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
Permit Number - T16CM04683
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/26/2016 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Principle Planner PROJECT: 267 S. Avenida Del Convento T16CM04683 Building Plan (3rd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 26, 2016 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. It appears that the proposed building plans matches what is shown on development package DP16-0084 but until the development package is approved the building plans cannot be approve. 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 |
| 11/02/2016 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DP must be approved first. |
| 11/07/2016 | DAN SANTA CRUZ | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 11/08/2016 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Detail 14/A2.01 calls for 2" high x 8" wide overflow scuppers to be located 4" above the low point of the roof. With a 2" head of water required to accommodate the design rainfall, the roof could see a 31 PSF live load due to water. Have the structural engineer evaluate the roof design for possible changes to support this load. In addition, the minimum dimension for a scupper is 4". Reference: Sections 1101.7 and 1108.3, IPC 2012 and Sections 1611.1 and 1611.3, IBC 2012. [Second comment: Buildings A and B have roofs with scuppers. Provide the roof drainage and hydraulic scupper size calculations; provide construction details for the scuppers and secondary drainage.] [Initial comment: Provide roof drainage and hydraulic scupper size calculations based on the 100-year hourly rainfall rate for Tucson, 3" per hour. Reference: Sections 1106.1, 1106.4, and 1108.3, IPC 2012.] |
| 11/09/2016 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. The presented U-value calculations are to be used in lieu of the wall and roof menu items in COMcheck program; enter your wall or roof type as "other" and use your calculated U-value in place of entering the R-values for cavity and continuous insulation. None of the wall types shown on the drawings have continuous insulation. The window types shown on drawing A3.00 and noted in specification sections 08411 and 08520 do not indicate that they are required to be NFRC-certified. In addition, no windows are included in the COMcheck Envelope Compliance Certificate assemblies. [Second comment: Comment no resolved; the wall and roof sections shown on sheet A2.00 do not correspond to the component descriptions in the envelope compliance certificates for either construction or insulation. Provide documentation of the U-value determination for the walls and roofs. The envelope compliance certificate calls for high efficiency HVAC systems but the mechanical compliance certificate calls for reduced interior lighting power; some of the interior lighting compliance certificates reference high efficiency HVAC while others call for reduced interior lighting power: coordinate the approaches to the additional energy efficiency requirement. None of the windows scheduled on the drawings appear to be NFRC-certified as required by Section 303.1, IECC 2012 which will result in the default values being required in the calculations.] [Initial comment: Revise the energy code analysis for the building envelope, coordinating the building components used in the analysis with those shown on the drawing (e.g. walls and roofs). The walls and roofs of shipping containers are not included in the list of components in COMcheck so the calculation of U-values must be documented. Reference: Section C303.1, IECC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.] 2. Justify the cooling capacities for HP-1, HP-2, HP-4., HP-5, HP-7, HP-8, HP-9a, HP-9b, HP-10, and HP-13 all of which appear to be in excess of the calculated cooling loads. Verify that the baseboard heaters BBH-1 and BBH-2 are capable of maintaining the spaces they serve at a minimum temperature of 68 degrees Fahrenheit on a design day per Section 309, IMC 2012. [Second comment: The equipment tags used in the cooling/heating load calculations do not appear to have been updated to coordinate with the scheduled equipment shown on the drawings.] [Initial comment: Coordinate the air system names in the cooling/heating load calculations with the equipment schedules on the plans. Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012.] |