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: REVISION - - 1ST
Permit Number - T17CM08994
Review Name: REVISION - - 1ST
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12/04/2018 | MASHFOR1 | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 12/10/2018 | PIMA COUNTY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | MECHANICAL – COMMERCIAL Reviewer: Chris Anderson, December 6, 2018 The outside air calculation sheets have not been modified to include the new workout room and locker rooms addition. Please add new addition to OA calculation on sheet M0.3 and revise minimum OA for AHU-2 on the Air Handling Unit Schedule, sheet M7.1. Ref. 2012 IMC 106.3.1. |
| 12/10/2018 | PIMA COUNTY | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 12/10/2018 | KROBLES1 | WATER | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 12/10/2018 | PIMA COUNTY | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | BUILDING – COMMERCIAL Reviewer: Chris Anderson, December 6, 2018 On sheet G2.1.1 the total occupant load is 2,740 and not 2,741, and on sheet G2.1.2 the total occupant load is 497 and not 496. Please revise. On the site plan, sheet G2.2.0, the new addition to the office building is not shown. Please revise plan. On the site plan, sheet G2.2.0, the north entry/exit ramp to the parking structure is retained; however on the revised garage floor plan level 1, sheet G2.2.3, this ramp appears to have been removed and replaced with parking (although miscellaneous “orphan” notes and lines pertaining to the ramp are still present on the drawing in this location). Please coordinate. On this plan, sheet C2.2.3, there appear to be lines missing for the access ramp on the west side of the garage. Please cloud with revision delta all changes to the structural sheets. On structural GSN sheet S0.1 building loads information been deleted for the office building and only parking garage loads retained. Also, much of the wind loading information (i.e. wind pressure diagram) has been removed. Please explain. The revised garage foundation plan, sheet S1.1.0, shows that it has been revised extensively and that concrete columns will be cast-in-place rather than precast. Submit structural calculations sealed by the Engineer of Record for the redesign. A complete structural review will be done upon receipt of calculations. The approved sheet S1.1.0 includes a stair at the northeast corner of the foundation plan. This stair is not shown on the revised sheet. The garage level structural floor plan on sheet S1.1..1 shows that the structural floor system has been changed from precast double-tees to a post tensioned beam system with 7” concrete slab between P.T. beams. Submit structural calculations sealed by the Engineer of Record for the redesign. A complete structural review will be done upon receipt of calculations. Please submit structural calculations for the added building areas shown on the office building foundation plan, sheet S2.1.B, and framing plans, sheet S2.2B and S2.3A. A complete structural review will be done upon receipt of calculations. Sheet S5.2 is marked “SUPERCEDED” however there is not drawing in the set replacing it. There are details on this sheet referenced elsewhere in the drawing set, i.e. details 322 and 323 which are referenced on the roof plan S2.4.A. Parking canopies are noted on the architectural site plan, sheet A1.0.0. Are structural plans, details and calculations for these structures to be a deferred submittal? On sheet A1.3.1 the revised stair section shows a guardrail, however there are no details for this guard. Please add note that the guard shall be constructed so that is opening allowing a 4-inch diameter sphere to pass thru from walking surface to required guard height. Ref. 2012 IBC 1013.4. Sheets A1.2.1, A1.4.1 are been included in the revised drawing set but still remain in the drawing list on sheet G1.1. Sheet A5.3.1 is marked “SUPERCEDED” in the revised drawing set but still appears in the drawing list on sheet G1.1. Does “SUPERCEDED” mean “DELETED” or “OMITTED” since no replacement sheet is in the revised drawing set? A jib crane is shown in detail 6/A5.5.1 with a note to refer to structural drawings for crane attachment to masonry wall. No reference to the bridge crane could be found in the structural drawings. Please add to structural sheets and provide structural calculations for attachment. An accessible shower compartment is shown in the proposed addition on sheet A7.2.4; however no accessible accessories mounting heights are shown for a shower room on sheet A0.2. Please add shower elevations showing accessory configurations and mounting heights per ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009 608.4. Sheet A9.3.1 is marked “SUPERCEDED.” Where is the Door and Interior Opening Schedule now located and what changes have been made to it? |
| 12/10/2018 | PIMA COUNTY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 12/13/2018 | ALEXANDRA HINES | ZONING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 12/13/2018 | AHINES2 | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Passed | |
| 12/13/2018 | ALEXANDRA HINES | DESIGN PROFESSIONAL | REVIEW | Approved | Design Professional Review Comments Date: December 5, 2018 To: Alexandra Hines Planning and Development Services City of Tucson 201 N. Stone Avenue Tucson, AZ 85701 From: R. Fe Tom, AIA Project: T17CM08953 & 94 Caterpillar SM&T HQ - Revision Review Re: IID Review by Richard Fe Tom, Design Professional Alexandra Hines has requested a Design Professional review of the design package revisions with construction documents sheets. I have performed a review for the following Design Revisions with the Construction Documents: o Fitness Center: The only change I found is that they added "manual window shades" to the East windows of the Fitness Center, but this did not change the Exterior Elevations or the Floor Plan. o Exterior Patio: The only change I found is that they added "Deck Drains" to the Patio Paver Deck. o Parking Garage: The Parking Garage is designed with 2 levels - one below grade and the top level is "at grade". The top level is heavily screened by landscaping & trees on all sides (particularly along Avenida Del Convento). The top level that can be seen by pedestrians appears to meet all of the IID Zoning Option Requirements and its layout and landscape screening is the exactly same as the Design Package. Is does appear that the architects added stair and ramp details for the Parking Garage as part of the Revision. All changes appear to me minor and does not effect the exterior aesthetics of the approved design. As the Design Professional, I approve the changes to the Construction Documents. Richard Fe Tom, AIA COT Design Professional |
| 12/14/2018 | JOHN VAN WINKLE | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved |