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: DP16-0196
Parcel: 124150330

Address:
941 E 19TH ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL

Permit Number - DP16-0196
Review Name: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
04/30/2018 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
05/02/2018 SSHIELD1 H/C SITE REVIEW Reqs Change See Zoning comments
05/02/2018 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
4.1 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.
COMMENTS: the following comments are relative to an application for a Design Development Option (DDO) (UDC 3.11.1).
Applicability

The following dimensional, screening, and landscaping standards may be considered for modification under this Section:

Landscaping and screening standards when the modification does not decrease the required area in square footage of landscaping or height of a screening feature:

Provide calculation of

This site is located in the I-1 zone (UDC 4.7.29).
7.6.4. LANDSCAPE STANDARDS
Minimum Width:

Street landscape borders must be a minimum of ten feet wide as measured from the street property line. On streets designated as Major Streets and Routes (MS&R), the street landscape border must be measured from the future MS&R right-of-way line as determined by Section 5.4.4, Establishment of MS&R Right-of-Way Lines and Gateway Routes.

Portions for the landscape buffer along 19st do not meet the 10' requirement.

7.6.5. SCREENING STANDARDS

When Required
Screening for individual land uses and zones must be provided as determined in Table 7.6.4-1 and in addition to the required landscape borders. Screening is not required between similar uses in accordance with Table 7.6.4-1.

A 30" screen is required to screen vehicle use areas and drive thru on 19th street and Park Ave.

Note: Vegetation used to meet the screening standards is not included in the ground cover calculation as provided in Section 5-01.5.3, Calculation of Plant Growth Coverage.


The following information must be provided on the landscape plans
Screening
a. Location of screening elements;
b. Height of screening material and reference point for measurement;
c. Type of screening material (e.g., masonry wall, wood fence, species of plant material).

Ensure that all Zoning comments have been addressed.

Additional comments may apply.
05/02/2018 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Principal Planner

PROJECT: BK Restaurant Commissary
Development Package (2nd Review)
DP16-0196

TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 2, 2018

DUE DATE: May 3, 2018

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).

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 26, 2018.

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

1. This comment was not fully addressed; sheet 5 does not have a DP approval stamp. 2-06.3.5 - Provide the development package approval stamp on all sheets of the development package. Sheets 2 - 5 do not have a stamp.

2. Addressed. 2-06.3.10 - The keynote symbol, diamond, should match the symbol, hexagon, shown on the plan.

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

3. Based on your comment response the proposed uses are Food Service and Administrative and Professional Office, but based on parking calculations, Building floor area, and call outs within the building footprints it also appears that some type of storage use is proposed. Separating out storage use only applies if you are proposing a separate use with a separate C of O for something like Personal or Commercial Storage. If the Storage shown on the plan is storage for the Food Service or Office the GFA is calculated based on the primary use. This also applies to the office spaces shown. If the office will receive a separate C of O totally separate from the food service uses than it can be calculated as a separate use. 2-06.4.7.A.4 - General Note 2 appears to propose three (3) separate uses on site, Food and Beverage Wholesaling, & Retail. Under General Note 23 Parking Calculations (Phase I) you list Wholesaling, Office, Storage, and Food Service & Terrace. Under Building Floor Area you list Wholesaling, Office Storage, Restaurant, Commercial Kitchen & Covered porch. Are you proposing several primary uses (mixed use) or are you proposing single primary use, wholesaling with accessory uses. Until this comment is addressed development standards cannot be verified and additional comments may be forth coming.


4. Addressed. 2-06.4.7.A.4 - General Note 2 you list Retail as a use. Retail is a use group; clarify what retail use you are proposing.

5. Addressed. 2-06.4.7.A.4 - General Note 23 Parking Calculations (Phase I) you list Terrace as a use, clarify what this use is.

6. Addressed. 2-06.4.7.A.4 - Under Building Floor Area you list covered porch as a use, clarify what this use is.

7. This comment was not addressed. 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - As a Design Development Option (DDO) is required for street perimeter yard setback reduction, see comment 26; provide the DDO case number adjacent to the title block on all sheets. Also provide a general note stating the DDO case number, date of approval, what was varied and if applicable any 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.

8. This comment was not addressed. It appears that under General Note 23 "PARKING CALCULATIONS (PHASE 1); the "MOTOR VEHICLE: FULL DEVELOPMENT" is phase 2. If this is the case label it correctly. Also under General Note 23 you list "CITY OF TUCSON LAND USE CODE, DIV 3, SEC 3.3.4"a. The LUC is no longer the applicable code and should reference the correct Unified Development Code section. 2-06.4.9.G - The drawings shown "Phase I & Phase II" but no Phase II calculations are provided. Provide all applicable calculations, vehicle & bicycle parking etc.

9. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show all required sight visibility triangles on the plan.

10. This comment was not fully addressed. Provide an access lane width dimension for the eastern most one-way access lane and the drive-thru exist onto 19th Street. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - Provide access lane width dimensions for all entrances/exits on to 19th Street.

11. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - Per UDC Table 7.4.6-2 the proposed drive thru is required to be 10'-0" wide.

12. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - Per UDC Article 7.4.6.F.2.a.(2) show the required 1'-0" from the drive thru to the building.

13. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - There is some type of structure shown north of the west end of the proposed drive thru lane. If this structure is over 6" tall show the required 2'-0" setback to the drive thru, see UDC Article 7.4.6.F.2.b.

14. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Until comment 3 has been addressed the vehicle parking requirements cannot be verified.

15. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Provide a PAAL width dimension for the PAAL providing access to the angled vehicle parking. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Provide a "A Parking Angle" for the proposed angled vehicle parking, see UDC Figure 7.4.6-A.

16. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Provide a typical parking space detail for a standard parking spaces.

17. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - The Handicap sign detail, sheet 4 provide a sign mounting height for the "VAN" sign. This dimension should be 7'-0" to grade.

18. Until comment 3 has been addressed the vehicle parking requirements cannot be verified. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Provide a Phase II vehicle parking space calculation that addresses the proposed use, ratio used, number required and provided along with the required and provided accessible vehicle parking spaces.

19. Zoning acknowledges that three (3) accessible vehicle parking space have been provided near the future buildings. The northern most space requires an accessible access aisle; see ICC A117.1-2009 502.4. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show the required accessible vehicle parking spaces for Phase II.

20. 2-06.4.9.H.5.c - Until comment 3 has been addressed the loading space requirements cannot be verified.

21. Once comment 3 has been addressed loading space requirements can be verified. 2-06.4.9.H.5.c - Provide a loading space calculation for Phase II.

22. Once comment 3 has been addressed bicycle parking requirements can be verified. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Until comment 3 has been addressed the short and long term bicycle parking requirements cannot be verified.

23. Once comment 3 has been addressed bicycle parking requirements can be verified. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Provide a Phase II short and long term bicycle space calculation that addresses the proposed use, ratio used, number required and provided.

24. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Provide a detail for the proposed short term bicycle parking that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1, .2 and 7.4.9.C are met.

25. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Provide a detail for the proposed long term bicycle parking that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1, .2 and 7.4.9.D are met.

26. This comment was not addressed. If the DDO is approved provide the DDO case number adjacent to the title block and provide a general note stating the DDO case number, date of approval, what was modified and if applicable any conditions of approval. 2-06.4.9.O - Sheet 1 "Setbacks" the street perimeter yards setback appears to be incorrect. You have listed a developing area setback and it does not appear that this site meets the definition of developing area. The street perimeter yard setbacks for this site should be listed as 20'-0" or 1-½ the height of the height of the proposed exterior building wall, whichever is greatest, measured from the street property line. That said a Design Development Option (DDO) will be required to be submitted and approved prior to approval of the development package.

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

28. This comment was not fully addressed. Sheet 2 provide sidewalk width dimension for all sidewalks highlighted in blue on. 2-06.4.9.R - Provide width dimensions for all proposed and existing sidewalks on the plan.

29. Addressed. 2-06.4.9.R - Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.A & .D clearly show the required sidewalk from the proposed/existing buildings to the south street property line.

30. Zoning acknowledges that the required connection is shown on the plan but there are not sufficient spot elevations to evaluate the grades. 2-06.4.9.R - Per TSM Section 7-01.3.3.B show the required sidewalk between the existing/addition to the future building. This sidewalk is required to meet the requirements of the ICC A117.1-2009 for accessibly.

31. Zoning acknowledges that the proposed accessible routes have been somewhat marked on the plan but there are not sufficient spot elevations, that are readable, to evaluate the grades. 2-06.4.9.R - Clearly show the accessible route from the accessible vehicle parking spaces to both buildings, existing and proposed and to 19th Street. Provide spot elevations so that the requirements of ICC A117.1-2009 405 can be verified.

32. Based on the spot elevations provided Zoning cannon verify that the cross slopes have been met on the proposed ramps, 2-06.4.9.R - Ramp and Stairs Addition detail, sheet 4, provide spot elevations so that the requirements of ICC A117.1-2009 405 can be verified for the proposed ramp.

33. As handrails have been provided provide the required handrail extensions for bottom of the ramp, see ICC A117.1-2009 505.10.1, 505.10.2 & 505.10.3. 2-06.4.9.R - Ramp and Stairs Addition detail, sheet 4, until comment 32 is addressed the requirements of ICC A117.1-2009 405.8 cannot be determined. If handrails are required clearly demonstrate that the clear width of 36" is maintained, see ICC A117.1-2009 Section 405.5.

34. As handrails have been provided provide the required handrail extensions for the top and bottom of the stairs see ICC A117.1-2009 505.10.2 & 505.10.3. 2-06.4.9.R - Ramp and Stairs Addition detail, sheet 4, clearly shown the required handrails for the proposed stairs, see ICC A117.1-2009 Section 504.6.

Additional comments;
35. 2-06.4.9.G - General Note 23 "MOTOR VEHICLE PHASE 1" the total square footage does not appear to be correct. Based on square footage listed on sheet 2 within the footprint of the Existing and proposed addition the total square footage should be 13,795. Also clarify what the raised deck will be used for, and if this area is use for food or beverage service is must be included in all calculations.

36. 2-06.4.9.G - The phasing is unclear; provide phase lines that clearly shown what will be built in each phase.

37. 2-06.4.9.R - Ramp and Stairs Addition detail, sheet 4, clearly demonstrate that the landing at the bottom of the ramp meets the requirements of ICC A117.1-2009 405.7.3. Provide length and width dimension for all ramp landings.

38. 2-06.4.9.R - Ramp and Stairs Addition detail, sheet 4, clearly demonstrate that a clear 4'-0" wide sidewalk is provided from then end of the required handrail extension.

39. 2-06.4.9.R - Along the east side of the existing building there is a combo keynote, 26 & 9. Keynote 26 calls for a sidewalk flush with parking, Keynote 9 calls for a raised concreate sidewalk, clarify which type of sidewalk is proposed.

40. 2-06.4.9.R - Along the east side of the Phase II parking area there is a sidewalk called out under Keynote 26, Keynote 26 calls for a sidewalk flush with parking. Just north of this there is a Keynote 25 calling out a ramp. Clarify why a ramp is necessary if the sidewalk is flush with pavement in this area.

41. 2-06.4.9.Q - Clearly identify the "COVERED PATIO" called out for the proposed addition. Based on a square footage shown on the plan and a quick takeoff of the square footage that the square footage listed for the addition is correct.

42. 2-06.4.9.Q - There are two (2) areas, one near the northwest corner of the existing building and one at the south end of the proposed restaurant that appear to be patios. Clarify what these areas are and if they are proposed to be use area such as food or beverage service they must be included in all calculations..

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
05/04/2018 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Approved
05/08/2018 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change Second comment: Revise the site drawing to show the point of connection of the existing building to the public sewer. Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual, Section 2-06.4.8D and Section 107.2.1, IBC 2012.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
09/18/2018 QJONES1 APPROVAL SHELF Completed
09/18/2018 QJONES1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
09/18/2018 QJONES1 REJECT SHELF Completed