Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG
Permit Number - DP20-0187
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/04/2020 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/04/2020 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department, Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields, Section Manager PROJECT: Sprint Communication Development Package (1st Review), DP20-0187 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 3, 2020 DUE DATE: November 3, 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 November 02, 2021. 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS 1. 2-06.3.12 – The sheet index should include both sheets. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2. 2-06.4.1 – Provide the email address for the contractor and engineer on the plan. 3. 2-06.4.2.D – Provide the page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx) in the title block on all sheets. 4. 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, DP20-0187 , adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 5. 2-06.4.4 – The location map shows that it is drawn at 3” = 1 mile but it is drawn at almost double that. 6. 2-06.4.2.C – The sections corners shown on the location map are not correct. 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 7. 2-06.4.7.A.2 – The minimum lot size listed under general note 5 is not correct, per UDC TABLE 6.3-5.A: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE P-I, I-2, & I-2 ZONES, I-1 Zone there is no minimum lot size. 8. 2-06.4.7.A.4 – General Note 3 lists the use as “SHADE STRUCTURE AWNING “ this is not a use; Provide the use of the site and if applicable the Use Specific Standards, based on the UDC 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 - Provide the distance and bearing for the south and west property lines. 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. 10. 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Based on current aerial photos there is what appears to be an existing shade structure located near the southwest corner of the main building. Clarify if this structure is to remain and if so show it on the plan as it appears that it could affect access to the proposed shade structure and the vehicle parking spaces shown under the structure. 11. 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Fully dimension the vehicle use area. 12. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The required number of vehicle parking spaces does not appear to be correct, show the gross floor area used in this calculation. 13. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Detail 1 sheet 1 the parking space width does not meet the minimum B Space Width requirements of UDC Figure 7.4.6-A. 14. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Detail 1 sheet 1 the dimension shown for the wheel stop does not meet the requirement of UDC Article 7.4.6.H.3. 15. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – 2018 IBC Chapter 11, Section 1106.5 for every six or fraction of six accessible parking spaces, at least one shall be a van-accessible parking space. That said detail 2 sheet 1 does not meet the requirements of ICC A117.1-2009 Section 502.2. 16. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Detail 3 sheet 1 the height dimension for the sign should be 7’ to the bottom of the van accessible sign. 17. 2-06.4.9.O – The perimeter yard setbacks listed under General Note 5 are not correct. As both Park and 18th are listed on the COT Major Streets and Routes plan and the ADT is 1000 or greater the required street perimeter yard setback is 21’ or the height of the exterior wall, greater of the two, measured from the back of future or existing curb, whichever is more restrictive. For the east property line perimeter yard setback, per UDC TABLE 6.3-5.A: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE P-I, I-2, & I-2 ZONES, I-1 Zone, Non Residential use to a Residential Zone the perimeter yard setback is 1 ½ times the height of the building exterior wall, for the north property line perimeter yard setback, per UDC TABLE 6.3-5.A: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE P-I, I-2, & I-2 ZONES, I-1 Zone, Non Residential use to a Non Residential Zone the perimeter yard setback is 0’-0”. 18. 2-06.4.9.Q – The allowed max building height listed under General Note 5 is not correct. Per UDC TABLE 6.3-5.A: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE P-I, I-2, & I-2 ZONES, I-1 Zone, the allowed height should be listed as 75’. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Steve Shields at (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 11/12/2020 | GDAURIA1 | FIRE | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 11/13/2020 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: November 13, 2020 RETURNED FOR CORRECTIONS NOTICE Your Next Steps: Resubmittal of your updated/corrected documents IMPORTANT: On the Filedrop page, select the box: "Site Review/CDRC..." when sending your next submittal. DESCRIPTION: SITE - Sprint Communication, new shade structure/awning. PERMIT/ACTIVITY: DP20-0187 FEES DUE: $ 181.50 Please pay the total fees (or at a minimum, the REVIEW Fees). ONLINE PAYMENTS https://www.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/fees IMPORTANT: If information is not available or amount isn't correct, check back later after data is updated. (Visa, MC, Discover, American Express, or pay from bank 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/pdsd-filedrop 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 Filedrop page, select the box: "Site Review/CDRC..." when sending your next submittal City of Tucson Attn: Sharon Beasley, Permit Specialist Planning and Development Services email: COTDSDPermits@TucsonAz.gov |