Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Permit Number - T16CM02572
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/03/2017 | PAUL BAUGHMAN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: January 3, 2017 DUE DATE: January 10, 2017 SUBJECT: Take-out Kitchen TO: Eduardo J. Ornelas, RA LOCATION: 1122 S 6th Avenue REVIEWERS: Paul Baughman, PE, CFM ACTIVITY: DP16-0063 and T16CM02572 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning and Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package. The following item needs to be addressed: 1) Per previous comment 6 and AM 2-06.4.8H2 please show and label the sight visibility triangles along S Russell Avenue. The trash enclosures shown in response to previous comment 8 now seem to be in potential conflict with the location where these sight visibility triangles need to be shown. If you have any comments questions or wish to discuss new information, please call or email me at 520-837-5007 or paul.baughman@tucsonaz.gov. |
| 01/10/2017 | ARUIZ1 | WWM | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 12/15/2016 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Principle Planner PROJECT: 1122 S. 6th Avenue - Take-Out Kitchen T16CM02572 Building Plan (2nd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 15, 2016 DUE DATE: January 04, 2017 1. The building plans have been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 2. Zoning has reviewed the building plan for compliance to development package DP16-0063 but until the development package has been approved Zoning cannot approve the building plan. 3. 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 |
| 12/21/2016 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | No change to the notes; coordinate the drawings. [Initial comment: Clarify the sizes of the proposed water meter and reduced pressure backflow prevention assembly. On the site plan there is a 5/8" meter and a 1" reduced pressure backflow prevention assembly but on the plumbing plan, both are ¾". Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012.] |
| 12/21/2016 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Provide the water supply isometrics. [Initial comment: Provide plumbing plans for the new work, including water isometrics and waste and vent isometrics. Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012.] 2. Provide fixture descriptions that are complete enough to allow the listing information of the fixtures to be checked. [Initial comment: Provide fixture descriptions for all plumbing fixtures. Reference: Section 402, IPC 2012 and Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012.] 3. Revise the wording of the general note for automatic valves. The maximum delivery volume is to be 0.25 gallons per cycle; the shortest allowable cycle time is 10-seconds. The maximum delivery volume does not change based on the cycle time. [Initial comment: Provide an automatic faucet for the lavatory, dispensing a maximum of 0.25 gallons per metering cycle. Verify that the automatic faucet will operate for a minimum time of 10-seconds. Reference: Section 416.6, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson and Section 606.4, ICC/ANSI A117.1-03.] 4. The specified model number of the water heater could not be found on the manufacturer's web site; provide a copy of the manufacture's specifications and installation instructions for the proposed water heater. [Initial comment: Provide the specifications and listing information for the proposed water heater. Reference: Sections 303.2 and 501.5, IPC 2012 and Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012.] 5. The size and route of the T&P relief pipe was not shown on the drawing. [Initial comment: Show the size and route of the T&P relief pipe from the water heater. Reference: Section 504, IPC 2012.] 6. State the required insulation specifications on the drawings, not just the applicable code section. [Initial comment: If the specified water heater is not supplied with integral heat traps, provide 0.5" of insulation with a maximum conductivity of 0.27 BTU per inch/h F on the first 8 feet of supply and discharge piping. Reference: Section C404.5, IECC 2012.] 7. The size of the water service to the building has not been clarified; a ¾" pipe is still not allowable based on the water velocity. [Initial comment: Clarify the size of the water service pipe to the building. The plumbing plan and the site plan show a 1" water service but the calculations indicate a ¾" water service. At 15 GPM, a ¾" Type M copper pipe has a water velocity greater than 8 feet per second. Reference: Sections 303.2 and 604.3, IPC 2012.] 8. Provide a cleanout downstream of the hydromechanical grease interceptor. [Initial comment: Show cleanouts for all horizontal drains on the plans; the cleanouts shall be sized per Section 708.7, IPC 2012 and shall open to allow cleaning in the direction of flow. Reference: Sections 708.3.1 and 708.5, IPC 2012. 9. No cleanouts are shown for the building sewer past the 2-way cleanout where the building drain joins the building sewer. Cleanouts are required at least every 100-feet and at the right-of-way. [Initial comment: Show the location of all cleanouts for the building sewer; the cleanouts shall not be located greater than 100-feet apart, measured from the upstream entrance of the cleanout. Reference: Section 708.3.1, IPC 2012.] 10. The rim elevations for the manholes have not been shown. [Initial comment: Provide the rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole 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.] 11. The mop sink may not be indirectly wasted; it must be directly-connected and have a trap and vent. [Initial comment: Show that each trap and trapped fixture has been vented in accordance with one of the methods shown in the IPC. Reference: Section 901.2.1, IPC 2012.] 12. The specified model number of the hydromechanical grease interceptor could not be matched on the manufacturer's web site; provide a copy of the manufacture's specifications and installation instructions for the proposed hydromechanical grease interceptor. [Initial comment: Provide specifications for the proposed hydromechanical grease interceptor. The minimum capacity for a hydromechanical grease interceptor shall be 25 GPM and 50-pounds of grease storage. Provide a detail showing how it is to be installed. Reference: Section 1003.3, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. 13. Comment not addressed. [Initial comment: Provide roof drainage and hydraulic scupper size calculations based on the 100-year hourly rainfall rate for Tucson, 3" per hour. Provide overflow protection for the roof. Reference: Sections 1106.1, 1106.4, and 1108, IPC 2012.] 14. Based on a developed pipe length of 50-feet, the pipe running from the gas meter to the range (1) should be 1", not ¾" in size. In addition, a solenoid valve is required to shut off the fuel supply to the cooking appliances under the hood if the extinguishing system is activated. [Initial comment: Provide a complete diagram of the natural gas distribution system showing the all of the loads, the developed length from each load to the gas meter, and the layout of the distribution piping. (Note: the maximum developed length of the natural gas distribution piping is not 1,011-feet, as stated on sheet 6.) Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012.] 15. Comment not addressed. [Initial comment: Show that the termination of the gravity vent for the gas-fired water heater complies with the requirements of Section 503.6.4 (1), IFGC 2012.] |
| 12/27/2016 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Revise the wall insulation call-out on Section 'A', sheet 5 to agree with the R-values specified on sheet 6. Provide the area of the vertical glazing and show that it is less than 30% of the total gross wall area. [Initial comment: Provide energy code compliance calculations for the building envelope; use the climate zone for Tucson. Provide sufficient detail on the drawings to evaluate the energy compliance of 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 C103.2 and C401.2, International Energy Conservation Code 2012.] 2. Comment not addressed. [Initial comment: Show how the requirements of Section C406, IECC 2012 (Additional Efficiency Package Options) are to be fulfilled. Reference: Section C401.2, IECC 2012.] 3. Verify that the evaporative coolers (MU-1 and EC-1) comply with Section 401.4 (3), IMC 2012 by being located a minimum of 3-feet below the outlet of EF-1 and EF-2 or 10-feet horizontally from the exhaust outlets. (See also detail 1/sheet 8 for clearance information.) [Initial comment: Provide operating and maintenance access space for the rooftop equipment in accordance with the manufacturer's installation instructions. Reference: Sections 304.1 and 306.1, IMC 2012.] 4. Drain information was not found on the drawings. [Initial comment: Show the size, routing, and termination of the evaporative cooler drains. Reference: Section 307.2.1, IMC 2012 as amended by the City of Tucson.] 5. No calculations found in this submittal. [Initial comment: Provide sufficient heat for the building to maintain a minimum temperature of 68 F on a design heating day (32 F). Provide heating load calculations that justify the capacities of the heating equipment specified for the project. Reference: Sections 309.1 and 312.1, IMC 2012 and Sections C403.2.1 and C403.2.2, IECC 2012.] 6. No calculations found in this submittal. [Initial comment: Provide calculations to show how ventilation will be provided for the occupied spaces. Reference: Section 401.2, IMC 2012.] 7. The TJI calculations appear to show double TJI-beams over the hood location but this is not shown on the framing plan the calculations do not appear to identify the hood loads. [Initial comment: Provide structural calculations to show that the Type I hood is supported from the building structure in accordance with Section 507.6, IMC 2012 (the hood hanging weight plus the weight of personnel working in or on the hood). Reference: Section 302.1, IMC 2012.] 8. Revise the dimension on detail 1, sheet 8 to show a minimum of 18" between the top of the hood and the combustible TJI supports. 3M fire wrap or similar materials shall not be used to reduce this clearance. Reference: Section 507.10, IMC 2012. [Initial comment: Show that the hood installation complies with Section 507.9, IMC 2012 for clearances.] |
| 12/28/2016 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. PREVIOUS COMMENT 6; SHEET 3; FRAMING PLAN NOTES: NOTE 3 INDICATES 2X6 AT 24" O.C. WITH 1/2" GWB, BUT IS INDICATED ON THE PLAN AT THE NORTH EXTERIOR WALL (THIS IS THE TWO HOUR RATED WALL). PLEASE MOVE NOTE 3 TO ANOTHER WALL. 2. PREVIOUS COMMENT 8; SHEET 3; FRAMING PLAN NOTES: NOTE 7 REFERENCES THE IBC SECTION 1108.2.1 FOR A UNISEX RESTROOM. SECTION 1108.2.1 OF THE IBC ADDRESSES SPECIAL OCCUPANCY SERVICES AS IT RELATES TO ASSEMBLY AREA SEATING. PLEASE INDICATE ON THE DRAWING WHERE THE IBC OR ICC/ANSI CODE INDICATE AN F-1 OCCUPANCY NOT REQUIRING SEPARATE MEN'S/WOMEN'S RESTROOM FACILITIES. THE IBC SECTION 2902.2 ADDRESSES THIS CONDITION. 3. PREVIOUS COMMENT 9; SHEET 3; FRAMING PLAN NOTES: NOTE 9 IS NO LONGER INDICATED ON THE FLOOR PLAN. PLEASE VERIFY. 4. SHEET 2 (FOUNDATION PLAN); SHEET 4 (ROOF FRAMING PLAN: THE THREE COLUMNS AT THE PORCH ARE NOTED AS 8X8 (NOTE 1) ON SHEET 2, AND 6X6 WOOD POSTS (NOTE 12) ON SHEET 4. PLEASE COORDINATE. 5. PREVIOUS COMMENT 11; SHEET 4; DETAIL 1: REMOVE THE IRC REFERENCE AND PROVIDE STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR ALL EXTERIOR WALLS (SHEAR WALLS PROVIDED DESIGN, BUT NO CALCULATIONS ON OTHER WALLS). 6. PREVIOUS COMMENT 12; SHEET 4; DETAIL 3: PROVIDE STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR THE HEADER DESIGNS. THERE ARE SEVERAL DIFFERENT LINTEL WIDTHS AND LOADING CONDITIONS, AND THE ONLY CALCULATION PROVIDED IS FOR A 5'-0" OPENING. 7. SHEET 4 (ROOF FRAMING PLAN); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (MAIN WOOD BEAM): THIS BEAM DOES NOT SHOW UP ON THE ROOF FRAMING PLAN. PLEASE ADD. 8. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS: THE SHEAR WALL CALCULATIONS DO NOT INDICATE THE CONNECTOR SIZE FOR THE PLYWOOD/GYPSUM BOARD CONNECTION TO THE WALL STUDS. PLEASE PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION IN THE CALCULATIONS AND VERIFY THE SIZES AND SPACING COORDINATE WITH THE SHEAR WALL SCHEDULE ON SHEET 2. 9. SHEET 2; FOUNDATION PLAN: IT IS NOT CLEAR ON THE PLAN WHICH WALLS ARE REQUIRED TO BE SHEAR WALLS. PLEASE CLARIFY ON THE PLAN. 10. GENERAL: THE 8 1/2 X 11 DRAWINGS/CALCULATIONS SUBMITTED BY LP ENGINEERED WOOD PRODUCTS MUST BE REVIEWED AS A DEFERRED SUBMITTAL AND FOLLOW THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE IBC SECTION 107.3.4.1. 11. GENERAL: ON THE SHEETS THAT STRUCTURAL INFORMATION IS INDICATED, THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER OF RECORD SHOULD SEAL, SIGN, AND DATE THOSE SHEETS TO INDICATE THE INFORMATION SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS MEETS THE INTENT OF THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER'S DESIGN. 12. GENERAL: PLEASE PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| 12/28/2016 | DAN SANTA CRUZ | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING ELECTRICAL PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS. ALSO PROVIDE A WRITTEN RESPONSE. #1. As per the last electrical plan review comments it was requested to provide a written response to the plan review comments. No response was found in the re-submittal. #2. It was requested to provide compliance with the 2012 IECC for the lighting. No compliance calcs or documents were found in the plan set or documents. #3. Could not verify compliance for LIGHT SOURCE COLOR TEMPERATURE limitations for exterior lighting as required per sec. 402.1 OUTDOOR LIGHTING CODE. #4. No complete luminaire schedule was provided as requested. #5. Clarification for the electrical service and associated equipment, including a complete one line diagram, load calcs, grounding electrode system, as outlined per the CITY OF TUCSON COMMERCIAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, and 2011 NEC, was not provided as requested. #6. Per 2011 NEC art. 210.8B, all 125 volt single phase 15 and 20 amp receptacles installed in commercial kitchens are required to be ground fault protected. This provision was not added as requested. The CITY OF TUCSON COMMERCIAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS and the TUCSON/ PIMA COUNTY OUTDOOR LIGHTING CODE can be downloaded from, www.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd. REF: 2012 IBC sec. 107.2.1, 2011 NEC Dan.santacruz@tucsonaz.gov |