Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL
Permit Number - DP15-0118
Review Name: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/02/2015 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/07/2015 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: October 7, 2015 DUE DATE: October 28, 2015 SUBJECT: Blake's Lotaburger Tucson #91 Development Package- 2nd Engineering Review TO: Gilda Maraboto LOCATION: 2810 E Speedway Blvd; T14S R14E Sec08 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: DP15-0118 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Package. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development 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) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.7.A.2: Revise the development package and the new General note to list the gross area of the site/subdivision by square footage and acreage to match on all sheets. The Cover Sheet and Site Plan sheet differ from the acreage that is shown on General Note #1 on Sheet 2 of 9. 10) Complied. 11) Complied. 12) Complied. 13) Complied. 14) Acknowledged: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Revise the development package to label the required 25-foot radii at the intersection of the existing driveways and Speedway Blvd per TSM Sec.10-01.3.2.C and Figure 6. Provide a General Note on the development package (DP15-0118) referencing the TSMR Case #, date of approval and any conditions (if applicable). 15) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development package to label and dimension the existing/future SVT dimensions for the driveways and the MS&R Arterial Street, refer to TSM Sec.10-01.5.3 for line of sight matrix. Revise the development package to provide the correct dimensions for the SVT's that are shown. Per the line of sight matrix the stem side of the SVT is 20-feet not the dimension 15-feet as shown. For a PAAL intersecting an Arterial Street the Near Side dimension is 345-feet and the Far Side dimension is 20'x30' due to the existing roadway median. Revise the site plan sheet to remove the incorrect SVTs and make sure they match the grading plan sheet in location and dimensions. 16) Complied. 17) Complied. 18) Complied. 19) Complied. 20) Complied. 21) Complied. 22) Complied. 23) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development package to provide a pedestrian access path to all buildings, all bicycle and vehicle parking areas, all recreation areas, all dumpster areas, and all other common use areas. Per TSM 7-01.3.3.B the areas within the development which must be connected specifically verify how the pedestrian access is connected to the proposed refuse containers for the development. The code does not consider the dumpster areas for maintenance use only it is very specific in requiring a pedestrian access from the building to the refuse containers. This may be in the form of a cross walk or a sidewalk depending on the site layout. 24) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.J: Revise the development package to label and dimension the future right of way, future curb location and future SVTs for the MS&R Street. The plan set was not revised to reflect the future right-of-way widths or the future curb and sidewalk area. The response was to refer to the Civil Responses which stated "Repeat comments from Zoning see previous responses" however there was not a response under the Zoning comment section that detailed how the comment was addressed (or in this case not addressed). 25) Complied. 26) Complied. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development 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 |
| 10/19/2015 | DAVID RIVERA | HC SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/19/2015 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: DP15-0118 2810 E Speedway Blvd. Development Package for a Food Service Use - (Lotaburger Restaurant) TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 4, 2015 DUE DATE: August 26, 2015 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. The previous comment was left as reference, address only the Follow up Comment noted. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Package Standards listed in section 2-06 of the City of Tucson Administrative Manual. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC). 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 July 29, 2016. 1. Follow up comment to previous comment 13 - List the Use Specific Standard in General note 3 on Sheet 2; Subject to: C-1: 4.9.4.M.1 & 5 and 4.9.13.O 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. 13. Previous COMMENT: List the correct use of the site as listed in the UDC and include the applicable use specific standard section number(s). ****************************************************************************************** 2. Follow up Comment to Previous Comment 21 - Revise the sight Visibility Triangles per the engineering reviewer comments. 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. 21. Previous COMMENT: Draw and label the sight visibility as noted by the standard above. ****************************************************************************************** 3. Comment: The remaining zoning comments are minor and Zoning is willing to review and approve the revised DP over the counter on the next submittal. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package site plan and any requested documents. |
| 10/26/2015 | 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. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE 4.8 Existing Site Conditions 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. The previously approved plans indicate a 5.0' buffer easement along Speedway Blvd. The submitted development plans indicate that development is proposed and a portion the required landscaping and irrigation is to be removed. Contact Gary Wittwer City of Tucson Transportation, Landscape Architect @ Gary.Wittwer@tucsonaz.gov on how to proceed with development and review within City of Tucson recorded easements. Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. Additional comments may apply |
| 10/28/2015 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Comment not addressed. Revise the site drawing to include the following existing utility information: a. The location and size of water lines, and fire hydrants. b. The location and size of sanitary and storm sewers, including the pipe diameter and the invert and rim elevations of all manholes and cleanouts; along with the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD) reference number. c. The points of connection to existing public sewers. d. The locations of gas lines, electric and telephone lines, poles, and communications cables, on-ground junction boxes, and street lights. e. Any existing or proposed utility easements Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual, Section 2-06.4.8D and Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012. |