Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG
Permit Number - DP20-0186
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/28/2020 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 10/01/2020 | GDAURIA1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Reqs Change | * Verify fire aerial access required at east drive complying with IFC D105. * Show fire undergound. * Fire flow to be calculated using IFC B105 * FYI - If high-piled storage, emergency rescue openings (man doors) to be provided every 125'. |
| 10/26/2020 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL 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. 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 # DP20-0186 on each sheet. Ensure that Zoning and Engineering comments are addressed prior to landscape section approval. Additional comments may apply |
| 10/26/2020 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 10/26/2020 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Section Manager PROJECT: Daybreak Distribution Center Development Package (1st Review) DP20-0186 TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 26, 2020 DUE DATE: October 26, 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). 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 27, 2021. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, DP20-0186, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 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. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - Provide a general note on the cover sheet stating “THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC ARTICLE 5.4 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R) & ARTICLE 5.6 AIRPORT ENVIRONS ZONE (AEZ).” 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. 3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.8.C – Provide the following information regarding existing public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: right-of-way width, dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. 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. 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.2 – Based on the COT MS&R plan Tucson Blvd has a future ½ right-of-way (ROW) 60’. As your plan shows the current ½ ROW at 50’, provide future SVT’s on the plan. Also Keynote 9 states “SEE KEYNOTE FOR DIMENSIONS” Zoning was unable to find a keynote that calls out the dimensions of the SVT’s. 5. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The vehicle parking space calculation is not correct and should be based on the primary use of General Manufacturing as stated in General Note 3. 6. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – The short – and long – term bicycle parking space calculation is not correct and should be based on the primary use of General Manufacturing as stated in General Note 3. Per UDC Table 7.4.8-1: Minimum Required Bicycle Parking Spaces, INDUSTRIAL USE GROUP, Short – Term required is zero, and Long – Term is based on 1 space per 15,000 sq. ft. GFA. Minimum requirement is 2 spaces. Maximum required is 10 spaces. 7. 2-06.4.9.O – You show the building height as 38’ in General Note 18 and within the footprint of the building but you show the required street perimeter yard setback as 48’ for Ginter & Wieding. Also, the required street perimeter yard for Tucson is shown at 38’. Clarify what height is correct. Also, the street perimeter yard setbacks are shown to the property line. Based on the UDC definition of Established Area Setbacks established area only applies to streets that are not shown on the COT MS&R map therefore street perimeter yard setbacks are based on UDC Article 6.4.5.C.2. Per a Zoning Administrator determination, you cannot mix established area and developing area setbacks so all street perimeter yard setbacks are based on UDC Article 6.4.5.C.2. Per UDC Table 6.4.5.C-1 Tucson Blvd perimeter yard setback is measured from the back of future curb, Ginter Rd & Wieding Ed are measured from the outside edge of the nearest adjacent travel lane. 8. 2-06.4.9.Q – As this site is within the Airport Hazard District for TIA provide a height based on the mean sea level (MSL) elevations of the established NE end of runway 21, provide a height based on UDC Article 5.6.11.A.1. 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 |
| 10/29/2020 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 11/20/2020 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Show Sight Visibility Triangles for the intersections of Ginter Road and Wieding Road with Tucson Boulevard. 2. Show dimensions for sidewalks, both existing and proposed. 3. Keynote 21 in the driveway to Ginter Road indicates a new wall or fence. The location of the wall or fence is not clearly indicated. Please make sure the locations of all indicated features are clearly identified. 4. Check dimension labels throughout the plans. For example, the 40' dimension in the south quarter of the truck area is probably incorrect. |
| 11/23/2020 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: November 23, 2020 RETURNED FOR CORRECTIONS NOTICE Your Next Steps: Resubmittal of your updated/corrected documents IMPORTANT: On the upload page, select the box: "Site Review..." when sending your next submittal. PERMIT/ACTIVITY: DP20-0186 DESCRIPTION: Site/Grading/SWPPP - Daybreak Distribution Center. FEE BALANCE: $0 (zero) Thank you for the payment. 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 (NEW LINK for all uploads): https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp 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 - Title the documents for your 2nd submittal starting with the submittal number, for example: 2_Plan_Set IMPORTANT: On the upload page, select the box: "Site Review..." when sending your next submittal. City of Tucson Attn: Sharon Beasley, Permit Specialist Planning and Development Services email: COTDSDPermits@TucsonAz.gov |