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 - TI ALL
Permit Number - T16CM08161
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TI ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/03/2017 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: 5020 E. Glenn Street T16CM08161 Building Plan (2nd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 3, 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. Based on a wall height of 33'-3" shown for the stair area shown on the west elevation, sheet A5.10 the required perimeter yard setback to the west property line would be 49'-10". The approved development plan (DP) shows 48'-0", Zoning acknowledges that DP setback line does not show the actual setback. Demonstrate that the proposed building height meets setbacks or revise the DP to show that the proposed 33'-3" wall height meets setbacks. 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 |
| 01/06/2017 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. PREVIOUS COMMENT 3; SHEETS LS1.10 AND LS1.20: THE CITY OF TUCSON REQUIRES ALL LETTERING (UPPER AND LOWER CASE) TO BE A MINIMUM OF 3/32" IN HEIGHT. PLEASE REVISE. 2. PREVIOUS COMMENT 17; SHEET A0.40; MOUNTING HEIGHTS: PLEASE INDICATE ON THIS SHEET THE LOCATIONS FOR SHOWER/TUB CONTROLS AND HAND SHOWERS PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ICC/ANSI SECTIONS 607 AND 608. 3. PREVIOUS COMMENT 19; SHEET A2.32; ROOF PLAN: PLEASE REFERENCE THE STEEL LADDER OVER THE PARAPET TO A DETAIL. 4. PREVIOUS COMMENT 32; STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS: FOR THE GRAVITY COLUMN DESIGN SUMMARY SHEETS AND THE SPREAD FOOTING DESIGN SUMMARY SHEETS IN THE CALCULATIONS, NEARBY GRID REFERENCES (PAGES 46 THROUGH 57) FOR THE COLUMN DESIGNS AND NEARBY GRID REFERENCES (PAGES 60 THROUGH 63) FOR THE SPREAD FOOTING DESIGNS WERE NOT CLEAR, OR NOT LOCATED. PLEASE REVISE. 5. PREVIOUS COMMENT 33; STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS: FOR THE LATERAL ANALYSIS, A LATERAL DESIGN KEY PLAN ON PAGE 64A WAS NOT LOCATED. PLEASE REVISE. 6. GENERAL: PLEASE PROVIDE TWO COMPLETE SETS OF THE STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS. 7. GENERAL: PLEASE PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ALL REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| 01/09/2017 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 01/11/2017 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Despite keynote 12 on sheet P0-01, the 3-compartment sink (#83) and the 2-compartment prep sink (#63) are still shown with combined indirect drains on sheet P3-01. [Initial comment: Provide separate indirect waste pipes for each food-handling fixture to protect against cross-contamination or fouling. Reference: Section 801.2, IPC 2012.] 2. Provide the size of the RDL and ODL running North to South from J.5-16 to J.5-14.5 on the first level (1194 square feet). Verify the size of the RDL and ODL running from South to North from R-14 to R-15 on the first level (3330 square feet). [Initial comment: Provide calculations (i.e. the horizontal projected area of the roof plus half of the area of vertical walls diverting rain to the roof) to show how the roof drains and horizontal rainwater pipes were sized. Show the slope of the horizontal rainwater pipes on the plans. Reference: Section 1106, IPC 2012.] 3. Based on the scupper calculations shown on sheet P6-01, a 14"-wide scupper, as noted on sheet A2.30, is capable of handling a maximum roof area of only 1374 square feet. Review the roof areas being drained to ensure that the overflow scuppers are adequately sized. [Initial comment: Provide hydraulic calculations for the overflow scuppers based on the 100-year hourly rainfall rate for Tucson, 3" per hour. Reference: Sections 1106.1, 1106.4, and 1108.3, IPC 2012 and Sections 1611.1 and 1611.3, IBC 2012.] 4. Replot sheet P4-04 so that detail 2 is legible. |
| 01/11/2017 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Comment not addressed. Reduced pressure backflow prevention assemblies are required to be installed in locations accessible to Tucson Water. Contact Ray Munoz at Tucson Water for coordination (Ray.Munoz@tucsonaz.gov, 520-837-2207). Reference: Chapter XXVII, Article V, Section 27-72, the Tucson Code, http://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/water/docs/backflow-ordinance.pdf 2. Comment not addressed. Clarify the reason for installing a 3" water service pipe and a 6" water meter. A 3" pipe, schedule 40 IPS would have a flow of 184 GPM at a velocity of 8 feet per second but a 6" meter has a maximum capacity of 1050 GPM. |
| 01/12/2017 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. According to the architect, room 177 will have a nail polish station (see 1/A2.12). Keynote 12 on sheet M2-11 also notes the installation of a source-capture exhaust for a nail station in room 177. [Initial comment: If the use of room 177 will include the application of nail polish, provide source-capture exhaust system of at least 50 CFM per nail station. Reference: footnote (h), Table 403.3, IMC 2012.] 2. The exhaust requirement for room 190 appears to have been mixed up with the source-capture exhaust for room 177. Show how the exhaust duct for room 190 will be enclosed in a fire-resistance rated shaft. [Initial comment: Hazardous exhaust ducts shall not have fire dampers or penetrate fire-rate floor-ceiling assemblies but shall be enclosed in a fire-resistance rated shaft (Room 190, O2 Storage). Reference: Section 510.6.2, IMC 2012.] |
| 01/18/2017 | DAN SANTA CRUZ | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING ELECTRICAL PLAN REVIEW COMMENT. The new electrical plan sheets are not stamped by the PE of record. |
| 01/27/2017 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Reqs Change | The following is needed for Sewer Connection Fee Application Approval: Need PCRWRD/IWC/Steven Valencia review of grease interceptor and of the elevator sump pump draining to sewer (detail 10 on drawing P6-01) – 520-724-6200 (steven.valencia@pima.gov) Need to review the location of building connection to the sewer (A & B flows west per P2-01 – C & D flows east per P2-02) *Need to submit referenced site drawing U0.3 utility plan – not in drawing package set or site utility plan showing location of all connections to the private or public sewer Need site utility plan showing the location & size of water meter for sewer connection fee calculation with water supply fixture units(WSFU’s) |
| 12/22/2016 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Needs Review |