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.

Plan Review Detail

Plan Number: CIP-0825-00018
Parcel: Unknown

Address:
310 W ALAMEDA ST

Review Status: Requires Resubmit

Review Details: CIP - DEVELOPMENT SITE - INITIAL v.1

Plan Number - CIP-0825-00018
Review Name: CIP - DEVELOPMENT SITE - INITIAL v.1
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
Real Estate NOT REQUIRED Any proposed improvements located outside property lines and into public rights-of-way require a right-of-way permit and Private Improvement Agreement with the Department of Transportation & Mobility or Temporary Revocable Easement with the Real Estate Division (separate processes). If any action is required to address property rights (dedications, easements, etc), please contact the Real Estate Division 520-791-4181.
Design Review REQUIRES RESUBMIT Project needs to demonstrate compliance with the Rio Nuevo Area (RNA) overlay zone, UDC Section 5.12.7 (https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/tucson/latest/tucson_az_udc/0-0-0-23005). Please submit a Design Package as a subrecord of CIP-0825-00018, following these instructions: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/3/pdsd/documents/submission-documents/special_districts_application_instructions_7.18.23.pdf, and include materials listed in the instructions. The Design Package will need to be reviewed by the Design Review Board. No historic review will be needed. If you have any questions, please let me know: maria.gayosso@tucsonaz.gov. Thank you.
CDRC Post Review Express REVIEW COMPLETED Please review the comments left by reviewers. External Reviewers will be added once plans are between 90-100%
Commercial Plumbing REVIEW COMPLETED
Entitlements REVIEW COMPLETED
Fire New Construction REVIEW COMPLETED Provide/maintain Knox access at gate.
Questions: patricia.shelton@tucsonaz.gov
New Services/JOC REVIEW COMPLETED No comments at this time. There is no observable impact on the existing potable water distribution main.
NPPO REVIEW COMPLETED
ROW Engineering Review REVIEW COMPLETED Show dimension from edge of pavement (curb) to gate
Signs REVIEW COMPLETED The signage as proposed is considered an interior sign as defined under UDC Section 7.A.10.1. A separate permit is required for the signs.
Site Engineering REVIEW COMPLETED
Site Landscape REVIEW COMPLETED
Site Zoning REVIEW COMPLETED FROM: Ramiro Olivarez
PDSD Zoning Review Section
PROJECT: CIP-0825-00018
310 W ALAMEDA ST TUCSON, AZ 85701
La Entrada Garage (1st Review) (30% Review)
TRANSMITTAL DATE: ‎September 08, 2025

COMMENTS: Resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed.

1. Comment: Upon formal submittal provide the development package case number adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

2. Comment: If a plan or plat is prepared in conjunction with other applications or overlays or the parcel being developed is subject to conditions of an application processed previously, additional information must be added to the plan. Such applications and overlays include, but are not limited to: annexations; rezonings; special exceptions; Board of Adjustment variances; Design Development Options; Technical Standard Modification Request; overlays (Airport Environs Zone, Environmental Resource Zone, Gateway Corridor Zone, Hillside Development Zone, Historic Preservation Zone, Major Streets and Routes, Rio Nuevo District, Scenic Corridor Zone, WASH); Modification of Development Regulations through the Downtown Area Infill Incentive District or Rio Nuevo District; Downtown Heritage Incentive Zone; or, Design Review Board. Provide the following information on the plan.

If applicable, list additional applications and overlays, by case number.

3. Comment: Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and all streets that abut the subject property.

Label the “Granada AV” on the project-location map.

4. Comment: This site is located within PAD-2. The project is located within the boundaries of a Planned Area Development (PAD) zone, include a reduced-scale map of the PAD on the first sheet, indicating the location of the portion being developed.

5. Comment: If applicable, list additional applications and overlays, by case number (if applicable), in lower right corner of each sheet. As a general note provide the type of application processed or overlays applicable, a statement that the project meets the criteria/conditions of the additional application or overlay, the case number, date of approval, what was approved, and the conditions of approval.


6. General note 11 is not correct and should read –
"Drainage will remain in its natural state and will not be altered, disturbed, or obstructed other than as shown on this site plan."

7. Comment: General note 13 is not correct and should read – “No structure or vegetation shall be located or maintained so as to interfere with the sight visibility triangles in accordance with Section 10-01.5.0, Sight Visibility, of the Technical Standards Manual.”

8. Comment: The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided.

Include the conditions for the site to the west of Granada AV.

9. Comment: Provide site boundary/subdivision perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system.

10. Comment: The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks.

Identify the recordation data.

Dimension the on the site plan the new proposed pedestrian crossing, keynote 4.

11. Comment: Indicate if existing streets are public or private; provide street names, widths, curbs, sidewalks, and utility locations, all fully dimensioned.

12. Comment: Dimension the distance from the new proposed gate to the existing vehicle parking not being altered.

13. Comment: Show dimension from edge of pavement (curb) to gate.

14. Comment: Demonstrate vehicle parking maneuverability for the parking space located outside (west) of the proposed parking security gate.

15. Comment: Clarify, where does the pedestrian crossing pavement (keynote #4) connect to. Does it connect to a sidewalk?

This path must connect all public access areas of the development and the pedestrian circulation path located in any adjacent streets.

16. Comment: Dimension the vehicle ingress and egress width driveway points.

17. Comment: Motor vehicle parking spaces are being reduced from 81 spaces to 78. The proposed plan does not meet the minimum motor vehicle parking required per La Entrada Redevelopment Pl/Planned Area Development (PAD-2). Parking reductions are listed in the PAD-2 document page VII-11.

Per the PAD-2 document, commercial and public office space 1 space per 400 sq. ft. = 122 motor vehicle parking spaces. The proposed project is reducing the existing vehicle parking spaces from 81 to 78 vehicle parking spaces, making the vehicle parking less compliant.

In order to reduce the motor vehicle parking as proposed a City Manager Office (CMO) Waiver will be required. For further information on the CMO waiver process please contact Elisa Hamblin at Elisa.Hamblin@tucsonaz.gov.

18. Comment: See Site Landscape review comments as it pertains to the following:

A conceptual grading plan is required on projects with significant topographic conditions. The PDSD Engineering Administrator or designee will determine the need for such a plan.

Concurrent Reviews - For all projects, grading plans may be included in the development package and will be reviewed concurrently.

19. Comment: Draw, label, and dimension all applicable building setback lines, future right-of-way building setback lines and setback lines such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown.

20. Comment: If applicable, indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Indicate if there are any existing billboards on site. Compliance to the Sign Code, Chapter 3 of the Tucson Code, is required.

21. Comment: See Site Landscape review comments as it pertains to the following: show compliance with landscaping and screening requirements by locations, material descriptions, and dimensions. Specific plant or hardscape material shall be detailed on a landscape plan. A detailed landscape plan is required. In accordance with Section 2-11.0.0, Landscape Plan Requirements.

22. Comment: See Design Review comments. Site Zoning will be unable to approve the Development Package (DP) until all the Design Review Board has approved the DP.

23. Comment: Additional comments may be forthcoming on the next review based on the proposed use.

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Corrected CIP development package.
If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Ramiro.Olivarez@tucsonaz.gov
Storm to Shade Review REVIEW COMPLETED No comments from S2S, plans do not impact landscape areas
Traffic Engineering Review REVIEW COMPLETED No comments. No effects to public right-of-way.
TW Planning and Engineering Review REVIEW COMPLETED No comments at this time. There is no observable impact on the existing potable water distribution main.
Water - PDSD REVIEW COMPLETED