Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Permit Number - T10CM00576
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/27/2010 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: T10CM00576 Ghost Ranch Lodge - Affordable Elderly Housing 801 W. Miracle Mile Site Plan TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 27, 2010 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. Per the previous redlines the pedestrian refuge with sidewalks were also indicated as required in front of buildings 4 and 7. Access ramps to be placed at driveway crossing to provide the accessible connection. 2. Zoning is willing to review the re-submittasl over the counter once the plan has been revised. PLease call in advance if this is something you wish to do and if Zoning is the only review needed short of all reviewers requiring a full re-submittal of the plans. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. C:\planning\cdrc\DSD\T10CM00576.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents |
| 04/27/2010 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/28/2010 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | T10CM00576 April 30, 2010 1. Since the two phases involve more than one acre of disturbed area, a stormwater pollution prevention plan will be required for the entire project. 2. The SWPPP must meet all of the requirements of the ADEQ stormwater construction permit including the identification of all operators. Additional comments may be forthcoming once these comments have been addressed. Loren Makus, EIT Senior Engineering Associate |
| 05/11/2010 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | Confirm the need for backwater valves. Buildings 1, 10 (west), 12 (west), and 12 (east) do not require backwater valves but backwater valves are shown on the drawings. Buildings 2 (east) and 3 require back water valves but none are shown on the plans. Building 8 does not indicate the presence of any building sewer, and it is not clear if buildings 6 or 11 have one building sewer or two building sewers. Where a finished floor elevation is less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole in the public sewer or private sewer collection system, a backwater valve shall be installed in the building drain or branch of the building drain serving that floor. Floors discharging from above that reference point (e.g. the second floor of building 12) shall not discharge through the backwater valve. Reference: Section 710.1, UPC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 05/12/2010 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond |