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: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Permit Number - T17CM04357
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/06/2017 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | FROM: David Rivera PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: T17CM04357 and T17CM04364 (Retail Use - Convenience Store with Fuel Pumps) Building Plan Review (1st Review) 333 W. Grant Road TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 6, 2017 DUE DATE: June 28, 2017 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. COMMENT: Zoning has reviewed the building plans for the C-Store and Fuel Canopy for compliance with the approved development package. While the building footprint for the C-Store and Fuel Canopy are consistent with the building footprints on the approved development package as it relates to the zoning review purview such as but not limited to building footprint (Square footage), building location, Building height, and use, zoning cannot approve the plans at this time. As of this zoning review of the building plans, the plan review by the PDSD commercial plans review agencies had been completed. Zoning cannot approve the building plans until all commercial review agencies have approved and signed the building plans. 2. COMMENT: The copy of the DP included in the building package is not the approved and signed copy. Remove the unapproved copy of the DP and replace it with the approved and signed copy or label the plans as "Reference only see approved and signed DP17-0046". 3. COMMENT: Zoning will review the building plans on the next submittal to assure that any revisions made to the building plans do not affect zoning requirements and that the above comments have been addressed. If you have any questions about this transmittal, Contact David Rivera on Tuesday or Wednesday at (520) 837-4957 or by email David.Rivera@tucsonaz.gov or contact Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov |
| 06/08/2017 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | Diagonal distance between exits should be measured center to center. Corridor for secondary exit needs to 1 hour rated, including 20 minute doors. |
| 06/13/2017 | PIMA COUNTY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | SHEET P1.2 The grease trap calculation includes a 25% storage factor in the sizing calculation. Since 390 gallons is required per that calculation, provide a 400 gallon interceptor rather than a 500 gallon interceptor. Oversized tanks can produce a corrosive environment and generate odor problems. SHEET P1.3 Revise Grease Trap Detail to show the 3-compartment sink with 3 separate waste lines terminating over the floor drain. Separate waste lines are required to prevent potential cross-contamination of tubs. Ref. 2012 IPC 801.2. |
| 06/13/2017 | PIMA COUNTY | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | SHEET E1.1 The photometric plan is not adequate to show compliance with the City of Tucson/Pima County Outdoor Lighting Code. Provide shielded and unshielded exterior light fixtures lumen calculations for the parcel in accordance with Section 401 of the Outdoor Lighting Code for lighting area E3a. Clearly label on the light fixture schedule which fixtures are fully shielded and which are unshielded and in the calculations indicate allowable total lumens for the parcel based on acreage, and of that total the allowable unshielded lumens component. Then indicate lumen calculations for selected fixtures to show compliance. Lumen calculations to include all exterior lights, including ground mounted, building mounted, canopy mounted, landscaping, etc. Find the outdoor lighting code on our website www.dsd.pima.gov. Click on the link “Building Permits Resources” and find the Outdoor Lighting Code on the bottom right of the page. (There are 2-WP fixture and 1-Sec fixture that appears to be not under a cover and should be counted in the OLC calculation.) Per 402.1 of the OLC, the rated color temperature of light sources (lamps and fixtures) shall not exceed 3500K and unshielded lighting 3000K. From the light fixture product data sheets it appears that some of the selected fixtures exceed this limitation. Reselect fixtures as required and clearly show on the product data presented which color temperature option is selected for each fixture. |
| 06/13/2017 | FRODRIG2 | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/13/2017 | PIMA COUNTY | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Reviewer: Chris Anderson, June 12, 2017 GENERAL BUILDING ENVELOPE COMcheck The COMcheck indicates a 0.3% better than Code compliance with envelope assemblies indicated. However, the exterior wall is shown as consistently wood framed, 16” o.c. with R-19 cavity insulation and R-3.6 continuous (board) insulation. This is not what the architectural drawings show. While R-19 cavity insulation is shown throughout, the continuous R-3.6insulation is only shown as backer to stucco exterior finish. No continuous insulation is shown behind masonry wainscot and full height panels. Revise the COMcheck to match what is shown on the architectural sheets and rerun the program. SHEET A6.0 Add a boxed note at the windows schedule that indicates the maximum U-value and SHGC for glazed fenestration. These values shall match what is shown in the revised envelope COMcheck. This note shall be placed on the drawing (rather than only in a specification) for the building inspector’s information. Add a boxed note at the door types that indicates the maximum U-value for opaque excterior fenestration. These values shall match what is shown in the revised envelope COMcheck. This note shall be placed on the drawing (rather than only in a specification) for the building inspector’s information. SHEET S1.2 Light pole foundation detail 10 indicates 5’ min. burial; however the structural calculations (page 8.1) require minimum 6’ burial. SHEET S2.2 On west wall, framing plan shows a 3 1/8” x 10 ½” GLB. However, for same beam, the structural calculations show both a 5 1/8” x 10 ½” GLB (page 4.7) and a 3 1/8” x 10 ½” GLB (page 4.8). Coordinate. Show location(s) of 3-2x8 headers on plan. Reference page 4.10 of calcs. SHEET S3.2 Detail 121 shows a footing width of 6’-0” while the structural calculations, page 9.16, shows a footing depth of 6’-6”. |
| 06/13/2017 | PIMA COUNTY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | SHEET M1.2.2 Regarding Exhaust Fan Schedule, note 1, refer to note 1 for sheet M1.1 above. Please confirm that the heating and cooling load calculations and product selection for HP-1 and HP-2 were done using 104 degrees F summer outside DB design temperature and 32 degrees F winter outside DB design temperature per Pima County amendment to the 2012 IECC. If they were not, rerun calculations and modify the 2012 IECC Load Summary and Packaged Rooftop Unit schedule as necessary. Add this confirmation as note 4 to the 2012 IECC Load Summary and Packaged Rooftop Unit schedule as note 8. |
| 06/13/2017 | FRODRIG2 | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Approved | ALREADY APPROVED BY ERIC NEWCOMB. |
| 06/13/2017 | FRODRIG2 | WWM | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/30/2017 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/07/2017 | ARUIZ1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |