Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Permit Number - T17CM06525
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/06/2017 | FRODRIG2 | WWM | REVIEW | Reqs Change | WASTEWATER – COMMERCIAL Sewer connection fee based on water meter size. See Water comment 1 above. |
| 09/06/2017 | PIMA COUNTY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PLUMBING – COMMERCIAL There is a major structural foundation below the back to back toilets at the south end of the building. The plumbing plan indicates a 4” sanitary line north-south along this column line which extends to an exterior cleanout. Will this reinforced concrete column footing and the major column footing to the north prevent the plumbing from being installed as shown? Ref. 2012 IBC 107.2.1. |
| 09/06/2017 | PIMA COUNTY | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/06/2017 | FRODRIG2 | WATER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | WATER – COMMERCIAL The Water Floor Plan, sheet P1.2, indicates a 2” water service line along the east side of the building and Water Calculations, sheet P2.2, show a 1” water meter. However, the civil Utilities Plan shows a 1” water service line connected to a ¾” water meter at the west side of the building. Coordinate. Ref. 2012 IPC 106.3.1. |
| 09/06/2017 | PIMA COUNTY | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | T17CM06525 - PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS Reviewer: Chris Anderson, September 5, 2017 BUILDING – COMMERCIAL The Special Inspections list on sheet T1.0 includes “wood lateral force resisting system.” Is there such a system in this project? The drawings do not indicate that there is. Please delete all structural items from this list and refer to the list on structural drawing S0.1 for structural deferred items and special inspections. Only include in the list on sheet T1.0 any deferred submittals not identified on sheet S0.1 (i.e. fire protection plan). Also include on sheet T1.0 a “boxed” note saying “any modifications to the approved architectural and structural drawings required by the deferred metal building and stair shop drawings shall be submitted as revision.” Ref. 2012 IBC 107.2.1. The Occupancy Load Table on sheet T1.0 does not seem to correlate to the floor plans. Assembly A-2 is listed although there are no A-2 occupancies in this office building and the designations “preparation” and “grade floor area” with associated SF is not easily checked against the plans. Please expand the calculation to list each room with area per person per Table 1004.1.2, occupancy of each listed room or space, and total occupancy. Provide on sheet T1.0 a plumbing fixture calculation per 2012 IBC 2902.1.1 and Table 2902.1. On the floor plan, sheet A1.0, exterior walls are keyed to W3 all type. However there is no W3 wall type included in the Partition Types schedule, this sheet. Ref. 2012 IBC 107.2.1. The layout and orientations of structural columns and posts shown on the architectural floor plan, sheet A1.0, do not match what is shown on the structural foundation plan, sheet S1.1. Please coordinate these drawings to match as the orientations, locations and configurations of structural members will affect the architectural walls shown on sheet A1.0. Also, the pre-engineered building manufacturer’s engineer will need to have coordinated documents from which to design his structure. Ref. 2012 IBC 107.2.1. To comply with ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009 Figure 604.9.2 the accessible water closet and handrails in the women’s restroom as shown in plan 4/A1.2 must be located caddy corner to the door rather than across from the door as shown. To comply with ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009 Figure 604.9.3.1(C) for a door swinging into the men’s room accessible toilet compartment, the toilet maneuvering space must be minimum 59” deep. The plans scale approximately 48” deep. Provide dimensions on the enlarged toilet room plans, 4/A1.2, for toilet compartments interiors and access hall clear width to comply with the ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009 figures referenced above. Per the development plan the east wall of the building is to be a 1-hour masonry wall due to its location less than 10’ from the property line. However, the architectural and structural drawings do not show the east wall as masonry or as a 1-hour fire-rated wall. Ref. 2012 IBC Table 602. The rainwater cisterns shown on building elevation 1/A2.1 scale 16-feet high x 5-feet diameter. The tops of the cisterns are approximately 6-feet below the roof. Please submit cistern information, including manufacturer’s product data, piping schematic/details for how the rainwater will get from roof outlet to cisterns. Ref. 2012 IBC 107.2.1. The R-38 roof insulation noted in various places within the drawing set (i.e. General RCP Note 2 on sheet A3.1 and Wall Section Keynote 11), and the R-19 wall insulation noted elsewhere (i.e. Wall Section Keynote 12) are not prescriptive to the 2012 IECC Table C402.2 for metal buildings in Climate Zone 2. Per that table, the roof must have R-5 thermal spacer blocks between roof panels and framing and with R-19 cavity insulation between purlins and an R-11 continuous liner membrane below the purlins with uninterrupted R-11 insulation on top of the membrane. The exterior walls, per Table C402.2, shall have R-13 cavity insulation between girts and a continuous layer of R-6.5 insulation. In lieu of complying with the prescriptive insulation method of the 2012 IECC submit a building envelope COMcheck that accurately reflects what is shown on the architectural drawings. Add U-factors for each exterior door in the Door Schedule “notes” column per 2012 IECC Tables C402.2 and C402.3. Swinging opaque doors shall have a maximum U-factor of 0.61. Glazed entry doors shall have a maximum U-factor of 0.83 and maximum SHGC of 0.25. Alternate U-factors may be used if shown in a building envelope COMcheck with a passing grade. See comment 12 above. Indicate door hardware for exterior exit doors in compliance with 2012 IBC 1008.1.9. The SHGC fir SF-X storefront shown on sheet A6.1 is shown as 0.27; however, the 2012 IECC Table C402.3 requires the maximum SHGC to be 0.25. Revise. Provide a section detail through stair treads and risers on sheet A7.1 to show compliance with 2012 IBC 1009.7. Per ICC/ANSI A117.1A 505.10.2 and 10.3 handrails shall extend a minimum of 12” horizontally above the landing at the top of stairs and minimum one tread depth horizontally beyond the lowest tread nosing at the bottom of stairs. Handrail extensions shown on stair sections 3 and 4/A7.1 do not comply. On the Footing Schedule, sheet S1.1, footing F 3-3 is shown with (4) #4 reinforcing bars each way. However, the structural calculations, pages 3 and 26, indicate that (3) #5 rebar each way is required. |
| 09/06/2017 | PIMA COUNTY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | MECHANICAL - COMMERCIAL Mechanical detail 101/M2.0 indicates that the 20’ (+/-) tall SA and RA ducts from AC-1 and AC-2 will be supported by unistrut from the metal building walls. How will the unistrut be secured to the ribbed metal panel wall system in a way that will provide structural support for the ducts and maintain weather-resistance of the building envelope? Coordinate with Architect. Ref. 2012 IBC 107.2.4. |
| 09/07/2017 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/14/2017 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Principle Planner PROJECT: Onyx Creative Design New Building T17CM06525 Building Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 14, 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. Sheet T1.0 the building area listed under "CODE ANALYSIS AND SUMMARY" does not match the building area listed on DP16-0014. Clarify the difference and a DP revision may be required. 3. Sheets A2.0 & A2.1 elevations do not match the elevations submitted for the Design Development Option (DDO) . These plans will need to be approved and stamped by the DDO section prior to approval of the building plans. 4. 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 |
| 09/14/2017 | SSHIELD1 | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Passed |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/20/2017 | ARUIZ1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |