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 - BLDG/FIRE/ZONING/ENG
Permit Number - T22CM00654
Review Name: COMMERCIAL - BLDG/FIRE/ZONING/ENG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/31/2022 | PCAMARE1 | OIP | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 02/15/2022 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 02/18/2022 | JVINCEN1 | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/25/2022 | SAFEBUILT | 2ND PARTY REVIEW | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Activity Number: T22CM00654 GENERAL: Provide written responses to all review comments. Provide a complete plan set. Provide additional documents as requested by review staff. STRUCTURAL REVIEW COMMENTS: Denied 1. Provide Structural Calculations for Foundations and Roof Framing for Control Building and for Foundation of the Proposed Steel Tank per Section 1601.1 of International Building Code 2018. 2. Provide Wind Load Calculations for the Building and Proposed Steel Tank per Section 1609 of International Building Code 2018. 3. Provide Seismic Calculations for the Building and Proposed Steel Tank per Section 1613 of International Building Code 2018. 4. All Calculations shall be sealed and signed by Professional Engineer registered with State of Arizona per Section 107.1 of International Building Code 2018. 5. Provide Geotechnical Report for the proposed project per International Building Code 2018, Section 1803.1. 6. Provide Structural Calculations for Base Plate thickness and Anchor Bolts Design for the proposed Tank support. 7. Refer to General Structural Notes Drawing 18 of 36 and Control Building Structural Notes 22 of 36. There is discrepancy regarding Foundation Notes on these drawings. Investigate and make changes as needed. Submit a response letter addressing these correction items and provide bubbles on the revisions to the drawings. BUILDING REVIEW COMMENTS: Approved MECHANICAL REVIEW COMMENTS: Conditionally Approved Approved/subject to field inspection ELECTRICAL REVIEW COMMENTS Conditionally Approved Sheet # 26: Comment only: Feeders to the three 30 amp disconnects are #2 AWG which are too large to fit into a typical 30 amp disconnect which typically only accept up to #4 AWG wire. PLUMBING REVIEW COMMENTS: Denied 1). Is this a private potable booster station or does this station belong & controlled by a local utility authority? Does Tucson require a Plumbing review for this type of pump station, the permit fees & inspection sheet have plumbing marked as NO? |
| 03/02/2022 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 03/02/2022 | SSHIELD1 | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Passed | |
| 03/18/2022 | SBLOOD1 | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Passed |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03/18/2022 | VVERA1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |