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: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - DP15-0084
Review Name: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/12/2015 | KROBLES1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 08/20/2015 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: August 25, 2015 DUE DATE: September 08, 2015 SUBJECT: 1 West Broadway Development Plan Package- 2nd Engineering Review TO: Metro TED; Attn: Lisa Bowers LOCATION: 1 W Broadway Blvd; T14S R13E Sec13 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: DP15-0084 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package, Drainage Statement (Cypress Civil Development, 18MAY15), and Geotechnical Investigation (Speedie and Associates, 11JUN15). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administration Manual (AM) and Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Refer to the following link for further clarification: http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az The following items need to be addressed: SITE PLAN: 10) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan package and Keynotes 18 and 19 to correctly dimension the 20-foot stem length of the SVTs for the driveway and the Local Street and the Near Side dimension along Jackson Street, refer to TSM Sec.10-01.5.3 for line of sight matrix. It is acknowledged that an IID (Case Number 15-0002) was reviewed and approved for the modification of the SVT dimension; however per the Directors Condition of Approval Item 1 it states that documentation from TDOT is required to show that the modification does not create a public safety concern. No such documentation was provided with this review and TDOT has not yet reviewed the project and provided an approval as of this ENG review. 11) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a Revise the development plan package to provide a standard vehicle parking space detail. Verify on the detail the required 2.5 foot overhang for spaces adjacent to sidewalks, landscape areas, wall, proposed riprap swale, etc. Refer to UDC Figure 7.4.6-C for the 2.5 foot overhang dimension. The Detail was provided on Sheet 4 however it does not show the wheels stops of the required 2.5 foot overhang for spaces adjacent to walls. 15) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: It is acknowledged that an IID (Case Number 15-0002) was reviewed and approved for the modifications to the proposed refuse services pick up location; however per the condition of approval and General Note #19 the site plan sheet and/or Keynote #13 needs to be revised to reflect the dimension (10'x20') for the concrete apron that will be constructed as part of this permit. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan Package that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Department |
| 08/20/2015 | BVIESTE1 | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | 201 N. STONE AV, 1ST FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 MICHELENE NOWAKADDRESSING REVIEW PH #: 721-9512 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: MICHELENE NOWAK, ADDRESSING REVIEW SUBJECT: DP15-0084/ 1 WEST BROADWAY-DEVELOPMENT PLAN-2ND REVIEW DATE: AUGUST 19, 2015 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. Note: APARTMENT UNITS NEED TO BE NUMBERED CONSECUTIVELY-- NO SKIPPING NUMBERS ie. #101-#110, #201-#210 ETC. 1.) Submit a 24 x 36 Reverse Reading Double Matte Photo Mylar of approved Final Plat to City Planning ***PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING MUST RECEIVE A COPY OF THE RECORDED FINAL PLAT PRIOR TO THE ASSIGNMENT OF ANY ADDRESSES. PLEASE COORDINATE THE DELIVERY AND RECORDATION OF THE MYLAR WITH THE CITY OF TUCSON PLANNING*** 2.) All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection. ***The Pima County Addressing Section can use digital CAD drawing files. These CAD files can be e-mailed to: CADsubmittals@pima.gov The digital CAD drawing files expedite the addressing and permitting processes when we are able to insert this digital data into the County’s Geographic Information System. Your support is greatly appreciated.*** |
| 08/26/2015 | FDILLON1 | DESIGN PROFESSIONAL | REVIEW | Denied | The 1 West Broadway project IID Design Package has been approved with the follwing conditions: 1. Please consult with T-DOT and Traffic Enginnering Staff to ensure that Item #10, MODIFICATION OF SIGHT VISIBILITY TRIANGLES and provide documentation from T-DOT that this modification does not create a public safety concern. 2. Please consult with the Historic Preservation Office and provide an agreed upon plan outlining weather / water damage mitigation and maintenenance access strategies for the east adobe wall of the adjacent contributing historic property located at 40 West Broadway. The IID Design Package can not be approved until the above listed conditions are met. |
| 09/02/2015 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: 1 West Broadway Development Package (2nd Review) DP15-0084 TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 2, 2015 DUE DATE: September 9, 2015 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and any redlined plans along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC) and the UDC Technical Standards Manual (TSM). The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC & TSM requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, An applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One year Expiration date is May 19, 2016. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS) Section 2-06.1.0 GENERAL 2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD) - ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS 2-06.1.0 GENERAL 2-06.1.1 PURPOSE This standard has been prepared for the purpose of informing applicants of the submittal and review requirements for development package documents to assure proper and adequate information is presented in a consistent manner, thereby providing the basis for an efficient and timely review. The development package documents are prepared in support of applications for building permits and related reviews. The information that is requested establishes the basis upon which the project will be approved and could affect what is required of the property in the future, should there be a proposal for expansion or for a different use of the property. This standard does not waive any applicable city regulations or codes. 2-06.1.2 APPICABILITY This standard shall be used for all site plans and tentative plats submitted to PDSD for review. 2-06.2.1 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS Development Package applications are available from PDSD. Completed applications and accompanying materials shall be submitted to PDSD. Incomplete or inaccurate applications will not be accepted, nor will any application in which the pre-application conference or neighborhood meeting requirements have not been met. The types of documents and the specific number of copies required of each of the documents are on the PDSD website or may be obtained from PDSD. Resubmittals of development packages require a comment response letter that details how all previous comments have been addressed. Provide the same number of copies of the comment response letter as plans provided. The following documents and information shall be submitted upon application: 2-06.2.1 Application Form A completed application signed by the property owner or authorized designee; 2-06.2.2 Development Package A development package must be prepared to the format and content requirements described herein; 2-06.2.3 Related Reviews In addition to the plan process, a project may require review for other types of plans and documents. The applications for those processes are submitted to the appropriate department for review and approval. These related reviews can be applied for so that review can occur concurrently with the development package application. However, it must be understood that, should the related application be approved subject to conditions or denied, this may affect the; 2-06.2.5 Fees Fees in accordance with Section 4-01.0.0, Development Review Fee Schedule. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.4.3 - The administrative street address and relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 1) The provided IID case number does not appear to be correct. Based on documentation available on Property Research On-line (PRP) it appears that the number should be IID-15-01. COMMENT: Provide the IID/MDR case number adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 2-06.4.7 - General Notes The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable. 2-06.4.7.A - Zoning and Land Use Notes 2-06.4.7.A.4 - Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses. 2) This comment was not addressed. The UDC table listed, "TABLE 5.12-GIIS-1" only applies to the Greater Infill Incentive Subdistrict. That said as there are no allowed uses listed under the Downtown Core District (DCS) or the Rio Nuevo Area (RNA) the applicable use specific standards would be found in UDC Table 4.8-4: PERMITTED USES - COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE ZONES, C-3 & OCR-2 Zones. General Merchandise Sales, excluding Large Retail Establishment use in the C-3 & OCR-2 zone, use specific standards 4.9.9.B.1 applies. COMMENT: Provide the applicable use specific standards for the proposed General Merchandise Sales, excluding Large Retail Establishment use in the C-3 and OCR-2 zones within the "ZONING" table under the "NEW USE(S). See TABLE 4.8-4: PERMITTED USES - COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE ZONES 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - List additional applications and overlays, by case number (if applicable), in lower right corner of each sheet. As a general note provide the type of application processed or overlays applicable, a statement that the project meets the criteria/conditions of the additional application or overlay, the case number, date of approval, what was approved, and the conditions of approval, if any. 3) This comment was not addressed correctly. The IID number provided in General Note 7 is not correct. This number should be IID-15-01. COMMENT: Provide the above information for the IID/MDR on the plan. 4) Provide a copy of the agreed upon plan required for IID-15-01 Condition of Approval #2 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided. 2-06.4.8.A - Provide site boundary/subdivision perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system. 5) Zoning acknowledges you response to this comment. I have referred this to the our City Attorney, Piroschka Glinsky, for review. COMMENT: It appears that the existing building, located on parcel 117-13-027A, encroaches onto this project site. Zoning recommends that a lot line reconfiguration be processed to correct this encroachment. 2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes. 2-06.4.9.A - Draw in all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements. 6) Provide a copy of the approved combo with your next submittal. COMMENT: As this site is comprised of five (5) parcels a lot combination is required. Provide a copy of the approved Pima County Lot Combination Request form with your next submittal. 2-06.4.9.O - All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown. 7) Provide copies of the approved documents with your nest submittal. COMMENT: As encroachments, balcony and canopy, in to the right-of-way are proposed, some type of easement or agreement is required. Contact COT Transportation Real Estate to secure the required easement/agreement. The easement/agreement must be in place prior to approval of the development package. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 09/02/2015 | SSHIELD1 | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/04/2015 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Reqs Change | September 4, 2015 DP15-0084 1 West Broadway Zelin Canchola TDOT Awaiting TSMR information for review concerning modification of sight visibility triangles. |
| 09/08/2015 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | The upstream manhole is less than 12" below the first floor elevation. Include a note to require the installation of a backwater valve for all fixtures located on the first floor; fixtures located on floor levels above the first floor shall not discharge through the backwater valve. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012. [Initial comment: Revise the site utility drawing to include the invert and rim elevations of manhole 8137-20A. Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual No. 2-06.0.0, Section 4.8 and Section 107.2.13, IBC 2012.] |
| 09/08/2015 | BVIESTE1 | COT NON-DSD | ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES | Reqs Change | The Development Package has been reviewed on behalf of the Environmental Services Dept. and the following will need to be addressed on the resubmittal: 1. Show the dimensions of the required 10 ft. x 20 ft. apron on the plans. 2. This comment was not fully addressed. Revise the collection wording in General Note 18 to read per the comment in the previous review which was agreed to by Rob Caylor of Caylor Construction. Add the language regarding the owner’s facility personnel will roll the containers out clearly onto the service apron in the loading area when the service truck arrives and roll the containers back into the building after servicing. The ramp from the building to the service apron is at a grade exceeding 9 percent. This may require several of the owner’s personnel to safely maneuver the rolling containers in and out of the apron. 3. Revise the result of the General Note 18 Waste Steam calculations to reflect the size containers that will actually be used for service. The actual size will be a maximum of 4 cubic yards which is the largest size front load container allowed to roll. If there are any questions, I can be reached at kperry@perryengineering.net |
| 09/09/2015 | GARY WITTWER | DOT LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Trish, They have not address items, 1, 2, and 5 that I can see. Gary >>> Patricia Gehlen 9/3/2015 2:31 PM >>> Here you go. Trish, I looked in Permits Plus, but could not find a spot for my comments. Here they are: 1. There are two additional trees in the ROW that are not being shown. Please check on them. 2. There is existing irrigation to all four trees that will need to be protected in place, or repaired if damaged. 3. All new irrigation needs to be sleeved under concrete. Sleeves not needed under brick. 4. Mature size of Palo brea may be a concern for modern street car cantinary lines. This will be the property owners responsiblity to maintain. 5. Both the bike rack and the trash recepticals need to be black. 6. Please all standard notes for planting in ROW. (attached) Thanks, Gary City of Tucson Department of Transportation Standard Notes for Planting in ROW 1. It is the owner's responsibility to keep the Sight Visibility Triangles (SVT), and the pedestrian access area clear of vegetation at all times, per Land Use Code (LUC) section. 2. It is the owner responsible to keep vegetation from growing past the curb line clear, and keep a 15' high clear zone over the travel lane. 3. Final plant locations must be in compliance with all utility setback requirements. 4. The owner understands that if the City of Tucson Transportation Department or any utility company needs to work within the ROW in the landscaped area, plants and irrigation may be destroyed without replacement or repair. 5. The owner takes full liability for this landscape and irrigation, and any damage to roadway, sidewalk and utilities. 6. The only private irrigation equipment that is allowed within the ROW are lateral lines, tubing and emitters that are not under constant pressure. All other equipment must be on private property. (excluding water meter) 7. Contractor to obtain a Right Of Way excavation permit prior to construction within the right-of-way. |
| 09/09/2015 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items: 1) Two rolled sets of the plans 2) A disk containing all items submitted 3) All items requested by review staff 4) All items needed to approve this plan |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/21/2015 | AROMERO4 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |