Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - T19CM00710
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/27/2019 | PIMA COUNTY | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | BUILDING – COMMERCIAL Please respond to these review comments in writing. Regarding response to previous building comment 10, there still are note(s) referencing the janitor’s sink but pointing to other items (i.e. partitions in corridor and). Additionally, the keynote pointing to the janitor’s sink has been changed from 6 to 8 which references the water heater. Regarding response to previous building comment 11, while dimensions were added to the plan on sheet A2 as requested, for some reason text on this sheet (dimensions, keynote references, note references, etc.) and on sheet A3 has been reduced in size from what was originally submitted. Per City of Tucson standard text, both upper and lower case, shall not be smaller than 3/32”. Revised text is smaller than 3/32”. Please go through every sheet and enlarge text as required to comply. There was no response to previous building review comment 13 regarding how the dehumidifiers will be suspended from the existing roof panel system. In regards to response to previous building comment 14, the plan shows that in three grow rooms, three new 520-lb HVAC units (1,560-lbs) are located over an existing beam that also carries the loads of three new 280-lb (840-lbs) dehumidifiers. And in the fourth grow room an existing beam carries the load of two new 520-lb (1,040-slbs) HVAC units and three new 280-lb (840-lbs) dehumidifiers. The total loads added to these beams is substantial. While the plans reviewer and the architect discussed locations for HVAC units over structural elements, there is a concern that the existing beams may be undersized to accommodate the existing roof dead and live loads plus the new equipment loads. Please submit structural calculations for these beams sealed by an Arizona registrant and identify the beam locations on the ceiling plan using the same identifiers for them used in the structural calculations. In regards to response to previous building review comment 16, the handrail extension shown on the revised detail 1/A3 is incorrect. Per ICC/ANSI A117.1-2009 Fig. 505.10.3 the top of the handrail extension shall continue the line and trajectory of the top rail of the stair handrail/guard. In regards to the response to previous building comment 17, the dimension for handrail height on detail 1/A3 shall be shown from step nosing to top of railing. In regards to the response to previous building comment 18, the revised detail 1/A3 shows that the portion of the guard at the landing with sloping top rail is less than the required guard height of 42-inches. And, because 2018 IBC 1014.2 restricts the height of handrails to 38”, the top rail of the guard at the landing cannot also be the handrail. Also, the 1” x 1” pickets located 5” o.c. will provide a 4” clear opening between pickets. Per 1015.4 the clear opening must be less than 4”. Please revise detail 1/A2 to comply. There was no response to previous building review comment 19. Either remove the exit lights from the reflected ceiling plan and electric lighting plan making exterior door C in the Equipment Room an exit or revise the door hardware for this door so that it is readily openable from the egress side without the use of a key or special knowledge or effort. |
| 03/27/2019 | PIMA COUNTY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PLUMBING – COMMERCIAL Please respond to these review comments in writing. No response was made for previous plumbing review comment 2 showing the routing of sump pump plumbing lines from the grow rooms. 2018 IPC 106.3.1. In fact, the plumbing drawings do not include sump pumps at all. If the sump pumps shown in architectural detail 2/A2 are to be “by others” note this on the plumbing plan. Regardless, the plumbing plan must show how/to where the sump is discharged. |
| 03/27/2019 | PIMA COUNTY | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | ELECTRICAL – COMMERCIAL Please respond to these review comments in writing. No response was made for previous electrical review comment 2. See also building review comment 19 above. No response was made for previous electrical review comment 3 that all receptacle outlets in the grow rooms shall be GFI. Ref. 2017 NEC 547.5(G). |
| 03/27/2019 | PIMA COUNTY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | MECHANICAL – COMMERCIAL Please respond to these review comments in writing. No response was made for previous mechanical review comment 3. The Load Summaries for zones 2, 3, 4 and 5 still show Ac-1, AC-2 and AC-3 as the HVAC units handling each of these zones. |
| 04/18/2019 | AVAUGHN1 | ZONING | REVIEW | Needs Review |