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: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING
Permit Number - DP13-0163
Review Name: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/30/2013 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Progressive Insurance DP13-0163 New Office Building TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 30, 2013 DUE DATE: October 11, 2013 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC) and the UDC Technical Standards Manual (TSM). The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC & TSM requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC. COMMENT: Detail 8 sheet 5 the location dimension for the wheel stop is not correct. Per UDC Section 7.4.6.H.3 this dimension is 2'-6" not 3'-0". 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Section 7.4.9, Bicycle Parking Design Criteria, of the UDC. Provide, as a note, calculations for short and long term bicycle spaces required and provided. COMMENT: The lighting requirement was not addressed. The proposed short and long term bicycle parking details do not addressed UDC Section 7.4.9.B.1.e Outdoor bicycle parking areas must be lighted so that they are thoroughly illuminated and visible from adjacent sidewalks, parking lots, or buildings during hours of use. COMMENT: As long-term bicycle parking is proposed within the building provide a detail that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Section 7.4.9.D.2.b are met. COMMENT: Detail 4 sheet 5 remove the reference to "TOWN OF ORO VALLEY" from the plan. Once the above comments have been addressed Zoning will provide an over the counter review. Please call or email to schedule an appointment for this review. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package . |
| 09/30/2013 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | |
| 10/07/2013 | RONALD BROWN | HC SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/07/2013 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Clearly indicate and label the WASH study area on the plans. The line shown and labeled on these plans seems to correspond with the PRA. The WASH study area extends 50 feet from the top of the bank of the wash. If the line on the plan indicates the PRA, please label it correctly. (TSM 4-02.2.1) 2. As previously commented, show how the site uses storm water runoff to the maximum extent possible for landscape watering. As a practical effect, runoff must be directed to landscape areas first and only overflow should be directed to storm drains. (UDC 7.6.6.C.2) If this cannot be achieved, provide a clear explanation of why it is not feasible. 3. As previously commented, the solid waste enclosure doesn't meet the requirements of the TSM 8-01.9 figure 3A. Provide an enclosure that meets the TS or request a TSMR. If a TSMR is requested, I recommend discussing the proposal with ES before submitting. 4. The Floodplain use permit will be approved and issued simultaneously with the DP. 5. As part of the floodplain use permit review, provide calculations showing the velocity within the Naylor Wash and addressing the adequacy of the proposed splash pad. The analysis should address the effect of scour on the splash pad design. 6. Show the location and describe the condition of any bank protection or bank armor within the Naylor Wash. Show the location of the proposed storm drain outlet in relation to the bank protection. |
| 10/15/2013 | KEN BROUILLETTE | FIRE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Building is required to have an approved automatic fire sprinkler system installed and one new hydrant per sheet 9 will be installed |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/05/2013 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 11/05/2013 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | REJECT SHELF | Completed |