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 - DP15-0208
Review Name: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/15/2016 | AROMERO4 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 01/21/2016 | PAUL BAUGHMAN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: January 22, 2016 DUE DATE: February 16, 2016 SUBJECT: Add Floors TO: Richard Macias, PE LOCATION: 10 E Broadway Blvd REVIEWERS: Paul Baughman, PE, CFM ACTIVITY: DP15-0208 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning and Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package. The following items need to be addressed: 1) Per previous comment 5 and AM 2-06.4.9X please provide a copy of the hardscape plan mentioned in Keynotes 25 and 30 on sheet 2. This plan should be provided for review and pertinent details included in the civil plans set. Please specify which sheet these plans are located on. 2) Per previous comment 6 and TSM 7-01.3.3B and AM 2-06.4.9S and T please show the accessible route, on sheet 2 (previously sheet 4 on first submittal) between the new trash and recycle storage location as called out by keynote 32 and the trash and recycle pick up location in keynote 31 (now also keynote 27). Please note that keynote 31 is now showing a different location than keynote 27 for the trash pick up location. Please clarify. The accessible route could be shown more clearly with shading and a callout in the legend than a callout arrow to a single point location. Some of the clarity is likely being lost on the confusion over where the trash pick up location is supposed to be. Please update line work as needed to clarify. 3) Per previous comment 7 there is concern that the 4.4 foot wide pedestrian access between the eastern most existing raised brick planter, as called out by keynote 13 on sheet 4, may not be sufficient to transport the 4 cubic yard waste container between its storage and pick up location. The comment response indicated that this planter was to be removed. The planter still appears on the plan as well as new irrigation line work to provide service to new plants on the landscape plan. Please clarify the disposition of this planter and the accessible route. 4) Per previous comment 8, Sheet 5 of the first submittal was calling out several existing roof drains to remain. However, there appeared to be an existing roof drain on the east side of the new curb access ramp (see keynote 4 on sheet 4 of the first submittal) that was not identified or notated as to whether it is to remain. The second submittal does not show any roof drainage as required by AM 2-06.4.9N7. Please show roof drainage discharge points with 10 year roof drainage conveyed below the new concrete sidewalk (keynote 25 on sheet 2) as required by TSM 7-01.4.3E. A detail such as Pima County City of Tucson detail 204 should be called out as existing, proposed and/or to remain in place. If you have any comments questions or wish to discuss new information, please call or email me at 520-837-5007 or paul.baughman@tucsonaz.gov. |
| 01/21/2016 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | The above project has been Approved by Pima County Addressing on 01/20/16. |
| 01/22/2016 | FDILLON1 | DESIGN PROFESSIONAL | REVIEW | Denied | Requires review by staff, T-PCHC PRS and IID DRC prior to approved design package. |
| 01/25/2016 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: DP15-0208 Address: 10 E. Broadway Development Package: DP15-0208 - Multi-use development TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 1, 2016 DUE DATE: February 16, 2016 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Package Standards listed in section 2-06 of the City of Tucson Administrative Manual. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC). 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 December 1, 2016. ****************************************************************************************** 01. Follow up to Previous Comment 3: A review under the DCS is another process. Therefore an application case number will be assigned to that case. List the IID case number, date of approval, and conditions of approval as a general note and list the case number in the lower right corner of the plan sheets. 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. PREVIOUS COMMENT 03: If applicable, list any related application case numbers as noted by the standard above. ****************************************************************************************** 02. Follow up to Previous Comment 9: The previous comment will remain until the air easements are finalized. 2-06.4.7.E.1.a - The following notes will be placed on all plans/plats. 2-06.4.8.B - All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided. PREVIOUS COMMENT 09: Clarify if there are easements for the building overhang that extend into the right of way. If not, contact Jim Rossi with the COT Real Estate Division about obtaining aerial easements. ****************************************************************************************** 03. Follow up to Previous Comment 12: Previous comment 12 will remain until the IID process has been completed and approved. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC. PREVIOUS COMMENT 12: It is acknowledged that a Modification through the IID process is to be requested for the parking requirements. ****************************************************************************************** 04. Follow up to Previous Comment 14: Previous comment 14 will remain until the IID process has been completed and approved. 2-06.4.9.H.5.c - Show all loading zones, vehicle maneuverability fully dimensioned, and access route. Provide as a note the number of loading spaces required, the number provided, whether the loading space is a Type A or B as provided in UDC Section 7.5.4. PREVIOUS COMMENT 14: It is acknowledged that a Modification through the IID process is to be requested for the loading zone requirements. ****************************************************************************************** 05. Follow up to Previous Comment 19: Revise note 19 to state monument signs. 2-06.4.9.W - Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Indicate if there are any existing billboards on site. Compliance to the Sign Code, Chapter 3 of the Tucson Code, is required. PREVIOUS COMMENT 19: If applicable indicate on the site plan sheet if any monument signs are proposed. If so include a statement that the signs will be reviewed and approved under separate permit. ****************************************************************************************** 06. Follow up to Previous Comment 20: Previous comment 20 will remain until the IID process has been completed and approved. 2-06.4.9.X - Show compliance with landscaping and screening requirements by locations, material descriptions, and dimensions. Specific plant or hardscape material shall be detailed on a landscape plan. A detailed landscape plan is required. In accordance with Section 2-11.0.0, Landscape Plan Requirements. PREVIOUS COMMENT 20: It is acknowledged that a Modification through the IID process is to be requested for the landscaping and screening requirements. ****************************************************************************************** 07. COMMENT: Additional zoning review comments may be forthcoming based on the responses to the zoning review comments and changes to the DP Plan sheets. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package site plan and any requested documents. |
| 02/01/2016 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 02/02/2016 | GARY WITTWER | DOT LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | No further comments |
| 02/16/2016 | ARUIZ1 | COT NON-DSD | ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES | Reqs Change | Patricia, The City of Tucson - Environmental Services Department (ES) has completed our second review of the Development Package Application materials for the proposed Westerner office and residential facility in Tucson. Mr. Ken Perry completed the initial review of this development package on December 19, 2015 on behalf of ES. The seven review comments from the initial review and the response prepared by Grenier Engineering, Inc. for this proposed site are as follows: 1. Item No. 4 under the IID notes shall state that a loading space is needed on Jackson Street and not on Stone Avenue. Response: Item No. 4 was corrected on the plan sheet to state the containers will be serviced off of Jackson Street and not Stone Avenue. ES approves this response. 2. State who is provide service to the two proposed waste containers along Stone Avenue identified by keynote 30. Response: The applicant stated that the owner/developer will service these containers. ES approves this response. 3. Revise the waste stream calculation on the cover sheet under item C to read that recycling is 50% of the total waste as described in the calculation method in TSM Section 8. Therefore, the amount of recycling per week should read 8.9 cubic yards. The Collection note under the waste stream calculations should read "Two 4 cubic yard waste and two 4 cubic yard recycling rolling metal containers shall be collected 2 to 3 times per week". The typical result of the calculations is that adequate storage capacity is provided so that service is required only once per week, not every day. See TSM 8-01.4.0.D. ESD is prepared to allow service 2 to 3 times per week as allowed under the IID. Response: The calculation of the total waste generation per year at the subject facility is 286.6 tons. This calculation is correct. Refuse (waste not being recycled) is 50 % of the total waste generated and the recycling amount is also 50 % of the total waste generated. The calculation of the recycling volume of 9.1 cubic yards is correct. The calculation of the volume of refuse must be revised to indicate 9.1 cubic yards rather that the 18.2 cubic yards shown in the notes. Note C "Recycle = 20% of Total Waste" should be revised to state "Recycle = 50% of Total Waste" . ES is requiring a revision for this comment. 4. The use of APCs for recycling is not allowed. Remove all references to APC use on the plans. Show a storage area within the building for four 4 cubic yard containers two for waste and two for recycling per comment #2. Detail this area on the plans. Response: The reference to APC on the plans was removed. Provide additional information on the plans describing the interior waste container storage area. Is this a utility room, storage room or other type of room? Indicate size of room and any other pertinent features of this room. ES is requiring a revision for this comment. 5. Revise the note below the waste stream calculation regarding collection service to read that the building owner facility personnel shall watch for the arrival of the service vehicle on the day of servicing, shall roll the containers out clearly into the loading space in front of the vehicle when the vehicle arrives and shall roll the containers back into the building immediately after servicing so that the service vehicle operator does not exit the truck. Omit the statement this will be performed on a daily basis. Response: The required revisions to the note below the waste stream calculation were properly made. ES approves this response. 6. Demonstrate that the 35 ft. long service vehicle can enter and exit the 35 ft. loading space using the turning templates in TSM Section 8, Figure 7, while cars are parked in the adjacent parking spaces. The service vehicle must be able to pull straight into the loading space while traveling west without backing. Response: Grenier Engineering, Inc. used a computer program called "Auto - Turn" to determine if the service vehicle can enter and exit the 35 foot loading space rather than the turning template on Figure 7. The location of tires and turning arrows shown on Sheet C 2.0, Site Plan, were obtained using the "Auto - Turn" program. ES will allow the use of the "Auto - Turn" program for this determination instead of using the turning templates in the TSM. However, additional computational details and / or drawings depicting the travel path of the service vehicle produced by this program must be provided to demonstrate the successful ability to access the loading zone. ES is requiring a revision for this comment. 7. Show the path the rolling containers will take tot he loading area from the storage room in the building. Show a ramp instead of the vertical curb where the containers will be rolled out from the building to the loading space. Response: The applicant is proposing to use the handicap accessible ramp at the intersection of Jackson Street and Stone Avenue to convey the waste containers from the sidewalk on the south side of the building to the waste pick up location in the loading space. ES will not approve this container transport procedure. The handicap accessible ramp was designed for and is intended for use by handicapped persons. This ramp is also near the travel lane for vehicles turning right from Jackson Street onto Stone Avenue and could pose a traffic and safety hazard if used to transport the waste containers to the waste pick up location. ES recommends that a ramp be constructed in the sidewalk area to the immediate north of the waste pick up location in the loading space. Approval from the City of Tucson would be required to remove a portion of the curb at this location to construct this ramp. ES is requiring a revision for this comment. Please contact me if there are any questions concerning this review. Thank you. Thomas G. Ryan, P. E. City of Tucson - Environmental Services |
| 02/16/2016 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL SECTION 2-10.0.0: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS Identification and Descriptive Data All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the landscape plan will be identical in size and location to those shown on the base plan (site plan or tentative plat). Should amendments be required to the base plan through the review process, the same amendments will be made to the landscape plan which will then be resubmitted along with the base plan. The landscape plan will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet: Add a general note to site, landscape & grading: Provide the type overlays applicable, a statement that the project meets the criteria/conditions of applications or overlays, the case number, date of approvals, conformation of what was approved, and any conditions of approvals. (5.12.6. IID PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES UNDER THE IID ZONING OPTION). Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. Additional comments may apply |
| 02/17/2016 | 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 these plans |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 02/19/2016 | PGEHLEN1 | APPROVAL SHELF | Completed |
| 02/19/2016 | PGEHLEN1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 02/19/2016 | PGEHLEN1 | REJECT SHELF | Completed |