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: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - DP17-0100
Review Name: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/30/2017 | ALEXANDRA HINES | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/07/2017 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | No existing or proposed Tucson Parks and Recreation facilities are affected by this development. Howard B. Dutt, RLA Landscape Architect Tucson Parks & Recreation (520) 837-8040 Howard.Dutt@tucsonaz.gov |
| 09/14/2017 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 09/19/2017 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Principal Planner PROJECT: Parking Addition for Penske Truck Leasing Development Package (2nd Review) DP17-0100 TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 19, 2017 DUE DATE: September 28, 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 April 25, 2018. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. Previous comment 11; This comment was not fully addressed, clearly show the section lines and label the section corners on the location map. 2-06.4.4.C - Identify the section, township, and range; section corners; and the scale on the location map. 2-06.4.7 - General Notes The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable. 2-06.4.7.A - Zoning and Land Use Notes 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 2. Previous comment 16; This comment was not addressed correctly. Based on UDC Article 5.6.8.A.1.c the maximum FAR is 0.50. The calculation should be based on UDC Article 6.4.6.C.2.a and Figure 6.4.6-B. 2-06.4.7.A.8.b - As the site is located within the Davis Monthan AFB Environs zone, Approach Departure Corridor 1 provide a floor area ratio calculation on the plan that meets the requirements of UDC Article 6.4.6. 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. 3. Previous comment 19; This comment was not addressed. 2-06.4.8.A - Sheet 2 you reference "L1, L2 & L3" but no line table is provided. Either provide a line table or the site boundary information for these lines. 4. Previous comment 22; This comment was not addressed. 2-06.4.8.B - Provide the recordation information for all existing easements shown on the plan. 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. 5. Previous comment 22; Provide a copy of the approved combo request with your next submittal. 2-06.4.9.E - As the overall site consists of four (4) parcels, 130-13-016B, 130-13-016C, 130-13-068A & 130-13-069A a lot combination is required. Provide a copy of the approved Pima Combination Request form with your next submittal. 6. Previous comment 23; This comment was not addressed correctly. The property directly north and northwest of this site is zoned R-1. Cleary show the correct zoning and define the zoning boundaries. Also provide the zoning of the parcels south of 34th Street. 2-06.4.9.F - Provide all existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) on the plan with zoning boundaries clearly defined. 7. Previous comment 24; This comment was not addressed correctly, review TSM 10-01.5.0 and provide the correct SVT's on the plan. 2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show the required sight visibility triangles on the plan. 8. Previous comment 25; This comment was not fully addressed, provide a width dimension for the 2nd driveway from the east end of the property.2-06.4.9.H.5 - Provide width dimensions for the two (2) driveways off of 34th Street. 9. Previous comment 26; This comment was not addressed correctly. Vehicle parking requirements are based on UDC Article 7.4.4 and Table 7.4.4-1, COMMERCIAL SERVICES USE GROUP, Trade Service and Repair, Major. Per UDC Article 7.4.3.2 the ratio used should be based on the standard formula listed for the COMMERCIAL SERVICES USE GROUP of 1 space per 300 sq. ft. GFA. That said the required number of standard vehicle parking space should be 31. Per the 2012 IBC Section 1106, Table 1106.1 the required number of vehicle parking spaces is based on the provided number of vehicle parking spaces. That said based on 37 vehicle parking space provided the number of required accessible vehicle parking spaces should be 2, 1 being van accessible. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Provide a vehicle parking space calculation on the plan. The calculation should include the ratio used, number required, number provided, and accessible required and provided. 10. Previous comment 27; This comment was not addressed correctly. Short and Long Term bicycle parking requirements are based on UDC Article 7.4.8 and Table 7.4.8-1, COMMERCIAL SERVICES USE GROUP, Trade Service and Repair, Major. Per UDC Article 7.4.3.2 the ratio used should be based on the standard formula listed for the COMMERCIAL SERVICES USE GROUP or 2 short & 2 long term bicycle parking spaces required. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - - Provide a short and long term bicycle parking space calculation on the plan. The calculation should include the ratio used, number required, number provided, Additional comments due to changes to the plan: 11. 2-06.4.8.A - As the existing site has been added to the development package as requested, provide the site boundary perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds with distances in feet for the entire site. 12. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - As you are providing "EMPLOYEE PARKING" along the southeast portion of the site the parking area must meet the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.6 specifically UDC Article 7.4.6.F.4. Provide a fully dimensioned backup spur along with the required radii and minimum 3' distance from the back of spur to the proposed fence. Additionally these spaces should be included in the provided number of vehicle parking spaces and could affect the number of required accessible vehicle parking spaces. 13. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Clearly show the 2 required 1 van and 1 standard accessible vehicle parking space on the plan. Clearly demonstrate how all requirements of the ICC A117.1-2009 are met. 14. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Provide a short term bicycle parking space detail that clearly demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1, .2 & 7.4.9.C are met. 15. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Provide a long term bicycle parking space detail that clearly demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1, .2 & 7.4.9.D are met. 16. 2-06.4.9.R - Clearly show the required pedestrian sidewalk connection to the sidewalk within the right-of-way along 34th Street, see TSM 7-01.3.3.A. This sidewalk must meet the requirements of the 2012 IBC Chapter 11 and the ICC A117.1-2009. The striped area shown at the west end of the landscape area must be physically separated from the vehicle use area per TSM 7-01.4.2 except where this path crosses perpendicular to an access lane or parking area access lane. 17. Sheet 1, General Notes 7 & 17 Development Standards are no longer applicable, remove this reference from the plan. 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 |
| 09/20/2017 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/20/2017 | PAUL BAUGHMAN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | The 2nd submittal has substantially addressed the comments from the 1st submittal engineering review. The following comments are minor and can be addressed with the next submittal before final engineering approval. 1) Page 7 of the drainage report has a couple of minor updates needed. Please update the next to last sentance of the first paragraph to reflect the allowed 12 hour infiltration time instead of the stated 36 hour infiltration time. It is noted that the 8.8 hour calculated drain down time is acceptable. The next to last paragraph indicates that Basins C and E overtop to 38th Street. This is a typo and should refer to 34th Street. 2) Cross section B on sheet 6 of the plans refers to a proposed curb. This curb, if required, should be reflected at the appropriate location on sheet 7 with appropriate linework at the correct locations. A new keynote that refers to SD 209 Type-2 may be used to reflect what is being shown in cross section B. This could replace keynote 4 which does not appear to be called out on this submittal. 3) Keynote 21 on sheet 7 is being called out at locations where construction of a curb access ramp is not anticipated. these locations include areas where keynotes 2, 13 or 19 may be more appropriate. Please update these areas as needed where keynote 21 is currently being called out. See redlines if needed. Please contact Loren Makus at Loren.Makus |
| 09/20/2017 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE 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: Provide dimensions for the street landscape borders. AM 2-10.4.2.A.2 Located on Site Street landscape borders must be located entirely on site, except that, if approved by the City Engineer or designee, up to five feet of the required ten foot width may be placed within the adjacent right-of-way area or within the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) right-of-way area on MS&R streets. per UDC 7.6.4.C.2.c Use of the Public Right-of-Way Nonrequired 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. 10-01.5.0 SIGHT VISIBILITY 5.1 Sight Visibility Triangles Clear lines of sight will be maintained along all streets and driveways to assure the safety of motorists and pedestrians. A. Lines of Sight 1. Lines of sight will not be obscured between 30 inches and six feet through a triangular area adjacent to a driveway, a PAAL, an alley, or a street, where such access ways intersect with another street in a T-configuration. The sight visibility triangle, or sight triangle, consists of three sides that are formed by two intersecting access ways and a line connecting the two. Provide SVT per City of Tucson standards. Ensure that all Zoning comments and concerns are addressed prior to landscape approval. Additional comments may apply pending submittal of revised plans. AM 2-10.2.0 |
| 09/22/2017 | KELLY LEE | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items: 1) Two rolled sets of the plans 2) All approved documents submitted previously 3) A disk containing all items submitted 4) All items requested by review staff 5) All items needed to approve these plans |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/25/2017 | QJONES1 | APPROVAL SHELF | Completed |
| 09/25/2017 | QJONES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 09/25/2017 | QJONES1 | REJECT SHELF | Completed |