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
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: REVISN TENT PLAT & CORE RESUB
Plan Number - S06-076
Review Name: REVISN TENT PLAT & CORE RESUB
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/21/2009 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/21/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | NOT A COT OWNED/OPERATED PROPERTY |
| 05/26/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Detail C/3 and Accessible Parking Plan change on Sheet 2: a. Delete all references to PC/COT STD DETAIL 207. This is a DOT detail used stricly for Right of Way construction. It does not apply to private properties. Use 2006 IBC, Chapter 11 and ICC/ANSI 117.1, Sections 405 and/or 406 b. As per ICC/ANSI 117.1, detectable warnings are required only at marked crossings as per Section 406.12 and 406.14. Delete the detecteable warnings shown at the parking aisle of the relocated accessible parking spaces. 2. As per the two new notes 54 and 55, please provide large scale details of both ramp and stair areas showing all dimensions, grade elevations, slopes, stair riser and treads and why these are necessary. Provide elevations for all railings. a. Need a ramp somewhere in the accessible route at Building 1, in front of units 8 through 11. END OF REVIEW |
| 06/05/2009 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | The Landscape Section does not recommend approval of the "as-built" plans as a revision to the approved versions of sheets P-1 & P-2 due to the fact that much of the original plan information is omitted. The plans may be accepted as a construction update for inspection purposes, but will not be accepted as the plan of record. 1) The as-built landscape plan notes that several of the PV trees are not transplants as required by the native plant preservation plan. If the transplants did not survive the move, then they are required to be replaced with plants of the same size and species. Indicate the size of trees wherever there is a substitution for a TOS tree. 2) A joint wall agreement is required for the eastern screen wall. If this has been completed provide the recording information on the plan and revise the note on sheet 2 of the tentative plat. |
| 06/05/2009 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | June 5, 2009 The Engineering Division recommends approval of the revised tentative plat/development plan. Loren Makus, EIT Senior Engineering Associate |
| 06/10/2009 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: S06-076 Grant Road Professional Plaza Condominiums Revised AS BUILT Development Plan/Tentative Plat TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 10, 2009 DUE DATE: June 5, 2009 COMMENTS: 1. The Zoning Review Section approves the development plan for this project, subject to the following: Inspection by Zoning inspector or designee to ensure that the changes that have been made and are relevant to zoning requirements or criteria meet code requirements. The inspection must occur prior to submittal of the Mylar copies submittal to CDRC for stamps and signature. However, should there be any changes requested by other CDRC members, the Zoning Review Section approval is void, and we request copies of the revised development plan to verify that those changes do not affect any zoning requirements. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\S006076tp-dpca.doc Suppemental comments. I conditionally approved the as built plan for this development pending a site inspection to verify the changes. I went out today to do that inspection. I found a few items that are worth mentioning. I found one of the parking spaces adjacent to utility boxes and bollards that had we seen this on the plan we would have required this particular parking space to be 10 feet wide due to close proximity of the bollards that are adjacent to the edge of the parking space. I did talk to Glenn about it and based on what I saw in the field he is ok with the parking spaces as is. The other two items are related to the class two bicycle parking facilities. The two facilities do not meet what I would consider today's requirement for two point support system that supports the bicycle and allows the user to securely lock the frame and wheel(s). The locations are as follows, southwest corner of building 4 and the northeast corner of building 1. I would encourage the developer to provide a solution to comply with this requirement. |
| 06/11/2009 | JWILLIA5 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES June 15, 2009 Darren Watson Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2210 E. Fort Lowell Road Tucson, Arizona 85719 Subject: S06-076 Grant Road Professional Plaza Revision Dear Darren: Your submittal of May 21, 2009 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 set of 3 DETAILED cover letters explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 3 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (Landscape, HC Site, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. Sincerely, John Williams Planning Technician All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: (520) 615-9292 |