Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING
Permit Number - DP13-0116
Review Name: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/19/2014 | 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: May 19, 2014 DUE DATE: June 16, 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. 1. This comment was not addressed correctly. See UDC Section 7.4.6.H.3, & Figure 7.4.6-C and sheet DP-1, VEHILCLE PARKING DETAIL redline. 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. This comment was not addressed. 2. COMMENT: Demonstrate on the plan or detail how the requirements of UDC Section 7.4.9.B.1.e, Outdoor bicycle parking areas must be lighted so that they are thoroughly illuminated and visible from adjacent sidewalks, parking lots, or buildings during hours of use, 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. 3. This comment was not addressed correctly. The sidewalk to the storage area cannot be located within the backup spur as shown. This sidewalk must be physically separated from the vehicle use area, see TSM 7-01.4.2.A and be a minimum four (4) foot wide, see TSM 7-1-01.4.3.A. 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. 4. COMMENT: Keynote 14 calls out "EXISTING 2'-0" CMU WALL. This wall appears to encroach into the required four (4) foot sidewalk. Clearly show and dimension the required four (4) foot sidewalk along the north side of the covered storage and show that the wall does not encroach. 5. COMMENT: Provide a width dimension for the sidewalk shown adjacent to the CONEX STORAGE. Once the above comments have been addressed Zoning is willing to provide an over-the-counter review. Call or email to schedule an appointment for this review. 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 . |
| 05/29/2014 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: May 29, 2014 SUBJECT: Lee's 4 Wheel Drive Inc. Development Plan Package- 3rd 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) Complied. 2) Complied. 3) Complied. 4) Complied. 5) Complied. 6) Complied. 7) Complied. 8) Complied. 9) Complied. 10) Complied. 11) Complied. 12) Complied. 13) Complied. 14) Complied. 15) Complied. 16) Complied. 17) Complied. 18) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: It is acknowledged that the development plan package was revised to provide a 6-inch curb as a barrier along the west end of the southern parking area to prevent vehicles from extending past the parking lot area. However the pedestrian access from the existing building to the covered storage area can not pass through the back up spur located within the vehicular use area. Revise the cross walk to be shown on the other side of the curbing to allow for safe passage of pedestrians. 19) Complied. 20) Complied. 21) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: It is acknowledged that the development plan package was revised to provide for a typical parking space detail however the dimensions shown on the wheel stop is incorrectly located. Dimension the 2.5 foot overhang for the wheel stops at the face of curb which would give the parking stall a 15.5 foot depth dimension per UDC Sec.7.4.6.H.3. 22) Complied. 23) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.J: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the MS&R future sidewalk area for Stone Avenue. It is acknowledged that the intersection taper has now been dimensioned correctly however the future curb and sidewalk location must be shown to verify future location. 24) Complied. 25) Complied. 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 |
| 06/05/2014 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed prior to Landscape approval stamp. |