Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: T07CM04510
Parcel: 12008781A

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T07CM04510
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/07/2008 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Edmund Marquez - Suzuki Dealership Expansion
T07CM04510
Site Plan (1st Review)

TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 7, 2008

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings 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 compliance with the City of Tucson Development Standards (D.S.) and Land Use Code (LUC) for full code compliance due to a greater than twenty-five (25) percent expansion of building area.

2. Zoning reviewed drawing AS102 as no other drawing and substantial information for a site review based on D.S. 2-02.

3. Not used.
4. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.1 Provide a north arrow on the plan.

5. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.2 Provide a property description (legal description) on the plan.

6. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.3 Provide a project address on the plan.

7. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.4 Provide a location map which meets the minimum requirements of D.S. 2-05.2.1.D, show the subject property approximately centered in the one (1) square mile area, identify conditions within the square mile area, such as major streets and watercourses, section, township and range, north arrow and scale.

8. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.5 It appears that this project is comprised of four (4) different parcels. There are two (2) options in regards to utilizing the four (4) parcels as one site. Prior to approval of the site plan provide; 1) A Pima County Tax Parcel Combo and a recorded covenant regarding development and use of real property, or 2) Provide a site plan for each parcel that shows how the parcels can stand alone, if sold separately, and meet the requirements of the LUC if sold separately along with a recorded covenant regarding development and use of real property. Also once the parcels have been combined the lot dimensions should reflect the overall distance along each property line.

9. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6 Provide overall dimensions and label the height for both the existing and proposed buildings on site. Also if applicable show and label and overhangs and canopies.

10. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7 Provide all zoning setbacks on the plan. It does not appear that the proposed building, based on a 16' height, meets the requirement of a 1-1/2 times the height of the building setback.

11. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Provide a typical parking space detail for both handicapped and standard parking spaces.

12. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Fully dimension all proposed required parking. Clearly delineate between required/provided parking and display area.

13. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9 Clearly demonstrate that the existing bicycle parking meets the requirements of D.S. 2-09.5.1.B minimum thirty-six (36) inches provided between a bicycle parking space and the proposed building. Provide a fully dimensioned layout.

14. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.10 Provide future sight visibility triangles (SVT's) on the plan.

15. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.11 Provide a dimension for all entrance parking area access lanes (PAALs) on the plan.

16. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.11 The proposed two-way PAALs and/or PAALs adjacent to the required ninety (90) degree parking spaces do not meet the minimum required width, see D.S. 3-052.1.C.1, 3-05 Table 1 and LUC Table 3.3.7.I. A minimum width of twenty-four (24) feet is required. The areas in question are, the PAAL south of the "EMPLOYEE/CUSTOMER PARKING" along the northwest property line, and the PAAL located south of the parking shown south of the existing building.

17. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.11 Is the PAAL direction south of the proposed building one-way. If so clearly delineate the one-way PAAL on the plan. If this is proposed to be two-way then the requirement for a two-way PAAL must be met, see D.S. 3-052.1.C.1, 3-05 Table 1 and LUC Table 3.3.7.I.

18. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 It is not clear how the handicapped access aisle, located south of the existing building, gains access to the sidewalk.

19. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 It is not clear how the proposed handicapped access aisle, located near the northwest corner of the proposed building, gains access to the sidewalk.

20. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 There appears to be some type of structure, a circle, located in the required sidewalk shown along the north property line.

21. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 A four (4) foot sidewalk is required between the parking space and the southeast corner of the proposed building, see D.S. 2-08.4.1.C

22. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 It is not clear if the required pedestrian circulation/access route to the pedestrian circulation located within the right-of-way (ROW) along 13th Ave is in place, see D.S. 2-08.3.1. Please clarify.

23. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13 If applicable, provide the location, type, size and height of existing and proposed freestanding signage and billboards.

24. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.14 Show the required loading space on the plan.

25. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.18 Label Irvington Road as a "MS&R ROUTE".

26. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.18 Add a note to the plan stating "THIS SITE PLAN IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OVERLAY ZONES CRITERIA: SEC. 2.8.3 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES (MS&R) SETBACK ZONE".

27. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.19 Provide dimensions for all ROWs on the plan, include future ROW is applicable.

28. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.20 If applicable show all easements of record graphically on the plan together with recording docket and page reference.

29. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.25 If applicable, provide existing and proposed freestanding lighting layout and type. Provide a detail; list the height of pole and type of lighting.

30. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.28 Provide the zoning for the adjacent parcels on the plan.

31. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31 Zoning acknowledges that the PROPOSED USE is shown on the plan, provide the existing use on the plan.

32. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.3 Zoning acknowledges that the MAXIMUM FAR is shown on the plan, provide the proposed Floor Area Ratio (FAR) on the plan.

33. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4 The provide vehicle parking space calculation is not correct. The parking calculation is based on the total square footage of building, not just the proposed. This said 5300 / 250 = 21 vehicle parking spaces required for the building square footage plus the number required for the lot square footage. It is unclear what lot square footage you are using as the LUC Date shows "SITE AREA = 74,486 SF" and under the parking calculation it shows "115,817, please clarify. Also provide the number of vehicle parking spaces provided. Once the total number of vehicle parking spaces is provide the required number of handicapped vehicle parking spaces required can be verified. Revisions may be required to the handicapped vehicle parking space calculation.

34. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4 The provided bicycle parking calculation is not correct. Per LUC Sec. 3.3.3.5 the required number of bicycle parking spaces is based on the total number of vehicle parking spaces provided, once the provide number of vehicle parking spaces is provided the bicycle parking calculation can be verified. For your information based on LUC Sec. 3.3.3.5 the minimum number of bicycle parking spaces is 2. Provide the number of bicycle parking spaces provided.

35. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.5 Provide the required and provided loading space calculation.

36. The "REAR (NORTH) PERIMETER YARD" of 18' is not correct. Based on a building height of 16 feet x 1.5 the minimum setback would be 24'.

37. Ensure all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape plan.

38. 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) 837-4956.

C:\planning\site\t07cm04510.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents
01/07/2008 PETER MCLAUGHLIN NPPO REVIEW Passed
01/07/2008 PETER MCLAUGHLIN LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1. Label on the site plan and the landscape plan the specific areas to be used for vehicle display as well those areas to be used for employee and customer parking. All parking areas other than those used solely for vehicle display must be provided with canopy trees at a ratio of one (1) canopy tree for each ten (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.

2. It is not clear where the loading zone is to be located. On some sheets there is a loading zone depicted to the east of the existing building but on others it is not shown here. Any loading zone must be screened from adjacent rights-of-way and residentially zoned properties with a 6-foot high masonry wall per LUC Table 3.7.2-I.
02/01/2008 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: February 1, 2008
SUBJECT: 702 W Irvington Road Site Plan- Engineering Review
TO: ABA Architects
LOCATION: T14S R13E Sec35 Ward 1
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: T07CM04510 (Site Plan)


SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the site plan package (T07CM04510) and Drainage Statement (DOWL Engineers, 21NOV07) for the above referenced property. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the site plan application at this time. The following items need to be addressed:


SITE PLAN COMMENTS: The entire site plan package was reviewed for Development Standard compliance, however the civil sheets and architect sheets must be revised to match each other. Sheets C1.1, C1.2, C1.3, AS101 and AS102 were the sheets that were reviewed for Development Standard compliance.

1) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.1: Revise the Architect site plan to provide for the north arrow, Sheet AS102

2) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.2: Revise the cover sheet to include a legal description of the property.

3) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.4: Revise the location map shown on Sheet C1.2 to the cover Sheet G101. Revise the location map to show the parcel centered within a one square mile area, the map must be to a 3-inch equal's 1-mile scale with a brief legal description.

4) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.5: Verify all lot combinations or lot splits. It appears that this project is comprised of four (4) different parcels. There are two (2) options in regards to utilizing the four (4) parcels as one site. Prior to approval of the site plan provide; 1) A Pima County Tax Parcel Combo and a recorded covenant regarding development and use of real property, or 2) Provide a site plan for each parcel that shows how the parcels can stand alone, if sold separately, and meet the requirements of the LUC if sold separately along with a recorded covenant regarding development and use of real property. Also once the parcels have been combined the lot dimensions should reflect the overall distance along each property line.

5) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.8: Revise or clarify Sheet C1.1 and Sheet AS102. The Architect Sheet AS102 shows a handicap-parking stall along with a customer-parking stall on the West Side of the proposed building. However the Civil Sheet C1.1 only shows the handicap-parking stall, clarify.

6) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.10: Provide the sight visibility triangle on the architect site plan for the PAAL entry points. SVTs can be shown as per the last approved site plan, T06CM05961.

7) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Verify on the site plan that the proposed handicap access ramp meets the minimum design requirements (longitudinal slopes, cross slopes, handicap access ramps, etc.) per DS Sec.2-08 and the ANSI Standards A117.1-2003 Section 406.13.

8) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.19: Provide the recordation information for all existing public roadways that are shown on the site plan. Clearly label the existing and future right-of-way width for both Irvington Road and Fifteenth Avenue. Label each road as Public. Provide the MS&R label for Irvington Road.

9) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.20: Verify that all easements of record are shown on the site plan, if applicable.

10) DS Sec.2-01.2.1.A.21: Provide dimensions from street monument lines to existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, driveways, and utility lines.


GRADING PLAN:

11) DS Sec.11-01.2.1: A grading permit must be submitted for this project due to the cut and fill quantities shown in General Note #26 on Sheet C1.1. A grading permit may not be issued prior to site plan approval. The grading plan will be reviewed once all comments associated with the site plan have been addressed. Subsequent comments may be necessary, depending upon the nature and extent of revisions that occur to the site plan.

12) Please ensure that any future grading plan will be consistent with the site plan and drainage report. Grading standards may be accessed at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf

13) Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) requirements are applicable to this project. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans and text addressing stormwater controls for all areas affected by construction activities related to this development will be required with grading plan submittal. For further information, visit www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html.


GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised site plan that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Enclose "redlines" with the resubmittal package.

Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the site plan review.

If you have any questions, or to schedule an appointment, I can be reached at 837-4929.



Jason Green, CFM
Senior Engineer Associate
Engineering Division
COT Development Services
12/21/2007 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Denied See Zoning comments.
12/24/2007 SREEVES1 FIRE REVIEW Approved

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
02/11/2008 DELMA ROBEY APPROVAL SHELF Completed
02/11/2008 DELMA ROBEY OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
02/11/2008 GERARDO BONILLA REJECT SHELF Completed