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

Permit Number: T06CM06034
Parcel: 116300240

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: RESIDENTIAL BLDG/ZONING/ENGINE/NPPO

Permit Number - T06CM06034
Review Name: RESIDENTIAL BLDG/ZONING/ENGINE/NPPO
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/23/2007 ELIZABETH EBERBACH ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: January 16, 2007
TO: Troy Williams
SUBJECT: 3265 W Big Dipper Dr Site Review
REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach
ACTIVITY NUMBERS: T06CM06034, T06BU02776

Summary: Engineering Division has reviewed the site plan and does not recommend approval at this time.
Address the following comments for resubmittal.

SITE PLAN COMMENTS:
1) DS Sec.11-01.2.1.A: Site Plan may be labeled as Site/Grading Plan. Submit a grading permit application since a grading plan will be required for this project.
2) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.23: Provide topography that is labeled for FEMA datum (NGVD), or both NAVD and NGVD. Label FFE
3) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C.3: Clarify grading limits as the limits do not currently show as including the full building pad and do not appear to provide for sufficient space to grading construction. Show minimum disturbance in Erosion Hazard Setback or provide drainage report substantiating encroachment. Revise grading limits to show full proposed disturbance area. It may be necessary to indicate heavy duty construction fence to restrict construction activity along the south grading limit boundary.
4) DS Sec.3-01.4.4.B: Provide the following cross sections for clarification:
a) Provide a section at the rear fill condition proposed at the southwest corner of the building. Show extents of runout for fill or terrace system.
b) Provide a cross section of the front of the lot with the FFE of the proposed building, proposed driveway with grades, and elevations at the street.
5) Tucson Code Sec.26-11.A: If there is any encroachment to the Floodplain, a floodplain use permit will be required.
6) Tucson Code 29-15: The plan must show that all earthwork and disturbance does not encroach the ERZ or WASH restricted areas. Upon review of resubmittal, it will be determined whether the proposed project will meet the ERZ or WASH limits.
7) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C: Address the following General Notes comments:
a) Remove reference to Town of Marana on notes 8 and 12. Reference City of Tucson Development Standards 11-01 for grading standards on the grading plan.
b) Add that the project will comply with City of Tucson Land Use Code Sections 2.8.1 Hillside Development Zone (HDZ), and 2.8.6 Environmental Resource Zone (ERZ), and Tucson Code Chapter 29 Article VIII Watercourse Amenities, Safety and Habitat Ordinance (WASH).
c) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.17: Add estimated cut/fill in cubic yards to the plan.
d) Add the following notes to the grading plan:
i) CALL FOR PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING. FOR A DSD ENGINEERING INSPECTION, CALL IVR (740-6970), OR SCHEDULE WITH A CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE AT THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, OR CONTACT DSD ENGINEERING AT 791-5550 EXTENSION 2101, OR SCHEDULE INSPECTIONS ONLINE AT: HTTP://WWW.CI.TUCSON.AZ.US/DSD/ONLINE_SERVICES/ONLINE_PERMITS/ONLINE_PERMITS.HTML
ii) A COPY OF THE GRADING PLAN AND GRADING PERMIT SHALL BE KEPT AT THE SITE AT ALL TIMES, UNTIL FINAL GRADING APPROVAL.
iii) ANY REVISION TO THE GRADING PLAN MAY REQUIRE A RE-SUBMITTAL OF A REVISED GRADING PLAN FOR REVIEW. CONTACT DSD ENGINEERING AT 791-5550 TO DISCUSS CHANGES IN GRADING DESIGN.
iv) IF GRADING CONSTRUCTION IS EXPECTED TO LAST LONGER THAN THE EXPIRATION DATE OF THE GRADING PERMIT, CONTACT DSD TO RENEW/EXTEND THE GRADING PERMIT. IF FINAL GRADING INSPECTION HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED BEFORE THE GRADING PERMIT EXPIRES, AND THE PERMIT HAS NOT BEEN RENEWED, ADDITIONAL FEES AND REVIEWS MAY BE REQUIRED.
v) SEPARATE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS ARE REQUIRED FOR ANY WALLS.
vi) THE PERMITEE SHALL NOTIFY THE DSD WHEN THE GRADING OPERATION IS READY FOR FINAL GRADING INSPECTION. FINAL GRADING APPROVAL SHALL NOT BE GIVEN UNTIL ALL WORK, INCLUDING INSTALLATION OF ALL DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS AND THEIR PERMANENT PROTECTIVE DEVICES, AND ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES HAVE BEEN COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED GRADING PLAN AND GRADING PERMIT, AND ALL CONDITIONS OF PERMIT ARE COMPLETED.
vii) THERE SHALL BE NO DISTURBANCE OUTSIDE OF THE DISTURBANCE/GRADING LIMITS.
8) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C: Remove notes regarding slope treatments A through D. Add note regarding and rip rap slope with filter fabric shall have handplaced rip rap per HDZ requirements. Any slopes steeper than 3:1(H:V) shall require geotechnical report or submit subdivision geotechnical report to justify any slope grades / treatment notes.
9) For resubmittal, provide 4 copies of the revised Site/Grading Plan and any other supporting documents, with a response letter.

I can be reached at 791-5550, ext.2204 if you have questions.

Elizabeth Eberbach, PE
Civil Engineer
Engineering Division
Development Services Department
01/31/2007 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Corral Residence
3265 W. Big Dipper Dr.
T06CM06034
Site Plan (1st Review)

TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 31, 2007

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with redlines and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed.

1. This site plan was reviewed for compliance with the City of Tucson Development Standards (D.S.) and Land Use Code (LUC).

2. Provide a note on the plan that states "THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE".

3. Provide a note on the plan that states "ALL PROPOSED SITE WORK, INCLUDING GRADING, WILL COMPLY WITH DEVELOPMENT STANDARD 9-01.0".

4. Provide a note on the plan that states "ALL EXPOSED EXTERIOR WALLS AND ROOFS OF STRUCTURES, RETAINING WALLS, AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, EXCEPT SATELLITE DISHES, SHALL BE EARTH TONE IN COLOR AND WILL BLEND WITH THE PREDOMINANT NATURAL COLORS FOUND ON THE PARCEL. SATELLITE DISHES MAY BE BLACK".

5. Provide a note on the plan that states "THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH CITY OF TUCSON HDZ GRADING, CUT AND FILL, VEGETATION, RETENTION AND SLOPE STABILIZATION REQUIREMENTS PER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 9-04.3.1 AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 9-04.3.2 & LAND USE CODE SECTION 2.8.1. ALL AREAS AFFECTED BY GRADING IN ALLOWABLE AREAS WILL BE REFEGETATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH C.O.T. STANDARDS".

6. Indicate on the plan the zoning on the property "R1 RCP-4" and the surrounding properties "R1 RCP-4".

7. Provide a note on the plan "ALL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, STORAGE AND PARKING AREAS ARE TO BE SCREENED WITH MATERIAL COMPATIBLE WITH THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.

8. Provide a note on the plan "ALL OUTDOOR LIGHTING WILL BE DIRECTED DOWNWARD AND AWAY FROM SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS AND NEIGHBORHOODS.

9. This site plan cannot be approved until the grading plan (T06BU02776) is approved by all Development Services agencies.


If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 791-5608 ext. 1180.

C:\planning\site\t06cm06034.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site/grading plan and additional requested documents
12/22/2006 LINHART PETERSEN POERS ASSOC. 2ND PARTY REVIEW REVIEW Denied December 21, 2006 CITY OF TUCSON - FIRST CHECK
Tucson Appl. No. T06CM06034
Bureau Veritas Project No. 01006-161113
Mr. Troy Williams
4561 W. Annabell St.
Tucson, Arizona 85741


Re: Plan Review: Corral Residence
Address: 3265 W. Big Dipper Drive



Dear Mr. Williams:

Bureau Veritas North America has completed a review of the following documents on behalf of the City of Tucson:

Plans: One (1) copy of plans (13 sheets, 1 through 13) no dates and no stamps.

Structural Calculations: None submitted for review.



These documents were reviewed only for their conformance to the provisions of the 2003 International Building Codes (i.e., State of Arizona and Tucson amended 2003 IRC, 2003 IMC, 2002 NEC and 2003 IPC).

Please submit an itemized response letter and required number of complete and revised documents with all revisions clouded.



Sincerely,

BUREAU VERITAS NORTH AMERICA



Shelley Knuffke
ICC Plans Examiner








SK:pc S:\Tucson\01006-1610113pc1.doc
Enclosures

A. The following plan review comments are based on the City of Tucson Building Regulations and referred to the 2003 International Residential Code.

Please respond in writing to each comment by marking the attached comment list or creating a response letter. Indicate which detail, specification, or calculation shows the requested information. Your complete and clear responses will expedite the re-check and hopefully, approval of this project. Thank you for your assistance.

These plan review comments are based on building code items only. If site-related comments are applicable to this project, they will be generated by others (e.g., County Engineering, Public Works, Health, etc.).


GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:
Sheet C-1 states plans drawn per 2000 IRC.
Provide an accurate index to drawings on the first sheet of the set. Sheet 1D not in plan set.

FLOOR PLAN COMMENTS:
Locate skylights. IRC Section 106.
Provide the following note: A separate insulation inspection prior to drywall or an insulation certificate will be required at time of final. IRC Section N1101.3.1.
Openings between the garage and residence shall be equipped with solid wood doors not less than 1 3/8-inch thick, or shall be 20-minute fire-rated doors and shall be maintained self-closing and self-latching. Amendment to IRC Section R309.1.

FIREPLACE REQUIREMENTS:
Factory built fireplaces (zero-clearance) shall be listed by an approved listing agency. Specify make and model number and provide the approval number of the testing agency.
For zero-clearance fireplaces, indicate hearth size and materials.

ELEVATION COMMENTS:
The chimney shall extend at least 2 feet higher (minimum 3 feet at roofline) than any portion of the roof within 10 feet. IRC Table R1003.1.

BUILDING CROSS SECTION COMMENTS:
Indicate by drawing and/or notes, how insulation meets the requirements of IRC Section N1101.2



ROOF PLAN COMMENTS:
Provide ICBO Evaluation Report number and manufacturer of all concrete or clay-type tile roofing.
Note and specify all roof slopes. IRC Chapter 9.
Provide attic ventilation calculations for all concealed attic spaces; include required and provided net free ventilation area. Also, indicate the type and location of attic ventilation. Provide the following note, if applicable: "Where eave or cornice vents are installed insulation shall not block the free flow of air. A minimum of 1 inch space shall be provided between the insulation and roof sheathing at the location of the vent”. IRC Section R806.

FOUNDATION PLAN COMMENTS:
Note on the drawings the allowable soil bearing pressure used in the design of the footings.
Provide note: Footings shall be on undisturbed soil or approved fill. IRC Section R403.
Foundation plates and sills shall be bolted to the foundation with minimum 1/2 inch bolts at 6 feet or less on center and embedded a minimum 7 inches into the foundation. IRC Section R403.1.6.
Locate and specify all anchor bolt spacing and post anchors on the foundation plan.

FRAMING PLAN COMMENTS:
Sheet 5 states that trusses will be designed per 2000 IRC.
Indicate that all sills and sleepers that rest on concrete are to be of an approved species and grade of lumber, pressure preservative treated per IRC Section R323.
Specify design criteria: floor and roof live and dead loads. IRC Section R301.

TRUSS SYSTEMS: Trusses can be submitted as a “Deferred Submittal”. However, they must be submitted and approved prior to their fabrication.

MECHANICAL COMMENTS:
Provide a minimum 4 inch diameter moisture exhaust vent for clothes dryer, or as required by the clothes dryer’s listing and the manufacturers installation instructions provided that is to be presented prior to construction. IRC Section M1501.1.

Show condensate line and secondary condensate line. IRC Section M1411.3 and M1411.3.1.

PLUMBING COMMENTS:
Provide a plumbing floor plan showing all plumbing fixtures, supply, waste and gas lines. Indicate sizes of all plumbing lines, vents, cleanouts, etc. Provide isometric diagrams as needed to clearly convey the design. These drawings must be incorporated onto the plans. No small-sized sheets attached to the drawings will be allowed.

Provide a gas isometric with length of line (horizontal and vertical) to each appliance, BTU demand of each appliance, size of each branch, total demand and size of the meter.
Note that drainage piping serving fixtures which have flood level rims located below the elevation of the next upstream manhole cover of the public sewer shall be protected from backflow of sewage by a backwater valve. IRC Section P3008.
Provide a detail for island sink venting.

ELECTRICAL COMMENTS:
Sheet 9 states electric plan drawn per 2000 IRC.
Receptacle outlets for ranges and clothes dryers shall be a 3-pole with ground type. Four-wire, grounding-type flexible cords will be required for connection of ranges and clothes dryers. The bonding jumper shall not be connected between the neutral terminal and the frame of the appliance. IRC Section E3808.
Provide at least one weatherproof receptacle outlet, not more than 6 feet 6 inches above grade and GFCI protected, at the front and back of each dwelling. IRC Sections E3801.7 & E3802.3. Back porch.
Provide a receptacle outlet in hallways 10 feet or more in length. IRC Section E3801.10.
Fixtures, fittings, boxes and receptacles located in damp or wet locations shall be "listed" to be suitable for such location. IRC Sections E3805.10, E3902.8, E3902.9, E3903.8.

If you have any questions regarding the above comments, please contact Shelley Knuffke at (520) 576-8400 between 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., M-F.
12/26/2006 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Denied 1. Grading plan approval is necessary to continue review; each lot within Wildcat Pass requires a separate overlay review and approval for ERZ, HDZ, NPPO, and WASH.

2. Submit approved documents for reference. The application will be reviewed for compliance only when the approved documents are included in the submittal.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
02/12/2007 DELMA ROBEY OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
02/12/2007 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed