Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Permit Number - T07CM04696
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/20/2008 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/25/2008 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Clean Energy T07CM04696 Site Plan (2nd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 25, 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. 2. Zoning acknowledges that a dimension for the height of the canopy was added to the elevations on sheet G03, provide the height of the canopy within the footprint of the canopy on the site plan. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6 Provide the size and height of the proposed canopy. Also provide overall dimensions for the proposed canopy. 3. This comment was not addressed. Twenty-four foot clear is required behind 90 degree parking therefore the area next to the proposed pumps cannot be included in the twenty-four foot area as at any time a vehicle, i.e. bus could be at the pumps restricting access to the parking space. Show the PAAL areas on either side of the proposed pump parking areas as one-way or provided the required twenty-four foot two-way PAAL on both sides of the pumps. The twenty-five foot dimension shown on the plan does not meet this requirement due to the parking area adjacent to the pumps. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Per LUC Section 3.3.7.2 the minimum parking area access lane (PAAL) when 90 degree parking is proposed is 24'. This said it does not appear that the PAAL that provides access to the southern most parking space is wide enough. 4. Provide written documentation from Andy Vera, Solid Waste, that now refuse containers are required. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.32 Show the refuse container location on the plan. 5. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 The required pedestrian circulation/accessible route from this site to Winsett St has been removed from the plan. Per D.S. 2-08.3.1 this pedestrian circulation/accessible route is required, provide on the plan. 6. Ensure all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape plan. 7. Once the above comments have been approved Zoning is willing to provide an over-the-counter review. Call or email to schedule an appointment for this review. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\site\t07cm04696-2nd.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents |
| 06/25/2008 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: June 25, 2008 SUBJECT: 1755 E Winsett St Site Plan- 2nd Engineering Review TO: General Physics Corporation LOCATION: T14S R14E Sec18 Ward 5 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: T07CM04696 (Site Plan) SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the revised site plan (T07CM04696) 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: Engineering Division has reviewed this project for conformance with the Development Standards (DS) and Land Use Code (LUC). More specifically DS Sec.2-02, 2-08, 3-01, 3-05, 6-01, and Chapter 25 of the Tucson Code. 1) DS Sec2-02.2.1.A.12: A DSMR will be required for this project for modifying the Development Standard Sec.3-01.3.3.A to allow the sidewalk to be constructed along the leased portion of the property only. The area that is not leased by the applicant is not to have sidewalk installed along the frontage and this proposal is a modification to the Development Standards. The DSMR must be approved prior to site plan approval. All exhibits and discussion must reflect any changes made by the approved DSMR. Provide a General Note to list the DSMR number, the Development Standard being modified along with the date of DSMR approval. 2) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.32: Provide a letter from Environmental Services Department showing their approval for the trash receptacles at the fuel island that is proposed to be maintained by the tenant. Per Development Standard Sec.6-01.3.0 all commercial development requires onsite refuse collection containers. If the applicant is modifying the Development Standard then a DSMR (both items 1 and 2 can be applied for on the same DSMR) will be required to allow the proposed trash receptacles and the collection of refuse by the tenant. 3) Review and approval from TDOT Permits and Codes for all improvements within the public right-of-way will be required. A right-of-way use permit application will be required prior to construction. Refer to the following links for TDOT Forms and applications: a) http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Forms_Fees___Maps/Applications/applications.html / b) http://www.dot.ci.tucson.az.us/engineering/pia.php c) Or contact Thad Harvison at 837-6592 for all additional questions regarding r-o-w. 4) Be advised that further comments may be forth coming on resubmittal of the site plan. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised site plan with the listed DSMR that addresses the comments provided above. Provide the Geotechnical Evaluation (ConformaTECH, 11DEC07) that was submitted on the 1st review, this was not included in the 2nd submittal and is required for record keeping purposes. 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 and DSMR view. 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 |
| 06/30/2008 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/02/2008 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. 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. 2. Street landscape borders shall be located entirely on site, except that, if approved by the City Engineer or designee. Obtain permission for any off site landscaping. 3. Fifty (50) percent or more of the street landscape border area must have shrubs and vegetative ground cover per LUC 3.7.2.4 4. Indicate square footage of all landscaped areas and calculation of the percentage of vegetative coverage per DS 2-07.2.2.2.g. 5. One (1) canopy tree must be provided for every thirty-three (33) linear feet of landscape border per LUC 3.7.2.4. 6. A 30" continuous screen along entire street frontages for vehicle use area must be provided per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. 7. The planting plan and layout calculations will include the location, size, and name of existing vegetation to remain in place. 8. All disturbed, grubbed, graded, or bladed areas not otherwise improved shall be landscaped, reseeded, or treated with an inorganic or organic ground cover to help reduce dust pollution LUC 3.7.2.7. 9. Landscape plan shall include irrigation specification design and layout per DS 2-06.5.4.A & DS 2-06.5.4.B including source of irrigation, sleeves for driveways and sidewalks, locations of valves, low-flow bubblers or drip irrigation. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. Additional comments may apply. |
| 07/02/2008 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | Application for Exception approved |