Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: DP13-0039
Parcel: 117042630

Address:
222 E 5TH ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP13-0039
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
04/02/2013 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
04/03/2013 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Denied 1. Any pedestrian ways to the public right of way/s as required by zoning are to be accessible. Reference Zoning comments.
2. The City of Tucson minimum lettering and number size is 3/32", actual, lower and upper case for all drawings. Please revise all noncompliant sheets and resubmit.
3. Provide a large scale detail of the ramp showing all accessible requirements such as all dimensions, slopes, handrails (plan and elevation), landings and grades.
4. Provide a large scale detail of the accessible parking space showing all accessible requirements such as all dimensions, grade slopes, markings, aisles, access to accessible route, van accessible parking space as required and sign location.
5. Provide a large scale detail of the accessible parking sign showing all accessible requirements such as all dimensions, mounting, mounting height and "Van Accessible" signage.
END OF REVIEW
04/09/2013 KEN BROUILLETTE FIRE REVIEW Denied PLEASE INDICATE THE LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING FIRE HYDRANTS WITHIN 350 FEET OF STRUCTURE
04/16/2013 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied Revise the site drawing to include the following information:
a. The location and size of the water meter and backflow preventer serving the building (keynote #25 not found on the site plan).
b. The location and size of sanitary sewers, including the pipe diameter, invert and rim elevations of all manholes and cleanouts; along with the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD) reference number.
c. The points of connection to existing public sewers.
d. The locations of any gas meters (if existing or planned).
Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual No. 2-06.0.0, Section 4.8 and Section 107.2.13, IBC 2012.
04/16/2013 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: April 16, 2013
SUBJECT: 222 Storage Development Plan Package- Engineering Review
TO: FORS Architecture Attn: Miguel Fuentevilla, RA
LOCATION: 222 E 5th Street; T14S R13E Sec12
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP13-0039

SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administration Manual (AM) and Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Refer to the links for further clarification:
http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/files/planning/UDC_ADOPTED_100912.pdf; http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/files/planning/Technical_Manual_ADOPTED_100912.pdf; http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/files/planning/Admin_Manual_ADOPTED_100912.pdf

The following items need to be addressed:

SITE PLAN:

1) AM Sec.2-06.3.5: Revise the development plan document to include the approval stamp in the lower right quadrant of each sheet. The link to the stamp can be found here: http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/cdrc-rezoning/cdrd-stamp

2) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP13-0039) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets.

3) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.A: Revise the development plan to provide for a lot combination for the 2 lots or provide easements for all offsite improvements (sidewalk, refuse containers, portion of parking stalls, etc.) that are being constructed on the lot to the south.

4) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Revise Keynote #6 that references a new curb cut per COT Environmental Services (or provide written approval that ES is actually paying for and constructing a curb cut that is specifically used for this property). The Keynote should read that a new curb cut is proposed and that a right-of-way use permit is required through the Permits and Code Section of the Transportation Department.

5) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Clarify on the development plan document the location of the near and far side sight visibility triangle for the intersection of the PAAL and 5th Street. The SVT must be measured form curb line to curb line unless 5th Street has allowed on street parking. If on street parking is allowed on 5th Street then a dimension of 8-feet can be used and must be clearly labeled in plan view, it appears that a larger dimension is being used, verify.

6) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan documents to provide the minimum dimensions and radii for the required back-up spur for the 2 proposed parking stalls and bollard area of the parking lot per LUC 3.3.6.D.

7) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all handicap accessibility comments that may be associated with this project.

8) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Revise the development plan document to provide a construction detail for the refuse enclosures. The detail must match DS Sec.6-01 and Figure 3a for the required enclosure walls with gates, concrete thickness and compressive strength, concrete approach apron dimensions, 14'x40' clear approach for each container, etc.

9) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Verify with TDOT and ES the location of the proposed refuse containers, the proposed containers must be locate completely onsite and can not block the existing right-of-way of Arizona Avenue. The concrete apron must be fully onsite and provide the clear 14'x40' approach for each container.

GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised Development Plan Package that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments.

For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929.



Jason Green, CFM
Senior Engineer Associate
Engineering Division
Planning & Development Services Department
04/18/2013 TERRY STEVENS ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: Terry Stevens
Lead Planner

PROJECT: DP13-0039
222 E. 5th St.
Development Package


TRANSMITTAL DATE: 04/23/2013

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with redlines and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed.

1. AM 2-06.3.4 A title block shall be provided in the lower right quadrant of each sheet.

2. AM 2-06.3.5 Revise the development plan document to include the correct CDRC approval stamp in the lower right quadrant of each sheet. The link to the stamp can be found here: http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/cdrc-rezoning/cdrd-stamp

3. AM 2-06.3.7 A small, project-location map shall be provided in the upper right corner of the cover sheet.

4. AM 2-06.3.8 The north arrow, contour interval, and scale as applicable to each sheet should be placed together in the upper right corner of each sheet.

5. AM 2-06.3.10 A legend that shows and describes all symbols used on the drawing is to be provided, preferably on the first sheet.

6. AM 2-06.4.2 The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet:
A. The proposed name of the project or subdivision, or if there is no name, the proposed tenant's name.
B. A brief legal description
D. The administrative street address.
E. The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e sheet xx of
xx).

7. AM 2-06.4.3 Relevant case numbers (development package document, MDR, DSMR, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

This project has been assigned case number DP13-0039.

Provide as a general note the case number, date of approval, what is for, and any conditions of approval for the DSMR and the MDR as well as provide case numbers near the lower right corner of all sheets.

8. AM 2-06.4.4 The project-location map to be located on the first sheet of the development package in the upper right corner, shall cover approximately one (1) square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of 3" = 1 mile, and provide the following information.
A. Show the subject property approximately centered within the one (1) square mile area.
B. Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and
all streets that abut the subject property.
C. Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be
labeled.

9. AM 2-06.4.7 General Notes The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable.
A. Zoning and Land Use Notes
1. List as a general note: "Existing zoning is C-3."
2. List the gross area of the site by square footage and acreage.
3. Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses. Personal Storage subject to: 4.9.10.C.3 and .6 Clearly indicate compliance with the subject to sections for this use.
4. Provide as a note indicating that this project is designed to meet the criteria of the Greater Infill Incentive Subdistrict Overlay per UDC Sec. 5.12.4
5. Provide as a note the floor area for each building. The total GFA on the foot print of the building does not match the vehicle parking calculation. Total should be 33,705.
6. Provide as a note the allowed and proposed building height.

10. AM 2-06.4.8.A This project will require completion of a tax parcel combination with the lot to the south. Provide documentation of approval.

Once the combination has been completed remove from the plans the property line between the two parcels and provide distance and bearings for the entire surrounding property lines.

11. AM 2-06.4.8.B If applicable, all easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated.

12. AM 2-06.4.9.H.5.a Cross reference all details to the key notes, Parking spaces, bicycle parking spaces, etc.

In the parking calculations it is indicated that there are 12 on street parking spaces, it appears there is only 10. Revise.

Per UDC Sec. 5.12.4.A & .B approval through the MDR process will be required to use the 25% reduction in required parking (UDC Sec. 5.12.4.C.3.a) and to use on street parking (UDC 5.12.4.C.3.c.3).

13. AM 2-06.4.9.H.5.c Provide the number and size of required loading zones and the number of provided loading zones. Per UDC Sec. 7.5 one type A loading zone is required. It does not appear that a loading zone is being provided. Per UDC Sec. 5.12.4.A & .B approval through the MDR process will be required to use UDC Sec. 5.12.4.C.4, elimination of the loading zone.

14. AM 2-06.4.9.H.5.d In the bicycle parking calculations clearly indicate That the type of required and provided bicycle parking space are short term and that zero long term bicycle parking spaces are required.

15. AM 2-06.4.9.O Provide the required and proposed setbacks for the building and proposed addition per UDC Table 6.3-4.A. It does not appear that this structure will meet the required street perimeter yard setback of 20' or 1 ½ times the height of the building not required side street setback of 10'. Per UDC Sec. 5.12.4.A & .B approval through the MDR process will be required to use UDC Sec. 5.12.4.C.2 to reduce the required setbacks.

Per keynote number 32 a low site wall is proposed which appears to be located within the right of way. If this is to remain at this location a TRE will be required to be obtained from the City of Tucson Real Estate Division. Contact Jim Rossi for further information.

16. AM 2-06.4.9.R The pedestrian circulation from the handicap access aisle to the proposed ramp appears to be blocked by the proposed curbing. Clarify.

17. Clarify site plan general note number 7 in regards to the DSMR.

18. For information regarding the MDR process contact Joanne Hershenhorn @ 837-6976.



If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 837-4961
04/26/2013 JOE LINVILLE NPPO REVIEW Approved
04/26/2013 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1) Revise the Plant Key to include the correct botanical name for Lantana. Administrative Manual 2-10.4.2.A.1

2) Revise the landscape plan to identify the screening elements. Administrative Manual 2-10.4.3.

3) Submit an irrigation plan. Administrative Manual 2-10.4.2.
Show the location of all main lines, sleeves unpaved areas.
UDC 7.6.6.E.2

4) Revise the site to comply with UDC 8-01.5.3. There appears to be sufficient space for on-site collection access and collection.

5) A complete or partial exception to Section 7.6, Landscaping and Screening Standards, may be granted when shade is provided for pedestrians and customers, such as along sidewalks, pedestrian circulation paths, and outdoor patios, in accordance with Section 5.12.6.A.2.

UDC 5.12.4.C.6

b. The following types of landscaping and improvements may be used to comply with this section:

(1) Existing landscaping;

(2) Shade trees in the right-of-way;

(3) Green walls or green roofs; and/or,

(4) Shade structures, such as awnings. Shade shall be provided for at least 50% of all sidewalks and pedestrian access paths as measured at 2:00 p.m. on June 21 when the sun is 82 degrees above the horizon. Shade may be provided by trees, arcades, canopies, or shade structures. The use of plantings and shade structures in the City right-of-way is permitted to meet this standard. The shade provided by a building may serve to meet this standard.

2. Shade

a. Except as provided below, shade shall be provided for at least 50% of all sidewalks and pedestrian access paths as measured at 2:00 p.m. on June 21 when the sun is 82 degrees above the horizon. Shade may be provided by trees, arcades, canopies, or shade structures. The use of plantings and shade structures in the City right-of-way is permitted to meet this standard. The shade provided by a building may serve to meet this standard. UDC 5.12.6.C.2.
b. Exception

The PDSD Director may approve an IID Plan providing less than 50% shade where compliance is not feasible due to a project site’s location and/or building orientation and the applicant has made a reasonable attempt to comply with this standard.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
05/03/2013 FERNE RODRIGUEZ OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed