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
Permit Number - DP22-0241
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/05/2022 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/16/2022 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: 6601 E Grant Rd Development Package (1st Review) DP22-0241 TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 16, 2022 DUE DATE: September 29, 2022 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings 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 August 16, 2023. 2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 1. COMMENT: 2-06.2.2 – The plans, Development Package, Landscape & SWPPP shall be submitted as a single multi-page PDF file. 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS 2. COMMENT: 2-06.3.12 – The Sheet Index shall include all drawings, Development Package, Landscape & SWPPP. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.2.D – The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx) shall include all drawings, Development Package, Landscape & SWPPP. 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, DP22-0241, 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 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – The proposed use “COMMERCIAL” is a Use Group not a Use, provide the proposed use and if applicable any Use Specific Standards. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - As Grant Rd is designated as an Arterial on the COT MS&R Map 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)”. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.a – The square footage shown within the footprints do not match. 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. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.8.B – There is an existing Electrical Easement shown running under the northwest corner of the proposed building. This easement will need to be abandoned prior to approval of the dP. 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. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show future and existing sight visibility triangles. On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – It appears that a drive-through is proposed along the southeast side of the building. Demonstrate on the plan that the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.6.F.2.a.(2) are met. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Fully dimension the back-up spur shown at the east end of the northern most parking area, see UDC Article 7.4.6.F.4 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Clearly demonstrate that the required 24’ PAAL is maintained from the northwest corner of the shown loading space north to the vehicle parking spaces. 13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Until comment 5 is addressed vehicle parking requirements cannot be verified. 14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The gross floor area (GFA) shown in the PARKING TABULATION does not match the GFA listed in the footprint on sheet SP01. Also, on sheet CS01 you show a PATIO 400 SF, if this is a patio that will be use for a use than it is included in the GFA for parking. 15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The PARKING TABULATION shall include the number of required and provided accessible and van accessible vehicle parking spaces. 16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Provide a detail for both a standard and accessible vehicle parking space. 17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Until comment 5 is addressed short- & long-term bicycle parking requirements cannot be verified. 18. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – The short- & long-term bicycle parking calculation shall include the ratio used for the calculation. 19. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Provide a short- & long-term bicycle parking detail that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9 are met. 20. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.J – It does not appear that the curb and sidewalk along Grant Road are at full width, clearly show the future curb and sidewalk on the plan. 21. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – As the proposed height of the building was not provided the street perimeter yard setback requirement cannot be verified. Review UDC Article 6.4.5.C.2 and Table 6.4.5.C-1 and provide the setback on the plan. 22. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – The square footage shown within the footprint of the building on sheet CS01 & SP01 do not match. 23. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – Provide the height of the building within the footprint. 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 |
| 09/22/2022 | SBLOOD1 | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Any proposed trash enclosure that differs from that found in TSM (Technical Standards Manual) section 8-01 will require a TSMR (Technical Standards Modification Request) and approval from ES (Environmental Services). 2. Show a complete pedestrian circulation path including out to the proposed trash enclosures. 3. Show both existing and future Sight Visibility Triangles (SVT) for ingress/egress along E Grant Rd. 4. Show on the grading plan the roof drainage and downspout locations. 5. Only providing the PCLID worksheets is not sufficient. In order to check compliance we need a complete discussion, calculations, tables, and exhibits to establish accomplishment of first flush requirements. Include an exhibit comparable to Figure 2.1 in the Retention/Detention Manual that shows undisturbed area, disturbed area, impervious surfaces, non-contributing basins with landscape, stormwater harvesting basins including first flush, watershed #, stormwater harvesting basin #, and flow direction. Also include both tables 2.2 and 2.3 in the same section of the Retention/Detention Manual to demonstrate required/achieve retention volumes. 6. Make sure all water harvesting basins have means for runoff to enter and exit via scuppers and curb cuts. For example the water harvesting basin on the south east corner of the building is showing a roof drainage arrow going into it with no scupper proposed and no curb cut to drain the basin when it fills up. Stephen Blood (520) 837-4958 Stephen.blood@tucsonaz.gov |
| 09/29/2022 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | The 4" fire line on the site plan (SP01) is labeled as "sewer service to building" (construction keynote 12 instead of keynote 14). |
| 09/29/2022 | JVINCEN1 | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/07/2022 | JCARLTO1 | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department, Plans Coordination FROM: Matthew Carlton PDSD Landscape/Native Plant Preservation Section PROJECT: Grant Rd Development Plan ACTIVITY NO: DP22-0241 Address/Parcel ID: 6601 E Grant Rd/13365770 Zoning: C- & C-2 TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 5, 2022 DUE DATE: September 29, 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. 1) All separate plans should be combined into one doc with the next submittal. 2) A Commercial Rainwater Harvesting plan is required. UDC Technical Standards Manual – Section 4-01.0.0. and Section 5-01.0.0 Landscaping and Screening. Demonstrate how water harvesting is being maximized. The Site Plan, Grading Plan, and Water Harvesting Plan all indicate the parking island at the southeast corner of the building as an area for Water Harvesting Infiltration (Construction Keynote #17 on Site Plan,/WHIA BOT: 2502.19 on Grading Plan), yet there is no 1.5’ depressed curb opening on this parking island. Is the intent of this basin to be an active or passive water harvesting? Please clarify & revise across all plan sheets. 3) Show scuppers, curb cuts, inlets, and splash pads to landscaped areas on water harvesting and grading plans. 4) Please label the existing right of way for all public streets, UDC 7.6.4.C.2.a. 5)This landscape plan does not meet the required 1 canopy tree per 4 parking spaces outlined in UDC 7.6.4 with only 15 canopy trees in the parking area when 16 are required. 6)All spaces within 40’ of a tree is only one of the requirements, and it is required to meet all. 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. 7-10 parking spaces in a row is too distant to and doesn’t meet the intent of the code, which is, to shade the asphalt of the parking lot. 6 spots will work, but there will need to be a diamond or inlet planter space. 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)The planting plant legend shows “GPH”. Should this read “QTY”? Please clarify and revise. 8) The irrigation controller is located mid side-walk on the irrigation plan, yet the detail sheet shows a wall-mounted controller. Please clarify and revise. 9) Please show a detail to show depressed landscape areas or indicate with notes. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package If you have any questions, please contact me at matthew.cartlton@tucsonaz.gov |
| 10/07/2022 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | email from: COTDSDPermits To: Andie Hemmah 10/07/2022 REVIEW NOTICE Returned for Corrections: DP22-0241 Site/Grading/Swppp - 6601 E. Grant Road. Demo. New commercial project, retail and restaurants. FEE BALANCE: $ 870.10 ONLINE PAYMENTS ** If the online amount doesn't match "Fee Balance" above, check again in a few hours ** https://www.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/fees 1- Click on: Pay Planning & Permit Fees 2- Enter Permit Nbr, example: dp20-0000 (not case-sensitive but a hyphen-dash- is needed) 3- Business/Individual Name: Leave this blank 4- "Continue" 5- In the Pay column - check the boxes 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 SECOND submittal documents accordingly, example: 2_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 |