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

Permit Number: TD-DEV-0423-00210
Parcel: 11309227A

Address:
2402 N 1ST AV

Review Status: Requires Resubmit

Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.1

Permit Number - TD-DEV-0423-00210
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.1
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
08/04/2023 Site Landscape APPROVED
08/21/2023 CDRC Post Review PENDING ASSIGNMENT
08/21/2023 Commercial Plumbing REQUIRES RESUBMIT 1. Comment not addressed. [Initial comment: 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. Comment not addressed. [Initial comment: 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.]
07/28/2023 Site Engineering REQUIRES RESUBMIT 1. Ensure all appendixes from the drainage report are included.
2. Provide a waste stream calculation compliant with TSM 8-01.8
3. Ensure a 40X14' open space in front of the waste container (TSM 8-01)
4. Concrete service apron of waste enclosure must slope away from the enclosure at a minimum 2% slope
5. Ensure a 4' pedestrian circulation path is maintained with 2.5' overhang from curb or edge of wheel stop in sidewalks adjacent to parking spaces
6. A pedestrian path cannot lie inbetween a parking space and the PAAL providing access to that space (TSM 7-01)
7. Sidewalk north of building between 5 and 8.33% running slope must be constructed as an ADA ramp
8. Ensure water harvesting areas are depressed 6-9" below adjacent surface to maximize water harvesting (grading plan indicates elevated areas)
9. Show using a software like PC-LID that the provided storage attenuates the 2, 10, and 100-yr storm discharges following balanced basin detention requirements.
10. Provide a detail of the underground storage system specific to this site
11. Provide a callout and keynote for any rip rap, specifying any grouting, filter fabric, etc. If filter fabric is planned, specify the type
12. Underground Retention: As per the updated Detention/Retention manual, underground retention requires city engineer approval based on the following comments:

a. Show how 150% of the neccessary 100-yr detention volume is provided in the underground drainage improvements. (50% can be provided on the surface so that issues regarding improper drainage can be observable) (Detention/Retention manual 4.13.1.4)

b. Show how necessary first flush volume is retained and infiltrated into the surrounding soils and that the soil beneath the chamber will infiltrate in a reasonable amount of time through a geotechnical report (now), or an infiltration test completed (prior to final inspection)

c. Ensure landscaping comments regarding rainwater harvesting are addressed. Water harvesting must be maximized. Onsite flow should be primarily directed towards landscaping through the use of grading and curb cuts/scuppers

d. Include a note in the plan set requiring a maintenance schedule and process that follows the manufacturer's process on page 89 of the drainage report. Ensure this includes a plan for cleaning the outlet into the drainage channel

e. Include an inspection and maintenance port into each chamber (Detention/Retention Manual 4.13.1.5)

f. Show how flow will be safely discharged when the storage capacity is exceeded through use of an overflow outlet (Detention/Retention Manual 4.13.1.6)

g. Process a covenant agreement for this project (Detention/Retention Manual 4.13.1.7), a sample can be found at:

https://webcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government/Flood%20Control/Rules%20and%20Procedures/Stormwater%20Detention-Retention/dssdr-final-201406-appendix-g.pdf

Ensure template language is modified for use within the city

h. Provide a report from an engineer registered in Arizona showing adequacy of the load bearing capacity of the underlying soils, as well as providing appropriate building setbacks and design details associated with the structural integrity of the system and surrounding site features (Detention/Retention Manual 4.13.1.8)

i. Apply for city engineering approval by emailing Stephen Blood stephen.blood@tucsonaz.gov Please provide proof of addressing the comments 12a-12h in that email

Scott Haseman
scott.haseman@tucsonaz.gov
08/02/2023 Site Zoning REQUIRES RESUBMIT CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Wyatt Berger
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Black Rock Coffee
Development Package (2nd Review)
TD-DEV-0423-00210

TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 2, 2023

DUE DATE: August 20, 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 August 2, 2024.

1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.1—This comment was not entirely addressed. Provide the email addresses of the surveyor, civil engineering firm, and architects on the cover sheet.

2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4.C—This comment was not entirely addressed. Label the section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and scale on the project-location map. The minimum scale is three inches equal to one mile and shall cover approximately one square mile. Refer to issued development package TD-DEV-0223-00138 for an example: https://pro.tucsonaz.gov/activity_search/?csrfmiddlewaretoken=0VI9IssyKPt9SNaZNxaEAnSlOXQ1TbKceKR0XutqzA3n7YIZRTtNmyvkZU3dRyWE&activity_number=TD-DEV-0223-00138&honeypot=.

3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.2 –This comment was not properly addressed. 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.” The site specifically includes the existing McDonalds’s, Firestone, BBVA, and the entire shopping center.

Attachment “A” provided with the resubmittal is also not a recorded cross access agreement. A recorded agreement is required to allow shared ingress and egress to and from the adjacent parcels. An example may be found here: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/pdsd/Covenant_Regarding_Development_and_Use_of_Real_Property_UDC.pdf.

4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4—This comment was not entirely addressed. Provide the applicable use-specific standards in tandem with the proposed use. The proposed use is subject to use-specific standards 4.9.4.M.1 and .5, and 4.9.13.O.

5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.d – Based on the above explanation of the site, 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.

6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.F—Correctly notate the existing zoning classifications of the subject property and on adjacent properties, including properties across adjacent rights-of-way. Clearly delineate the zoning boundaries on the site plan as well.

7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – This comment was not addressed. The proposed building is required to maintain a minimum one-foot setback from the drive-thru lane (UDC 7.4.6.F.2.a.(2)).

8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – This comment was not addressed. Demonstrate within a detail that the proposed motor vehicle parking spaces meet the dimensional requirements of UDC Table 7.4.6-1: Motor Vehicle Use Area Dimensions. Parking spaces with a 90 degree angle are required to maintain a minimum width of 8’-6” and a minimum depth of 18’-0”. The motor vehicle parking spaces along the eastern portion of the property do not meet the intent of UDC Table 7.4.6-1.

9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – This comment was not entirely addressed. Two long-term bicycle parking spaces are required for the proposed development. Indicate the location of the required long-term bicycle parking facilities in accordance with UDC 7.4.9.D.1 and .2.

10. COMMENT: 2-06.H.5.d – This comment was not entirely addressed. The proposed short-term bicycle parking facilities do not meet the intent of UDC 7.4.9.B. Indicate the location of outdoor lighting as a “photometric plan” was not provided. See UDC 7.4.9-C for an example of a typical short-term bicycle parking facility, and a provide a detail of the facilities. Provide a dimension on the site plan from bicycle parking facilities to the nearest public entrance to ensure the bicycle parking facilities are within 50 feet of a public entrance (UDC 7.4.9.C.2.a).

11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – This comment was not entirely addressed. While a pedestrian circulation path was provided to the proposed trash enclosure, sidewalks or pedestrian refuge areas cannot be located between any motor vehicle parking space and the PAAL providing access to the space (TSM 7-01.4.1.F). Reconfigure and notate the width of the entire pedestrian circulation path.

Additionally, provide the width of the proposed pedestrian circulation path along the east façade of the building. 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 (TSM 7-01.4.3.A).

12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.T – Wheel stop curbing will be required for the three existing motor vehicle parking spaces to the east of the proposed trash enclosure. Wheel stop curbing is required in a vehicular use area to prevent cars from damaging adjacent walls (UDC 7.4.6.H.1). The wheel stop proposed for the handicapped accessible parking space does not meet the intent of UDC 7.4.6.H.3. Wheel stop curbing must be a minimum of two and one-half feet from the front of the parking space.

13. COMMENT: It has been mentioned to staff from a surrounding property owner that there may be a covenant in place that restricts maximum building height for any new development on this specific property. Staff is unable to locate such a record.

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.
07/14/2023 CDRC Application Completeness REVIEW COMPLETED
08/16/2023 Traffic Engineering Review REVIEW COMPLETED No Comments

David Stiffey

David.Stiffey@tucsonaz.gov