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: RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - T12CM01442
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/04/2016 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: T12CM01442 813 E. 8th Street Residential (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 21, 2015 The building plans have been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. The following comments were not addressed. Per UDC Article 7.8.4.C If access is provided by an easement and the easement serves more than two single-family homes the City may require the easement to be developed as a street or as a parking area access lane (PAAL). The determination as to whether a developed street or PAAL is required will be made at the time of review of the proposed land division or development of the property based on the need for public services, such as utilities, refuse collection, and fire suppression, and on the projected average daily traffic (ADT) of the access easement. That said it appears that the front structures has at least two units and with the addition of the proposed house you are proposing a minimum of three (3) units accessing off of the same easement. The existing drive way does not appear to meet the minimum widths for a PAAL or access lane, see UDC Tables 7.4.6-1 & -2. Provide a width dimension for the access lane on the plan. At a minimum access to the proposed site will need to be 20' wide along with a four sidewalk along the existing duplex and 24' wide where access is provided to vehicle parking spaces. A parking design modification request (PDMR) may be required A utility/access easement is required across parcel 124-06-006B. Show the easement on the plan and provide the recordation information. Zoning recommends that you contact Tucson Water to determine requirements for new water meters. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956 |
| 01/04/2016 | KEN VAN KARSEN | BUILDING-RESIDENTIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 01/04/2016 | PAUL BAUGHMAN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: December 21, 2015 DUE DATE: December 30, 2015 SUBJECT: SFR south of High School Wash bank TO: Cypress Civil, Jeff Hunt, PE LOCATION: 813 East 8th Street REVIEWERS: Paul Baughman, PE, CFM ACTIVITY: T12CM01442 and T15OT01111 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning and Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed SFR Plan Package, Drainage Report (Cypress Civil July 20, 2015). Engineering does not recommend approval of the SFR plan package at this time. Since the first submittal review, it has been determined that there is no existing bank protection. Additionally, no response letter has been received to the first submittal comments. Please call to arrange a meeting if there is any question as to what is required to gain approval of this plan set. The following items need to be addressed: 1) Per Chapter 26-8 (d) (2) Fill needs to extend 25' from edge of structure for a fill pad. Since the pad is only 50 feet wide it appears that a design alternative for a shorter distance may be required as provided by a civil engineer. Please dimension proposed distance from top of fill slope to structure on plan. 2) Per the Drainage Standards Manual section 8.5.10.1 superelevation needs to be analyzed and the finished floor elevation set based on developed conditions, superelevated flow depths. The current proposal to set the finished floor elevation based on existing conditions, unsuperelevated water surface elevations needs to be revised to reflect developed conditions. 3) Per Chapter 26, Section 7, 8 (4) and 8 (e) Erosion Hazard Setback needs to be established using equation 7.8 from the drainage standards manual. The radius of curvature (please show graphically and add this number to the channel report) of the channel will need to be determined to select the coefficient for use in equation 7.8. Per the Drainage Standards Manual section 7.4, item 1 the setback is to be measured from the top edge of the highest channel bank. If the setback is to be reduced below the limits established by equation 7.8 a soils investigation prepared by a state-registered professional Civil Engineer will need to be provided outlining the erosive properties of the area to be graded or disturbed. 4) Per section 6.6 and equation 6.3 of the Drainage Standards Manual, scour analysis needs to be performed since the structure is proposed in the erosion hazard setback area (EHS). 5) Per Chapter 26, Sections 5.2 (9) and 11.2 (h) the finished floor elevation shall be certified by a professional Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor such that it is shown to be at or above the regulatory flood plain elevation. 6) Per Chapter 26, Section 5.2 (11) all service facilities such as electrical, and heating equipment shall be at or above the regulatory floodplain elevation. Please add a general note to the plan. 7) Per Chapter 26, Section 5.2 (12) please provide slope protection, as designed by an engineer and concrete toe downs around fill pad where fill or structure has been placed in the erosion hazard setback area. 8) Per Chapter 29, Article 8 (Section 29-14) there is a study area measured 50' from the top of high school wash bank that may require additional analysis prior to development in this area. Please see Landscape and/or planning staff review comments for additional detail. If this lot existed on or before April 25, 1991, development of one (1) single-family residence may be exempt per Chapter 29-14 (b) (1). 9) Per Chapter 26, Section 11.2 (a) (1) and (2) a and b, please show proposed fill contours and a cross section of the proposed fill pad including the high school wash channel bottom, any existing or proposed slope protection, toe downs and the limits of the erosion hazard setback area. 10) Per Chapter 26, Section 11.2 (a) (2) b. please provide photographs of the adjacent channel upstream and downstream such that it can be ascertained whether bank protection currently exists. This first submittal comment may be mute per phone conversation with the Engineer where it was communicated that there is no existing bank protection. 11) Per Chapter 26, Section 11.2 (b) the floodplain use permit may be subject to conditions and restrictions designed to reduce or mitigate the potential damage or hazard to life or property resulting from development within the regulatory floodplain, floodway or erosion hazard areas. 12) Per Chapter 26, Section 11.2 (b) (6) please add a general note to the plan that indicates the applicant agrees to hold the city and its officials and agents, harmless and defend them from any and all claims for damages now and in the future relating to the use of the property sought to be developed by reason of flooding, flowage, erosion or damage caused by water, whether surface, flood or rainfall. 13) Please add easement recordation data for lot access through lot 3B. If you have any comments questions or wish to discuss new information, please call or email me at 520-837-5007 or paul.baughman@tucsonaz.gov. |