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: T07CM01696
Parcel: 117143290

Address:
600 S MEYER AV

Review Status: Active

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T07CM01696
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Active
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
06/01/2007 HEATHER THRALL ZONING REVIEW Denied TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Heather Thrall
Senior Planner

PROJECT: T07CM01696, 600 S. Meyer Avenue
Jerry Lee Ho building - addition and conversion to office
Commercial Site Plan, 1st Review

TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 1, 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.

1. This project was reviewed for full code compliance, as there were no percentage of expansion calculations provided to do an accurate review. It appears there is a basement expansion, a 2nd floor expansion, and a building addition on the 1st floor.

The parking and loading zone variances noted on the submittal, C10-04-38, were never effectuated per the variance requirements, and are null and void.

The site plan attached as the base site plan for this project, dated from February 2006, for the parking lot reconfiguration only, is now expired, as plans are viable to pull permits off of for only one year.

The site plan that was included as sheet G2.1 is the site plan that staff reviewed for this project, as it shows the building addition proposed.

This project was reviewed for compliance with the Land Use Code (LUC), Development Standard (DS), American National Standard Institute (ANSI) and International Building Code 2003 (IBC). Specifically, the site plan content was reviewed for compliance with requirements listed in DS 2-02.

2. Per DS 2-02.2.1.2, provide the legal description.

3. Per DS 2-02.2.1.4, please provide the Township Range and Section numbers on the location map and for adjacent sections and re-orient drawing to north as top of page. Provide a scale on the location drawing as 3" = 1 mile. The location map standard is actually found in DS 2-05, but is applicable to site plans.

4. Per DS 2-02.2.1.6, with regards to the building:
A) dimension footprint
B) call out required setbacks per LUC 3.2.6.5.A, and the actual provided setbacks
C) identify all canopy or roof overhangs with their vertical clearance
D) identify on the floor plans shown on sheet G1.2 - in bolded lines - the new areas of occupancy or additions. Label whether applicable to first or second floor - or both - for expansion area and addition area.
E) Provide the last approved set of floor and site plans for comparison. It appears the basement and 2nd floor use are areas of expansion.
F) Show new building area with distinct darkened lines or shading, and clearly dimension area being added, with square footage.
G) List wall heights - existing and proposed - on site plan.
H) Show square footage of all building areas, whether "occupied" or not - it's total gross floor area

5. Per DS 2-02.2.1.8, with regards to parking:
A) once total square footage of the building, listed by each floor, is provided, the exact number of parking spaces required can be determined
B) based upon the preliminary information found on the site plan, a variance is needed to reduce the number of required parking spaces
C) park the basement and first floor at a ratio of 1:200 square feet of gross floor area
D) park the 2nd floor at 1:250 square feet of gross floor area
E) Provide a van accessible parking space per
F) Per ANSI 502.4.1, access aisle for van accessible space must be on passenger side
G) Parking spaces cannot be backing into the right of way for maneuvering
H) Parking overhang needs to be dimensioned
I) The overhang appears to conflict with a fence
J) Number the parking spaces in each row
K) Parking space against the wall or fence needs to be 10' wide per DS 3-05

6. Per DS 2-02.2.1.9, with regards to bicycle parking
A) provide bicycle parking per LUC 3.3.4. ratios - I see keynote 6, need more data
B) Provide detail per DS 2-09 and show on plan per DS 2-09

7. Per DS 2-02.2.1.10, show sight visibility triangles.

8. Per DS 2-02.2.1.11, with regards to PAALs
A) provide a two foot separation between the PAAL at the west and the fence, per DS 3-05.
B) Gate interferes with the PAAL width entry

9. Per DS 2-02.2.2.12, with regards to pedestrian circulation:
A) provide 4' wide sidewalks from both streets to the building per DS 2-08
B) provide 4' wide sidewalks between the building and the parking per DS 2-08 - if provided (keynote 14) it is not clear.
C) provide handicapped parking and access aisle closer to building
D) provide ramps and truncated domes where applicable to ensure handicapped access to the building.
E) further review comments on this may be forthcoming

10. Per DS 2-02.2.1.13, is there any new signage - free -standing - that is proposed?

11. Per DS 2-02.2.1.14, dimension loading zone and show all maneuvering. Note, prior variances for this loading area are void. Also, further loading zones could be required, depending upon the square footage of the building overall.

12. Per DS 2-02.2.1.19, please dimension the right of way from centerline to travel lanes, any parking lanes, curb and to property line.

13. Per DS 2-02.2.1.20, please ensure any and all easements are shown on the plan, with recordation data and purpose called out with dimensions.

14. Per DS 2-02.2.1.25, please call out any free-standing lighting and their pole base and vertical clearance.

15. Increase all type on the plans to a minimum of 12 point - the adjacent zoning is hard to read.

16. Per DS 2-02.2.1.31, please clarify the building's former use - the current - and the proposed use as what type of office? Medical, administrative office?

17. Per DS 2-02.2.1.32, for comments on trash enclosures, see engineering.

18. List all prior zoning cases and their history on the plan, noting that the variance was not effectuated.

19. Provide a total lot area in acreage and square footage.

20. Check the floor area information provided - is this inclusive of the areas that are shown to be "future offices" - they count. Provide a floor area ratio.

21. Provide a percentage of expansion of new square footage and of overall occupancy areas.

22. Historic Advisory Review is required for this project.

23. Board of Adjustment variances would be needed for this project for parking and loading at a minimum from this review.

24. Further review comments may be forthcoming, depending upon the responses provided. If you have any questions on this review, contact me at Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov or at 837-4951.

HCT C:\planning\site\DSD\T07CM01696 600 s meyer.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents
06/01/2007 HEATHER THRALL ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Denied Please see zoning review comments.
06/01/2007 HTHRALL1 ADA REVIEW Passed
06/05/2007 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Revise the site drawing to include the following information:
a. the location of the main water lines and fire hydrants
b. the location and size of the public sanitary sewer
c. the location, inverts, and rim elevation of all manholes and cleanouts
Reference City of Tucson Development Standard No. 2-05.0 2.3 and Section 103.2.3, UPC 2003.
06/07/2007 DAVE MANN FIRE REVIEW Approved
06/14/2007 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1. Historic Advisory Review is required for this project per LUC 2.8.8 HISTORIC PRESERVATION ZONE (HPZ)

2. Landscaping. Plantings and other ornamental features shall reflect the historic period of the subject structure. Landscaping may be reviewed in the context of a required HPZ review; landscaping alone shall not be considered through an HPZ review.

3. The site plan has been reviewed by the Landscape / NPPO Section but cannot approve the plan until all Zoning, comments, concerns, and appropriate revisions have been addressed

4. Include with re-submittal approval documentation. Indicate on the lower right hand corner of the site plan, the variance case number, date of approval, and any conditions imposed.

5. Additional comments may apply.
06/15/2007 PETER MCLAUGHLIN NPPO REVIEW Approved Exception.
06/15/2007 PATRICIA GILBERT ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: June 19, 2007
ACTIVITY NUMBER: T07CM01696
PROJECT ADDRESS: 600 South Meyer Ave
PROJECT REVIEWER: Patricia Gilbert, Engineering Associate

The following items must be revised or added to the site plan. Please include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed.

RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: SITE PLAN

1. Provide a location map which meets the minimum requirements of D.S. 2-05.2.1.D. Include the Section with the Town and Range. Identify conditions within the square mile area, such as major streets. Show the section lines and label. The lettering shall be the equivalent of twelve (0.12") point or greater in size. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.4.

2. Provide existing sight visibility triangles (SVT) for the exit onto Meyer Avenue. The near side length is 185' and the far side length is 110'. DS 3-01.5., DS 2-02.2.1.A.10.

3. At least one (1) sidewalk will be provided to a project from each street on which the project has frontage. The sidewalk should be located to minimize any conflict with vehicular access to the project. Provide a 4' sidewalk to each street. DS 2-08.4.

4. A sidewalk will be provided adjacent to any parking space accessed by a PAAL where the space is located on the same side of the PAAL as any building and no other parking spaces or PAALs intervene. Provide a 4' sidewalk between the parking spaces and the strucuture. DS 2-08.4.1.C.

5. Detectable warnings (truncated domes) will be required at all curb access ramps or at any area where the sidewalk is flush with the asphalt. ICC/ANSI A117. 1-2003 Sec. 406.13, D.S. 2-02.A.2.1.12.

6. Show the loading vehicle maneuverability for the required loading space. The minimum requirements for a 30' single unit vehicle is an outside radius of 42' and inside radius of 28'. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. DS 2-02.2.1.A.14.

7. Provide estimated cut and fill quantities in cubic yards, if zero indicate on the plan. DS 2-02.2.1.A.17.

8. Provide the recordation data for both streets and indicate the streets are public. DS 2-02.2.1.A.18.

9. Dimension from the street centerline of both streets to the ROW line, front of curb and front of sidewalk. Label accordingly. DS 2-02.2.1.A.19.

10. Show on the plan all easements that effect the property. Provide dimensions, recordation data and indicate if public or private. DS 2-02.2.1.A.20.

11. Provide existing topographic contours at intervals not exceeding 2' and/or spot elevations as pertinent and Bench Mark based on the City of Tucson Datum, including City Field Book and page number. DS 2-02.2.1.A.23.

12. New projects will provide centralized on-site refuse storage, collection and pickup areas. Indicate refuse container location, size and access thereto fully dimensioned. Demonstrate maneuverability for the collection vehicle. Be aware refuse vehicles require 36' inside radius and 50' outside radius. Revise plan accordingly. DS 6-01. Figure 1.

13. Please note that subsequent comments may be necessary upon resubmittal, depending on the nature and extent of revisions that occur to the plans.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
06/01/2007 ANY REJECT SHELF RECEIVED