Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you can not find what you are looking for please submit a records request.
Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - DP22-0149
Review Name: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/10/2022 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 08/19/2022 | SBLOOD1 | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Development Package Comments: Sheet 1 1. Confirm there is a drainage easement in place for the outlet swale into the existing concrete drainage on the southeast site. 2. Add all used abbreviations to list (ex: TC, G and FL). 3. In Location Map, adjust Project Location call out to highlight Building 3 only. 4. Please note proposed plan is for Building #3 only, not Buildings #1 & 2. Sheet 2 5. Please provide the area for Building 3 site. 6. Reconcile acreages for Building 3 (General Notes and General Grading Notes). Sheet 3 7. Provide bollards on all interior walls of the trash enclosure. Provide clearances between bollards. See UDC Technical Standards Manual Section 8.01.0.0. 8. Please revise details/sections to reference this sheet, not sheet 4. 9. Water surface in weir profile does not match elevation in plan, please review and revise. 10. Provide striping thickness and color requirements for accessible parking aisles and stalls. 11. Reference landscape plan for bottom of basin material in the Basin A-1 Section. 12. Detail "AA" referenced in Basin A-1 section is not provided. Please revise as necessary. Sheet 4 13. Revise Keynote #4 to reference Detail "R" on Sheet-3. 14. Pedestrian access path crossing is shown going through the middle of an ADA parking stall. Adjust path so that it is not located within a stall. 15. Adjust "200" sidewalk callout leader to land on sidewalk. 16. Relocate truck parking space width dimension such that it is dimensioning a parking stall. 17. Potential rounding issue with plan dimensions and Drive Section-2. Please revise to be consistent. 18. Keynote 2 - Site Setbacks, not shown on plan. Callout Keynote #2 on plan. 19. Please screen existing site features so it is clear what is proposed and extents of proposed work. Typical for all sheets. 20. Show electrical and communication lines on plans. 21. Move to applicable sheet and adjust location of storm drain plan labels. 22. Provide detail or specification for security barrier between parking areas and retention basin. 23. Show proposed swale from weir to existing drainage on site plan. 24. Provide keynote for catch basin for standard detail on applicable sheet. 25. Provide dimensions for southern truck parking area landscape area. 26. Storm drain west of the building is located within the sidewalk. Consider relocating into pavement area for future service/access. 27. Move pipe network table and storm drain labels from site plan to the utility sheet. Sheet 5 28. Low spot located in the core area of the parking stalls (G=35.77 to G=35.9). Please revise slope so that grade slopes away from the building 29. Provide finished grades of truck parking against building wall 30. Provide curb grades at block out in southern truck parking area. 31. Provide sections callouts for weir and outfall structure. 32. Section A-3 doesn't apply to the drive aisle and park area condition on the west side of the building. Please provide additional section. 33. Provide proposed contour labels. 34. Provide spot elevations at end of parking stalls where grade breaks, typical. 35. Revise Z/4 section reference to reference Z/3. Section located on sheet 3, typical. 36. Provide spot elevations along interior edge of the sidewalk. 37. Provide earthwork quantities. 38. Please add contour labels. 39. Add existing grade elevations, typical. 40. Please identify if there is longitudinal slope along curb line (or show slope and/or high points). 41. Evaluate need for rip-rap at curb openings. 42. Please identify building access points (doorways and access points, typical both sheets) 43. Please extend section A/3 to include SW-1 swale or add additional section detail. 44. Please provide spot elevations for channel. 45. Landscape plans show medians as water harvest areas, please provide typical detail. 46. Please provide discharge (cfs), WSEL, Erosion Hazard Setback (EHS), 100 yr flood limits, FEMA mapping for Rodeo Wash (typical both sheets). Sheet 6 47. Please fix text conflict between section callout and 2:1 side slope fabric callout. 48. Provide Keynote 212 in keynote list. 49. Basin A1 has different volume quantities on sheet 5 and 6. Please review and revise. 50. Please add contour labels. 51. Please add existing spot elevations. 52. Add storm drain inverts. 53. Handrails are required for any ramp other than a curb ramp with a rise greater than six inches or longer than 72 inches. Please see UDC Technical Standards Manual Section 10-01.4.2 for criteria. 54. Please show proposed finished grades within Alvernon way and proposed building. 55. Add centerline elevations as applicable. 56. Please add spot elevations to Alvernon curb line. Sheet 7 57. Provide material for proposed 8 in. water line. 58. Provide size of existing water line. 59. Provide existing hydrant locations and add symbol to legend. 60. Add 'R' keynotes into plan callouts. 61. Provide detail or standard for sewer lift station. Add inverts. 62. Reference building permit drawings for fire pump room. 63. Provide standard detail or specification for back flow preventer. 64. Show existing utilities screened and add to legend. 65. Confirm water and sewer main crossing elevations to ensure sufficient separation between the utilities. 66. Provide keynote for SD manhole standard detail. 67. Provide dimension between water line and storm drain line on the west side of the building. 68. Insufficient information provided for storm drain on paving sheets, please add to applicable sheet. 69. Show any proposed grading between S Alvernon way and proposed building. Sheet 13 70. Civil plans show a proposed fabric base, rip rap swale from Basin A-1 to the existing drainage. Please make plans consistent between the two. Sheet 14 71. Please provide and ensure sufficient clearance between planted trees and storm drain line to avoid tree-utility conflict. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Comments: 1. Provide slope arrow on the northern parking area, north of the swale. 2. Show drainage direction of the concrete swale at the north parking area. 3. Overflow for basin should be directly connected into the existing concrete drainage way. Show proposed swale. 4. Provide curb opening locations on SWPPP plan so it is clear where water will exit the site. Drainage Report Comments: 1. Cover - Please revise location description to state in City of Tucson instead of Unincorporated Pima County 2. Section 1.2 - Please confirm the parcels proposed for development listed. It would appear that 3 parcels are proposed for development though only one parcel listed. 3. Section 1.3 - In first sentence, "cities" should be city's 4. Section 2.2 - Please add discussion of Rodeo Wash. 5. Section 2.3.1 - Please revised last sentence of 1st paragraph to state EOS-2 is undeveloped. 6. Section 2.3.1 - Please clarify if the 100-year design flow rate from EOS-2 is for its existing condition state and not a future proposed conditions with a 10% reduction in runoff flow rate due to Critical Basin design requirements 7. Table 3 - Please provide a description for the asterisk related to EOS-1 peak discharge 8. Table 3 - Please provide the peak flow rate for Rodeo Wash and include its reference in the appendix. 9. Section 2.4 - Please revise discussion to provide clarity on watershed breakdown. Exhibits within Appendix A do not show a breakdown of the southeaster site into 4 watersheds nor the northern areas into "two each". 10. General note - please add discussion to drainage report that the project is phased and if this report is intended to be also applicable for each site area or solely for development of the southeastern parcel for this the included in this submittal. 11. Section 2.4 - Please provide water surface elevations for the flow within Rodeo Wash and include its reference in the appendices. 12. Section 3.1 - Please expand the discussion of the basin to include B3 and B4 which also appear to be conveyed to B2. 13. Section 3.1 - Please correct spelling word "first" in the last paragraph. 14. Section 3.2 - Text states that Basin 3 and 4 were not included in the analysis showing reduction of peak flows. Review of the analysis shows a peak inflow of 124 cfs instead of 190 cfs shown in Table 6 for DON-3. Basin analysis needs to be revised to include the full peak flow for all connected basins as a reduction in peak flow may not occur if the basins fill up too quickly with the additional flows reaching them. 15. Section 3.3 - Entrance culvert crossings are located between basins. Please discuss if the basin tailwater was considered in the analysis of the pipe capacities to ensure an accurate representation of the ponded depth in each basin. 16. Section 3.3 - Please confirm that the earthen swale depths were designed to be the greater of the flow depth of culvert headwater depth. 17. Table 8 - Please provide Q100 in table. 18. Section 3.3.2 - All basin slopes greater than 3:1 should be protected unless a geotechnical report demonstrating stable slopes is not necessary. 19. Section 3.3.2 - Please provide the peak flow being conveyed to the City system and a discussion of its capacity, or what happens to the flow if the system is not capable of conveying the flow rate reaching it. 20. Table 10 - Please clarify the "Diameter/Length" column. Are 60" pipes provided at CC-3, CC-4? 21. Section 3.3.5 - Please provide a statement where flows greater than the 10-year event are handled. 22. Section 3.3.6 - Please explain why water surface elevations are not available for the Rodeo Wash Floodplain. 23. General - Please provide erosion hazard setback calculations and depict that linework on the exhibits since Rodeo Wash appears to be earthen and does not contain any bank protection. 24. General - Please include discussion of basin and other onsite stormwater conveyance feature maintenance responsibilities and requirements. 25. General - Please describe the perched condition of the Rodeo Wash as compared to adjacent site graded and demonstrate the Basin meet necessary perched conditions requirements per the manual. 26. Exhibit A.1 - Please provide offsite contours to verify drainage area boundaries shown 27. Exhibit A.1 - Please provide flow paths for each watershed 28. Exhibit A.1 - Please provide Q100 and water surface elevations along Rodeo Wash 29. Figure A.2 - Please provide flow arrows and flow length lines within each watershed. 30. Figure A.2 - Please provide Ex. and Prop. Qs entering and existing the site. 31. Figure A.3 - Please provide Qin/Qout, retention and detention volumes, and 100-year WSELS in each basin. 32. Figure A.3 - Please provide 100-yr WSELs along Rodeo Wash and proposed FFEs for each building 33. Figure A.3 - Please provide direction flow arrows for surface flows and along storm drain pipes. 34. Storm drain profiles - Please provide legend for blue filled in areas and red line. Please also review model as the results show irregular steps in what is assumed to be a water surface. 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 |
| 08/29/2022 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: South Tucson Commerce Center Development Package (2nd Review) DP22-0149 TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 29, 2022 DUE DATE: September 7, 2022 This comment was not addressed. COMMENTS: Resubmit revised drawings and 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 June 05, 2023. 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 1. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – The existing use listed under General note 3 is not correct and should be listed as “VACANT”. 2. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.B – As Alvernon Way is not designated as a Gateway on the COT MS&R Map remove the reference to “UDC ARTICLE 5.5 GATEWAY CORRIDOR ZONE (GCZ)” from General Note 20. 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. 3. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.F – Provide the zoning for the parcels north of this project. 4. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - The required number of accessible vehicle parking spaces is based on the requirements found in the 2018 IBC Chapter 11, Table 1106.1. Based on a total of 201 vehicle parking spaces provided the total number of accessible parking spaces required should be 7 with 2 being van accessible. Revise the accessible parking calculation to reflect the current number required and to show the van accessible requirements. 5. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The required number of vehicle parking spaces listed under General Note 19 is not correct and should be 49. 6. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Provide a detail for the proposed long-term bicycle parking that meets the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9. 7. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O - The street perimeter yard setback for “SIDE (ALVENON WAY)” should be measured from the back of future curb. 8. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – The perimeter yard setbacks shown for the “FRONT” & “SIDE” ae not correct and should be 0’. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Nicholas Ross at Nicholas.Ross@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 |
| 09/06/2022 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 09/12/2022 | 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: South Tucson Commerce Center ACTIVITY NO: DP22-0149 Address: 6690 S Alvernon Way Zoning: I-1 Existing Use: undisturbed Sonoran Desert Proposed Use: Distribution Center TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 12, 2022 DUE DATE: September 7, 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. General Note - 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. General Note - Ensure that Zoning and Engineering comments are addressed prior to landscape section approval. 1. This comment was not adequately addressed - Please label the existing and future rights of way for all public streets, UDC 7.6.4.C.2.a. 2. If there is landscaping within the rights of way, please contact David.marhefka@tucsonaz.gov for permission to use up to 5’ of the right of way. Plans cannot be approved without the department’s consent. 3. This comment was not adequately addressed - The ERR requires exhibits that show floodplain, riparian area and proposed disturbance, as well as mitigation. Please refer to Tech Standards 4-01.2.5.B for content requirements. Please add reference points for the photographs. 4. This comment was not adequately addressed Demonstrate how water harvesting is being maximized. It appears that a lot of water from impervious surfaces are being directed to the basins rather than the landscape areas. UDC Technical Standards Manual – Section 4-01.0.0. and Section 5-01.0.0 Landscaping and Screening. 5. The below comments are directed to the engineer’s drainage solution. The grading plan and water harvesting plan must meet the requirements of the water harvesting ordinance and technical standard. The plan doesn't show the effective use of run-off to supplement irrigation along the east or south side of the project. nor do the grading plans match the water harvesting plans. Provide flow arrows on the grading plan to show where water is accessing the landscape areas. Curb cuts must be shown on the grading or site plan. 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 |
| 09/19/2022 | JPEELDA1 | FIRE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Plans shall show the location of the new and existing fire hydrants Plans shall show the location of the FDC's Questions: Jennifer Peel-Davis Tucson Fire Department Fire Plans Examiner Fire Inspector I, II and Fire Alarm Plans Examiner Jennifer.Peel-Davis@Tucsonaz.gov Desk: 520-837-7033 |
| 09/20/2022 | SBEASLE1 | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA COUNTY - REGIONAL FLOOD CTRL DIST | Approved | email from: Ann Moynihan <Ann.Moynihan@pima.gov> To: CDRC Date: 09/20/2022 The District has no further requests for corrections. Conditionally approved - A Facility Impact Permit from the Regional Flood Control District is required prior to construction of the private sewer across the Rodeo Wash channel. Thank you, Ann B. Moynihan, P.E., CFM Pima County Regional Flood Control District 201 N. Stone Avenue, 9th Floor Tucson AZ 85701 520-724-4638 |
| 09/20/2022 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | EMAIL FROM: COTDSDPermits To: Jeff Stine Date: 09/20/2022 Returned for Corrections: DP22-0149 Site/Grading/Swppp - Tucson Commerce Center, SOUTH side of Rodeo Wash. 6690 S ALVERNON WY Fee Balance: $0 (zero) Thank you for the payment. YOUR NEXT STEPS 1. SEE REVIEW COMMENTS and documents on PRO: www.tucsonaz.gov/pro - Home page, Activity Search, enter the Activity/Permit Number - Permits - click on the blue tab - Reviews section - click on REVIEW DETAILS - Documents section - click on VIEW 2. Title your THIRD submittal documents accordingly, example: 3_Comment Response Letter 3. UPLOAD documents to Filedrop: - Comment Response Letter (your response to REQUIRES CHANGE comments) - Plan Set (all pages, full set, even if no changes were made) - Documents requested by review staff FILEDROP https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp - "Existing Application" - "Permit Number" field: enter the number (and any notes for our staff) Sharon Beasley, Certified Permit Specialist City of Tucson, Planning & Development Services Dept. Email: COTDSDpermits@TucsonAz.gov (for development packages, land splits, Thursday Presubmittal meetings) Email: PDSDinquiries@TucsonAz.gov (for building permits) |