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

Permit Number: T16CM07685
Parcel: 11713039A

Address:
20 E BROADWAY BL

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: COMMERCIAL - NEW

Permit Number - T16CM07685
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
10/19/2016 PAUL BAUGHMAN ENGINEERING REVIEW Approved
10/20/2016 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
10/21/2016 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change FROM: David Rivera for Steve Shields - Principal Planner
PDSD Zoning Review Section

PROJECT: T16CM07685
Building Plans for Multi-Use Residential Tower (1st Review)
10 E Broadway Boulevard - OCR-2 Zone

TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 21, 2016

DUE DATE: November 04, 2016


1. Zoning has reviewed the building plans but cannot approve them at this time.

2. Revisions to the DP and IID application must be approved prior to the next building plan review.

3. Zoning will review the building plans on the next submittal and do a review and comparison of the building plans with the revised DP and IID plans.
10/28/2016 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change 1. The callouts for waste and vent isometrics C/P2.1 and E/P2.1 appear to be mislabeled on sheet P1.0. In addition, verify the labeling of the showers (P-3) in isometric C/P2.1 and show the installation of the lavatories (P-1) in isometric E/P2.1.
2. Revise the size of the floor drain for the central clothes washing facility per Section 412.4, IPC 2012 (the minimum size shall be 3"). The floor drain is not shown on the waste and vent isometric (B).
3. Provide a floor drain for the fire pump room and ensure that the floor is pitched away from the critical equipment per Section 5.12.6, NFPA 20-2013 and Section 913.1, IFC 2012.
4. Revise plumbing fixture specification for P-1 and P-1A to use a thermostatic mixing valve that has not been discontinued (Watts L111); see detail 202 for a currently available mixing valve. Reference: section 607.1.2, IPC 2012.
5. Revise the water distribution system design criteria to account for the actual static lift to the highest fixture outlet. Reference: Section 604.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.
6. Provide a detail of the installation of the ejector pump system including the dimensions of the sump, the inlet pipe, and effluent control levels. Verify that the maximum effluent level in the sump is 2" below the invert of the gravity inlet. Reference: Section 712.3.4, IPC 2012.
7. The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (2387.43') is higher than the first floor elevation (2387.07'). Provide a backwater valve; floors discharging from above the first floor shall not discharge through the backwater valve. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.
8. Provide a size for each segment of the rainwater and overflow leaders. Correct the summation of the roof areas. Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 20012.
9. Correct the total natural gas load shown on the gas isometric (A/P2.2). Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 20012.
10. Correct the size of the natural gas piping header to the dryers; it is correct on plan 2/P1.2 but is shown as both 1" and 2" on the gas isometric (A/P2.2). Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 20012.
11. Provide gas service to the dryers, not to the clothes washers. Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 20012.
12. Clarify the specifications for WH-1: An A. O. Smith model BTH-120 has a 60-gallon tank capacity, an input of 120 BTUH and a 95% thermal efficiency, not a 100-gallon tank, 150 BTUH input, and 96% thermal efficiency.
13. Clarify the specifications for WH-2 through WH-6: An A. O. Smith model BTH-150 has a 60-gallon tank capacity and a 95% thermal efficiency, not 100-gallon tank and 96% thermal efficiency.
10/28/2016 ROBERT SHERRY WATER REVIEW Completed
11/01/2016 ROBERT SHERRY MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change 1. Complete the keynotes for the mechanical floor plans (i.e. numerous blank keynote symbols are shown in each floor plan). Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012.
2. Clarify how the mechanical ventilation (both outside air and exhaust requirements) has been determined for each dwelling unit based on Table 403.3, IMC 2012.
3. Clarify how the penetration of fire-rated shafts by dryer exhaust ducts and range exhaust ducts are acceptable without fire and smoke dampers. Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012 and Sections 504.8 and 607.5.5, IMC 2012. IMC 2012.
4. Provide fire and smoke dampers for the outside air ducts at the penetrations of the fire-rated shafts. Reference: Section 607.5.5, IMC 2012.
5. Provide justification for the installation of the direct-vent ducts for the water heaters in common fire-rated shaft. Reference: Section 607.5.5, IMC 2012.
6. Show that the termination of the concentric vents for the water heaters complies to the manufacturer's requirements with respect to both the proximity to the building parapet and for required clearances for multiple terminations of concentric vents. Reference: Section 503.2.3, IFGC 2012.
7. Provide ventilation for the interior exit stairwells that is independent of other building ventilation systems. Reference: Section 1022.6, IBC 2012.
8. Provide combination fire/smoke damper protection for the ventilation duct penetrations of the interior stairwells. Reference: Sections 1022.6 and 717.5.3, IBC 2012.
9. Provide information to show that the elevator machine room does not require an independent venting or air conditioning system to prevent overheating of the elevator equipment. Reference: Section 3006.2, IBC 2012.
11/04/2016 DAN SANTA CRUZ ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change Please address the following electrical plan review comments. Also provide a written response.
#1. PLEASE PROVIDE FOR A SELECTIVE COORDINATION ANALYSIS FOR THE CIRCUIT PATHS REQUIRED TO BE SELECTIVELY COORDINATED PER NEC ARTICLES 517,620, 700, 701, 708. PROVIDE A STATEMENT CLEARLY STATING THAT SELECTIVE COORDINATION HAS BEEN ACHIEVED, AND APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD, PRIOR TO FINALIZATION OF THIS PROJECT.
#2. REF; PLAN SHEET E1.0. THE OUTDOOR LIGHTING CODE COMPLIANCE CALCS SHOW, "ALLOWABLE LUMENS PER ACRE (FROM TABLE 5.1). WHERE IS TABLE 5.1 ?
ALSO THE EXTERIOR LUMINAIRE TYPES SHOWN ON THE FIXTURE MARK UNDER INSTALLED LUMENS, LUMINAIRES COULD NOT BE LOCATED ON THE LIGHTING OR SITE PLANS.
Ref; 2012 IBC 107.2.1, 2011 NEC, TUCSON/PIMA COUNTY OUTDOOR LIGHTING CODE.
11/10/2016 ERIC NEWCOMB BUILDING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change T16CM07685
1. SHEET T2.0; CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS: PLEASE VERIFY THE SECTION OF THE CODE THAT REQUIRES A TWO HOUR FLOOR/CEILING HORIZONTAL ASSEMBLY FIRE RESISTANCE RATING AS INDICATED IN THE TABLE ON SHEET T2.0.
2. SHEET T2.0; RESIDENTIAL UNIT DATA: THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF ACCESSIBLE UNITS (PER THE IBC SECTION 1107.6.2.1) IS A MINIMUM OF 2% OR ONE UNIT. PLEASE REVISE THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF ACCESSIBLE UNITS AS INDICATED IN THE TABLE ON SHEET T2.0.
3. SHEET T2.0; CODE CONFORMANCE PLANS: PLEASE PROVIDE A SITE PLAN, INDICATING DISTANCES OF THE NEW BUILDING FROM EXISTING STRUCTURES AND PROPERTY LINES.
4. SHEET T2.0; CODE CONFORMANCE PLANS: PLEASE VERIFY THE SECTION OF THE CODE THAT REQUIRES A THREE HOUR EXTERIOR WALL FIRE RESISTANCE RATING AS INDICATED ON THE CONFORMANCE PLANS.
5. SHEET T2.0; CODE CONFORMANCE PLANS: THE PLAN FOR THE 2ND THROUGH 6TH LEVELS INDICATES UNLIMITED OPENINGS ON THE NORTH WALL, BUT DOES NOT ADDRESS THE OTHER THREE SIDES. PLEASE INDICATE ON THE PLANS THE VARIOUS CRITERIA USING THE IBC TABLE 705.8 FOR THE PERCENTAGE OF OPENINGS ALLOWED FOR EACH WALL.
6. SHEET T2.0; CODE CONFORMANCE PLANS: PLEASE INDICATE ON THE PLANS THE REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE RATING FOR THE HORIZONTAL ASSEMBLIES PER THE IBC SECTION 711. DO ALL CONCRETE FLOOR/CEILING ASSEMBLIES MEET THE CODE REQUIREMENTS? PLEASE VERIFY.
7. SHEET T2.0; GENERAL BUILDING SUMMARY: THE ACTUAL BUILDING HEIGHT IS LISTED AS 6 STORIES/98 FEET. PLEASE REVISE THE HEIGHT TO MATCH THE CODE.
8. SHEET T2.0; CODE CONFORMANCE PLANS: PLEASE VERIFY THERE IS NO LOWER LEVEL PLAN INDICATED IN THIS SUBMITTAL FOR THE CODE CONFORMANCE ISSUES.
9. SHEET T3.0; OCCUPANT LOAD CALCULATION: ON THE FIRST FLOOR CALCULATION, HOW WAS THE 200 SF/OCCUPANT FACTOR DETERMINED FROM THE IBC TABLE 1004.1.2 FOR THE ASSEMBLY AREA?
10. SHEET T3.0; PLUMBING FIXTURE CALCULATIONS: THE TABLE IN THE S-2 AREA INDICATES A DRINKING FOUNTAIN IS PROVIDED. WHERE IS THIS INDICATED ON SHEET T3.0 OR SHEET A2.0?
11. SHEET T3.0; LIFE SAFETY PLAN 2: IN A SOUTH STORAGE ROOM (ADJACENT TO STAIR B), PLEASE PROVIDE THE OCCUPANT LOAD FOR THAT ROOM.
12. SHEETS T3.0 AND T4.0; EXITS: PLEASE INCLUDE VERBIAGE ON THESE SHEETS CONCERNING EMERGENCY ESCAPE FROM THE BASEMENT LEVEL SLEEPING ROOMS THROUGH THE THIRD FLOOR SLEEPING ROOMS PER THE IBC SECTION 1029.
13. SHEETS T3.0 AND A2.1; GROUND LEVEL PLAN: PLEASE VERIFY THE HALLWAYS WEST OF STAIR A AND STAIR B ARE RATED ENCLOSURES (VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL) SINCE THE EXITS FROM THE STAIRS DO NOT EXIT DIRECTLY TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING (PER THE IBC SECTION 1009.2).
14. SHEETS T3.0 AND T4.0; LIFE SAFETY PLANS: PER THE IBC SECTION 1016.3, EXIT ACCESS TRAVEL DISTANCE MUST BE MEASURED ALONG HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL PATHS (NO DIAGONALS AS INDICATED). PLEASE REVISE.
15. SHEET A1.4: THE CITY OF TUCSON REQUIRES ALL LETTERING (UPPER AND LOWER CASE) TO BE A MINIMUM OF 3/32" IN HEIGHT. PLEASE REVISE.
16. SHEET A1.6 (SHAFTS 1 THROUGH 10); FLOOR PLANS (SHEETS A2.0 THROUGH A2.4): ON THE VARIOUS LEVEL FLOOR PLANS, PLEASE REFERENCE THE SHAFT NUMBER (ON SHEET A1.6) AT THE APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS. ARE ALL SHAFT WALLS ON THE FLOOR PLANS REFERENCED TO THE SHAFTS INDICATED ON SHEET A1.6?
17. SHEET A1.7; DIMENSIONED GROUND FLOOR PLAN: AT THE ELEVATORS, A NORTH/SOUTH DIMENSION LINE INDICATES 0'-0" IN TWO PLACES. PLEASE CLARIFY.
18. SHEET A1.7; DIMENSIONED LEVEL 2-6 FLOOR PLAN: AT THE ELEVATORS, A NOTE INDICATES 'AT LEVEL 2 THE SLAB IS PRESENT HERE'. THE DETAILS CUT ON THE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS (422 AND 426) ARE THE SAME AT ALL FLOORS AT THE LOCATION INDICATED BY THE NOTE. PLEASE CLARIFY.
19. SHEET A2.0; ALTERNATE LOWER LEVEL PLAN: THE 'PROPOSED' LOWER LEVEL PLAN HAS BE REVIEWED FOR THIS PERMIT. VERIFICATION THAT THE 'ALTERNATE' PLAN IS TO BE USED WILL REQUIRE A SEALED NOTE FROM THE ARCHITECT TO THE CITY OF TUCSON AND WILL REQUIRE ADDITIONAL REVIEW TIME.
20. SHEETS A2.0 THROUGH A2.4; KEYNOTES: PLEASE INDICATE THE SPECIFIC SHEET NUMBERS THAT HAVE THE DOOR AND WALL SCHEDULES.
21. SHEET A2.0; KEYNOTES: PLEASE FINISH THE DETAIL REFERENCE IN NOTE 9.
22. SHEET A2.1; GROUND FLOOR PLAN: PER A PREVIOUS COMMENT (13), THE CORRIDORS ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE TWO STAIR TOWERS MUST BE RATED ALONG WITH THE DOORS IN THOSE CORRIDORS.
23. SHEETS A2.2, A2.3, AND A2.4; KEYNOTES: NOTE 18 REFERENCES A1.8 FOR SPECIFICATIONS. PLEASE REVISE THAT REFERENCE.
24. SHEETS A2.3 AND A2.4; FLOOR PLANS: PLEASE INDICATE "ACCESSIBLE" (PER SHEET A2.2) AT THE ROOMS ON SHEETS A2.3 AND A2.4 (ROOMS 304, 404, 504, AND 604).
25. SHEET A5.0; PLANS: PLEASE REFERENCE ON THIS SHEET THE LOCATION ON THE DRAWINGS OF ALL FINISHES INDICATED.
26. SHEETS A7.0, A7.1, A7.2, AND A7.3; KEYNOTES: IN NOTES 1 AND 2, PLEASE INDICATE THE SPECIFIC SHEET NUMBER FOR THE WALL SCHEDULE.
27. SHEET A7.3; KEYNOTES: IN NOTE 15, PLEASE INDICATE THE SPECIFIC SHEET NUMBER FOR THE DOOR SCHEDULE.
28. SHEETS A8.0 AND A8.1; KEYNOTES: IN NOTE 14, PLEASE INDICATE THE SPECIFIC SHEET NUMBER FOR THE DOOR SCHEDULE.
29. GENERAL: PLEASE VERIFY, ON THE DRAWINGS, THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE IBC SECTION 1007.4 FOR AN ACCESSIBLE ELEVATOR ARE MET (EMERGENCY OPERATION AND SIGNALING, STANDBY POWER, ACCESSIBLE FROM EITHER AN AREA OF REFUGE OR A HORIZONTAL EXIT).
30. SHEET S1.0; GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES (FOUNDATIONS): NOTE 1 INDICATES A SOIL REPORT WAS USED FOR THE FOUNDATION DESIGN. PLEASE PROVIDE ONE COPY OF THAT REPORT FOR REVIEW.
31. SHEET S1.0; GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES (CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE): NOTE 2 REFERENCES SHEET S1.9 FOR THE CONCRETE REQUIREMENTS SCHEDULE. PLEASE REVISE THE REFERENCE.
32. SHEET S2.1; FOUNDATION PLAN: AT THE ELEVATOR NORTH WALL, A DETAIL 206 IS CUT. PLEASE REVISE THE DETAIL NUMBER.
33. SHEET S2.1 (FOUNDATION PLAN); SHEET S1.11 (CONCRETE COLUMN SCHEDULE): THE SCHEDULE INDICATES A 'C2' COLUMN FROM THE LOWER LEVEL TO THE GROUND LEVEL. NO C2 IS INDICATED ON THE FOUNDATION PLAN. IS THIS A BASEMENT WALL REFERENCE? PLEASE CLARIFY AND INDICATE ON THE PLAN.
34. SHEETS S2.1 THROUGH S3.4: PLEASE ADD A NOTE TO THESE SHEETS INDICATING TO SEE SHEETS S3.6 THROUGH S3.9 FOR SHEAR WALLS.
35. SHEET S2.1 (FOUNDATION PLAN); STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS (PAGE 69): THE DRILLED SHAFT AT GRIDS A.5 AND 1.2 INDICATES A (2) WITH 337 KIPS (4' DIAMETER X 29' DEEP), WHILE THE PLAN INDICATES A CF1 (3' DIAMETER X 30' DEEP). PLEASE COORDINATE.
36. SHEET S2.1 (FOUNDATION PLAN); FOUNDATION PLAN NOTES: IN NOTE 7, ADD A REFERENCE TO DETAIL 201 FOR SLAB JOINTS.
37. SHEET S2.1; FOUNDATION PLAN NOTES: IS NOTE 2 INDICATED ON THE PLAN? PLEASE VERIFY.
38. SHEET S2.1; FOUNDATION PLAN: WHERE IS THE GRADE BEAM SCHEDULE LISTED OR REFERENCED? PLEASE VERIFY.
39. SHEET S2.1; FOUNDATION PLAN: IS THERE A SUMP PIT IN THE ELEVATOR PIT? PLEASE VERIFY.
40. SHEEET S3.0; FLOOR FRAMING PLAN: THIS IS A CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE SLAB. PLEASE REMOVE THE POST TENSION LEGEND AND NOTES.
41. SHEET S3.2; FLOOR FRAMING PLAN: ON THE WEST WALL ABOVE GRID 1.2, IT APPEARS THERE IS MASONRY WALL, BUT NO PLAN NOTE INDICATION. PLEASE VERIFY.
42. SHEET S3.3; FLOOR FRAMING PLAN: PLEASE ADD THE FIFTH AND SIXTH FLOOR TO THE PLAN TITLE.
43. SHEET S3.6; SHEAR WALL ELEVATIONS: PLEASE REVISE THE SHEAR WALL ELEVATION GRID LINES AND FLOOR ELEVATION REFERENCES AS REQUIRED.
44. SHEET S5.0; NOTES TO BAR PLACING: PLEASE ADD NOTE 2 TO THE PLAN.
45. SHEET S6.2; DETAIL 612: THE DETAIL INDICATES TO SEE THE TYPICAL BOLT SCHEDULE. WHERE IS THAT SCHEDULE LOCATED? PLEASE ADD REFERENCE.
46. STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS; PAGES 30 THROUGH 49: THE SHEAR WALLS 1, 2, AND 3 HAVE CALCULATIONS. THE CALCULATIONS FOR SHEAR WALLS 4, 5, AND 6 WERE NOT LOCATED. PLEASE VERIFY.
47. GENERAL: PLEASE REVISE THE ENGINEER'S SEAL IN THE TITLE BLOCK ON SEVERAL SHEETS.
48. GENERAL: PLEASE PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS.
11/17/2016 ERIC NEWCOMB COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING Approved

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
12/14/2016 ARUIZ1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed