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: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Permit Number - T05CM03820
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/10/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Submit approved landscape and NPP plans included with tentative plat Case # S00-019. The landscape shown on approved tentative plat must be installed per plan along Speedway Blvd. This can be used to satisfy street landscape requirement. 2. A street landscape border is required along Pressyc Place per LUC 3.7.2.4. A street landscape border is a 10' area running the full length of the street property line bounding the site except for points of ingress-egress. Street landscape border must be 10' per LUC 3.7.2.4 3. Fifty (50) percent or more of the area of the street landscape border must be covered with shrubs or vegetative ground cover. The required ground coverage must be achieved within two (2) years from the date of planting. (20) Percent of the required landscaping is to be five- (5) gallon container size or larger and one canopy tree must be provided for every thirty-three (33) linear feet of the street landscape borders. 4. Landscaping within the right of way be approved by the City Engineer or designee per LUC 3.7.2.4 5. Included with Case # S00-019 NPP plan an Arial Photograph indicates that native plants were on-site and never inventoried it appears that the site has been graded without a permit proper mitigation must be provided per DS 2-15.0 6. Additional comments may apply |
| 11/10/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Included with Case # S00-019 NPP plan an Arial Photograph indicates that native plants were on-site and never inventoried it appears that the site has been graded without a permit proper mitigation must be provided per DS 2-15.0 Additional comments may apply |
| 12/13/2005 | HEATHER THRALL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Heather Thrall Senior Planner FOR: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: T05CM03820 7480 E. Speedway Blvd. New Apartment Complex, 6 units Site plan 2nd Review Transmittal date: December 13, 2005 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with redlines and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. A MEETING WITH STAFF IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO RESUBMITTAL OF THIS PROJECT TO ENSURE THE APPLICANT IS CLEAR THIS SITE WAS REVIEWED FOR AN APARTMENT COMPLEX AND THE ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA, NOT AS A SUBDIVISION. 1. (PER LAST REVIEW.) Per discussions with the applicants at the date of submittal, this project was reviewed as a new apartment complex, which is a site plan review. Please note: should the applicants desire to turn the apartments into individual properties for sale in the future, a tentative and final plat process will be required for the code review. Plat submittals are directed through the Community Design Review Committee (CDRC) Office at Development Services. Please contact Marilyn Kalthoff at 520-791-4541x1117 for submittal information. Please be advised, due to the proximity of the units in relation to each other, the only possible ways to split these units into separate lots in the future is via the condominium process or Residential Cluster Project (RCP), as 0 lot lines would be involved. 2. (PER LAST REVIEW.) This project was reviewed in accordance with requirements of the Land Use Code (LUC), Development Standard (DS), American National Standard Institute (ANSI) and International Building Code 2003 (IBC). THIS PLAN WAS REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH DS Section 2-02. PLEASE REFERENCE THIS SECTION OF THE CODE WHEN REVISING THE SITE PLAN. 3. (PER THIS REVIEW.) Per DS 2-02.2.1.2, please provide the CORRECT legal description for the property. This property does NOT consist of 6 separate lots. 4. (PER THIS REVIEW.) Please provide a legend on the site plan for all symbols utilized on the drawing. 5. (PER LAST REVIEW.) Per DS 2-02.2.1.4, please correct the location map to meet standards outlined in DS 2-05.2.1.D (thought this section of the DS refers to Development Plans, the information given in this section for location maps is applicable to all commercial plans.) The drawing submitted does not have a scale, township, range or section data, AS REQUIRED. 6. (PER LAST REVIEW.) Per DS 2-02.2.1.6 & 7, list the setbacks required by LUC 2.4.3.2 designator "L", and the actual setbacks to be provided for the buildings. Note: the required building setback from all adjacent O-3 zoned property lines is equal to the height of the proposed exterior building wall. Staff noted that BOTH THE EAST AND SOUTH PROPERTY LINES APPEAR INSUFFICIENT FOR A TWO-STORY BUILDING, as proposed. Be sure to clarify if there are roof overhangs, and their dimensions, if applicable. Provide building height, as measured from grade to both the exterior building walls, and the top of the Roofs (THIS WILL ASSIST WITH VERIFYING SETBACKS) Please ensure all typeface on the site plan is revised to a minimum of 12 point, to ensure records can be kept efficiently. 7. (PER LAST REVIEW.) As this project is for an apartment complex, please remove all references of subdivision calculations from the plan - including the general notes listed. In addition, remove the street cross section depicted above the general notes. Please ensure the revised plan just reflects apartment complex development notations. 8. (PER LAST REVIEW.) Staff noted in your response letter that the site will offer 6 units, each with 3 bedrooms, which requires 13.5 parking spaces, and 18 spaces are offered. This information needs to be presented on the site plan in calculation form. 9. (PER LAST REVIEW/THIS REVIEW) Per DS 3-05.2.2.D, a back up spur must be provided at the end of a row of parking spaces where no ingress/egress is provided. Please revise the plan TO SHOW THE BACK UP SPUR WITH CURBING AND MEASUREMENTS. 10. (PER THIS REVIEW.) Per DS 2-02.2.1.8, staff recommends moving the proposed crosswalk to an area east of the back up spur, as this will add a greater safety area for handicapped access and reduce traffic conflict with the back up spur. Handicapped ramps are only needed where the vehicular use area transitions to pedestrian sidewalks. Please remove the handicapped ramps shown along side the handicapped parking space. Handicapped ramps should be positioned in such a way that access is provided from the vehicular use area onto the sidewalk area with maneuverability, not just leading up to it. Please revise the handicapped ramps on the plan to show which directions the ramps will angle to allow unimpeded access with maneuverability in all directions. Please refer to ANSI Chapter 4, Section 406 for drawings and information on handicapped ramps. Please add truncated domes (early warning systems) where transitioning at any point from vehicle use areas to handicapped and pedestrian access aisles. 11. (PER LAST REVIEW.) Please note, should the applicants desire to convert this apartment complex to an RCP subdivision, 25% of the lots must be barrier free in accessibility from the street to the entry to the unit. It is further recommended all units be developed as barrier free, with sidewalks shown from the sidewalk along the PAAL to the unit entries. 12. (PER LAST REVIEW) Per DS 2-02.2.1.9, and DS 2-09.6.1, provide specification drawings, fully dimensioned, for required bicycle parking. Please refer to DS 2-09.6.1 for bicycle parking requirements, including access aisle widths. (PER THIS REVIEW.) Also, clarify if the bicycle parking area is on pavement or cement. Both lighting and signage directing the location of the bicycle parking is recommended, as visibility to the bicycle parking location is not immediately clear. Provide signage and lighting specs to be used . 13. (PER LAST REVIEW.) Per DS 2-02.2.1.10, provide existing and proposed Sight Visibility Triangle information. 14. Per DS 2-02.2.1.12 and DS 2-08, PEDESTRIAN ACCESS MUST BE PROVIDED FROM ALL STREET FRONTAGE (SPEEDWAY) TO THE SITE. Revise the plan to show pedestrian access connected to Speedway. 15. (PER LAST REVIEW.) Per DS 2-02.2.1.19, provide dimensioned right of way information for Speedway Boulevard, including location of future curb. Staff acknowledges your response letter, however, the dimensioned right of way requested must be shown on the plan. (If the road is at maximum right of way, indicate so on the plan.) Provide a copy of the right of way plan for this area of Speedway with the resubmittal. Please note, further review comments on this issue may be forthcoming. 16. (PER LAST REVIEW.) Per DS 2-02.2.2.A.3, provide lot coverage calculations, expressed in both square feet and percentages. Lot coverage includes all ALL VEHICLE USE AREA AND BUILDINGS. NOTE: the maximum lot coverage allowed for this development is 75 percent. Please add density calculations to the revised site plan, noting the maximum density allowed is 22 units per acre. Revise the table of information presented on the plan to provide the above information. 17. NOTE: Should the applicants desire to convert this complex into a subdivision, a street with parking on both sides should be provided. The design presented would not be possible without Development Standard Modification Requests (DSMR) approved to allow parking on just one side. 18. Please note, depending upon the responses provided, further review comments may be forthcoming. Should you have any questions regarding this review, please contact me via email at Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov or at 520-791-4541x1156. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call (520) 791-5608. |
| 12/13/2005 | HEATHER THRALL | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | See zoning review comments please. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/05/2006 | GERARDO BONILLA | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 12/16/2005 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Approved |