Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you can not find what you are looking for please submit a records request.
Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING
Permit Number - DP16-0162
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/28/2016 | DAVID RIVERA | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | see zoning comments |
| 09/28/2016 | DRIVERA1 | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 09/28/2016 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera for Steve Shields - Principal Planner PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: New Greenhouse for MM Cultivation - 6525 E Littletown Road Development Package (1st Review) DP16-0162 TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 28, 2016 DUE DATE: October 12, 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. 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 September 7, 2017. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS) Section 2-06.3.9 - The plan drawing shall be oriented with north toward the top of the sheet. If it is not practical to orient north to the top of the sheet, the plan drawing shall be oriented with north to the left side of the sheet. 1. COMMENT: The north arrow depicted for the drawing is facing the wrong direction. The arrow should be pointing to the left. Revise as required. 2-06.3.10 - A legend that shows and describes all symbols used on the drawing is to be provided, preferably on the first sheet. 2. COMMENT: Add the legend as noted by the standard above. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.4.1 - The name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s), or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional, such as a surveyor, architect, landscape architect, or engineer. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines. 3. COMMENT: List the information as noted by the standard above. 2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet: 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. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP16-0162, adjacent to the title block on 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. 4. COMMENT: The MM Dispensary Off-site Cultivation Location use does not fall under the Agricultural Use Group. It is listed under the Retail Use Group and is subject to compliance with Use Specific Standards 4.9.9E.2 and 4.9.13.Q. Revise the use note to state the existing and proposed use is a "MM Dispensary Off-site Cultivation Location Use" and subject to UDC Use Specific Standards 4.9.9E.2 and 4.9.13.Q. 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - List additional applications and overlays, by case number (if applicable), in lower right corner of each sheet. As a general note provide the type of application processed or overlays applicable, a statement that the project meets the criteria/conditions of the additional application or overlay, the case number, date of approval, what was approved, and the conditions of approval, if any. 5. COMMENT: List the following reference case numbers, DP15-0154 and C9-95-16 in the lower right corner next to the title block. 2-06.4.7.A.8.a - Floor area for each building; 6. COMMENT: Label the existing and proposed buildings as MM Cultivation buildings. 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. 7. COMMENT: As noted in comment 5, the correct use is MM Dispensary Off-site Cultivation Location. As a result the vehicle and bicycle parking calculation used are incorrect. Review the vehicle parking requirements in Section 7.4.4, Table 7.4.4-1 and 7.4.8, Table 7.4.8-1 for the Bicycle parking requirements. Revise the parking calculations text block to show the number required and provided for both vehicle and bicycle parking and accessible vehicle parking spaces (include van accessible spaces). 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. 8. COMMENT: As noted above the incorrect land use was being utilized to perform the parking calculations for both the vehicle and bicycle parking. Review the bicycle parking table 7.4.8-1 for the bicycle parking requirements. Add fully dimensioned detail drawings for the short and long term facilities. See UDC section 7.4.8 for more information on the bicycle parking requirements, facility types and design criteria. 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). 9. COMMENT: Within the building footprint, label the square footage of the existing building and the height of the existing and new building. 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. 10. COMMENT: Annotate on the plan the longitudinal and cross slopes for all new sidewalks. Sidewalks must be accessible. 11. COMMENT: As noted in the building plan review, a MM review application is required due to the expansion. While the sensitive use setback in the I-1 and I-2 zones is only to school sites, it is not known whether or not a new public or charter school has moved into or within the sensitive setback requirement. An internal PDSD discussion has been initiated to see whether or not the MM review will be required. Please follow up with Carolyn Laurie or Steve Shields. If the review is required a separate MM review application is to be submitted and will be reviewed for the compliance with the sensitive use setback to any school with 500 feet of the new and existing building on site. The DP will not be able to be approved until the MM application is completed and approved. 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 |
| 10/05/2016 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/07/2016 | ARUIZ1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |