Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: DP14-0223
Parcel: 104080870

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP14-0223
Review Name: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
03/02/2015 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Jim Click Dodge - Remodel
Development Package (2nd Review)
DP14-0223

TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 4, 2015

DUE DATE: March 11, 2015

COMMENTS: This review is based on sheets C1, C1.1 & C2 only. Please resubmit revised drawings along 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 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 December 11, 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

2-06.3.5 - A three-inch by five-inch space shall be reserved in the lower right quadrant of each sheet for an approval stamp.

1. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide the development package stamp on all sheets of the development package.

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

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;

2. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide a brief legal description within 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).

3. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide the page number and total number of pages (i.e., sheet xx of xx) for the development package.

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.

4. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP14-0223, adjacent to the title block on all sheets.

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.2 - List the gross area of the site/subdivision by square footage and acreage.

5. Addressed. COMMENT: List the gross area of the site/subdivision by square footage and acreage.

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.

6. Addressed. COMMENT: The existing and proposed use should be listed as "VEHICLE RENTAL AND SALES SUBJECT TO USE SPECIFIC STANDARD 4.9.9.G.2 & .2". Remove the reference to development designators "33 & 34" as the LUC is no longer applicable.

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;

7. Addressed. COMMENT: Remove the reference to "FAR" as Floor Area Ratio is no longer applicable.

2-06.4.7.A.8.c - Percentage of building, lot area, or vehicular use area expansion. If the building(s) or lot area have been previously expanded, those calculations shall be included; and,

8. Addressed. COMMENT: The expansion calculation does not appear to be correct. Patios, coverer display areas, covered drive areas are not included. Also until the last approved site/development plan is provided the expansion cannot be verified.

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.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.

9. This comment was not fully addressed. Provide the recordation information for all easements. COMMENT: Show all existing easements on the plan. Based on the Tucson Auto Mall plat, Book 40 Page 14 there are numerous easements that are not shown on this development package.

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.

10. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide the dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks for all streets shown on this development package.

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.

11. Addressed. COMMENT: Clarify what a "ASSUMED PROPERTY LINE" is. Are you proposing some type of lot split?

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.

12. The zoning listed for the parcels west of Fairview Avenue is not correct. This should be listed as MU. COMMENT: Provide the existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) on the development package.

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

13. Addressed. COMMENT: Show the required SVT's on the plan.

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.

14. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide a width dimension for the PAAL that provides access to the angled parking near the northwest corner of the existing 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.

15. The vehicle parking space calculation is not correct. It does not appear that the existing service buildings are included in the calculation. COMMENT: Until Comments 11 & 22 are addressed the required number of vehicle parking spaces cannot be verified.

16. Comment not addressed. COMMENT: As required vehicle parking spaces are shown within a walled/fenced area provide a note on the plan that states that the gates providing access to these required vehicle parking spaces will remain open during business hours.

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.

17. The bicycle parking calculation is not correct. The reference to "CLASS I" & "CLASS II" bicycle parking is not correct, this should be listed at Short & Long term bicycle parking. The reference to UDC Section 7.4.8.B.1.a.(1) is not applicable. This only applies to a site where the gross floor area for the entire site is less than the 2,500 Sq. Ft., plus the total expansion exceeds the 2,500 Sq. Ft. Based on a gross floor area of 22,168 two (2) long term bicycle parking spaces are required. COMMENT: Provide a short and long term bicycle parking calculation, required and provided, on the plan.

18. COMMENT: Show the location of the required long term bicycle parking on the plan.

19. Detail 1 sheet C1.1 appears to show two (2) proposed racks. If this is the case than the provided number of short term bicycle parking should be four (4). See UDC Section 7.4.9.B.2.d. If two (2) racks are proposed the distance between racks is not correct. See UDC Section 7.4.9.B.2.f and UDC Figure 7.4.9-C. Provide a detail for the required long term bicycle parking. COMMENT: If any new short or long term bicycle parking is proposed provide a detail.

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.

20. Comment not addressed. COMMENT: Provide building street perimeter yard setback dimensions from the proposed "NEW ROOF STRUCTURE" to both Sport Road and Fairview Avenue.

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).

21. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide the height of all structures, proposed and existing that are shown on the plan within the footprint.

22. Addressed. COMMENT: Clarify what the two (2) "EXISTING BUILIDNG" shown north of the "ASSUMED PROPERTY LINE" are used for and provide the square footage and height 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.

23. Addressed. COMMENT: Per TSM 7-01.4.1.A provide the required sidewalk from both Auto Mall Drive and Sport Road.

2-06.4.9.T - Show refuse collection areas, including locations of dumpsters, screening location and materials, and vehicle maneuverability, fully dimensioned, and access route. If dumpster service is not proposed, indicate type of service. For specific information on refuse collection, refer to Section 8-01.0.0, Solid Waste and Recycle Disposal, Collection, and Storage, of the Technical Standards Manual. Refuse collection on all projects shall be designed based on that section, even if collection is to be contracted to a private firm.

24. Comment not addressed. COMMENT: Show the required refuse collection area on the development package.

Additional Comments

25. Addressed. COMMENT: Provide a copy of the last approved site plan with your next submittal.


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 and last approved site plan
.
03/03/2015 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change Verify that the rim elevations of the upstream and downstream manholes (PCWMD 4664-07 and 4664-06) and the first floor elevation of the building have the same basis (e.g. NAVD88)
03/10/2015 RONALD BROWN HC SITE REVIEW Reqs Change SHEET C2
1. NON RESPONSIVE TO PREVIOUS COMMENT 3. Provide a note: All accessible routes slopes are to be as per the 2009 ICC A117.1, Section 403.3; 5% maximum running slope and 2% maximum cross slope.
PLEASE PROVIDE THE NOTE

2. At the accessible route to Auto Mall Drive:
a. Provide dimensions for the width of the accessible route.
b. For all curb ramps except the one at the accessible parking aisle, delete the flared sides and provide return curbs or just plain side curbs.
c. Provide a large scale detail of all different types of curb ramps showing all accessible requirements such as dimensioning, slopes, directional arrows, grade differences, landings as required and connection to continuing walks and/or marked crossings.
3. At the accessible route to Sport Road:
a. Provide dimensions for the width of the accessible route
b. Provide flared sides at the curb ramp next to the building with a 1:10 maximum slope as required by 2009 ICC A117.1, Section 406.
c. Delete the ramp configuration at the west side of the marked crossing to Sport Road and provide an side walk ramp and 5'x5' landing as required by 2009 ICC A117.1, Section 405.
d. Provide a large scale detail of all different types of curb ramps showing all accessible requirements such as dimensioning, slopes, directional arrows, grade differences, landings as required and connection to contiuning walks and/or marked crossings.
END OF REVIEW
03/11/2015 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change Submit a revised landscape plan if new landscaping is proposed.
03/11/2015 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change Provide cut and fill quantitites.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
03/31/2015 SHANAE POWELL OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
03/31/2015 SHANAE POWELL REJECT SHELF Completed