Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING
Permit Number - DP16-0063
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/13/2016 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/28/2016 | PAUL BAUGHMAN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: April 28, 2016 DUE DATE: May 10, 2016 SUBJECT: Take-out Kitchen TO: Eduardo J. Ornelas, RA LOCATION: 1122 S 6th Avenue REVIEWERS: Paul Baughman, PE, CFM ACTIVITY: DP16-0063 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning and Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package. The following items need to be addressed: 1) Per AM 2-06.4.3 please add the case numbers (DP16-0063 and T16CM02572). 2) Per UDC 7.4.6D1 the 90 degree parking requires a 24 foot wide PAAL per Table 7.4.6-1 and Figure 7.4.6-A. The current layout only provides for a 14.5 foot PAAL. Please update parking layout accordingly. It may be necessary to push the parking and 6" depressed landscaping further to the north to provide the required 24' wide PAAL for 90 degree parking. Alternatively, the parking could be angled at a 45 degree angle and a narrower one-way PAAL could be provided. 3) Per UDC 7.4.6H1 please provide barriers around the parking/pavement areas to prevent vehicles from damaging/driving onto unimproved portions of the site (see keynote 18) or extending beyond the property lines (ie turning onto or off of South Russell Avenue at a location other than the paved access point). These barriers should reflect the need to maintain existing drainage flows from the south that are currently conveyed onto this property. 4) Per AM 2-06.4.8D show 16" Cast Iron water line within 6th Avenue. 5) Per AM 2-06.4.9H1 please show the existing drainage patterns and structures from the adjacent properties. 6) Per AM 2-06.4.8H2 please show show and label the sight visibility triangles. 7) Per AM 2-06.4.9H4 please indicate if existing streets are public or private and dimension the distances between curbs, sidewalk and utility locations. 8) Per AM 2-06.4.9T please show refuse collection area such that it does not conflict with the existing street light as called out by keynote 12. Per TSM 8-01.6.2C there is a 25' minimum height clearance that would be difficult to comply with adjacent to the existing street light. 9) Per AM 2-06.4.9W please show the location of any proposed signs such as one way only or exit only signs should the parking be placed at a 45 degree angle instead of at a 90 degree angle to narrow the PAAL width requirement. 10) Per TSM 10-01.3.2C please provide curb returns at the access points between the PAAL and the streets with a minimum 25' radius. Please note that South 6th Avenue is classified as a collector Street. 11) Per TSM 10-01.3.2F please show wheelchair ramps at all curb returns. - TSMR applied for and accepted by TDOT. If you have any comments questions or wish to discuss new information, please call or email me at 520-837-5007 or paul.baughman@tucsonaz.gov. |
| 04/29/2016 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Provide the rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole and the first floor elevation. Determine the need for a backwater valve per Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. 2. Verify the location of the natural gas meter on site. Reference: Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012. |
| 05/09/2016 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Principal Planner PROJECT: 1122 S. 6th Avenue - Take-Out Kitchen Development Package (1st Review) DP16-0063 TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 9, 2016 DUE DATE: May 10, 2016 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and any redlined plans along with 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). 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 April 10, 2016. 1. 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. That said remove the building plans from the development package and revise the sheet index and total number of pages accordingly. 2. 2-06.4.1 - Provide the name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, and the developer of the project, shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. 3. 2-06.4.2.B - Provide a brief legal description within the title block on all sheets. 4. 2-06.4.3 - Remove the street address from the title block and provide it adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 5. 2-06.4.3 - Provide the development package case number, DP16-0063, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 6. 2-06.4.7.A.1 - The zoning listed under "ZONING INFORMATION", "I-2" is not correct and should be listed as C-3. 7. 2-06.4.7.A.2 - As a general note list the gross area of the site/subdivision by square footage and acreage. 8. 2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Remove the reference to "LOT COVERAGE" from the plan as it is not applicable. 9. 2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show all applicable sight visibility triangles (SVTs) on the plan. 10. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - Per UDC Table 7.4.6-1 the minimum PAAL width when accessing 90 degree parking is 24'. Show the required 24' PAAL. 11. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - Per UDC Article 7.4.6.H.1 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 along the north and south side of the access lane and PAAL and the west end of the vehicle parking. See yellow highlight. 12. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Provide a large scale detail of the accessible parking space showing all accessible requirements such as dimensions, markings, grade slopes, accessible parking aisle, signage, van accessible space and access to the accessible route. 13. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Provide a large scale sign detail including a van accessible sign. 14. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Provide a detail for the proposed short term bicycle parking that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B & .C are met. 15. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Provide a detail for the proposed long term bicycle parking that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B & .D are met. For your information per UDC Article 7.4.8.B.1.a.(1) No long-term bicycle parking is required on a site where there is less than 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. 16. 2-06.4.9.O - Per UDC Article 11.4.6 DEFINITIONS - Established Area Setback, A term used to describe the required building setback from a street applicable as follows. 1. When street frontage of the property is on a street other than one designated a major street or route by the adopted Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan. That said as 6th Avenue is designated on the COT MS&R map as an Arterial street the street perimeter yard setbacks are based on UDC Article 6.4.5.C.2 and Table 6.4.5.C-1 ADT of 1000 or greater, 21' or the height of the exterior wall whichever is greatest measured from the back of curb. That side the street perimeter yard dimension is not shown correctly and does not meet the 21' minimum. A Board of Adjustment for variance will be required. 17. 2-06.4.9.R - Per TSM 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 sidewalk out to Russell Avenue. 18. 2-06.4.9.R - Demonstrate on the plan that at least one of the required sidewalks to the street meet the requirements of IBC Chapter 11 and the ICC A117.1-2009. 19. 2-06.4.9.T - Show refuse collection area on the plan. 20. 2-06.4.9.W - Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. 21. 2-06.4.9.W - Provide a general note on the plan stating "ALL SIGNAGE REQUIRES A SEPARATE PERMIT". 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 |
| 05/09/2016 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 05/09/2016 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 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. The landscape plan will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet: Rezoning case; Subdivision case; Board of Adjustment case; Design Development Option case; Development Review Board (DRB) case; and/or, Any other relevant case number for reviews or modifications that affect the site. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ARTICLE 7: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING To enhance the visual appearance of the streetscape, a street landscape border is required in accordance with Table 7.6.4-1 along the street frontage of a site as follows: Street Landscape Buffer is required along Russell Ave. Minimum Width Street landscape borders must be a minimum of ten feet wide as measured from the street property line. Fifty percent or more of the area of the street landscape border must be covered with shrubs or vegetative ground cover. The required ground coverage must be achieved within two years from the date of planting. One canopy tree is required for every 33 linear feet of landscape border or fraction thereof, excluding vehicular ingress or egress points. Continuous screens along street frontages for vehicle use area must be as determined by Table 7.6.4-I. Provide appropriate screening. Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. Additional comments may apply |
| 05/09/2016 | SSHIELD1 | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | See Zoning comments. |
| 05/09/2016 | SSHIELD1 | ADA | REVIEW | Passed |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05/11/2016 | KROBLES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |