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
Permit Number - T06CM03269
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/23/2007 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Capin Grant Road Brake Shop T06CM03269 Site Plan (3rd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 24, 2007 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with redlines and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. This site plan was reviewed for full code compliance with the City of Tucson Development Standards (D.S.) and Land Use Code (LUC) for the proposed expansion only. Due to the change of use proposed on this plan from the last submittal, a complete review has been done based on Commercial Services Use Group, Automotive - Service and Repair. Addition comments have been generated. 2. Zoning acknowledges that the documentation will be provided but Zoning cannot approve the site plan until the lot split has been approved. It appears that this parcel was recently split. Provide documentation that shows that the lot split was processed through The City of Tucson. 3. Based on the provided parking calculation showing 46 spaces provided, 9 on adjacent parcels, provide a cross parking agreement. This agreement must be recorded prior to site plan approval. The provided documentation "AGREEMENTS AND EASEMENTS" does not address any cross parking. If the use of 9 parking spaces is removed from this plan then no cross parking agreement would be needed for approval of this site plan. The provided document which talks about "AGREEMENTS AND EASEMENTS" is not clear as to what project this relates to, provide the full document. Also there is no reference to cross parking in the document, therefore provide recorded documentation which allows for the proposed cross parking. 4. Zoning acknowledges receipt of the MS&R future site plan. Once the MS&R future site plan is approved a copy of the approved plan must be recorded along with the Major Streets and Routes Covenant. Provide a note on the site plan stating "Major Streets and Routes Covenant recorded, Provide the docket and page along with recording date. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 The proposed parking located along the south property line cannot be located within the future site visibility triangle (SVT). Either relocated or provide a Major Streets and Routes Covenant along with a future site plan indicating how the project will comply with LUC requirements when the MS&R ROW can no longer be used as part of the site. 5. The wheel stops shown on Detail 16/C-4 are not shown correctly, see redline set. Provide a dimension as shown on the redline. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Provide wheel stops for all vehicle parking spaces where the adjacent sidewalk is less then 6'-6" in width. Show the wheel stops on both the handicapped and standard parking spaces detail as provide where required. 6. The proposed handicapped sign can not obstruct the minimum 4' wide sidewalk. Provide a dimension on the plan that clearly delineates the 4' clear sidewalk. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Details 3 & 4/C-2 Van Accessible Sign & Handicapped Parking Sign, the dimension shown for the height of the sign should be seven (7) feet from finish grade, pavement or sidewalk to the bottom of the sign, revise. The sign detail is also incorrect. See the detail provided on sheet C-2. 7. The dimension on the eastern entrance PAAL does not align with the curbing, clarify. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.11 Provide dimensions for the width of the entrances off of Grant Road. 8. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 The angled parking dimension "A" Parking angle appears to be incorrect. Detail 16/C-4 calls out a 20 degree angle and when measured it appears to be 63 degrees, clarify. Show this dimension as shown on LUC Sec. 3.3.7.2 Motor Vehicle Parking Space Dimensions. 9. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Provide a Space width "B" as shown on LUC Sec. 3.3.7.2 Motor Vehicle Parking Space Dimensions. 10. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Provide a Space depth "C" as shown on LUC Sec. 3.3.7.2 Motor Vehicle Parking Space Dimensions. 11. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Provide a Curb length "E" as shown on LUC Sec. 3.3.7.2 Motor Vehicle Parking Space Dimensions. 12. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 The proposed planter areas along the angled parking appear to encroach into the overhang area for the vehicles, clarify. 13. The provided MS&R plan must include all of the information required for the site plan, notes, calculations, etc. Provide a note on the plan stating "AT THE TIME OF RIGHT OF WAY TAKING A CROSS ACCESS AGREEMENT MUST BE SECURED". Also if utilizing the surplus parking on adjacent parcels to meet the required 36 spaces a plan showing all parking on all three parcels so that zoning can verify the required parking exists. Provide a parking calculation for the entire site. 14. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape & grading plan. 15. Additional comments may be forth coming depending on how each comment has been addressed. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 873-4956 C:\planning\site\t06cm03269-3rd.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents |
| 04/24/2007 | SSHIELD1 | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 04/24/2007 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | See Zoning Comments |
| 05/10/2007 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: May 10, 2007 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T06CM03269 PROJECT NAME: Capin Grant Road Brake Shop PROJECT ADDRESS: 462 West Grant Road PROJECT REVIEWER: Patricia Gilbert, Engineering Associate The following items must be revised or added to the site plan. Please include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: SITE PLAN 1. Sheet C1 on the existing site plan shows different cut and fill quantities then what is provided on the grading plan, sheet C-3. Revise the cut and fill discrepancy between the two sheets. 2. Per Zoning's comment 4, either relocate the parking spaces outside the future SVT or provide a MS&R Covenant with a future plan showing the required number of parking spaces outside the future SVT. |
| 05/11/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Provide North arrow and scale on the landscape plan. 2. A 10' wide street landscape border per LUC 3.7.2.4.A is required along the entire street frontage. 3. Fences or walls constructed in a single continuous line shall extend into a street landscape border no more than the actual width of the fence or wall per LUC 3.7.3.2. The location of required screens is the back of the 10' wide street landscape border. 4. Fifty (50) percent or more of the street landscape border area must have shrubs and vegetative ground cover per LUC 3.7.2.4. Revise coverage calculations for street buffers if necessary. 5. Within a vehicular use area, one (1) canopy tree is required for each 10 motor vehicle parking spaces and every parking space shall be located within forty (40) feet of the trunk of a canopy tree (as measured from the center of the tree trunk) per LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1. Additional trees are required. 6. For each tree required by the LUC, a planter area with a minimum unpaved area of 34 square feet and a 4 foot minimum width is required per DS 2-06.3.3.C. Verify square footage of planters within vehicle use area. 7. The site plan and landscape plan must show identical site layout to avoid conflict between the two plans. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape plan 8. All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the future site plan will be identical in size and location on the future landscape plan. Dimension future landscape plan as necessary. 9. All landscape areas will be depressed to accept water flow from roofs, PAAL, and parking areas. Show by detail or spot elevations how landscape areas will accommodate water harvesting. 10. Additional comments may apply |
| 05/16/2007 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | Clarify the nature of the existing 8" sewer shown north of the proposed building: is it a public or private sewer? If it is a private sewer, provide a joint sewer use agreement and show the necessary easements. Reference Section 103.2.3, UPC 2003. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05/18/2007 | GERARDO BONILLA | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 05/18/2007 | GERARDO BONILLA | REJECT SHELF | Completed |