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 - T09CM02016
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/29/2009 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied | Fire sprinklers required. Please indicate method and location of water supply for fire sprinklers. |
| 07/29/2009 | RBROWN1 | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | NOT A COT OWNED/OPERATED PROPERTY |
| 07/31/2009 | SSHIELD1 | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | PROVIDE A REVISED LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT REFLECTS ALL CHANGES TO THE SITE PLAN. LANDSCAPE SECTION WILL REVIEW THE PLAN ON THE NEXT SUBMITTAL. |
| 07/31/2009 | SSHIELD1 | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | SEE LANDSCAPE COMMENTS |
| 07/31/2009 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 5DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Callecita Villas T09CM02016 Site Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 31, 2009 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 due to a change of use. This site plan is being reviewed as a site plan for a multi-family, apartment, and complex. A final plat for condo conversion will be required for the proposed condominiums. 2. Remove all references to "CONDOMINIUMS" from the plan. Remove all references to "CONDOMINIUMS & COMMOM ELEMENTS" from the title block. 3. Remove the references to "DSMR DS06-20 & DS07-21" from the plan as the Development Standard Modification Requests (DSMR) have expired. If requirement for the prior approved DSMR is still valid a new DSMR will need to be applied for. 4. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A. Provide a detail for the proposed accessible handicapped parking space. 5. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 At the northeast corner of #14 and the northwest corner of #15 there is a ramp called out under keynote 12, what is the purpose of this ramp. 6. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Along the west side of #12 provide a dimension from the proposed structure to the parking area access lane (PAAL). Per D.S. 3-05.2.2.B.1 A minimum setback distance of five (5) feet for a pedestrian refuge area must be maintained between any enclosed structure and a PAAL. 7. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Along the east side of #14 provide a dimension from the proposed structure to the parking area access lane (PAAL). Per D.S. 3-05.2.2.B.1 A minimum setback distance of five (5) feet for a pedestrian refuge area must be maintained between any enclosed structure and a PAAL. 8. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 It does not appear that there an accessible route from the accessible vehicle parking space access aisle to the adjacent sidewalk, please clarify. 9. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Per D.S. 3-05.2.2.D provide a dimension for the radius on the backup spur shown at the north end of the visitors parking. 10. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Per D.S. 3-05.2.2.D provide a dimension from the backup spur to the proposed refuse enclosure. 11. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.1 Please clarify how the gross lot area change from the last approved plan. 12. Depending on how the above comments are addressed addition comments may be forth coming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\site\t09cm02016 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents. |
| 08/05/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 5 August 2009 T09CM02016/CALLECITA VILLAS CONDOS REVIEWED BY RON BROWN ACCESSIBLE REVIEW 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1 DENIED: SEE COMMENTS BELOW I. SHEET 1 OF 3 A. Denote governing accessibility code as 2006 IBC, Chapter 11 and ICC/ANSI 117.1 for private property. B. Denote public right of way accessibility standards as COT DOT 207 standards for curb ramps at drive ways. II. SHEET 2 OF 3 A. Provide a new note 28 referencing all interior ramps, marked crossings and detectable warnings in the inside property line boundaries to 2006 IBC, ICC/ANSI, Sections 405 and 406. Change all note 11 and 12 references within the boundaries of the property lines to note 28. All ramps and crossings in the public right of way may remain referenced to notes 11 and 12. B. Please denote the one required space as "Van Accessible" as per 2006 IBC, Section 1106.5 C. Please provide an accessible parking signage detail including the "Van Accessible" sign. D. The marked crossing on the west side needs ramps and detectable warnings. Please provide a large scale detail of the marked crossing showing all critical accessible dimensions, ramps, slopes, markings and detectable warnings required by ICC/ANSI sections 406.12, 406.14 and 106.5 " Marked Crossing".. E. Verify all building egress compliance with IBC Sections 1007, 1015, 1019, AND 1105. III. SHEET 3 of 3: A. DETAIL J: Change the reference and redesign the curb ramp to comply with ICC/ANSI 117.1, section 406. SD 207 is for DOT public right of way construction only. END OF REVIEW |
| 08/17/2009 | RICK MYERS | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. A seperate permit is required for the installation of a private sewage collection system. Reference: Title 18-9-E 302, 4.02 General Permit Arizona Administrative Code. |
| 08/18/2009 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: August 20, 2009 SUBJECT: 209 E Limberlost Drive Site Plan- Engineering Review TO: Mike Harris LOCATION: T13S R13E Sec24 Ward 3 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: T09CM02016 (Site Plan) SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the site plan (T09CM02016) for the above referenced property. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the site plan at this time. The following items need to be addressed: SITE PLAN COMMENTS: 1) The submitted plans were reviewed for full code site plan requirements per DS Sec.2-02. All comments and requirements on the site plan must reflect proposed apartments and not condominiums. Revise all language on the site plan to reflect an apartment complex versus a condominium complex including the reference to all Common Elements. Private streets must be constructed per DS Sec.3-01. Once the site plan is approved the applicant can submit through the CDRC Department a Final Plat for a condominium conversion or if the applicant chooses they can apply for a Condominium Tentative Plat-Final Plat review through CDRC. 2) DS Sec.10-01.2.2: Provide onsite retention for the required 5-year threshold requirement. Onsite retention can not be waived unless it is not feasible due to constraints imposed by subsurface conditions (e.g., close proximity to bedrock or ground water table). A Drainage Report was not submitted with this project therefore drainage related issues could not be reviewed at this time. Provide all associated documentation with the next submittal to verify retention requirements. 3) Revise the site plan to remove all references to the site plan activity T06CM00804 and the DSMR's (DS06-20 and DS07-21). The new site plan number T09CM02016 can be added to the site plan. Any modifications to the Development Standards will require a new DSMR submittal for review and approval. 4) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.8: Revise the site plan to provide dimensions for the proposed back-up spur adjacent to the refuse container location. Verify the minimum 3 feet in depth, a 3-foot radius, and a 3 foot separation between curb and the proposed refuse container. Refer to DS Sec.3-05.2.2.D for clarification. 5) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.11: Revise Keynote #14 and/or the referenced Detail J/3 to verify that the handicap access ramp and all associated improvements within the public right-of-way meet the minimum requirements of Standard Detail for Public Improvement #207. Detail J/3 appears to be for onsite handicap ramps that must meet the minimum ANSI requirements (not ADOT). 6) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.11: For consideration; Limberlost is no longer classified as a Major Street and Route therefore the 25-foot curb returns at the roadway intersection is no longer required. However as a local road 18-foot radii and concrete curb returns are per City of Tucson Transportation Access Management Guidelines (TAMG), Section 5.5. The applicant has the option of keeping the 25-foot radii or proposing the minimum 18-foot radii. 7) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to show that all proposed handicap access ramps within the public right-of-way are constructed entirely offsite. Any portion of the public right-of-way improvements that are proposed to be constructed onsite will require easements prior to site plan approval. Provide the recordation information for any proposed easement. 8) DS Sec2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to dimension the required 5-foot wide sidewalk along the street frontage of Limberlost Drive, currently the site plan labels it as existing, but without a dimension. Refer to DS Sec.3-01 for all curb and sidewalk requirements. A DSMR will be required for modifying the development standards to allow a sidewalk that does not meet the minimum 5-foot width requirements. The DSMR must be approved prior to site plan approval. All exhibits and discussion must reflect any changes made by the approved DSMR. Provide a General Note to list the DSMR number, the Development Standard being modified along with the date of DSMR approval. This comment was not fully addressed with this submittal. 9) DS Sec2-02.2.1.A.12: Provide a dimension for all sidewalks adjacent to the proposed structures and PAAL. Per DS Sec.3-05.2.2.B.1 a minimum setback distance 5-feet is required for a pedestrian refuge area between any enclosed structure and a PAAL. 10) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all onsite handicap and ANSI Standard requirements that apply to this project. 11) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Revise the site plan to label and dimension the Q100 discharge, the erosion hazard setback line and the existing/proposed 100-year floodplain limits for the existing Stone Wash drainage way. All flows of 100-cfs or more must be shown along with the existing floodplain limits and erosion hazard setback limit on the site plan. Verify that the limits match the required Drainage Report and post-exhibit watershed map. 12) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Label and dimension on the site plan all existing drainage improvements that are contained within the regulatory wash. Specifically the culverts located under Limberlost Drive. 13) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Revise the site plan to show the erosion hazard setback line for Stone Wash located west of the subject property. The erosion hazard setback must be determined for the public drainage channel and shown on the site plan. If the erosion hazard setback is to be reduced provide a discussion and details that meet the requirements within DS Sec.10-02 Chapter VII. 14) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Verify that all proposed scuppers have the capacity to contain the 10-year flow event under any sidewalk. Specifically the scuppers proposed with Keynote #13. 15) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Provide details and spacing for all proposed wall openings that meet the minimum requirements of the required Drainage Report. The proposed wall will be constructed and permitted under a separate permit however, weep hole sizing and spacing is required to be shown on the site plan to verify minimum requirements of the Drainage Report. 16) DS Sec.2-01.2.1.A.19: Revise the site plan to label and dimension the existing right-of-way and future Major Streets and Routes right-of-way for Stone Avenue. 17) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.19: Revise the site plan to label Stone Ave as MS&R Arterial. 18) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.19: Revise the site plan to label the (½)-30-foot right-of-way for Limberlost Drive as existing. 19) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.20: Revise the site plan to show that all proposed easements are clearly dimensioned and labeled with recordation information. Specifically the proposed public water easement must be a dedicated easement with recordation information ("By Final Plat" does not satisfy this requirement since this is a site plan review) shown on the site plan prior to site plan approval. Only during the Final Plat process to convert the apartments to condominiums will Common Elements or "By Final Plat" be accepted along with the required CC&Rs. 20) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.27: Provide a General Note stating that all fences or walls will require a separate permit for review and approval by all necessary Development Services Departments. 21) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.32: Revise the site plan and details to provide the minimum dimensions and construction details for the required refuse containers. Refer to DS Sec.6-01 (Figure 3) for all required refuse enclosure dimensions and construction details. 22) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.32: Verify the maneuverability, label and dimension the required 36-foot and 50-foot radii for the refuse container; clearly label these in plan view. Provide the required 14-foot by 40-foot clear approach and verify the maximum allowed back up distance for maneuverability. Refer to DS Sec.6-01 for all refuse requirements. 23) A Geotechnical Report is required for this project. The soils report needs to discuss suitability and feasibility of the project. Description of existing soil constraints for the site, structural design recommendations, and other typical geotechnical data is needed. The soil report shall provide identification / assessment of any potentially hazardous geotechnical areas. The Geotechnical Report shall specifically address all criteria listed in this section. Recommendations need to be incorporated into the site plan and Drainage Report. 24) DS Sec.11-01.9: Revise the site plan and associated details to verify the required 2-foot setback from all property boundaries to the proposed limits of grading, fill slopes, block wall and any associated erosion protection. Provide sufficient room to allow for the 2-feet setback from property lines to top of fill slopes and associated erosion protection. Provide a cross section for all property boundaries that show the 2-foot setback for all structures from the property line. 25) Review and approval from TDOT Permits and Codes for all improvements within the public right-of-way will be required. A right-of-way use permit application will be required prior to construction. Refer to the following links for TDOT Forms and applications: a) http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Forms_Fees___Maps/Applications/applications.html / b) http://www.dot.ci.tucson.az.us/engineering/pia.php c) Or contact Thad Harvison at 837-6592 for all additional questions regarding r-o-w. 26) Be advised that further comments may be forth coming on resubmittal of the site plan due to the full code requirement status. DRAINAGE REPORT: 27) All commercial/residential site plans over an acre require a Drainage Reports submitted to the City of Tucson that must follow the requirements outlined within the City of Tucson Development Standards Sections 10-01 and 10-02. These standards can be accessed online at http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf. 28) Provide onsite retention for the 5-year threshold requirement. Per 10-01.2.2 onsite retention can not be waived unless it is not feasible due to constraints imposed by subsurface conditions (e.g., close proximity to bedrock or ground water table). 29) DS Sec.10-02.7.6.1: Provide a discussion within the Drainage Report for the required erosion hazard setback and 100-year floodplain limits for the existing Stone Wash drainage way. All flows of 100-cfs or more must be shown along with the existing floodplain limits and erosion hazard setback limits. Revise the Drainage Report, pre and post-development drainage maps and the site plan to reflect all changes made within the revised report. 30) TC Sec.26-5.2: Provide a Drainage Report with existing floodplain determination and an erosion hazard setback evaluation discussion for Stone Wash. Revise the site plan to match the required information within the Drainage Report. Refer to City of Tucson Code Chapter 26-5.2 for floodway fringe development requirements. The following information is required on the site plan and must be discussed within the Drainage Report: a) The proposed report must provide calculations, with reference to the equations used from DS Sec.10-2, to justify the required erosion hazard setback line for the regulatory Stone Wash. Provide details and calculation within a Drainage Report to verify building setback from the existing wash. b) Provide a Drainage Report that calculates the water surface elevation (WSEL) at the upstream end of all proposed structures to verify that the FFEs and all service equipment are elevated at or above the base flood elevation of Stone Wash. c) Provide a revised Drainage Report showing cross sections along the regulatory Stone Wash with water surface elevations clearly labeled. Cross section distance must be a minimum of 200-feet between cross sections. 31) Provide a copy of the last approved Drainage Report for Stone Wash showing the discharge values and the toe-down depths of the existing bank protection to verify that the design of the bank protection can reduce the required erosion hazard setback as shown. GRADING PLAN: 32) A grading permit application is required for this project prior to any construction activity. Provide a copy of the stamped approved site plan (T09CM02016) along with the proposed grading plan for review. The grading plan can not be approved until verification that all details, locations, dimensions, and plan profiles match the approved site plan. Verify all information associated with the site plan is shown on the grading plan which will be used as the construction document. 33) DS Sec.11-01.9: The grading plan must dimension, in plan view and within the details, the required 2-foot setback from all property boundaries to the proposed limits of grading, top of fill slopes, and proposed fencing (the grading plan is required to label this clearly at all property line cross sections). 34) Provide a grading note to state the following: "Call for a Pre-construction meeting prior to start of earthwork. To schedule a DSD Pre-construction meeting, SWPPP inspection or general Engineering Inspections, call IVR (740-6970), or schedule with a Customer Service Representative at the Development Services Department, or contact DSD Engineering at 791-5550 extension 2101, or schedule inspections online at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Online_Services/Online_Permits/online_permits.html 35) DS Sec.11-01: Provide a grading note specifying conformance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (excavation and grading requirements). 36) Provide a general grading note stating that "All proposed fencing and walls will require a separate permit for review and approval by all necessary Development Services Departments." 37) Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) requirements are applicable to this project. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) and text addressing stormwater controls for all areas affected by construction activities related to this development will be required with a grading plan submittal. For further information, visit www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised site plan and Drainage Report that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Enclose "redlines" with the resubmittal package. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the site plan and Drainage Report review. For questions, or to schedule an appointment, I can be reached at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division COT Development Services |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/31/2009 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 08/31/2009 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |