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: LUCAPPS - OVERLAY ZONE REV
Permit Number - T06SA00120
Review Name: LUCAPPS - OVERLAY ZONE REV
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/16/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/28/2006 | HEATHER THRALL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Add the SCZ case number (T06SA00120) to the development plan, landscape/NPPO, and grading plans near the title block in the lower right hand corner of the sheets. 2) Once the SCZ application is approved, add a general note stating the SCZ case number, date of approval and any conditions imposed. 3) Label Silverbell Road and its edge of MS&R right-of-way on the plan on sheet 1 of 2. Label and dimension the 400-foot Scenic Corridor Zone on this map from both Silverbell Road and from Ironwood Hills to show what portions of the site are subject to SCZ requirements. LUC 2.8.2.3, LUC 2.8.2.6.B 4) Minimum required text size is 12 point (0.12") for microfilming/archiving purposes. Revise all lettering and dimensions in the bicycle parking and curb access ramp details to meet this minimum standard for text size. 5) State the proposed height above grade for the elevated portion of the parking structure at its highest point above the ground. Dimension the distance of the parking structure from the edge of MS&R right-of-way for Silverbell Road. LUC 2.8.2.5 6) Add the following SCZ notes to the plan: a. All new utilities will be underground per LUC 2.8.2.9 b. No grading is to occur more than 30 days prior to construction. Grading permits are to cover only those areas for which building permits are granted. (LUC 2.8.2.13) c. Building or stucture surfaces, which are visible from the Scenic Route, will have colors which are predominant within the surrounding landscape. such as desert and earth tones per LUC 2.8.2.10.A. d. Fencing and freestanding walls facing the Scenic Route will meet the material restrictions in LUC 3.7.3, Screening requirements (LUC 2.8.2.10.B) |
| 06/29/2006 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | DATE: June 20, 2006 SUBJECT: New Parking Structure for Mosaic Cafe TO: Maria Rojas LOCATION: 2625 N Silverbell Rd, T13S R13E Sec33, Ward 1 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: T06CM02533 & T06SA00120 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the submitted site plan, landscape plan and drainage report. The drainage report was reviewed for site plan purpose only. The site plan is not approved at this time. Please address the following comments: DRAINAGE REPORT: 1) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.2.D: Provide a copy of the previous drainage report referenced in the Detention/Retention section of this proposed report titled, "Drainage Report for Silverbell Road & Ironwood Hill Drive Property" by Rick Engineering Company. 2) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.5.C: Provide hydraulic calculations for the basin outfall weir and provide any necessary outlet protection if applicable. 3) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.6.A.4.a: Revise the drainage report with a submitted site plan which clearly shows the location, size, dimensions and elevations for the basins existing outfall pipe and outfall weir that are referenced in the Detention/Retention section of the proposed drainage report. 4) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.6.A.4.f: Provide on the revised site plan the location and type of security barriers that are to be installed around the basin. Include a discussion on how the security barriers will prevent transient activity, trespassing issues and safety hazards. 5) DS Sec. 3-01.4.4.F: Provide a revised drainage report showing scupper calculations that demonstrate that the 10-year flood flow from the roof drainage is contained under the sidewalk. Provide details and dimensions in plan view for any proposed scuppers. SITE PLAN COMMENTS: 6) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.20: Review of the site plan shows utility easements that fall in the location of the proposed parking structure that may have maintenance access obstruction issues with the proposed improvements. Obtain a letter from each entity having a recorded interest in all easements, as shown on the proposed site plan that will be obstructed by the construction of the proposed elevated parking structure. Each entity must provide a letter stating that they do not have any issues with the proposed parking structure being constructed over the existing easements. 7) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.8: Revise the entire existing parking lot and parking area access lanes (PAAL) to bring them into full code compliance. Per Tucson Code 25-39 the maximum number of driveways per 100 feet of frontage road is 2. Currently there are 3 driveways along N Silver Mosaic Drive. Please refer to Sec 25-39 of the Tucson Code and Development Standard Sec.3-05 for all specifications and restrictions for redesigning the parking area and PAALs. 8) DS Sec.3-05.2.2.2.D: Revise the back-up spur provided at the end of the PAAL on the proposed elevated parking structure. The spur must be a minimum of 3 feet in depth with a 3-foot radii, but must also provide a minimum of 3 feet between the back of spur and any wall obstruction that is over 6 inches in height. 9) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.10: Revise the sight visibility triangles on Sheet 2 of 2. Specifically revise the near side length to read 185 feet and the far side length to read 110 feet. The proposed site plan shows the sight visibility triangles reversed in plan view. Refer to DS Sec3-01.5.1 for sight visibility triangle procedures and criteria. Also revise the landscape plan to reflect the sight visibility triangles shown on the site plan. 10) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise Sheet 2 of 2 to label the continuous pedestrian circulation path that connects all public access areas of the existing building and the proposed circulation path located on N Silver Mosaic Drive. 11) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.14: Provide the required maneuvering area for the loading zone that will be shown on the revised site plan. Refer to AASHTO for the national standards for turning radii. 12) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Revise the site plan to provide the limits of the 100-year floodplain and water surface elevations within the existing basin. 13) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Provide a detail for any proposed scuppers, which are used for collecting onsite roof drainage at all pedestrian sidewalks. Any scupper proposed under the sidewalk will be designed and constructed to convey the 10-year flood flow. Provide a revised drainage report showing scupper calculations that demonstrate that the 10-year flood flow is contained under the sidewalk. 14) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.23: Revise the site plan so that the shaded area referencing the proposed elevated parking structure is readable. The shaded area needs to be lightened up so that existing topography, spot elevations, and details of the structure can be seen. 15) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.29: Revise the site plan to include the correct site plan number (T06CM02533) in the lower right hand corner of the plans where indicated by "T06CMXXXXX". 16) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.31: Provide on the revised site plans the Scenic Corridor overlay Zone. The overlay zone must be approved prior to site plan approval. 17) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.32: Provide dimensions for refuse container, show or label gates or doors for trash enclosures. The property is subject to full code compliance therefore all aspects of the site plan must be brought up to current development standards. The enclosure must have a minimum inside clear dimension of 10 feet by 10 feet between bollards that are required between the container and the enclosure's rear and sidewall. Refer to DS Sec.6-01.4.2 for specifications and requirements on access, placement of containers, bin enclosure and construction. Show maneuverability for refuse vehicles in plan view. 18) DS Sec.2-01.2.1.C: Revise the landscape plan to reflect the revised sight visibility triangles that are shown on the site plan. Provide a note on the landscape plan to state no structures and vegetation is allowed within 30" to 72" in height and will not be placed within the sight visibility triangles. Remove any proposed vegetation within the sight visibility triangle areas that obstructs sight visibility. 19) Provide construction easements on the site plan for construction of the columns and/or caissons along the slope access. The construction easements must be provided along with recordation information for the easements that adjacent property owners have granted access for construction vehicles across their property. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: 20) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a, 10-02.14.2.6: A geotechnical evaluation needs to be submitted for review, addressing the following: a) Soils report should provide conformance with DS Section 10-02.14.2.6 regarding 30-foot boring for the basin, and provide discussion of potential for hydro-collapsible soils and any recommendation for setbacks from building to basin and depth of footings for the caissons and concrete columns located in the basin and along the existing natural slope. b) The soils report shall provide identification / assessment of any potentially hazardous geotechnical areas, and state any geotechnical recommendations and whether there are special provisions for the soil preparation for this development. c) Provide slope stability recommendations for any proposed constructed slopes. d) Provide pavement structure design recommendations. GENERAL COMMENTS: 21) A grading plan will be required for this project. It is not recommended at this time to submit the grading plan until the site plan is further along and the major design issues are resolved. However the geotechnical report will be required at the grading plan submittal for feasibility concerns and isues. 22) Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) requirements are applicable to this project. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) and text addressing stormwater controls for all areas affected by construction activities related to this development will be required. For further information, visit www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html. Please provide a revised site plan, a revised landscape plan, a revised drainage report, and a geotechnical report that address the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the site plan, landscape plan, drainage report, and geotechnical report reviews. Please enclose "redlines" with the resubmittal package for reference. For any questions or to schedule a meeting, call me at 791-5550, extension 1189. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 07/21/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | WRITE DECISION LETTER | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES July 21, 2006 Dick Karkau/Patricia Rojas The Architecture Company 2625 North Silverbell Road Tucson, Arizona 85745 Subject: T06SA00120 Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone 2456 North Silver Mosaic Drive (T06CM02533) Dear Dick and Patricia: Your submittal of May 3, 2006 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 DETAILED cover letter for each agency explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLUELINES MUST BE FOLDED 2 Copies Revised Overlay zone submittal package as detailed in the on line comments (Zoning, DSD). Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608, ext. 1179. Sincerely, Patricia Y. Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 620-6097 |