Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG
Permit Number - DP19-0205
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/26/2019 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/03/2019 | MASHFOR1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Reqs Change | Confirmation from Cypress Civil (Alberto Navarro) regarding the occupancy type/usage: This is actually a mixed-use occupancy with Group (B) retail space up top and a bar Group (A) down below. Please define the actual square footage that will be used for the specific Occupancy Group. This will determine whether Fire Sprinkler/Alarms will be required within the structure. Please also provide the occupancy load to also make our determination. A new C/O will be required since this will no longer be a Mattress Factory. |
| 09/11/2019 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: DP for Mattress Factory / Shopping Center development (Retail) Development Package (1st Review) 1021 S. 6th Avenue DP19-0205 - C-3 Zoning TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 10, 2019 DUE DATE: September 24, 2019 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. 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 22, 2020. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS) CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet: 1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 - Provide the development package case number, DP19-0205, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 - Identify the proposed use. In order to verify that this is truly a Shopping Center use, demonstrate that the uses proposes in the building will comply with the definition of Shopping Center. 3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6 - General note 22 states that this project has been designed to comply with the Downtown IID overlay. This plan does not appear to be requesting modifications nor does it appear that an IID application has been submitted for review. Clarify if an IID application is to be submitted for review? 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - If indeed and IID application is submitted for review and approval, list the IID case number next to the title block of each plan sheets and add a general note with the IID case number date and conditions of approval for any modifications requested and approved. 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.a - As a note include the square footage of the first and second floors separately. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.c - Clarify the expansion calculations. The numbers do not add up to the square footage listed on the building footprint. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.8.A - This site is made up of three parcels. Prior to approval of the DP a Pima County Tax Parcel Combo will be required. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.F - Label the zoning classification across 6th Avenue. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.2 - - It does not appear that the existing sight visibility triangles have been drawn in the correct location. Sixth Avenue has a bike lane in this area and the SVT can be drawn based on the five feet from the face of the existing curbs. There is no median island on Sixth Avenue, the pedestrian SVT shall be revised to include the correct far side SVT at the driveway. Also the SVT should not be drawn from the center of the driveway entrance and depicted, revise as required. Verify location with the PDSD Engineering reviewer. Also, Sixth Avenue is a major street and per the adopted MS&R map, will be widened to 90 feet. Per your plan the ½ R/W is just short of 40 feet in width. The future right of way information shall be drawn, labeled and dimensioned, including the future svt's. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.3 - At the end of a back-up-spur there must be a three foot clear area to any barrier or obstruction that is over 6 inches in height. Per the plan, vegetation is proposed within both 3-foot back-up-areas. Revise as required. Dimension the width of the back-up-area at the south parking area. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 - The north parking lot PAAL width is labeled as 22'. The minimum width for a two way PAAL is 24'. Revise as required. 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - There appears to be conflicting information as to the use of the property and building. Per the plan the proposed use is for a Shopping Center and per the Fire Departments plans reviewer the building is to be used as retail on the upper floor and Bar on the lower floor (per Alberto Navarro / Cypress). In order to verify that this is truly a shopping center the plans must clearly be drawn to demonstrate the use as defined by the Shopping Center definition. Shopping center as a use is not demonstrated nor confirmed as of this review. The parking requirements will be re-evaluated on the next submittal. Clearly define the accessible ramps from the ADA parking space access aisles leading to the sidewalk system. 13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.c - A Loading zone may be required based on the response to the uses proposed. If a bar is proposed a loading zone will be required. To be re-evaluated on the next submittal. 14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - The number of bicycle parking spaces bof short and long term will be re-evaluated on the next submittal. 15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.I - If right of way dedication is required revise the drawing with the new right of way line, future curb and sidewalks, labeled and dimensioned. 16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.J - If dedication is not required or proposed draw the Major Street right-of-way lines for Sixth Avenue, (Add the MS&R future sidewalk, right-of-way lines, sight visibility triangles, etc.). 17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O - Sixth Avenue is an Arterial roadway listed on the MS&R map. The street building setbacks along the Sixth Avenue frontage should be labeled from the existing and future back of curb locations. Unless the overall height of the building along the east side of the building is 22 feet the building setback appears to be incorrect. Keep in mind that the building setback can be based on the developing area setbacks along Arizona Avenue (based on the applicable ADT for this street). Check with TDOT for an ADT count for Arizona Avenue. 18. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q - The existing building is two stories but only for approximately 60 feet from the front of the building. The rest of the building is a single story structure and is less than 22 feet in height. Draw, label and dimension the second floor correctly on the building print of the building. Label the existing floor area of the second floor, first floor, and the proposed expansion within the building footprint. Clarify the expansion calculations, how is the 10,916 SF calculated. Label the heights of both the one and two story portions of the building. 19. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R - Clearly define the accessible ramp locations with slopes. 20. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.W - Consult with Heather Thrall with regards to the existing sign. The sign is considered a non-conforming and possibly a Historic Landmark Sign. Any proposed changes to the sign would require approval through a separate permit application. ***For additional information on the any standard presented in this memo, please refer to the City of Tucson "Unified Development Code" - Administrative Manual Section 2-06 or Technical Standards noted in the comments. https://www.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/all-codes-plans-determinations If you have any questions about this transmittal, Contact David Rivera at (520) 837-4957 or by email David.Rivera@tucsonaz.gov or contact Steve Shields any time during the week at (520) 837-4956 or email Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 09/11/2019 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Reqs Change | see zoning comments |
| 09/23/2019 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL 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 Development Package will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet: Any other relevant case numbers for reviews or modifications that affect the site. Provide the Case # DP19-0205 on plans. 7.6.4. LANDSCAPE STANDARDS Street Landscape Borders A street landscape border is an area running the full length of the street property line bounding the site except for points of ingress-egress. Street landscape borders must be a minimum of ten feet wide as measured from the street property line. Located on Site Street landscape borders must be located entirely on site, except that, if approved by the City Engineer or designee, up to five feet of the required ten foot width may be placed within the adjacent right-of-way area. Portions of the required landscape borders along Arizona Ave and 6th Ave are not 10' wide, not provided or located onsite. A Design Development Option (DDO) for Landscaping & Screening may be available contact Mark.Castro@tucsonaz.gov for more information. Additionally, obtain permission for use of the ROW Ensure that all Zoning comments and concerns are addressed. Additional comments may apply. |
| 10/01/2019 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (9891-15, 2409.0') is less than 12" below the first floor elevation (2409.4'). Provide a note on the plans requiring the installation of a backwater valve when future plumbing activities take place. Reference: Section 714.1, IPC 2018, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 10/07/2019 | JOHN VAN WINKLE | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DP19-0205 1) Minimum width for a PAAL accessing 90 degree parking is 24'. Current proposal shows northern PAAL to only be 20' wide. Reference UDC table 7.4.6-1. Update PAAL width as needed 2) Provide on plans waste stream calculations per TSM section 8-01.8.0 showing that with the proposed addition the existing trash service is sufficient 3) Sheet 6 is placed out of numerical order. Please adjust sheet placement 4) The Q100 =, D.A. =, is missing from the proposed water harvesting basin. See sheet 4, top left corner 5) Sheet 3. The site visibility triangle crosses through the Proposed Accessible Parking Space. Adjust placement of Site Visibility triangle or the accessible parking space, such that there is no interference. Note that the 20' stem of the SVT is measured from the edge of the vehicular travel lane 6) UDC section 7.4.6.H requires barriers, such as curbing, to prevent vehicles from driving onto unimproved portions of the site. Provide a barrier, such as curbing to prevent vehicles from driving into non-vehicular use areas, for the parking area in the southeast corner 7) Show compliance with UDC section 7.6.6.C. Available landscaped areas should be depressed up to 6" to maximize water harvesting. The southeast parking lot appears to be a good area to apply water harvesting. Provide details as needed 8) Sheet 3. The northern most parking area shows a 17' TYP dimension for the parking space. Please update this to be a minimum of 18' 9) Southern most accessible pathway appears to be interfered with by a man door into the building. Reference ICC A117.1 section 404.2.3.2 and provide appropriate clearance as needed 10) Southern most accessible pathway, excluding ramps, needs to be separated from the vehicular use area. Minimum curb height is 6", provided spot grades show a sidewalk height above pavement to be only about 4.8" John Van Winkle, P.E. John.VanWinkle@tucsonaz.gov 520-837-5007 |
| 10/09/2019 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PLAN RETURNED FOR CORRECTIONS NOTICE - A resubmittal is required Permit/Activity Number: DP19-0205 Project Description: SITE/GRADING - Mattress Factory, building expansion. The fee balance is $0 (zero). Thank you for your payment. To view the review comments: www.tucsonaz.gov/PRO, enter Activity Number. (If information isn't shown yet, check back later as data uploads to PRO periodically.) Submit the following items to the PDSD Filedrop: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/file-upload-pdsd. In the Project Description field, please include the Activity Number. 1) Comment Response Letter (listing your response to the reviewer's comments and the changes that were made) 2) Plan Set (all pages, full set) 3) Any other documents requested by review staff 4) Name your 2nd submittal documents accordingly, for example: 2_Plan_Set Thank you. Sharon Beasley, Permit Specialist City of Tucson Planning and Development Services Attn: Permit Counter/Payments 201 N. Stone Avenue, First Floor Tucson, AZ 85701 |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/09/2019 | SBEASLE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |