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: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING
Permit Number - DP13-0075
Review Name: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/23/2015 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Guadalajara Fiesta Grill - Storage Room and Trellis Additions Development Package (Revision) DP13-0075 TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 25, 2015 DUE DATE: April 09, 2015 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC) and the UDC Technical Standards Manual (TSM). The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC & TSM requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS) Section 2-06.1.0 GENERAL 2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD) - ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS 2-06.1.0 GENERAL 2-06.1.1 PURPOSE This standard has been prepared for the purpose of informing applicants of the submittal and review requirements for development package documents to assure proper and adequate information is presented in a consistent manner, thereby providing the basis for an efficient and timely review. The development package documents are prepared in support of applications for building permits and related reviews. The information that is requested establishes the basis upon which the project will be approved and could affect what is required of the property in the future, should there be a proposal for expansion or for a different use of the property. This standard does not waive any applicable city regulations or codes. 2-06.1.2 APPICABILITY This standard shall be used for all site plans and tentative plats submitted to PDSD for review. 2-06.2.1 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS Development Package applications are available from PDSD. Completed applications and accompanying materials shall be submitted to PDSD. Incomplete or inaccurate applications will not be accepted, nor will any application in which the pre-application conference or neighborhood meeting requirements have not been met. The types of documents and the specific number of copies required of each of the documents are on the PDSD website or may be obtained from PDSD. Resubmittals of development packages require a comment response letter that details how all previous comments have been addressed. Provide the same number of copies of the comment response letter as plans provided. The following documents and information shall be submitted upon application: 2-06.2.1 Application Form A completed application signed by the property owner or authorized designee; 2-06.2.2 Development Package A development package must be prepared to the format and content requirements described herein; 2-06.2.3 Related Reviews In addition to the plan process, a project may require review for other types of plans and documents. The applications for those processes are submitted to the appropriate department for review and approval. These related reviews can be applied for so that review can occur concurrently with the development package application. However, it must be understood that, should the related application be approved subject to conditions or denied, this may affect the; 2-06.2.4 Concurrent Reviews The development package is designed to allow for concurrent review of any site related reviews. Concurrent review means that all plans and documents needed for the review are submitted as one package. Examples of site related reviews include but are not limited to: site plans, landscape plans, NPPO plans, water harvesting plans, grading plans, SWPPP plans, floodplain use permits, and overlay reviews. Separate applications are often required for the different site related reviews even if the plans are submitted concurrently; and, 2-06.2.5 Fees Fees in accordance with Section 4-01.0.0, Development Review Fee Schedule. 2-06.4.7 - General Notes The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 2-06.4.7.A.8.a - Floor area for each building; 1. COMMENT: Clarify why the building square footage for Guadalajara Grill shown on this plan, 6,476 s.f., is different from the square footage shown on DP12-0010, existing 5,193 plus proposed exterior patio 1,498 for a total of 6,691 s.f.. 2. COMMENT: Based on a quick square footage take-off, 1,918, of the existing patio it appears that the listed patio square footage, 1,498, is not correct, clarify. 2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Percentage and area in square feet of building and accessory building coverage; 3. COMMENT: Until comment 1 above is clarified the building coverage and floor area ratio cannot be verified. 2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - If utilizing parking area access lanes (PAALs), they shall be designed in accordance with Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC. 4. COMMENT: Provide the radius and distance from the sidewalk for the back-up spur shown near the northeast corner of the propose ramp, see UDC Section 7.4.6.F.4. 5. COMMENT: Keynote 27 calls out a new trellis, provide a setback dimension from the proposed structure to the PAAL, see UDC Section 7.4.6.F.2.a.(1). 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC. 6. COMMENT: Until comment 1 & 2 above is clarified required number of vehicle parking spaces cannot be verified. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Section 7.4.9, Bicycle Parking Design Criteria, of the UDC. Provide, as a note, calculations for short and long term bicycle spaces required and provided. 7. COMMENT: The short-term bicycle parking location shown on this plan does not match the location shown on DP13-0010. This location does not appear to meet the requirements of UDC Section 7.4.9.C.D.a. 8. COMMENT: As the short-term bicycle parking is being relocated provide a detail that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Sections 7.4.9.B.1, .2 & 7.4.9.C are met. 9. COMMENT: Show the require long-term bicycle parking on the plan and provide a detail that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Sections 7.4.9.B.1, .2 & 7.4.9.D are met. 2-06.4.9.Q - Provide the square footage and the height of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building(s). 10. COMMENT: Provide the height of the proposed new patio area within the footprint. 2-06.4.9.R - Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual. 11. COMMENT: The crosswalk shown running from the southern most parking area to the sidewalk area near the southwest corner of the building does not line up with the ramp. 12. COMMENT: Cleary show the accessible route from the existing accessible vehicle parking spaces, shown along the west side of the building to the proposed new entrance of the building. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 04/07/2015 | RONALD BROWN | HC SITE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | SHEET 2 OF 4 1. Widen accessible route on North side of ramp to 4'-0" and connect to ramp lower landing. 2. As per the 2012 IBC, Section 1106.6 Location: Relocate the three accessible parking spaces "on the shortest accessible route of travel from adjacent parking to the accessible building entrance." a. Maintain an accessible route connection to the nearest public right of way. b. Provide a 4'-0" wide accessible route around the north side of the existing patio. c. Provide a large scale detail of the accessible parking showing all accessible requirements including dimensions, markings, grade slopes, signage, van accessible parking spaces, ramps as required, marked crossing and access to the accessible route. SHEET 4 OF 4 3. Comment 2 applies to this sheet also. 4. At detail 1/4: a. Remove the bottom portion of the masonry fence at the north side of the bottom ramp landing to maintain a direct connection to the accessible route. b. Change the 2'-0" accessible route on the north side of the ramp to 4'-0" wide. c. Provide a landing at the bottom of the East side stair as required by the 2012 IBC, Section 1009.8. 5. At detail 1a and 1b provide a dimension from the top of the landing to the top of the cmu wall. END OF REVIEW |
| 04/08/2015 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Clearly show and label solid waste container enclosures and access. |
| 04/09/2015 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/15/2015 | KROBLES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |