Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: CDRC - DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D02-0021
Review Name: CDRC - DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/13/2002 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | INITIALIZE THE WORKFLOW | Completed | |
| 11/15/2002 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | PIMA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 201 N. Stone Ave, 1st Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701-1207 KAY MARKS ADDRESSING OFFICIAL PH: 740-6480 FAX #: 740-6370 TO : CITY PLANNING FROM : KAY MARKS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL SUBJECT : D02-0021 OREGANO’S PIZZA BISTRO / REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE : November 15, 2002 *********************************************************************************************************** The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/ addressing, and we hereby approve this project. Note: Remove "East" and "North" from Street Names on Mylar. (Sheets SP1. OA and OB). NOTE: 1. Submit a 24 x 36 Mylar of approved Development Plan to City Planning. Signed and dated mylar will be forwarded to Pima County Addressing prior to the assignment of addresses. 2. All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection. |
| 11/25/2002 | LAITH ALSHAMI | DEVELOPMENT SERVICES | ENGINEERING | Approved | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain, 11/25/2002 The subject submittal has been reviewed. The Development Plan and the Drainage Report are hereby recommended for approval pertaining to drainage and engineering. |
| 11/26/2002 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | DEVELOPMENT SERVICES | ZONING | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Peter McLaughlin Senior Planner FOR: Patricia Gehlen Principal Planner PROJECT: D02-021 Oregano's Restaurant Remodel/Expansion TRANSMITTAL: November 26, 2002 DUE DATE: November 26, 2002 1. Add future site visibility triangles (based on future curb location, which is shown to be different from the existing curb location) to the plan for the intersection of Speedway Blvd and Arcadia Ave and for the ingress-egress point. Two of the parking spaces appear to be located partially within the future SVTs. Please revise. DS 2-05.2.4.R 2. Provide the degree of the angled parking along the east property line. Angled parking must meet the criteria listed in the Table 3.3.7-I of the Land Use Code. LUC 3.3.7.2 3. Revise keynote 21 indicator arrows to the west and east of the entrance from Speedway. They point to locations where concrete wheelstops are not depicted. 4. Provide a loading zone calculation on the plan listing how many loading zones are required (1) and how many are provided. DS 2-05.2.O 5. Rezoning condition 13 requires that loading spaces to be located a minimum of 50 feet from residentially zoned/developed properties. It appears that the proposed loading zone is only about 12 feet from adjacent R-2 zoned property to the east. Also, the location of the loading zone, with vehicle parking spaces located at both ends, does not allow for maneuverability of trucks into and out of the zone. Please revise. 6. The class 2 bicycle parking detail must include a 6-foot length for the bicycles and a 5-foot maneuverability area adjacent to the bicycle parking spaces per DS 2-09. Revise bicycle parking detail to show fully dimensioned spaces. The location of bicycle parking only allows for eight feet total between two vehicle parking spaces. Revise the location of bicycle parking to allow for adequate maneuverability. DS 2-05 7. Revise keynote 22 to indicate that the bicycle parking detail is on sheet SP1.2. 8. Both keynote 2 and 25 refer to "after hours gate". Please clarify and remove one of the keynotes if there is only one after hours gate location. 9. Dimension the width of the entrance drive from Speedway. Parking and handicap ramps may not be located in the PAAL and the PAAL must be a minimum 24 feet in width. Minimum required standard vehicle parking space dimensions are 8 ½ feet by 18 feet. The handicap ramp, the two "pick-up" parking spaces near the entrance, and the parking space adjacent to the existing storage building appear to extend into the 24-foot PAAL. Please revise. LUC 3.3.7.2.A DS 3-05.2.1.C.1 10. The ten parking parking spaces along the west edge of the parking lot do not meet the 18-foot length requirement, and their wheelstops must be located at 2 ½ feet from the front end of the parking spaces. Please revise. Also, remove from the landscape plan the wheelstops which are shown along the east property line within the proposed loading zone and to the south of the angled parking. DS 3-05.2.3.C.2 LUC 3.3.7.2.A 11. Indicate with a standard h/c symbol all handicapped accessible parking spaces to be provided. Only one h/c space is depicted with this symbol on the drawing. Add the slope of the h/c access ramps. ANS/IBC 12. For legibility and microfilming purposes all lettering and dimensions must be a minimum of 0.12 point or greater in size. Portions of details 4 (particularly section A-A) and 8 (section X) on sheet SP1.3, and detail 3 on sheet SP1.2 do not meet this minimum standard. Please revise. DS 2-05.2.1.C 13. Add the section corners, with sections labeled at the intersection of Speedway and Swan on the location map. DS 2-05.2.1.D.3 14. Between any building and PAAL a five-foot pedestrian refuge with four-foot sidewalk is required. There is no sidewalk/pedestrian refuge indicated along the east side of the existing storage building adjacent to the PAAL. A Development Standards Modification Request (DSMR) may be applied for if no sidewalk/refuge is to be provided. DS 3-05.2.2.B.1 If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608. |
| 11/27/2002 | FRODRIG2 | CITY OF TUCSON - NOT DSD | REAL ESTATE | Denied | Please re-submit the revised legal description with the updated title report. (Acknowledged your note that the legal description has been revised and resubmitted, but I have not received it.) Please feel free to call me with any questions at 791-4001 # 231. |
| 11/27/2002 | JOE LINVILLE | DEVELOPMENT SERVICES | LANDSCAPE | Denied | The Landscape Section does not recommend approval of the development plan at this time. ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY LINE A MIN. 5 FOOT HIGH MASONRY WALL IS REQUIRED IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH LUC 3.7.3 SCREENING REGULATIONS. Identify the height of any existing wall utilized to meet the screening requirements. AN INTERIOR LANDSCAPE BORDER IS REQUIRED ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY LINE ADJACENT TO THE R-2 ZONED PROPERTY. LUC 3.7.2.4 THE PLAN MUST INCLUDE DEMONSTRATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE STREET LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS ALONG SPEEDWAY BOULEVARD. THE LANDSCAPE BORDER IS BASED ON THE MS&R RIGHT OF WAY LINE AND MUST BE A MINIMUM OF TEN FEET IN WIDTH AND PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 50% VEGETATIVE COVERAGE. DIMENSION THE REQUIRED BORDER AND PROVIDE CALCULATIONS TO MEET THE COVERAGE REQUIREMENT. PROVIDE ONE CANOPY TREE FOR EVERY 33 FEET OF FRONTAGE ALONG THE STREET. LUC 3.7.2.4, DS 2-07.2.2 IDENTIFY ALL EXISTING PLANTS BY GENUS AND SPECIES. DS 2-07.2.2 A MINIMUM 30 INCH HIGH SCREEN IS REQUIRED ALONG THE DEVELOPMENT SIDE OF THE LANDSCAPE BORDER BETWEEN THE VEHICULAR USE AND OTHER USES AND THE LANDSCAPE BORDER. THE BUILDING MAY SERVE AS THE REQUIRED SCREEN FOR A PORTION OF THE FRONTAGE IF NO OTHER USES ARE LOCATED BETWEEN THE LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS AND THE AREA IS LANDSCAPED TO PROVIDE 50% VEGETATIVE COVERAGE. REVISE THE PLAN TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED SCREENING. LUC 3.7.3 DIMENSION THE FIRST ST. LANDSCAPE BORDER ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. CITY ENGINEER APPROVAL IS REQUIRED TO LOCATE A PORTION OF THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE BORDER WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY AREA. PROVIDE VERIFICATION OF THE REQUIRED APPROVAL IF GRANTED. SCREENS MAY ONLY BE LOCATED WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE BORDER AS ALLOWED UNDER LUC 3.7.3.2.C.1. IDENTIFY ALL SCREENING ELEMENTS ON THE PLANS. PARKING AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS IS NOT ALLOWED WITHIN SIGHT VISIBILITY TRIANGLES ALONG SPEEDWAY BOULEVARD. Resubmittal of the landscape and development plans is required. |
| 11/27/2002 | ROGER HOWLETT | CITY OF TUCSON - NOT DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING TASK FORCE COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D02-0021 Oregano’s Pizza Bistro 11/26/02 () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-01-24 Oregano’s Speedway Boulevard AREA PLAN: Broadway - Craycroft GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: NO COMMENTS DUE BY: November 26, 2002 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: () No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment (x) Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions () RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies () See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: 7/29/02 REVIEWER: msp DATE: November 25, 2002 |
| 12/03/2002 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | PIMA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION 201 N. Stone Avenue, 2nd Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701-1207 CARMINE DEBONIS, JR. Phone: (520) 740-6586 Director FAX: (520) 740-6380 November 27, 2002 TO: James Larson, Larson Associates THRU: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Development Services FROM: Subhash Raval, P.E., Division Manager Pima County Development Review & Technical Services Divisions SUBJECT: Oregano’s Pizza Bistro Development Plan - 2nd Submittal D02-0021 We have reviewed the above-referenced project on behalf of the Pima County Wastewater Management Department. The following comments are offered for your use: 1. In General Notes add the following: The existing number of fixture units is (fill in with appropriate #) and proposed number of fixture unit is _____. Total number of fixture units is _____ . Based on the above number, a Sewer Service Agreement will be prepared for this project, if required. The signed Sewer Service Agreements should be returned to this office in order to satisfy the necessary requirements needed to approve the Development Plan. 2. As requested in comment letter dated August 30, 2002, label the existing off-site public sewers to the north, south and east, with plan number and size. Label the existing manholes, each side of the point of connection, with rim and invert elevations. 3. Label the HCS connection (identify the size, public or private, new or existing, etc.) 4. This submittal is incomplete. Please obtain a copy of the Development Plan requirements and revise accordingly. A copy can be obtained online at www.dsd.co.pima.az.us/subdivision. 5. Provide all the required General and Permitting Notes. 6. Be advised, there may be additional comments, and or corrections, on the next submittal of this Development Plan . If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact Tim Rowe at 740-6563. Subhash Raval, P.E., Division Manager Pima County Development Review & Technical Services Divisions SR/DK/dk Copy: Project |
| 12/03/2002 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | CITY OF TUCSON - NOT DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | Traffic Engineering recommends APPROVAL of this development plan D. Dale Kelch, EIT Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dkelch1@ci.tucson.az.us |