Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - T06CM00782
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/24/2006 | STANTEC | 2ND PARTY REVIEW | REVIEW | Denied | May 24, 2006 To: City of Tucson Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue, First Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701 Attn: Steven Long, Acting Building Official Cc: Michael & Connie Olivas 2110 E. Howard Stravanue Tucson, Arizona 85713 Re: Olivas Residence - Additions to existing residence City of Tucson No. T06CM00782 Stantec Project No. 816-30015-01 (078) Plan review for the above referenced project has been completed. This letter reflects comments to be addressed. In order to facilitate a shorter back-check time, we request that you please provide revised plans and calculations, clouding any changes, along with a written response to each of the noted items indicating the action taken. SCOPE OF REVIEW: The scope of this review covers Architectural, Structural, Plumbing, Mechanical, Model Energy and Electrical codes. All code references are to the 2003 International Residential Code (IRC). Applicants may reference the 2003 UPC for plumbing. All features were checked only to the extent allowed by the submittals provided. All portions of this project are assumed to meet or will meet other departmental requirements, conditions and concerns before permit approval. GENERAL: The architectural site plan master and the plan backgrounds for the electrical, mechanical and plumbing must all be coordinated and match for the utility locations. Therefore, coordinate and depict all the utility relocations of the water, sewer, gas and electric as they are affected by the additional area. Not addressed throughout the set. No coordination on the electric service is noted. No coordination on relocations or extensions of existing utility connections to the existing house for gas and water were denoted nor depicted as previously requested. Please provide notation on this set of drawings stipulating the new sewer run for the addition will meet [2003 UPC Sec’s 708.0 & 718.1] min. slope of ¼” per foot or slope certification shall be presented to the building inspector from a registered land surveyor before approval of the pipe laid. Not addressed. ARCHITECTURAL: Provide an emergency escape or rescue window (or door) from all bedrooms [2003 IRC Sec. 310]: Maximum sill height of 44”. Minimum net clear area of opening of 5.7 square feet. Minimum net clear dimensions of opening of 24” height by 20” width. The applicant is responsible to depict the method and choice to provide code compliance. The submitted documents depict non-compliant windows in bedrooms #2 and #3, which cannot be recognized as sleeping rooms until appropriate changes have been made. Provide access to each separate attic and crawlspace that exceeds 30 square feet. Designate locations on the drawings. Openings shall not be less than 22” by 30”. The attic access shall provide a minimum of 30” of headroom, and shall be located in a hallway or readily accessible space [2003 IRC Sec. R807]. The area chosen is within the existing roof structure and the existing web configuration may not afford the applicant the required access clearance area for placing equipment in the attic. See structural comments, etc. Show calculation of attic space ventilation area required and note the location of all vents needed to comply [2003 IRC Sec. R806.2, Sec. R408 or Sec. N1102.1.7]. The code specifically references the theory of high – low venting with different amounts of ventable area required by which format to compliance is chosen. The framing plan sheet 4 and the truss package are in conflict with one another. The location and feasibility of the denote but not depicted ridge venting needs to be shown. STRUCTURAL: The stabilization detail B/5 does not depict adequate penetration, length of bar nor thickness of slab to be an effective joint per typical structural depictions received from registrants. Modifications suggested. Not addressed. The framing plan does not depict the location, wood bearing area required or use of bearing posts and their connections at the denoted headers and girder truss from the roof framing plan submitted. Denote all on plan. The framing plan sheet 4 does not match the submitted truss package. Cross-sections on sheet 4 do not represent the configurations of the truss package nor the over-framing configuration proposed. Provide manufacturer’s calculations and data for pre-fabricated trusses upon next submittal. Truss calculations must be signed, dated and wet-sealed by an engineer who is registered in Arizona. Truss calculations shall be cross-referenced to the framing plan. The applicant is required to provide missing detail information on how the over-framing is provided. The applicant is required to detail the methods to support the trusses as denoted upon the truss profiles. (Typ. Ref: note #4 truss profile A06G, etc.) The applicant is required to provide details of the conditions at the new and existing trusses attachments. PLUMBING PLANS: The new location of the existing gas water heater is a code violation to 2003 IRC Chapter 24 Appliance location. Code compliance is required. MECHANICAL PLANS: The amount of duct clearance required within the prefab wood truss webs needs to be verified upon the next submittal. The applicant has incompletely denoted the mechanical system. If this is to be a split system, then the existing attic must provide the clearance and service area within the attic truss webs for placement of the fan coil box service platform or access and the ducts. Not depicted accurately. Denote the sizes of the mechanical rooftop unit’s SDTR & RDTR and size of filter frame. The applicant has incompletely denoted the mechanical system. If this is to be a roof package unit then the duct penetrations are denoted as larger then the allowable clearance between the truss members. The applicant did not address the location and size of the return air. Not depicted accurately. ELECTRICAL PLANS: Designate the location and circuit of all required light fixtures, receptacle outlets, power outlets and switches. Indicate the location of all air conditioning and heating units, air handlers, compressors, source of power and disconnects. Not depicted accurately, reference the mechanical comments. Indicate the location of convenience outlet and light switch for heating and air conditioning equipment [2003 IRC Sec. M1305.1.3, M1305.1.3.1, E3801.11 and E3803.4]. Not depicted accurately, reference the mechanical comments. Provide an exterior light at each exterior door to grade per [2003 IRC Sec. E3803.3]. Not depicted accurately all doors existing and new require a switched light. Provide an electrical service riser location upon the plan and site plan. Not depicted accurately, the site plan denotes overhead service and riser is for an underground service. The City of Tucson submittal package shall include two (2) – copies of all exterior light fixtures compliant to the Outdoor Lighting Code for the location area within Pima County the addition is to be built. Not depicted accurately, all doors existing and new require a switched light. These shall then appear on the lighting calculation and fixture cut sheets are required. Not found. MODEL ENERGY CODE: No comments to address. -End of Review- If you have any questions, please call (520) 750-7474. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Inc. Steven L. Nygren, R.A. Senior Plans Examiner SLN:sln |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 06/01/2006 | AMERY KLAPPERT | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 06/01/2006 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |