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 - T07CM03057
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/20/2007 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/25/2007 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: T07CM03057 759 S. MacArthur Circle Site Plan TRANSMITTAL: 07/30/07 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 2-02.2.1.6 Provide dimensions on the foot print of the building and canopy on the site plan. 2. DS 2-02.2.1.7 The indicated "21' building setback limits" are incorrect. As per LUC 3.2.6.5.A with in an established area the required street perimeter yard setback is 20' or 1 ½ times the height of the structure, whichever is greater. Where a lot abuts more than one street , the owner shall choose which street lot line is the front lot line. From other than the front lot line, the street perimeter yard is ten (10) feet. Revise notes on the site plan. 3. DS 2-02.2.1.8 Per DS 3-05.2.3.C.2 when wheel stops or wheel stop curbing is used, it is to be located two and one-half feet from the front of the parking space. The parking spaces along the east property line do not meet this requirement. Indicate the distance from the wheel stop curbing to the wall for the parking spaces along the north property line. Indicate on detail E on page 4 of 5 the maximum slope for the handicap parking spaces and access aisles as 1:48 per ANSI 117.1-2003 Sec. 502.5. The amount of the fine on the handicap parking sign, detail J on page 4 of 5, is incorrect. Revise to $518. There appears to be two parking spaces along the west side of the development where there will be a curb opening ten (10) feet wide. A barricade (bollard) or some other type of device will be required to limit the opening in the curb to less than five (5) feet. This is required to prevent vehicles from driving onto unimproved portions of the site. 4. DS 2-02.2.1.9 Bicycle parking provided on the site plan does not meet the requirements of revised DS (Development Standard) 2-09. Per DS 2-09.4.1 Class 2 bicycle parking facilities will be located no more than fifty (50) feet from the main building entrance(s) and will be along the front side of the building as well as along other sides of the building that has an entrance. 5. DS 2-02.2.1.11 The vehicular use area which is under the canopy and along the west side of the building does not meet the requirements of a 2 way PAAL (minimum 24' width), if this vehicular use area is to be considered a one way PAAL clearly indicate the direction of travel. See DS 3-05.2.1.C.3 for minimum radius of curbing located in a PAAL. See engineering comments. 6. DS 2-02.2.1.12 Per DS 2-08.3.1, a pedestrian circulation path is required to connect to any adjacent street. A sidewalk, crosswalks, and handicap ramps are required to be provided from the building to MacAuthur Circle. Per DS 3-05.2.2.B.1 a minimum 5' pedestrian refuge is required between a PAAL and a building. A minimum 4' sidewalk is required between a building and a PAAL as per DS 2-08.4.1.B. The sidewalk must be physically separated from any vehicular use area per DS 2-08.4.1. The stripped area at the west side of the building and area under the canopy does not meet these sections of the code. Revise the site plan and clearly indicate on detail B on page 5 of 5 how the pedestrian circulation criteria listed above is meet. Detectable warnings (truncated domes) are required at marked crossings (crosswalks). The area covered by the truncated domes shall be twenty-four (24) inch deep and extend the full width of the crosswalk, preceding the crosswalk, including access aisles of handicapped motor vehicle parking spaces. All accessible curb ramps including the flush entrances of buildings shall have truncated domes installed that shall be twenty-four (24) inches minimum in the direction of travel and extend the full width of the curb ramp or flush surface. The domes shall be located so the edge nearest the curb line is six (6) inches to eight (8) inches from the curb line. ANSI 406.12, ANSI 705 Curb ramps shall be a minimum of three (3) feet in width, exclusive of flared sides. The curb ramp flares shall not be steeper than 1:10. Counter slopes of adjoining gutters and road surfaces immediately adjacent to the curb ramp shall not be steeper than 1:20. The adjacent surfaces at transitions at curb ramps to walks, gutters and streets shall be at the same level. All slopes are to be indicated on the plan/plat and associated details. ANSI 406.2, 3, & 4 7. DS 2-02.2.1.13 Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, freestanding, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Also indicate if there are existing billboards on site. Billboards will be required to meet all LUC requirements as stated in LUC Sec. 3.5.4.26. If none exists please state so. 8. DS 2-02..2.1.25 If applicable, provide location and type of existing or proposed lighting for the site. 9. DS 2-02.2.1.32 Provide location, size , and access to the required refuse container. See engineering comments. 10. DS 2-02.2.2A.4 The number of required bicycle parking spaces listed on the plan as 7 required is incorrect. 8% of 94 parking spaces is 7.52, rounding up is required therefore 8 bicycle parking spaces are required. Revise note. 11. DS 2-02.2.1.10 Provide the sight visibility triangles for the intersection Ohio and MacAuthur Circle. See engineering comments. 11. Depending on responses to the above comments and changes to the site plan, further comments may be forth coming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 837-4961 TLS C:\zoning\siteplan\DSC\T07CM03057.doc |
| 07/30/2007 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | see zoning cxomments |
| 08/10/2007 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | Revise the site drawing to include the invert, and rim elevation of all manholes. Reference City of Tucson Development Standard No. 2-05.0 2.3 and Section 103.2.3, UPC 2003. |
| 08/13/2007 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Remove or revise all Landscape Plan general notes referencing Pima County Zoning Code sections, including notes 1 and 11, since this project site falls with the City of Tucson. This project is not along a designated scenic route so general note 11 should be removed. 2. Remove the Approvals Block located below the general notes on sheet 1 of 5. When approved the plans will be stamped and signed with a City of Tucson approval stamp. 3. Street landscape borders are required adjacent to MacArthur Circle and Ohio Street. Revise "Landscape Bufferyard Table" to be correct and to include all required calculations. A street landscape border, per Sec. 3.7.2.4 of the LUC, is a landscape area with a minimum width of ten (10) feet, running the full length of the street property line(s) bounding the site except for points of ingress-egress. 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. 5. Indicate square footage of all landscaped areas and calculation of the percentage of vegetative coverage per DS 2-07.2.2.2.g 6. One (1) canopy tree must be provided for every thirty-three (33) linear feet of landscape border per LUC 3.7.2.4. In areas where a required landscape border falls within the vehicular use area, up to 50% of the canopy trees may be counted towards both the minimum parking lot canopy tree requirement and the landscape border canopy tree requirement. Provide a parking lot tree calculation per DS 2-07.2.2.A.2.c 7. The screen wall and sight visibility triangles are shown in different locations on Landscape Plan sheets 1, 2 and 3. Revise to be correct and consistent. Walls constructed in a single continuous line shall extend into a street landscape border no more than the actual width of the wall per LUC 3.7.3.2.C.3. Where a fence or wall incorporates offsets or similar design features, a screen may extend a maximum of three (3) feet into the street landscape border. Screens are to be located so that the landscaping is visible from the street per DS 2-06.3.7.B.2 Revise plan accordingly to meet code. 8. The site area given on the site plan (3 acres) is not the same as that given on the Landscape Plan (3.61 acres). Revise to be accurate. 9. All disturbed areas including adjacent rights of way shall be treated with ground cover such as decomposed granite to help reduce dust pollution per LUC 3.7.2.7. Indicate treatment within right-of-way areas within general note 8 Landscape Plan sheet 1 of 5. 10. Dimension the minimum width and label the square footage measured from the inside of tree planters in the vehicle use area. An unpaved area, which is a minimum of thirty-four (34) square feet in area and four (4) feet in width, must be provided for each canopy tree. LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.c, DS 2-07.2.2.A.2.e 11. Landscape plan shall include irrigation specification design and layout per DS 2-06.5.4.A & DS 2-06.5.4.B including sleeves for driveways and sidewalks. Revise irrigation plan so the irrigation lines do not pass underneath the proposed building. 12. Any required storm water detention/retention basins shall be landscaped to enhance the natural configuration of the basin. Design criteria are set forth in Development Standard 10-01.0. LUC 3.7.4.3.A 13. Additional comments may apply upon resubmittal. |
| 08/13/2007 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | 1. General Note 7 on Landscape Plan sheet 1 of 5 references a Native Plant Preservation Plan, prepared by Lyn Tan. No Native Plant Preservation Plan was included as part of the submittal. Provide a Native Plant Preservation Plan for the site as required per DS 2-15. |
| 08/14/2007 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | August 22, 2007 T07CM03057 and T07BU01542 Site and Grading Plan Review The Site and Grading Plans cannot be approved at this time. Address the following comments and submit a revised site plan for review. Include a letter that details how each comment has been addressed. Drainage Report Comments: 1. The drainage report is accepted. Site Plan/Grading Plan Comments: 2. Provide the recordation information for the easement that is to be abandoned. 3. Key note 14 is used on the site plan. Provide a description in the list. 4. Provide additional proposed spot elevations for the site/grading plans. Indicate by note or by proposed grades that the basin will be designed to drain toward the outlet structure. 5. The proposed and existing sewer lines appear to be very close to the bottom of the retention basin. Consider changing the basin or the sewer lines to remove the potential conflict. If the site is not reconfigured, show how the sewer lines will be protected from tunneling from the water stored in the basin. 6. Provide truncated domes at all locations where pedestrian use areas abut vehicular use areas without a vertical separation. All curb ramps require truncated domes. 7. Show the location of the solid waste container and the proposed pick-up location. If a rolling container is to be used, indicate the storage location. Make a note that if more than 3 cans are required by the facility, a revised site plan providing for a dumster will be required. 8. The SWPPP will be approved when the grading plan is approved. revise the SWPPP as necessary if the site and grading plans are revised. Include the SWPPPs with the next submittal. If you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting, I can be reached at 520.837.4927 or loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov. Loren Makus, EIT Senior Engineering Associate |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/28/2007 | DELMA ROBEY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 08/28/2007 | DELMA ROBEY | REJECT SHELF | Completed |