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 - SITE
Permit Number - T05CM03968
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/28/2006 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL FROM: Michael St.Paul Planner Technician PROJECT: T05CM03968 1802 East Prince Road Dental addition: 4th review TRANSMITTAL: January 28, 2006 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. 1. This site review is for an addition of a dental office in the C-1 Zone. The expansion of the building is greater than 25%: therefore this site review is for a full code compliance of the site. The Development Designator is "29" and the use is Medical Service - Outpatient (LUC Sec 2.5.3.2.A.10 & LUC Sec 3.3.3.12). 2. Please remove the symbols for flush pavement to the sidewalk and curb for the pedestrian refuge between the west side of the parking lot and the east side of the building. The sidewalk for this pedestrian refuge is identified as four feet and dimension as five feet. Comment #7 from last review follows: [A minimum setback distance of five feet (5'-0") must be provided between the parking area access lane (PAAL) and the building as a pedestrian refuge. This pedestrian refuge must provide a four foot (4'-0") sidewalk that is setback a minimum distance of one foot (1'-0") from the PAAL. The sidewalks must be physically separated from the PAAL by curbing or other barriers except at the crosswalk. Please revise the pedestrian refuge area and the sidewalk and demonstrate compliance (DS 3-05.2.2.B.1, DS 3-01.3.3.B.5 & DS 2-08.4.1).] Please provide these corrections on both the proposed and future site plans. A detail may be the best way to clarify this issue. 3. Also, please provide the MS&R parking adjustment formula on the proposed site plan. On both the proposed site plan and the future site plan state that the number of required parking spaces is nineteen (19) and the number provided is twenty (20). You may also state that there are three (3) additional parking spaces provided in the future right-of-way only on the proposed site plan. 4. Please provide handicapped accessible ramps for access to all accessible entrances of the building. Please provide truncated domes, as detectable warning, at every handicapped accessible transition ramp. Such as where the crosswalk meets the sidewalk, and the transition point on the sidewalk just off the PAAL near the front entrance. These detectable warning should be the full width of the entrance with a minimum depth of twenty-four inches (24"). The detectable warning shall be located within six (6) to eight (8) inches of the curb line. (Please see ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003: Sec 406.1, 406.6, 406.12, 406.13.1, 406.13.2 & Sec 705.5.) Please provide these corrections on both the proposed and future site plans. Details are usually provided for the accessible ramps and the truncated domes. 5. "An approved site plan is required indicating how the project will comply with LUC requirements when the MS&R right-of-way can no longer be used as part of the site. Such plan is to be an exhibit to an executed covenant for recordation stating the responsibility of the property owner, successor, or assignee as to the removal of improvements and compliance with the LUC at no cost to the City." (Please see LUC Section 2.8.3.5.F.) This recorded covenant must be provide with the revised future site plan. The MS&R covenant can be acquired at the DSD web site for the City of Tucson under "forms and applications" (http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/). Please contact me to make an appointment when you have the revised plans and the covenant. I expect that we will be able to approve these plans at that time. |
| 01/28/2006 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL FROM: Michael St.Paul Planner Technician PROJECT: T05CM03968 1802 East Prince Road Dental addition: 4th review TRANSMITTAL: January 28, 2006 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. 1. This site review is for an addition of a dental office in the C-1 Zone. The expansion of the building is greater than 25%: therefore this site review is for a full code compliance of the site. The Development Designator is "29" and the use is Medical Service - Outpatient (LUC Sec 2.5.3.2.A.10 & LUC Sec 3.3.3.12). 2. Please remove the symbols for flush pavement to the sidewalk and curb for the pedestrian refuge between the west side of the parking lot and the east side of the building. The sidewalk for this pedestrian refuge is identified as four feet and dimension as five feet. Comment #7 from last review follows: [A minimum setback distance of five feet (5'-0") must be provided between the parking area access lane (PAAL) and the building as a pedestrian refuge. This pedestrian refuge must provide a four foot (4'-0") sidewalk that is setback a minimum distance of one foot (1'-0") from the PAAL. The sidewalks must be physically separated from the PAAL by curbing or other barriers except at the crosswalk. Please revise the pedestrian refuge area and the sidewalk and demonstrate compliance (DS 3-05.2.2.B.1, DS 3-01.3.3.B.5 & DS 2-08.4.1).] Please provide these corrections on both the proposed and future site plans. A detail may be the best way to clarify this issue. 3. Also, please provide the MS&R parking adjustment formula on the proposed site plan. On both the proposed site plan and the future site plan state that the number of required parking spaces is nineteen (19) and the number provided is twenty (20). You may also state that there are three (3) additional parking spaces provided in the future right-of-way only on the proposed site plan. 4. Please provide handicapped accessible ramps for access to all accessible entrances of the building. Please provide truncated domes, as detectable warning, at every handicapped accessible transition ramp. Such as where the crosswalk meets the sidewalk, and the transition point on the sidewalk just off the PAAL near the front entrance. These detectable warning should be the full width of the entrance with a minimum depth of twenty-four inches (24"). The detectable warning shall be located within six (6) to eight (8) inches of the curb line. (Please see ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003: Sec 406.1, 406.6, 406.12, 406.13.1, 406.13.2 & Sec 705.5.) Please provide these corrections on both the proposed and future site plans. Details are usually provided for the accessible ramps and the truncated domes. 5. "An approved site plan is required indicating how the project will comply with LUC requirements when the MS&R right-of-way can no longer be used as part of the site. Such plan is to be an exhibit to an executed covenant for recordation stating the responsibility of the property owner, successor, or assignee as to the removal of improvements and compliance with the LUC at no cost to the City." (Please see LUC Section 2.8.3.5.F.) This recorded covenant must be provide with the revised future site plan. The MS&R covenant can be acquired at the DSD web site for the City of Tucson under "forms and applications" (http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/). Please contact me to make an appointment when you have the revised plans and the covenant. I expect that we will be able to approve these plans at that time. |
| 02/07/2006 | JOSE ORTIZ | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/27/2006 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Approved site and landscape plans are required to indicating how the project will comply with LUC requirements when the MS&R right-of-way can no longer be used as part of the site. Landscape plan must show how the site will meet future conditions, if landscape requirements can not be met then a variance must be granted. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03/03/2006 | GBONILL1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 03/03/2006 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |