Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG
Permit Number - DP21-0306
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/10/2022 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Perception Counseling Development Package (1st Review) DP21-0306 TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 10, 2022 DUE DATE: January 13, 2022 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 December 16, 2022. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. COMMENT: 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 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – Include the Use Specific Standards listed in UDC TABLE 4.8-5: PERMITTED USES - INDUSTRIAL ZONES in Zoning and Land Use Note 4. 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 – For Warehouse Ave provide the right-of-way width and 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.A – It appears that some type of lot line reconfiguration is proposed. This reconfiguration will need to be processed through PDSD and approved prior to approval of this DP. As it does not appear that the Perception site will be able to stand on its own a Covenant Regarding Development and Use of Real Property will need to be recorded. Also, some type of recorded access easement or agreement will need to provided. 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.B – It appears that parcel #124-18-122A listed under Zoning and Land Use Note 2 is not correct. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show all applicable sight visibility triangles on the plan. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The vehicle parking space calculation is not correct. Provide the UDC Article that allows this type of calculation. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The vehicle parking for the existing building is not correct and should either be all office or commercial storage unless there are two separate uses. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Per UDC Article 7.4.3.E.2 as this expansion exceeds the 25% provide a short- & long-term bicycle parking calculation for both buildings. Also, clearly show where the required bicycle parking is located for the existing building. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Provide a detail for the proposed long-term bicycle parking that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.B.1, .2 & 7.4.9.D are met. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.L – The proposed ingress/egress easement will need to be recorded and the recordation information provided prior to approval of this DP. 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – As building heights were not provided street perimeter yard setback requirements could not be verified. Revise the required street perimeter yard to include “or one and one-half the height of the proposed wall (H)” greater of the two”, see UDC Article 6.4.5.C.1.a. 13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – The “21.0’ BUILDING SETBACK” shown on sheets C3.0 & C3.1 is not correct. This site does not qualify for developing area setbacks therefore must meet the requirements of UDC Article 6.4.5.C.1.a. 14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – Provide the height and use of each building within the footprint. 15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Per TSM Section 7-01.2.B.2 the provision of TSM Section 7-01 apply to the entire site. 16. Per TSM Section 7-01.3.2 – Show the required accessible route from the proposed angled accessible space shown along the north side of the existing building to the accessible entrance of the existing building. 17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Per TSM Section 7-01.3.3.B show the required pedestrian circulation between the existing building and the proposed building. 18. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.A show the required sidewalk from the existing building to the street property line. 19. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.C provide the required sidewalk between the proposed angled parking spaces and the existing buildings. 20. 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 all signage requires separate permits. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Elisa Hamblin at Elisa.Hamblin@tucsonaz.gov. To resubmit your plans for additional review, please visit: https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 01/12/2022 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (5665-03, 2435.32') is less than 12" below the first floor elevation (2436.18'). Provide a backwater valve per Section 714.1, IPC 2018, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 01/12/2022 | SBLOOD1 | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Development Package Comments: Sheet 1 1. Please provide basis of Bearing and Elevation according to Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06.4.8. 2. Please provide name and contact information of firm/individual who prepared the geotechnical report. Sheet 5 3. Parking stalls for van accessibility require an aisle on the passenger side. Keynote 12 suggests both of these are van accessible spaces. Please revise. 4. Please label all existing utilities and structures. (fence, electric pole, fire hydrant, etc... comment applies to all sheets) Sheet 7 5. Please provide flow rate (Q100 peak) for Basin #2. 6. Southwest corner of building (next to downspout flow to parking pavement), please clarify elevation "FL 35.68" to be FG instead of FL. Sheet 8 7. Please provide flow rate (Q100 peak) for Basin #1. 8. Please check elevation at gutter (G 34.27) next to concrete header at Basin#1. The Gutter elevation is lower than the Pavement elevation. (P 34.40) 9. All match existing grades should be gray scale per the legend and have periods removed from "M.E.". Please verify the P 35.80 (M.E.) callout is a match existing grade versus a proposed grade. Sheet 9 10. Please check sewer invert elevations. It shows the same elevations INV= 30.11 at each clean out. Sheet 10 11. Swap the van accessible and accessible labels so that the van accessible stall has the aisle on the passenger side. 12. Detail #4 Pavement Please add "95%" to compacted subgrade. 13. Detail 2 is missing post. Please revise. Drainage Report Comments: 1. Page 5 - Please explain why the latest version of PC-Hydro is not being utilized. 2. Page 7 - Please include a statement regarding the required finished floor elevation for the proposed building. 3. Offsite topographic watershed map - TSMS node CW-N0760 draft Q100 located just downstream without much more contributing area shows 474cfs. Please verify contributing area. 4. Concept Drainage Plan - Rooftop drainage does not match the flow arrows shown on the water harvesting plan which indicated that the majority of the roof flows into WS-7 and offsite as opposed to into the first flush basin. Please verify rooftop drainage pattern to ensure runoff from the building reaches the retention areas. 5. Soils Map - please extend view cover all watersheds analyzed in this study. 6. Hydrology Calc Street Flow - soils map does not cover the entire watershed yet indicates 100% soil type D. Please verify soil group percentages and adjust calculation as necessary. 7. Hydrologic data sheet indicates 100% soil type d for north ditch PC Hydro calculation. please revise calculation or explain why this is not necessary. 8. HEC-RAS output- please provide cross section and profile output. Review and Comments provided by third party engineer reviewers under contract with the City of Tucson. For Questions or Concerns contact: Stephen Blood (520) 837-4958 Stephen.blood@tucsonaz.gov |
| 01/12/2022 | AWARNER1 | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department, Plans Coordination FROM: Anne Warner, RLA PDSD Landscape/Native Plant Preservation Section PROJECT: Perception Counseling ACTIVITY NO: DP21-0306 Address: 1215 E Warehouse Ave Zoning: I-1 Existing Use: parking, parking lanes Proposed Use: Commercial, Medical Uses TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 12, 2022 DUE DATE: January 13, 2022 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Landscape Review Section comments were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with applicable development criteria in the City of Tucson Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-11 and Technical Manual (TM) Section for landscape, native plants and water harvesting. 1. UDC 2-10.4.1 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. • Please identify existing vegetation on landscape plan and its disposition and delete from civil drawings. 2. Ensure that Zoning and Engineering comments are addressed prior to landscape section approval. 3. The Unified Development Code (UDC) requires all new development or an expansion of less than 50 % of an existing development submit a landscape plan, UDC 7.6.2. Preparation of the landscape plan shall adhere to UDC 7.6.4. and Administrative Manual 2-10. 4. Please provide all landscape calculations on the landscape plan, including required trees for the parking areas, Admin. Manual 2-10-4.2.A.2.c and landscape borders, UDC Technical Standards 2-10.4.2.f & g. 5. Please label the existing and future rights of way for * UDC 7.6.4.C.2.a. 6. Placing trees along the edge of a parking area or at the ends of parking row does not meet the intent of the UDC. All spaces within 40’ of a tree is only one of the requirements. The intent is to provide as much shade on the asphalt as possible, and the requirement is 1 tree per 4 parking spaces; trees are expected to be placed within the parking area itself to mitigate the heat and glare radiated by the built environment, UDC 7.6.1.A.3. Trees are to be distributed evenly throughout the parking area, UDC 7.6.4.B.1.a., UDC Technical Standards Manual 5-01-.3.2. 7. Please add/call out soil moisture gauge/tensiometers and rain shut-off device on irrigation plans and details. UDC Tech Standards 4.01-2.A. 8. Please add a detail to show depressed landscape areas or indicate with notes. 9. Per Admin. Manual 2-10-4.2.D, provide page/detail reference to civil drawings/details that show bike racks, walkways, and screening/retaining walls on landscape plans. See civil drawing is not sufficient. 10. Provide a detail to show tree planting with root barrier adjacent to walkways. 11. Adherence to the Low Impact Development Standards outlined in Section 5 of the PCRFCD Design Standards for Stormwater Detention and Retention is required and shall work in conjunction with the Commercial Rainwater Harvesting design. https://webcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government/Flood%20Control/Rules%20and%20Procedures/Stormwater%20Detention-Retention/dssdr-manual-board-version-201511.pdf 12. Grading, hydrology, and landscape plans must be integrated to make maximum use of site storm water runoff for supplemental on-site irrigation purposes. The landscape plan shall indicate use of all runoff, from individual catch basins around single trees to basins accepting flow from an entire vehicular use area or roof area. UDC 7.6.6.C.2. The landscape, water harvesting, and grading plans must match. 13. Because the hatch for rip rap is so dark it is difficult to identify curb inlets/splash pads to landscape areas on water harvesting or landscape plans. 14. Indicate basin inlets/outlets on both landscape and water harvesting plans. Provide spot elevations. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package YOUR NEXT STEPS: Submit documents to the Filedrop https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp Select "Existing Application" 1) Comment Response Letter (your response to the reviewer's Requires changes comments) 2) Plan Set (or individual sheets) 3) Any other items requested by review staff If you have any questions, please contact me at anne.warner@tucsonaz.gov |
| 01/24/2022 | JPEELDA1 | FIRE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Note shall be made that the rolling gate nted on C3.0 & C3.1 will require a permit from PDSD and if electric a KNOX Key Switch. Questions: Jennifer Peel-Davis Jennifer.Peel-Davis@Tucsonaz.gov 520-837-7033 |
| 02/14/2022 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Email from: COTDSDPermits To: Jason Morse Mon 2/14/2022 10:28 AM REVIEW NOTICE Returned for Corrections: DP21-0306 DESCRIPTION: Site/Grading/Floodplain - Perception Counseling. 1215 E WAREHOUSE AV Fee Balance: $0 (zero) Thank you for the payment. YOUR NEXT STEPS 1. SEE REVIEW COMMENTS and 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 to see different sections - Reviews section - click on REVIEW DETAILS - Documents section - click on VIEW 2. UPLOAD A RESUBMITTAL and include: 1) Comment Response Letter (your response to REQUIRES CHANGE comments) 2) Plan Set (all pages, full set, even if no changes were made) 3) Any other documents requested by review staff Please title your SECOND submittal documents according to this example: 2_Comment Response Letter FILEDROP for your Resubmittal https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp - Select "Existing Application" - In the "Permit Number" field, enter the number and, if applicable, any notes for our staff - Select "PLANS" for documents for quicker downloading of your documents on our end Thank you. Sharon Beasley, Building Permit Specialist City of Tucson, Planning and Development Services Email: COTDSDpermits@TucsonAz.gov |
| 12/24/2021 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed |