Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING
Permit Number - DP16-0066
Review Name: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/08/2016 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/11/2016 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 07/12/2016 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Ensure that all Zoning comments and concerns are addressed. |
| 07/13/2016 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Principal Planner PROJECT: Brake Max 15 - 3206 E. Valencia Road Development Package (2nd Review) DP16-0066 TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 14, 2016 DUE DATE: July 13, 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 11, 2016. 1. This comment was not fully addressed, sheets 8 & 10 were not corrected. 2-06.4.3 - Remove the street address from the title block and provide it adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 2. This comment was not fully addressed, sheets 8 & 10 no case number provided. 2-06.4.3 - Provide the development package case number, DP16-0066, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 3. Addressed. 2-06.4.2.C - Sheet 1, location map, the section corners are not labeled correctly. 4. Addressed. 2-06.4.7.A.1 - General Note 2 remove the reference to "EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATION" show it as "EXISTING ZONING". 5. Addressed. 2-06.4.7.A.4 - The proposed use listed under General Note 3 is not correct. Brake repair does not fall under Automotive - Minor Service and Repair and should be listed as Automotive - Major Service and Repair. See UDC Article 11.3.4.E. Also provide the use specific standard 4.9.13.E that applies for the C-2 zone and 4.9.13.Q that applies to the I-1 zone. 6. This comment was not fully addressed. Per UDC TABLE 4.8-4: PERMITTED USES - COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE ZONES, Commercial Use 2-06.4.7.A.4 - Based on the ratios used in the vehicle parking space calculation it appears tha Commercial Services Land Use Group With Land Use Class/Type: Food Service, Excluding Soup Kitchens, the following Use Specific Standards apply in the C-2 Zone 4.9.4.M.1 and 4.9.13.P. t two separate uses are proposed for this site. Under General Note 3 list the second use and any applicable use specific standards that apply. 7. Addressed. 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - General Note 15 lists and old LUC code reference for the Major Streets and Route. This note should show UDC Article 5.4. This note should also include a reference to Gateway Corridor Article 5.5. 8. Addressed. 2-06.4.7.A.8.b - General Note 5 remove the reference to "FLOOR AREA RATIO" as it is no longer applicable. 9. It does not appear that the lot combination was processed through the Pima County Assessor's Office. Provide written documentation from the Assessor's Office. 2-06.4.9.A - As a lot combination is required provide a copy of the approved Pima County Lot Combination form with your next submittal. 10. Addressed. 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. Clearly show the C-2 zoning to the west and the C-2 and I-1 to the north side of Valencia. 11. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - Provide an access lane width dimension for the access between the parcel to the east shown near the southeast corner of the site. 12. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - Fully dimension all back-up spurs shown on the plan, see UDC Article 7.4.6.F.4. 13. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Until all proposed uses are listed, see comment 6, the required number of vehicle parking spaces cannon be verified. 14. As the long-term bicycle parking is still shown at the southwest corner of Building 1 the vehicle parking space directly south of the bicycle parking must be 10'-0" wide, provide a width dimension for the parking space. 2-06.4.9.H.5.b - As the long-term bicycle parking spaces shown near the southwest corner of Building 1, are directly adjacent to a vehicle parking space demonstrate on the plan how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.6.D.2.b are met. 15. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5.b - As both short-term bicycle parking spaces are shown directly adjacent to a vehicle parking space demonstrate on the plan how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.6.D.2.b are met. 16. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5.b - Detail 8 sheet 4 provide a mounting height dimension from the bottom of the "VAN ACCESSIBLE" sign. This dimension should be 7'-0". 17. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5.c - Until all proposed uses are listed, see comment 6, the requirements for loading spaces cannot be determined. 18. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Sheet 2 near the northwest corner of Building #1 it appears that you are providing two (2) racks for a total of four (4) short-term bicycle parking spaces. See UDC Article 7.4.9.B.2.d. Clarify what is happening in this area and if applicable revise the numbers of provided spaces. 19. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - As both short-term bicycle parking spaces are shown directly adjacent to a vehicle parking space demonstrate on the plan how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.B.2.g are met. 20. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.6 -As phasing is proposed provide all applicable phased calculations. 21. Detail 9 sheet 4 does not look anything like what is shown on the plan. Provide a detail that matches the site plan. 2-06.4.9.R - Provide a detail for what appears to be an accessible access ramp shown near the northwest corner of Building 2. 22. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.R - Provide a sidewalk width dimension form the top of the proposed accessible ramp, shown west of Building 1 to the proposed building. 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 |
| 07/14/2016 | SSHIELD1 | HC SITE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | See Zoning Comments |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/15/2016 | KROBLES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |