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: DP13-0257
Parcel: 10707018B

Address:
1102 W GRANT RD

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP13-0257
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
09/26/2016 KEN BROUILLETTE FIRE REVIEW Approv-Cond The proposed uses require a new Certificate of Occupancy. All applicable International Fire Code requirements will be applied at time of application and review of the Certificate of Occupancy.
09/26/2016 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Needs Review CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: The Slaughterhouse
Development Package (2nd Review)
DP13-0257

TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 27, 2016

DUE DATE: October 11, 2016

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

This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC) and the UDC Technical Standards Manual (TSM).

The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az

This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC & TSM requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above

1. Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, 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 January 16, 2015.

2. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS)
Section

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.3 - The administrative street address and relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

1. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP13-0257, adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

2-06.4.7 - General Notes
The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable.

2-06.4.7.A - Zoning and Land Use Notes

2-06.4.7.A.4 - Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses.

2. COMMENT: The use specific standard for Commercial Recreation and Administrative and Professional Office should be listed as 4.9.13.Q

3. COMMENT: Clarify what type of storage you are proposing, Commercial or Personal, and provide the applicable use specific standards.

2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide:

2-06.4.7.A.8.a - Floor area for each building;

4. This comment was not addressed, all structures should be accounted for. COMMENT: The "TOTAL BUILDING GFA" listed under General Note 19 does not appear to include all buildings on site. List the square footage for all building on site including storage buildings.

5. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: There are numerous "EXISTING STORAGE UNIT/SHEDS" shown on the plan that do not appear to be permitted. Provide documentation that permits exist or show them to be permitted.

2-06.4.7.A.8.c - Percentage of building, lot area, or vehicular use area expansion. If the building(s) or lot area have been previously expanded, those calculations shall be included; and,

6. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: As new buildings are proposed provide a building area expansion calculation on the plan.

2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions

2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development
The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes.

2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show future and existing sight visibility triangles (SVTs). On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section.

7. This comment was not fully addressed. Zoning acknowledges that existing SVTs are provided, provide the future SVTs on the plan. COMMENT: As Flowing Wells Road is a road designated on the MS&R Map provide both future and existing sight visibility triangles on the plan.

2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

8. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Until comment 3 & 4 above has been addressed the required number of vehicle parking spaces cannot be verified. It appears that a large amount of building square footage has not been accounted for.

2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Section 7.4.9, Bicycle Parking Design Criteria, of the UDC. Provide, as a note, calculations for short and long term bicycle spaces required and provided.

9. This comment was not addressed. OMMENT: Until comment 3 & 4 above has been addressed the required number of bicycle parking spaces cannot be verified. It appears that a large amount of building square footage has not been accounted for.

10. This comment was not addressed. Demonstrate how the long term bicycle parking within the building meets UDC Section 7.4.9. D COMMENT: Demonstrate on the plan how the requirements of UDC Section 7.4.9.D are met for the long term bicycle parking that will be provided within the building.

2-06.4.9.J - If street dedication is not required or proposed and the project site is adjacent to a Major Street or Route, draw the Major Street right-of-way lines for those streets. (Add the MS&R future sidewalk, right-of-way lines, sight visibility triangles, etc.)

11. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: As Flowing Wells Road is a road designated on the MS&R Map show all applicable future information on the plan.

2-06.4.9.O - All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown.

12. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Per UDC Table 6.4.5.C-1 there minimum required street perimeter yard along Grant Road is twenty-one (21) feet measured from the back of future curb. There is an "EXISTING STORAGE UNIT/SHEDS" shown along Grant Road that does not appear to meet setback. The perimeter yard setback will require a Board of Adjustment for Variance.

13. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: There is an "EXISTING STORAGE UNIT/SHEDS" shown near the northeast corner of the existing building that does not appear to meet setbacks. Until the future right-of-way information is provided for Flowing Wells Road, see comment 19, the setback cannot be verified.

2-06.4.9.Q - Provide the square footage and the height of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building(s).

14. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Provide the square footage and height and use for all "EXISTING STORAGE UNIT/SHEDS" shown on the plan.

2-06.4.9.R - Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual.

15. COMMENT: Per 2012 IBC Section 1104 show the required accessible route from the proposed accessible vehicle parking spaces to the accessible entrance of the building. Clearly demonstrate that this route meets the requirements of ICC A117.1-2009.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package
.
09/27/2016 SSHIELD1 H/C SITE REVIEW Reqs Change See Zoning comments
09/27/2016 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change 1) The provisions UDC 7.6 may be applicable to the entire site. Provide calculations for floor area, and vehicular use area. UDC 7.6.3.B.1.b

If expansions exceed 25% revise the plans to address the Landscape and Screening provisions.

A) Revise the plans to provide street landscape borders per UDC 7.6.4.C.1 & 2.

B) Identify all proposed screening on the landscape plan. UDC 7.6.5.A
10/04/2016 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Completed
10/05/2016 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change 1. The drainage report states that retention and detention will be provided for only the impervious area added since 1984. Provide a reference site plan approved before 1984, showing approved impervious area. The provided aerial photo is not sufficiently detailed to establish the amount of impervious surface.
2. The proposed parking lot plan shows direct discharge to Flowing Wells Road. Explain how the proposed drainage scheme meets the requirements of UDC 7.6.6.C.2: "Grading, hydrology, and landscape structural plans must be integrated to make maximum use of site storm water runoff for supplemental on-site irrigation purposes. The landscape plan shall indicate use of all runoff, from individual catch basins around single trees to basins accepting flow from an entire vehicular use area or roof area."
3. The site is within a critical basin as described in the Drainage Report. Show a 15 per cent reduction in discharge for all areas of the site.
4. Figure 5 in the drainage report doesn't show the proposed discharge from the new parking area. Section 12.2.1.7 requires proposed drainage to streets to be similar in volume and location to pre-developed conditions. Show the discharge quantity at this location.
5. Figure 4 shows discharge quantities from the Cypress 2013 report. Explain the purpose of this information and state whether you have accepted this information. Account for all of the shown discharges in the drainage report and the site plan. (AM 2-06.4.9.N)

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
03/14/2017 KROBLES1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed