Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: COMMERCIAL TI
Permit Number - T08CM01251
Review Name: COMMERCIAL TI
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/10/2008 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/10/2008 | JWILLIA5 | MECHANICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 06/10/2008 | LINDA BUCZYNSKI | ELECTRICAL-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/10/2008 | JWILLIA5 | WATER | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 06/10/2008 | RONALD BROWN | BUILDING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/10/2008 | JWILLIA5 | WWM | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 06/10/2008 | JWILLIA5 | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 06/10/2008 | BIANCA RAMIREZ | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/10/2008 | JOHN WILLIAMS | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Completed | |
| 06/12/2008 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: T08CM01251 8201 s Rita Rd Rita Ranch Market TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 12, 2008 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. The proposed T.I. has been reviewed by Zoning but cannot be approved at this time until the following items have been addressed through the correct plan review process. This site is subject to a review of a revised development plan and approval through the CDRC review and approval process. Contact Patricia Gehlen CDRC Manager for specific on the plan submittal requirements. Patricia's phone number is 837-4919. The following items are a result of a review of the DSD records for this address and a site inspection performed on June 12, 2008. 2. Per the submitted site plan several items have been found to be in conflict with the actual site conditions. a. Per the site plan the existing trash location is located in the location of two of the required parking spaces. Per the site inspection this is incorrect. The dumpster location is in the North West corner of the site as depicted in the approved development plan. b. A portion of the required curbing next to the actual dumpster location has been removed allowing vehicular traffic to occur over vacant and unsurfaced land which has not been approved as PAAL or for vehicular access. c. The Air and Water dispensers (possible Vacuum units) next to the parking spaces along the northeast parking lot have not been depicted on the plan. d. The plan is annotated with a note for an existing cell tower. It is clear that the pole and enclosure are on the site but the antenna arrays are not installed. If the arrays have been removed from the pole for more than 6 months the pole and enclosure may have to be removed. Provide documentation of the removal date of the antennas. Please contact Michael Wynekin for more information on this item. e. The area annotated on the plan as a porch is really an enclosed screened structure. This area is being used as an expansion of dining area for a restaurant within the building. It is not clear if the restaurant has a current C of O. While the original approved development plan with an approval stamp of August 1995 depicted a pizzeria use in the north portion of the building it appears that the pizzeria use has been replaced with a full service restaurant. Accurate cumulative expansion calculations must beaded to the plan to verify expansion total. f. Out door seating has been added in front of the store front under the porches. This is considered an expansion of dining area and must be included in the expansion calculations. If the front porch area was part of the pedestrian circulation system and now is not useable due to the dining tables, a revised pedestrian circulation system must be added to the site and must comply with development standards 2-08. g. The previous plan did not depict parking spaces in front of the store front. While the parking spaces may not be a concern if the spaces have been striped to comply with DS 3-05, a reviewed and approved/stamped revised D.P. or site plan would have been required for any site changes. In addition a minimum four foot wide concrete sidewalk will be required between the parking spaces and the building. h. A propane tank has been installed along the west property boundary within the landscape buffer area. It is not clear if a revised site plan or permit for the propane tank has been issued. Please provide the supporting documents for review. i. Additional parking spaces have been added by striping an area in front of the propane tank. While the parking itself may not be a problem it does not appear that a revised development or site plan was submitted for review and approval. Provide any documents related to the re-striping j. The parking lot area along the south boundary of the site has been restriped and a few of the parking spaces removed. While the removed spaces have been added in front of the store front there does not appear to be a revised plan for this change. In addition to the relocation of the parking spaces mentioned, an access has been created to allow and encourage customers to park vehicles on the adjacent vacant property. An arrow has been painted on the pavement directing motorists to park on the adjacent no-surfaced property. This is a zoning violation and must be addressed and resolved by the owners. In addition to the parking on the vacant land, it appears that an accessory structure has been added to the south side of the building and may be encroaching on to private property. It is not clear what purpose the structure serves but this is considered an expansion of building area. As indicated before all expansions are cumulative. If the total expansion calculation exceeds 25%, full code compliance for the entire site will be required. k. Per the floor plan on sheet A1.1, a portion of the store is reserved as an existing rental use. During the site inspection it was noted that the video store had closed and that the space was up for rent. l. This development has two principal uses and must be parked according. The Plans submitted indicate a parking calculation based on a 1:200 parking ratio. This is not a retail use only but a mixed use with two principal uses one being food and beverage sales and the other as food service (restaurant). The parking calculations are to be based on 1:200 for the retail use and 1:100 for the restaurant use which includes the outside dining along the store front and the screened porch which is utilized as dining area. m. This plan must be re-submitted for review as a revised development plan that complies with Development Standards 2-05. Contact Patricia Gehlen for specifics on the CDRC review process and submittal requirements. A re-review as a T.I. will not be done for this site until a revised development plan is processed and approved. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan, and additional requested documents. |