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 - NEW
Permit Number - T19CM02310
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - NEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/03/2019 | CTREVIL1 | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Completed | |
| 04/11/2019 | PIMA COUNTY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 04/11/2019 | PIMA COUNTY | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 04/11/2019 | CTREVIL1 | WATER | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 04/11/2019 | PIMA COUNTY | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | BUILDING – COMMERCIAL Please respond to all review comments in writing. Sheets g3.0 – g3.10 imply that fireproofing will be part of the work of this permit. Is this correct? Ref. 2018 IBC 107.2.1. Sheet xd1.0 indicates that demolition will be a part of the work of this permit. Is this correct? Ref. 2018 IBC 107.2.1. Please provide building section(s) in the drawing set for reference and clarity. Ref. 2018 IBC 107.2.1. In the Concrete Grade Beam Schedule, sheet s1.8, reinforcing for GB3 is shown as (12) #10 at bottom, while the structural calculations indicate that 2 rows of 8-#10 are required. Please explain. Ref. 2018 IBC 107.2.1. In the Concrete Grade Beam Schedule, sheet s1.8, reinforcing for GB4 is shown as (6) #8 at bottom, while the structural calculations indicate that 2 rows of 7-#10 are required. Also, the structural calculations show GB4 as 36” wide x 36” high and the Schedule on sheet s1.8 shows this beam as 24” wide x 36” high. Please explain. Ref. 2018 IBC 107.2.1. In the Structural Calculations there is a GB5 which does not appear in the Concrete Grade Beam Schedule on sheet s1.8. Please explain. Ref. 2018 IBC 107.2.1. The Foundation Plan, sheet S2.0, shows cut lines along the south end of the plan. Where is the remainder of the foundation plan? Ref. 2018 IBC 107.2.1. On sheet s3.0, PT Concrete Floor Framing Plan Notes, please provide the sheet reference for keynote 15. Ref. 2018 IBC 107.2.1. On the Levels 2 and 3 Steel Stud Wall and Column Layout plan, sheets s3.0b and s3.1b, Level 4 Floor Framing Plan, sheet s3.2, Level 5 Floor Framing Plan, sheet s3.3, and Level 6 Floor Framing Plan, sheet s3.4, not all of the stacked bearing wall marks match what is shown on Wall Key Plans in the structural calculations. Please review east-west walls at gridlines D, K, the wall extending west from the north wall of elevator between gridlines G and H, north-south walls between gridlines 1 and 2, and between gridlines 2 and 3. Ref. 2018 IBC 107.2.1. On sheets s3.1b, s3.2, s3.3 and s3.4 there are north-south bearing walls to the west of the elevators that have the mark Wx but that are not included in the Bearing Wall Loads Schedule on sheet s1.8. Ref. 2018 IBC 107.2.1. Sheet s3.7 is missing from the drawing set or it is corrupted and cannot be viewed in Bluebeam. Ref. 2018 IBC 107.2.1. Please provide column key plans in the structural calculations so that required column sizes, reinforcing, etc. can be compared with the structural floor plans and schedules. Marks used in the structural calculations are not what is used in the drawing schedules. Ref. 2018 IBC 107.2.1. |
| 04/18/2019 | CTREVIL1 | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/25/2019 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | FROM: David Rivera PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: T19CM02310 - New Hotel (Commercial Use TCC Hotel) Foundation Only Plan Review (1st Review) 280 S. Church Avenue - PAD 5 TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 25, 2019 DUE DATE: April 30, 2019 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 plans for compliance with the approved development package. While the building footprint is consistent with the un-approved version of the DP as it relates to the zoning review purview (Building footprint, Height, square footage, site conditions etc) zoning cannot approve the plans until the 2nd Party and PDSD Commercial Plans reviewers have approved the plans. 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. (if available, include a copy of the approved and PDSD stamped version of the DP with the next building submittal.) 3. COMMENT: If any changes are necessary, due to the 2nd Party or 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 2nd Party and PDSD Commercial Plan Reviewers and zoning has verified consistency with the PDSD approved and stamp DP, the building plans can be approved by zoning. If you have any questions about this transmittal, Contact David Rivera on Tuesday or Wednesday at (520) 837-4957 or by email David.Rivera@tucsonaz.gov or contact Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov |
| 05/01/2019 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 05/06/2019 | PIMA COUNTY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Passed |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05/07/2019 | PMARTIN1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |