 06/08/2016 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Revise the sequence of operation for the restroom exhaust fans so that all of the air supplied to the restrooms will be exhausted even if the lights are turned off during occupied hours. Reference: Section 403.2.1 (4), IMC 2012. [Initial comment: Provide exhaust for the new restroom (formerly an office). Verify that the existing (but modified) restroom also has sufficient exhaust flow. Reference: Section 403.3, IMC 2012.] 2. Revise the mechanical design as required to avoid using Hall 15 (an egress corridor) as a return air duct. Reference: Section 601.2, IMC 2012. [Initial comment: Provide balancing information for the existing HVAC system so that the balancing contractor can verify that the calculated quantities of outside air are being delivered to the various occupancy zones. Reference: Sections 403.3 and 403.7, IMC 2012.] 3. The occupant load used to calculate the required ventilation is not necessarily the same as the occupant load used for calculating exiting requirements. The occupant load used for calculating the minimum required ventilation is to be based on Table 403.3, IMC 2012 or an approved engineering analysis of the specific occupancy type. The coffee roasting room is not specifically identified in Table 403.3, IMC 2012 and will have to be evaluated to determine the required ventilation; the contaminants in the space are probably process related and do not depend on the number of people in the room. (It is possible that you may want to treat it like a kitchen and provide a significant exhaust rate for the room.) Reference: Section 403.3, IMC 2012. [Initial comment: Revise the ventilation calculations to determine the minimum required outside air for a recirculating system serving multiple zones. Reference: Section 403.3.2.3, IMC 2012.] |
| 06/08/2016 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera for Steve Shields PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Savaya Coffee Market Building Review T16CM02286 Related to DP15-0038 TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 8, 2016 DUE DATE: June 21, 2016 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and any redlined plans along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. 1. Zoning has reviewed the building plans as it relates to the zoning review purview. While the building plans can be approved by zoning for the Tenant Improvement, the plans must be approved by the commercial plans reviewers first. 2. Zoning did a comparison the site plan on sheet C1.0 of the tenant improvement package to the approved DP site plan DP15-0038 and the 2014 aerial. While the proposed site plan is close to the approved site plan there are inconsistencies. The approved DP site plan must be used for this site or a revised DP will be required. Also, if a revised DP site plan is going to be processed the changes must meet code, which means parking spaces cannot be placed within the right of way as depicted on sheet C1.0. The zoning data and calculations listed on the Sheet C1.0 should continue to be used even on a revised DP site plan. The approved DP site plan can be viewed on PDSD PRO website. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised Plans as required |
| 06/15/2016 | DAN SANTA CRUZ | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved |