Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL
Permit Number - DP16-0196
Review Name: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/09/2018 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL SECTION 2-10.0.0: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS 4.1 Identification and Descriptive Data A. 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: Design Development Option case; and any condition imposed by DDO DDO representative must stamp appropriate plans. Any relevant case numbers for reviews or modifications that affect the site. ARTICLE 7: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 7.6. LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING Use of the Public Right-of-Way Landscaping may be placed in the public right-of-way, if the following standards are met: 1. The landscaping is approved by the City Engineer or designee and complies with the City Engineer's standards on construction, irrigation, location, and plant type; 2. All vegetation complies with the standards of Section 7.6.4, Landscaping Standards; and, 3. The landscaping does not interfere with the use of the sidewalk. Obtain permission for use of ROW Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. Additional comments may apply |
| 10/12/2018 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Section Manager PROJECT: BK Restaurant Commissary Development Package (3rd Review) DP16-0196 TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 15, 2018 DUE DATE: October 17, 2018 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 January 26, 2018. 8. This comment was not fully addressed. General Note 23 still references the "CITY OF TUCSON LAND USE CODE, DIV 3, SEC 3.3.4". This note should reference the UDC. It appears that under General Note 23 "PARKING CALCULATIONS (PHASE 1); the "MOTOR VEHICLE: FULL DEVELOPMENT" is phase 2. If this is the case label it correctly. Also under General Note 23 you list "CITY OF TUCSON LAND USE CODE, DIV 3, SEC 3.3.4"a. The LUC is no longer the applicable code and should reference the correct Unified Development Code section. 2-06.4.9.G - The drawings shown "Phase I & Phase II" but no Phase II calculations are provided. Provide all applicable calculations, vehicle & bicycle parking etc. 22. The comment was not addressed correctly. Per UDC Table 7.4.8-1, COMMERCIAL USE GROUP, Administrative and Professional Office, based on 2,600 sq. ft. the minimum requirement is 2 short term bicycle parking spaces. Per UDC Table 7.4.8-1, COMMERCIAL USE GROUP, Food Service, 1 space per 2,000 sq. ft. GFA, 16,440 sq. ft./2000 = 8 required short term bicycle parking spaces for a total of 10 short term bicycle parking spaces not 8. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Until comment 3 has been addressed the short and long term bicycle parking requirements cannot be verified. 26. The plans will need to be stamped by the DDO Section prior to approval by Zoning. 2-06.4.9.O - Sheet 1 "Setbacks" the street perimeter yards setback appears to be incorrect. You have listed a developing area setback and it does not appear that this site meets the definition of developing area. The street perimeter yard setbacks for this site should be listed as 20'-0" or 1-½ the height of the height of the proposed exterior building wall, whichever is greatest, measured from the street property line. That said a Design Development Option (DDO) will be required to be submitted and approved prior to approval of the development package. 34. This comment was not addressed correctly. Per ICC A117.1-2009 505.10 handrails shall extend beyond and in the same direction of the stair flight. It does not appear that the handrail extensions shown for the top of the stairs meet this requirement. As handrails have been provided provide the required handrail extensions for the top and bottom of the stairs see ICC A117.1-2009 505.10.2 & 505.10.3. 2-06.4.9.R - Ramp and Stairs Addition detail, sheet 4, clearly shown the required handrails for the proposed stairs, see ICC A117.1-2009 Section 504.6. Once the above comments are addressed Zoning is willing to provide and over the counter review. Call or email to schedule an appointment for this 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 |
| 10/15/2018 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary cleanout (#8892*13, 2428.2') is less than 12" below the finished floor elevation of the building (2428.78'). Provide a note on the plans requiring the installation of a backwater valve when future plumbing activities take place. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. [Second comment: Revise the site drawing to show the point of connection of the existing building to the public sewer. Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual, Section 2-06.4.8D and Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012.] |
| 10/15/2018 | SSHIELD1 | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | See Zoning comments |