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.
Plan Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: REVISION - TENT PLAT & CORE RESUB
Plan Number - S11-044
Review Name: REVISION - TENT PLAT & CORE RESUB
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/17/2014 | SPOWELL1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/18/2014 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 09/18/2014 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/18/2014 | MARTIN BROWN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 09/23/2014 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: S11- 044 9046 S. Houghton Road Revised Tentative Plat TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 22, 2014 DUE DATE: September 24, 2014 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Package Standards listed in section 2-06 of the City of Tucson Administrative Manual. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC). 1. 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 18, 2015. 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.3.6 - Provide a blank three-inch by five-inch block in the lower right corner of the plan adjacent to the title block on the first sheet of the development package for use by Pima County Addressing. 01. COMMENT: Provide the address block on the cover sheet as noted by the standard above. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.3.12 - An index of sheets in the development package shall be provided on the first sheet. 02. COMMENT: The sheet index on the cover sheet must include the sheet numbers i.e., 1 of 45, 2 of 45, 3 of 45 etc. All sheets in the package must be included in the total number of sheets and the sheet numbers listed in the lower right corner of all plan sheets. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.0 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. 03. COMMENT: List the information for any and all registrants that prepared this development package as noted by the standard above. List the information of the owner(s) as noted by the standard above. Clarify if the expiration date under the registrants seal is correct or a typo. The expiration date is labeled as 3/31/13. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet: 2-06.4.2.C - The number of proposed lots and common areas are to be noted. If the subdivision is a Flexible Lot Development (FLD), a condominium, or a similar type of residential subdivision utilizing special provisions of the UDC, it shall be so noted; 04. COMMENT: Clarify if the number of lots listed in the title block is consistent with the final plat and/or the recent lot reconfigurations. No proposed lot splits will be accepted on the tentative plat revision. Contact Patricia Gehlen if the intent to further reconfigure existing lots is what is proposed. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.2.D - The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx). 05. COMMENT: Same as comment 03 above, the sheet index on the cover sheet must include the sheet numbers i.e., 1 of 45, 2 of 45, 3 of 45 etc. All sheets in the package must be included in the total number of sheets and the sheet numbers listed in the lower right corner of all plan sheets. ****************************************************************************************** 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. 06. COMMENT: List the Administrative Address on the cover sheet. ****************************************************************************************** 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.2 - List the gross area of the site/subdivision by square footage and acreage. 07. COMMENT: There appears to be a discrepancy in the size of the overall site when compared to the approved final plat. (S12-052), clarify the discrepancy. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.7.A.8.a - Floor area for each building; 08. COMMENT: On the cover sheet, list the individual buildings, existing and proposed and include the floor area for each. ****************************************************************************************** 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. 2-06.4.9.A - Draw in all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements. 09. COMMENT: Label all lot line distance and bearings for all lots depicted on the TP and as recorded on the Final Plat. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.9.B - Identify each block or lot by number within the subdivision boundary and include the approximate square footage of each, or a note may be provided stating that all lots comply with the minimum lot size requirements. 10. COMMENT: Clearly define the lot lines with distance and bearings. ****************************************************************************************** 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. 11. COMMENT: It appears that several of the ADA parking spaces were not labeled (missing the ADA symbols) on the site plan sheets. Add the ADA symbols where missing. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.9.O - All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown. 12. COMMENT: Draw and label the overall street building setbacks to all structures adjacent to Houghton Road and Old Vail Road street perimeter. ****************************************************************************************** 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. 13. COMMENT: There are several areas on the DP site plan sheets that depict the pedestrian connections with striped pavement. Painted crosswalks are allowed when crossing a PAAL but sidewalks must be constructed of concrete and have physical separation from the vehicular use areas. It is clear that there are areas that were intended to be access aisles between ADA parking spaces but the ADA symbols were not drawn on the plan. If this is the case for some of those locations where the ADA symbol has been left off, disregard this comment, however there are three locations on the plans (sheet 7 and 8) where the marked crossing is not adjacent to an ADA parking space. These three locations must be constructed of raised concrete or flush with the pavement but must have a physical barrier such as an extruded curb. See redlines made on sheets 7 and 8. On sheet 7 the building next to the proposed Dunkin Donuts is proposed with a drive-through lane. There is a pedestrian crossing from the retail building to the food service building which may be within the stacking area. This cannot be verified because the stacking spaces have not been drawn and dimensioned on the plan. Draw and dimension the stacking spaces in the drive-through and ensure that the crosswalk is not within the stacking area. ****************************************************************************************** 14. A more in depth review will be done for all individual developments on each remaining lot as they are submitted to PDSD for review and approval of a Development Package for each lot or development. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package site plan and any requested documents. |
| 09/23/2014 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/23/2014 | RONALD BROWN | HC SITE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | GENERAL 1. Not all sets are complete. One set is missing 11A and another set is missing 11. I only looked at two sets so I'm not sure about the others. SHEET 7 2. Identify all accessible parking spaces and indicate which ones of those are to be van accessible. 3. All curb ramps do not comply with the 2009 ICC A117.1, Section 405 and 406 as applicable. a. Some of the curb ramps resemble COT DOT 207 which is for right of way accessible compliance only, not for private projects. 4. Drawings are not finished. a. Not all accessible parkings is identified b. Curb ramps are missing c. Building Accessible route connections are missing. 5. Reference all types of accessible parking to large scale details where shown on sheet 10. 6. Reference all different types of ramps to the large scale details shown on sheet 10. SHEES 8 AND 9 7. Reference comments 1 through 6 above. SHEET 10 8. At detail 2, provide van accessible signage. 9. Provide large scale details of all the different types of accessible parking. SHEET 11A 10. Provide a column for van accessible parking spaces as required by the 2012 IBC, Section 1106.5; 1 in every 6. END OF REVIEW |
| 09/24/2014 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | 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 items requested by review staff 3) All items needed to approve these plans. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/30/2014 | CPIERCE1 | REJECT SHELF | Completed |