Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Permit Number - T08CM02765
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/08/2008 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/09/2008 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Benson Highway Auto Sales T08CM02765 Site Plan (2nd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 9, 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. This comment was not addressed. Per a Zoning Administrator determination any property bordering on an MS&R will be considered developing area. This said revised the "STREET BUILDING SETBACK" and the setback dimensions shown on the site plan to reflect the requirements of LUC Section 3.2.6.5.B and Table 3.2.6-I. 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. This comment was not addressed. 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.12 Per D.S. 2-03.3.1 Provide a sidewalk to both proposed storage units. 5. D.S.2-02.2.1.A.12 The striped area shown between the handicapped vehicle parking space and the landscape area to the south east is required to be a sidewalk. 6. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31 Provide documentation for solid wasted approving the use of roll-out units. A Development Standards Modification Request (DSMR) maybe required, see Engineering comments. 7. 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\t08cm02765-2nd RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents. |
| 10/10/2008 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/10/2008 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/16/2008 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 16 OCTOBER 2008 T08CM02765/BENSON HIGHWAY AUTO SALES REVIEWED BY RON BROWN ACCESSIBLE REVIEW 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1 DENIED: SEE COMMENTS BELOW 1. Provide large scale details of all different types of ramps showing compliance with 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1, sections 405 and 406. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS: 1. Large scale details are provided however they need to be referenced from/to site specific areas. 2. The marked crossing as detailed provides a hazardous situation where parked cars can easily back up into the crossing. Extend the crossing straight for 20' then angle to the concrete porch of the mobile office. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS: A. Redesigned, ok, reference NEW COMMENTS below. 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 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. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS: A. Redesigned, ok, reference NEW COMMENTS below. B. Also reference zoning comments 4. The finished floor of most mobile units has a finished floor higher than that of the surrounding grade. A ramp is normally needed for accessible entry to the mobile 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. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS: A. Redesigned, ok however it appears incomplete. No large scale detail of access to trailer office detailed. Very confusing. Provide spot grades to show grade differences, required ramps and etc. 5. The accessible parking must also be a "Van Accessible" space. Provide an 11' wide parking space with a 5' wide aisle or an 8' wide space with an 8' wide aisle. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS: A. Redesigned, ok 6. Provide a large scale detail for accessible parking signage. Refer to "Park Wise" for exact sign size and graphic layout. Provide a "Van Accessible" sign below the main sign. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS: A. Redesigned, ok 7. NEW COMMENTS: SHEET 2 OF 4 A. Indicate all ramps required on sheet 2 of 4 and reference to the large scale details. B. Provide detectable warning at the south end of the planter strip next to the accessible parking space at the beginning of the marked crossing. C. The accessible parking aisle can not be combined with an accessible route. As per ANSI 117.1, Section 502.4.1.: "Access aisles shall adjoin an accessible route" not replace the accessible route. Please redesign. Reference suggested detail attached to drawing. D. Reference Zoning comments for other changes. SHEET 4 OF 4 A. Detail 8: Provide a 2' wide Detectable warning strip as marked up on drawing. B. Detail 1: Identify, dimension and reference detail all ramps required. END OF REVIEW |
| 10/27/2008 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 11/04/2008 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | November 4, 2008 T08CM02765 Site Plan Review The site plan cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following comment. Revise all sheets so they are consistent. The basin is shown with different configurations on the separate sheets. Note that a separate grading plan and grading permit is required for this project. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/10/2008 | DELMA ROBEY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 11/10/2008 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |