Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Active
Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING
Permit Number - DP15-0193
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Active
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/12/2015 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | An additional fire hydrant will be required because after the addition is complete, the existing fire hydrant on Bilby will be further than 600 feet away from all portions of the exterior walls per the 2012 IFC. A fire hydrant may be added off of the 6 inch FP line that is existing to meet the distance requirements. |
| 12/07/2015 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. The drainage standards manual requires annual inspection of the basin. Provide the most recent inspection report to demonstrate the functioning of the basin. 2. Show the limits of grading along with existing and propose spot grades. 3. On sheet C3 the detail callout for the sidewalk scupper provides the incorrect location of the detail. Ensure all callouts and details are correctly referenced. 4. Provide a note or detail describing the surface shown at the south side of the buildings. |
| 12/07/2015 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Michael St Paul Planning Technician PROJECT: DP15-0193 2660 East Bilby Road Manufacturing: P-I & I-1 zones TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 7, 2015 DUE DATE: December 7, 2015 1) COMMENT: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Unified Development Code, The Administrative and Technical Manuals were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Package Standards listed in section 2-06 of the City of Tucson Administrative Manual. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC). 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 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 . 2. 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. 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.3.12 - An index of sheets in the development package shall be provided on the first sheet. 2) COMMENT: The sheet index may need to be adjusted if additional sheets are necessary. 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.4.1 - The name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s), or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional, such as a surveyor, architect, landscape architect, or engineer. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines. 3) COMMENT: Provide the email address for property owners. 2-06.4.2.D - The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx). 4) COMMENT: Include all the sheets submitted within the numbering system. 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 2-06.4.8.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. 5) COMMENT: Provide all existing easements, as described above, on the site plan. 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 - Proposed Traffic Circulation 2-06.4.9.H.3 - Indicate fire circulation, including accessibility and vehicle maneuverability. 6) COMMENT: See review comments by the Fire Department. 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. 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. 7) COMMENT: Provide dimensions and details for all parking, accessible parking and PAALs. 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. 8) COMMENT: Provide bicycle parking locations and provide fully dimensioned details. 2-06.4.9.L - All proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. The easements may have to be recorded and the recordation information added to the development package prior to approval. 9) COMMENT: If there are any proposed easements, depict those easements on the site plan as described above. 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. 10) COMMENT: Continuous pedestrian circulation paths are required with all development (TS 7.01.3.3). A) The pedestrian path must be connected to all public access areas of the development and to any adjacent streets (TS 7-01.3.3.A). B) "The areas within the development which must be connected include, but are not limited to, all buildings, all bicycle and vehicle parking areas, all recreation areas, all dumpster areas, and all other common use areas" (TS 7-01.3.3.B). C) "Within this pedestrian circulation path, an accessible route is also required in compliance with the city's adopted building codes" (TS 7-01.3.2). "Pedestrian circulation paths designed for barrier-free accessibility for the physically disabled and located within any development are regulated by the adopted building codes" (TS 7-01.3.3.C). 11) COMMENT: See HC review comments. 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. 12) COMMENT: All signs shall require a separate permitting process. 2-06.4.9.X - Show compliance with landscaping and screening requirements by locations, material descriptions, and dimensions. Specific plant or hardscape material shall be detailed on a landscape plan. A detailed landscape plan is required. In accordance with Section 2-11.0.0, Landscape Plan Requirements. 13) COMMENT: See review comments by Andrew Conner. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Michael St. Paul, (520) 837-4959. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package site plan and any requested documents. |
| 12/07/2015 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Provide new NPP plan or Application for Exception with acceptable documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants. Such documentation includes photographs of the site taken from all sides of the property. |
| 12/07/2015 | MSTPAUL1 | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 12/07/2015 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Identification and Descriptive Data All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the landscape plan will be identical in size and location to those shown on the base plan (site plan or tentative plat). Should amendments be required to the base plan through the review process, the same amendments will be made to the landscape plan which will then be resubmitted along with the base plan. The landscape plan submitted does not match the site and grading plans. The landscape plan will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet: Any relevant case number for reviews or modifications that affect the site. 7.6.2. APPLICABILITY. Buildings 10,000 Square Feet or Less On sites where the gross floor area of the existing building(s) is 10,000 square feet or less, expansions in square footage of land area, floor area, lot coverage, or vehicular use area as follows. If the expansion is less than 50%, the standards of this section apply only to the proposed expansion. Existing development on the site is subject to the zoning standards in effect at the time the existing development received zoning approval. If the expansion is 50% or greater or if expansions as of February 15, 1991, cumulatively result in a 50% or greater expansion in land area, floor area, lot coverage, or vehicular use area, the standards of this section apply to the entire site. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ARTICLE 7: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING 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 a site Including undeveloped portions of the site. Barriers Barriers, such as post barricades or wheel stop curbing, are required in a vehicular use area to prevent vehicles from extending beyond the property lines, to prevent cars from damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings, overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas, and/or driving onto unimproved portions of the site. Provide new NPP plan or Application for Exception with acceptable documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants. Such documentation includes photographs of the site taken from all sides of the property. Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. Additional comments may apply |
| 12/07/2015 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Revise the site utility drawing to include the location, invert and rim elevations of the upstream and downstream manholes, along with the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD) reference numbers. If the rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole is higher than the first floor elevation or is less than 12" below the first floor elevation, provide a note on the plans requiring the installation of a backwater valve when future plumbing activities take place. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 12/07/2015 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Michael St. Paul Planning Technician PROJECT: Accessibility Review - On Site Only 2660 East Bilby Road DP15-0193 TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 7, 2015 DUE DATE: December 7, 2015 1) COMMENT: Please resubmit revised drawings and any redlined plans along with a detailed response letter, which states how all handicapped accessible review comments were addressed. 2) COMMENT: Provide an accessible route from the accessible parking space to the accessible route at the building and to all accessible entrances of the building. 3) COMMENT: Insure and 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. 4) COMMENT: 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. 5) COMMENT: 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 per ICC A117.1-2009 403.3 and IBC 107.2.1 6) COMMENT: Place the accessible parking signs out of both the parking spaces and the pedestrian circulation. (See zoning review comment # 10.) 7) COMMENT: Provide an accessible sign detail (Tucson City Code 20-222(a)). |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/05/2015 | ANY | REJECT SHELF | RECEIVED |