Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG
Permit Number - DP20-0159
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/10/2020 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 08/11/2020 | GDAURIA1 | FIRE | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 08/17/2020 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 09/04/2020 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL SECTION 2-10.0.0: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS 4.1 Identification and Descriptive Data A. 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 development package will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet: Any relevant case numbers for reviews or modifications that affect the site. Provide Case # DP20-0159 on each sheet. 5.4.2. APPLICABILITY The MS&R standards apply to the following uses on property, any portion of which abuts or is adjacent to a street designated on the City's or County's MS&R Plan: A. New structures; B. Changes of use, including new structures occurring on vacant land; C. Uses of land or structures legally existing as of June 27, 1988, that are expanded in floor area, lot coverage, parking, seating capacity, or any other expansion of use, as listed below. Exception. An expansion of off-street parking for a nonconforming existing use that increases the number of spaces to the minimum required by the UDC for that use is exempt from counting toward the 25% expansion: (See Figure 5.4-A.) 1. If the expansion is less than 25%, the MS&R applies to the proposed expansion. The remainder of the use or structure shall be governed by provisions in force at the time of initial approval for the use or structure; 2. If the expansion is 25% or more, the MS&R applies to the proposed expansion and to the parking and landscaping standards that apply to the overall development. Provide expansion calculation. The landscape plan shall include the following: Calculations a) Square footage of the site; b) Square footage of the vehicular use area; number of parking spaces, including the required and provided parking space calculations; and the calculation of the required number of canopy trees. c) Square footage of all landscaped borders and calculation of the percentage of vegetative coverage, when applicable. 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 Zoning and Engineering comments are addressed prior to landscape section approval. Additional comments may apply |
| 09/08/2020 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Site Section Manager PROJECT: Optimum Inc Development Package (1st Review) DP20-0159 TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 8, 2020 DUE DATE: September 8, 2020 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 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 08, 2021. 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 1. 2-06.3.12 - An index of sheets in the development package shall be provided on the first sheet. 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2. 2-06.4.1 - Provide an email address for the OWNER/DEVELOPER. 3. 2-06.4.2.B - Provide a brief legal description within the title block. 4. 2-06.4.3 - Provide the Development Package case number, DP20-0159, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 5. 2-06.4.4.C - Label the section corners on the location map. 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 6. 2-06.4.7.A.4 - The use called out under GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN NOTE 3 is not correct. The UDC does not have a use of "COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION" but it appears that the proposed use should be Construction Services. Also include the applicable Use Specific Standard, 4.9.13.Q. Remove the reference to "INDUSTRIAL GROUP" as construction services is part of the Commercial Use Group. Also clarify what the proposed use is as GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN NOTE 3 calls out a different use than what is called out under the parking calculation. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 7. 2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Provide a Floor Area Ratio calculation on the plan, see UDC Article 5.6.8.B.1.c. 8. 2-06.4.7.A.8.c - Provide a building expansion calculation on the plan. 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. 9. 2-06.4.8.A - It is not clear where the north property line is located. Clearly show the north property line along with the distance and bearing. 10. 2-06.4.8.B - Clearly show all easements on the plan. Provide the recordation information for the 30' public drainage easement. Base on the approved plat for this subdivision there is a 60' Exist. Elec Esmt that runs through this parcel. Show this easement on the plan long with the recordation information. 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. 11. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - Per UDC Article 7.4.6.H.1 Barriers, such as post barricades or wheel stop curbing, are required in a vehicular use area to prevent vehicles from driving onto unimproved portions of the site. Clearly demonstrate how this requirement is met for all PAALs and access lanes. 12. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Based on a construction services use the vehicle parking space calculation is not correct. Construction services is parked at 1 space per 300 square feet of gross floor area. This includes all buildings on site including storage containers. Until the proposed use is clarified the required number of vehicle parking spaces cannot be verified. 13. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Detail 2 sheet 1 does not match what is proposed on site. Provide a detail that matches what is proposed. Provide a location dimension for the wheel stop shown on this detail, see UDC Article 7.4.6.H.3. 14. 2-06.4.9.H.5.c - The existing loading space shown on the plan cannot be accessed through required vehicle parking. 15. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Until the proposed use is clarified the required number of bicycle parking spaces cannot be verified but it appears that the bicycle calculation is base on the LUC not the UDC. Also, Class 1 & 2 bicycle parking is not the correct terminology. Per the UDC the correct terminology is Long - and Short - Term bicycle parking. 16. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Detail 4 sheet 1 does not match what is proposed on site. The site only shows 2 racks, provide a detail that matches what is shown on the plant. The distance shown between racks is not correct and should be 4', see UDC Article 7.4.9.B.2.f. Detail 4 should also address UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1.e, 7.4.9.B.2.d, .f & .h. 17. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Provide a detail for the required long - term bicycle parking that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.f and 7.4.9.D. 18. 2-06.4.9.Q - Provide the height for building #1 within the footprint and provide the height and square footage for all storage containers. 19. 2-06.4.9.Q - The "BUILDING HEIGHT: ALLOWED (25'-0") is not correct. Per UDC Table 6.3-5.A: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE P-I, I-2, & I-2 ZONES, I-2 zone the maximum allowed height is 140'. 20. 2-06.4.9.R - Clearly demonstrate how the requirements of TSM Section 7-01.4.2 are met for all sidewalks on the plan. 21. 2-06.4.9.R - Per TSM Section 7-01.3.3 Within all development, a continuous pedestrian circulation path is required as follows: A. This path must connect all public access areas of the development and the pedestrian circulation path located in any adjacent streets. 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. That said show the required sidewalk to all structures on the site, this includes the storage containers. This pedestrian circulation must all meet the accessibility requirements. 22. 2-06.4.9.R - As wheel stops are not provided for the vehicle parking spaces shown along the east side of the western most PAAL the sidewalk must be 6'-6" wide to accommodate the 2'-6" vehicle overhang. 23. There is a call out of "RAMPS PER ANSI ICC 117.1 SEC. 405 AND 406.12 STANDARD TYP." Near the "EXISTING SOLD WASTE DUMPSTER" that does not point to anything, clarify. 24. Sheet 2 there is a call out for "EXISTING 8' CHAINI LINK FENCE W/SLATS 10' BACK FROM PROPERTY LINE" along the west property line, it appears this fence is right on the property line. 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 |
| 09/24/2020 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: Sept. 24, 2020 RETURNED FOR CORRECTIONS NOTICE Your Next Steps: 1. Payment 2. Resubmittal of your updated/corrected documents DESCRIPTION: SITE/GRADING - Optima Inc, new building and driveway. PERMIT/ACTIVITY: DP20-0159 FEES DUE: $ 1,965.73 Please pay the total fees (or at a minimum, the REVIEW Fees). A payment is required before your next submittal. ONLINE PAYMENTS **Allow 1-2 days for correct amount to show** https://www.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/fees (Visa, MC, Discover, American Express or pay from checking account) 1- Click on: Pay Planning & Permit Fees 2- Enter your Permit Nbr, example: dp20-0000 (not case-sensitive but a hyphen-dash- is needed) 3- Business/Individual Name: Leave blank 4- Click the blue tab: Continue 5- Under the Pay column, check the boxes you want to pay 6- Click Continue, then enter your credit card info 7- If any issues, try using the browser Internet Explorer SEE REVIEW COMMENTS and your submitted documents on PRO: www.tucsonaz.gov/pro (If information is not available, check back later after data transfers to PRO.) - Home page, Activity Search, enter the Activity/Permit Number - Permits - click on blue tab - Reviews - click on Review Details - Documents - click on View to the right of each document YOUR NEXT STEP: Submit documents to the Filedrop https://www.tucsonaz.gov/file-upload-pdsd 1) Comment Response Letter (your response to the reviewer's Requires Change comments) 2) Plan Set (all pages, full set, even if no changes were made) 3) Any other documents requested by review staff - Name the 2nd submittal documents starting with the submittal number, for example: 2_Plan_Set IMPORTANT: On the Filedrop page, select the box: "Site Review/CDRC..." Thank you. Sharon Beasley, Permit Specialist City of Tucson Planning and Development Services email: COTDSDPermits@TucsonAz.gov |
| 09/24/2020 | JOHN VAN WINKLE | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Provide waste stream calculations on plans per Technical Standards Manual (TSM) section 8-01.8.0 2. Sheet 4 detail 7 - Provide a trash enclosure detail to meet TSM section 8-01.9.0 3. Show access and maneuvering details per TSM section 8 4. Provide a complete pedestrian circulation path per COT TSM section 7-01.3.3.B, includes a path to the proposed trash enclosures 5. Onsite circulation paths must comply to construction standards per TSM section 7-01.4.3.C including existing asphalt path to Vail Rd 6. Provide cross slopes and running slopes for all new/existing sidewalks. Add note on plans that any out of compliance existing sidewalks will be replaced 7. Sheet C-3 - indicated detail 2 on sheet C-1 for parking spaces and show wheel stops on plans 8. Sheet C-2 - show ROW lines on Old Vail RD 9. Show existing sidewalk on Old Vail RD. Show cross slopes and running slope to show compliance 10. Show on plans that curb access ramps located in the right of way will be updated to PAG standard detail 207 and be in compliance with ICC A117. Including the use of detectable warnings 11. Per TSM section 10-01.3.2.C. At the intersections of streets with other streets or collector or arterial streets with PAALs/Driveways, the curb lines will be connected with a curve having the minimum radius shown in Figure 6, measured at the face of the curb. Show the radius of the new driveways apron connecting to Old Vail Rd 12. Sheet C-4 - update general note 8 to be in compliance with TSM section 10-01.5.1.A.1 13. Sheet C-2 - Show that there is sufficient vehicular maneuvering area to preclude a vehicle from having to back out onto Vail Rd. For all access gates show that there is sufficient vehicle turn around area 14. Sheet C-4 Drainage Statement - please provide a copy of complete drainage report showing that the 5 year threshold retention and detention for a balanced basin are being met 15. Provide SWPPP manual and plans 16. This project will require a pre-construction meeting prior to issuance of the development package permit. Project will require EOR certification prior to final inspection 17. Provide spot grades in all depressed water harvesting areas. Spot grades to take into account the depth of ground cover proposed 18. Provide construction details of existing/expanded water harvesting basin and detention/retention basins on site 19. Clarify existing weir structure purpose/function at southwest of project site 20. Show compliance with UDC section 7.6.6.C. Available landscaped areas should be depressed up to 6" to maximize water harvesting. Provide curb cut locations to allow parking lot/vehicle use areas to drain into the water harvesting areas. 21. Per Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual section 3.4.2 provide a grade control marker for each of the proposed detention basins. On the plans please also provide the coordinates of the grade control markers so that they can be easily located in the future 22. Reference City of Tucson Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, include all applicable drainage maintenance responsibility notes found in section 14.3 23. Sheet C-4 - show drainage patterns including roof drain directions and show not only existing but also proposed spot grades and contours for grading 24. Ensure that roof drains, from the new buildings, scupper underneath sidewalks as needed. Reference COT TSM section 7-01.4.1.e 25. Provide area of disturbance in acres 26. Sheet C-1 - Please provide sheet index 27. All sheets please clean up text overlapping, dimension lines and label pointing to nothing 28. Addition comments may apply after required documents are submitted Stephen Blood stephen.blood@tucsonaz.gov |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/24/2020 | SBEASLE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |