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 - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D05-0020
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/10/2006 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 01/18/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Note the CDRC Case number on the native plant preservation/landscape plans. |
| 01/26/2006 | JOSE ORTIZ | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | DATE: January 26, 2006 FROM: Jose E. Ortiz Engineering Division SUBJECT: 2851 N. Balboa Avenue Development Plan D05-0020 (Third Review) T13S, R13E, Section 36 Development Plan: 1. To avoid overlooking the need for truncated domes on access ramps during construction please consider calling out truncated domes in keynote 3 in the future Grading Plans. Drainage Report: Drainage Report acceptable at this time. Modifications to the drainage report may be required during the review of the Grading Plan. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1191 or Jose.Ortiz@ci.tucsonaz.govs Jose E. Ortiz Civil Engineer City of Tucson/Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210 (520) 791-5550 x1191 office (520) 879-8010 fax |
| 01/26/2006 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 01/30/2006 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D05-0020 Beacon Group Expansion 01/27/06 () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-02-10 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: General Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: No COMMENTS DUE BY: January 25, 2006 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: () No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment () Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions () RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies () See Additional Comments Attached (X) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: 8/11/05 |
| 02/16/2006 | HEATHER THRALL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Heather Thrall Senior Planner PROJECT: D05-0020 308 W. Glenn Street Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: 02/16/2006 DUE DATE: 01/25/06 COMMENTS: 1. ADVISEMENT ONLY: Section 5.3.8.2, LUC, permits a maximum of one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a development plan. If, at the end of that time, the development plan has not been approved, it must be revised to be in compliance with all regulations in effect at that time, and must be resubmitted for a full CDRC review. The one-year expiration date for this development plan is May 31, 2006. 2. ADVISEMENT ONLY: This project was reviewed in accordance with applicable divisions of the Land Use Code (LUC), Development Standard (DS), American National Standard (ANSI) and International Building Code 2003 (IBC). For reference, the Land Use Code can be found on the internet at www.ci.tucson.az.us/planning under Land Use Code. The Development Standard can be found at www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd under Codes. 3. ADVISEMENT ONLY: Per 3.4.3.7.B of the LUC, if an expansion of land area, floor area or vehicular use area is proposed greater than 25%, the entire site must meet current code requirements. This plan was reviewed under such circumstances. 4. A MEETING WITH THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR IS REQUIRED TO DETERMINE THE USE CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PROJECT PRIOR TO PLAN RESUBMITTAL. PLEASE REVIEW THE FOLLOWING NOTES. Per DS 2-05.2.2.B.3, the correct proposed use of the development is required on the plan. Per recent advisement of the Zoning Administrator, the original determination from 1985 allowing this site to be parked as a school use has slightly changed due to updates in the Land Use Code. The LUC has two school categories, Educational Use for Elementary and Secondary Schools or Instructional Schools. Per the Zoning Administrator, this project can be classified as an Instructional School or as "Craftwork", an Industrial Use. Please amend all references on the plan pertaining to the proposed use to declare the use as either of the above. If an Instructional School is chosen, a floor plan showing all types of use areas, classrooms, offices, storage, etc. must be submitted to determine parking calculations. For either use: Please be sure to show all floor area ratio, parking, bicycle parking and loading zone calculations to match either use. FURTHER COMMENTS ON THESE DESIGN CRITERIA ARE OUTLINED IN THIS REVIEW. 5. (Per last review) Per DS 2-05.2.3.B. Include any easements on the development plan, with their respective recording information. Per last review: The easement shown at the southwest corner of lot 5 cannot have a building built over an easement. If this easement is to be abandoned provide recordation information of the abandonment on the plan. Per the response the easement is to be abandoned, please record the abandonment of the shown electric easement on the east side of lots 5 and 8 by separate instrument and provide documentation to staff. Please show the location of the new electric easement (where the transformer is being moved, per your response) with recordation information. Whereas the approval of structures in an easement is not permitted, staff will allow the bicycle parking proposed to be placed in the shown utility easement, providing written approval of the use of the easement from the utility source is provided. 6. (Per last/current review). Per DS 2-05.2.3.C, the right of way information listed on the plan for Glenn Street indicates the total right of way is only 60 feet, when in actuality it is PLANNED FOR A WIDENING TO 64 feet per the City Major Streets and Routes Map. Please revise the plan accordingly, showing the correct position of the future curb locations with dimensions from property line and existing buildings. The response provided was in reference to the current right of way. The purpose of the Major Streets and Routes map is to show the total FUTURE right of way width. Please amend the plan according to the future right of way, with 32 feet on either side of the centerline. Should you have any concerns as to whether Glenn Street will be widened the additional 4 feet, please contact Gary Oaks at the Department of Urban Planning and Design at 791-4505. Should Mr. Oaks issue written advisement that the Glenn Street widening shall not occur, please provide that notice to staff. 7. (Per last review/ current review). Per DS 2-05.2.3.C, please call out all sidewalk areas throughout and surrounding the project. Provide side-walk widths for existing conditions. Clarify existing sidewalk WIDTHS around existing buildings #1 and #2. 8. (Per last/ current review) At the southeast corner of the property is indicated an existing driveway apron. Staff acknowledges the driveway apron is intended to be kept, per your response to the prior review. Please show handicap ramps across this apron. 9. Per DS 2-05.2.4.A, Zoning acknowledges the response regarding the lot combination completion. Until recordation information is provided ON THE PLAN IN A NOTE, this comment will remain. A lot combination does not remove lot lines but combines all parcels into a single tax parcel number. Please indicate the lot lines as a light dashed line to indicate that the lots have been combined and indicate the dashed lines as lot lines in the legend. Please amend the plan to show the dashed lot lines requested. 10. Per 2-05.2.4.L, all sidewalks abutting right of way areas and vehicle use areas must meet accessibility standards for physically disabled, thus access ramps at crosswalks connecting to sidewalks must be provided. Staff acknowledges the notation on the plan that advises all handicapped ramps will have truncated domes. Please add handicapped ramps with truncated domes in the following places: A) On current lot 4 - at both ends of the concrete island connected by cross-walks in the east parking lot area. B) On current lot 1 - at the end of the sidewalk transitioning to the cross-walk to cross the PAAL. 11. (ADVISEMENT ONLY) Per DS 2-05.2.4.O and LUC 3.4.5.1, the number and size of loading zones required for this project depends upon the total gross floor area and property use. With the Craftwork Industrial Use OR for the Industrial School Use, a total of 3 loading spaces are required, at a minimum dimension of 12 feet wide by 55 feet long for Craftwork. The loading zones shown on the plan are suffice for either use. 12. (Per last review/current review.) Per DS 2-05.2.4.P, the parking requirements for the development should be listed on the plan, based upon the requirements for the use of the site. Please clarify the use on the site in all notes on the plan, then revise the plan to have parking at a ratio of either of the following calculations: Per LUC 3.3.4, Craftwork, 1 space per 500 square feet of gross floor area. Per LUC 3.3.4., Instructional School, THE GREATER OF: 1 space per 200 square feet of gross floor area, OR 1 space per 250 square feet of office area PLUS 1 space per 100 square feet of classroom area. Parking calculation for Craftwork: With the gross floor area consisting of 74,580 square feet (per the plan), 149 parking spaces are required. Parking calculation for Instructional School: at a 1:200 ratio, at 74,580 square feet, requires 373 parking spaces. A greater amount may be required, depending upon the floor plan of the structures. The plan shows 117 parking spaces provided. Please review and revise the plan to meet either of the above parking requirements. PLEASE NOTE, IT HAS BEEN CLARIFIED THAT A Board of Adjustment variance to delete a portion of required parking spaces is not an allowed process for this project, as a rezoning case has been processed. 13. Per DS 2-05.2.4.Q and LUC 3.3.4, the number of bicycle parking spaces required is equal to 8 percent of the total amount of vehicle parking spaces required or offered (greater number prevails) - for either Craftwork or Instructional School uses. Of this ratio, Craftwork uses require 90 percent class 1 (locker type) and 10 percent shall be class 2 (lock to fixture type). Instructional School uses require 10 percent class 1 and 90 percent class 2. Please revise the plan notes and bicycle details based upon either of the above chosen uses . In addition, please revise the typical detail drawings of the Class I bicycle parking locker to show a length of 72 inches rather than the 3'7" provided. Please clarify how many bicycles can be held in each locker space and how tall the lockers are. Staff acknowledges the response adding the bicycle directional signs to direct bicyclists into the building for the Class I parking location. 14. Please note, depending upon the information provided on the resubmittal, further review comments may be forthcoming. Should you have any questions on this review, please contact me via email at Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov or at 791-4541x1156. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call (520) 791-5608. C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D005-020 308 w glenn beacon 3.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan. |
| 02/23/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES February 23, 2006 Bruce M. Paton Rick Engineering Company 1745 East River Road, Suite 101l Tucson, Arizona 85718 Subject: D05-0020 Beacon Group Expansion Development Plan Dear Bruce: Your submittal of January 10, 2006 for the above project has been reviewed by the Community Design Review Committee and the comments reflect the outstanding requirements which need to be addressed before approval is granted. Please review the comments carefully. Once you have addressed all of the comments, please submit the following revised documents and a DETAILED cover letter for each agency explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLUELINES MUST BE FOLDED 3 Copies Revised Development Plan (Wastewater, Zoning, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608, ext. 1179. Sincerely, Patricia Y. Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 322-6956 |