Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING
Permit Number - DP16-0067
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/23/2016 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Approved | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Principal Planner PROJECT: Bahama Bucks - Restaurant Development Package (2nd Review) DP16-0067 TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 24, 2016 DUE DATE: July 06, 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 27, 2017. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 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, 1. This comment was not addressed correctly. 800 sf / 1900 sf = 42.1% expansion not 29.6 %as shown on the plan. COMMENT: Include a building expansion calculation under the Project Data text block. Expansion of the patio is a building / use area expansion. If the expansion is greater than 25% of the existing building gfa, full code compliance will be required. Additional comments may be forthcoming if the expansion is greater than 25%. 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. 2. COMMENT: AT the northern most vehicle parking area the parking space depth shown 17'-6" this does not meet the minimum depth of 18' see UDC Article 7.4.6.D Table 7.4.6-1. 3. COMMENT: Along the east and west vehicle parking show the 2'-6" vehicle overhang over the landscape area and sidewalk. 4. COMMENT: It does not appear that the location of the wheel stops shown on detail 8 match the location shown on the site plan. Provide a location dimension for the wheel stops or remove them and show the 2'-6" vehicle overhang of the sidewalk. If you elect to remove the wheel stops ensure that the accessible sign does not encroach into the 2'-6" overhang and that the minimum 4'-0" sidewalk width is maintained. 5. COMMENT: Detail 9 shown a 7'-0" dimension to the bottom of sign but in the text of detail 9 note 1 it references 80", revise the text to match the dimension. 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. 6. COMMENT: The proposed long term bicycle parking does not meet the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.D.2 7. COMMENT: The proposed short term bicycle parking does not meet the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.C.2.c. 8. COMMENT: The requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.B.1.e were not addressed. 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. 9. COMMENT: Provide a width dimension for the sidewalk shown at the top of the accessible ramp shown on the plan. Once the above comments have been addressed please email a pdf of the plan and I will provide a cursory review to ensure all comments have been addressed. If addressed Zoning will than provided an over-the-counter review/ 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 site plan |
| 06/24/2016 | SSHIELD1 | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 06/24/2016 | SSHIELD1 | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Approved | See Zoning comments |
| 07/05/2016 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Completed |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/06/2016 | RBENT1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |