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 - T19CM01180
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/25/2019 | PIMA COUNTY | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | BUILDING - COMMERCIAL 1. Per previous building comment 5, "on sheet A2 cloud the added notes to identify them as part of this revision." 2. The previous building comment 6 states, "there are many walls at the 1st floor that now are not braced at the top because the 2nd floor is removed. Please explain how you intend to laterally brace 1st floor walls." Your reply that the 2018 Table 2308.5.1 allows the maximum height of a 2x6 laterally unsupported non-bearing wall to be 20' is a misconception. First, the walls shown in your drawings are 2x4. But whether 2x4 or 2x6, the text of section 2308.5.1 states "studs shall be continuous from a support at the sole plate to a support at the top plate to resist loads perpendicular to the wall. Secondly, in Table 2308.5.1 sub-note "a" for the column titles "Laterally unsupported stud height (feet)" states, "listed heights are distances between points of lateral support placed perpendicular to the plane of the wall." While these walls could extend to a maximum 20 in height, the top plates still need to be braced against lateral forces. For example, without top support the wall separating Corridor 112 from Corridor 113 will topple over. Revise you plan(s) and building section to show how you will do this. 3. The previous building comment 7 states, "various 2x4 walls are shown full height from floor to roof structure. Please verify the stud size and spacing required (and available) for laterally unsupported 25-foot high wood framed walls." See review comment 6 above. Also, the full height wall separating the gymnasium from the office area is show as 2x4 construction on the structural drawings and by note on sheet A1 floor plan. Per Table 2308.5.1, laterally unsupported 2x4's at 24" o.c. can only extend to 14'. This wall extends to 25' in height and therefore is not in compliance with Code and is it unlikely that 25' long 2x4 or 2x6 studs can be obtained. Neither a 25' high 2x4 wall nor a 25' high 2x6 wall are prescriptively compliant with the IBC and cannot be approved as shown in the documents. 4. In regards to Paul Seppala's letter responding to previous building review comment 9, Mr. Seppala added a condition for his approval "with the expectation that the building will ultimately be completed per original plan." However, the architect's response letter for previous building mechanical comment 2 and previous plumbing review comment 2 states "the capacity to add the second floor at a later date if the owner chooses to do so." If the structure is not impacted by the removal of the 2nd floor the structural engineer's response should not include a condition. Please coordinate responses. 5. The architect shall add his seal with current date for revision #2 on all architectural and structural sheets as requested in previous building note 9. |
| 09/25/2019 | PIMA COUNTY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 09/25/2019 | PIMA COUNTY | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 09/25/2019 | PIMA COUNTY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed |