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: SITE
Permit Number - T03CM05845
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/28/2004 | Doug Williams | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | SUBJECT: Site, Grading and Drainage review - 1016 E. Milton Rd. DATE: 2 February 2004 ACTIVITY NUMBERS: T03CM05845/T03BU03175 SUMMARY: Engineering Section has reviewed the Drainage Report, Site Plan and Grading Plan received on 15 January 2004. Approvals are not recommended at this time. Please address the following comments: DRAINAGE REPORT: 1. Please provide the site address that corresponds with the site and grading permit applications (1016 E. Milton Rd.) on the drainage report cover sheet and in the introduction, in accordance with the City of Tucson's Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management (SMDDFM), Section 2.3.1.1 B (Development Standard - DS 10-02.0). 2. Specify the name, address and telephone number of the person(s), firms(s), agency or agencies responsible for the ownership, operation, scheduled and unscheduled maintenance and liability of the detention basins described in the report (SMDDFM, Section 2.3.1.2 E). 3. The text in the report states this site is not affected by any offsite drainage sources, yet existing photo-contours indicate there may be flows entering the site from the east and possibly south. Please address acceptance of offsite flows, with flow-through wall opening calculations and recommendations in a revised report. The report should include a topographic map at a scale of one inch = 200' or larger, or preferably a photo-topo showing the applicable items listed in section 2.3.1.3 A 3 of the SMDDFM. 4. All retention/detention basins within the City of Tucson must have a minimum of one maintenance access ramp. The City of Tucson's Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management (Development Standard 10-02.0), Section 14.3.4, states that, "a minimum of one 15-foot wide vehicular access ramp shall be provided into each basin. The maximum roadway or access ramp slope shall not exceed 15 percent. Alternate means of access will be reviewed by the City Engineer on a case-by-case basis". Please discuss an appropriate ramp in the drainage report and depict on the site and grading plans, labeled and dimensioned, addressing this requirement. 5. As a part of the basin maintenance checklist, provide the summaries outlined in section 2.3.1.6 C 2, of the SMDDFM. 6. Please provide percolation test results with the resubmittal. Test results are required to be submitted with the drainage report, in accordance with section 3.5.1 of the Pima County/City of Tucson Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual. Testing shall be performed in accordance with the recommended procedure of the Pima County Department of Transportation - Flood Control District. 7. Please provide a soils report with the resubmittal. Soils reports are required in conjunction with the design of each surface facility that utilizes infiltration as a method of basin drainage. The report shall at minimum address minimum recommended setbacks to structures, soil permeability, erodibility, slope stability and groundwater elevation (Section 3.5.1.5, DS 10-01.0). 8. The report should address an appropriate erosion control or energy dissipation structure at the detention basin outlet weir. The pad must be located onsite, and be designed to return flows to pre-developed conditions location and magnitude, as nearly as possible, prior to exiting the site (Section 3.3.3, DS 10-01.0). SITE PLAN: 1. Depict the location and size of maintenance access ramps and roadways, in accordance with the City of Tucson's Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management (SMDDFM), Section 2.3.1.6 A 4 b (Development Standard 10-02.0). 2. Provide the 100-year ponding limits with water surface elevation noted (SMDDFM, Sec.2.3.1.6 A 4 e). 3. Depict and label minimum unobstructed radii of 18' at the driveway entrances onsite (DS 3-05.2.1 C 3 a). 4. Identify and label proposed driveway aprons in the right of way to be constructed in accordance with Pima County/City of Tucson Standard Detail (SD) 206, or provide 18' radius curb returns, with curbing to be constructed per SD 209. 5. Omit or revise the Floodplain Note on sheet 2.0. 6. Provide and label roof downspout locations with corresponding sidewalk scuppers south and southwest of the storage/office building. 7. Please provide a typical flow-through wall opening detail with clear notation of opening size, spacing and location(s), in accordance with a revised drainage report (see drainage report comment #3). 8. Provide a note for stormwater harvesting maximization in all landscape areas, in accordance with Section 14.2.10 of the SMDDFM and Section 3.7.4 of the City of Tucson's Land Use Code (LUC). GRADING PLAN: 1. Please provide grading limits and the total area to be disturbed. 2. Provide a Grading Note specifying conformance to excavation and grading requirements outlined in the 2000 International Building Code - local amendment. These may be accessed at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/2000_IBC_Amendments.pdf 3. Please provide ease-west and north-south cross sections for basin A2, fully labeled and dimensioned, and ensure the former section depicts a 2'setbacak from property line. 4. Provide any wall opening details, as may be indicated in a revised drainage report, and include a detail or cross section for conveyance and/or water harvesting along the eastern (2' wide) perimeter. 5. Revise the riprap splash pad to be constructed within the property limits. ***GENERAL COMMENT*** A right of way excavation permit will be required for any proposed work in the right of way. Contact Permit and Codes Section, Tucson Department of Transportation - Engineering Division at 791-5100 for questions. Resubmittal will require a revised Site Plan, Drainage Report and Grading Plan addressing all items listed above. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 1189 or Dwillia1@ci.tucson.az.us Douglas Williams Sr. Engineering Associate Engineering Division Development Services Department |
| 02/10/2004 | JIM EGAN | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Fire sprinklers required per 2000 IBC Sec. 903.2.8. 2. An approved fire apparatus access roadway shall be provided and extended to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of all structures. An approved turnaround is required for deadend access roadways. 3. Fire hydrant required. |
| 02/11/2004 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | HANDICAP-SITE | REVIEW | Denied | See Zoning comments |
| 02/11/2004 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | SITE PLAN TRANSMITTAL TO: Metro Permit Express 1001 N. Alvernon Way #105 Tucson, AZ 85711 FROM: Peter McLaughlin Senior Planner FOR: Patricia Gehlen Principal Planner PROJECT: T03CM05845 Milton Road Apartments 1016 E. Milton Road TRANSMITTAL: February 11, 2004 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 project is being reviewed for full code compliance. DS 2-02 2. Revise the denominator in the lot coverage calculation to be consistent with the lot size given (43,633 square feet). LUC 3.2.9.2 3. To adjacent C-1 and O-3 zoned properties the required setback is the height of the building. Except for the west side of the building, proposed heights are not specified on the drawing. For clarity, please specify the proposed heights of the buildings in the zoning information. Setbacks cannot be verified until proposed heights are stated. LUC 3.2.6.4 DS 2-02.2.1.A.6 4. Revise the adjacent zoning on the plan to be correct. The zoing to the south and west is C-1 rather than C-2. Also the western portion of the property (portion of tax parcel 140-25-0580) is zoned C-1. Revise zoning information accordingly, and add the correct development designator ("O") for the proposed residential use in the C-1 zone. Also add a note stating that the C-1 portion has a perimeter yard indicator of "CC". Also, revise density calculation to indicate that the C-1 portion has a max density of 36 units per acre. DS 2-02.2.1.A.28 5. Remove all notes/general notes stating that the R-2 zone is subject to LUC 3.5.7.1.F as this does not apply to this site, which is zoned C-1 and O-3. 6. Label and dimension any existing or proposed easements and add their recordation information to the site plan. DS 2-02.2.1.A.20 7. A sidewalk must be provided along the north side of the office/storage bldg (between the parking spaces and the bldg.) and along the east side of the bldg. (between this bldg. and the PAAL). DS 2-08.4.1.B & C DS 3-05.2.2.B.1 8. This lot is made up of two lots, one being a portion of a lot. All approved lot split documents must be provided to the zoning review section for the split on the western lot portion. Also, provide lot combination documents including Assessor's lot combo docs and notarized/recorded covenant. Revise legal description to be correct and include the westernmost portion of the site. 9. Revise the square footage and acreage to be consistent. 43,633 sqaure feet is greater, not less than one acre. 10. Revise site visibility triangle dimensions to be correct. The stem side dimension must be 20 feet. DS 2-02.2.1.A.10 11. Dimension the proposed structures on the drawing. DS 2-05.2.1.A.6 12. Remove the line and 21-foot dimension measured from the street property line. Street setbacks in established areas are the greater of 20 feet or height of exterior structure wall, measured from property line. LUC 3.2.6.5 13. Add the maximum slope of the handicap access aisle. ANS/ IBC If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608. PSMc: H:\PETER\Siteplans\T00CM05845a |
| 02/12/2004 | Andrew Connor | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/12/2004 | Andrew Connor | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 8) Dimension the street landscape borders on the site and landscape plans. DS 2-07.2.2.A.2 |
| 02/12/2004 | Andrew Connor | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the landscape plan to match the site and grading plans. The parking design and other elements are not consistent with the other plans. DS 2-07.2.0 Additional comments will apply pending revisions. 2) A five-foot high screen is required to screen the vehicular use area along Milton Road. The screening is to be located behind applicable sight visibility triangles. 3) Revise the landscape plan to locate plants which typically exceed thirty inches in height outside of applicable sight visibility triangles. Show the SVT's on the landscape plan. 4) List the screening requirements on the landscape plans. Show the location of all walls and other required screening elements. 5) Identify any retention basins on the landscape plan and include depths of basins, and percentage of side slope. DS 2-07.2.2.B 6) Provide landscaping as indicated in note 5 on sheet L1 for all of the retention basin areas. DS 10-01 7) The retention proposed in the landscape areas does not meet the requirements of DS 10-01.1.IV (p. 78). Basin slopes are to be 2:1 maximum for protected side slopes and 3:1 maximum for unprotected side slopes for basins less than three feet deep. This requirement would preclude the use of the retaining wall at the front of the street landscape border. 8) Dimension the street landscape borders on the site and landscape plans. DS 2-07.2.2.A.2 Areas reserved to meet the minimum parking space dimensions cannot be counted to also meet the landscape border width requirements. DS 2-06.3.3.E |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 02/18/2004 | TAMI ACHONG | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 02/18/2004 | TAMI ACHONG | REJECT SHELF | Completed |