Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL
Permit Number - DP13-0116
Review Name: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/10/2014 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: 3127 N. Stone Avenue Development Package (2nd Review) DP13-0116 TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 10, 2014 DUE DATE: May 07, 2014 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. 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 1. Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, An applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One year Expiration date is November 27, 2014. 2-06.4.3 - The administrative street address and relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 1. This comment was not completely addressed. Remove the address from the title block and provided it adjacent to the title block. COMMENT: Provide the administrative street address and the development plan case number, DP13-0116, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 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 - Zoning and Land Use Notes 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. 2. COMMENT: General Note "B" lists the use as General Merchandise Sales, the vehicle parking calculation shows Vehicle Sales and Rental. Clarify what the proposed use will be. 3. COMMENT: Clarify who/what the covered storage and conex storage will be used for. If this is storage for other than the Vehicle Sales and Rental that it would be two separate primary uses. Additional comments maybe forth coming. 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.2 - Show future and existing sight visibility triangles. On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section. 4. COMMENT: Show the future sight visibility triangles are not shown correctly on the plan. Per the MS&R plan the future curb for a 90' ROW is located 10 from the future ROW line. 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. 5. This comment was not addressed correctly. The barriers are required at the edge of pavement not setback from the edge of pavement. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.6.H Barriers, such as post barricades or wheel stop curbing, are required in a vehicular use area to prevent vehicles from extending beyond the property lines, to prevent cars from damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings, overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas, and/or driving onto unimproved portions of the site. That said provide some type of barrier at the west end of the southern most parking area. 6. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.6.F.4.c A minimum distance of three (feet must be provided between the back of spur and any wall, screen, or other obstruction over six inches in height. That said provide a dimension from back-up spur shown at the north end of the parking area to the fence shown on the plan. 7. COMMENT: Keynote 29 calls out a chain link fence "BEHIND BACK-UP SPUR" at the west end of the southern vehicle use area. There is no back-up spur shown in this area. 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. 8. COMMENT: General Note "B" lists the use as General Merchandise Sales, the vehicle parking calculation shows Vehicle Sales and Rental. Until the proposed use is verified the vehicle parking calculation cannot be verified. 9. Zoning acknowledges that there is a "VEHICLE PARKING - DETAIL" shown on sheet DP-1. this detail is not clear as to the location of the wheel stops, clarify. COMMENT: Provide a typical parking space detail for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. Show the proposed wheel stops and provide a location dimension for the wheel stop, see UDC Section 7.4.6.H.3. 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. 10. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Demonstrate on the plan or detail how the requirements of UDC Section 7.4.9.B.1.e are met for the short term bicycle parking. 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. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Per TSM 7-03.3.B The areas within the development which must be connected include, but are not limited to, all buildings, all bicycle and vehicle parking areas, all recreation areas, all dumpster areas, and all other common use areas. That said provide a sidewalk from the existing building to the propose storage area and shipping container. 12. This comment was not addressed correctly. This sidewalk must connect to the front sidewalk with a minimum 4' connection. COMMENT: Per TSM 7-04.1.B A sidewalk is required adjacent and parallel to any access lane or PAAL on the side where buildings are located. That said a sidewalk is required along the south side of the existing building. 13. COMMENT: The 4'-8" dimension shown from the bicycle parking space to the edge of sidewalk cannot be correct. Based on a 6'-0" deep bicycle parking space and a 10' wide sidewalk there is only 4'-0" left for the sidewalk. Additional Comments 14. COMMENT: As the development package has not yet been approved, remove all revision clouds and revision dates from the plan. 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 . |
| 04/15/2014 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: April 16, 2014 SUBJECT: Lee's 4 Wheel Drive Inc. Development Plan Package- 2nd Engineering Review TO: Lee Taft LOCATION: 3127 N Stone Ave; T13S R13E Sec36 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: DP13-0116 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 following link for further clarification: http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az The following items need to be addressed: SITE PLAN: 1) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.3.5: Revise the development plan package to include the approval stamp in the lower right quadrant of each sheet, stamp is missing on Sheet 2. The link to the stamp can be found here: http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/cdrc-rezoning/cdrd-stamp. 2) Complied. 3) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.1: Revise the development plan package to provide the email addresses and phone number of the primary property owner of the site under the Project Information Section on Sheet DP-1. 4) Complied. 5) Complied. 6) Complied. 7) Complied. 8) Complied. 9) Complied. 10) Acknowledged. The site is full code compliant due to the 34% expansion calculation. All dimensions and comments must be addressed. 11) Complied. 12) Complied. 13) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Provide a copy of an approved site plan or a copy of an approved and finalized right-of-way use permit (T00EX00952 and/or T00EX01410) for the northern curb cut off of Stone Ave. Per the approved site plan submitted (1999) with this project there is only one curb cut shown for the site. Both of the ROW Use Permits have not been finalized through TDOT. Provide approval from TDOT Permits and Codes for both curb cuts by finalizing out the ROW Use Permits that are currently shown in the 2012 Aerial. 14) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the correct future SVTs for both driveway entrances. SVTs are based on the line of sight matrix per TSM Sec.10-01.5.3 for a driveway to an Arterial MS&R Street. Due to the required taper for the intersection widening the future right-of-way property line will change as will the future curb location which will change the future SVT location, revise. 15) Complied. 16) Complied. 17) Complied. 18) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to provide a barrier or separation along the west end of the southern parking area to prevent vehicles from extending past the parking lot area. Per UDC Sec.7.4.6.H. Barriers, such as post barricades or wheel stop curbing, are required in a vehicular use area to prevent vehicles from extending beyond the property lines, to prevent cars from damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings, overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas, and/or driving onto unimproved portions of the site. It is acknowledged that a chain link fence (Keynote #29) is proposed however it must be located at the end of the pavement section to prevent encroachment onto the unimproved portion of the site that is being used solely for storage. Revise the fence location to meet this standard. 19) Complied. 20) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to fully label and dimension the required back up spur at the end of the row of parking in the northern parking lot. The back up spur must also dimension the required 3-foot space from the curb to the existing fence along the property line. 21) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to and the typical parking space detail for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled to provide the correct dimensions. Dimension the proposed wheel stops and provide a location dimension for the wheel stop per UDC Sec.7.4.6.H.3. 22) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.J: Revise the development plan package to correctly label and dimension the future MS&R right-of-way for Stone Ave. It appears that intersection tapering affects the site and must be correctly dimensioned on the plan set. The future right-of-way for Stone Avenue is 90-feet with a future intersection tapering dimension of 120-feet (60-feet ½ ROW tapering) per the MS&R Map. Currently the site plan only labels the 45-foot half right-of-way which is inaccurate due to the intersection widening. 23) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.J: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the MS&R future sidewalk area, the future sight visibility triangles, etc. for Stone Avenue. Provide the dimension in conformance with the required intersection widening dimensions. 24) Complied. 25) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to provide a sidewalk along the south side of the existing building to connect to the sidewalk that is located along the front of the building. It is acknowledged that the sidewalk was labeled and dimensioned in plan view along the south side; however it must still connect to the existing sidewalk along the front of the building for pedestrian continuity. 26) Acknowledged. 27) Complied. 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 |
| 04/24/2014 | RONALD BROWN | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/30/2014 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Add the following notes to site plan: Existing landscape must be installed (excluding ingress/egress) per approved plans dated 9/22/97. Plant count must be the same, substitutions can be made. All plant material used for landscaping must be selected from the Arizona Department of Water Resource's Low Water Use/Drought Tolerant Plant List. Previously approved plan must be on-site for inspection purposes. Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. Additional comments may apply |
| 05/06/2014 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved |