Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE
Permit Number - T07CM01618
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/04/2008 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied | The nearest fire hydrants are too far from the homes. The maximum disance is 400 feet for non-sprinklered and 500 feet for sprinklered home. Per C.O.T. amendements to the 2006 IFC (Section 508), an additional hydrant and/or fire sprinklers may be required. |
| 04/15/2008 | RBROWN1 | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. PROVIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGNS AS REQUESTED BY PREVIOUS REVIEW COMMENT NUMBER 4A. 2. CLARIFY DETAIL OF THE TWO ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES SHOWN: A. PROVIDE SIDE WALK RAMP DETAIL B. ONE OF THEM MUST BE VAN ACCESSIBLE; 11' WIDE WITH A 5' ISLE OR 6' WIDE WITH AN 8' ISLE, REFERENCE ICC 117.1, SECTION 502.2 |
| 04/16/2008 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | The site plan must be accompanied by a landscape plan with information specified in DS 2-07.0. and LUC 3.7.2 The site plan and landscape plan must show identical site layout to avoid conflict between the two plans. The application will be reviewed for compliance when the documents are included in the submittal. |
| 04/17/2008 | HEATHER THRALL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Heather Thrall Senior Planner PROJECT: T07CM01618 1446 E. Blacklidge Drive, new apartments - 11 units Commercial Site Plan, 2nd review TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 17, 2008 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. 1. Please enlarge all print to 12 point for microfilming (ie. Building height notes) 2. Per DS 2-02.2.1.6 regarding building height A) Plan is difficult to read with line weights. Appears there is a mix of parapet walls and flat roofs for first floor and then gabled roofs for the 2nd floor - please clarify. (Suggestion, provide elevation view to help with reducing clutter on plan.) 3. Per DS 2-02.2.1.7, with regards to building setbacks: A) Sec. 3.2.6.5.A - revise sheet 1, note 14 & drawing on sheet 2 for street front setbacks to be a minimum of "the greater of 20' or 1.5 times the height of the exterior building wall" - measured from the property line. The structures don't meet this front setback. B) on the resubmittal, the 2nd story building line appears to be within the required setback on the east and west sides (dashed line). call out wall height from grade to top of wall at each point of the proposed setback, and clearly call out the wall location(s) with distinct line weights. C) setback notes are either under other data or missing for south property line and east property line along unit 6. D) west side of unit 8 appears setbacks is provided less than 10'. Required minimum setback is the greater of 10' or ¾ of the height of exterior building wall. Check. E) note that balconies count as walls if solid and will affect building setback - wrought iron will not be a wall. Clarify balcony construction please. 4. Please note that further review comments may be forthcoming, depending upon the responses provided. I may be reached at Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov HCT C:\planning\site\DSD\T07CM01618 1446 e blacklidge 2.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan |
| 06/03/2008 | BIANCA RAMIREZ | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: May 8, 2008 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T07CM01618 PROJECT NAME: Casas Urbano PROJECT ADDRESS: 1446 East Blacklidge Drive PROJECT REVIEWER: Patricia Gilbert, Engineering Associate The following items must be revised or added to the site plan. Please include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. Floodplain Use Permit will be required for any work being done within the identified City of Tucson 100-year floodplain. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: SITE PLAN, DRAINAGE REPORT 1. Complied 2. Complied 3. It is not clear why a private 10' drainage easement is proposed. A drainage easement would be required if the drainage is flowing through separate lots, such as a townhome. Because this is a site plan review it is only necessary to show the drainage area. Revise appropriately. 4. Complied 5. Complied 6. Provide the existing floodplain delineation on the site plan. Include the line weight in the legend. DS 2-02.2.1.A.15. Reponse: Include floodplain in southwest corner if applicable. Address in drainage report. 7. Provide the proposed floodplain delineation line weight in the legend. DS 2-02.2.1.A.15. Reponse: Include floodplain in southwest corner if applicable. Address in drainage report.. 8. Indicate the datum used for the water surface elevation (WSE). Provide this information on the plan in an appropriate area. DS 2-02.2.1.A.15. Response: Include vertical datum and basis of elevation on site plan. 9. The WSE that is used to determine the finish floor elevation (FFE) discussed in the drainage report on page 3 is 2379.2'. The drainage report states this WSE is at the entrance of the project. The shown WSE on the site plan is 2378.9'. This office acknowledges the proposed FFEs is one foot above the WSE that is from the drainage report. However the document should match for consistency. Revise appropriately and/or clarify in the response letter. Response: Include vertical datum. 10. Complied 11. Complied 12. All easements of record must be graphically shown on the plan with recordation data. On sheet 2, there appears to be a utility box located at the east side of the entrance/exit drive. Is this existing? Is there an easement? Or is it a new easement? Clarify and revise appropriately. Response: Please respond to entire comment. Response letter only says acknowledged, please provide explination. 13. Dimension the 10' of clear space between the bollards on the detail for the solid waste enclosure (detail 11/4). DS 6-01. Response: Provide 10 distance dimension in north/south direction. See attached detail to ensure that detail incudes all the minimum requirements. 14. Complied 15. Complied 16. Revise keynote 7 to read, "general note 18." Response: It appears that response letter repeats comment 15 for comment 16 as well. Please reply and or correct original comment 16. 17. Clearly indicate on the plan detectable warnings (truncated domes) are provided at all transitions between the access ramps (concrete) and vehicle use areas (asphalt). All accessible curb ramps shall have truncated domes installed that shall be twenty-four (24) inches minimum in the direction of travel and extend the full width of the curb ramp or flush surface. The domes shall be located so the edge nearest the curb line is six (6) inches to eight (8) inches from the curb line. ANSI 406.12, ANSI 705 Reponse: Recently our H/C access review process has changes. Please see comments from Ron Brown for comments in regard to H/C access. 18. Please note that subsequent comments may be necessary upon resubmittal, depending on the nature and extent of revisions that occur to the plans. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS 1. Complied 2. The WSE that is used to determine the finish floor elevation (FFE) discussed in the drainage report on page 3 is 2379.2'. The drainage report states this WSE is at the entrance of the project. The shown WSE on the site plan is 2378.9'. This office acknowledges the proposed FFEs is one foot above the WSE that is from the drainage report. However the document should match for consistency. Revise appropriately and/or clarify in the response letter. Response: Include vertical datum and basis of elevation on site plan. 3. Indicate the datum used for all discussed elevations. Response: Include vertical datum. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 06/04/2008 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |