Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D08-0031
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/27/2008 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/02/2008 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 2 SEPT 2008 D08-0031/UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATES OF SOUTHERN ARIZONA - RESUBMITTAL REVIEWED BY RON BROWN ACCESSIBLE REVIEW-RESUBMITTAL 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1 DENIED: SEE COMMENTS BELOW A. OK B. DENOTE RIGHT OF WAY ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS; COT DOT STANDARDS FOR CURB RAMPS AT DRIVE WAYS. STANDARD DETAIL 207 IS FOR R.O.W. RAMPS ONLY. PROVIDE LARGE SCALE DETAILS OF ALL DIFFERENT TYPES OF RAMPS. AS PER AMENDED NOTE 30, THE IBC/ICC 177.1 GOVERNS ALL ACCESSIBILITY CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY. REVISE KEY NOTE 3 AS REQUIRED. C. OK 1. OK 2. PROVIDE SPOT GRADES THROUGH OUT ACCESSIBLE ROUTE FINISHED SURFACES TO SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH SLOPES AS REQUIRED BY ICC 117.1, SECTION 403.3 MOST ALL REQUIRED SPOT GRADES SHOWING SLOPES OF ACCESSIBLE ROUTES ARE SHOWN ON SHEET 3 OF 4 HOWEVER THERE IS AN UNCLEAR GRADING INDICATION FOR THE NEWLY ADDED ACCESSIBLE ROUTE TO WILMOT. SEE NOTE THREE COMMENTS BELOW. 3. SHOW AND PROVIDE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE CONNECTION TO PUBLIC R.O.W. PEDESTRIAN WAY. a. EXTEND ACCESSIBLE ROUTE ON WEST SIDE OF BUILDING TO WILMOT ROAD PEDESTRIAN CONCRETE WALK WAY. ACCESSIBLE ROUTE IS SHOWN AND ACCEPTABLE. IT IS UNCLEAR HOWEVER, IF EXISTING SPOTS GRADES SHOWN ON ROUTE ARE INTENDED TO BE FINISHED GRADES FOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE. IF SO, THEN THERE IS A SLOPE GREATER THAN 1:20 AND IS A RAMP AND MUST COMPLY WITH 2206 IBC/ICC 117.1, SECTION 405 INCLUDING GRAB BARS. IF NOT SO, PLEASE PROVIDE PROPER SPOT GRADES SHOWING CODE COMPLIANCE. ALSO REFER NOTE J.1.b FOR ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION D. OK E. OK F. OK G. DETAIL 2/4: WHAT STANDARD IS R7-8? ALL SIGNAGE SIZES, DESIGN, VERBIAGE AND FINE NOTICES ARE TO BE BY "PARK WISE", CONTACT MR. DON ANGEL, 429-3318. THE NEWLY REVISED FINE IS NOW $532.00 H. OK I. OK J. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FOR NEWLY ADDED CHANGES: 1. SHEET 3 OF 4 a. DENOTE CLEARLY (NOTE 18) THE REMOVAL OF THE DUMPSTER FENCE ENCLOSURE THAT IS SHOWN DIVIDING THE NEWLY ADDED ACCESSIBLE ROUTE CONNECTION TO WILMOT. b. THE EXISTING CONCRETE PATHWAY IN FRONT OF THE EXISTING "UASA BUILDING" IS NOW BEING SHOWN AS THE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE CONNECTION FROM THE NEWLY ADDED R.O.W. ACCESSIBLE ROUTE TO THE NEW BUILDING CONCRETE ENTRANCE AREA. 1. IS THIS WALKWAY FLUSH WITH THE PARKING LOT/PAAL PAVING? IF SO, SEE ZONING COMMENTS FOR SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS. PLEASE CLARIFY. 2. THE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE MUST HAVE A 4' WIDE CLEARANCE AREA. THIS IS NOT EFFECTIVE AT THE CONCRETE ENTRANCE AREA TO THE NEW BUILDING ENTRANCE AREA. THE BIKE RAMP JAMBS UP THE ENTRANCE AND SHOULD BE TO BE RELOCATED. 2. SHEET 4 OF 4: a. DETAIL 10: REVISE THE NOTE TO READ "AS PER NOTE 3/SHEET 1 OF 4, THE GOVERNING AUTHORITY FOR ALL ACCESSIBLE REQUIREMENTS FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY COMPLIANCE IS THE 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1. ALL SIDEWALK AND OR CURB RAMPS SHALL COMPLY WITH SECTIONS 405 AND 406. b. DETAIL 10: CHANGE THE DETAIL NOTES TO READ 1CC 117.1 COMPLIANT. END OF REVIEW |
| 09/10/2008 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | September 9, 2008 To: Steven W. Hill Leadstar Engineering Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ___________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6579), representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environment Quality Subject: UASA Expansion for USMD Tucson Cancer Center Dev. Plan – 2nd Submittal D08-031 The proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project have been reviewed on behalf of the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) and the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. Sheet 1: Remove General Note #11. Provide a letter from the owner of the existing private collection sewers, authorizing this connection and indicating that the existing private sewers have sufficient capacity to handle the additional flow. 2nd Request. This office will require a revised set of bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. Pima County Code Title 13.20.030.A.2 requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the development plan. The fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet. The next submittal of this project will be the third (3rd) submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $78.00 (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter. If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly. If you have any questions regarding the above-mentioned comments, please contact me. |
| 09/15/2008 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: D08-0031 Urological Associates of South Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: 09/15/2008 DUE DATE: 09/25/08 COMMENTS: 1. 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 06/15/09. 2. DS 2-05.2.4.G Provide clarification for the 1' NAE along the property line adjacent to Wilmot Rd. Indicated on the plan is a 1'NAE being abdandoned, a 1' NAE by separate instrument and a 1' NAE granted by dk X pg X all indicating the same line. Clarify and provide docket and page recording information for the new 1' NAE and docket and page recording information for the abandonment of the existing 1' NAE. 3. DS 2-05.2.4.K Per DS 2-08.3.1 Within all development, a continuous pedestrian circulation path is required. This path must connect all public access areas of the development and the pedestrian circulation path located in any adjacent streets. Provide a pedestrian circulation path (sidewalks, crosswalks, handicap ramps) that connects from the building to the sidewalk in the right of way for Wilmot Rd. Clearly indicate the width of the sidewalk along the west side of the buildings for both the new and existing sidewalk.. See DS 3-05.2.2.B.1 The location of the class two bicycle parking rack blocks the pedestrian circulation path from the sidewalk in front of the existing building and appears to interfere with the handicap ramp.. Relocate. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 837-4961 TLS C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D08-0031-2dp.doc |
| 09/16/2008 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 09/18/2008 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: September 18, 2008 SUBJECT: Urological Associates of Southern Arizona Development Plan- 2nd Engineering Review TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: 6325 E Tanque Verde, T145S R15E Sec06 Ward 2 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: D08-0031 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the revised Development Plan and Geotechnical Investigation (Fugro Consultants, Inc., 18MAR08). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan at this time. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Development Plan purposes only. The following items need to be addressed: DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 1) Complied 2) Complied 3) Complied 4) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.B: Verify that all easements are drawn with recordation information, location, width, and purpose of on the Development Plan. A Title Report was not submitted for this project, but maybe required to verify if any easements affect this property. This comment was not fully addressed. Per the comment letter submitted a copy of the Title Report was to be submitted with the 2nd submittal, however there was not one within the City of Tucson file. 5) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.B: Revise the Development Plan to provide the recordation information for the abandonment of the No Access Easement. Easement abandonment is required prior to approval. 6) Complied 7) Complied 8) Complied 9) Complied 10) Complied 11) Complied 12) Complied 13) Complied 14) Complied 15) Complied 16) Complied 17) Complied 18) Complied. 19) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.K: Revise the Development Plan and the pedestrian circulation path along the east side of the proposed building to label the minimum width requirements for the sidewalk. Not all areas in plan view show the width of the proposed sidewalk and Details 8 and 9 state "varies", The minimum sidewalk width adjacent to PAALs is 5-feet, verify at all locations. 20) Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all handicap accessibility comments that are associated with this project. 21) Complied 22) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.K: Revise the Development Plan to label and dimension the required 5-foot sidewalk for all areas that are adjacent to a PAAL. Per DS Sec.2-08 all sidewalks adjacent to a PAAL require a minimum 4-foot sidewalk with an extra 1-foot of space between the sidewalk and the PAAL, revise. This comment was not fully addressed at all sidewalk locations. 23) Complied 24) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.T: Revise the detail for the proposed refuse containers to meet the minimum requirements per Figure 3 DS Sec.6-01. The enclosures must have a minimum inside clear dimension of 10 feet by 10 feet between the steel bollards that are required between the container and the enclosure's rear and sidewall. The inside clear dimensions must be shown from the face of the wall protectors. Refer to Figure 3 and DS Sec.6-01.4.2 for specifications and requirements on access, placement of containers, bin enclosure and construction. Refer to Environmental Services for further clarity on refuse requirements. 25) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.T: Verify on the Development Plan the required 14' x 40' approach for both refuse containers. Per plan view the landscape island within the vehicular use area obstructs the clear 14' x 40' approach for the west container. Refer to Environmental Services for further clarity on refuse requirements. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: 26) Complied GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the Development Plan. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 09/22/2008 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the development and landscape plans to provide a screen wall per LUC Table 3.7.2-I for the loading area proposed near Tanque Verde Road. |
| 09/24/2008 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Does not provide the minimum required 14 ft x 40 ft approach for the west side of double wide enclosure. Conflict with the curb parking island adjacent to solid waste enclosure. DS 6-01.4.1.C. 2. Provide dimensions of the wall protectors (bollards) to the wall. The inside edge of the bollards shall be a minimum 1 ft inside the inside surface of the rear and side walls. Also, call out front side bollard 2ft from gates and rear side bollard 4 ft from front side bollard. 3. Double wide enclosure requres a minimum 10 ft x 20 ft inside clear service area between the rear and side bollards and the front gates. Or a 10 ft x 10 ft per container area. DS 6-01.4.1.B. 4. Recommend providing a separate post at the face of the CMU wall for mounting the gates. This will avoid structure damage to enclosure in the event of gate damage. 5. Revise general note (34) thirty-four to state as follows: "One single property owner, management, or association will be responsible for the management and maintenance of the solid waste collection service/s and storage area/s for all buildings/development." Please provide corrections on resubmittal. If you have any questions you may contact Andy Vera at (520) 791-5543 ext 1212 or e-mail: Andy.Vera@tucsonaz.gov |
| 09/26/2008 | CDRC1 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Denied | Waiting for the Real Estate Application and legal descriptions for the 1' no-access easement abandonment. Sincerely, Jim Stoyanoff Property Agent Real Estate Division City of Tucson 201 N. Stone Ave. 6th Fl. Tucson, Arizona 85701 (O) 520.837.6719 (F) 520.791.5641 Jim.Stoyanoff@tucsonaz.gov |
| 09/29/2008 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES September 29, 2008 Joe Zeman Leadstar 1010 North Finance Center Drive, Suite200 Tucson, Arizona 85710 Subject: D08-0031 Urological Associates of Southern Arizona Development Plan Dear Joe: Your submittal of August 28, 2008 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 explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 8 Copies Revised Development Plan (ADA, Wastewater, Zoning, Landscape, Engineering, ESD, Real Estate, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Landscape, Engineering, Zoning, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. Sincerely, Patricia Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 571-1961 |