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

Permit Number: D07-0039
Parcel: 130144390

Address:
4426 E 22ND ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Permit Number - D07-0039
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
09/11/2007 FERNE RODRIGUEZ START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
09/13/2007 JIM EGAN COT NON-DSD FIRE Approved
09/14/2007 LAITH ALSHAMI ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 09/27/2007,

TO: Patricia Gehlen FROM: Laith Alshami, P.E.
CDRC Engineering

SUBJECT: Chapman Detail Building
D07-0039, T14S, R14E, SECTION 22

RECEIVED: Development Plan, Landscape Plan and Drainage Report on September 12, 2007

The subject project has been reviewed. The project can not be approved at this time. Address the following comments before review can continue. Prepare a detailed response that explains the revisions that where made and references the exact location in the drainage report and the development plan where the revisions were made:

Drainage Report:

1. Identify the offsite and onsite watersheds that impact the site and quantify the amount of runoffs they generate. Use the City of Tucson "Flood Peak Estimator" method and provide the Hydrological Data Sheets for every watershed. Show, on the drainage exhibits, the different offsite and onsite watersheds that impact the site.
2. Check if any of the proposed improvements, including the 6' walls, will cause an unacceptable encroachment on the existing regulatory floodplains.
3. Provide the retention basins infiltration rates based on the findings of the Geotechnical Report. Please be advised that according to Section 3.5.1.3.a of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual, the maximum disposal time for 10-acre watershed is 12 hours. Revise the drainage report accordingly.
4. The main purpose for runoff retention is water recharge. If the infiltration rates within the basins are not acceptable, investigate the possibility of bleeding out the proposed basins or allowing the calculated retention volumes to drain into Naylor Wash where the wash's sandy bottom has a better infiltration rate and provides a better recharge environment. Draining the site into the wash shall not coincide with the wash's peak time.
5. The proposed building finished floor elevation shown on Page 4 is slightly different from the elevation shown on the drainage exhibit.
6. According the information provided in Map Guide, the site soil type is "B". The retention basin analysis assumes type "C" soil. Redo the retention basin required volume calculations utilizing the runoff coefficient based on type "B" soil and revise the P1 to 1.5.
7. The driveway and P.A.A.L. capacity calculations should be included. Show on the drainage exhibits the locations of the cross sections, where the P.A.A.L's are being analyzed.
8. The Drainage Report does address the proposed the required erosion hazard setbacks from the Naylor Wash and does not address the proposed bank protection design. Please be advised that the bank protection shall have the proper key ins and toe down that will prevent the bank protection from being undermined in a major storm.
9. The Drainage Basin Area Map does not show all proposed drainage information. Revise the map to provide all proposed drainage solutions/structures with all required construction details (i.e. type, materials, location, size and dimensions, slopes, grades, roof drainage and surface flow arrows, inlets and outlets, maintenance access ramps, sidewalk scuppers, basins ponding limits and water surface elevations, etc.) that would clarify how the proposed drainage scheme will work.
10. All proposed spillways and splash pads design calculations shall be included in the report.
11. According to the "Security Barriers" Section on Page 81 of the "Stormwater Detention/retention Manual", "Security barriers must be provided at the top of all basin side slopes steeper than 4:1 where water depths exceed 2 feet". Verify compliance with this requirement.
12. Water harvesting techniques shall be incorporated into the development by conveying surface flow and rooftop drainage to designated water harvesting areas. Please address, in details, how water-harvesting techniques will be incorporated into the development. Refer to the newly adopted City of Tucson Water Harvesting Guidance Manual for design considerations. Copies of the above-referenced manual can be obtained from the Engineering Counter. Please be advised that for water harvesting purposes, the landscaped areas shall be depressed a maximum of 6". Please be advised that aggressive water harvesting may significantly reduce the volume of required retention.
13. According to Section 14.3 of the "Standard Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management In Tucson, Arizona", the proposed detention/retention basins require maintenance access ramps that should be wide enough to accommodate vehicular access. The minimum width should be 15' and the ramp slope should not exceed 15 percent. Please be advised that maintenance ramps should be designed in such a way that does not allow access to vehicles except maintenance vehicles. Additionally, the proposed drainage structures maintenance responsibility should be addressed in the Report and a maintenance check list for the proposed drainage structures should be include in the Report.
14. According to Section 3.3.5 "Low-Flow Channels" of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual, the proposed basins floors should be sloped to provide positive drainage especially if bleed pipes will be utilized to drain out the basins. The section recommends a minimum of 0.5% floor slope and 0.2% low flow concrete channel slope. Please be advised that based on the City's experience with similar projects, 0.5% slope was difficult to construct and maintain which resulted in nuisance ponding in the basins. Show the provided positive drainage on the drainage exhibit.
15. In accordance with Chapter 4 of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual, the detention/retention basins shall be designed to be natural looking, aesthetically pleasing and have multi-use. Verify compliance with these recommendations.
16. The drainage report does not address roof drainage and sidewalk scuppers. According to D.S. 2-05.2.4.H.3. and D.S. 3-01.4.4.F. 10-year flow has to be completely conveyed under sidewalks when concentrated runoff crosses any sidewalk/walkway. Additionally, show the roof drainage direction on the drainage exhibit and provide sidewalk scuppers for the roof drains. Please be advised that the 10-year flow requirement does not apply to roof drainage. Roof drainage has to be discharged in its entirety to avoid prolonged ponding on the roof that might cause the roof to collapse. Demonstrate compliance with the sidewalk scupper requirement including design calculations.
17. Buildings set backs need to be determined from the proposed retention basin(s) based on the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report. Submit a Geotechnical Report that addresses required setbacks.
18. Naylor Wash erosion hazard setback shall be determined and the location of the proposed building shall be based on the location of the setback.
19. The proposed building appears to be touching the existing floodplain. A floodplain use permit is required for the building and all proposed work within the regulatory floodplain. The building shall be set at least 1' above Naylor Wash's water surface elevation just upstream of the building.
20. Provide an encroachment analysis for all proposed improvements within Naylor Wash regulatory floodplain.
21. The drainage report does not address retention basin and drainage structure maintenance requirements and responsibility in details. Additionally, provide the proposed drainage structure maintenance checklist that addresses all drainage structures including the retention system.
22. Additional drainage related information might be required with the Grading Plan

Development Plan:

1. Complete the D (yr)-______ subdivision case number as required by D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2.
2. The Development plan does not show the existing lot lines. The Final Plat that removes the existing lot lines should have been submitted and approved first before the development plan is submitted.
3. List the applicable rezoning case number, in the lower right corner, next to the title block (D.S. 2-05.2.1.K.).
4. The location map is preferred to be in the upper right corner of the first sheet (D.S. 2-05.2.1.D.).
5. Provide a title block as required by D.S. 2-05.2.1.G.
6. Provide a legend as required by D.S. 2-05.2.1.J.
7. Provide all applicable general notes listed in D.S. 2-05.2.2.
8. Add a general note that addresses the drainage structure maintenance responsibility, the frequency of maintenance activities and who will be conducting the maintenance inspections. Please be advised that a registered civil engineer shall be responsible for the inspections and the preparation on the required maintenance report.
9. It does not appear that the basis of bearing is called out on the plan. Additionally, the tie to the Basis of Bearing is not clearly depicted (D.S. 2-05.2.3.A.). Revise as necessary.
10. Provide a recent property title report to help verify the depicted existing onsite easements (D.S. 2-05.2.3.B.).
11. Verify, either on the plan or in written documentation, compliance with Rezoning conditions 1. B, C, D, E, F, G, H, 2, 3, and 12. A and B. (D.S. 2-05.2.4.U).
12. Provide the recordation data, the width of paving, curbs, curb cuts and sidewalks for the adjacent right of way as required by (D.S. 2-05.2.3.C.).
13. Provide existing ground elevation on the site based on City of Tucson Datum (indicate City of Tucson field book number and page (D.S. 2-05.2.3.E.).
14. Show any existing drainage facilities on and adjacent to the site (D.S. 2-05.2.3.F.).
15. It is not clear to what civil plans the keynotes refer.
16. The proposed building appears to be touching the existing floodplain. A floodplain use permit is required for the building and all proposed work within the regulatory floodplain. The building shall be set at least 1' above Naylor Wash's water surface elevation just upstream of the building.
17. Provide the Naylor Wash 100-year floodplain ponding depth in the inventory parking area. Please be advised that vehicles can not be parked in flooding areas that are 1' in depth or deeper.
18. Provide the width of Belvedere Avenue entrance and driveway to ensure that the provided width is adequate for vehicular use. Please be advised that the location of the trash enclosure is not appropriate and it encroaches on the driveway. Revise as needed.
19. Retention areas shall include the 100-year ponding limits with water surface elevations (D.S. 2-05.2.4.H.1).
20. Indicate proposed drainage solutions, such as origin, direction and destination of flow and method of collecting and containing flow (D.S. 2-05.2.4.H.2).
21. Provide locations and types of all drainage structures including sidewalk scuppers, roof drains and roof drainage arrows, etc. (D.S. 2-05.2.4.H.3).
22. Indicate all proposed ground elevations at different points on each lot to provide reference to future grading and site drainage (D.S. 2-05.2.4.H.4).
23. Draw locations and indicate types of offsite runoff acceptance points and/or onsite runoff discharge points (D.S. 2-05.2.4.H.7).
24. Provide all applicable building setback lines including erosion hazard setback, retention basin setbacks and sight visibility triangles (D.S. 2-05.2.4.I.).
25. Provide the widths of all existing and proposed sidewalks and walkways (D.S. 2-05.2.4.K & L).
26. Trash enclosure location does not appear to be appropriate. The enclosures appear to be inaccessible and impede traffic within the driveway. Revise as needed. Additionally, the trash enclosure and its gate details shall be revised to meet the City of Tucson trash enclosure standard detail 6-01.0. (D.S. 2-05.2.4.T.).
27. Reference Standard Detail 207 (City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Details for Public Improvements) for all proposed wheelchair ramps.
28. Reference Standard Detail 106 (City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Details for Public Improvements) for the proposed steel pipe bollard.
29. Demonstrate how the site runoff including roof drainage will be directed towards water harvesting areas before it leaves the site.
30. The treatment of any proposed slopes shall be in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report. Provide a copy of the Geotechnical Report and verify compliance with its recommendations.
31. According to D.S. 2-05.2.4.H.3. and D.S. 3-01.4.4.F. 10-year flow has to be completely conveyed under sidewalks when the runoff crosses any sidewalk/walkway. Additionally, show the roof drainage proposed sidewalk scuppers where applicable. Please be advised that the 10-year flow requirement does not apply to roof drainage. Roof drainage has to be discharged in its entirety to avoid prolonged ponding on the roof that might cause the roof to collapse. Show the roof drainage direction and revise the Development Plan accordingly.
32. According to Section 3.3.5 "Low-Flow Channels" of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual, the proposed basins floors should be sloped to provide positive drainage. The section recommends a minimum of 0.5% floor slope and 0.2% low flow concrete channel slope. Please be advised that based on the City's experience with similar projects, 0.5% slope was difficult to construct and maintain which resulted in nuisance ponding in the basins. Show the provided positive drainage on the drainage exhibit.
33. Unless the retention basins are provided with bleed pipes, provide verification that the retention basins will percolate within 12 hours. Provide a Geotechnical Report that addresses retention basins percolation.
34. Provide a detail for the single trash enclosure shown at the southeastern corner of the project.
35. As per Federal ADA requirements, all wheel chair ramps shall have the Truncated Domes instead of the standard grooves, which are shown on City of Tucson Standard Detail 207. Aside from the Truncated Domes, the wheel chair ramps shall be constructed in accordance with the Standard Detail 207.
36. All proposed work in the public right of way will require a right of way excavation permit or a Private Improvement Agreement. Contact Steve Tineo of Transportation Department Permit and Codes at 791-5100 for additional information.
37. Revise the Development Plan according to the Drainage Report revisions.
38. Additional information and details might be required with the Grading Plan

Landscape Plan:

1. Complete the D(yr)-______ subdivision case number.
2. Ensure that the proposed landscaping does not conflict with the basin inlets, outlets, and access ramps.
3. Add a note that requires depressing landscaped areas a maximum of 6" for water harvesting

Prepare a detailed response that explains the revisions that were made and references the exact location in the drainage report and on the Development Plan where the revisions were made.
09/14/2007 ED ABRIGO PIMA COUNTY ASSESSOR Approved DATE: September 14, 2007
RE: Assessor's Review and Comments Regarding Development Plans
D07-0039 CHAPMAN DETAIL BUILDING T141422
X Plat meets Assessor's Office requirements.
09/14/2007 TIM ROWE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Denied September 14, 2007


To: Anthony Villarreal
Barry Barcus Architect, Inc.

Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager
City of Tucson Development Services Department

___________________________
From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6579), representing the Pima County
Departments of Wastewater Management and Environment Quality

Subject: Chapman Automotive, 22nd Street & Belvedere Ave.
Dev. Plan - 1st Submittal
D07-039

The proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project have been reviewed on behalf of the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) and the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use.

1. This project will be tributary to the Roger Road Wastewater Treatment Facility via the Randoph Interceptor.
The PCWMD will determine if the downstream public sewer system has the necessary treatment and conveyance capacity to serve this project. Please be aware that this office will not be able to approve the above referenced project until such capacity has been verified. No action on your part is necessary to initiate this determination.

2. All Sheets: Show the jurisdiction's case number, D07-0039, in or near the title block of each sheet. This case number should be shown larger and bolder than any associated cross-reference numbers.

3. The development plan submitted is significantly deficient. Refer to Pima County Development Services "Development Plan Review, Checklist Requirements" section J. WASTEWATER, for submittal requirements. The checklist is available at;

http://www.pimaxpress.com/SubDivision/Documents/DevPlanReq.pdf

4. You will need to field verify the location of M-123 which runs through the property because the as-builts do not match what is shown on map guide. A public sewer easement over this sewer line will need to be granted if there is not one already. If you are planning to relocate a portion of the public sewer you will need to meet w/Mr. Tim Rowe of PCWMD ((520)740-6547). The flow through must be maintained to the properties to the south.

This office will require a revised set of bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents.

Pima County Code Title 13.20.030.A.2 requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the development plan. The fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet.

The next submittal of this project will be the second (2nd) submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $150.00 (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter.

If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly.

If you have any questions regarding the above-mentioned comments, please contact me.
09/19/2007 TOM MARTINEZ OTHER AGENCIES AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION Approved ADOT has NO COMMENT on this project
D07-0039
BARRY R. BARCUS ARCHITECT INC.
CHAPMAN DETAIT BUILDING

--------------------------------------------------------


Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are intended for use by the person(s)/entity(ies) named above and may contain confidential/privileged information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by email, and delete or destroy all copies plus attachments.
09/27/2007 KAROL ARAGONEZ ZONING REVIEW Denied CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Karol Aragonez
Planner

PROJECT: D07-0039
Chapman Detail Building
Development Plan

TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 25, 2007

DUE DATE: October 9, 2007

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed.

Note: Phase I shall be reviewed and treated as a stand alone use based on zoning criteria for Automotive Service and Repair, Development Designator "30", subject to LUC Sec. 3.5.13.5, complying to parking and off-street loading for said use. At such a time that Phase II is developed this site will become an accessory use to Vehicle Rental and Sales, Development Designator "31", subject to 3.5.9.5.A & B. Parking and loading provided as part of Phase I can then be utilized to meet new parking requirements based on the new principal use.

1. Section 5.3.8.2, LUC, permits a maximum of one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a development plan. If, at the end of that time, the development plan has not been approved, it must be revised to be in compliance with all regulations in effect at that time, and must be resubmitted for a full CDRC review. The one-year expiration date for this development plan is September 11, 2008.

2. Staff recognizes that the applicant has submitted a final plat (S07-137) for the purpose of removing underlying lot lines per Bk. 52, Pg. 25. As an FYI this development plan cannot be approved until the final plat has been processed through CDRC and approved by Mayor and Council.

3. All mapped data on the development plan shall be drawn at an engineering scale having no more than forty (40) feet to the inch.
DS 2-05.2.1.B

4. All lettering and dimensions shall be the equivalent of twelve (0.12") point or greater in size.
DS 2-05.2.1.C

5. A small, project-location map shall be drawn on the first sheet of the development plan, preferably in the upper right corner. The map should cover approximately one (1) square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of 3" = 1 mile, and provide the following information.
a) Show the subject property approximately centered within the one (1) square mile area.
b) Identify conditions within the square mile area, such as major streets and watercourses.
c) Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled.
DS 2-05.2.1.D

6. Within the title block please provide a brief legal description of the site.
DS 2-05.2.1.G.2

7. Please add the contour interval with the provided north arrow.
DS 2-05.2.1.H

8. A legend, which shows and describes all symbols used on the drawing is to be placed on the plan, preferably on the first sheet.
DS 2-05.2.1.J

9. List as reference the rezoning case number in the lower right corner next to the title block of all plan sheets including landscape and NPPO sheets. Provide a separate response letter detailing compliance with rezoning conditions.
DS 2-05.2.1.K & DS 2-05.2.4.U

10. List the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the primary property owner of the site and developer of the project.
DS 2-05.2.2.A.1

11. Case number D07-0039 has been assigned to this development plan (DP). Please place this number in the right corner of all sheets of the development plan, landscape plan, NPPO, and any other associated sheets.
DS 2-05.2.2.B.2

12. Please revise existing zoning information provided in project data to read "W/conditions" instead of W/Amendments. Please remove proposed zoning information. Zoning for this site has already been effectuated by the existing subdivision plat done in 1996.

13. Please provide as a note the proposed use of the property to read " Proposed use is Automotive Service and Repair, Development Designator 30, Subject to LUC Sec. 3.5.13.5".

DS 2-05.2.2.B.3

14. Because the property is part of a subdivision plat that is being reviewed or one that has been recorded which required review of a development plan, provide the subdivision name and file number (S07-137), preferably in the lower right corner of the plan.
DS 2-05.2.2.B.8

15. Add a note stating that the project is designed to meet the overlay zone(s) criteria: Sec. 2.8.2, Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ); Sec. 2.8.3, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone
DS 2-05.2.2.B.10

16. Please list as a note the gross area of the site by square footage and acreage.
DS 2-05.2.2.B.11

17. Please draw all existing easements on the plan along with recordation information, location, width, and purpose. If an easement is no longer in use and scheduled to be vacated or has been abandoned, so indicate. If none exist provide response to reviewer's comments. Also if easements are purposed please draw, dimension and label as to their purpose and whether they will be public or private. If none exist provide response to reviewer's comments.
DS 2-05.2.3.B & DS 2-05.2.4.G

18. The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks.
DS 2-05.2.3.C

19. Please clarify if actual use is for the washing and detailing of cars and will not be performing minor automotive repair and maintenance. If the sole use is as a car wash facility the parking requirement is four (4) spaces plus one (1) space for each wash bay for a total of twenty (23) spaces. Remove calculations based on one (1) space per two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of GFA.
LUC 3.3.4

20. Of the two (2) required accessible spaces please indicate that one (1) is van accessible.
2006 IBC Sec.1106.5

21. Parking Area Access Lanes (PAALs). The minimum width for two (2) way traffic aisles is twenty-four (24) feet. A minimum one (1) way traffic aisle is twelve (12) feet in width, unless it also serves as a fire lane, in which case, the minimum width is twenty (20) feet. Please provide dimensions of all PAALs on site including those accessing the site from Belvedere Avenue, and from the southeast corner of proposed structures to the proposed parking.
DS 2-05.2.1.C.1

22. A minimum distance of one (1) foot must be maintained between any open structure and a PAAL. The one (1) foot setback is conditioned upon the pedestrian way(s) being designed at a location other than between the open structure and the PAAL. The distance is measured to the closest part of the structure such as the roof overhang. Please provide from the southeast corner of the carport to the edge of PAAL.
DS 3-05.2.2.B.2

23. A minimum distance of two (2) feet must be maintained between a PAAL and any wall, screen, or other obstruction, provided pedestrian activity is directed to another location. The additional area is necessary to provide clearance for fire, sanitation, and delivery vehicles. If walls exists along the PAAL from Columbus Boulevard please dimension.
DS 3-05.2.2.B.3

24. A minimum distance of five (5) feet for a pedestrian refuge must be maintained between any enclosed structure and a PAAL and is to contain a four (4) foot sidewalk that is set back one (1) foot from the PAAL and physically separated from the PAAL. Please provide along all sides of the proposed building.
DS 3-05.2.2.B.1

25. The gate at the southern portion of the site appears to open into a part of the parking space to the west. This creates a potential hazard. Design of gate may need to be modified.

26. A vehicular use area must be provided with post barricades or wheel stop curbing designed to prevent parked vehicles from extending beyond the property lines; damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings; or overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas or unpaved areas on or off site and to prevent vehicles from driving onto unimproved portions of the site. When wheel stop curbing is used, it is to be located two and one-half (2½) feet from the front of the parking space. Please dimension the wheel stop curbing in detail 7/AS2.00.

27. Please provide a detail of standard parking being provided for employees. Design criteria for parking spaces are provided in DS 3-05.0
DS 2-05.2.4.P

28. The gate entrance at Belvedere Avenue must be reviewed by Traffic and Engineering to determine if there is sufficient area to allow for a vehicle to turn around without having to back up on to Belvedere Avenue. Please verify with Traffic and Engineering if the area provided in front of the gate will work. A detail may be required to demonstrate turn around area

29. All accessible access aisles leading into the PAAL at the crosswalk shall have truncated domes installed that shall be twenty-four (24) inches minimum in the direction of travel and extend the full width of the access aisle. The domes shall be located so the edge nearest the curb line is six (6) inches to eight (8) inches from the curb line.
ANSI 406.12, ANSI 705

30. Please show the MS&R right-of-way for 22nd Street. Show the future sidewalk and curb. If the future is the same as the existing please label as such.
DS 2-05.2.4.E

31. Sidewalks within a project must be physically separated from any vehicular travel lane by means of curbing, grade separation, barriers, railings, or other means, except at crosswalks. The striped access running parallel with the PAAL and abutting the building must meet this requirement.
DS 2-08.4.1

32. A sidewalk must be provided from the existing sidewalk of path in Columbus Boulevard and connect to the pedestrian circulation within the site.
DS 2-08.4.1.A

33. A sidewalk will be provided adjacent and parallel to any PAAL on the side where buildings are located. All sidewalks are to be flood free for all storm discharges of up to ten (10) year flood event. Sidewalks are to a minimum of four (4) feet wide and be installed to avoid any obstruction which decreases the minimum width to less than four (4) feet. The cross slope on all sidewalks will not exceed two (2) percent.
DS 2-08.4.1.B, DS 2-08.5.1.A & D

34. All accessible routes shall consist of a walking surface with a slope not steeper than 1:20. The cross slope of a walking surface shall not be steeper than 1:48. All slopes are to be indicated on the plan/plat and associated details.
ANSI 403.3

35. Curb ramps or diagonal curb ramps shall be provided at all pedestrian crossings of vehicle use areas and streets where accessible routes are required. They shall be located so they do not project into vehicular traffic lanes, parking spaces, or parking access aisles. Ramps shall be located or protected to prevent their obstruction by parked vehicles.
ANSI 406

Curb ramps shall be a minimum of three (3) feet in width, exclusive of flared sides. The curb ramp flares shall not be steeper than 1:10. Counter slopes of adjoining gutters and road surfaces immediately adjacent to the curb ramp shall not be steeper than 1:20. The adjacent surfaces at transitions at curb ramps to walks, gutters and streets shall be at the same level. All slopes are to be indicated on the plan/plat and associated details.
ANSI 406.2, 3, & 4

All accessible curb ramps shall have truncated domes installed that shall be twenty-four (24) inches minimum in the direction of travel and extend the full width of the curb ramp or flush surface. The domes shall be located so the edge nearest the curb line is six (6) inches to eight (8) inches from the curb line.
ANSI 406.12, ANSI 705

36. Please dimension all structures on site within the building footprint.
DS 2-05.2.4.N

37. Per LUC Sec. 3.4.5, Automotive Service and Repair Minor requires two (2) off-street loading spaces twelve (12) feet wide by thirty-five (35) feet long when the GFA is between 10,001-30,000 square feet of GFA (Table 3, Sec. 3.4.5.3). Please revise off-street loading calculations and provide location on plan.

38. Please provide bicycle parking calculation. Zero (0) required, zero (0) provided.
LUC 3.3.4 (Commercial Services Use Group, Automative Car wash)

39. Please show all sight visibility triangles. Refer to DS 3-01.5.0.

40. Please provide as a note the maximum allowed FAR (0.75) and the proposed FAR. Provide the maximum allowed building height (40 feet) and the proposed building height (27.33 feet).

41. Please indicate the location and type of postal service to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements. If mail is to be delivered to an area within a building please state so on the plan.
DS 2-05.2.4.V

42. Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, freestanding, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Also indicate if there are existing billboards on site. Billboards will be required to meet all LUC requirements as stated in LUC Sec. 3.5.4.26. If none exists please state so.
DS 2-05.2.4.W & LUC 3.5.4.26

43. Per Rezoning condition 1F please provide a street cross section of Belvedere Avenue that demonstrate that sufficient pavement width has been provided to allow a parking lane on the west side.
C9-96-10 Condition 1F

44. Aboveground storage tanks for the storage of hazardous materials, such as, but not limited to, hydrogen, gasoline, diesel fuel, automotive fluids, oil, or waste-oil, are permitted as accessory uses in conjunction with and for the purpose of a principal Permitted Land Use.

No person shall install an accessory aboveground storage tank unless the tank meets the following requirements.
a) The tank shall be used only for the purpose of servicing the vehicles used or serviced in connection with a permitted principal use. The tanks shall not be open for use by the public.
b) Except as specified in this Section, the setback regulations of the zoning district in which the tanks shall be located apply to all accessory storage tanks.

45. A tank that is not located within an enclosed building shall be set back as follows.

a) A minimum of fifty (50) feet from any property line adjacent to any area where, in the opinion of the Fire Chief, the tank could present a hazard or danger to person or property.
b) The tank must be screened by a wall equal to the height of the tank.
c) The maximum permitted diameter of a tank is ninety-five (95) inches, except that, on ten thousand (10,000) gallon storage tanks, the maximum diameter may be increased to ten (10) feet. (Ord. No. 8864, §1, 4/28/97)
d) The maximum permitted height of a tank, excepting venting, manways, and filler caps, is ten (10) feet above grade, except that, on ten thousand (10,000) gallon storage tanks, the maximum height may be increased to twelve (12) feet above grade. (Ord. No. 8864, §1, 4/28/97)
e) An aboveground storage tank must have a secondary containment tank.
f) A concrete pad must be provided under all tanks.
g) The construction, installation, and location of the aboveground storage tanks and the types of materials to be stored in the tanks must be approved by the Fire Chief.

These regulations do not supersede or replace any other applicable city, county, state, or federal regulations and requirements for aboveground storage tanks.

46. All changes, modifications, and/or corrections must be made on all applicable plans including the development plan, landscape plan, and NPPO. Once changes, modifications, and/or corrections are made and reviewed further comments may result.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Karol Aragonez, (520) 837-4960.

KAA S:\zoning review\karol\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D07-0039dp.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents.
09/28/2007 KAY MARKS PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING Denied 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL
TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207

KAY MARKS
ADDRESSING OFFICIAL
PH: 740-6480
FAX #: 740-6370


TO: CITY PLANNING
FROM: KAY MARKS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL
SUBJECT: D07-0039 CHAPMAN DETAIL BUILDING/REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
DATE: SEPTEMBER 28, 2007




The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and the following matters must be resolved prior to our approval:


Spell out suffixes for all street names.

Lots 1 thru 9 will need to be combined, please provide copy of combo request prior to approval.

Parcel Number on sheet 1 is incorrect.



jg
10/03/2007 JOSE ORTIZ COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Denied October 3, 2007
ACTIVITY NUMBER: D07-0039
PROJECT NAME: Chapman Detail Building
PROJECT ADDRESS: 4426 E 22nd St
PROJECT REVIEWER: Jose E. Ortiz PE, Traffic Engineer

Resubmittal Required: Traffic Engineering does not recommend approval of the Development Plan; therefore a revised Development Plan is required for re-submittal.

The following items must be revised or added to the development plan.

1. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed.

2. List the existing ROW width and the future ROW width per the COT Major Streets and Routes plan for Columbus Blvd and 22nd St. (DS 2-05.2.2.D)

3. The access points off of Columbus Blvd shall have 25' radius curb returns and 18' radius curb returns off of Belvedere Ave. (DS 3-01.0 figure 6)

4. Show and label the existing and future SVTs (DS 2-03.2.4.M). If the existing and future SVTs are the same then label it as both existing and future.

5. A permit or a private improvement agreement will be necessary for any work performed within the Right-of-way. Contact Permits and Codes at (520) 791-5100 for permit information.

6. The proposed gate location shall not create queuing of vehicles into the public roadway therefore the gate may need to be relocated to avoid creating adverse conflicts with vehicles on the public roadway. If needed, city staff can provide a detail that illustrates the desired gate entry configuration.


If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x76730 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov
10/09/2007 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1) Add the CDRC case number and any related case numbers to the landscape and native plant preservation plans. DS 2-07.2.1.B

2) Any required storm water detention/retention basins shall be landscaped to enhance the natural configuration of the basin. Design criteria are set forth in Development Standard 10-01.0. LUC 3.7.4.3.A
Add landscaping in accordance with the guidelines in the manual.
http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Stormwater_detention-retention_manual.pdf

3) Canopy trees must be evenly distributed throughout the vehicular use area. Every parking space shall be located within forty (40) feet of the trunk of a canopy tree (as measured from the center of the tree trunk).
Revise the landscape plan as necessary to provide trees at the employee parking area. LUC 3.7.2.3.A

4) The site is required to include screening per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. Revise as necessary to provide a 5' high screen at all points where the site is adjacent to Office zoned property, including the driveway to Columbus Blvd., unless it is jointly between properties. LUC 3.7.3 & DS 2-06.3.7.

5) The loading area is required to be screened with a 6' high wall from the adjacent Office zone per LUC table 3.7.2-I. Revise the landscape and development plans to include the required wall.

6) Revise the landscape plans to show the limits of grading. DS 2-07.2.2.B.5
Revise the native plant preservation plans to show the limits of grading. DS 2-15.3.4.A

7) All disturbed, grubbed, graded, or bladed areas not otherwise improved shall be landscaped, reseeded, or treated with an inorganic or organic ground cover to help reduce dust pollution. Revise landscape plan to identify the type and locations proposed for inert ground cover materials or seeded areas. A minimum two-inch layer is required. LUC 3.7.2.7. DS 2-06.5.2.C

8) Landscape borders proposed in right-of-way or MS&R areas must be approved by the City Engineer or designee and comply with the City Engineer's requirements on construction, irrigation, location, and plant type. Approvals are also required for proposed plantings in the public drainageway or related 16' access easement. Provide verification, in writing, of any approvals obtained. Contact Gary Wittwer, DOT Landscape Architect for specific requirements.

9) Per condition of rezoning (C9-96-10), the drainage access and maintenance easement is to remain unobstructed. The development/landscape plan indicate a number items (parking, walls/fences, rip-rap, etc.) that obstruct access. Revise the plans to comply with the condition.

10) Landscape plans shall include a summary of plants required for mitigation and show their site location
on the landscape plans. Show the total PIP, TOS, required mitigation for each. 2-15.3.4.B

11) All Protected Native Plants shall be planted in locations able to support their long-term health and survival and shall be planted in densities and configurations to approximate the natural character of the Sonoran Desert. Revise the plans as necessary, avoiding utility and access easements.
LUC 3.8.6.6.C

12) An additional Native Plant Preservation Plan or approval is required for any construction or disturbance of public right-of-way areas adjacent the site. Contact Gary Wittwer, the Department of Transportation Landscape Architect, at 791-5100 for additional information. LUC 3.8.4.2

Alternatively, right-of-way areas may be incorporated into the submitted plans. The approved Native Plant Preservation Plan can then be used to obtain any required permits from the Department of Transportation where an NPPO clearance is required.

13) Revise the plans to indicate the same information regarding walls or barriers. Sheet C2 differs from the AS1.00 regarding the 22nd Street frontage.

14) Revise the development plan and landscape plan to show and dimension the space to be reserved for the Twenty-second Street landscape border. LUC 3.7.2.4, DS 2-05.2.4.X

15) The site affects regulatory floodplain areas that may contain riparian habitat. This habitat may not unnecessarily altered per TCC Sec. 26-5.2. Refer to DS 2-13 for the preparation, submittal, and review procedures for development within areas that have environmentally valuable habitat in conformance with Article 1, Division 1, Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Area Regulations.

16) Submit an Environmental Resource Report (ERR) and Mitigation plan per DS 2-13.2.5.B.1 if encroachment is proposed in the regulatory area. The report will document (1) the areas that contain riparian and wildlife habitat that is to be preserved and (2) those areas without such habitat within the regulatory floodplain.

17) All development within the Protected Riparian Area shall be reviewed to insure that there is no unnecessary disturbance of the riparian resources. Refer to DS 2-13.2.5.B.2 for the section on Development Restrictions and revise the plans as necessary to comply.

18) The Landscape plans for the project are required to document compliance with any mitigation plan requirements. A summary of mitigation and preservation requirements shall be included on the plans. The plans shall show the location of mitigation areas; techniques used for mitigating impacts to, or preservation of, natural areas; specifications for restoration and revegetation of disturbed areas; and general compliance with the applicable standards. Revise as necessary.

19) When vegetation is used to satisfy a screen requirement, the size of the plant material specified will be five (5) gallon minimum and be of a type that will maintain an opaque screen year round. Revise the plans to use the minimum size plants for screening purposes. DS 2-06.3.5.A

20) Revise the landscape plans to provide a continuous screen behind the Belvedere Ave. street landscape border by adding plants and reducing the spacing. DS 2-06.3.5 A

21) The development plans propose a pipe railing along 22nd Street. This railing may be better located behind the 10' wide street landscape border (inside the property limits) as an additional barrier will be required to protect the landscaping from any adjacent vehicular use areas creating a dual barrier. LUC 3.7.2.4, DS 3-05.2.3.C.

26) Revise the irrigation plans to indicate that the system will be installed within the development site, unless installation in adjacent public areas is allowed. Also, revise as necessary to comply with any landscape plan revisions that require additional landscape plantings.

27) Revise the landscape plan to provide 50% vegetative groundcover from the property line at 22nd Street to the proposed inventory lot. LUC 3.7.2.4.C

28) Plants proposed for screening are required to provide a year round opaque visual barrier from the ground level to the code required height. It is not clear how Sephora secundiflora can meet this requirement.

29) Revise the landscape plan to include the following calculations:
a. Square footage of the site.
b. Square footage of the oasis allowance area and calculation.
c. Square footage of the vehicular use area; number of parking spaces, including the required and provided parking space calculations; and the calculation of the required number of canopy trees.
d. Minimum width and square footage measured from the inside edge of tree planters in vehicular use areas.
e. Length and width of landscape borders and number of canopy trees per length.
f. Square footage of all landscaped areas and calculation of the percentage of vegetative coverage.
DS 2-07.2.2

30) A minimum distance of two (2) feet must be maintained between a PAAL (driveway to Columbus Blvd.) and any wall, screen, or other obstruction. DS 3-05.2.2.B.3
Keep this in mind as the plan is revised to comply with the screening requirements.

31) The minimum required text size is 12 point (0.12") for microfilming/archiving purposes. Revise lettering in the plant inventory on the NPP Plan to meet this requirement.
DS 2-03.2.1.C
10/09/2007 FRODRIG2 OTHER AGENCIES PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS Approved CASE: D07-0039, CHAPMAN DETAIL BLDG, DEV PLAN

COMMENT: NO OBJECTIONS OR ADVERSE COMMENTS




Vehicle Trip Generation: UNKNOWN





Please call if you have questions



Tom Cooney, Travel Forecasting Manager

Pima Association of Governments

177 N. Church Ave, #405

Tucson, AZ 85701

Tel: (520) 792-1093, Fax: (520) 620-6981

Web: www.PAGnet.org and www.RTAmobility.com




CASE: D07-0039, CHAPMAN DETAIL BLDG, DEV PLAN

COMMENT: NO OBJECTIONS OR ADVERSE COMMENTS




Vehicle Trip Generation: UNKNOWN





Please call if you have questions



Tom Cooney, Travel Forecasting Manager

Pima Association of Governments

177 N. Church Ave, #405

Tucson, AZ 85701

Tel: (520) 792-1093, Fax: (520) 620-6981

Web: www.PAGnet.org and www.RTAmobility.com
10/09/2007 FRODRIG2 COT NON-DSD REAL ESTATE Denied 1.) There is a 1' No-Access Easement that runs along Belvedere Avenue created by the subdivision plat 22nd Street Commerce Center 52/25. The plans show a new driveway encroaching into it just north of the Naylor Wash. A portion of this 1' no-access easement will need to be abandoned. Below is the link to Real Estate Services (RES) Application for vacation/abandonment of City right of way/easements. Along with the completed application I will need a legal description for the area of the 1' no-access easement abandonment from a registered land surveyor.

http://dot.ci.tucson.az.us/realestate/public.php

You will find the Application for Real Estate Services Form (RES FORM) pdf. at the top middle of the page under Real Estate Services. Print it out and submit the completed application with a check in the amount of $200.00 made out to the City of Tucson and the Real Estate Division will process this request.

2.) Re-zoning condition No.# 3 requires installation and maintenance of locking gates at the 16' wide drainage access and maintenance easement if there is an encroachment into this access easement. Please show details of the gates as there appears to be an encroachment (which is allowed by the re-zoning) into at least 6' of the access easement.

Real Estate Division would prefer this development be converted to a subdivision plat which would allow for the Abandonment of easements by the plat (Development Standard 7-01.0.0) and not by separate instrument (thus no need for the legal description). The phase ll development may also need the 1' no-access easement abandoned in which case a re-plat would make for a much cleaner development.

Please feel free to call me at 520-837-6719 with questions.
10/11/2007 ANDY VERA ENV SVCS REVIEW Denied 1. Sheet AS2.00, 9 refuse gate detail
Annotate and show on drawing, cane bolt sleeve flush with concrete for securing the gates in the open and closed positions.
Recommend positioning gate post to face of CMU wall in place of bollard.

2. Sheet AS2.00 15 Refuse enclosure plan
Require 2 bollards for each side wall to protect from damage during service. DS 6-01.4.2.C.2 and require a 10 ft x 10 ft minimum inside clear service area between the rear and side wall bollards and the front gates, DS 6-01.4.2.C.2. 10 ft clear area is measured to face of bollard not center.

3. Sheet AS1.00
A. Show service vehicle route with turning radii to and from enclosures within development.
B. Clarify hard line north of refuse enclosures along pedestrian path. Require adequate maneuverability for service vehicle to approach and back from enclsoures.

Please correct on resubmittal.
10/11/2007 PGEHLEN1 TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Passed
10/12/2007 ROGER HOWLETT COT NON-DSD COMMUNITY PLANNING Denied DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN COMMENTS

Regarding

SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application

CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT

D07-0039 Chapman Detail Building 10/12/07

( ) Tentative Plat
() Development Plan
() Landscape Plan
( ) Revised Plan/Plat
( ) Board of Adjustment
( ) Other

CROSS REFERENCE: C9-96-10

NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: General Plan

GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: N/A

COMMENTS DUE BY: October 9, 2007

SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:

( ) No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment
( ) Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions
( ) RCP Proposal Complies with Plan Policies
() See Comments Attached
( ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on:
() Resubmittal Required:
( ) Tentative Plat
() Development Plan
() Landscape Plan
() Other – see comments

REVIEWER: J. Hershenhorn 791-4505 DATE: 10/12/07


Chapman Building Detail
D07-0039


This case was reviewed for consistency with the amended Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) and zoning conditions adopted by the Mayor and Council on January 4, 2006 (Ordinance No. 10237).

The PDP shows a 3700-square foot detail shop north of the east-west access drive. South of the drive, adjacent to an authorized R-2 subdivision, the PDP shows parking, which would act as a buffer between the Chapman buildings to the north and the R-2 authorized area south of the Naylor Wash.

The Development Plan (DP) being reviewed shows a detail shop located south of the access drive, in what was shown on the PDP as a parking area. The building size has been increased to 14,000 square feet, and a car wash under a canopy is located on the south side of the building.

The relocation of the building south into what was shown as a parking area, the expanded size of the detail building, and the addition of the car wash on the south side of the detail building and are not consistent with the PDP and the intent of rezoning condition #9, and constitute a major change.

Please revise the Development Plan to be consistent with the amended PDP and zoning conditions. Alternatively, you may contact Michael Wyneken of the Rezoning Section (520-837-4955) to process a change of PDP and conditions, to enable the processing of the plan as submitted.

We would be happy to meet with you to discuss the options.
10/15/2007 LIZA CASTILLO UTILITIES TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER Approved 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714
Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702


WR#188123 October 15, 2007

Chapman Detail Building
Attn: Mr. Anthony Villareal
5251 N 16th Street 800
Phoenix, Arizona 85016

Dear Mr. Villareal:

SUBJECT: Chapman Detail Building
D07-0039

Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted September 15, 2007. It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development

Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. Any relocation costs will be billable to the customer.

In order to apply for electric service, call the New Construction Department at (520) 918-8300. Submit a final set of plans including approved site, electrical load, paving off-site improvements and irrigation plans, if available include a CD with the AutoCAD version of the plans.

If easements are required, they will be secured by separate instrument. Your final plans should be sent to:
Tucson Electric Power Company
Attn: Ms. Mary Boice
New Business Project Manager
P. O. Box 711 (DB-101)
Tucson, AZ 85702
520-917-8732

Should you have any technical questions, please call the area Designer Mike Kaiser at (520) 918-8244.

Sincerely,


Elizabeth Miranda
Office Support Specialist
Design/Build
lm
Enclosures
cc: DSD_CDRC@tucsonaz.gov, City of Tucson (email)
M. Kaiser, Tucson Electric Power
10/26/2007 GLENN HICKS COT NON-DSD PARKS & RECREATION Approved DATE: October 26, 2007

TO: DSD_CDRC@ tucsonaz.gov

FROM: Glenn Hicks
Parks and Recreation
791-4873 ext. 215
Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov


SUBJECT: D07-0039 Chapman Detail building: Development Plan(9-12-07)


Staff has no comments.
10/29/2007 PATRICIA GEHLEN ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Denied COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

October 29, 2007

Anthony Villarreal
Barry R. Barcus Architect Inc.
5251 N. 16th Street #800
Phoenix, Arizona 85016

Subject: D07-0039 Chapman Detail Building Development Plan

Dear Anthony:

Your submittal of September 12, 2007 for the above project has been reviewed by the Community Design Review Committee and the comments reflect the outstanding requirements which need to be addressed before approval is granted. Please review the comments carefully. Once you have addressed all of the comments, please submit the following revised documents and a DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed:

ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED

10 Copies Revised Development Plan (Eningeering, Wastewater, Zoning, Addressing, Traffic, Real Estate, Landscape, ESD, DUPD, DSD)

5 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Engineering, Zoning, Landscape, DUPD, DSD)

2 Copies Revised NPPO Plan (Landscape, DSD)

2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD)

Please see attached letter from Southwest Gas.

Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919.

Sincerely,


Patricia Gehlen
CDRC Manager

All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/

Via fax: (602) 264-2542