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: DP14-0155
Parcel: 13425195B

Address:
7065 E 21ST ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP14-0155
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
09/11/2014 KEN BROUILLETTE FIRE REVIEW Denied Please indicate location of existing and/or proposed fire hydrants, with dimensions to property lines. Refer to section 507 of the 2012 International Fire Code for spacing requirements.
Please indicate type and height of materials to be stored in the warehouse. Be advised that if storage height exceeds 12'-0" above finished floor, sprinklers and/or a fire alarm system may be required.
09/11/2014 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
09/25/2014 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: 7065 E. 21st Street - New Warehouse
Development Package (1st Review)
DP14-0155

TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 25, 2014

DUE DATE: October 08, 2014

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a 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. 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

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 September 09, 2015.

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

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.1.1 PURPOSE
This standard has been prepared for the purpose of informing applicants of the submittal and review requirements for development package documents to assure proper and adequate information is presented in a consistent manner, thereby providing the basis for an efficient and timely review. The development package documents are prepared in support of applications for building permits and related reviews.

The information that is requested establishes the basis upon which the project will be approved and could affect what is required of the property in the future, should there be a proposal for expansion or for a different use of the property.

This standard does not waive any applicable city regulations or codes.

2-06.1.2 APPICABILITY
This standard shall be used for all site plans and tentative plats submitted to PDSD for review.

2-06.2.1 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Development Package applications are available from PDSD. Completed applications and accompanying materials shall be submitted to PDSD. Incomplete or inaccurate applications will not be accepted, nor will any application in which the pre-application conference or neighborhood meeting requirements have not been met. The types of documents and the specific number of copies required of each of the documents are on the PDSD website or may be obtained from PDSD. Resubmittals of development packages require a comment response letter that details how all previous comments have been addressed. Provide the same number of copies of the comment response letter as plans provided.
The following documents and information shall be submitted upon application:

2-06.2.1 Application Form
A completed application signed by the property owner or authorized designee;

2-06.2.2 Development Package
A development package must be prepared to the format and content requirements described herein;

2-06.2.3 Related Reviews
In addition to the plan process, a project may require review for other types of plans and documents. The applications for those processes are submitted to the appropriate department for review and approval. These related reviews can be applied for so that review can occur concurrently with the development package application. However, it must be understood that, should the related application be approved subject to conditions or denied, this may affect the;

2-06.2.4 Concurrent Reviews
The development package is designed to allow for concurrent review of any site related reviews. Concurrent review means that all plans and documents needed for the review are submitted as one package. Examples of site related reviews include but are not limited to: site plans, landscape plans, NPPO plans, water harvesting plans, grading plans, SWPPP plans, floodplain use permits, and overlay reviews. Separate applications are often required for the different site related reviews even if the plans are submitted concurrently; and,

2-06.2.5 Fees
Fees in accordance with Section 4-01.0.0, Development Review Fee Schedule.

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet:

2-06.4.2.B - A brief legal description and a statement as to whether the project is a resubdivision are to be provided. On resubdivisions, provide the recording information of the existing subdivision plat;

1. COMMENT: Provide a brief legal description within the title block.

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.

2. COMMENT: Remove the address from the title block and provide it adjacent to the title block.

3. COMMENT: Provide the development package, DP14-0155, adjacent to the title block.

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 square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of three inch equals one mile, and provide the following information.

2-06.4.2.C - Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled.

4. COMMENT: Provide the scale of the location map.

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.

5. COMMENT: Revise Permitting Note 2 to read " EXISTING USE VACANT, PROPOSE USE COMMERCIAL STORAGE SUBJECT TO USE SPECIFIC STANDARD 4.9.10.A"

2-06.4.7.A.6.a - List additional applications and overlays, by case number (if applicable), in lower right corner of each sheet. As a general note provide the type of application processed or overlays applicable, a statement that the project meets the criteria/conditions of the additional application or overlay, the case number, date of approval, what was approved, and the conditions of approval, if any.

6. COMMENT: As a Design Development Options (DDO) will be required for perimeter yard setbacks, once approved provide the DDO case number adjacent to the title block. Also provide a note stating the DDO case number, date of approval, what was approved and if applicable conditions of approval.

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.5 - If utilizing parking area access lanes (PAALs), they shall be designed in accordance with Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

7. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.6.F.2.b Access lanes and PAALs must be setback at least two feet from a wall, screen, or other obstruction over six inches. The additional area is necessary to provide clearance for fire, sanitation, and delivery vehicles. Show the required two (2) foot setback from the PAAL and access lane to the wall shown along the east side of property

8. COMMENT: Per UDC Table 7.4.6-1: MOTOR VEHICLE USE AREA DIMENSIONS a 24' PAAL is required when access 90 degree parking. That said provide a PAAL dimension for access to the accessible parking space.

9. COMMENT: Per UDC Table 7.4.6-2: MOTOR VEHICLE USE AREA DIMENSIONS CONTINUED the minimum two-way access lane is 20'. Show the required 20' access lane between the loading space and the wall to the east.

10. COMMENT: Per UDC Table 7.4.6-2: MOTOR VEHICLE USE AREA DIMENSIONS CONTINUED the minimum two-way access lane is 20'. Show the required 20' access lane between the loading space and the proposed parallel vehicle parking space.

11. COMMENT: Per UDC Table 7.4.6-2: MOTOR VEHICLE USE AREA DIMENSIONS CONTINUED the minimum two-way access lane is 20'. Show the required 20' access lane between the required four (4) foot sidewalk and the proposed parallel vehicle parking space.

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.

12. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.6.D.2.b Minimum Width Requirement When Adjacent to Barrier. A motor vehicle off-street parking space must have a minimum width of ten feet when the side(s) of the parking space abuts a vertical barrier over six inches in height, other than a vertical support for a carport. That said both the accessible vehicle parking space and the parallel vehicle parking space are required to be 10'-0" wide.

13. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.6.H.3 When required, wheel stop curbing must be a minimum of two and one-half feet from the front of the parking space. (See Figure 7.4.6-C.). That said the wheel stop dimension shown on the Parking Detail is not correctly shown.

2-06.4.9.H.5.c - Show all loading zones, vehicle maneuverability fully dimensioned, and access route. Provide as a note the number of loading spaces required, the number provided, whether the loading space is a Type A or B as provided in UDC Section 7.5.4.

14. COMMENT: Under the "PARKING SPACES REQUIRED" provide the number of loading spaces provided.

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.

15. COMMENT: Under the "PARKING SPACES REQUIRED" remove the reference to "CLASS 2" bicycle parking from the plan as it is no longer applicable.

16. COMMENT: The bicycle parking calculation is not correct. Per UDC Table 7.4.8-1 STORAGE USE GROUP, Commercial Storage & Hazardous Material Storage, the only required bicycle parking for the proposed development is Long Term at 1 space per 40,000 sq. ft. GFA. Minimum requirement is 2 spaces. That said the bicycle parking calculation should show two (2) long term bicycle parking spaces required and should state the number of long term bicycle parking spaces provided.

17. COMMENT: The bicycle parking shown on this plan does not meet the requirements for long term. Provide a long term bicycle parking detail that meets the requirements of UDC Sections 7.4.9.B & .D.

18. COMMENT: Per UDC Table 7.4.8-1: Minimum Required Bicycle Parking Spaces the only required bicycle parking for the proposed development is two (2) long term. The bicycle parking shown on this plan does not meet the requirements for long term.

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.

19. COMMENT: Provide a street perimeter yard setback dimension from the southeast corner of the proposed building to the street perimeter yard.

20. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 6.4.5.C.1.a Within established areas, the minimum required front street perimeter yard is 20 feet or one and one-half the height of the proposed wall (H), measured from the street property line, whichever is greater, up to a maximum of 90 feet. That said based on exterior wall height of 20' the required street perimeter yard setback is 30'-0", proposed dimension not provided. A Design Development Option (DDO) will need to be processed and approved prior to approval of the development package.

21. COMMENT: Per UDC TABLE 6.3-4.A: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE C-1, C-2, C-3, OCR-1, & OCR-2 ZONES, Nonres Use to Res Zone the required perimeter yard setback to the north property line is 1 ½ time the height of the building exterior wall. Based on a wall height of 20'-0" the required perimeter yard to the north property line is 30'-0", proposed perimeter yard is 12'-6". A Design Development Option (DDO) will need to be processed and approved prior to approval of the development package.

22. COMMENT: As building elevations will be required for the DDO submittal provide copies of these elevations with your next submittal so that all perimeter yard requirements can be verified.

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.

23. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.A At least one sidewalk is required to a project from each street on which the project has frontage, unless there is no vehicular access from a street because of a physical barrier, such as a drainage way or an unbroken security barrier (e.g., a wall or fence). The sidewalk should be located to minimize any conflict with vehicular access to the project. That said show the required four (4) sidewalk from the proposed building to the sidewalk shown within the right-of-way (ROW).

24. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.B A sidewalk is required adjacent and parallel to any access lane or PAAL on the side where buildings are located. That said show the required four (4) sidewalk along the building and the PAAL.

25. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.F Sidewalks or pedestrian refuge areas cannot be located between any motor vehicle parking space and the PAAL providing access to that space. That said the accessible vehicle parking space access isle will not work as shown as the pedestrian access would have to go between the vehicle parking space and the PAAL that provides access to the space.

2-06.4.9.T - Show refuse collection areas, including locations of dumpsters, screening location and materials, and vehicle maneuverability, fully dimensioned, and access route. If dumpster service is not proposed, indicate type of service. For specific information on refuse collection, refer to Section 8-01.0.0, Solid Waste and Recycle Disposal, Collection, and Storage, of the Technical Standards Manual. Refuse collection on all projects shall be designed based on that section, even if collection is to be contracted to a private firm.

26. COMMENT: Show the required refuse collection area on the plan.

2-06.4.9.W - Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Indicate if there are any existing billboards on site. Compliance to the Sign Code, Chapter 3 of the Tucson Code, is required.

27. COMMENT: If applicable show in proposed signs on the plan.

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
.
09/30/2014 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change Revise the site drawing to include the following information:
a. The location of fire hydrants.
b. The location of sanitary and storm sewers, including the pipe diameter and the invert and rim elevations of the upstream and downstream manholes and cleanouts; along with the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD) reference number.
c. Provide the first floor elevation for the building. Determine the need for a backwater valve per Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.
Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual No. 2-06.0.0, Section 4.8 and Section 107.2.13, IBC 2012.
10/03/2014 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Reqs Change 1. The accessible parking must be van accessible with widths of 8' parking plus 8' asile or 11' parking plus 5' asile.
2. You must provide an accessible route connected to the public right of way from the accessible parking space. See attached suggested sketch on drawings.
a. Might be better if the parking was located on the south end of the property, less accessible route.
END OF REVIEW
10/08/2014 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1) Submit a complete landscape plan. AM 2-10.2.0

2) Submit an irrigation plan. AM 2-10..4.2.

3) Submit a Water Harvesting Plan. TSM 4-01.3.0
10/08/2014 JOE LINVILLE NPPO REVIEW Approved
10/08/2014 ELIZABETH LEIBOLD ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change TO: Larry Wilson R.A.
SUBJECT: Commercial Lot Warehouse Development Package Engineering Review
ADDRESS: 7065 E 21st Street, Miramonte Terrace Lot A-6
FLOODPLAIN STATUS: X-unshaded zone, 040076-2304L, Rose Hill Wash (UL)
REVIEWER: Elizabeth Leibold, PE
CASE NUMBER: DP14-0155
DATE: October 8, 2014

SUMMARY: The revised development package was submitted for first review of the proposed improvements. PDSD Engineering Division does not recommend approval until the following comments are addressed for next submittal.

MASTER COVER SHEETS/ GENERAL NOTES:
1) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.7.6.a,B.2.b, Tech Man Sec.2-01: Address the following Development Package general note comments:
a) For Permitting Note 4, include submittal of as-builts with substantial completion statements that will be needed prior to final inspection approval.
b) Add the following notes:
i) Call for Pre-construction meeting. For a PDSD Engineering Inspections, call IVR (740-6970), or schedule with a Customer Service Representative at the Planning & Development Services Department, or contact PDSD Engineering at 837-4888.
ii) There shall be no disturbance outside of these approved disturbance limits. Any disturbance outside of the disturbance limits requires separate permit or a submittal, review, and approval for separate permits.
iii) Permitee shall notify PDSD when construction operation is ready for final inspection. Final approval shall not be given until all work, including installation of all erosion control measures, have been completed in accordance with approved plan and permit, and all conditions of permit are completed.
iv) For final PDSD Engineering Inspector approval, submit project completion documentation, including one copy of original grading plans, 2 copies of final as-built plans, and letters of substantial completion.

BASE LAYER SHEET COMMENTS:
2) Assure all contents and formatting for project is in compliance with sections 2-06.3 and 2-06.4 of the Administrative Manual. See Zoning comments.
3) Admin Man Sec.2-06.3: Add DP14-0155 case number to Development Package sheets.

SITE PLAN SHEET COMMENTS:
4) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.8.C: Label the following information regarding existing public right-of-way adjacent to the site: right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks.
5) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.9.I: Clarify pavement width and label existing (platted) right-of-way information for 21st Street abutting the site. Also, clarify and dimension all parking area widths and access area width. Show curb curve radius for entrance.
6) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.8.G: Label accurate location with dimensions from north property boundary of the existing wall at north side of project site.
7) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Show vehicle maneuverability with turning radii delineations on planview for loading zone and refuse collection area per Tech Man Sec.8-01.5.3.C.

DRAINAGE COMMENTS:
8) Tech Man Sec.4-04.2.3.1.4: show flow arrows for proposed conditions to clarify proposed drainage patterns on site and around proposed building.

LANDSCAPE COMMENTS:
9) Tech Man Sec.10-01.5.1.A.1: Tree is proposed along southeast corner of pavement area. Assure adjustment of any proposed tree location is not in conflict with SVT's.

GRADING, PAVING, DETAIL SHEET COMMENTS:
10) Tech Man Secs.2-01.4.1.C, 8-01.5.2.G: Address the following grading comments:
a) Provide Basis of Bearings and local Basis of Elevation location labeled and identified on grading plan.
11) Tech Man Sec.8-01.5.2.D: Provide Refuse Enclosure location on planview and any associated details that address the following information:
a) Label dimensions between bollards (minimum 10-ft between interior lateral bollards and between gate and interior rear bollards.
b) Add note that gates shall be opaque (no see-through gates allowed).
c) Show maneuverability on planview, including 40-ft back-up area.
d) Label minimum 2% slope away within trash enclosure pad on planview. Include spot elevation information showing 2% positive gradient away from enclosure for solid waste pad area. Assure solid waste pick-up area is elevated so as not to become a flowline for general local flows across the project site.

UTILITIES / EASEMENTS COMMENTS:
12) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.8.B: All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided. Assure complete information is provided for easements on the site. If needed, assure any offsite construction easements are obtained for any proposed offsite disturbance and associated sequence numbers provided on plans.

STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN COMMENTS:
No SWPPP comments for this project.

SOILS/GEOTECHNICAL REPORT COMMENTS:
13) IBC 2012 Secs.1605, 1607, & 1807: Assure positive gradient is provided away from structure. Waterharvesting can not be located adjacent to proposed building.

For resubmittal, provide 2 copies of revised Development Package sheets and response letter. If you have questions, call me at 837-4934

Elizabeth Leibold, P.E., CPM, CFM
Civil Engineer
Engineering Division
Planning & Development Services Department
City of Tucson

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
10/09/2014 AROMERO4 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed