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: RESIDENTIAL BLDG/WWM
Permit Number - T09CM00164
Review Name: RESIDENTIAL BLDG/WWM
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/26/2009 | GERRY KOZIOL | WWM | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 01/30/2009 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL FROM: Michael St.Paul, Planning Technician PROJECT: T09CM00164 3540 West Tiny Bird Court New SFR in R-1 RCP & HDZ TRANSMITTAL: January 29, 2009 COMMENTS: Please attach a response letter with the next submittal, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1) This site is located in the Quail Ridge Subdivision, a Residential Cluster Project (RCP) of Starr Pass. This subdivision is located it the Hillside Development Zone (HDZ) and this lot is identified as being subject to CDRC review (TP, Sheet 1, General Notes: F.4). The zoning is R-1 RCP4. 2) All text and dimensions must be a minimum of twelve point (12pt) type or one-eight inch (1/8") lettering. 3) Provide the correct legal description at every place the lot and number is identified (Quail Ridge Lot 34). It is identified as Starr Pass Lot 34 in the large portion of the title block. 4) Clearly dimension elevation drawings from the lowest ground level of the building to the highest point of the flat roof, which is the building's height (See LUC Illustration 2.8.1.8). The maximum building height is twenty-four (24) for residential development in the HDZ (LUC Section 2.8.1.8.A). 5) Clearly delineate and dimension the curb and sidewalk on the plot plan (See Tentative Plate, Typical A/5). Be certain to include the on street visitor parking space on the plot plan (See the Tentative Plat, Sheet 2 and Typical H/5). 6) It appears that an HDZ CCRC Overlay review may be necessary. This requirement shall be determined by the engineering reviewer with the plot plan and grading plan reviews (LUC Section 2.8.8.3.B). 7) Please be aware that additional comments may be forthcoming relative to additional information and further submittals. |
| 02/10/2009 | ELIZABETH LEIBOLD | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: February 10, 2009 TO: Donald Clemons SUBJECT: Quail Ridge Lot 34 Engineering SFR Review Submittal ADDRESS: 3540 W Tiny Bird Ct LOCATION: Quail Ridge lot 34 T14S R13E Section 18, Ward 1 REVIEWER: Elizabeth Leibold ACTIVITY NUMBER: T09CM00164 SUMMARY: The SFR site plan submittal was received and reviewed. Engineering does not recommend approval of the site plan until the following comments are addressed. SITE PLAN AND GRADING COMMENTS: 1) Development Standards (DS) Section 9-04.3, LUC 2.8.1: The fill area at the rear / northeast portion of the lot has not been clearly defined on the site plan. Slopes that are steeper than 3:1(H:V) shall conform to Hillside Development grading standards; it is imperative that design for the building pad slopes conform to this section. The northeast slope is excessive and indicate that the runout could exceed the design shown. For the rear slope, the 12 feet of fill needs to be reconsidered for benching and any geotechnical recommendations, to blend with the natural appearance of the site or lot and the surrounding terrain. Revise planview and provide cross sections that clarify and shows the revised rear slope configuration. 2) DS Sec.11-01: Provide the following other clarification/notations on the grading plan: a) DS Sec. 11-01.10.5: Clarify proposed slopes at southeast and northwest side yard areas and show with details how stormwater runoff flow is intercepted and label erosion protection. Provide details or sections. Capacity for interceptors shall have a minimum of 30-in wide and 12-in deep. b) Proposed slopes exceed 2:1(H:V). Rear slope contours are drawn incorrectly and must match minimum geotechnical slope recommendations - revise. c) Per IBC, 10-ft at 5% earthen grade is required at minimum around foundations, unless the geotechnical addenda supports other design. The rear slope appears to be less than 5-feet from structure. Clarify details to provide positive drainage from structure and sufficient setback at retaining systems. d) Provide section callouts for all section details. e) Address the following driveway comments: i) Label elevation at driveway entrance at street. ii) Label material for driveway. iii) Provide spot elevations in driveway directing runoff away from garage and around the proposed house. f) Address the following grading limit comments: i) DS Sec.9-04.3.1.A.2: Label locations within the yard area for construction staging areas, construction materials, wall or slope runout/construction, and vehicle parking. ii) Label any construction staging area or other disturbance areas that will be revegetated or improved as noted. g) Address the following general note comments: i) Project is located within Starr Pass, in the Quail Ridge subdivision; clarify on title block. ii) Clarify how allowable grading limits were derived. Assure the square footage of disturbance reflects the actual graded area. iii) Add a general note stating that materials and / or construction equipment may not be stockpiled or parked outside of grading limits at any time. iv) Add a Grading Note to state that all grading construction work shall conform to IBC Chapter 18, City of Tucson DS Sec.11-01, Hillside Development Zone requirements DS Sec.9-04.3, and Terracon Geotechnical Engineering Report and any addenda for this site. v) Check fill quantity proposed as this seems low. vi) Add a note that clarifies that separate building permit applications are required for all walls. vii) DS Sec.9-04.3.3.A: Add that all rip rapped slopes shall have handplaced stone with filter fabric. viii) DS Sec.9-04.3.1.A.2: Add note that in order to prevent encroachment into the natural areas, temporary fencing may be necessary to be installed where the designated natural areas abut construction areas. ix) Add note that wall openings shall be provided for surface drainage from yard or patio areas. Any outlet areas will need splash pads for erosion protection. x) Add note that states that if grading construction is expected to last longer than the expiration date of the grading permit, contact City of Tucson Development Services Department 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. xi) Add note to call for DSD Engineering Pre-construction meeting. xii) Add note that 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. xiii) Add note that there shall be no disturbance or stockpiling outside of the approved Grading Limits as shown on the Grading Plan. xiv) Add note stating that the Grading Permit, geotechnical documents, as well as the copy of the Grading Plan, shall be kept at the site at all times, until Final Grading approval. xv) Clarify elevations as top and toe of retaining wall structures, clarifying any additional screen wall. If screen wall and retaining walls are at same location, provide section detail with dimensions from toe and ground to top of retaining and top of screen wall. 3) Show all lot 34 linework as depicted on the Final Plat (see attached). Assure the easements are delineated and labeled including the drainage easement at north boundary. 4) Since a grading permit will be required for this project, you may submit the site plan as a Site/Grading Plan and provide all the information on the Site/Grading Plan sheets. Label sheets 1 and 1.1 as "Site/Grading Plan" or submit separate grading plan sheets. 5) For resubmittal, provide two copies of the revised plans, two copies of geotechnical report and any addenda, and response letter. If you have questions or would like to set up a meeting, call me at 837-4934. Elizabeth Leibold, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Development Services Department |
| 02/13/2009 | DAVE WITT | BUILDING-RESIDENTIAL | REVIEW | Denied | PLAN CHECK COMMENTS - PROJECT #T09CM00164 2/20/09 3540 W. TINY BIRD CT. PLAN REVIEW FOR THE ABOVE REFERENCED STRUCTURE 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, HIGHLIGHTING ANY CHANGES, ALONG WITH A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO EACH OF THE NOTED ITEMS INDICATING ACTION TAKEN. SCOPE OF REVIEW: THE SCOPE OF THIS PLAN REVIEW COVERS ARCHITECTURAL, PLUMBING, MECHANICAL, IECC AND ELECTRICAL CODES. ALL CODE REFERENCES ARE TO THE 2006 IRC AND STATE PLUMBING CODE. 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 REQUIREMENTS: 1. ALL PLANS SHALL BE LEGIBLE AND A SCALE NO SMALLER THAN ¼ INCH = 1-FOOT SHALL BE USED FOR ALL FLOOR PLANS, FRAMING PLANS AND ELEVATIONS. DETAILS &CROSS SECTIONS AT A MINIMUM 3/8 INCH = 1-FOOT SCALE. 2. ALL CORRECTIONS AND REVISIONS SHALL BE MADE ON THE ORIGINAL TRACINGS AND TWO NEW SETS OF PRINTS OR (1) SEPIA & (1) BLUE LINE SHALL BE RETURNED ALONG WITH ALL REDLINE PRINTS. 3. PEN OR PENCIL CORRECTIONS ON FINAL PRINTS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTABLE. TO AVOID DELAYS ENSURE ALL CORRECTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE, ARE COMPLETE AND HAVE BEEN COORDINATED ON ALL APPLICABLE DETAILS AND NOTES. SITE PLAN: 1. SITE PLAN NOTE #1 / 1 ; THE FFE NOTED IN THE CENTER OF THE HOUSE DIFFERS FROM THAT MENTIONED IN NOTE #1. 2. SITE PLAN NOTE #9 / 1 ; PLEASE CHANGE PIMA COUNTY TO CITY OF TUCSON. FOUNDATION PLANS: 1. PROVIDE "INCLUSIVE HOME DESIGN ENTRANCE. 2. PROVIDE A DESCRIPTION OF THE F-1 AND F-2 FOOTINGS. IDENTIFY ALL FOOTINGS ON THE PLAN. 3. FIREPLACE FOOTING ? PROVIDE CROSS SECTION OF THE FIREPLACE, HEARTH, MANTLE, REINFORCEMENT/FRAMEING, …..(THIS NOTE SHOULD BE IN THE NOTES AND DETAIL SECTION OF THIS REPORT). FLOOR PLANS: 1. PLEASE DIMENSION THE SHOWERS. P2708.1 2. PROVIDE OPENINGS ADEQUATE FOR EGRESS FROM MASTER BEDROOM. R310 3. PROVIDE WINDOW FOR STUDY OR COMPLY WITH R303.1 EXCEPTION #1. 4. FIREPLACES: - INDICATE FIREPLACE LOCATION, HEARTH SIZE AND MATERIALS. - FOR MASONRY FIREPLACES, SHOW CROSS-SECTION AND PROVIDE FOOTING STRUCTURAL PLANS: 1. PROVIDE MANUFACTURER'S DATA FOR PRE-FAB TRUSSES. TRUSS DATA MUST BE SIGNED, DATED AND WET-SEALED BY AN ENGINEER WHO IS REGISTERED IN ARIZONA. TRUSS CALCULATIONS SHALL BE CROSS-REFERENCED TO THE FLOOR PLANS. ALSO, THE ENGINEER OF RECORD SHALL REVIEW AND "SHOP DRAWING" STAMP APPROVAL ON TRUSS DATA. 2. SPECIFY DETAILS FOR BRACEING OF TRUSSES. 3. PROVIDE SPECIAL INSPECTION FORM FOR THE USE OF EPOXY PER DETAILS 12 AND 13 ON SHEET 7. ELEVATIONS: 1. REAR ELEVATION / 5 ; SHOULD THE FIXED WINDOWS OVER THE PORCH BE 6020 INSTEAD OF 2060 ? 2. FRONT AND REAR ELEVATIONS / 5 ; 3/8" OSB IS SPECIFIED AS SHEAR PANELS. DOES THIS CONFLICT WITH THE ENGINEER'S REQUIREMENT FOR STRUC 1 ? SECTIONS - DETAILS - MISC. NOTES: 1. A / 8 ; PROVIDE 16, 17, 18 ON SHEET 7. 2. PLEASE PROVIDE A SCUPPER DETAIL INCLUDING SIZE. PLUMBING PLANS: 1. GAS DEMAND TABLE / 9 ; THE GAS DEMAND TABLE LISTS THE INPUT RATE OF FURNACE #1 AS 75,000 BUT THE MECHANICAL PLAN LISTS IT AT 100,000 BTUH. PLEASE RESOLVE. 2. PLEASE SIZE THE PLUMBING VENTS IN THE MASTER BATH AND BATH #3 3. PLUMBING FIXTURE SCHEDULE / 9 ; PLEASE CHECK THE FIXTURE UNITS PER FIXTURE. THEY DIFFER FROM THE CODE. 4. PLEASE CHECK THE GAS SIZES AFTER THE FIRST "T", TO THE COOK TOP. 5. PLEASE CHECK THE WATER DISTRIBUTION SIZES. 6. PLUMBING NOTE 4 / 9 ; PLEASE ADJUST THE FLOW RATES TO COINSIDE WITH THOSE IN TABLE P2903.1 7. PLUMBING NOTE 4 / 9 ; PLEASE REFER CLEAN OUTS TO COINSIDE WITH P3005.2 8. PLEASE CHANGE THE CODE REFERENCE FROM THE UPC TO THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE ON SHEET 1 BENEATH "GRADING". ELECTRICAL PLANS: 1. PLEASE CHECK MATH IN LOAD CALCULATIONS. 2. PLEASE ADJUST RECEPTACLE LOCATIONS TO BE WITHIN 6' OF DOOR OPENINGS, FIREPLACE, AND END OF CABINETS. E3801.2.1 3. SOME DEVICES HAVEN'T BEEN CIRCUITED. PLEASE ASSIGN TO CIRCUITS. 4. PROVIDE TWO 20 AMP CIRCUITS TO SERVE THE KITCHEN COUNTER TOPS E3603.2 5. ELECTRICAL PLAN NOTE 4 / 11 ; PLEASE SPECIFY A LIGHT FIXTURE LISTED AS APPROVED FOR USE IN WET AREAS FOR USE IN TUB AND SHOWER ENCLOSURES. E3903.8 6. ELECTRICAL NOTE 7 / 11 ; PLEASE CHANGE PIMA COUNTY TO CITY OF TUCSON. 7. PROVIDE ARC FAULT PROTECTION FOR BEDROOM OUTLETS. E3802.12 IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR ASSIGNED PLANS EXAMINER: DAVE WITT @ 837-4910 |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 02/23/2009 | CPIERCE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |