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

Permit Number: T03CM00208
Parcel: 11615087J

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T03CM00208
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/17/2003 JIM EGAN FIRE REVIEW Approved
01/31/2003 DOUG WILLIAMS FLOODPLAIN REVIEW Denied See below:






SUBJECT: St. Mary's Hospital
REVIEWER: Doug Williams
DATE: 4 March 2003
ACTIVITY NUMBER: T03CM00208

SUMMARY: Engineering Division has reviewed the site plan received on February 27, 2003. The package was given the "ok to submit" on 31 January 2003 with the understanding that a Floodplain Use Permit application accompanied by drainage report would be forthcoming, (in accordance with Development Standards 2-02.2.2 (C) and 10-02.0, and Tucson Code Chapter 26 - 1.2). Neither of these items could be found, thus the comments listed below do not represent a complete review by this division. Approval of the Site Plan may not occur prior to drainage report approval, and is not recommended at this time. The following preliminary comments are offered:

SITE PLAN COMMENTS:
1. The drainage report submittal must be accompanied by a Floodplain Use Permit application. A $50.00 floodplain use permit application fee and a $150.00 drainage review fee will be required upon submittal, in accordance with Tucson Code, Chapter 26-11.2 (i);
2. Depict and label lot dimensions and bearings on the site plan (DS 2-02.2.1.5);
3. Revise the Site Visibility Triangles, such that the apexes of the triangles terminate at the curb faces. Refer to the example depicted in fig. 18, (DS) 3-01.5.1 A & 3-01.5.2 B 4;
4. Depict the limits of the 100-year floodplain and water surface elevation on the plan (DS 2-02.2.1.15);
5. Depict drainage patterns and finish grades (DS 2-02.2.1.16);
6. Provide estimated cut and fill quantities (DS 2-02.2.1.17);
7. Correct or revise the Silverbell Road ½ right-of-way depicted and identify the dashed line from which the right of way is dimensioned, or revise as necessary (DS 2-02.2.1.19);
8. It appears that a portion of the eastern onsite parking area is within the current right of way, as depicted. The plan should clearly identify whether this is the present configuration, and if so, a Temporary Revocable Easement (TRE) will be required from the Tucson Department of Transportation (TDOT), Real Estate Division, prior to site plan approval. All recording information shall be shown on the plan (DS 2-02.2.1.20);
9. Provide existing topographic contours at intervals not exceeding two feet and/or spot elevations as pertinent, and bench mark based on City of Tucson (COT) datum including COT Field Book and Page (DS 2-02.2.23);
10. Dimension (and label) from street monument lines to existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, driveways, and utility lines (DS 2-02.2.1.21);
11. Depict new or proposed refuse container size, location and access thereto, fully dimensioned (DS 2-02.2.1.32);
12. Demonstrate water harvesting to the maximum extent reasonably possible, in accordance with Mayor and Council policy directive and the City of Tucson Land Use Code, section 3.7.4.3 B.
If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 1189 or Dwillia1@ci.tucson.az.us.

Doug Williams
Engineering Division
Development Services Department
02/05/2003 DAN CASTRO ZONING REVIEW Denied COMMENTS: Please attach a response letter with the next submittal, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed.
CODE SECTION/ DEVELOPMENT STANDARD

1. The following comments are based on a greater than 25% building area expansion. Site plan calculations encompass the entire site, whether existing or proposed.
D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.6

2. Per Pima County Assessors Records, the site is comprised of four (4) separate parcels which must be combined by providing a copy of the recorded City of Tucson Lot Combination Covenant and a copy of the approved Pima County Assessors Tax Combination form. A copy of the City of Tucson Lot Combination Covenant is attached to the yellow site plan card.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.2

3. This project is within the Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ). A separate review is required for the SCZ. The case number for this review must be noted in the lower right corner of each sheet of the site and landscape plans. All required elements of the SCZ (i.e. 30 foot buffer, view corridors, approved colors, etc..) as shown on the approved SCZ plan must be added to the site plan, along with date of approval and any conditions placed on that approval.

The SCZ requires separate review. A thirty-foot-wide buffer area, adjacent to the future MS & R right-of-way, is to be preserved in place and maintained in its natural state. Maximum height of a structure is one-third the distance of the structure from the future-right-of-way, not to exceed 30 feet in height for non-residential structures. Material and/or paint description for areas of structures and signage visible from the Scenic Route are reviewed for colors, which are predominant within the surrounding landscape, such as desert and earthtones. The SCZ process requires that the applicant offer to meet with the adjacent property owners and neighborhood associations. For more specific information on this process, please contact our office.
L.U.C. 2.8.2

4. Add lot dimensions and bearings.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.5

5. a) All existing and proposed buildings and structures, including location, size, height, overhangs, canopies, and use must be shown on the plan.
b) The cover sheet notes the actual height as 100 feet and the site plan indicates a 30 foot building height for the new building and 40 foot height for the flight quarters. What is meant by "actual height" on the cover sheet? Is the actual height 100 feet for the existing hospital building or for the proposed addition.
c) Since the proposed addition is located with the Scenic Corridor Zone, the maximum allowed building height allowed is 30 feet.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6

6. a) Per IBC Table 1106.1, the correct handicap parking ratio for more than 1,000 parking spaces provided is 20 plus one for each 100 over 1,000. Revise the handicap parking calculation on the cover sheet as required.
b) All vehicle parking spaces must be located on-site. The site plan shows portions of the vehicle parking spaces in the right-of-way area.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8/ D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4

7. Provide the bicycle parking calculation. Refer to L.U.C. 3.3.4 for number and type required. If new bicycle parking spaces are proposed, please provide a fully dimensioned bicycle parking detail. Refer to D.S. 2-09 for design criteria.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9/ D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4

8. Dimension the width of all PAAL's located on-site.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.11

9. a) Per D.S. 2-08.4.1.F, sidewalks or pedestrian refuge areas may not be located between a motor vehicle parking space and the PAAL providing access to that space. Revise plan as required.
b) Per D.S. 2-08.4.1.A, at least one (1) sidewalk must be provided to the project from each street on which the project has frontage. Per D.S. 2-08.4.1.D, sidewalks must connect all areas of the development and must also connect to the pedestrian circulation path located in any adjacent street.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12

10. If applicable, provide a detail of existing and/or proposed free standing signage and outdoor lighting on the site plan.
D.S. 2-02.2.2.1.A.13/ D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.25

11. a) Label and dimension all loading zone spaces.
b) Provide the loading space calculation based on the existing GFA of all existing and proposed buildings. Refer to L.U.C. 3.4.5.4 for the number and size required.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.14/ D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.5

12. Label and dimension the existing and future ½ right-of-way for Anklam Road.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.19

13. All existing or proposed easements must be shown on the plan including width, type, and recording docket and page reference.
D.S. 2-02.2.1A.20

14. Label the adjacent property zoning classifications.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.28

15. a) Add the existing and proposed use of the site as it is listed under L.U.C. Sec. 2.4.3.2.A.5. (Medical Service - Major "30", subject to: Sec. 3.5.4.9.A)
b) Remove the reference "Blood centers are not allowed" from the Site Code Checklist on the cover sheet as it does not pertain to this use.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31

16. Indicate the location of all on-site refuse containers.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.32

17. Note the floor area for each building.
D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.2

18. Revise the reference to "0 foot setbacks to all property lines" noted under the site code check list on the cover sheet, as it is incorrect. Please add the building setback requirements along the street property lines. Refer to L.U.C. Sec. 3.2.6.5.B.1 and 2.8.2.5 for street setback requirements and note them under the site code checklist.

19. If a Board of Adjustment Variance is applied for, please note the case number date of approval, variances granted, and any conditions imposed on the site plan.

20. All requested changes must be made to the site and landscape plans.
D.S. 2-07.2.1.A
02/05/2003 DAN CASTRO HANDICAP-SITE REVIEW Denied Per IBC Table 1106.1, the correct handicap parking ratio for more than 1,000 parking spaces provided is: 20 plus one for each 100 over 1,000. Revise the handicap parking calculation on the cover sheet as required.
02/12/2003 JOE LINVILLE NPPO REVIEW Denied Revise the NPPO sheet L1, the mitigation notes do note correspond with the plan.

The landscape plan does not include all of the trees shown as preserved in place along St. Mary's Road on the NPPO Plan. Revise as necessary.

Identify all abbreviations used on the Native Plant/Existing Plant Inventory.
02/27/2003 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1) Revise the landscape plan to match the site plan. It appears that the parking lot design differs on the plans. DS 2-07.2.0

2) Based on compliance with LUC 3.7.1.2.B.1.b the provisions of LUC 3.7 would apply to the entire site. Provide plans that include the entire site and that demonstrate compliance with the Landscaping and Screening regulations.

3) Identify all abbreviations used on the landscape plans.
DS 2-07.2.2

4) The site is subject to the provisions of LUC 2.8.2. Scenic Corridor Zone. The following requirements among others must be addressed on the site plan and subsequent Scenic Corridor Review Plans
Where possible along St. Mary's Road, a thirty-foot wide scenic route buffer is to be preserved and maintained in a natural state per LUC 3.7.5.2.A.

5) Landscape borders per LUC 3.7.2.4.A.2 are to be located within the property limits. Up to five feet of the adjacent right of way area may utilized to comply with the border regulations. Revise the plan as necessary to meet the minimum standards.

6) Additional comments may apply pending review of a complete landscape plan for the site. An irrigation plan is also required.
03/04/2003 DOUG WILLIAMS ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied SUBJECT: St. Mary's Hospital
REVIEWER: Doug Williams
DATE: 4 March 2003
ACTIVITY NUMBER: T03CM00208

SUMMARY: Engineering Division has reviewed the site plan received on February 27, 2003. The package was given the "ok to submit" on 31 January 2003 with the understanding that a Floodplain Use Permit application accompanied by drainage report would be forthcoming, (in accordance with Development Standards 2-02.2.2 (C) and 10-02.0, and Tucson Code Chapter 26 - 1.2). Neither of these items could be found, thus the comments listed below do not represent a complete review by this division. Approval of the Site Plan may not occur prior to drainage report approval, and is not recommended at this time. The following preliminary comments are offered:

SITE PLAN COMMENTS:
1. The drainage report submittal must be accompanied by a Floodplain Use Permit application. A $50.00 floodplain use permit application fee and a $150.00 drainage review fee will be required upon submittal, in accordance with Tucson Code, Chapter 26-11.2 (i);
2. Depict and label lot dimensions and bearings on the site plan (DS 2-02.2.1.5);
3. Revise the Site Visibility Triangles, such that the apexes of the triangles terminate at the curb faces. Refer to the example depicted in fig. 18, (DS) 3-01.5.1 A & 3-01.5.2 B 4;
4. Depict the limits of the 100-year floodplain and water surface elevation on the plan (DS 2-02.2.1.15);
5. Depict drainage patterns and finish grades (DS 2-02.2.1.16);
6. Provide estimated cut and fill quantities (DS 2-02.2.1.17);
7. Correct or revise the Silverbell Road ½ right-of-way depicted and identify the dashed line from which the right of way is dimensioned, or revise as necessary (DS 2-02.2.1.19);
8. It appears that a portion of the eastern onsite parking area is within the current right of way, as depicted. The plan should clearly identify whether this is the present configuration, and if so, a Temporary Revocable Easement (TRE) will be required from the Tucson Department of Transportation (TDOT), Real Estate Division, prior to site plan approval. All recording information shall be shown on the plan (DS 2-02.2.1.20);
9. Provide existing topographic contours at intervals not exceeding two feet and/or spot elevations as pertinent, and bench mark based on City of Tucson (COT) datum including COT Field Book and Page (DS 2-02.2.23);
10. Dimension (and label) from street monument lines to existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, driveways, and utility lines (DS 2-02.2.1.21);
11. Depict new or proposed refuse container size, location and access thereto, fully dimensioned (DS 2-02.2.1.32);
12. Demonstrate water harvesting to the maximum extent reasonably possible, in accordance with Mayor and Council policy directive and the City of Tucson Land Use Code, section 3.7.4.3 B.
If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 1189 or Dwillia1@ci.tucson.az.us.

Doug Williams
Engineering Division
Development Services Department
03/05/2003 DOUG WILLIAMS SANITATION REVIEW Denied SUBJECT: St. Mary's Hospital
REVIEWER: Doug Williams
DATE: 4 March 2003
ACTIVITY NUMBER: T03CM00208

SUMMARY: Engineering Division has reviewed the site plan received on February 27, 2003. The package was given the "ok to submit" on 31 January 2003 with the understanding that a Floodplain Use Permit application accompanied by drainage report would be forthcoming, (in accordance with Development Standards 2-02.2.2 (C) and 10-02.0, and Tucson Code Chapter 26 - 1.2). Neither of these items could be found, thus the comments listed below do not represent a complete review by this division. Approval of the Site Plan may not occur prior to drainage report approval, and is not recommended at this time. The following preliminary comments are offered:

SITE PLAN COMMENTS:
1. The drainage report submittal must be accompanied by a Floodplain Use Permit application. A $50.00 floodplain use permit application fee and a $150.00 drainage review fee will be required upon submittal, in accordance with Tucson Code, Chapter 26-11.2 (i);
2. Depict and label lot dimensions and bearings on the site plan (DS 2-02.2.1.5);
3. Revise the Site Visibility Triangles, such that the apexes of the triangles terminate at the curb faces. Refer to the example depicted in fig. 18, (DS) 3-01.5.1 A & 3-01.5.2 B 4;
4. Depict the limits of the 100-year floodplain and water surface elevation on the plan (DS 2-02.2.1.15);
5. Depict drainage patterns and finish grades (DS 2-02.2.1.16);
6. Provide estimated cut and fill quantities (DS 2-02.2.1.17);
7. Correct or revise the Silverbell Road ½ right-of-way depicted and identify the dashed line from which the right of way is dimensioned, or revise as necessary (DS 2-02.2.1.19);
8. It appears that a portion of the eastern onsite parking area is within the current right of way, as depicted. The plan should clearly identify whether this is the present configuration, and if so, a Temporary Revocable Easement (TRE) will be required from the Tucson Department of Transportation (TDOT), Real Estate Division, prior to site plan approval. All recording information shall be shown on the plan (DS 2-02.2.1.20);
9. Provide existing topographic contours at intervals not exceeding two feet and/or spot elevations as pertinent, and bench mark based on City of Tucson (COT) datum including COT Field Book and Page (DS 2-02.2.23);
10. Dimension (and label) from street monument lines to existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, driveways, and utility lines (DS 2-02.2.1.21);
11. Depict new or proposed refuse container size, location and access thereto, fully dimensioned (DS 2-02.2.1.32);
12. Demonstrate water harvesting to the maximum extent reasonably possible, in accordance with Mayor and Council policy directive and the City of Tucson Land Use Code, section 3.7.4.3 B.
If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 1189 or Dwillia1@ci.tucson.az.us.

Doug Williams
Engineering Division
Development Services Department

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
03/04/2003 ELAINE ROSE OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed