Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - T22CM05810
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/26/2022 | PAUL CAMARENA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | FROM: Paul Camarena PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: T22CM05810 722 N Tucson Blvd – R-1 Addition (2nd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE:?September 26, 2022 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. 1.COMMENT: Clearly show the property line on the plan and provide lot line dimensions. It appears that the site wall is in encroaching on the Right of way please clarify. 2.COMMENT: This comment is still applicable “The perimeter yard setback dimensions are not shown correctly and should be drawn from the face of wall to the property line. Once shown correctly additional comments may be forth coming.” 3.COMMENT. Provide a legal description on the plot plan. “FAIRMOUNT LOT 10 BLK 6” 4.COMMENT: Provide the zoning for all adjacent parcels on the plan. 5. COMMENT: Clarify if the outdoor patio on the north portion of the property has a roof. Show setback to the patio type structure to the south and west. 6. COMMENT: Draw dimension and label the height of the new structure measured from design grade to top of wall. Clarify if the on elevation D, if the portion on the west is to be proposed, since it has a different height then the existing building. 7. COMMENT: Please adhere to UDC section 6.6.2.I. The maximum height of a wall or fence within a perimeter yard shall be six feet; however, the wall or fence may be higher than six feet, but no higher than ten feet, Provide a detail showing the wall height. 8. COMMENT: The minimum setback is the greater of six (6) feet, or two-thirds (2/3) the height of the structure’s wall facing each interior property line (Table 6.3-2.A). Based on a wall height of 10’-0” the required perimeter yard setback from the proposed addition to the north and south property line is 6’-9”, the proposed setback is 4’-0”. A Design Development Option (DDO) will need to be processed and approved to reduce the setback. DDO application and requirements can be found at: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/pdsd/forms/DDO_for_Setback_and_Height_UDC_8.11.20.pdf. A DDO is a separate submittal from the building plan and shall be submitted at: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd-filedrop, using the Submission Type “Zoning Administration”. If you have questions about the DDO application or process please contact Mark Castro at Mark.Castro@tucsonaz.gov. If you have any questions about this transmittal, Contact Paul Camarena at (520)837-4986 or by email Paul.Camarena@tucsonaz.gov |
| 10/06/2022 | SAFEBUILT | 2ND PARTY REVIEW | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Activity Number: T22CM05810 GENERAL: Provide written responses to all review comments. Provide a complete plan set. Provide additional documents as requested by review staff. STRUCTURAL REVIEW COMMENTS: Approved BUILDING REVIEW COMMENTS: Denied Note: All references are to the 2018 International Residential Code Building Comments: • Stairway to upper deck (Sheet A5): ? Stair tread width shall be not less than 10 inches. 6 inches is proposed. Section R311.7.5.2 ? Walk line of stair exceeds a 2% slope. Section R311.7.7 ? Confirm handrail height is 34-38”. It is not currently dimensioned. Sections R311.7.8.1 and R312.1.2 ? Confirm handrail terminals/returns at the top and bottom of flight will conform to Section R311.7.8.4. ? Demonstrate compliance with grip size/graspability requirements. Section R311.7.8.5 ? Demonstrate the opening limitations on the handrail/guardrail will comply with Section R312.1.3. • Confirm that window type W02 (designated as sliding) will qualify as the required emergency escape and rescue opening for the corner bedroom. The minimum opening dimensions are not shown. Section R310.2.1 • The smoke alarm serving the master suite must be at least 3’ horizontally from the doorway into the bathroom. Section R314.3 • Wall insulation R-values and fenestration U- factors/SHGC values are not shown. Sections N1102.1.2 and N1102.3 MECHANICAL REVIEW COMMENTS: Conditinally Approved • Sheet M-3 General note. The 2018 IRC should be specified in lieu of the 2012 edition. ELECTRICAL REVIEW COMMENTS Denied Note: All references are to the 2018 International Residential Code Electrical Comments: • Sheets E1 and E-4- General note: Specify the 2018 IRC in lieu of the 2011 NEC. • E3: Switched illumination is needed at stairway. E3903.3 • Method of service grounding is unclear; recommend addition of an electrical riser diagram showing compliance with Section E3607. PLUMBING REVIEW COMMENTS: Conditionally Approved Note: All references are to the 2018 International Residential Code Plumbing Comments: • Sheet P2 General note. The 2018 IRC should be specified in lieu of the 2021 IPC. • Sheets P4 and P6: The water heater T&P discharge termination is unclear. Ensure compliance with Section P2804.6.1. • Sheet P-5 General note: Specify the 2018 IRC in lieu of the 2021 edition. If you require additional clarification regarding these comments, please contact Doris Benoit at doris.benoit@tucsonaz.gov |