Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE
Permit Number - T05CM00050
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/14/2005 | JIM EGAN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/01/2005 | DOUG WILLIAMS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | SUBJECT: Site review - 309 W. Elm ST. DATE: 31 March 2005 ACTIVITY NUMBERS T05CM00050 T14S, R13E, Section 01 Engineering Division has reviewed the Subject site plan, and approval is not recommended at this time. Please provide a revised site plan addressing all comments provided. Include a response letter addressing in detail where necessary, responses to all of the following comments: 1. Depict drainage patterns finished floor elevations and finish grades (DS 2-02.2.1 A 16). 2. Assure all easements are graphically shown on the plan with recording information provided (DS 2-02.2.1 A 20). 3. Depict existing topographic contours and spot elevations as pertinent, with benchmark based on COT datum, including City Field Book and Page (DS 2-02.2.1 A 23). 4. Depict and label any proposed fences or walls by type, material, height and location (DS 2-02.1.1 A 27). 5. The proposed refuse container location appears to create a back-up distance that slightly exceeds the maximum backing distance allowed for solid waste vehicles. Approval may POSSIBLY be obtained from Environmental Services Department. Contact John Clark, P.E. at 791-3175 ext. 1136 with questions or requests (DS 2-02.2.1 A 32 & DS 6-01.0). 6. Include a note for a 5" minimum concrete pad thickness and revise the dimensioning on plan view and in detail 3/C1 to specify 10' minimum between sidewall bollards for the refuse enclosure. Refer to Development Standard 6-01.0 for additional solid waste provision requirements, and include a note on the plan that the refuse provision shall comply with this standard (DS 2-02.2.1 A 32 & 6-01.0). 7. Dimension and label new 5' sidewalk, 2' from back of curb along each property frontage in the public right of way, where curbing exists. Please label existing curbing, and revise the sidewalk dimension to reflect 5' wide sidewalks (DS 3-01.3.3 A & 3-05.2.1 C 3 a). 8. Label minimum 18' curb return radii at the Elm Street ingress/egress, and 12' radii at the two street intersections with the public alleys (DS 3-01.3.2 C & 3-01.10 Figure 6). 9. Provide labeling for new curb access ramps (PC/COT SD 207) at all 5 locations depicted on the plan (DS 3-01.3.2 F). 10. Depict scuppers where any site drainage may be concentrated, for conveyance of 10-year flows (minimum) under sidewalk areas, on and offsite (DS 2-08.5.1 E & DS 3-01.4.4 F). GENERAL: A grading permit will be required for this development. Please complete and submit a grading permit application and submit with three sets of grading plans - preferably with the site plan resubmittal package. Grading standards may be accessed at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf Listed below are some general guidelines for grading plan preparation/submittal: 1. Provide general grading notes, including a grading/drainage note specifying conformance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (excavation and grading requirements). 2. Depict existing and proposed contours and/or spot elevations. 3. Depict and label grading limits and provide total area to be disturbed (square footage). 4. Provide a Basis of Elevation with City Field Book and Page referenced (DS 2-02.2.1 A 16 & 23). 5. Provide detailed cross sections for each perimeter, depicting all structures, setbacks, detention basins, etc., fully labeled and dimensioned. Please note that subsequent comments may be necessary upon resubmittal, depending on the nature and extent of revisions that occur to the plans. Resubmittal will require a revised site plan addressing all items listed above. The consultant may also wish to include a grading permit submittal package simultaneously, upon resubmittal of the site plan package If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, ext. 1189 or via email at: Doug.williams@tucsonaz.gov. Doug Williams Sr. Eng. Associate Engineering Division Development Services Department |
| 04/06/2005 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/06/2005 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Michael St.Paul FOR: Patricia Gehlen Planning Technician Principal Planner PROJECT: T05CM00050 309 West Elm Street Four-unit apartment complex for each parcel TRANSMITTAL: April 5, 2005 DUE DATE: April 5, 2005 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. CODE SECTION/ DEVELOPMENT STANDARD 1. This review is for two four-unit apartments building located on to adjacent lots that functions as one site. This site is in the C-1 zone with C-1 zoning to the north and south, C-3 zoning to the west and R-2 zoning to the east. LUC Sec 2.5.3.2.E.1 2. The residential Development Designator is "O" in the C-1 zone. Please revise the site plan data and the calculation data. Also provide a floor plan. LUC Sec 3.2.3.1.D 3. The Perimeter Yard Indicator for this site is CC. The setbacks requirements adjacent to the C-1 zones between the two units, to the south and to the west, which is C-3 zoning, are equal to the height of the structures' walls facing those property lines. The minimum setback for all these setbacks (except the side-street setback to the east) is twenty-one feet three inches (21'-3"). Please revise the plans. These plans cannot be approved without an approved Lot Development Option (LDO). LUC Sec 3.2.6.4 4. Clearly depict the proposed easements for both parcels and identify them as access easements for the use of both properties. Also provide docket and page reference on the plan when recorded. In addition, all easements of record must be graphically depicted on the plan with the use and docket and page reference. A cross-access and cross-parking covenant must also be recorded for the two parcels. DS 2-02.2.1.A.20 5. Depict the front patio and balcony as part of the building foot print and dimension the front setback from the edge of the balcony. LUC Sec 3.2.6.5.A DS 2-02.2.1.A.6 6. Depict the existing and proposed sight visibility triangles (SVTs) for all street intersections and alleys. DS 2-02.2.1.A10 7. Clearly identify and delineate all existing and proposed lighting. DS 2-02.2.1.A.25 8. Identify the location, type, size and height of all existing and proposed signage. DS 2-02.2.1.A.13 9. There appears to be walls on the site plan, please identify and dimension (both length and height) any existing or proposed walls. LUC Sec 3.2.6.5.C DS 2-02.2.1.A.6 10. Please see engineering comments concerning refuge location. DS 2-02.2.1.A.32 |
| 04/06/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Within a vehicular use area, one (1) canopy tree is required for each 10 motor vehicle parking spaces and every parking space shall be located within forty (40) feet of the trunk of a canopy tree (as measured from the center of the tree trunk) per LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.a. Trees are required for vehicle use area, revise landscape plan as necessary. 2. Submit NPPO plan or application for exception per DS 2-15.0. If applicable remove details and notes pertaining to plant preservation. 3. Additional comments may apply. |
| 04/07/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit NPPO plan or application for exception per DS 2-15.0. If applicable remove details and notes pertaining to plant preservation. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/28/2005 | JMORALE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 04/28/2005 | ANGIE SHOFFSTALL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |