Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING
Permit Number - DP13-0057
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/09/2013 | RBROWN1 | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 04/15/2013 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Ice House American Kiosk - 24 W. Irvington Road Development Package (1st Review) DP13-0057 TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 18, 2013 DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administrative Manual (AM) & Technical Standards Manual (TSM) were addressed. 1. This site was reviewed for full code compliance for the area of expansion only. 2. Remove all references to the Land Use Code (LUC) from the plans as this review is based on UDC requirements. The following comments are based on Administrative Manual (AM) 2-06.0. 3. A.M. 2-06.4.3 Provide the development package number, DP13-0057, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 4. A.M. 2-06.4.7.A.2 As a lot combo will be required list the gross area of the site as a single parcel, 16,741. 5. A.M. 2-06.4.7.A.3 The rezoning case number shown adjacent to the title block and at "REZONING CONDITIONS C9-09-04" is not correct, This case number should be C9-09-09. Also the copy of the rezoning conditions provided is not complete; conditions 7 through 17 were not provided. Provide a completer copy of the rezoning conditions with your next submittal. 6. A.M. 2-06.4.7.A.4 Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses. That said the proposed uses should be listed as "FOOD SERVICE SUBJECT TO USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS 4.9.4.M.1 and 4.9.13.P" & "GENERAL MERCHANDISE SALES, SUBJECT TO USE SPECIIFIC STANDARD 4.9.9.B.1". 7. A.M. 2-06.4.7.A.8.b Remove the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and Building site coverage calculations from the plan as they are no longer applicable under the UDC. 8. A.M. 2-06.4.7.A.8.c Provide a building square footage expansion calculation on the plan. 9. A.M. 2-06.4.9.A As this site is made up of two (2) parcels, 120-08-604C & 120-08-603C, a lot combo is required. Provide a copy of the approved Pima County Combo Request form with you next submittal. 10. A.M. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a The vehicle parking space calculation is not correct. Per UDC Section 7.4.4.B RETAIL TRADE USE GROUP, General Merchandise Sales, 1 space per 300 sq. ft. GFA. Also the total number shown is not correct. Zoning was only able to count 29 provided. 11. A.M. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a The northern most parking shows 12 spaces in 92'-2". At a minimum 12 spaces @ 8'-6" requires 102'-0". There are only 11 spaces shown in this location. 12. A.M. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a There is a wheel stop shown just north of the proposed ice kiosk. This wheel stop appears to delineate a vehicle parking space. This area does not appear to meet the minimum width for a vehicle parking space. Provide no parking striping for this area. 13. A.M. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d Provide a bicycle parking spaces calculation on the plan. Per UDC Section 7.4.8.B.2 RETAIL TRADE USE GROUP, General Merchandise Sales, Retail Trade Uses Less Than 50,000 sq. ft. GFA. 1 space per 5,000 sq. ft. GFA. Minimum requirement is 2 spaces. That said the minimum number of short term bicycle parking required is two (2). 14. A.M. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d Show the required short-term bicycle parking on the site plan and provided a detail that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Section 7.4.9.B.1, .2 and 7.4.9.C are met. 15. A.M. 2-06.4.9.O The perimeter yard setbacks for the north and east perimeter yards are not cored, shown under "Perimeter Yard" are not correct. Per UDC Table 6.3-4.A: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE C-1, C-2, C-3, OCR-1, & OCR-2 ZONES, Nonres Use to Nonres Zone is 0. Also remove all references to the development designators "DD" & "EE" from the plan as they are not longer applicable. 16. A.M. 2-06.4.9.Q Provide the height of the ice kiosk within the foot print on the plan. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov Sshield1 on DS1/planning/New Development Package/ DP13-0057 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package & approved Pima County Combo Request form. |
| 04/30/2013 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: April 30, 2013 SUBJECT: Ice House America Kiosk Development Plan Package- Engineering Review TO: Metro TED Attn: Lisa Bowers LOCATION: 24 W Irvington Rd; T14S R13E Sec36 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: DP13-0057 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administration Manual (AM) and Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Refer to the links for further clarification: http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/files/planning/UDC_ADOPTED_100912.pdf; http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/files/planning/Technical_Manual_ADOPTED_100912.pdf; http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/files/planning/Admin_Manual_ADOPTED_100912.pdf The following items need to be addressed: SITE PLAN: 1) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP13-0057) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets. 2) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.B: Verify the dimensioned Utility Easement as shown on the development plan document. Per the Assessors Map and the old subdivision plat (Book 7, Page 59) the easement is now a public alleyway per the County Attorney's opinion under NO.322 dated 28MAY81. The alley should be clearly delineated and the property lines should be revised to show that this is not part of the subject property. 3) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.A: Revise the development plan document to provide a lot combo to combine both properties into 1 combined property per Zoning requirements. 4) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan document to correctly label the near and far side SVTs. It appears that the Keynotes used for the far side SVT are being labeled as near side, verify all locations. 5) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan document to dimension the minimum height of the proposed canopy on the Kiosk (Keynote #20) that extends into the vehicular use area. Since the canopy is adjacent to the existing driveway entrance the canopy must meet the minimum 15-foot height requirement per UDC 7.4.6.E.2. 6) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Clarify on the development plan the parking space adjacent to the north side of the proposed Kiosk. It appears that the Kiosk obstructs the minimum width of the parking stall. If the parking stall is not part of the overall parking count and is to be deleted provide no parking striping in that area. 7) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all handicap accessibility comments that may be associated with this project. 8) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Revise the development plan document and refuse container to show that it is located completely onsite and not on the adjacent property as shown on Sheet 2. Verify that the refuse location is not encroaching into either an easement or alleyway and is located completely on the subject property. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan Package that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Department |
| 05/01/2013 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Note: Existing development on the site is subject to the zoning regulations in effect at the time the existing development received zoning approval per LUC 7.6.2.1.1.b Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed Additional comments may apply |
| 05/02/2013 | RONALD BROWN | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 05/02/2013 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05/03/2013 | CPIERCE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |