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: Requires Resubmit
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE REVIEW v.2
Permit Number - TD-DEV-0423-00210
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE REVIEW v.2
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/25/2023 | NPPO | APPROVED | |||
| 06/14/2023 | CDRC Post Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 06/13/2023 | Commercial Plumbing | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | 1. An approved 2-way cleanout fitting is allowed to be used at the junction of a building drain and a building sewer (i.e. within 30 inches of developed length of pipe beyond the exterior walls of the building); otherwise, cleanouts shall open to allow cleaning only in the direction of flow. Reference: Section 708.1.8, IPC 2018. 2. Provide the rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole. Determine the need for a backwater valve per Section 714.1, IPC 2018, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
||
| 06/05/2023 | ROW Engineering Review | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | TD-DEV-0223-00210 2402 N. 1st Ave. Comments: 1. Please provide more information on the “Site Plan” (C1.0) regarding the work within the Right of Way, a. Removal of existing driveway entrances. b. Replacement with concrete curb per P.A.G. standard 209. c. Sidewalk replacement per P.A.G. standard 200. 2. Existing curb may remain if it is compliant with current standards. 3. The existing curb access ramp on the NE corner of 1st Ave and Grant Rd, may remain if it is within tolerance of current standards. 4. Where adjoining sidewalk from the onsite circulation path, ties to sidewalk along the ROW frontage, a 60” X 60” ADA landing is required. Landings shall be 60” X 60” and not to exceed a 2% cross slope in all directions. 5. Protect in place or relocate accordingly, existing regulatory or warning signs. David Stiffey DTM Project Coordinator David.Stiffey@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 05/25/2023 | Site Engineering | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | 1. The 40X14 clear space in front of the waste enclosure cannot cross a parking space (TSM 8-01) 2. Show points of roof drainage, ensure roof drainage up to the 10-yr storm is directed away from/under adjacent sidewalk through the use of scuppers/gutters (TSM 7-01) 3. Provide a pedestrian crossing sign in front of the cross walk through the drive-thru 4. Clarify in the sidewalk detail that the sidewalk has a 5% max running slope and 2% max cross slope 5. Provide a detail of the trash enclosure and pad showing compliance with TSM 8-01, a copy of the figure in the code would be acceptable. Ensure this is reflected on the site plan 6. Clarify that the water harvesting basins should be depressed 6-9" maximum, not including any DG or other groundcover 7. Show the high point in the drive thru lane 8. Clarify the contradicting grade arrows in the PAAL near the eastern entrance exit 9. Ensure sufficient vehicle wheel stops or sidewalk width to maintain a 4' pedestrian path with a 2.5' vehicle overhang in sidewalk adjacent to parking spots (TSM 7-01.4) 10. Provide a pedestrian circulation path to the waste enclosure (TSM 7-01) 11. A one way access lane should be at least 10ft wide at all points, ensure this is provided where the drive-thru lane is split (UDC 7.4.6) 12. Ensure a 1' setback between the building and drive-thru lane (UDC 7.4.6) Drainage Report: 1. The COT ret/det manual requires attenuation of pre vs post development discharge quantities (volumetric flow), but the current report only shows that the difference in volume is accounted for. Show using software such as PC-LID that detention requirements are met through attenuation of the volumetric discharge. 2. The drainage manual calls out use of underground storage, but no storage is shown on the plan set. Please provide location and detail of the proposed storage. 3. If underground storage is used, all requirements of ret/det manual 4.13 need to be provided for/completed Scott Haseman scott.haseman@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 05/25/2023 | Site Landscape | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PROJECT: BLACK ROCK COFFEE ACTIVITY NO. TD-DEV-0423-00210 RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS ADDRESS/PARCEL: 2402 N 1ST AV/ 113-09-227A ZONING: C-1 & C-3 This plan has been reviewed for compliance with applicable development criteria in the City of Tucson Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-11 and Technical Manual (TM) Section for landscape, native plants and water harvesting. The comments provided are preliminary and are not to be assumed as a complete review of the proposal. During the Development Package review process, a full review will be made by Landscape/NPPO to assure compliance with the applicable UDC development criteria and Technical Standards. COMMENTS: 1. Please revise the Commercial Rainwater Harvesting Plan to include the areas sent over by Matthew Carlton via email and recalculate the percentage met. 2. Please revise the Commercial Rainwater Harvesting Plan to scale back the grading information, label all curb cuts/splash pads on the plan, show water flow directional arrows on site including from the roof. 3. Include the following details on your detail sheet: a. Locking cage for backflow preventer b. Basin planting section/elevation c. Root barrier for next to concrete/pathways If you have any questions about these comments, I can be reached at Matthew.Carlton@tucsonaz.gov or 520-837-4988 |
||
| 05/17/2023 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Wyatt Berger Lead Planner PROJECT: Black Rock Coffee Development Package (1st Review) TD-DEV-0423-00210 TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 17, 2023 DUE DATE: June 9, 2023 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and any redlined plans along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06, and the Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Per UDC Section 3.3.3.G.5.c, an applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One year expiration date is May 17, 2024. 1. COMMENT: 2-06.3.12 – Resubmit all drawings as a single file. Do not separate the landscape drawings from the remainder of the drawings. 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.1—Ensure the name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, and other persons who prepared the development package drawings are provided on the cover sheet. 3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.2.D—Ensure that the page number and total number of pages (i.e., sheet xx of xx) is provided within the title block on all sheets. 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3—Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-0423-00210, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4.A—Show the subject property approximately centered within the project-location map. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4.C—Label the section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and scale on the project-location map. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.2 – As the proposed project provides ingress and egress to and from the abutting shopping center site, show the entire site within the development package documents. Refer to UDC 11.4.20 for the definition of “Site.” Provide recorded cross access agreements to demonstrate that ingress and egress to and from the abutting parcels is permitted within the development. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4—Identify the existing and proposed uses of the property. The proposed use is Food Service, subject to use-specific standards 4.9.4.M.1 and .5, and 4.9.13.O. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6 – Provide a general note stating, “THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE CRITERIA FOR UDC SECTION 5.4, MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R).” 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.d – Provide the percentage in square feet of building and accessory building coverage; percentage of building, lot area, and vehicular use area expansion of the entire site. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.F—Show the existing zoning classification on the subject property and on adjacent properties, including properties across the adjacent rights-of-way. Clearly delineate the zoning boundaries on the site plan as well. 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Demonstrate compliance with UDC 7.4.6.F.2.a.(2) by providing a one-foot setback between the proposed drive-thru lane and the building. 13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Demonstrate that the proposed motor vehicle parking spaces meet the dimensional requirements of UDC Table 7.4.6-1: Motor Vehicle Use Area Dimensions. Wheel stops in accordance with UDC 7.4.6.H.3 will be necessary if the requirements of UDC Table 7.4.6-1 cannot be met. 14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – The proposed pedestrian circulation path connecting 1st Avenue to the proposed development does not comply with UDC 7.4.7.B.2. Reconfigure the pedestrian circulation path so that access is not proposed through the drive-thru lane. 15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Clarify why the required number of motor vehicle parking spaces in the “parking count” table show 20 spaces required as well as 21 spaces required. 16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – One motor vehicle parking space per 300 square feet gross floor area may be required for the proposed building if it can be demonstrated that no more than 50% of the floor area of the entire shopping center site is dedicated to uses with a parking formula of one space per 100 square feet of gross floor area or a more intense formula (UDC 11.3.9.C.3). Clarify whether the “Shopping Center” parking ratio will be utilized for this building. 17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Provide, as a general note, calculations for the number of required short- and long-term bicycle spaces required and provide. Review UDC Table 7.4.8-1: Minimum Required Bicycle Parking Spaces. 18. COMMENT: 2-06.H.5.d – Demonstrate that the proposed short-term bicycle parking facilities on the site meet the requirements of UDC 7.4.9.B and .C. Include a detail of the proposed facilities as well. 19. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – Show setbacks from all property lines to the proposed building. Code amendments effectuated by the Mayor and Council in April included amendments to setback requirements. For nonresidential development abutting an arterial or collector street, the minimum required street perimeter yard is 10 feet, as measured from the existing or future property line as determined by the adopted Major Streets and Routes Plan, whichever is greater. The required setback measured from the north and east property lines is zero feet (UDC Table 6.3-4.A). 20. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – Provide the height and proposed UDC use within the footprint of the building on the site plan. 21. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Show a pedestrian circulation path from the proposed development to the trash enclosure. Additionally, demonstrate that the pedestrian circulation path along the east façade of the building complies with TSM 7-01.4.3.A. All sidewalks must be a minimum of four feet wide and installed to avoid any obstruction which decreases the minimum width to less than four feet. 22. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.T – The proposed trash enclosure conflicts with the location of two on-site motor vehicle parking spaces. Zoning will not count these two parking spaces toward the total proposed number of motor vehicle parking spaces if this configuration remains. Either relocate the location of these parking spaces or demonstrate that the proposed trash enclosure does not conflict with these spaces. 23. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.V – Provide a general note clarifying whether mail service is to be collected within the building or with a gang mailbox. Show the location of the gang mailbox, if proposed, to assure there are no conflicts with pedestrian circulation. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Wyatt.Berger@tucsonaz.gov or at (520) 837-4951. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: A revised development package as well as a comment response letter. To resubmit, visit the Tucson Development Center Online at https://tdc-online.tucsonaz.gov/#/home. The instructions for resubmittal can be found at https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/pdsd/website/Resubmittals.pdf. |
||
| 06/05/2023 | Traffic Engineering Review | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | TD-DEV-0223-00210 2402 N. 1st Ave. Comments: 1. Please provide more information on the “Site Plan” (C1.0) regarding the work within the Right of Way, a. Removal of existing driveway entrances. b. Replacement with concrete curb per P.A.G. standard 209. c. Sidewalk replacement per P.A.G. standard 200. 2. Existing curb may remain if it is compliant with current standards. 3. The existing curb access ramp on the NE corner of 1st Ave and Grant Rd, may remain if it is within tolerance of current standards. 4. Where adjoining sidewalk from the onsite circulation path, ties to sidewalk along the ROW frontage, a 60” X 60” ADA landing is required. Landings shall be 60” X 60” and not to exceed a 2% cross slope in all directions. 5. Protect in place or relocate accordingly, existing regulatory or warning signs. David Stiffey DTM Project Coordinator David.Stiffey@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 05/10/2023 | CDRC Application Completeness | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 05/15/2023 | CDRC Review Coordinator | REVIEW COMPLETED | Added external reviewers, sent emails and sent FYI emails per SOP. | ||
| 06/01/2023 | External Reviewers - Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) | REVIEW COMPLETED | Good Afternoon, ADOT has no comments on this DEV. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. |
||
| 06/14/2023 | External Reviewers - COT Parks & Recreation | REVIEW COMPLETED | Hello CDRC team, On behalf of the City of Tucson Parks and Recreation Department, I have no comments on the above development plan. Tom Fisher Project Manager City of Tucson Parks and Recreation Department 900 S. Randolph Way Tucson, Arizona 85716 (520) 837-8037 |
||
| 05/15/2023 | External Reviewers - Pima Association of Governments | REVIEW COMPLETED | Sent FYI emails per SOP. | ||
| 05/15/2023 | External Reviewers - Southwest Gas | REVIEW COMPLETED | Sent FYI emails per SOP. | ||
| 05/15/2023 | External Reviewers - Tucson Electric Power (TEP) | REVIEW COMPLETED | Sent FYI emails per SOP. | ||
| 05/15/2023 | External Reviewers - United States Postal Service (USPS) | REVIEW COMPLETED | Sent FYI emails per SOP. | ||
| 05/15/2023 | Fire New Construction | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 05/15/2023 | OK to Submit - Engineering | REVIEW COMPLETED | Waiting on cut and fill from email | ||
| 05/12/2023 | OK to Submit - Landscape | REVIEW COMPLETED |