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

Permit Number: DP14-0176
Parcel: 12618111B

Address:
3901 E 22ND ST

Review Status: Active

Review Details: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL

Permit Number - DP14-0176
Review Name: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Active
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/23/2015 KROBLES1 START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
01/30/2015 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: McDonald's - 3901 E. 22nd Street
Development Package (2nd Review)
DP14-0176

TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 2, 2015

DUE DATE: February 23, 2015

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a 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 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 September 25, 2015.

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.

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.7 - A small, project-location map shall be provided in the upper right corner of the cover sheet.

1. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide a project-location map in the upper right corner of the cover sheet.

2-06.3.12 - An index of sheets in the development package shall be provided on the first sheet.

2. Addressed. COMMENT: The sheet index should include the Stormwater sheets.

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.1 - 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 shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional, such as a surveyor, architect, landscape architect, or engineer. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines.

3. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide the above information on the cover sheet.

2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet:

2-06.4.2.B - A brief legal description and a statement as to whether the project is a resubdivision are to be provided. On resubdivisions, provide the recording information of the existing subdivision plat;

4. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide a brief legal description in the title block.

2-06.4.2.D - The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx).

5. Addressed. COMMENT: The total number of pages should include the Stormwater sheets.

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.

6. Addressed. COMMENT: Remove the administrative street address from the title block and provide it adjacent to the title block on all sheets.

7. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP14-0176, adjacent to the title block on all sheets.

2-06.4.4 - The project-location map to be located on the first sheet of the development package in the upper right corner, shall cover approximately one square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of three inch equals one mile, and provide the following information.

8. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide a project-location map in the upper right corner of the cover sheet.

The following comments are based on sheets SP1, SD1-SD5;

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.3 - If the plan/plat has been prepared in conjunction with a rezoning application, add the following note next to the existing zoning note: "Proposed zoning is ____." List the applicable rezoning file number and conditions of approval. Also place the C9-__-__ (if applicable) and the plan/plat file numbers in the lower right corner of each sheet.

9. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide the rezoning case number in the lower right corner of each sheet adjacent to the title block.

10. Until ordinanced the rezoning conditions cannot be verified. COMMENT: List the rezoning conditions on the plan.

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.

11. This comment was not addressed. Add the proposed parking information to General Note 3.COMMENT: Add the proposed use of "PARKING SUBJECT TO UDC SECTION 4.9.4.S" to the plan.

2-06.4.7.A.6.a - List additional applications and overlays, by case number (if applicable), in lower right corner of each sheet. As a general note provide the type of application processed or overlays applicable, a statement that the project meets the criteria/conditions of the additional application or overlay, the case number, date of approval, what was approved, and the conditions of approval, if any.

12. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide a general note on the cover sheet stating "THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC ARTICLE 5.4 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R) & UDC ARTICLE 5.5 GATEWAY CORRIDOR ZONE (GCZ)."

2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide:

2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Percentage and area in square feet of building and accessory building coverage;

13. Addressed. COMMENT: Remove the Floor Area Ratio from the plan as it is no longer applicable.

2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions
The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided.

2-06.4.8.A - Provide site boundary/subdivision perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system.

14. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide the site boundary perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, together with distances in feet

2-06.4.8.B - All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided.

15. Zoning acknowledges that you will provide a letter from TEP. Once building plans have been submitted a hold will be put on the certificate of occupancy pending the abandonment of the easement. Until the letter is submitted and building plans submitted Zoning cannot approve the development package. COMMENT: There is a "6' EASEMENT FOR TELEPHONE & UTILITIES" called out on the plan. As this easement will run under the proposed building it will need to be abandoned prior to approval of the development package. Provide the recordation information for the abandonment on the plan.

2-06.4.8.C - The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks.

16. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks for both Alvernon Way, 22nd Street & Camino De Palmas on the plan.

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.A - Draw in all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements.

17. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: As the site is made up of two (2) parcels a lot combination is required. Provide a copy of the approved Pima County Combo Request form with your next submittal.

2-06.4.9.F - All existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) shall be indicated on the drawing with zoning boundaries clearly defined. If the property is being rezoned, use those boundaries and classifications. The basis for this requirement is that some zoning requirements on a project are based on the zoning classification of adjacent property. Also, in some instances, each zone has to be taken into consideration on property that is split by two or more zoning classifications, as each may have different requirements.

18. Addressed. COMMENT: Clearly define the zoning boundaries on the plan for the C-1 & P zone.

19. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide the zoning for the parcels west of Alvernon Way.

20. Addressed. COMMENT: The zoning to the north should list O-3 and R-1 plus define the zoning boundaries.

2-06.4.9.H - Proposed Traffic Circulation

21. Addressed. COMMENT:

2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show future and existing sight visibility triangles (SVTs). On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section.

22. Addressed. COMMENT: Show the future SVTs on the plan based on future curb location, see Engineering comments.

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.

23. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide a radius dimension for the curbs shown at the northeast & southwest corners of the site.

24. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide width dimensions for all drive-thru lanes.

25. Addressed. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.6.F.2.a.(2) Access lanes and PAALs must be setback at least one foot from: A structure when the access lane or PAAL serves as a drive-through lane. That said show the 1' setback from the drive-through to the proposed building.

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.

26. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide a standard vehicle parking space detail.

27. Addressed. COMMENT: There is a standard vehicle parking space shown south of the proposed accessible vehicle parking spaces. It appears that vehicle using this space will be allowed to overhang the sidewalk area shown to the west. Demonstrate on the plan that the overhanging vehicle will not reduce the sidewalk to less than four (4) foot.

28. Addressed. COMMENT: Along the east and south property there are vehicle parking spaces that appear to allow the vehicles to overhang into the landscape area. Demonstrate on the plan how the parking vehicles will be prevented from damaging required landscape.

2-06.4.9.H.5.c - Show all loading zones, vehicle maneuverability fully dimensioned, and access route. Provide as a note the number of loading spaces required, the number provided, whether the loading space is a Type A or B as provided in UDC Section 7.5.4.

29. Addressed. COMMENT: Show the maneuverability for the loading zone on the plan.

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.

30. Comment not addressed. COMMENT: The required short term bicycle parking calculation is not correct. Per UDC Section 7.4.3.G When the calculation of required motor vehicle and bicycle parking spaces results in a fractional number, a fraction of one-half or more is adjusted to the next higher whole number, and a fraction of less than one-half is adjusted to the next lower whole number. That said the required number of short term should be listed as 3.

31. Comment not addressed. COMMENT: The required long term bicycle parking calculation is not correct. Per Table 7.4.8-1: Minimum Required Bicycle Parking Spaces, COMMERCIAL USE GROUP, Food Service, Long-Term Bicycle Parking Required, 1 space per 12,000 sq. ft. GFA. Minimum requirement is 2 spaces. That said the required number of long term should be 2.

32. Addressed. COMMENT: The provided long term bicycle parking calculation is not correct. Based on detail 1, SD5, two racks provide for four (4) bikes.

2-06.4.9.J - If street dedication is not required or proposed and the project site is adjacent to a Major Street or Route, draw the Major Street right-of-way lines for those streets. (Add the MS&R future sidewalk, right-of-way lines, sight visibility triangles, etc.)

33. Addressed. COMMENT: Show the future curb, and sidewalk locations on the plan.

2-06.4.9.O - All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown.

34. Addressed. COMMENT: Once comment 33 is addressed provide street perimeter yard setback dimension from the back of future curb, see UDC Table 6.4.5.C-1.

35. Until ordinanced the rezoning conditions cannot be verified. COMMENT: Key Note 47 calls out a 8'-0" high CMU Screen wall along the east and north property lines. As the proposed walls exceed 6'-0" they are required to meet perimeter yard setbacks. Per UDC Table 6.4.5.C-1 the required street perimeter yard to Camino De Palmas is 21' measured to the nearest edge of travel lane. Show the edge of travel lane and provide a perimeter yard setback dimension. Per UDC TABLE 6.3-4.A Nonres Use to Res Zone the required perimeter yard setback to the east property line is 12'. A Design Development Option (DDO) is required to approve an 8' wall as shown on the plan. If a DDO is approved provide the DDO case number adjacent to title block on all sheets. Also provide a general note stating the DDO Case number, date of approval and if applicable any conditions of approval. The DDO must be approved prior to approval of the development package.

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).

36. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide the height of the proposed structure 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.

37. Addressed. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.A At least one sidewalk is required to a project from each street on which the project has frontage, unless there is no vehicular access from a street because of a physical barrier, such as a drainageway or an unbroken security barrier (e.g., a wall or fence). The sidewalk should be located to minimize any conflict with vehicular access to the project. That said provide a four (4) sidewalk from the proposed building to the sidewalk along Alvernon Way.

38. Addressed. COMMENT: There is a standard vehicle parking space shown south of the proposed accessible vehicle parking spaces. It appears that vehicle using this space will be allowed to overhang the sidewalk area shown to the west. Demonstrate on the plan that the overhanging vehicle will not reduce the sidewalk to less than four (4) foot.

39. Addressed. COMMENT: There is a pop out shown on the southwest corner of the building Demonstrate on the plan that the sidewalk minimum width of four (4) feet is maintained.

2-06.4.9.U - Indicate graphically, where possible, compliance with conditions of rezoning.

40. Until ordinanced the rezoning conditions cannot be verified. COMMENT: Once the rezoning conditions are provided Zoning will review for compliance.

41. COMMENT: Provide the required building elevations with your next submittal, see rezoning condition 11.

42. COMMENT: The required one (1) foot no access easement will need to be recorded prior to approval of the development package, see rezoning condition 28.

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
01/30/2015 CHRIS POIRIER PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING Approved 201 N. STONE AV, 1ST FL
TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207







MICHELENE NOWAKADDRESSING REVIEW
PH #: 721-9512






TO:
CITY PLANNING
FROM:
MICHELENE NOWAK, ADDRESSING REVIEW

SUBJECT:
DP14-0176 MCDONALDS RESTAURANT/2ND REVIEW

DATE:
JANUARY 30, 2015







The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project.




1.) Submit a 24 x 36 Reverse Reading Double Matte Photo Mylar of approved Development Plan to City Planning


***PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING MUST RECEIVE A COPY OF THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN PRIOR TO THE ASSIGNMENT OF ANY ADDRESSES. PLEASE COORDINATE THE DELIVERY OF THE MYLAR WITH THE CITY OF TUCSON PLANNING***


2.) All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection.




***The Pima County Addressing Section can use digital CAD drawing files.
These CAD files can be e-mailed to: CADsubmittals@pima.gov
The digital CAD drawing files expedite the addressing and permitting processes when we are able to insert this digital data into the County’s Geographic Information System. Your support is greatly appreciated.***
02/13/2015 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: February 13, 2015
DUE DATE: February 23, 2015
SUBJECT: McDonald's USA, LLC Development Plan Package- 2nd Engineering Review
TO: Wood/Patel, Attn: Stefanie Thrush, PE
LOCATION: 3901 E 22nd St; T14S R14E Sec15
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP14-0176

SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package and Drainage Report (Wood/Patel, 25SEP14 revised 21JAN15). 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://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) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.2.E: Revise the development plan package to provide the page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e sheet 1 of 26, 2 of 26 etc.). Specifically Sheet 1 should read Sheet 1 of 26.

3) Complied.
4) Complied.
5) Complied.
6) Complied.
7) Complied.

8) Restated: AM.Sec.2-06.4.7.A.3: It is acknowledged that the rezoning case number was added to the plan set, however until the Rezoning has been approved through Mayor & Council and made an ordinance the development plan package can not be approved. List the approved rezoning conditions on the plan.

9) Complied.
10) Complied.
11) Complied.
12) Complied.
13) Complied.

14) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.8.A: It is acknowledged that the perimeter information for the property boundary was included, however since the site is made up of 2 parcels a lot combination is required. Provide a copy of the approved Pima County Combination Request form with your next submittal for approval through all Sections.

15) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.8.B: It is acknowledged that TEP has agreed to provide a letter for the abandonment of the easement which will be required at the next submittal. Once a building plan application has been submitted a hold will be placed on the certificate of occupancy pending the abandonment of the 6-foot telephone easement. The same goes for the 1-foot no access easement.

16) Complied.
17) Acknowledged.
18) Complied.
19) Complied.
20) Complied.
21) Complied.
22) Complied.

23) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Prior approval from TDOT will be required for all proposed work within the right of way of the adjacent streets. The comment letter stated an email was provided from Richard Leigh with TDOT, but not could be located in the submittal package. Verify if TDOT will require a maintenance easement, temporary construction easement or a Temporary Revocable Easement for said work. A right-of-way use permit will be required.

24) Acknowledged: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: The SVTs have been added to the plan for the driveway entrance and are correct, however for future improvements SVTs are not required at the sidewalks into the right-of-way, they can be removed from the plan set.

25) Complied.
26) Complied.
27) Complied.
28) Complied.
29) Complied.
30) Complied.
31) Complied.
32) Complied.

33) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.L: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension any proposed easements onsite. If there are proposed easements provide the recordation information in plan view. Once a building plan application has been submitted a hold will be placed on the certificate of occupancy pending the abandonment of the 6-foot telephone easement and the new 1-foot no access easement.

34) Complied.
35) Complied.
36) Complied.
37) Complied.
38) Complied.
39) Complied.
40) Complied.
41) Complied.
42) Complied.

DRAINAGE REPORT:

43) Complied.
44) Complied.
45) Complied.

SWPPP:

46) 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
02/18/2015 RONALD BROWN ZONING HC REVIEW Approved
02/20/2015 PGEHLEN1 COT NON-DSD ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Reqs Change The resubmittal of the Development Package has been reviewed on behalf of Environmental Services and the following will need to be addressed on the next submittal:
1. The enclosure shown in Detail 1 on Sheet SD5 is in general compliance with the Figures in TSM Section 8, however, there are deviations such as the gate posts, bollard locations, center column, etc. from the standard detail that could be acceptable but will require a Technical Standards Modification Request (TSMR). Submit the TSMR request for the deviations from the standard detail. The reference to fibermesh in the concrete cannot be accepted. Note the concrete will be reinforced with #4 rebar, 12” O.C. as per the standard details and place the hose bibb on the outside of the enclosure walls. Dimension the length of the 10 ft. apron in the detail.
2. Curbside recycling service described in Note #5 under Detail 1 on Sheet SD5 will not be allowed. Revise Note #5 to read “The enclosure shall contain one front loading metal container for refuse, and one front loading container for recycling”.
3. Revise Note 3 under Detail 1 on Sheet SD5 to read “The inside clear width shall not be less than 10’-0” for each container” and revise Note 4 to read a 28’x40’ clear area shall be required.
4. Revise keynote 18 on Sheet C2 to reflect the concrete pavement shall require the rebar reinforcement per Note 1 above per the Standard figures in TSM Section 8.
5. Revise keynote 8 on Sheet SP1 to reflect the rebar reinforcement per Note 1 above and per the Standard figures in TSM Section 8.
If there are any questions, I can be reached at kperry@perryengineering.net
02/23/2015 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL SECTION 2-10.0.0: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS

Identification and Descriptive Data

All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the landscape plan will be identical in size and location to those shown on the base plan (site plan or tentative plat). Should amendments be required to the base plan through the review process, the same amendments will be made to the landscape plan which will then be resubmitted along with the base plan.

Include with re-submittal variance approval documentation, date of approval, and any conditions imposed.

ARTICLE 7: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING

Include the following notes for planting in the ROW per
Wittwer, Gary, Landscape Architect Transportation:

1) No major components in ROW (distribution tubing and laterals only)

2) All plants with spins and thorns are held back at least 2' off side walk

Along the east and south property there are vehicle parking
spaces that appear to allow the vehicles to overhang into the landscape area. Demonstrate on site and landscape plans how vehicles will be prevented from damaging required landscape.

Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed.

Additional comments may apply
02/23/2015 ZELIN CANCHOLA COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Approved
02/24/2015 PATRICIA GEHLEN ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Reqs Change This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items:

1) Two rolled sets of the drawings
2) A disk containing all items submitted
3) All items requested by review staff
4) All items needed to approve this plan

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
02/24/2015 CPIERCE1 REJECT SHELF RECEIVED