Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you can not find what you are looking for please submit a records request.
Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - SITE
Permit Number - T11CM00828
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/10/2011 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: May 11, 2011 SUBJECT: 135 S 6th Ave- 2nd Site Plan Engineering Review TO: Metro Permit Inc., Attn: Lisa Bower LOCATION: T14S R13E Sec13 Ward 6 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: T11CM00828 (Site Plan) SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning and Development Services Department has received and reviewed the Site Plan (T11CM00828) for the above referenced property. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the site plan at this time. The following items need to be addressed: SITE PLAN COMMENTS: 1) Completed. 2) Completed. 3) Completed. 4) Restated: DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.6: Clarify the Real Estate Condition on Sheet s1. Per condition #1 and the TRE statement an 8-foot pedestrian access is required, however per the comment letter and dimensions shown on the plan only a 5-foot sidewalk is proposed with approval from TDOT. Clarify which dimension should be used or revise the condition on Sheet s1 to read per TDOT requirements. Both TDOT and Real Estate conditions must correspond with each other. 5) Restated: DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.8: Clearly label the existing patio on the north side of the building as to be demolished (not abandoned). If the area is not to be used then it needs to be removed completely from the site, this will include all gates, railing and any proposed future outside storage. If this area is to be used then it needs to be shown n the Zoning calculations on Sheet a1.0. Per Sheet s1 the area is labeled only as to "abandoned." 6) Completed. 7) Restated: DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the civil sheets to correctly label the dimension for the revised bike lane as 4.5-feet as per the site plan sheets. Currently the civil sheets label it as 4.4-feet which does not technically match the site plan dimensions. 8) Acknowledged. 9) Completed. 10) Completed. 11) Completed. 12) Restated: 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 any construction within the public right-of-way. Contact Thad Harvison, (520)-791-5100 or Thad.Harvison@tucsonaz.gov for all right-of-way requirements and permit applications. NEW COMMENTS: Additional comments have been generated based on the 2nd submittal and changes and or discrepancies to the plan set. It is recommended that a quality control check be preformed on the plan set prior to resubmittal. 1) Clarify Sheet s1.1 within the plan set and how it relates to the proposed site plan. Per Sheet s1.1 the parking layout differs from what is shown on site and what is shown on the last approved site plan stamped in 2001. Remove the sheet if not needed or clarify the use. 2) Clarify the Sheet Index as shown on Sheet a1.0. The sheets within the plan set should be in the same chronological order as shown in the index. Also clarify why the civil sheet 1 of 1 is not included within the index count. 3) Clarify the purpose of both civil sheets 1 of 1 and c1. Sheet c1 appears to include all information required for PDSD and TDOT approval. The only differences in the sheets that can be determined are that sheet 1 of 1 does not include the layout of the proposed patio within the right-of-way. If Sheet 1 of 1 is needed for TDOT approval then the sheet must match sheet c1 in dimensions, proposed improvements and all other aspects of construction. 4) Clarify TDOT condition #1 on Sheet s1. Per the condition it states TDOT would prefer a rail system rather than an opaque wall however the comment letter states that Thom Trivener, TDOT will accept an opaque wall if below 30-inches. Clarify which condition is acceptable and revise the condition on the plan set to match. 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. A meeting is requested to discuss this project with the consultant to help expedite the 3rd resubmittal prior to resubmitting the plans. I can be reached at 837-4929 to schedule a meeting. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division COT Planning & Development Services |
| 05/12/2011 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Janos Downtown T11CM00828 Site Plan (2nd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 12, 2011 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). This project has been reviewed for the area of expansion only. 2) Complied with. Provide a copy of the last approved site plan. 3) Complied with. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.Provide a site plan drawn at a standard engineering scale no larger than l" = 60' not at an architectural scale. 4) Complied with. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.5 Provide the lot dimensions and bearings on the site plan. 5) Complied with. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6 For all buildings and structures on site provide the size and height. Show any overhangs, canopies, and the use one the site plan. 6) Per the response letter the patio along the north side of the building is to be abandoned. Show all fencing, gates, etc to be demolished on the site plan. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6 Show patio along the north side of the building. 7) Complied with. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.10 If applicable show the sight visibility triangles (SVTs) on the site plan. 8) Complied with. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.18 Label Sixth Street as a Major Streets and Routes (MS&R). 9) Complied with. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.19 Dimension the right-of-way, including any applicable Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan right-of-way. 10) Complied with. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.28 Provide the existing zoning of parcel and adjacent parcels, including those across streets and alleys. 11) This comment was not fully addressed. Add "SUBJECT TO: SEC. 3.2.4.6.C" to the proposed use. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31 Provide the existing and proposed use on the plan based on a use listed in the LUC. If applicable be sure to include any subject to section. 12) Complied with. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.1 Provide the gross lot area on the site plan. 13) Complied with. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.2 Provide the floor area for all structures on site. 14) Complied with. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.3 Provide a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) calculation on the plan that includes the allowed and proposed FAR. 15) This comment was not addressed. The outdoor seating area is part of the use area it is considered part of the building. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.6 Provide a building/use expansion calculation. The expansion calculation is a cumulatively calculation. 16) The Sheet Index does not match the sheets provided. Either revise the Sheet Index to match the sheets or reorder the sheets. Also Sheet S1.1 is not the last approved site plan based on the 11x17 plan dated 5/8/2001. Remove Sheet S1.1 from the plan set. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\site\2011\t11cm00828 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan. |
| 05/18/2011 | CAGUILA1 | HC SITE | REVIEW | Needs Review | |
| 05/18/2011 | CAGUILA1 | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Needs Review |