Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG
Permit Number - DP21-0050
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/22/2021 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 02/23/2021 | SBEASLE1 | COT NON-DSD | REVIEW | Approved | 02/22/21 Sun Tran does not have any services at this intersection. Service to the nearest bus stop, at Michigan NW, may be affected during the construction, contingent upon the TCP at that time. Thank you for the opportunity to review the plan. Bea Paulus, Programs & Projects Manager Sun Tran 520-206-8826 bea.paulus@tucsonaz.gov |
| 02/24/2021 | JOHN VAN WINKLE | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DP21-0050 1) Verify that all applicable development package formatting requirements, per TSM 2-06.20, are met. 2) Verify that all and development package content requirements, per TSM 2-6.4.0, are provided. 3) Provide a site location map according to AM section 2-06. Location provided does not match the project location 4) Provide waste stream calculations on plans per TSM section 8-01.8.0 showing that the existing service is sufficient for the proposed expansion. Otherwise show how the required service will be provided. 5) Provide positive drainage away from the trash enclosure according to TSM section 8 Figure 3A 6) Show service vehicle maneuvering in and out of S 6th Av 7) Sheet A2.0, Keynote one. Update to show that new enclosure will be constructed according to figure 3A in TSM Section 8 8) Show that a 2.5' vehicle overhang will be provided from the front of the proposed wheel stops in the parking spaces. Provide standard dimension for the depth of the proposed parking spaces 9) Ensure that roof drains, from the new building, scupper underneath sidewalks as needed. Reference COT Technical Standards Manual (TSM) section 7-01.4.1.e. Show on plans location of roof drains and scuppers 10) With the exception of the PAAL crossing, the Pedestrian circulation connection to W Aviation Dr is to be physically separated from the vehicle use are by curbing or bollards. Provide a linear pedestrian crossing in front of the trash enclosure 11) Provide a detail for the curb access ramps at W Aviation Dr. It does not appear that cross slopes/running slopes will work. Provide spot grades for all ramps 12) Show on plans that the curb access ramp at the north east corner is upgraded to current PAG 207 standards Dual Ramp Configuration. 13) Provide curb access ramps at the proposed entry off of S 6th Av 14) The pedestrian circulation path to S 6th Av needs to be physically separated from the vehicle use area. Update as needed 15) The existing paving area adjacent to the Existing bldg. appears to not longer be being used and does not provide sufficient vehicle maneuvering area. Show on plans that this area will be closed off as needed 16) Show on plans the new and existing brick sidewalk along 6th Avenue will be placed per PAG standard detail 201 17) Show on plans that the radius curb return connection to W Aviation Dr will be 18' 18) 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. Update the driveway entrance/exit one to S 6th Av to show a 25' radius 19) Re-locate proposed entrance on S 6th Av so that it lines up with the PAAL. Refer Department of Transportation Comments. Existing entrance will need to be closed off 20) Show on plans future Site Visibility Triangles for the driveway connections to 6th Av 21) Update drainage statement and plans as needed to provide a 15% reduction for a critical basin as required in the standards manual for drainage design and stormwater detention retention manual. Note that the City is updating its detention retention manual but will maintain the 15% reduction instead of the Pima County requirement of only 10% 22) Update drainage statement to include an existing vs proposed drainage map 23) Provide a discharge volume in CFS through the proposed WIER in detail A sheet C1 24) Confirm that proposed basins are providing the recommended volume. Volume to take into account side slopes/constructed condition of basin 25) Correctly depict the proposed sidewalk scupper on west Aviation Drive to outlet at the curb. Scupper should extend all of the way to the curb, eliminating the rip-rap 26) Indicate that the top of the basin slope will be a minimum 2 feet from the property line per TSM section 2-01.90 27) Volume of basins need to take into account reduction based on future right of way 28) Provide a note indicating that a separate permit from the Department of Transportation and Mobility will be required for the work in the public right-of-way. 29) Additional comments may apply John Van Winkle, P.E. John.VanWinkle@tucsonaz.gov |
| 03/11/2021 | JVINCEN1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 03/22/2021 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Reqs Change | Re-locate proposed entrance on S 6th Av so that it lines up with the PAAL. Refer Department of Transportation Comments. Existing entrance will need to be closed off Show on plans future Site Visibility Triangles for the driveway connections to 6th Av Show on plans the new and existing brick sidewalk along 6th Avenue will be placed per PAG standard detail 201 Show on plans that the radius curb return connection to W Aviation Dr will be 18' 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. Update the driveway entrance/exit one to S 6th Av to show a 25' radius Show on plans that the curb access ramp at the north east corner is upgraded to current PAG 207 standards Dual Ramp Configuration. Provide a site location map according to AM section 2-06. Location provided does not match the project location |
| 03/23/2021 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL 4.1 dentification 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 may be needed and should contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet: Any other relevant case number for reviews or modifications that affect the site. Add case number DP21-050 on each sheet. Remove PDSD approval stamp from lower right hand side of landscape plans. Ensure that Zoning, Engineering comments and concerns are addressed prior to landscape section approval. Additional comments may apply |
| 03/23/2021 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 03/30/2021 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | FROM: Development Services Department Zoning Review PROJECT: Carniceria Camacho – Building Expansion Development Package (1st Review) DP20-0050 TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 30, 2021 DUE DATE: March 22, 2021 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 February 21, 2022. 2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIRMENTS 1. COMMENT: 2-06.3.4 – Remove sheet 1 from the development package as it is not relevant to this review. 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS 2. COMMENT: 2-06.3.4 – A title block shall be provided in the lower right quadrant of each sheet. 3. COMMENT: 2-06.3.5 - A three-inch by five-inch space shall be reserved in the lower right quadrant of each sheet for an approval stamp. 4. COMMENT: 2-06.3.12 – An index of sheets in the development package shall be provided on the first sheet. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.1 - The name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s), or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.2.B - The title block shall include a brief legal description. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.2.D - The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx). 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, DP21-0050, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4 - The project-location map to be located on the first sheet shall be drawn at a minimum scale of three-inch equals one mile, and provide the following information. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4.A – the location map shows this site off of 12th Ave not 6th Ave. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4.C – Label the section, township, and range & 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 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.1 – On the cover sheet provide a general not stating "Existing zoning is ___." 13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – As a general note identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses. 14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a – As 6th Ave is designated as an Arterial on the COT MS&R map provided a general note stating “THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC ARTICLE 5.4 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R).” 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.a – Provide the floor area for each building. 16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.c – Provide a building area 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. 17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.8.A – Clearly show the property boundary and provide perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system for all property lines. 18. COMMENT: 2-06.4.8.C - The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. Provide the required information for both 6th and Aviation. 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. 19. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show future sight visibility triangles. On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section. Per the MS&R Map the future half right-of-way (ROW) for 6th Ave is 60’-0” not 50’-0” as shown on the plan. 20. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Provide a vehicle parking space calculation that provides the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. Until comment 13 is addressed vehicle parking requirements cannot be verified, additional comments may be forth coming. 21. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Provide a fully dimension typical parking space detail for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. As wheel stop curbing is proposed provide a location dimension for the wheel stops per UDC Article 7.4.6.H.3. 22. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Per 2018 IBC Chapter 11, Section 1106.5 for every six of fraction of six accessible parking spaces, at least one shall be a van -accessible parking space. The ‘STANDARD ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE” detail does not address the van accessible requirements, see ICC A117.1 Section 502.2. The accessible details shall also address A117.1 Sections 502.4 & 502.5. 23. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Provide a mounting height for the propose accessible sign. 24. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.c – Until comment 13 is addressed the requirements for loading spaces cannot be addressed, additional comments may be forth coming. 25. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Until comment 13 is addressed the requirements for short- & long-term bicycle parking cannot be addressed, additional comments may be forth coming. 26. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Provide a short-term bicycle detail that addresses the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B and 7.4.9.C, additional comments may be forth coming. 27. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Provide a long-term bicycle detail that addresses the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B and 7.4.9.D, additional comments may be forth coming 28. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.J - If street dedication is not required or proposed and the project site is adjacent to a Major Street or Route, draw the Major Street right-of-way lines for those streets. (Add the MS&R future sidewalk, right-of-way lines, sight visibility triangles, etc.) Per the MS&R Map the future ROW shown is not correct and should be shown a 60’ half ROW. Show the future curb and sidewalk on the plan. 29. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.J – As 6th Ave has a future ROW all development must meet the future ROW or a future site plan that demonstrates how the plan will meet code when the ROW is taken. This site plan must meet the requirements of AM 2-06.The other option is to use the MS&R Modification Request see UDC Article 5.4.7. 30. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – Until the future ROW is shown correcting and the proposed building height is provided and a setback dimension from the back of future curb to the building is provide the setback requirements cannot be verified. 31. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – Provide the height the building, existing and proposed expansion, within the footprint of the building. 32. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – The stiped pedestrian area shown along the south end of the property is required to be a sidewalk meeting the requirements of TSM 7-01.4.2 and 4.3. 33. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – The stiped pedestrian area shown running north from the proposed addition to Aviation Dr is required to meet the requirements of TSM 7-01.4.2 and 4.3 except at designated crosswalks. The area show does not meet the requirements of a crosswalk. 34. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – The stiped pedestrian area shown running across the access to the trash enclosure may not cross the access to this access, see TSM 7-01.4.1.F. 35. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Cleary demonstrate that an accessible route is provided from one of the streets to the existing & expansion and to the accessible parking space. Provide spot elevations so that all slope requirements can be verified. 36. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.W - Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Also provide a general note stating “SIGNAGE REQUIRES SEPARTE PERMITS”. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Steve Shields at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov. My email will return an automatic response stating that I have retired but I am currently working as a contract employee and will respond to your questions regarding this review. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 03/31/2021 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: March 31, 2021 Returned for Corrections PERMIT/ACTIVITY: DP21-0050 DESCRIPTION: Site/Grading - Carniceria Camacho Addition, prefabricated metal building. 4420 S 6TH AV FEE BALANCE: $0 (zero) Thank you for the payment. RESUBMITTAL Submit the following documents to: https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp (Select "Existing Application", then the permit number) 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 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 For all NEW development package submittals on the Filedrop page, select the box: "SITE REVIEW...". Thank you. City of Tucson Attn: Sharon Beasley, Permit Specialist Planning and Development Services email: COTDSDPermits@TucsonAz.gov |