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: SITE
Permit Number - T11CM01140
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/20/2011 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/21/2011 | RBROWN1 | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | Not a COT owned or operated property |
| 04/21/2011 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: DC Concrete T11CM01140 Site Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 21, 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) for full code compliance for the entire site. 2. Per LUC Section 2.5.4.6.B Unless modified by specific performance criteria or Sec. 2.5.4.6.A, land uses in the Commercial Services, Industrial, Restricted Adult Activities, and Wholesaling Use Groups shall be conducted entirely within an enclosed building. That said the proposed storage of forms, equipment, etc. must be done within a building. A Board of Adjustment for Variance is required. 3. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6 Provide the heights for all structures on the site plan. 4. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6 Based on the most current aerial photos there is a storage container located to the north of building #3. Show this container on the plan and include the GFA in all required calculations. 5. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7 The street perimeter yard setbacks, both 6th & Rillito, shown on the plan are not correct. As 6ht Avenue is shown as a collector street on the COT MS&R map then all street perimeter yards shall conform to LUC 32.6.5.B. 6. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Revise detail D1 Sheet A5.1 to reference the existing concrete curb as the only wheel stop shown on the plan is located at the accessible vehicle parking space. 7. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9 The proposed location for the Short-Term (Class 2) bicycle parking does not meet the requirements of Ordinance #10886 LUC Section 3.3.9.3.b.1. 8. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9 The proposed location for the Short-Term (Class 2) bicycle parking appears to encroach into the required sidewalk. 9. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9 Demonstrate on the plan how lighting is provide for the Short-term bicycle parking. 10. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9 Show the location for the required Long-term bicycle parking on the plan and provide a detail. 11. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.11 Provide width dimensions for both the entrance on 6th and Rillito. 12. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 It is not clear that the proposed sidewalk is physically separated from the adjacent vehicle use area 13. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 It appears that the proposed accessible vehicle parking access aisle encroaches into the required four (4) foot width of the sidewalk to the north. 14. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 It is not clear how vehicle will be prevented from accessing the proposed landscape buffers. Along the south side there is a call out for a chain link fence, clear indicate the extends of the fence on the plan. 15. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Per D.S. 2-08.3.1 A continuous pedestrian circulation path/accessible route will be provided to buildings on site. That said there does not appear to be a continuous pedestrian circulation path/accessible route provided to Building #1. 16. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13 If applicable show the location, type, size, and height of any proposed signage. 17. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.14 Per the loading space calculation one (1) 12 x 35 loading space is provided but it is not shown on the plan. If you are providing a 12 x 35 loading space fully dimension it and show the maneuvering area on the plan. 18. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.19 Based on paving plan I-85-037 it does not appear that the right-of-way (ROW) is shown correctly. Contact the Engineering reviewer for correct ROW dimensions. 19. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31 List the proposed use as a use stated within the LUC, "CONSTRUCTION SERVICES". 20. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.32 Show the refuse container location on the plan. 21. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.3 The floor area ratio calculation is no correct. The allowed should be listed as 49,203 sq. ft. and proposed as 1,902 sq. ft. 22. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4 The vehicle parking calculation is not correct. Per Ordinance #10886 LUC Section 3.3.4.2 Commercial Services Use Group, 1 space per 300 sq. ft GFA is required. 23. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4 The bicycle parking calculation is not correct. Per Ordinance #10886 LUC Section 3.3.8.2.B Commercial Use Group two (2) Short-term and two (2) Long-term are required. 24. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.5 The loading space calculation is not correct. Per Ordinance #10884 LUC Section 3.4.5 Commercial Services Use Group, None Required. 25. Depending on how the above comments are addressed additional comments may be forth coming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\site\2011\t11cm01140 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan. |
| 04/28/2011 | RONALD BROWN | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Please show all accessible route compliant with ICC (ANSI 117.1), Section 403.3, Slopes 2. Show exact sign location on details A1/A1.1E and D2/A5.1 3. Show signage mounting system and include "Van Accessible" signage. 4. Show how access is achieved from the accessible parking aisle to the accessible route, i.e. flush transition or a curb ramp. 5. Please provide two sets of drawings. 6. Please provide an accessible route to building 1. END OF REVIEW |
| 05/02/2011 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Outdoor Storage and Mechanical Equipment must be screened entirely from view along the street frontage(s) LUC 3.7.2-1. Identify screening elements on landscape plan. 2. Within a vehicular use area, one (1) canopy tree is required for each 4 motor vehicle parking spaces and every parking space shall be located within forty (40) feet of the trunk of a canopy tree (as measured from the center of the tree trunk) per LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1. 3. Show the location of required loading space. 4. Show the location of the required refuse container and appropriate screening on the landscape plan D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.32. 5. The planting plan and layout shall identify individual plants indicated on the planting schedule DS 2-07.2.2 6. 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. 7. Additional comments may apply. |
| 05/03/2011 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 05/13/2011 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | Revise the site drawing to include the following information: a. the location and size of the water meter b. the location of the main water lines and fire hydrants c. the location of the gas meter (if one exists or is planned) d. the location and size of the public sanitary sewer e. the location of the building connection to the public sewer f. the location, invert, and rim elevation of the upstream and downstream manholes or cleanouts g. the first floor elevations for the buildings Reference: City of Tucson Development Standard No. 2-01.0.0, Section 3.8 D and Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006. |
| 05/17/2011 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | May 17, 2011 T11CM01140 2251 N 6th Avenue Site Plan Review The site plan and drainage report cannot be approved as submitted. Please submit revised plans addressing the following: 1. The drainage report assumes a pre-development impervious area of 13.4 per cent. However, the 1998 aerial photo on the City of Tucson PDSD map (http://maps.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/index.html) shows the whole parcel as vacant and undeveloped land. Using this as the starting conditions gives a retention requirement much closer to that indicated by Matt Flick in the referenced e-mail included in the report. Revise the drainage report to indicate the starting conditions are vacant land. 2. In the drainage report provide an analysis of the volume of each water-harvesting area and the drainage area discharging to it. Demonstrate that sufficient discharge will be directed to each water-harvesting area to meet the required retention volume. Provide a plan delineating the areas supplying each basin. Provide enough spot elevations and contours to show the effective volume for each basin. 3. As required by the e-mail from Craig, provide specifications and instructions for the paving of the gravel lot. 4. Provide dimensions for the existing sidewalk in the adjacent right of way. Where the existing sidewalk is less than 4 feet wide, provide new 5-foot sidewalk. 5. The south driveway along 6th Avenue is too close to the corner to meet current standards. Please revise. 6. Explain how solid waste will be addressed on site. Show container storage and collection locations. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01/11/2012 | GERARDO BONILLA | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 01/11/2012 | GERARDO BONILLA | REJECT SHELF | Completed |