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 - T08CM01171
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/14/2008 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/16/2008 | RBROWN1 | ADA | REVIEW | Denied | 15 APRIL 2008 T08CM01171/CASITAS ON BROADWAY REVIEWED BY RON BROWN ACCESSIBLE SITE REVIEW COT/ADAAG DENIED: SEE COMMENTS BELOW 1. GENERAL COMMENT: A. DENOTE ACCESSIBILITY COMPLIANCE TO ADAAG 1994 EDITION 2. SHEET C1.1: A. TWO ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED, ONE MUST BE VAN ACCESSIBLE. DENOTE SUCH, ADAAG SECTION 4.1.2 (5) (b) B. SURFACE SLOPES FOR ALL ACCESSIBLE PARKING AREAS TO BE NO GREATER THAN 1:50, ADAAG SECTION 4.6.3. PROVIDE SPOT GRADES REFLECTING COMPLIANCE C. PROVIDE AND IDENTIFY ACCESSIBLE ROUTE THROUGHOUT SITE TO ALL BUILDING ENTRANCES AND EXITS AND PARKING FACILITIES AND TO NEAREST PUBLIC TRANSPORATION POINT AS PER ADAAG 4.1.2. SHOW LOCATION OF NEAREST PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION DROP OFF POINT. PROVIDE SPOT GRADES THROUGHOUT ACCESSIBLE ROUTE SHOWING COMPLIANCE WITH SLOPE REQUIREMENTS OF ADAAG SECTION 4.3 SPECIFICLY 4.3.7 WIDTH OF ACCESSIBLE ROUTES TO BE 4' AND 5' AS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS, WITH OUT CURB. C. RIGHT OF WAY CURB RAMPS ARE TO MEET REQUIREMENTS OF COT DOT DETAILS 207. D. RAISED MARKED CROSSING CURB RAMP REFERENCED BY NOTE 32 (REF DETAIL 13/S-1.2) DOES NOT WORK IN THIS SITUATION. ACCESSIBLE ROUTE IS DISRUPTED BY SLOPES OF CURB RAMP. BECAUSE THIS IS AN ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCE TO THE BUILDING, THE ACCESS GETS EVEN WORSE. ONE SOLUTION IS TO SEPARATE THE CURB RAMP AWAY FROM THE BUILDING EGRESS AND PROVIDE SIDE WALK RAMPS MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF ADAAG SECTION 4.8. E. AN ACCESSIBLE RAMP PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE PROVIDED TO WEST ENTRANCE/EXIT OF THE FACILITY AT THE COVERED PATIO AREA. CAN'T REALLY BE SURE WITHOUT FLOOR PLANS SHOWING ALL ENTRANCES AND REQUIRED EXITS. F. VERIFY THAT ALL REQUIRED ACCESSIBLE BUILDING ENTRANCES AND EXITS ARE COMPLIABLE TO ADAAG SECTIONS 4.1.3 (8) (A) AND (9) AND 4.1.2 (7) (C). 3. SHEET C-1.2 A. DETAIL 3: PROVIDE/SHOW "VAN ACCESSIBLE" ADDED SIGNAGE B. DETAILS 8, 9, 12 AND 13: APPLIED NOTE REFERENCES DETECTABLE WARNINGS (TRUNCATED DOMES) TO BE FULL WIDTH AND DEPTH (SIC OF CURB RAMP). ADAAG SECTION 4.7.7 REQUIRES DETECTABLE WARNINGS TO EXTEND TO THE FULL WIDTH AND DEPTH OF THE CURB RAMP. CORRECT DETAILS AND MAKE IT SO. C. DETAIL 13: CHANGE DIMENSION FROM 5' TO 5'-6"; CHANGE FLARED SLOPES OF 1:12 TO 1:10 MAX AS PER ADAAG DETAIL 12 (a). D. DETAIL 7: IDENTIFY ONE SPACE AS "VAN ACCESSIBLE"; MOVE SIGNAGE OUT OF THE 2.5' BUMPER OVER HANG AREA. END OF REVIEW |
| 04/16/2008 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Passed | THIS IS A COT PROJECT GOVERENED BY ADAAG |
| 04/22/2008 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. 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. Dimension street landscape borders. 2. Indicate square footage of all landscaped areas and calculation of the percentage of vegetative coverage per DS 2-07.2.2.2.g. 3. A 6' wall is required to screen loading zone from adjacent residential properties per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. Identify all screening elements on landscape plans. 4. The site plan and landscape plan must show identical site layout to avoid conflict between the two plans. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape plan. 5. Additional comments may apply. |
| 04/23/2008 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | Exception |
| 05/02/2008 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Casitas on Broadway T08CM01171 Site Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 5, 2008 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. This site plan was reviewed for compliance with the City of Tucson Development Standards (D.S.) and Land Use Code (LUC) for full code compliance. 2. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.3 Correct the project address to include East Broadway. 3. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7 Based on the information provided on the plan the proposed building setback shown to the back of future curb for Broadway Blvd. does not meet the requirements of LUC Section 3.2.6.5.B Table 3.2.6.I ADT of 1000 or greater. Based on the provided building height of 22'-6" this setback should be 22'-6". After reviewing the provided elevations it appears that the 22'-6" wall height is measured from finish floor. Building setbacks are based on to of wall to design grade. This said the height used to determine building setback would be 23'-0". 4. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7 The setback to Plumer Avenue is not shown correctly. This setback is based on LUC Section 3.2.6.5.B Table 3.2.6.I ADT of 1000 or greater measured to the back of curb. 5. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Provide a dimension from the vehicle parking spaces located on the east and west side to the proposed refuse enclosure. 6. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 It appears that there is a proposed parallel vehicle parking space near the entrance to the property. Provide a curb length (E) dimension. 7. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9 On detail 11/C1.2 provide the materials for lighting, specific type of rack and the number of bicycles it supports. 8. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9 Identify the main entrance of the proposed building so that the requirements of D.S. 2-09.4.1 can be verified. 9. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 As this is a commercial project the proposed parking located at the northwest corner of the property cannot be accessed from an alley or easement. 10. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13 If applicable provide the location, type, size and height of existing and proposed freestanding signage and billboards. 11. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.20 If applicable show all easements of record graphically on the plan together with recording docket and page reference. 12. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.25 If applicable provide existing and proposed freestanding lighting layout and type. Provide a detail; list the height of pole and type of lighting. 13. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.1 As this is a single lot with split zoning provide the overall site area on the plan. 14. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.3 Zoning acknowledges the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) provided on the plan. Please remove the reference to Maximum Lot Coverage as Development Designators 29 & 30 does not address lot coverage. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\site\t08cm01171 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents. |
| 06/06/2008 | BIANCA RAMIREZ | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: June 9, 2008 SUBJECT: Site Plan TO: MPE LOCATION: 2121 E Broadway, T14S, R14E, Section 8, Ward 6 REVIEWERS: Bianca Ramirez, CFM ACTIVITY: T08CM01171 (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 site plan. Site Plan: 1. The most recent aerial photo of the site does not match what is depicted on the site plan. Please modify site plan to represent actual footprint of existing building and/or clarify. If the existing buildings have been demolished please provide demolition permit number in the lower right hand corner of each sheet of the site plan. The address being utilized appears to be the address located to the south of the proposed development site. I tried to located by parcel number. But, the parcel number provided in permit plus 129-04-1490 - the actual parcel numbers for the properties indicated are 129-04-157A and 129-04-157B. 2. Clarify the mulitiple property descriptions provided on the cover sheet. Is their going to be a lot combo completed? See zoning comments. 3. As per the Federal ADA requirements, all wheel chair ramps shall be constructed in accordance with COT SD 207. New review process has begun within the City of Tucson. See comments from Ron Brown for comments. 4. Ensure that all text is a minimum of twelve point font. 5. Provide all existing and proposed buildings and structures, include demensions of building on site plan per D.S. 2-02.2.1.6. 6. Add a note in your own words stating that the site plan has been designed to ensure that it has meet all the Gateway Overlay Criteria per the Land Use Code. 7. Label existing and future sight visibility triangles per D.S. 2-02.2.1.10. 8. Label Broadway Boulevard as an arterial street and Plumber Avenue as a local Sreet. 9. Change existing and future near side sight visibility triangles to 345'. 10. Label all points of egress and ingress iand label parking area access lanes PAAL(s) per D.S. 2-02.2.1.11. 11. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.11 & DS Sec.3-01.3.2.C: Depict and label 25-feet radii concrete curbs per City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Detail 213 (PC/COT SD 213) at the driveway entrance along Fort Lowell Road. The curbs should be constructed at the edge of pavement and entirely on the subject property, which must also be depicted on the site plan. 12. Per City of Tucson, Transportation Access Management Guidelines, Guideline 5.4.1 states entrance and exit drives crossing arterial and collectors are limited to two per three hundred feet of frontage along any major roadway. The nearest pavement edges spaced at least eighty feet apart. Guideline 5.4.1 states a minimum of one hundred and fifty feet, measured at curbline, shall separate the nearest pavement edge of any entrance or exit driveway and the curbline to any signalized intersection with arterial and collector roadways. For questions in regard to Transportation Management Guidelines please contact Jose Ortiz, Civil Engineer, for questions. 13. Label existing and future right of way (ROW) for Broadway Boulevard and Plumer Avenue. 14. Call out and dimension exising sidewalk along Broadway Boulevard and Plumer Avenue. 15. Fully dimensioned maneuvering area(s) for loading zones per D.S. 2-02.2.1.14. 16. Show the limits of the 100-year floodplain and water surface elevation per D.S. 2-02.2.1.15. 17. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Indicate limits of the 100-year floodplain per the provided water surface elevations. 18. List estimated cut & fill quantities on site plan per D.S. 2-02.2.1.17. 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 if there are any cut or fill to be taking place. If no cut and/or fill is taking place indicate the quantity of zero (0) on the plan. Estimated cut and Fill: Cut = 0 and Fill = 0 will suffice. 19. Label dimensioned right-of-way, including any applicable Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan right-of-way per D.S. 2-02.2.1.19. 20. DS Sec. 2-05.2.4.H.2: Provide the right-of-way (ROW) recordation information for Broadway Boulevard and Plumer Avenue. 21. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.19: Label the 11-foot future sidewalk and curb area on the site plan to verify that all improvements are located outside of the future ROW. 22. Verify that all easement(s) of record have been graphically shown on the plan together with recording docket and page per D.S. 2-02.2.1.20. 23. Dimension from street monument lines to existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, driveways, and utility lines per D.S. 2-02.2.1.21. 24. Verify that all fences, walls, or vegetation for screening and sight visibility by type, material, height, location and spacing along with details have been provided on the site plan per D.S. 2-02.2.1.27. 25. Show site plan activity number in the lower right hand corner of each of the site plan sheets per D.S. 2-02.2.1.29. 26. Call out curb radius(s) on site plan. 27. 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. 28. 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. 29. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Provide drainage arrows and locations of all concentration points. Specifically show roof down spout locations from existing and proposed buildings at pedestrian circulation areas. Indicate drainage symbol in legend to identify drainage arrows.rian sidewalk is required. Detail D does not reflect City of Tucson Detail 204. Detail resembles City of Tucson detail 205.5. Modify to reflect actual proposal and update detail and note (L) accordingly. 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. 30. Add note: "Depress all landscaped areas 6" maximum for water harvesting". 31. A Stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) is required during Grading plan submittal. See SWPPP requirements. 32. "A grading permit and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP's) may be will be required for this project. Submit 3 sets of grading and SWPPP's with text, upon completion and submittal of a grading permit application. A grading permit may not be issued prior to site plan approval. Subsequent comments may be necessary, depending upon the nature and extent of revisions that occur to the plans". 33. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 06/16/2008 | DELMA ROBEY | APPROVAL SHELF | Completed |
| 06/16/2008 | DELMA ROBEY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 06/16/2008 | GERARDO BONILLA | REJECT SHELF | Completed |