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: DP15-0009
Parcel: 11515092A

Address:
2051 N 13TH AV

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP15-0009
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
02/11/2015 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
02/20/2015 KEN BROUILLETTE FIRE REVIEW Reqs Change 1) Please indicate location of existing and/or proposed fire hydrant(s). Refer to section 507 of the 2012 International Fire Code for spacing requirements.
2) It appears that from where the fire department trucks can park exceeds 150' of hose lay to all parts of the building. One of the rolling gates need to meet access requirements.
Needs to be minimum 20' wide, and the gate needs to meet requirements of section 503.6. Please confirm on plans.
3) Please indicate location of fire department approved lock boxes.
02/27/2015 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change Revise the site drawing to include the following information:
a. The location and size of water lines and fire hydrants.
b. The location of sanitary sewers, including the pipe diameter and the invert and rim elevations of all manholes and cleanouts; along with the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD) reference number.
c. The point of connection to existing public sewers.
d. The locations of gas lines, electric and telephone lines, poles, and communications cables, on-ground junction boxes, and street lights.
e. Any existing or proposed utility easements
f. The first floor elevation for the building
Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual No. 2-06.0.0, Section 4.8 and Section 107.2.13, IBC 2012.
03/04/2015 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Loomis Armored, USA
Development Package (1st Review)
DP15-0009

TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 4, 2015

DUE DATE: March 11, 2015

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings 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. 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 August 20, 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

2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD) - ADDITIONAL 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.

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.2 - All mapped data shall be drawn at an engineering scale having no more than 50 feet to the inch. This scale is the minimum accepted to assure the plan will be legible during review and when digitized and/or reduced for record-keeping purposes. The same scale shall be used for all sheets within the set. Smaller scales (60:1 or greater) may be used for some or all of the sheets with the prior approval of PDSD when it is determined legibility and the ability to be digitized and/or reduced for archiving will not be affected.

COMMENT: Revise the plans to an engineering scale.

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

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.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.

1. COMMENT: Remove "Zoning and Land Use Note" 4 from the plan as it is not applicable.

2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions
The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided.

2-06.4.8.A - Provide site boundary/subdivision perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system.

2. COMMENT: Provide site boundary perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, together with distances.

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.

3. COMMENT: As the vehicle parking shown west of the building does not match the provided last approved site plan provide a fully dimensioned vehicle use area.

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.

4. COMMENT: As this is a change of use bicycle parking is required. Based on Table 7.4.8-1: Minimum Required Bicycle Parking Spaces, COMMERCIAL USE GROUP, Transportation Service, Short term not required, Long term 1 space per 12,000 sq. ft. GFA. Minimum requirement is 2 spaces. Provide a short and long term bicycle parking space calculation showing the number required and provided and show the required long term bicycle parking 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.

5. COMMENT: Provide a setback dimension from the proposed 10' wall to the property line along Flores Avenue.

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).

6. COMMENT: Provide the height of the buildings within the footprint 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
03/05/2015 ELIZABETH LEIBOLD H/C SITE REVIEW Reqs Change SHEET DP-2
1. Provide an accessible route from the building rear exit door to the public way.
a. Provide a exit man gate through the fence as required.
b. If more than 50 occupants exit to the rear fenced parking lot, provide two exits through the fence as per the 2012 OBC, Section 1015.1.
2. Provide large scale details of the following showing all accessible requirements:
a. The rear entrance ramp showing all required dimensions, slopes, directional arrows, landings, handrails and grade differences.
b. The accessible parking layout showing all required deminisions, markings, aisles, access to the accessible route, the accessible route, signage, grade elevations and van accessible spaces as required.
c. All different types of curb ramps showing all required dimensions, slopes, directional arrows and landings.
3. At the marked crossing to Flores Av.:
a. Detectable warnings strips are only required at transportation platforms and may be deleted from this project with in the boundaries of the property line.
b. Flared sides on the curb ramps are needed to accommodate cross traffic accross the ramp. If provided all flared sides are to be a minimum of 1:10 slope as required by 2009 ICC A117.1, Section 406. If flared sides are not used then provide return curbs for the ramp.
4. Provide an additional note: "All accessible route slopes are to be as per 2009 ICC A117.1, Section 403.3; 5% max running and 2% max cross.
5. Clarify exist ramp on the south side of the building
6. Show where fence terminates at the south side of the building.
SHEET DP-4
7. Detail 2 is strictly for right of way accessible construction requirements only is not in compliance with the 2012 IBC, Chapter 11 and the 2009 ICC A117.1. and may not be used within the boundaries of the pricvate property.
END OF REVIEW
03/10/2015 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Approv-Cond Note: Existing development on the site is subject to the zoning regulations in effect at the time the existing development received zoning approval.

Ensure that all Engineering and Zoning comments and concerns are addressed prior to landscape approval signature.
03/10/2015 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved
03/11/2015 ELIZABETH LEIBOLD ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: March 11, 2015
TO: Steven C. Shell R.A.
SUBJECT: Development Package Engineering Site-Grading Review submittal
PROJECT: Loomis Armored, USA Development Package
LOCATION: 2051 N 13th Av, Ward 3
FEMA PANEL: 2276 L, X-unshaded
WATERSHED: TSMS DD - Grant Road Watershed, (Kruger Wash to south)
REVIEWER: Elizabeth Leibold P.E.
ACTIVITY NUMBER: DP15-0009
SUMMARY: The Development Package including site, demo, and grading plans, were submitted and reviewed. Non-designated basin management area; due to negligible proposed change in imperviousness for this project; there is no basin requirement. No SWPP will be required for this project. Development Services Department Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan at this time until the following comments are addressed.
BASE PLAN SHEETS COMMENTS:
1) City of Tucson Administrative Manual Section (Admin Man Sec.) 2-06.4.8.B: On site and grading planview sheets, show any easements on and immediately adjacent to or overlapping the project site parcel.
MASTER COVER SHEETS/ GENERAL NOTES:
No comments.
DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS:
Tucson Code Sec.26-5.2.11: Although local floodplain appears to be located on parcel to the south, to protect service equipment and tanks from flood events, consider elevating tanks, generator, compressor and other service equipment on concrete pads.
SITE AND GRADING COMMENTS:
2) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.8.A, Tech Man. Sec.10-01.5.3: Address the following site plan related comments and existing conditions:
a) Label all parcel boundary perimeter bearings/distances.
b) If ramp and sidewalk is to remain along south side of existing building structure, label type and dimension width.
c) Provide additional dimensions for vehicle use areas.
d) Show vehicular maneuverability of vehicle in NW gated area.
e) End of south fencing is unclear; assure locations of fence/gate/walls are clarified on planview.
f) Assure all existing utilities are shown and clearly labeled. Specifically show/label existing fire hydrant in NE corner area of project site.
g) On sheet DP-2, regarding notation below "remove existing railing", clarify whether ramp and sidewalk is to remain, along south side of existing building structure.
h) Double check and correctly label dimensions of sight visibility triangles for Flores St at 14th Av and 13th Av, as well as for each entrance/exit area for site. If necessary, AASHTO 15-ft stem may be used for this project.
3) City of Tucson Technical Standards Manual Section (Tech Man Sec.) 2-01: Address the following grading comments on sheet DP-6:
a) Clarify with spot elevations or with a cross section to show grading on north property line including fill, in area from sidewalk to existing building.
b) Check slope for upper ramp area; add additional spot elevations for clarification.
SURVEY RELATED COMMENTS:
4) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.8.A: Label all parcel boundary perimeter bearings/distances.
A response letter is required with the resubmittal of the revised Development Plan package, acknowledging or addressing all of the above comments. For resubmittal, provide response letter and revised plan sheets. If you have questions, call me at 837-4934.
Elizabeth Leibold, P.E., CPM, CFM
Civil Engineer
Engineering Division
Planning & Development Services Dept

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
03/17/2015 CPIERCE1 REJECT SHELF Completed