Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING
Permit Number - DP16-0197
Review Name: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12/16/2016 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Principal Planner PROJECT: Kappa Kappa Gamma - Expansion Development Package (2nd Review) DP16-0197 TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 16, 2016 DUE DATE: January 17, 2017 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 November 09, 2017. 2-06.4.7 - General Notes The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable. 1. 2-06.4.7.A.6 - As a Design Development Option (DDO) is required for street perimeter yard setbacks provide the DDO case number, T16SA00520 , adjacent to the title block on all sheets. Also provide a general note stating the DDO case number, date of approval, what was modified or varied, and if applicable any conditions of approval. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 2. 2-06.4.7.A.8.c - The building expansion calculation is not correct. Per UDC Article 7.4.6.E.2 If an expansion is 25% or greater or if a series of expansions cumulatively results in a 25% or greater expansion in floor area, the requirements of this section apply to the entire site. Based on the provide last approved site plan form 2003 the existing building square footage would be 20,564. The total additions would be; From 2003 plan - "NEW 1ST FLOOR = 950 sq. ft." From 2003 plan - "BASEMENT NEW = 465 sq, ft," Shed not permit - Per SP16-0197 = 193 sq. ft. Difference between demo and proposed = 3,691 sq ft Total square feet of expansion = 5,299 sq. ft. As expansions are cumulative the calculation would be as follows, 5,299/20,564 = 25.7% expansion. 2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided. 2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes. 3. The provided covenant will need to be recorded prior to approval of the development package. 2-06.4.9.A - As this site is made up of four (4) parcels, 124-04-0110, 124-04-0120, 124-04-0130 & 124-04-0140, a lot combination is required. Provide a copy of the approved Pima County Combo Request form with your next submittal. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - Based on comment 2 an expansion is 25% or greater or if a series of expansions cumulatively results in a 25% or greater expansion in floor area, the requirements of this section apply to the entire site. Based on the dimensions provided the following comments apply to the vehicle use area. 4. 2-06.4.9.H.5 The two-way PAAL shown north of the eastern most building does not meet the minimum 24' required width, see UDC Table 7.4.6-2. Also per UDC Article 7.4.6.F.2.b the PAAL must be setback 2' from the wall shown along the north side of the PAAL. 5. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - The vehicle parking spaces shown north of the eastern most building do not appear to meet the requirement of UDC Table 7.4.6.-1. Provide the following, A Parking Angle, B Space width, C Space depth. 6. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - The vehicle parking spaces shown along the north property line do not meet the C Space depth requirements of UDC Table 7.4.6-1. Also per UDC Article 7.4.6.H.1 some type of barrier is required to prevent vehicles from damaging the wall shown along the north property line. 7. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - The vehicle parking space shown near the northeast corner of the proposed expansion is required to 10'-0" wide, see UDC Article 7.4.6.D.2.b. 8. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Per 2012 IBC Section 1106.5 one (1) of the accessible spaces must be van accessible. 9. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Show the required short term bicycle parking on the plan and demonstrate that the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1, .2 and 7.4.9.C are met. 10. Until the DDO is approved the development package cannot be approved. 2-06.4.9.O - The street perimeter yard setbacks shown on the plan are not correct. The street setbacks shown are based on UDC Article 6.4.5.C.2. Per UDC Article 11.4.5 definition of Developing Area, this project does not qualify for developing area street perimeter yard setbacks. The front street perimeter yard setback should be based on UDC Article 6.4.5.C.1.a, and the side street perimeter yard setback should be based on UDC Article 6.4.5.C.1.b. Based on a building height of 27 feet the required front street perimeter yard is 40'-6". 11. 2-06.4.9.R - Demonstrate on the plan that the requirements of ICC A117.1-2009 Sections 405.7.2 & .3 are met at the top and bottom of the proposed ramp. 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, & Approved Pima County Combo Request form. |
| 12/16/2016 | SSHIELD1 | HC SITE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | See Zoning comments |
| 12/23/2016 | PAUL BAUGHMAN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 12/23/2016 | PIBARRA1 | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Needs Review | |
| 12/23/2016 | CLAYTON TREVILLYAN | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed |