Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE
Permit Number - T11CM00338
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/03/2011 | RBROWN1 | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | Not a COT owned or operated property |
| 02/04/2011 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied | Proposed building appears to be too close to property line. Approval of site plan contigent on fire rating of struture. |
| 02/08/2011 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: University of Arizona Hillel Student Center Expansion T11CM00338 Site Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 9, 2011 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). This project has been reviewed for full code compliance for the entire site due to a building expansion greater than 25%. 2) Provide written documentation from Craig Gross stating that the proposed project is a "Religious" use. 3) D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6 Provide a clear height for the covered parking area from grade to structure above. 4) D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7 The following comments are in regards to building setbacks: a) Front Street Perimeter Yard Setback - Per LUC Section 3.2.6.5.A Within established areas, the front street perimeter yard is twenty (20) feet or one and one-half (1 1/2) the height of the proposed wall (H), measured from the street property line, whichever is greater, up to a maximum of ninety (90) feet: i) The required front street perimeter yard setback to the south property line is based on a wall height of 20.0' x 1.5 = 30.0', proposed front street perimeter yard setback is 25.0'. b) Interior Perimeter Yard Setback - Per LUC Section 3.2.6.4 using Development Designator "18", Perimeter Yard Indicator "CC", the required perimeter yard is based on 10.0' or ¾ (Height of the proposed exterior building wall): i) The required perimeter yard setback from the proposed building to the north property line is based on a wall height of 32.5' x 0.75 = 24.375', proposed perimeter yard setback is 14.0' ii) The required perimeter yard setback from the proposed building to the west property line is based on a wall height of 32.5' x 0.75 = 24.375', proposed perimeter yard setback is 7.5' c) As heights were not provided for the proposed balcony and stairs Zoning was not able to provide comments in regards to required perimeter yard setbacks for these areas. Additional comments will be forth coming. 5) D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9 Provide an off-street bicycle parking detail, including materials for lighting, paving, and security; fully dimensioned layout; location; specific type of rack. Refer to D.S. 2-09.5.0 for layout requirements. 6) D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.11 Per LUC Section 3.3.7.2 the minimum width of a two-way Parking Area Access Land (PAAL) is 24.0'. That said the proposed PAAL of 20.0' does not meet this requirement. 7) D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Per LUC Section 3.2.8.4.B & D.S. 2-08.4.1 C 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 PAAL's intervene. That said a four (4) foot side walk is required between the vehicle parking space and the area that resembles a turret located on the north side of the existing building. 8) D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13 If applicable provide the location, type, size, and height of existing and proposed signage. 9) D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.20 I applicable all easements of record must be graphically shown on the plan together with recording docket and page reference. 10) D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.28 The zoning shown on Sheets 1 & 2 for the parcel located to the north is not correct. Revise the drawings to shown this zoning as "R-3". 11) D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31 Provide the "EXISTING USE" on the plan. 12) D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.3 Per LUC Section 3.2.3.2.A & Development Designator "18" the allowed Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is 0.50, proposed FAR is 0.772. A Board of Adjustment for Variance is required. 13) D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.3 Per LUC Section 3.2.3.2.A & Development Designator "18" the allowed Lot Coverage is 70%, proposed Lot Coverage is 96.7%. A Board of Adjustment for Variance is required. 14) D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4 Per LUC Section 3.3.4, CIVIC USE GROUP, Religious Use, Motor Vehicle: SB. One (1) space per five (5) fixed seats or one (1) space per fifty (50) sq. ft. of floor area of all combined areas of assembly where religious services are held. Based on an assembly area of 6,130 Sq. Ft / 50 = 123 vehicle parking spaces required, 18 vehicle parking spaces provided. A Board of Adjustment for Variance is required. 15) If a Board of Adjustment for Variance is applied for and approved provide the following information on the plan; Board of Adjustment for Variance Number, Date Approved, What was approved, and Conditions of Approval. 16) Near the vehicle parking calculation there appears to be a revision cloud. As this set of pland have not been approved remove any and all revision clouds from the plans. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\site\2011\t11cm00338 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents. |
| 02/11/2011 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | Exception |
| 02/11/2011 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Submit a landscape plan to verify that the site meets minimum requirements. 2. 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. On streets designated as Major Streets and Routes (MS&R), the street landscape border is measured from the MS&R right-of-way line as determined by LUC 2.8.3.4. 3. Fifty (50) percent or more of the street landscape border area must have shrubs and vegetative ground cover per LUC 3.7.2.4 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 10' interior landscape border is required along site boundaries of the adjacent residential properties per LUC Table 3.7.2-I 6. One (1) canopy tree must be provided for every thirty-three (33) linear feet of landscape border per LUC 3.7.2.4. 7. A 5' continuous screen along street frontages for vehicle use area must be provided per LUC Table 3.7.2-I 8. A 5' wall is required for adjacent residential properties per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. 9. Planting Plan. The planting plan and layout calculations will include the following information: § The location of individual plants one (1) gallon or larger. § Sizes of plants indicated in boxes, gallon cans § Ultimate size of plants indicated by the spread of canopy, circumference of shrubs, or spread of ground cover. § Both the proper and common name of each type of plant material. § Location, size, and name of existing vegetation to remain in place. § Material and areas of inert ground cover. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. 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 plan. 14. Additional comments may apply. |
| 02/15/2011 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | February 16, 2011 T11CM00338 Site Plan Review Please address the following: 1. Clarify the solid waste container location and details. General Note 23 on sheet 1 indicates that the enclosure is existing. Aerial photography of the site seems to show the current container located at the west end of the parking lot without an enclosure. Provide details of the proposed enclosure location and access provisions. Provide documentation for permission to access the solid waste enclosure from the private alley. 2. To the extent possible, direct roof and parking area drainage to landscape areas. 3. Correct the spelling of North Mountain Avenue on all sheets. |
| 02/16/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/16/2011 | RONALD BROWN | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. The accessible parking sign in not located on the accessible parking space, detail 1/2. 2. There are two accessible ramps, one on the West side and one on the East Side. a. The East side ramp has been identified and needs to have a large scale plan drawn up showing all accessibility requirements with dimensions and handrail elevations. b. The West side ramp has not been identified as an accessible route needing compliance with the 2006 IBC, ICC (ANSI 1171.), Section 405 and 505. Please provide a larges scale detail fron the building entry to the curb access to the PAAL showing all accessibility requirements as per code. 1. If the end (most Westerly) landing of this ramp is flush to the adjacent PAAL, then a detectable warning strip must be added. 3. Please remove the detectable warning strip at the accessible parking aisle. It is not required. 4. Provide a "Van Accessible" sign to the accessible parking signage. 5. Provide a minimum 3' width accessible route passage in front of the rounded arched of the building located just in front of the accessible parking space. END OF REVIEW |