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 - T17CM05605
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/07/2017 | PIMA COUNTY | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | T17CM05601 through 5608 - PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS – 2nd review Reviewer: Chris Anderson, November 3, 2017 BUILDING – COMMERCIAL PER PREVIOUS COMMENT: On sheet G1.1 provide handrail extensions for the ramps that extend a minimum of 12” from ramp edge in the direction of travel. Handrail extensions 90-degrees to the direction of travel do not comply with Code. Revise the plan and details to comply with Code. Ref. ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009 505.10. PER PREVIOUS COMMENT: Gates keynote 01 on sheet G1.2 indicate that the gates will be keyed from both sides. This does not comply with 2012 IBC 1008.1.9 that requires egress doors to be readily openable from the egress side without the use of a key of special knowledge or effort. PER PREVIOUS COMMENT: Per ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009 1004.12.2.1, a parallel approach is acceptable for kitchen sinks as long as the 48” clear floor space is centered on the sink bowl. This appears not to be the case for units 1, 2, 6, 7 and 8. Revise the plans to comply. PER PREVIOUS COMMENT: New bathroom lavatories for all units are shown to be 3’-0” above the floor from what appears to be the centerline of the fixture. ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009 1004.11.3.2.1.1 requires that the maximum height of the lavatory rim be 34” above the floor. Revise to comply. PER PREVIOUS COMMENT: Carbon monoxide alarms are required outside each separate sleeping area in the immediate vicinity of bedrooms. Add this note to the drawings. Ref. 2012 IBC 908.7. The ME’s response to previous mechanical comment 5 for T17CM05602 (Unit 2) and T17CM05602 (Unit 5) makes the statement that “demising walls don’t extend up thru attic. They stop at fire rated ceiling.” Please specify on the plan how the one-hour fire-rated ceiling has been achieved. Ref. 2012 IBC 420.2 and 708.4. MECHANICAL – COMMERCIAL Regarding the ME’s response to previous mechanical comment 5 for T17CM05602 (Unit 2) and T17CM05602 (Unit 5) demising walls that continue to the underside of roof sheathing may be required depending on whether or not the ceilings are shown by the architect to be 1-hour fire-rated (see building review comment 6 above). If the demising walls are to be extended, fire dampers will be required. Ref. 2012 IBC 420.2 and 708.4. |
| 11/07/2017 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Nothing in the current drawing set calls for fire rating of the ceilings. Assuming that the ceiling will be fire-rated, the attic space will require the installation of draft stops to limit the fire areas to less than 3,000 square feet. Installation of draft stops could cause access and combustion air issues. Reference: Section 708. IBC 2012. [Initial comment: Show how adequate combustion air is to be provided for the gas-fired appliances in the attic. Reference: Section 304.5, IFGC 2012.] |
| 11/07/2017 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Nothing in the current drawing set calls for fire rating of the ceilings. Assuming that the ceiling will be fire-rated, the attic space will require the installation of draft stops to limit the fire areas to less than 3,000 square feet. Installation of draft stops could cause access and combustion air issues. Reference: Section 708. IBC 2012. [Initial comment: Show how adequate combustion air is to be provided for the gas-fired appliances in the attic. Reference: Section 304.5, IFGC 2012.] |