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 - TI
Permit Number - T18CM05254
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - TI
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/09/2018 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/12/2018 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Provide automatic faucets for the lavatories, dispensing a maximum of 0.25 gallons per metering cycle. Verify that the duration of the automatic faucet cycle will be at least 10-seconds for accessibility. Reference: Section 416.6, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson and Section 606.4, ICC/ANSI A117.1-09. 2. The temperature mixing valve specified for use with the public lavatories is listed as conforming to ASSE 1070, not ASSE 1016. Revise the specifications to note the correct ASSE standard so that an incorrect mixing valve is not substituted. (Note that the Watts USG-B has been discontinued; the replacement is the Watts LFUSG-B.) Reference: Sections 416.5 and 607.1.2, IPC 2012. 3. Provide separate indirect waste pipes for each compartment of the 3-compartment sink to protect against cross-contamination or fouling. Reference: Sections 801.2 and 802.1.8, IPC 2012. 4. Clarify why the sample vault for the gravity grease interceptor is located upstream of the interceptor. Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012. 5. Based on the drawings for the shell building, the building drain runs from north to south. |
| 07/12/2018 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 07/13/2018 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Revise the energy code analysis for the building envelope, coordinating the building components used in the analysis with those shown on the drawing. The drawings for the shell building variously indicate that the roof was built with R-21, R-30, or R38 cavity insulation and no furring for the exterior walls. The new drawings show no furring of the exterior walls in the dining area, no continuous insulation for the roof or the exterior walls, and no clear specification for the new cavity insulation for the dining room roof. Clarify how the finished suite will be insulated. Reference: Section C303.1, IECC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. 2. Revise the COMcheck mechanical compliance certificate using HVAC components that correspond to those shown on the drawings (there are 2 5-ton and 2 6-ton heat pumps without economizers, not 4 2-ton heat pumps with economizers). 3. Revise the balancing data for the two restrooms so the exhaust fans remove at least all of the air supplied to each restroom. Provide a sequence of operation for the restroom exhaust fans to show that all of the air supplied to the restrooms will be exhausted. Reference: Section 403.2.1 (4), IMC 2012. 4. The sum of the outside air (2830 CFM) and make-up air (3266 CFM) flow rates significantly exceeds the exhaust air (4120 CFM) flow rate. Show how over-pressurization building will be avoided. Reference: Section 501.4, IMC 2012. 5. Correct detail 2/M2 to show that the minimum height of the exhaust fan discharge is 40" above the roof surface, not the height of the motor cover for the fan (see detail 1/M2). Reference: Section 506.3.13.1, IMC 2012. 6. Hood canopies shall extend at least 6" horizontally on all open sides beyond the edge of the top horizontal surface of the appliances under the hood (see the pizza hood). Reference: Section 507.12, IMC 2012. 7. Show that the fryer hood installation complies with Section 507.9, IMC 2012 with regard to a smooth, cleanable, non-absorbent, and non-combustible material installed between the hood and the surrounding walls, and extending 18" beyond the hood. 8. Verify that the evaporative cooling section of the makeup air unit specified on sheet M5 is equipped with a recirculating water system. Reference: Section 928.2, IMC 2012 and ARS Title 45, Chapter 1, Article 12. See text at: (http://www.azleg.gov/viewdocument/?docName=http://www.azleg.gov/ars/45/00313.htm). |
| 07/19/2018 | DAN SANTA CRUZ | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/25/2018 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Sheet A1 Add the occupant load from the outdoor seating area to the calculation for the minimum plumbing fixture count. IBC TABLE 2902.1 2. Sheet A2 Specify the occupant load for the outdoor seating area. Where the occupant load exceeds 49 persons, not less than 2 exits is required. IBC TABLE 1015.1, IBC TABLE 1004.1.2. 3. Provide dimensions for the vertical grab bar in Figure 604.4. Show the grab bar height above the floor, distance from rear wall, and the length of bar. ICC A117.1-2009 4. Show number and type of fasteners at the diagonal bracing to the top of new metal walls and at the ceiling connection. IBC 1607.14. 5. Show the location of all EXIT signage on the reflected ceiling plan. IBC 1011.1 |
| 07/30/2018 | JOHN VAN WINKLE | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | T18CM05254 1) Engineering has reviewed the building plans but cannot approve them at this time. A development package (DP) is required for the proposed patio expansion. Engineering will review the building plans for conformance with the approved DP John Van Winkle, P.E. John.VanWinkle@tucsonaz.gov 520-837-5007 |
| 07/30/2018 | EHAMBLI1 | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | FROM: Elisa Hamblin, AICP Lead Planner PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: T18CM05254 - TI for pizza restaurant Building Plans (1st Review), Barro's Pizza 410 N Wilmot Rd., C-1 Zoning TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 30, 2018 DUE DATE: August 3, 2018 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 but cannot approve them at this time. The tenant improvement proposes a patio seating area on the west side of the building. This constitutes an expansion of use and requires an updated development package (DP). An approved development package (DP) is needed for comparison at the time of the building plan review by zoning. 2. COMMENT: Zoning will review the building plans on the next submittal as it relates to the zoning review purview and compare the building plan footprint, building height, and square footage and location to ensure consistency with the DP. (Include a copy of the revised and approved DP (with PDSD stamp) with the next building submittal.) The PDSD approved and signed copy of the DP shall not be incorporated into the building plans unless it is a PDSD approved and stamped copy. 3. COMMENT: If any changes are necessary, due to the PDSD Commercial Plan Reviewer's comments that affect or change the building footprint, height, or square footage, the DP will need to be updated prior to approval of the building plans by Zoning. 4. COMMENT: Once the plans have been reviewed and approved by the Commercial Plan Reviewers and zoning has verified consistency with the PDSD approved and signed copy of the DP, the building plans can be approved by zoning. 5. COMMENT: The revised DP could be potentially handled as an over-the-counter walk through. Please contact me if you wish to proceed in this manner. If you have any questions please contact me at Elisa.Hamblin@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4966. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Building plans and revised and approved version of the DP as reference. |