Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL
Permit Number - DP15-0144
Review Name: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/13/2015 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 11/30/2015 | KEN BROUILLETTE | FIRE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | The location of the fire hydrant to be utilized for the proposed structure is more than 400 feet as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building from the fire hydrant by utilizing the proposed access. An additional fire hydrant may be provided closer to the proposed structure or the installation of an approved fire sprinkler system in the proposed building can extend the distance to 600 feet per IFC Section 507.5.1 exception 2 |
| 12/01/2015 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 12/02/2015 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Foundation Building Materials Development Package (2nd Review) DP15-0144 TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 2, 2015 DUE DATE: December 11, 2015 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. 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 15, 2016. 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 2-06.3.5 - A three-inch by five-inch space shall be reserved in the lower right quadrant of each sheet for an approval stamp. 1. Addressed COMMENT: Provide the PDSD Development Package approval stamp in the lower right quadrant of all sheets. The required stamp can be found at http://pdsd.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/development-permits under Development Package. 2-06.3.12 - An index of sheets in the development package shall be provided on the first sheet. 2. Addressed COMMENT: The sheet index should include all sheets, i.e. landscape. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet: 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. 3. Addressed COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP15-0144, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 4. Addressed COMMENT: Remove the address from the title block and provide adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 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. 5. 2-06.4.2.A - Show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area; Addressed COMMENT: Show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area on the location map. 6. 2-06.4.2.C - Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled. Addressed COMMENT: The southern most section corners labels are not correct on the location map. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 2-06.4.7.A.8.a - Floor area for each building; 7. Addressed COMMENT: Based on the most current aerial photos it appears that outdoor storage is used on this site. If this is the case clearly show the area on the plan that will be used for outdoor storage and provide the square footage. 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.C - The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. 8. Addressed COMMENT: Provide a width dimension and location dimension for the sidewalk shown along 25th Street. 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. 9. Addressed COMMENT: Provide a width dimension for the entrance access lane off of 25th Street. 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. 10. Addressed COMMENT: Until comment 7 is addressed the required number of loading zones cannot be verified. 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. 11. Addressed COMMENT: Until comment 7 is addressed the required number of long term bicycle parking spaces cannot be verified. 12. Addressed COMMENT: The bicycle parking calculation should show the required and provided number of short and long bicycle parking spaces. 13. Addressed COMMENT: Based on detail 2 sheet 2 the provided number of short term bicycle parking spaces should be 4, see UDC Article 7.4.9.B.2.d. 14. Addressed COMMENT: The dimension shown between racks on detail 2 sheet 2 is not correct, see UDC Article 7.4.9.B.2.f and figure 7.4.9-C. 15. This comment was not fully addressed. UDC Articles7.4.9.B.1.e & 7.4.9.B.2.a have not been addressed. Your response to comment states "Notes have been added to detail" but no notes are shown on the detail that address these requirements. COMMENT: Demonstrate on detail 2 sheet 2 how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1.e & 7.4.9.B.2.a, .f are met. 16. This comment was not addressed correctly. Review UDC Article 7.4.9.C.2. COMMENT: It does not appear that the proposed location of the short term bicycle parking meets the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.C.2.a. 17. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Show the location of the long term bicycle parking on the plan. 18. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Provide a detail for the long term bicycle parking that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1 & 7.4.9.D are met. 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. Addressed COMMENT: Under "UDC REQUIREMENTS FOR I1 ZONE" the perimeter yard setbacks shown for the "SOUTH" & "WEST" are not correct. This setback should be shown as 21' or the height (H). 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. 20. This comment was not addressed. Per TMS Section 7-01.2.0.B.2 All existing uses of land or structures legally existing as of September 24, 1990, which are expanded in lot coverage, floor area, number of parking spaces, or seating capacity, as follows: If the expansion is 25% or more, these provisions apply to the existing use or structure, as well as the expansion. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.C A sidewalk is required adjacent to any parking space accessed by a PAAL where the space is located on the same side of the PAAL as any building and no other parking spaces or PAALs intervene. That said the area shown as "4' WIDE PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION PATH" show between the vehicle parking spaces and building 1 is required to be a sidewalk meeting the requirements of TSM 7-01.4.3. 21. This comment was not addressed. Per TMS Section 7-01.2.0.B.2 All existing uses of land or structures legally existing as of September 24, 1990, which are expanded in lot coverage, floor area, number of parking spaces, or seating capacity, as follows: If the expansion is 25% or more, these provisions apply to the existing use or structure, as well as the expansion. 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 the striped area shown around the southeast corner of the building is required to be a sidewalk. 22. This comment was not addressed. Per TMS Section 7-01.2.0.B.2 All existing uses of land or structures legally existing as of September 24, 1990, which are expanded in lot coverage, floor area, number of parking spaces, or seating capacity, as follows: If the expansion is 25% or more, these provisions apply to the existing use or structure, as well as the expansion. Per TSM Section 7-01.3.3.B.2 Portions of certain Land Use Classes which by their nature will not be used for public pedestrian access, such as industrial uses, commercial storage uses, wholesale uses, contractor yards, or similar uses, are not required to have sidewalks constructed in conformance with this standard, provided adequate pedestrian refuge areas are provided. That said show the required pedestrian refuge to the proposed building. Additional comments due to changes or additions to the plans. 2-06.4.7.A.8.a - Floor area for each building; 23. COMMENT: The square footage shown within the footprint of the southern most building, 20,826 does not match what is shown under the "ZONING AND LAND USE NOTES" and the "PARKING CALCULAITONS" 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. 24. COMMENT: The provided vehicle parking space calculation is not correct. Per UDC Article 7.4.3.G Fractional Amounts. When the calculation of required motor vehicle and bicycle parking spaces results in a fractional number, a fraction of one-half or more is adjusted to the next higher whole number, and a fraction of less than one-half is adjusted to the next lower whole number. That said 43,809/10,000 = 4.3809 or 4 required, + 20,000/2,000 = 10 for a total of 14 vehicle parking spaces required. Also the calculation appears to shown 15 provided, 12 existing and 3 new but there are only 14 spaces shown on site. 25. COMMENT: Per UDC Article 7.4.6.D.2.c Parallel Parking Spaces. A parallel parking space must be eight feet wide and 23 feet in length, except as follows. A parallel parking space can be reduced to 18 feet in length if the space is located immediately adjacent to a driveway, access lane, PAAL , alley, or street intersection and the parking space is designed to provide maneuvering area on at least one end. That said it does not appear that the two (2) center parallel parking spaces meet the 23' length requirement. 26. COMMENT: Some type of barrier will be required to prevent parking vehicles from encroaching into the required 4' sidewalks, see UDC Article 7.4.6.H.1. Zoning acknowledges that wheel stops are shown on detail 1 sheet 2 but no wheel stops are shown on the plan. 27. COMMENT: Keynote DP22 refers to "REFER TO DETAIL" no detail was found on the drawing set for parallel vehicle parking spaces. 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. 28. COMMENT: Keynote DP26 refers to "REFER TO DTAIL 2 ON L1.1" no detail has been provide on L1.1 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. 29. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.C A sidewalk is required adjacent to any parking space accessed by a PAAL where the space is located on the same side of the PAAL as any building and no other parking spaces or PAALs intervene. That said a sidewalk is required along the south side of the 4,500 sq. ft building between the vehicle parking spaces and the building. 30. COMMENT: Provide a sidewalk width dimension for what appears to a sidewalk located between what appears to a wall and the accessible & standard vehicle parking spaces. This area is required to be a 4' wide sidewalk. 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 |
| 12/02/2015 | SSHIELD1 | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Foundation Building Materials Accessibility Review - On Site Only Development Package (2nd Review) DP15-0144 TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 2, 2015 DUE DATE: December 11, 2015 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. 1. Addressed Provide a note to that effect, that all accessible route slopes are to comply with ICC A117.1, Section 403.3; 5% maximum running slopes and 2% maximum cross slopes. 2. Addressed Provide a large scale detail of the accessible parking space showing all accessible requirements such as dimensions, markings, grade slopes, accessible parking aisle, signage, van accessible space and access to the accessible route. 3. This comment was not addressed. Per IBC Section 1106.5 the one provided accessible vehicle parking space is required to be van accessible. The sign detail does not show the required van accessible sign. Provide a large scale sign detail including a van accessible sign. 4. This comment was not addressed. Provide running slope directional arrows, running slope percentages, cross slope directional arrows and cross slope percentages for all surfaces along the required accessible route from the proposed building entrance to the sidewalk located in the right-of-way and from the building entrance to the accessible vehicle parking space per ICC A117.1-2009 403.3 and IBC 107.2.1 |
| 12/11/2015 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1) UDC 7.6.4.C.2 To enhance the visual appearance of the streetscape, a street landscape border is required in accordance with Table 7.6.4-1 along the street frontage of the site. Revise the plan to include the required 15 gal. min. trees. Provide the appropriate quantity, check the calculation. |
| 12/11/2015 | JOE LINVILLE | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved |