Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Permit Number - T06CM04805
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/24/2007 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 01/30/2007 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Terry Stevens FOR: David Rivera Lead Planner Principal Planner PROJECT:T06CM04785 and T06CM04805 3150 & 3162 N. Freeway Industrial Loop Site Plans Transmittal date: 2nd Review 2/1/07 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. DS 2-01.2.1.7 Your response to the required setback comment is agreed with regarding the 21' or the height of the structure. The 29'-10" dimension indicated in your response has not been provided on the site plan. Please provide. 2. DS 2-02.2.1.8 The parking calculations as indicated are incorrect. A total of 64 parking spaces are required if the use is parked at a ratio of 1:500 with a building area of 32000 sq. ft. If the floor area of both building including any second floors or mezzanines is 30833 sq. ft., as indicated on the site plan building foot prints, revise the building area square footage in the notes. Provide dimensions for the proposed structures on the footprints of the buildings. On elevation D3 there is a note indicating a second floor or mezzanine. If this is a correct note and these are 2 story structures additional parking spaces will be required as well as the parking calculations and floor area ratio will be required to be revised. If this note is in error please remove. A cross parking and cross vehicular and pedestrian access agreement will be required to be provided. Provide a copy of the agreement and recordation information (docket and page) on the site plan. Clearly indicate the location of the handicap parking sign on the detail B1/C5.1. Note: sign cannot be located so as to decrease the width of the sidewalk to less than 4'. 3. DS 2-02.2.1.9 The following comment has not been completely addressed. Provide the number and location of required Class 1 bicycle parking spaces as well as a detail of the locker type. See LUC Sec. 3.3.4 and DS 2-09. The location of the class 1 bicycle parking spaces have been provided. Provide a detail of how the required security measures will be provided. Revise bicycle parking calculations to indicate the number of required class 1 and class 2 as well as the number of provided class 1 and class 2 bicycle parking spaces. Note the type of class 2 bicycle rack indicated on detail D1 of C5.1 does not meet the clearance requirements of DS 2-09 see figure 9. 4. DS 2-02.2.1.11 Indicate by dimension the widths of all PAAL's. Missing along the northwest side of building 1. 5. DS 2-02.2.1.12 Provide a 5' paved and striped pedestrian refuge or a four (4) foot wide sidewalk inside the pedestrian refuge area along the north east side of building 1 and building 2. These pedestrian refuge areas must connect to the pedestrian circulation path. See DS 3-05.2.2.B.1. An accessible pedestrian circulation path is required from the parking spaces at the southern side of the project connecting to both buildings. (sidewalk, handicap ramps, cross walk, etc.) Provide a striped cross walk between the handicap access aisles. A minimum four (4) foot wide sidewalk will be required along the southwest side of building 2 connecting the pedestrian refuge area with the pedestrian circulation path. Clearly indicate the minimum required sidewalk width of four (4) feet in the areas along the front of both buildings. It appears the sidewalk will be limited to less than 4' at the column locations for the front covered walkway. 6. DS 2-02.2.1.14 Clearly indicate maneuverability for the loading zone located on the south side of building 2. Including location of gates for the fenced area. 7. DS 2-02.2.1.20 Provide a copy of the indicated e-mail from PCWW that clearly allows all construction as indicated on the site plan to be allowed in the easement. As per the final plat for this subdivision, no walls or structures are allowed to be constructed within the 20' sewer easement without written permission from Pima County. Provide documentation allowing the walls, landscape, refuse containers, etc. to be built in the easement. 8. DS 2-02.2.1.25 Provide a detail of the proposed pole light with dimensions showing clearance above grade to the light fixture. If applicable, provide proposed lighting layout and type. 9. DS 2-02.2.1.31 The following comment has not been addressed. The indicated proposed use of "Industrial" is a use group not a specific use. Provide the specific use for this project with the "subject to:" sections applicable as per LUC 2.7.22.A, .1 thru .8. Clearly indicate how all subject to sections of the proposed use are complied with. 10. Based on changes to the plans and responses to the comments further comments may be forth coming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 791-5550 ext. 2000. |
| 02/01/2007 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | see zoning comments |
| 02/07/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. The planting plan and layout calculations will include the location and shown graphically of individual plants per DS 2-07.2.2.A.1.a. Indicate all shrubs on landscape plan. 2. Indicate the actual plant coverage percentage using the following table: (Note stating that 50% coverage within in three years is not acceptable). Plant Coverage Calculations Diameter Approximate Area (sq. ft.) 1' .8 2' 3.5 3' 7 4' 13 5' 20 6' 28.5 7' 38.5 8' 50.5 3. Individual plant sizes can be found @ http://ag.arizona.edu/pima/gardening/aridplants/aridplant_index.html |
| 02/07/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/13/2007 | SUZANNE BOHNET | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: February 20, 2007 FROM: Suzanne Bohnet, CFM Engineering Division SUBJECT: 3150 & 3162 N. Freeway Industrial Loop Site Plans T06CM04785 & T06CM04805 (Second Review) RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Site Plan. The Site Plan cannot be approved as submitted. Please include a response letter to the comments below along with the corrected copies of the Site Plan with your next submittal. Site Plan: 1. The final plat shows a 19' private Drainage Easement. The refuse pickup area and enclosure are proposed to be located within that Drainage Easement on Lot 8. Provide a Drainage Statement verifying that the placement of the refuse area and enclosure will not create adverse drainage conditions nor allow drainage to flow under the refuse containers. Or provide the master Drainage Report for the entire subdivision that allows for the refuse pickup area and enclosure to be located within the Drainage Easement. 2. The Drainage Statement needs to also address the placement of a 6" vertical curb within the Drainage Easement on Lot 9 to either ensure that adverse drainage conditions will not result from its placement or provide openings in the curb to allow drainage to flow through. Or provide the master Drainage Report for the entire subdivision that allows for curbs to be located within the Drainage Easement. 3. Give the reference to the appropriate details for the dumpster enclosure wall and bollards. 4. Provide the dimensions from the street monument lines to the existing and proposed curbs and sidewalks. 5. Provide curb access ramps at all drives where the sidewalk meets the pavement. Truncated domes are required at the interface of the pavement (or vehicle use area) and the sidewalk (or pedestrian area) that do not have a physical separation. The area where the truncated domes are required is 6 inches back from the interface, a minimum 2 feet deep and extending the width of the interface. Revise Detail D2 to match the above criteria. 6. Provide the written consent from Eric Weiduwilt of PCWW to allow the obstructions (i.e., the refuse pickup area, refuse enclosure and curb) within the dedicated sewer easement. 7. Remove the shading and hash marks from the Site Plan for legibility and reproduction purposes. 8. Ensure no data is obscured or rendered illegible from overlapping. A Grading Permit is required for the proposed development. The Grading Plan included with the Site Plan is approved however any modifications made to the Site Plan that also appear on and/or affect the Grading Plan will need to be reflected. The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is approved. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Suzanne Bohnet, CFM Engineering Associate (520) 791-5550 x1188 office Suzanne.Bohnet@tucsonaz.gov |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 02/22/2007 | FSANCHE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 02/22/2007 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |