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 - T19CM03510
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/13/2019 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/19/2019 | ROBERT SHERRY | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Comment not addressed. [Initial comment: Provide calculations for the building envelope to demonstrate compliance with the energy code (e.g. COMcheck). Reference: Sections C103.2 and C401.2, International Energy Conservation Code 2018.] 2. Revise the sequence of operation for the restroom exhaust fan (EF-1) so that all of the air supplied to the restrooms will be exhausted (i.e. all of the air supplied to each restroom is to be exhausted during the hours of operation even if the lights are off). The exhausted air from the restrooms shall be limited to no more than 10% of any subsequent supply air stream. Reference: Section 403.2.1 (4), IMC 2018. Revise the sequence of operation for the kitchen exhaust fan (EF-2) to coincide with the hours of operation. (Note that the area of the appliance does not apply to the calculations.) Reference: Section 507.1, exception 2, IMC 2018. See "ASHRAE 62.1-2016" in Chapter 15, IMC 2018: Section 403.3.1.1.2.3.2, IMC 2018 is the only section of the ventilation calculations that references ASHRAE 62.1-2016. [Initial comment: The City of Tucson did not adopt ASHRAE Standard 62.1 for ventilation calculations and the 2018 IMC only references the ASHRAE Standard for the purpose of calculating the system ventilation efficiency (Ev). Provide calculations to show that the outdoor airflow rate of the ventilation system is in accordance with Section 403.3.1.1, IMC 2018.] |
| 08/19/2019 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 08/26/2019 | SAMUEL ROGERS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | FROM: Samuel Rogers PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: T19CM03510 - The Human Bean - Coffee Shop Building Plan Review (1st Review) - Related to DP19-0110 6295 E 22nd Street - C-2 Zoning TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 26, 2019 DUE DATE: September 5, 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 Building plans for compliance with the unapproved version of the development package. While the building footprint and the site revisions are consistent with the unapproved version of the DP as it relates to the zoning review purview (Building footprint, Height, square footage, site conditions etc.) zoning cannot approve the building plans until the PDSD Commercial Plans reviewers have approved the building plans. 2. COMMENT: Zoning will review the building plans on the next submittal to assure that any revisions made to the building plans do not affect zoning requirements and that all PDSD commercial plans reviewers have also approved the building plans. If you have any questions about this transmittal, Samuel Rogers at (520) 791-6932 or by email Samuel.Rogers@tucsonaz.gov or contact Steve Shields at (520) 837-4956 or email Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: as noted above |
| 08/29/2019 | ERIC NEWCOMB | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Previous Comment 7; Sheet AS102; Detail 15: Structural calculations for new light pole bases were not located in this submittal. Please provide. 2. Previous Comment 16; Structural Calculations; Page 495: Footing 1 design (2'-0" SQ x 12" THK) was not located on Sheet A100. Please verify the footing location. 3. Previous Comment 17; Structural Calculations (Page 497); Sheet A100 (Foundation Plan): This comment was not addressed. 4. Previous Comment 20; Structural Calculations (Page 505); Sheet A100 (Foundation Plan): The calculations for Footing 5 still indicate the footing is 5.0' x 5.0' x 24" Thick, while the footings on the plan changed to 54" SQ x 24" THK. Please clarify. 5. Previous Comment 22; General: The Special Inspection Certificate with Parts A and B completed was not provided in this submittal. 6. General: Please provide written responses to all review comments. |
| 09/05/2019 | DAN SANTA CRUZ | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Please address the following electrical plan review comments. Also provide a written response. REF; Exterior Lighting. 1. The quantity of exterior luminaires does not correlate with the quantity shown in the lumen calcs for Outdoor Lighting. Please clarify. 2. Verify that the light source color temperature output for the exterior lighting does not exceed 3500K, per section 402.1 of the OLC. 3. Verify that the shielding for the 'SD' and 'SC' luminaires are 'Full Cut Off' type. 4. Provide a note stating whether or not a special inspection is required for Outdoor Lighting, as required per section 104.2.2 and 106.2. OLC. Ref; 2018 IBC sec 107.2.1, 2017 NEC, 2012 Tucson/Pima County Outdoor Lighting Code, (OLC). |
| 09/06/2019 | JOHN VAN WINKLE | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1) After all outstanding building reviews have been completed and the development package has been approved, Engineering can approve the building plans 2) Coordinate with the development package to ensure roof drains scupper under pedestrian circulation paths |