Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: T08CM00263
Parcel: 11616301J

Address:
705 N FREEWAY

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T08CM00263
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/28/2008 DAVE MANN FIRE REVIEW Approved
01/31/2008 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1. Screening is required for the entire Frontage Rd. per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. Revise plan as necessary.

2. In situations where the street landscape border is wider than the minimum ten (10) foot requirement, the landscape border width needs to be determined for the purposes of calculating the fifty (50) percent vegetative coverage requirement, LUC 3.7.2.4. The width is that area between the required screen and the property line. Portions of the landscape buffer are wider than 10'. Verify that coverage meets requirements.

3. A street landscape border, per Sec. 3.7.2.4 of the LUC, is a landscape area with a minimum width of ten (10) feet, running the full length of the street property line(s) bounding the site except for points of ingress-egress. Expand or eliminate portion of buffer that does not meet requirements.

4. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape & grading plan.

5. Additional comments may apply.
02/01/2008 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved Exception
02/04/2008 HEATHER THRALL ZONING REVIEW Denied TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Heather Thrall
Senior Planner

PROJECT: T08CM00263, 665 N. Freeway, New Country Inn Hotel
1st Review

TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 4, 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. This project was reviewed for compliance with the Land Use Code (LUC), Development Standards (DS), American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and International Building Code 2006 (IBC). Specifically, this project was reviewed for compliance with site plan content specified in DS 2-02.

2. Per DS 2-02.2.1.2, the Pima County Assessor's lists a parcel split/combination was done to the property in 2003. As the City must approve lot line changes, staff requests copies of the lot line activity done in 2003.

Please note that any proposed lot splits must also be done through the city review process. A 20 year lot line configuration and legal description history is needed for staff to determine whether the proposed lot split is possible.

Please indicate on each notation for the "proposed lot split" - that it is "via separate process", then add a Docket and Page notation for the future recordation information to be added next to the lot split note. The site plan won't be able to be approved until the lot split as proposed on the plan is approved.

3. Per DS 2-02.2.1.5, please provide dimensions and bearings for the proposed lot line on sheetA0.2.

4. Per DS 2-02.2.1.6, regarding the building:
A) please provide building footprint dimensions for permitting and records
B) clarify type of roofs for building -gable or parapet?
C) clarify the points of measurement for the height of the building - from grade to flat roof and then include parapet height - OR - grade to midpoint of pitched roof and include ridge height as well.
D) Any overhangs? Please show with dashed line
E) Is the porte cochere detached?
F) Declare the height of the porte cochere please
G) Please call out any restaurant or conference rooms & indicate whether open to public or just hotel guests

5. Per DS 2-02.2.1.7, add the following to the street perimeter setback notation - "measured from the back of the future curb location."

6. Per DS 2-02.2.1.8, regarding parking:
A) I acknowledge the parking layout and calculations meet code, thank you.
B) Please clarify if there will be a cross parking agreement between the adjacent hotel and restaurant sites. Provide a copy please, if applicable. Note that it will have to be recorded as well, and a note provided on the plan with the docket/page.

7. Per DS 2-02.2.1.9, regarding bicycle parking:
A) Per DS 2-09.4.1 (updated on the internet) please locate the class 2 bike parking to within 50' of the entry to the building.

8. Per DS 2-02.2.1.10, please provide sight visibility triangles at the entry to the development. Note that parking cannot be located within this SVT area.

9. Per DS 2-02.2.1.11, regarding PAALs
A) please provide vehicular circulation arrows/signage near the porte cochere
B) the area under the porte cochere, though showing a loading zone, appears to imply the use as a PAAL. Per LUC 3.4.3.2, a loading zone cannot be located within a PAAL. Dimension this area.
C) If the area under the porte cochere is not a PAAL, provide a directional sign for thru traffic to use the uncovered PAAL area and provide a sign directing loading only under the porte cochere.
D) A cross access agreement is needed between the existing hotel and restaurant sites and the new development. Please provide a copy on the next review.

10. Per DS 2-02.2.1.12, regarding handicapped and pedestrian circulation:
A) dimension between the porte cochere pillar and the hotel pillar - maintain 4' clear.
B) All gates require a minimum of 4' clear, for pedestrian access clearance, per DS 2-08
C) Clarify if the sidewalk outside the pool, along the PAAL, is in flush with the PAAL - it has to be physically separated from the PAAL, per DS 3-05
D) Provide a pedestrian connection to the street, per DS 2-08
E) Provide a pedestrian connection to the adjacent Ramada Inn, per DS 2-08.4.1.
F) Truncated domes should only be applied in a 2' wide strip, per ANSI 705.5., and should be positioned on the concrete - directly where transitioning from the handicapped parking access aisle to the pedestrian walk.
G) Please provide a dimension on the width of the sidewalks at the south side of the building along the parking area, and at the west side of the building leading to the River walk recreation area. Please ensure they are 4' minimum wide, per DS 2-08.
H) Please provide pedestrian access to the dumpster in the north side of the site, per DS 2-08.3.1.

11. Per DS 2-02.2.1.13, I see the free-standing signage noted near the entry. Please note that once sight visibility triangles are added near the entry, the sign location could be affected.

12. Per DS 2-02.2.1.14, regarding the loading space: per LUC 3.4.3 and DS 3-05
A) Per LUC 3.4.3.2, a loading zone cannot be located within a PAAL -please ensure the loading zone versus the PAAL use is determined and clarified as to which it shall be
B) Please provide free-standing signage advising traffic on both sides of the porte cochere of the loading zone only use area - and the designated traffic circulation area.
C) Please provide the overhead clearance for the loading zone

13. Per DS 2-02.2.1.19, please clarify with ADOT if the I-10 frontage road will widen, and if so clarify the future curb location and future right of way location. Please dimension distance from curb location(s) to edge of right of way location(s).

14. Per DS 2-02.2.1.20, please ensure all easements are shown graphically on the plan, with recordation information provided. Please list as a note a reference to cross access easements/agreements, with recordation information.

15. Per DS 2-02.2.1.25, please call out any free-standing lighting and provide height/base width.

16. Per DS 2-02.2.2.A.1 & 2, please note, should the proposed lot split project not go through, the Floor Area Ratio and lot size notes will need to be changed. In the response letter, please provide a copy of the lot split project.

17. Please note, further review comments may be forthcoming, depending upon the responses provided. I may be reached at Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov or at 837-4951.

HCT C:\planning\site\DSD\T08CM00263 665 N. Freeway.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents
02/04/2008 HEATHER THRALL ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Denied Please see zoning review comments for handicapped compliance review.
02/25/2008 BIANCA RAMIREZ ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: February 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Site Plan
TO: Kenta Delph
LOCATION: 665 N Freeway, T14S, R14E, Section 18, Ward 5
REVIEWERS: Bianca Ramirez, CFM
ACTIVITY: T08CM00263 (First Review)


RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Site Plan

SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed site plan for the above referenced property. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the site plan at this time. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal.

Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the SP.

Site Plan:

1. The most recent aerial photo of the site appears to indicate that there has already been some site improvement done to the site. Please clarify and indicate what is existing on the site plan. If demolition will be taking place. Demolition permit will be required if demolition will be taking place on site.
2. As per the Federal ADA requirements and revised standard detail 207 wheel chair ramps shall have the truncated domes. Aside from the Truncated Domes, all wheel chair ramps shall be constructed in accordance with COT SD 207. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Modify truncated domes so that they are located along the transition of pedestrian and vehicle circulation area.
3. Entire parcel is to be indicated on site plan. Provide addition sheet showing existing structures, improvements, etc for the entire parcel.
4. Label egress and ingress and provide width of parking area access lanes (P.A.A.L.).
5. Label and dimension parking area access lanes for southeast corner of parking area and parking area access lane between sidewalk and adjacent property per D.S. 2-02.2.1.11.
6. Provide dimension for distance between proposed loading zone and edge of curb.
7. Provide the surface material being utilized for the turn about driveway.
8. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to show the required pedestrian circulation path that is required from the proposed buildings to the required pedestrian circulation path connecting adjacent property.
9. Keynote #1 indicates 4" concrete slab on 4" ABC. Verify that specifications meet minimum development standard requirements.
10. Fully dimensioned loading space(s) and maneuvering area(s) per D.S. 2-02.2.1.14.
11. Show the limits of the 100-year floodplain and water surface elevation per D.S. 2-02.2.1.15. Provide FEMA FIRM panel information.
12. Please provide Drainage patterns and finished grades per D.S. 2-02.2.1.16.
13. Provide estimated cut & fill quantities per D.S. 2-02.2.1.17. If you site does not have any grading taking place, as part of the site submittal requirement estimated cut and fill quantities are required to be indicated on the plans so that it is clear to the inspector that no cut in fill is to be taking place. If not cut and fill is taking place indicate the quantity of zero (0) on the plan. Estimated cut and Fill: Cut = 0 and Fill = 0 will suffice
14. DS Sec.2.02.2.1.A.16: Provide drainage arrows and locations of all concentration points. Specifically show roof down spout locations proposed buildings at pedestrian circulation areas. A detail for the dimension of the proposed scuppers that are used for collecting onsite roof drainage at all pedestrian sidewalk is required, refer to City of Tucson details. Any scuppers proposed under the sidewalk will be designed and constructed to convey the 10-year flood flow. Provide a drainage statement showing scupper calculations that demonstrate that the 10-year flood flow is contained under the sidewalk.
15. Provide dimensioned right-of-way for Freeway per D.S. 2-02.2.1.19.
16. DS Sec. 2-05.2.4.H.2: Provide the right-of-way (ROW) recordation information for Freeway.
17. Verify that all easements of record have been graphically shown on the plan together with recording docket and page per D.S. 2-02.2.1.20.
18. Provide existing topographic contours at intervals not exceeding two (2) feet and/or spot elevations as pertinent and Bench Mark based on City of Tucson Datum, including City Field Book and page number per D.S. 2-02.2.1.23. Provide contour interval on plan below the scale located near the north arrow.
19. Verify that all fences, walls, or vegetation for screening and sight visibility by type, material, height, location and spacing have been indicated on site plan per D.S. 2-02.2.1.27. Provide note: fences, walls, etc. cannot be located within the sight visibility triangle between 30" and 72".
20. Show site plan activity number in the lower right hand corner of all sheets per D.S. 2-02.2.1.29.
21. Provide detail with dimensions for refuse container per D.S. 2-02.2.1.32 and D.S. 6-01.0. See attached figure 3 for refuse container.
22. A permit or a private improvement agreement will be necessary for any work performed within the Right-of-way. Contact Permits and Codes at (520) 791-5100 for permit information.
23. Please show a typical cross section of the P.A.A.L. or call out the percentage of slopes. Call out the grade break at the driveway, if applicable.
24. All symbols on plans need to be indicated in legend. Indicate all symbols on plans and reference in legend.
25. A grading permit and/or Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP's) may be required for this project. Provide cut and fill quantities along with area of disturbance. Subsequent comments may be necessary, depending upon the nature and extent of revisions made to the plans".
26. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.8: Provide typical parking space detail for parking areas. Provide site plan parking dimensions, note and parking details for both standard and handicap parking, together with access thereto. See DS Sec. 3-05.2.0.B.1 for minimum parking standards.
27. Per drainage report northeast corner of parcel must be rip rapped. Refer to proposed exhibit and indicate on plan.
28. Pedestrian access to trash enclosure is required. Door may be installed in trash enclosure to permit access.
29. Provide depressed curbing to allow for onsite drainage to enter into identified water harvesting areas. Verify that water harvesting areas do not affect proposed sidewalk.
30. Verify that all keynotes are indicated on site plan.
31. Provide existing and proposed site visibility triangles on site plan.
32. Provide retention basin locations and identify as water harvesting areas Depiction of water harvesting areas must be indicated on site plan on with preliminary civil sheets.
33. Provide retention basin located adjacent to property on site plan. Provide details and locations for all drainage infrastructures proposed. Label and dimension 10' weir per drainage report. Show water surface elevation of basin, side slopes adjacent to property line, etc.
34. Reference drainage report on site plan.
35. Indicate 50' erosion setback per drainage report. Label and dimension the erosion hazard setback. Provide a copy of improvements plans for verification.
36. Revise site plan to show all drainage areas and concentration points per drainage report to verify locations drainage concentration points.
37. Call out all radius dimensions on site plan for verification of minimum radius compliance.
38. Additional comments may be forthcoming.

Drainage Report:

Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the Drainage Report.

1. The content and format of the Hydrology report should follow S.M.D.D.F.M., chap. II, 2.1.3.
2. Sheet 6 of drainage report verify that retention basins Q100 = 218.4 - may be typo in A. Off Site explanation.
3. Verify that Off- Site aerial meets minimum requirements per 2.3.1.3.A.3.
4. Provide Client information on the cover of the Hydrology report.
5. Provide retention calculations for water harvesting areas since they are being utilized as retention basis. Provide explanation for water harvest areas … is water being concentrated?
6. On page 12 of the drainage report verify that 0.6 cfs for east channel is accurate.
7. Per aerial photo the spillway is non existent. It appears that recent landscaping may have removed swale.
8. Provide all applicable sheets from the ADOT drainage report that is referenced within proposed drainage report. Provide previous reports that effect property to verify if exiting basin was designated to contain the volume of water required for all sites. In that is
9. Add the basin(s) maintenance responsibility note and checklist per S.M.D.D.F.M. 2.3.1.6 C 1 and 2 to the Drainage Report.
10. Provide geotechnical report that includes the following:
a. 30- ft boring to verify hydro-collapsible soils and setbacks of building to basins and/or water harvesting areas.
b. Slope recommendations.
c. Parking area and parking space asphalt recommendations, specifically for heavy traffic.
d. Percolation test for retention within proposed water harvesting area.
11. Explain in drainage report that the basin is being used and provide maintenance report that shows that the proper inspections are taking place. In addition, provide that inspection reports to verify the basin maintenance.
12. Additional comments may be forthcoming.

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4928 or Bianca.Ramirez@tucsonaz.gov

Bianca C. Ramirez
Engineering Associate
City of Tucson/Development Services Department
201 N. Stone Avenue
P.O. Box 27210
Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210
(520) 837-4928 office
(520) 879-8010 fax

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
03/03/2008 DELMA ROBEY APPROVAL SHELF Completed
03/03/2008 DELMA ROBEY OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
03/03/2008 GERARDO BONILLA REJECT SHELF Completed