Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Permit Number - T06CM03746
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/02/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit Application for Exception; include acceptable documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants. |
| 01/10/2007 | HEATHER THRALL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Heather Thrall Senior Planner PROJECT: T06CM03746, 1800 N. Camino Pio Decimo, St. Pius X Catholic Church Garage addition and pedestrian circulation changes to church Site Plan Review, 2nd review TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 10, 2007 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with redlines and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. Staff chose to review sheet C1.1 for site plan data. NOTE THAT SEVERAL COMMENTS WILL BE ASKING FOR YOU TO MOVE THE DATA FROM THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN TO THE CIVIL SITE PLAN. IT IS IMPERATIVE THE INFORMATION IS ON ONE SITE PLAN THAT WILL BE REVIEWED AND STAMPED FOR PERMITS APPROVAL AND RECORDS. SITE PLAN A 1. (Per last review) Per DS 2-02.2.16, with regards to the proposed garage: A) clarify building height (grade to top of flat roof, grade to midpoint of pitched roof) RESPONSE: The max. height I see - to top of parapet is 12' from FFE, staff takes the total building wall height from grade. I see that you will have a parapet a few feet above the garage roof, rendering the roof height under the 12' max allowance - good. Please dimension the elevation to show the difference in height from roof to parapet. B) ensure general zoning notes state max building height is 12' for garage RESPONSE: The general notes on the site plan on sheet G1.2 do not list specifically the garage height is limited to no more than 12'. I see notes for proposed structure height of 12, and then I see a height of 20' actual (for the church?) Please make it clear in notes. C) Please dimension the building footprint. RESPONSE: I see it on sheet A2.2. Please put it on the site plan shown on C1.1. 2. Per DS 2-02.2.1.7, with regards to building setbacks: A) provide building setbacks from north lot line RESPONSE: Shows it on sheet A0.4, move data to sheet C1.1. The setbacks for the structure, at 2 x the height of the exterior building wall, at 24' may not be quite enough as the architectural plan on A0.4 shows the 12' height is being measured from FFE. Staff needs it measured from grade, which may add as much as 8" for example. Setbacks will be checked again on the next review. 3. Per DS 2-02.2.1.8, with regards to parking: A) provide back up spur at south end of new parking lot RESPONSE: I see back up spur, thank you. The back up spur designed is too close for vehicles backing safely - as they will overhang right into the sidewalk area. The back up spur should not be as deep as shown - allow for 2.6" clear vehicle overhang from walk. 4. Per DS 2-02.2.1.12 /DS 2-08 with regards to pedestrian circulation A) is required to be continuous from garage to church, connect from Grady RESPONSE: I see the connection, thank you. The crosswalk leading from the parking lot to the church should be perpendicular to the PAAL, without a jog in it. Can the handicapped ramp near the church be slid over? If not, provide a straight lined crosswalk without a jog, and the slight angle should work between the two ramps. B) provide truncated domes (early warning system per ANSI 705.5.) on all ramps RESPONSE: I see truncated domes, thank you. Per ANSI, the domes should be provided in only a 2' wide strip on the ramp where the ramp meets the asphalt - extend full width of the flat part of the ramp. You also need a strip of truncated domes at end of crosswalk - but on concrete part of sidewalk - at garage end. 5. Per DS 2-02.2.1.28, call out zoning of adjacent parcel to north RESPONSE: indicates zoning is R-1 to north, that is correct. Please put it on sheet C1.1 - in site plan A box near word "ALLEY" so that it's clearly visible. Thanks. 6. Per DS 2-02.2.2.A.6, provide exact percentage of expansion calcs for both building and parking lot RESPONSE: Indicates shown on architectural drawings - where? Provide calcs on sheet G1.2 or C1.1 please. SITE PLAN C 7. Per DS 2-02.2.1.11, with regards to drop off area A) clarify width of drop off PAAL B) clarify why bollards, even removable, are provided C) clarify if concrete is in flush with sidewalk, provide separation if so D) clarify pedestrian access route, barrier free, from building to handicapped parking E) clarify where handicapped ramps on south side of drop off lead to - there are no ramps on other side - handicapped access in a PAAL is a safety issue F) provide width of crosswalk G) provide width of sidewalk H) provide slope ratio for ramp please I) provide truncated domes on all ramps J) if sidewalk in drop off is in flush with asphalt, provide physical barrier to prevent vehicles from entering up on sidewalk to building and provide truncated domes in a strip full length of pedestrian area that may touch the in flush asphalt or pavers where vehicles travel (detection for blind) K) call out width of handicapped access aisle between parking spaces L) call out where handicapped access aisles are for other two handicapped spaces - must be adjacent M) call out ramps at handicapped access aisle to sidewalk near parking spaces, crosswalk too RESPONSE: responses were labeled to the above, thank you - however, this drawing really needs to have some kind of cross-section view provided. The drawing is very difficult to understand for slopes, and where sidewalks are meeting asphalt. Please provide me with a cross-section showing how this driveway and the sidewalk surfaces meet. Remember that per DS 2-08 and 3-05 and ANSI, physical separation must be provided between a sidewalk and a driveway. That can be accomplished with bollards, with a curb, or raising the sidewalk higher than the driveway. In addition, handicapped ramps and truncated domes are required. Truncated domes are required even if the concrete and asphalt are in flush but are physically separated by bollards. 8. Depending upon what the last approved site plan shows, and the responses given to this review, further review comments may be forthcoming, or comments provided here may be deleted. Should you have any questions on this review, please email me at Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov or at 791-4541x1156. I WOULD LIKE TO MEET WITH BOTH A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING FIRMS ON THIS TO HELP GET SOME OF THESE NOTES REVIEWED TOGETHER. Please email me for an appointment. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call (520) 791-5608. HCT C:\planning\site\DSD\T06CM03746 1800 n camino pio decimo garage church 2.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan |
| 01/11/2007 | HEATHER THRALL | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | See zoning review comments please. |
| 01/18/2007 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: NTD STICHLER DATE: January 19, 2007 Architects 2940 N. Swan Road Ste 214 Tucson, Arizona 85712 SUBJECT: 1800 N. Camino Pio Decimo Site plan T06CM03746 (Second Review) T14S, R15E, Section 05 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Site Plan The Site Plan (SP) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Site Plan: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the SP. 2. DSD staff, engineering included reviewed sheet C1.1 for site plan content. The following requirements shall be shown on the site plan (sht. C1.1). 3. As per the Federal ADA requirements, all wheel chair ramps shall have the truncated domes instead of the standard grooves that are shown on COT SD 207. Aside from the Truncated Domes, all wheel chair ramps shall be constructed in accordance with COT SD 207. Per previous comment. 4. Please label lot dimensions and bearings per D.S. 2-02.2.1.5. Per previous comment. 5. Label existing and future sight visibility triangles per D.S. 2-02.2.1.10. Per previous comment. 6. Please list estimated cut & fill quantities per D.S. 2-02.2.1.17. Additional comments may be forth coming. I could not locate the estimated quantities on the site plan. Per previous comment. 7. Please show dimensioned right-of-way, including any applicable Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan right-of-way per D.S. 2-02.2.1.19. Per previous comment. 8. Show Site plan number on all sheets per D.S. 2-02.2.1.29. The response does not match the comment. Per previous comment. 9. Please provide a Bench Mark based on a City of Tucson Datum, including City Field Book and page number per D.S. 2-02.2.1.23. 10. Please feel free to make an appointment with me to clarify any comments made on the site plan. Drainage Statement: 1. The DS has been accepted by engineering. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1193 or Paul.Machado@tucsonaz.gov Paul P. Machado Senior Engineering Associate City of Tucson/Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210 (520) 791-5550 x1193 office (520) 879-8010 fax C:/1800 N. Camino Pio Decimo Site 2 |
| 12/20/2006 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied | Garage would need high fire rating at property line if it is type IV. Elevations do not look like type IV. |
| 12/29/2006 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Provide North arrow and scale on the landscape plans. 2. Street landscape border is required along Grady St. for the new parking and building areas. A street landscape border, per Sec. 3.7.2.4 of the LUC, is a landscape area with a minimum width of ten (10) feet, running the full length of the street property line(s) bounding the site except for points of ingress-egress 3. Fifty (50) percent or more of the area of the street landscape border must be covered with shrubs or vegetative ground cover. The required ground coverage must be achieved within two (2) years from the date of planting. LUC 3.7.2.4.A.5. Verify coverage for required street landscape border 4. Indicate square footage of all landscaped areas and calculation of the percentage of vegetative coverage per DS 2-07.2.2.2.g. 5. A 30" continuous screen along street frontages for vehicle use area must be provided per LUC Table 3.7.2-I 6. Within vehicular use areas, one (1) canopy tree is required for each 10 motor vehicle parking spaces and every parking space shall be located within forty (40) feet of the trunk of a canopy tree (as measured from the center of the tree trunk) per LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.a. Verify new parking area meets canopy tree requirement 7. All landscape areas will be depressed to accept water flow from roofs, PAAL, and parking areas. Indicate by detail or spot elevations how landscape areas will be depressed to accept water flow from roofs, PAAL, and parking areas. 8. Landscape plan shall include irrigation specification design and layout per DS 2-06.5.4.A & DS 2-06.5.4.B including source of irrigation, sleeves for driveways and sidewalks, locations of valves, low-flow bubblers or drip irrigation. 9. The planting plan and layout calculations will include both the proper and common name of each type of plant material, including existing plants. 10. Submit Application for Exception; include acceptable documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01/26/2007 | SUE REEVES | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |