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: SITE
Permit Number - T07CM03015
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/25/2007 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/31/2007 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Fire Central T07CM03015 Site Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 2, 2007 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. This site plan was reviewed for compliance with the City of Tucson Development Standards (D.S.) and Land Use Code (LUC) for full code compliance. 2. Per LUC Sec. 2.8.10.4 A Development Review Board (DRB) is required for this project. 3. Zoning has reviewed both sets of site plans. The following comments are based on a review of the architectural site plan, sheets A1.0 - A1.7 and the provided plans for the parking structure, sheets A2.0 - A2.2a. Zoning acknowledges that some of the following requested information maybe shown on sheets C1.0 - C1.4. Provide a single site plan with all information required by D.S. 2-02. Please clarify which plans you are requesting to be reviewed as the site plan. The next single site plan submittal will need to include the layouts for the parking structure. 4. Add a note to the plan stating "THIS SITE PLAN IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OVERLAY ZONES CRITERIA: SEC. 2.8.3 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES (MS&R) SETBACK ZONE. 5. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A The submitted sheets exceed the maximum size limits, 30" by 42", revise the sheet size to meet this requirement. 6. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.2 Provide a property description on the site plan. 7. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.4 Provide a location map which meets the minimum requirements of D.S. 2-05.2.1.D, identify conditions within the square mile area, such as major streets and watercourses, section, township and range, section corners, and scale. 8. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.5 Provide the lot dimensions and bearings on the site plan. 9. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7 Provide the required setback from the proposed ramada to Simpson St. curb. 10. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Provide typical parking space details for both handicapped and standard spaces. On the details provide the dimension for the concrete wheel stop per D.S. 3-05.2.3.C.2. Also provide on the handicapped parking space detail the maximum slopes for the handicapped vehicle parking space and the access aisle per ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 Sec. 502.5 11. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Provide a dimension from the proposed columns to the front of the vehicle parking spaces within the parking structure. 12. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Provide a width dimension for the vehicle parking space located on the west side of the proposed parking area access lane (PAAL) next to the parking structure access ramp. Per D.S. 3-05.2.1.3 this parking space is required to be 10'-0" wide. 13. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Provide a width dimension for the vehicle parking spaces located on the north and south end of the northern most parking, along the east side of the PAAL. Per D.S. 3-05.2.1.3 this parking space is required to be 10'-0" wide. 14. D.S. 2-02.A.2.1.9 & D.S. 2-09.0 Provide off-street bicycle parking detail for Class 1; including materials for lighting, paving, and security; fully dimensioned layout; location; specific type of rack and the number of bicycles it supports; and the location and type of directional signage if required. 15. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9 There is an inconsistency between dimensions shown on the Class 2 bicycle parking details, 205 & 206. The overall width of the proposed rack shown on detail 205 equals fifteen and one-half (15 ½) inches. . The overall width of the proposed rack shown on detail 206 shows an overall width dimension of twenty-one (21) inches. Please clarify which is correct. 16. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9 Provide the location of the Class 1 bicycle parking on the site plan. 17. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9 There appears to be a light pole that encroaches into the required five (5) foot access aisle (see D.S. 2-09.5.2) for the Class 2 bicycle parking located near the vehicle access gate. 18. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Provide a striped crosswalk at the curb access ramps located just north of the vehicle security gate. 19. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Provide a dimension from the proposed air intake/tree planters to the buildings and or site walls so that zoning can verify that the minimum four (4) foot width. 20. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 There is a proposed sidewalk, located near the southeast corner, which appears to cross the adjacent property. Provide documentation that allows the sidewalk to be located on the adjacent property, i.e. easement, access agreement. 21. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 The proposed PAAL for fire vehicle access crosses through existing right-of-way (ROW) located to the west of this parcel. Provide documentation that allows the use of the ROW. 22. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13. If applicable provide the location, type, size and height of existing and proposed freestanding signage and billboards. 23. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.18. Add MS&R next to the Cushing Street's name. 24. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.20. Show all easements of record graphically on the site plan together with recording docket and page reference. 25. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31. Per CITY OF TUCSON REQUIRED LAND USE COAD SITE PLAN NOTES #31 this information is provided on sheet A0.1. This info is not shown on sheet A0.1 but is on Sheet A0.2. Provide the existing and proposed use on one site plan, see comment 3 above. 26. D.S. 2-02.2.2 Calculations: Provide the following calculations on the site plan, see comment 3 above: a) Gross lot area b) Floor area for the building c) Provide the allowed and provide floor area ratio (FAR). This calculation shown on sheet A0.2 is incorrect. The allowed FAR shown is 0.9, per LUC Sec 3.2.3.2.B, Development Designator "34", the allowed FAR is 2.0. d) Vehicle parking space required and provided. The calculation shown on sheet A.02 is incorrect. Per LUC Sec. 3.3.6.1.B the required vehicle parking is based on one (1) space per three hundred (300) square feet of gross floor area. Also per a determination, the floor area where emergency vehicles are parking inside the building, does not count toward the gross floor area used in the required vehicle parking calculation. This said once the gross floor area, minus the interior emergency vehicle parking area, is clearly delineated on the site plan, zoning can verify the vehicle parking calculation. Per LUC Sec. 3.3.7.2.C.1 provide a calculation for the percentage of compact vehicle parking spaces proposed. e) Handicapped parking spaces required and provided. f) Bicycle parking space required and provide. The calculation shown on sheet A.02 is incorrect. Per LUC Sec. 3.3.4 eight (8) percent of the provided vehicle parking spaces, fifty (50) percent Class 1 and fifty (50) percent Class 2. g) Loading spaces required and provided. For your information per a determination, the floor area where emergency vehicles are parking inside the building, does not count toward the gross floor area used in the required loading space calculation. This said once the gross floor area, minus the interior emergency vehicle parking area, is clearly delineated on the site plan, zoning can verify the loading space calculation. 27. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape plan. 28. Additional comments may be forth coming depending on how each comment has been addressed. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. I:\planning\site\t07cm03015.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents |
| 08/02/2007 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | See Zoning Comments |
| 08/14/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Applications for projects within the Rio Nuevo and Downtown (RND) Zone shall be reviewed in accordance with the Administrative Design Review Procedures, 23A-32. 2. A 5' wall is required to screen residential zoned properties from vehicle use area per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. 3. All landscape areas will be depressed to accept water flow from roofs, PAAL, and parking areas. Show by detail or spot elevations how landscape areas will accommodate water harvesting. 4. The site plan and landscape plan must show identical site layout to avoid conflict between the two plans. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape & grading plan. |
| 08/14/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/15/2007 | WILLDAN | ADA | REVIEW | Denied | August 15, 2007 City of Tucson Development Services 201 North Stone Avenue Tucson, AZ 85701 RE: FIRE CENTRAL SITE ADA– 1ST REVIEW CITY OF TUCSON LOG NO. T07CM03015 WILLDAN PROJECT NO. 16608-7007 The initial review for the above project has been completed. This letter contains comments which need to be addressed by written responses to each, indicating all actions taken. In order to facilitate a shorter second review, all corrections and revisions must be completed. Two complete new sets of prints, along with a redlined set from the previous review, must be delivered to our office. To avoid delays, ensure that all corrections have been made, are complete, and have been coordinated on all applicable detail and note sheets. Pen or pencil corrections on final prints are not acceptable. This project has been reviewed for conformance with the City of Tucson Land Use Code 1995 and the City of Tucson Development Standards 2000 as amended and supplemented. Should you have questions regarding the comments herein, please contact your plans examiners, David Williams, ADA. GENERAL COMMENTS: General The plans show 20 parking spaces outside of the access gate and 1 accessible space. On the inside of the access gate the plans show 48 spaces and 2 accessible spaces. These ratios are correct yet the parking calculations on the plans call out 207 parking spaces. The spaces provided in the parking garage will be reviewed when the building plans are submitted. All accessible parking spaces shall be designated as reserved by a sign showing the symbol of accessibility. Please detail a separate accessible sign for the car accessible space and the van accessible spaces. Sheet C1.3 The width required for a van accessible parking is 11 feet. Please revise detail 7 to reflect this per Section 502.2 of the ANSI A117. Sheet C1.4 Please add the max slope of 12:1 for the ramp detail number 5. Sincerely, WILLDAN David A. Williams, AICP Principal Planner |
| 08/17/2007 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/20/2007 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | August 31, 2007 T07CM03015, T07OT01635, T07OT01526 FIRE CENTRAL 495 W Cushing Street Site, Grading and Floodplain Reviews The plans cannot be approved as submitted. The following comments must be addressed on each plan as applicable. 1. Provide an exhibit in the Drainage Report showing the existing and proposed floodplain boundaries. All areas subject to periodic inundation must be identified. 2. Revise the site plan to delineate the floodprone areas. The site plan should show the areas subject to inundation under existing condition and show the areas that will still be subject to periodic inundation once the improvements have been completed. 3. Provide existing and future water surface contours for all off-site and on-site concentrated flows. (Ensure that the lowest floor of each structure is at least one foot above the adjacent water surface contours.) 4. Provide sufficient spot elevations details to show that the underground parking garage will be kept flood-free. The floodplain use permit and SWPPP will be approved when the site and grading plans are approved. If you have any questions or want to set up a meeting contact me at 520.837.4927 or loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov. Loren Makus Senior Engineering Associate |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/04/2007 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |