Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE
Permit Number - T08CM02765
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/15/2008 | RBROWN1 | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | NOT A COT PROJECT |
| 08/15/2008 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Provide large scale details of all different types of ramps showing compliance with 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1, sections 405 and 406. 2. The marked crossing as detailed provides a hazardous situation where parked cars can eaisly back up into the crossing. Extend the crossing straight for 20' then angle to the concrete porch of the mobile office. 3. The distance of this marked crossing is excessively long and creates a more lengthy hazardous exposure time than is desirable. How about having the accessible route start in the middle concrete island, ramp down to the asphaltic paving and go straight to the bike ramp, up and around the the accessible aisle and then to the concrete porch of the mobile office. Reference suggested red line detail alternate two taped to the drawing. Relocate bike racks. 4. The finished floor of most mobile units have a finished floor higher than that of the surrounding grade. A ramp is normally need for accessible entry to the mobnile unit. Verify the f.f. elevation and provide a ramp as required. This will also require a concrete pad (porch) for the ramp to base upon. Provide a large scale detail of ramp, porch and transition into the mobile office. 5. The accessible patrking must also be a "Van Accessible" space. Provide a 11' wide parking space with a 5' wide aisle or an 8' wide space with an 8' wide aisle. 6. Provide a large scale detail for accsssible parking signage. Refer to "Park Wise" for exact sign size and graphic layout. Provide a "Van Accessible" sign below the main sign. END OF REVIEW |
| 08/19/2008 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Benson Highway Auto Sales T08CM02765 Site Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 19, 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. D.S.2-02.2.1.A.7 The street perimeter yard as listed under "Land Use Code Data and shown on the site plan is not correct. As a portion of this parcel boarders on an MS&R the street perimeter yard is based on LUC Section 3.2.6.5.B and Table 3.2.6-I. 3. D.S.2-02.2.1.A.9 Provide an off-street bicycle parking detail that includes, materials for lighting, paving, fully dimensioned layout; specific type of rack and the number of bicycles it supports. The fully dimensioned layout needs to meet the requirements of D.S. 2-09.5.1 & 5.2. 4. D.S.2-02.2.1.A.9 Identify the main entrance to the building so that the requirements do D.S. 2-09.4.1 can be verified. 5. D.S.2-02.2.1.A.12 Per D.S. 2-03.3.1 within all development, a continuous pedestrian circulation path is required. This path must connect all public access areas of the development and the pedestrian circulation path located in any adjacent streets. The areas within the development which must be connected include, but are not limited to, all buildings, all bicycle and vehicle parking areas, all recreation areas, all dumpster areas, and all other common use areas. This said a sidewalk is required to connect all buildings and the Class two bicycle area. Also once the refuse container location is shown on the plan a continuous pedestrian/access route is required to the refuse container location. 6. D.S.2-02.2.1.A.12 Per D.S. 3-05.2.2.B.1 A minimum setback distance of five (5) feet for a pedestrian refuge area must be maintained between any enclosed structure and a PAAL. Also per D.S. 2-08.4.1.B A sidewalk will be provided adjacent and parallel to any PAAL on the side where buildings are located. This said along the northwest side of the proposed building a five (5) foot pedestrian refuge area and minimum four (4) foot wide sidewalk is required. 7. D.S.2-02.2.1.A.13 If applicable show the location, type, size, and height of existing and proposed signs on the plan. 8. D.S.2-02.2.1.A.20 If applicable show all easements of record graphically on the plan along with the recording docket and page reference. 9. D.S.2-02.2.1.A.21 Show the future curb location and dimension for Benson Highway. 10. D.S.2-02.2.1.A.25 If applicable show the proposed lighting layout on the plan. 11. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.28 Provide the existing zoning for the parcel across Benson Highway. 12. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31 Under "Land Use Code Data, PROPOSED USE" provide the "SUBJECT TO LUC SECTION 3.5.9.5.A & .B. 13. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31 Under "Land Use Code Data, PROPOSED USE" you have listed "VEHICLE SALES/SERVICE PER L.U.C. 2.5.4.2.A.4". The use listed under LUC Section 2.5.4.2.A.4 is Automotive - Service and Repair "30", subject to: Sec. 3.5.13.5. not VEHICLE SALES/SERVICE, please clarify. For your information Service and Repair can be done as an ancillary use to vehicle sales and rentals and does not need to be listed under the proposed uses. 14. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31 Show the refuse container location on the plan. 15. D.S.2-02.2.2.A.3 The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) calculation shown on sheet 1 of 4 is not correct. The FAR should include all structures on site. 16. D.S.2-02.2.2.A.4 The vehicle parking calculation is not correct. The calculation is based on gross floor area (GFA) and gross lot area. That said 600/250 = 2 and 44775/10,000 = 4 for a total of six (6) vehicle parking spaces required. 17. D.S.2-02.2.2.A.4 The bicycle parking calculation shown is not correct. The calculation shows "2 CLASS 1 & 2 CLASS 2" required. Per LUC Section 3.3.4 RETAIL TRADE USE GROUP, Vehicle Rental and Sales, Four (4) percent - all Class 1 would be required. Per LUC Section 3.3.3.5 Bicycle Parking Requirements. The number of required bicycle parking spaces is calculated as a percentage of the total number of motor vehicle parking spaces provided. If the calculated number of required bicycle parking spaces is less than two (2), the minimum number of required spaces is two (2). Per LUC Section 3.3.7.8.A Bicycle Parking Requirements. Any use providing less than fifty (50) motor vehicle parking spaces may substitute Class 2 spaces for Class 1 spaces. The calculation should show two (2) Class 1 required and per LUC Section 3.3.7.8.A two (2) Class 2 provided. 18. There is a heavy line near the intersection of Benson Highway and Fair Street. Please clarify what this line is. 19. 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\t08cm02765 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents. |
| 08/20/2008 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/25/2008 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Show the refuse container location and screening on the site and landscape plans D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31. 2. Submit an Application for Exception; include acceptable documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants. 3. 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. 4. Additional comments may apply. |
| 08/26/2008 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit an Application for Exception; include acceptable documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants. |
| 09/16/2008 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | September 16, 2008 T08CM02765 Site Plan Review The site plan cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following comments. 1. The site plan indicates that curbside pickup will be used. Indicate the number of containers that will be used. Show the storage location for the containers and the collection location as well. 2. The site plan indicates that the water service is brought from the adjacent parcel. Show easement along with recordation for the water line. 3. Demonstrate that water harvesting will be maximized by directing surface drainage to the landscape areas to the maximum extent possible. 4. Clarify the heavy line at the corner of Benson Highway and Fair Street. 5. Show existing and future SVTs at the intersection of Benson Highway and Fair Street and for the intersection of the alley and Fair Street. The drainage report also must be revised to address the following comment. 6. Provide results of infiltration tests to establish that the basin will dispose of the retained volume within 12 hours. 7. Provide boring logs from the geotechnical evaluation of the site. At least one boring should be to 32 feet. If you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting, please contact me at loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/07/2008 | DELMA ROBEY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 10/07/2008 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |