Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D11-0017
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/24/2011 | JWILLIA4 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/25/2011 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 05/25/2011 | DAVID MANN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approv-Cond | Fire Conditions: Automatic fire sprinklers are required in areas that have sprinklers already and restaurants that will have over 100 occupants. |
| 05/26/2011 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 06/16/2011 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Bear Canyon Shopping Center - Restaurant Outdoor Seating Expansion Development Plan (1st Review) D11-0017 TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 16, 2011 DUE DATE: June 24, 2011 DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1) Section 5.3.8.2, LUC, permits a maximum of one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a development plan. If, at the end of that time, the development plan has not been approved, it must be revised to be in compliance with all regulations in effect at that time, and must be resubmitted for a full CDRC review. The one-year expiration date for this development plan is May 23, 2012 2) This plan was reviewed for full code compliance for the seating additions and areas of modification only. 3) The proposed covered seating areas are located within the "400' SCENIC CORRIDOR ZONE". That said a Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ) Overlay review is required. Contact Patricia Gehlen for submittal requirements. 4) D.S. 2-05.2.1.B Sheet DP2 "REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN", the scale does not appear to be correct. If the scale is 1" = 40' than the existing parking spaces are over 18' wide. Please clarify. 5) D.S. 2-05.2.1.D A small, project-location map shall be drawn on the first sheet of the development plan, preferably in the upper right corner. The map should cover approximately one (1) square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of 3" = 1 mile, and provide the following information. (a) Show the subject property approximately centered within the one (1) square mile area. (b) Identify conditions within the square mile area, such as major streets and watercourses. (c) Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled. 6) D.S. 2-05.2.1.K List the following reference case numbers in the lower right corner, next to the title block; CD9-84-32A-H, C9092-25, CO12-80-127. 7) D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.1 Sheet DP-2 revise General Note 3 to include C-1 existing zoning. 8) D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.3 Provide the LUC subject sections for the "EXISITNG" and "PROPOSED" uses shown on the plan. For the C-1 - Food Service "28", subject to: Sec. 3.5.4.6.A and .C, General Merchandise Sales "28", subject to: Sec. 3.5.9.2.C, C-2 Alcoholic Beverage Service "30", subject to: Sec. 3.5.4.19.C and Sec. 3.5.13.5, Food Service "30", subject to: Sec. 3.5.4.6.C and Sec. 3.5.13.5, General Merchandise Sales "31", subject to: Sec. 3.5.9.2.A. 9) D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.10 Provide a General Note stating "THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED OT MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA: SEC. 2.8.2, SCENIC CORRIDOR ZONE (SCZ); SEC. 2.8.3, MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES (MS&R) SETBACK ZONE" 10) D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.11 List the gross area of the site by square footage and acreage. 11) D.S. 2-05.2.4.I.D.3 Sheet DP2 provide a Parking Area Access Lane (PAAL) width dimension for the north south PAAL at both areas of proposed outdoor seating. 12) D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Provide a width dimension for the proposed sidewalk shown along the south side of the southern outdoor seating area. 13) D.S. 2-05.2.4.K As the proposed fenced/gated outdoor seating areas are for a specified use, food service, a continuous pedestrian circulation path/accessible route (sidewalk) must be maintained around the outside of the fenced/gated area. Show this sidewalk around both the north and south outdoor seating area. 14) D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Sheet C2.1 "ENLARGED SITE PLAN #3, remove the truncated domes shown at the north and east end of the proposed sidewalks as this would direct a handicapped person directly into a PAAL with no marked crossing. 15) D.S. 2-05.2.4.M Provide the gross floor area (GFA) for the proposed outdoor seating areas on the plan. 16) D.S. 2-05.2.4.M Provide a building/use area expansion calculation on the plan. This calculation is a cumulative, see development plan D09-0021 for the last expansion calculation. 17) D.S. 2-05.2.4.N Sheet DP2 shown the footprint for the proposed outdoor seating for both the north and south area. 18) D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Provide dimensions for the accessible vehicle parking space show to be relocated on sheet DP2. If this is proposed to be a "VAN" accessible space the access aisle is required to on the passenger side of the parking space. 19) D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Provide a vehicle parking space calculation that includes the ratio used. Also the "REQUIRED" number of vehicle parking spaces does not appear to be correct. Based on development plan D09-0021 548 spaces were required prior to the proposed outdoor seating expansion. The required number needs to reflect the square footage for the expansion. It appears that the ratio used is 1 space for 200 sq. ft of gross floor area (GFA). As the outdoor seating square footage was not provided the required vehicle parking spaces cannot be verified. 20) Additional comments may be forth coming depending on how each comment has been addressed. 21) If applicable ensure all changes are made to the grading and landscape plans. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.com Sshield1 on DS1/planning/Development Plan/ D11-0017 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan |
| 06/21/2011 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 06/21/2011, TO: Patricia Gehlen FROM: Laith Alshami, P.E. CDRC Engineering SUBJECT: Bear Canyon Shopping Center D11-0017, T13S, R15E, SECTION 34 RECEIVED: Development Plan Package on May 24, 2011 The subject project has been reviewed. The project can not be approved at this time. The plans generally do not comply with the requirements of the Development Package Development Standard 2-01.0.0. Refer to Development Standard 2-01.0.0 to address the following comments before review can continue. Prepare a detailed response that explains the revisions that where made and references the exact location in the Development Package where the revisions were made: Cover Sheet: 1. Show the Location Map (D.S. 2-01.2.9. and D.S. 2-01.3.4.B). 2. Provide a legend that shows and describes all symbols used on the drawing (D.S. 2-01.2.9). 3. Provide, on the right half of the cover sheet, the name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s) or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines (D.S. 2-01.3.1). 4. Provide a sheet index as required by D.S. 2-01.3.5. 5. Provide the applicable general notes as required by D.S. 2-01.3.7. including the drainage notes. 6. Provide the basis of elevation and bearing descriptions on the cover sheet. Every Sheet: 1. Revise every sheet in the document to provide a standard Title Block in the lower right quadrant of each sheet (D.S. 2-01.2.4) and (D.S. 2-01.3.2). The Title Block shall include all applicable items under this development standard (i.e. Items A, B, D and E.). 2. Provide the D (yr)-______ subdivision case number and all relevant case numbers as required by D.S. 2-01.3.3.3. 3. Provide a minimum one (1) inch margin on left side and one-half (1/2) inch margin on all other sides to facilitate efficient record keeping (D.S. 2-01.2.1). 4. All Mapped data shall be drawn at an Engineering scale having no more than fifty (50) feet to the inch (D.S. 2-01.2.2). 5. Provide a three (3) inch by five (5) inch space in the lower right quadrant of each sheet (D.S. 2-01.2.5). 6. Provide a brief legal description and a statement as to whether the project is a resubdivision (D.S. 2-01.3.2.B). Base Layer: 7. Show the basis of bearing and the tie as required by D.S. 2-01.3.8.A. 8. Show, if applicable, all existing easements as required by (D.S. 2-01.3.8.B.). 9. Provide the adjacent public right of way information including name, dimensions and recordation data, curb and sidewalk, etc. as required by D.S. 2-01.3.8.C. 10. Provide existing utilities and service equipment as required by D.S. 2-01.3.8.D. 11. Provide, if applicable, all proposed easements as required by (D.S. 2-01.3.9.L.). Site Plan: 12. Indicate the ground elevations as required by D.S. 2-01.3.8.E. 13. Provide all Existing storm drainage facilities on and adjacent to the site (D.S. 2-01.3.8.F). 14. Provide, if applicable, floodplain information as required by (D.S. 2-01.3.8.I). 15. Show existing sight visibility triangles (D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.2). 16. Show, if applicable, the location(s) of detention/retention basin(s)/waterharvesting areas including 100-year ponding limits with water surface elevations (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.1). 17. Provide, if applicable, locations and types of drainage structures, such as, but not limited to, drainage pipes, erosion control pads, retention basins, sidewalk scuppers, etc. (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.3). If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4933 or Laith.Alshami@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Development Plan Package |
| 06/22/2011 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | 1. This project requires a building permit for 2006 IBC code compliance, occupancy changes, possible additional toilet fixtures and structural review. SHEET DP2 2. Provide actual design large scale details of each new/modified accessible parking layout showing all dimensions, slopes, ramps, parking aisles, signage, accessible route and existing building columns. a. Typical details are not accurate. 3. COT detail 207 is for right of way accessible requirements only and is not acceptable for private property compliance. Remove all references to detail 207 and ADA. Provide accessible compliance as per the 2006 IBC, Chapter 11 and ICC/ANSI 11.1, 2003 Edition, curb ramps as per section 406. SHEET C1.1 4. DITTO Comment 3 above. SHEET C2.1 5. The enclosure of two areas of the promenade s per details 3 and 4 does not allow for the continuance of the existing accessible route as required by the 2006 IBC, Section 1104 and ICC/ANSI 11.1, 2004 Edition, Section 402. Please redesign and comply. 6. Please explain the double lines in front of the angled parking just prior to the wrought iron fence. SHEET C3.1 7. The scope of work shown on this sheet is not the same as sheets C1.1 and DP2. Please be consistant on all drawings. END OF REVIEW |
| 06/23/2011 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | CDRC Review Planning and Development Services Dept., Community Planning Review D11-0017, Bear Canyon Shopping Center Comments Due: 6/24/11 Items reviewed: Development Plan Rezoning conditions, C9-92-25, Bear Canyon Shopping Center - Tanque Verde Road, B-1 to B-2A Comments: 1. Per rezoning condition #1.d, the applicant needs to provide documentation that the development plan has been reviewed by the affected neighborhood association and property owners (i.e., the condo owner's association to the north). Please provide that documentation. 2. The plans are not approved. A resubmittal is required. Reviewed by: J. Hershenhorn, 837-6976 6/23/11 F:\Shardir\UPDfiles\Development Review\CASE_REVIEW\CDRC\2011 Cases\D11-0017_BearCny.doc |
| 06/24/2011 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) The landscape plan serves as the document on which the intent to comply with the requirements of Sec. 3.7.0 of the LUC is noted. The landscape plan is kept on file and becomes part of the permanent record for the subject site. Any change in design or land use requires a new review and approval process for the landscape plan. DS 2-07.2.0 Submit a revised landscape/irrigation plan. Ensure that the plan is compliance with any associated conditions of annexation or rezoning. 2) Add the CDRC case number and any related case numbers to the landscape plans. DS 2-07.2.1.B |
| 06/27/2011 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department Jackson Jenkins Director 201 N. Stone Ave., 8th Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701-1207 PH: (520) 740-6500 FAX: (520) 620-0135 June 8, 2011 To: GABRIEL VARGAS ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GROUP INC. Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6719), Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department Subject: BEAR CANYON SHOPPING CENTER Development Plan - 1st Submittal D11-0017 The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD) has reviewed the proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project. The following comments are offered for your use: Sheet 1: Include the following General Note if no new sewer is proposed: THE ON-SITE SEWERS ARE EXISTING AND PRIVATE. NO NEW SEWERS ARE PROPOSED. This office will require a revised set of bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. Pima County Code Title 13.20.030.A.2 requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the development plan. The fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet. The next submittal of this project will be the second(2nd) submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $50.00 (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter. If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly. cc: Chad Amateau, PE Checked by:______ Kristin Greene, PE, DLU Manager DLU Project folder |
| 06/27/2011 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES June 27, 2011 Gabriel Vargas Architectural Design Group Inc. 2510 E. Grant Rd. #140 Tucson, Arizona 85716 Subject: D11-0017 BEAR CANYON SHOPPING CENTER Development Plan Dear Gabriel: Your submittal of May 24, 2011 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 set of 7 DETAILED cover letters explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 7 Copies Revised Development Plan (Zoning, Engineering, HC Site, Planning, Landscape, Wastewater, PDSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Engineering, Planning, Landscape, PDSD) 2 Copies Neighborhood Documentation (Planning, PDSD) 1 Check Made out to “Pima County Treasurer” for $50 (Wastewater) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4893. Sincerely, John Williams Planning Technician All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: (520) 323-3337 |