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: DP12-0009
Parcel: 115044910

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: DEV PKG

Permit Number - DP12-0009
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/13/2012 FERNE RODRIGUEZ START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
01/17/2012 RONALD BROWN ADA REVIEW Passed
01/18/2012 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Approved
01/23/2012 JWILLIA4 DESIGN EXAMINER REVIEW Denied Rick Gonzalez, Architect
3004 E Adams Street, Tucson, Arizona 85716
520.2072521 520. 8507401 (cell)

DESIGN PROFESSIONAL
RECOMMENDATIONS & MODIFICATIONS REPORT LETTER

PROJECT: COT CDRC DP12-0009 January 17, 2012
CAMPUS ACQUISITIONS
1020 N TYNDALL AVE
MAIN GATE DISTRICT
OVERLAY REVIEW

This project has been selected for review by Rick Gonzalez, Architect (RGA), a contracted Design Professional for the City of Tucson (COT). RGA has conducted a Main Gate District (MGD) Urban Overlay District (UOD) report #1 for compliance with the MGD zoning option on behalf of the Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD) Director, Ernie Duarte, and Planning Administrator (PA), Jim Mazzocco.

This letter contains recommendations and modifications to be addressed by written responses indicating any actions taken. In order to facilitate a shorter 2nd review, provide all indicated responses and revisions to the plans. Please return revised plans and response letter to the COT PDSD in accordance with their submittal requirements.

To avoid delays, ensure that all responses are made and are complete, and have been coordinated on all applicable details and note sheets. When the plans are found to be in accordance with the MGD UOD recommendations and modifications listed below, RGA will forward a letter of recommendation of compliance to the COT PDSD Director and PA. The Director shall make the final decision on the project’s compliance with MGD design requirements (B-2.d.6). The applicant shall include the Design Professional’s communication in the development package (B-2.d.5).

1ST REVIEW COMMENTS:

B . E s t a b l i s h m e n t a n d A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f M a i n G a t e
D i s t r i c t
B-1. E s t a b l i s h m e n t o f M a i n G a t e D i s t r i c t;
E f f e c t i v e n e s s o f M a i n G a t e D i s t r i c t Z o n i n g
O p t i o n
DEVELOPMENT AXON SHEET A1.0
B-1.e. A property owner using the MGD zoning option shall have existing zoning
designation prefaced by a U on the City of Tucson’s Zoning Maps. Add this information on to the Development Package Plans.

C-3. D e v e l o p m e n t S t a n d a r d s
C-3 ; Table 1
Add a note to the plan that states as follows:
* A Right-of-Way permit is required for elements in ROW areas.

Table 1 Max. Setback is 15’ from property line on all sides. This amount is exceeded in the easement at the Northwest corner of the property, please reduce the setback in this area.

C-4. A c c e s s a n d P e d e s t r i a n F a c i l i t i e s
C-4 . a . V e h i c u l a r A c c e s s
MEETS COMPLIANCE

C-4 . b . P e d e s t r i a n A c c e s s; S i d e w a l k s
MEETS COMPLINCE

C-5. P a r k i n g ( M o t o r V e h i c l e s a n d B i c y c l e s )
C-5. a. M o t o r V e h i c l e P a r k i n g
MEETS COMPLIANCE

C-5 . b. B i c y c l e F a c i l i t i e s
SITE PLAN SHEET A1.0
C-5.b.1. Short Term Bicycle Parking Facilities:
iii. Short-term bicycle parking area shall be located within 50 feet of a building
Entrance, demonstrate compliance. Short-term bike parking along Tyndell appears to be slightly greater than 50’ from the main entry, please revise.

iii. For a lot smaller than one acre, at least 65% of the parking shall be located
within 50 feet of a building entrance, demonstrate compliance.

C-5.b.2. Long Term Bicycle Parking Facilities:
iv. It is not called on the plan, as to how long term bicycle storage access is achieved by the building occupants. Revise your Key Note to describe
access means by the building occupants.

C-5.c. Parking Structures
SITE PLAN PROJECT DATA - SHEET A1.0
C-5.c.4. Lighting within the parking structure shall provide for safety and security and
shall be integrated into the architectural character of the building design.
No light bulbs shall be directly visible from outside the parking structure.
Light spillage out of the parking structure shall be controlled according to urban design best practices. Add a note to the Project Data to show intention of compliance, or conceptually demonstrate it graphically in the Development Package.

C-5.c.5. the internal circulation to and within the garage shall be convenient, safe,
and clearly identified for both pedestrian and vehicular traffic, including appropriate signage for and placement of such at elevators and stair cores. Add a note to the Project Data to show an intention of compliance as regards signage, or conceptually demonstrate it graphically in the Development Package.

C-5.c.6. the minimum height clearance in parking structures shall be as required by
the building code. Add a note to the Project Data to show compliance as regards height clearance, or conceptually demonstrate it graphically in the Development Package.

C-6. Loading and Solid Waste
SITE PLAN - SHEET A1.0
C-6b. Solid Waste Facilities: On-site refuse collection container requirements
governing access, type, and location may be modified, but provide written acceptance of modification from Department of Environmental Services, Tucson Fire Department and Department of Transportation stating that no public health or traffic safety issue is created. Provide a note on the plan that Proposed Solid Waste and Recycling Plans shall be reviewed during the preliminary application process.

C-7 Screening
MEETS COMPLIANCE

C-8 Utility Facilities
SITE PLAN PROJECT DATA - SHEET A1.0
C-8.c. Ground floor vents shall be oriented away from pedestrian plazas, building frontage and pedestrian areas. Add a note addressing this on the plan.

C-8.d. No building equipment, antenna or satellite dishes may be located along any building facade facing a street. Add a note addressing this on the plan.

C-9 Landscaping
LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN - SHEET L1.1
C-9.a. Native Plant Preservation:
C-9.a.1. Native plants must be preserved in place, trans-planted, or provide a 1:1
mitigation. Indicate compliance on the plan, or if there are no native plans on the
site, please provide a note stating such.
C-9.a.2. All trees provided in fulfillment of mitigation requirements must be 36” box or larger. Indicate compliance on the plan, or if there are no native plans on the site, please provide a note stating such.
C-9.a.4. Plants with thorns or terminal spines shall be placed clear of pedestrian
circulation. Verify that proper clearance will be provided.

C-9.d. Trees planted in the ROW within 4’ of curb, 10’ of the travel lane or adjacent to the pedestrian area shall be of predominately vertical growth form and structure, with a single trunk, and shall not have thorns. Several thorn bearing trees are located adjacent to pedestrian areas. Please revise the plan to meet compliance.

C-9.e. At least 60% of trees shall be 36” box or larger. The plan calls out only about 44% of the trees that meet this requirement. Please revise the plan to meet compliance.

C-10 Open Space
MEETS COMPLIANCE

C-11 Maintenance
SITE PLAN - SHEET A1.0
C-11.a. The property owner is responsible at all times for maintenance of landscape,
hardscape, building architectural elements and site furnishings, including features installed in the public Right-of-Way (i.e., to the curb). Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

C-11.b. The property owner shall replace or repair vandalized elements within 48 hours.
Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN - SHEET L1.1
C-11.c. The property owner shall replace dead or missing vegetation within 14 days to ensure full compliance with approved landscape plans. Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

HARDSCAPE SITE PLAN - SHEET L1.0
C-12 Site Furnishings
C-12.b. One trash receptacle and one recycling receptacle shall be provided at each street
corner. Please add onto the plan.

GRADING,PAVING, AND DRAINAGE PLAN - SHEET C3.1
C-13. On-Site Water Management
C-13.h. Landscape depressions and curb openings shall be provided to allow water to flow into and out of curb side planters. Please add curb openings onto the plan.

SITE PLAN - SHEET A1.0
C-13.i. Building downspouts shall be directed away from pedestrian circulation areas and
sidewalks. Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

C-13.j. Standing water may not be more than 6” deep. Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

C-14. Street lighting and building lighting shall comply with the City of Tucson Outdoor Lighting Code and shall be incorporated into the landscape design. Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

C-15. Hardscape
GRADING,PAVING, AND DRAINAGE PLAN - SHEET C3.1
C-15.e. If less than 100 square feet in the Right-of-Way, asphalt may be used in streets, alleys, driveways and surface parking areas. Asphalt exceeds 100 sf allowable, please revise.

C-16. Environmentally Conscious Design Practices.
MEETS COMPLIANCE

C-17 Height and Mass Transition
MEETS COMPLIANCE

C-18 Historic Preservation
MEETS COMPLIANCE - NO CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES SHOWN ON MGD UOD FIGURE 2 ARE IMPACTED BY THIS DEVELOPMENT.

C-19 Design Standards
SITE PLAN - SHEET A1.0
C-19.a. Lighting strategies shall reduce or prevent glare and light trespass, conserve energy, and promote safety and security. Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

C-19.b. All area lights, including streetlights and parking area lights shall be full cut-off
fixtures. Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

C-19.c. Sources of lighting shall be recessed and shielded so that the bulb itself is
concealed from public right-of-way view. Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

SITE PLAN - SHEET A1.0/SITE DEVELOPMENT AXOM - SHEET A1.1
C-19.e. Building materials should be chosen for integral colors and their visual and physical permanence in the Sonoran Desert. Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

C-19.f. Building materials should be selected with the idea of localizing the architectural
effect and ambiance in a method coherent with the neighborhood. Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

C-19.j. The use of color should be compatible with the historic traditions of the University of Arizona, City of Tucson, and adjacent historic neighborhoods. Accent colors should be used consistently throughout the building: in signage, architectural features, lighting, window frames, doors and accent walls. Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

C-19.k. Colors and materials that reflect glare should not be used in large quantities.
Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

C-19.s. No more than three consecutive street-facing façade areas should use the same
color paint or method of articulation. Regarding color, please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

C-19.x. Public art located at the corner is encouraged. Art must be designed and
manufactured locally (e.g. sculpture art). Please indicate onto the plan how this will be achieved.

C-19.y. Doors must be shaded or protected from the weather. Please indicate onto the plan how this will be achieved on the side entries and rear roll door.

C-19.aa. Doors must be safe, secure, and universally accessible. Please add a note to this effect onto the plan.

C-19.ab. Storefronts shall provide canopies or awnings for shade and color and material
variation. Canopies may be used as a design element and may incorporate signage. Indicate that shade structure may incorporate signage.

C-19.af. Glazing shall be low-e and shall allow a visual connection through either side of the window. Indicate that glazing will be low-e.

END OF 1ST REVIEW DESIGN PROFESSIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND MODIFICATIONS
01/23/2012 RONALD BROWN ZONING HC REVIEW Denied SHEET A1.1
1. Please show location of signage for the accessible parking spaces.
2. Please provide a large scale detail of the signage including a "Van Accessible" sign.
SHEET A1.2
3. Ditto Comment 1
4. Please locate the 1 accessible parking to the parking area on the North side of the elevator lobby.
END OF REVIEW
01/24/2012 LIZA CASTILLO UTILITIES TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER Approved 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714
Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702


WR#245323 January 24, 2012

Shepley Bulfinch & Richardson
1437 N 1st Street, Suite 201
Phoenix, Arizona 85004

Dear Shepley Bulfinch & Richardson:
:

SUBJECT: Campus Acquisitions/Tyndall Ho
DP12-0009

Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted January 13, 2012. 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: Mr. Richard Harrington
New Business Project Manager
P. O. Box 711 (DB-101)
Tucson, AZ 85702
520-917-8726

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
01/24/2012 MARTIN BROWN COT NON-DSD FIRE Denied Can not locate a reference to type of construction. Not all types are unlimted height.
The alley does not appear to fulfill the requirements for fire department access. Must be 20' wide, unobstructed. Where the road is 20' wide, you show no parking signs in the road.
Much of the alley is only 15' wide. Also, please verify 15' clear height requirement.
01/25/2012 LAITH ALSHAMI ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 01/25/2012,

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

SUBJECT: Campus Acquisition/Tyndall Housing
DP12-0009, T14S, R14E, SECTION 07

RECEIVED: Development Package on January 13, 2012

The subject submittal has been reviewed and it can not be approved at this time. This project is part of an Urban Overlay District (UOD) process for the West University Transition Area. The process has not been completed and the UOD has not been adopted by Mayor and Council. Since the UOD process has not been finalized yet, a complete and an effective review can not be conducted. Additional submittal(s) will be required to ensure that the project complies with the Finalized UOD document. Address the following comments before review can continue. Prepare a detailed response that explains the revisions that were made and references the exact location in the drainage report and on the Development Package where the revisions were made:

Drainage Report:

The drainage report is lacking a lot of information concerning the proposed drainage scheme and facilities and their design calculations. Additionally, a geotechnical report shall address slope protection and stabilization and onsite soil type(s) and their infiltration rate(s) in order to determine how to design the required runoff retention basin(s). The following comments are more specific:

1. Provide, on the drainage exhibits, all right of way width including the alley.
2. This Office looks at both phases as one project. The project size exceeds one acre and runoff retention needs to be provided. Since the project impervious cover will not significantly change between existing and future conditions, the required runoff retention amount might be small enough to be accommodated by providing additional waterharvesting. Revise the report accordingly.
3. Determine, if applicable, what offsite watersheds impact the subject parcel. Provide an offsite watershed map.
4. Provide, in the report, the proposed drainage scheme and all proposed drainage facilities and their design calculations (i.e. runoff retention including dimensions, side slopes and 100-year ponding limits, drainage scuppers, curb openings, storm drain rating, erosion control pads, swales, alley's hydraulic rating, proposed materials, dimensions, etc.).
5. Address, in the report, drainage facilities maintenance requirement and responsibility and specify that the inspection shall be performed by a registered civil engineer annually and/or after every major storm. Additionally, provide a drainage facilities maintenance checklist to facilitate the required maintenance.
6. Explain in the text the building roof drainage direction and explain if sidewalk scuppers will be required. Show the roof drainage direction and provide the scuppers design calculations if proposed.
7. The alley 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. Will the proposed parking garage be below grade? If so, clarify how the parking garage drainage will be accommodated.
9. Address the maximum disposal time for the proposed retention basins based on the basins infiltration rates found in the Geotechnical Report. Verify, that the basins will completely empty out in about 12 hours or less as required by Section 3.5.1.3.a of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual. If bleeders are utilized to drain the retention basins, verify that they are adequate to drain them in the required time. Provide basins' inlet and outlet details to clarify the proposed structures and the location and elevation of the bleeders.
10. According to Section 14.3 of the "Standard Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management in Tucson, Arizona", the proposed 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 inadvertent vehicular access. Address this issue and determine what kind of maintenance access is required for the proposed basins. Please be advised that small shallow basins may not require access ramps.
11. According to Section 3.3.5 "Low-Flow Channels" of the Stormwater 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 and provide the inlet and outlet proposed grades.

Cover Sheet:

1. The name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s), or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional, such as a surveyor, architect, landscape architect, or engineer. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines (D.S. 2-01.3.1).
2. Provide the project Township, Range and Section below the Location Map (D.S. 2-01.3.4.C).
3. Provide a reduced scale map of the UOD indicating the portion being developed (D.S. 2-01.3.6.).

EVERY PAGE OF PACKAGE:

1. Provide the DP12-0009 case number as required by D.S. 2-01.3.3.

BASE LAYER SHEET COMMENTS:

1. Provide the tie between the basis of bearing and one of the corners of the parcel.
2. According to the parcel information provided on PDSD GIS Maps, the subject project area consists of several lots. It appears that a lot combo is required for this project.
3. All existing onsite easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements onsite will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided (D.S. 2-01.3.8.B). Provide a recent Title Report.
4. 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 (D.S. 2-01.3.8.C). Provide all missing information.
5. All proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private (D.S. 2-01.3.9.L).

Permitting/General Notes:

1. Complete the overlay zone number in Permitting Note #6 (D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.6.b).
2. Since the project is not impacted by the regulatory floodplain, Permitting Note #9 can be removed (D.S. 2-01.3.7.B.2.a).
3. Revise Permitting Note #13 as follows: Add the following "and after a major storm" after the words "at least once each year".
4. Complete missing information in General Note #2.
5. The gross area information, provided in General Note #2, appears to be advertently added and it needs to be a separate note.
6. The gross area, provided in General Note #2, is inconsistent with the gross area, provided in Permitting Note #4 and the site area provided on Sheets 1 of 20 and 4 of 20. Clarify the discrepancy and revise as necessary.
7. Replace the name of the department in General Note #24 by the accurate name of the department (i.e. Planning and Development Services Department).
8. Add the following general notes:

a. The approved Development Package Plan is the only acceptable construction plan onsite.
b. The contractor shall remove the fine materials from the bottom of the drainage related basins and scarify their bottoms once the construction activities are completed, in order to remove any fine material build up caused by construction and to restore soil percolation. BMP's may be installed at the basin inlet(s) to prevent the fines from entering the basin
c. Any proposed engineering work to be done below grade (i.e. toe-downs, cutoff walls, drainage pipes/structures, etc.) shall not be back filled until Development Services Inspector inspects the work and approves it.
d. The contractor is not permitted to make an autonomous decision to carry out construction field changes without prior written approval from the Engineer of Record and the City of Tucson Development Services Department.
e. "CALL FOR SWPPP INSPECTION AND PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETINGS. FOR A PDSD ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS, CALL IVR (740-6970), OR SCHEDULE WITH A CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE AT THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, OR CONTACT DSD ENGINEERING AT 791-5550 EXTENSION 2101, OR SCHEDULE INSPECTIONS ONLINE AT: http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/inspections".
f. The project will be in compliance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (Excavation and Grading).
g. A copy of the approved Grading Plan, Grading Permit, and any Geotechnical Reports shall be kept at the site at all times, until final grading approval.
h. Any revision to the Grading Plan MAY require a re-submittal of a revised grading plan for review. Contact PDSD Engineering at 791-5550 to discuss changes in grading design.
i. If grading construction is expected to last longer than the expiration date of the grading permit, contact PDSD to renew/extend the Grading Permit. If Final Grading Inspection has not been completed before the Grading Permit expires, and the permit has not been renewed, additional fees and reviews may be required.
j. See the associated Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan as a part of this grading permit.
k. Contact Permits and Codes at 791-5100 for any questions regarding any right-of-way permit requirements.
l. As-builts and letters of completion for basin and overall project are required.
m. The Engineer of Record shall submit a statement of conformance to as-built plan and the specifications.
n. The permitee shall notify the PDSD when the grading operation is ready for final grading inspection. Final grading approval shall not be given until all work, including installation of all drainage facilities and their permanent protective devices, and all erosion control measures have been completed in accordance with the approved grading plan and grading permit, and any required reports have been submitted.
o. Depress all landscaped areas a maximum of 6" for waterharvesting"

9. Revise all references to "Development Services Department" and "DSD" to "Planning and Development Services Department" and "PDSD".

Site Plan:

1. Indicate existing ground elevations on the site based on City of Tucson Datum as required by D.S. 2-01.3.8.E.
2. Are there existing onsite storm drainage facilities. Additionally, are there and storm drainage facilities on Tyndall Avenue? (D.S. 2-01.3.8.F.).
3. Draw in all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements (D.S. 2-01.3.9.A).
4. Call out the truncated domes on the new wheelchair ramps.
5. Proposed traffic circulation will be designed in accordance with Street Development Standard 3-01.0, to include streets, intersections, street names, right-of-way widths, curve radii of centerlines and curb returns, and proposed improvements, such as pavement, curbs, access points (driveways), handicap ramps, and sidewalks. Street improvements, such as sidewalks, curbs, pavement, and handicap ramps, do not need to be drawn on the plan if such information is provided on typical street cross sections (D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.1) .
6. 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 (D.S. 20-1.3.9.H.2).
7. Show existing onsite and offsite storm drainage facilities, if applicable, as required by (D.S. 2-01.3.8.F.).
8. Show the 100-year ponding limits with water surface elevations within the proposed drainage related basins (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.1).
9. Show the 100-year ponding limits with water surface elevations for the proposed grate inlets in the alley (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.6).
10. Indicate proposed drainage solutions, such as origin, direction, and destination of flow and method of collecting and containing flow (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.2).
11. Provide locations and types of drainage structures, such as, but not limited to, drainage crossings and pipe culverts (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.3).
12. Provide the dimensions all proposed onsite and offsite sidewalks as required by (D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.4).
13. Provide the proposed building roof drainage (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.2).
14. Verification will be provided that any drainage solutions which occur outside the boundaries of the development document area are constructed with adjacent owners' permission. (Additional notarized documentation of that approval will be submitted with the drainage report.). Required drainage easements shall also be provided (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.5).
15. If the geotechnical report shows that the soils percolation rate is not sufficient, bleed pipes may be utilized for retention/waterharvesting areas to ensure that water will not pond for prolonged periods of time. Basin details may be revised accordingly.
16. Either provide a standard detail for the trash enclosure or reference the standard detail number (D.S. 2-01.3.9.T).
17. All proposed work in the public right of way will require a right of way excavation permit or a Private Improvement Agreement. Contact Richard Leigh of Transportation Department Permit and Codes at 791-5100 for additional information.
18. Revise the Development Plan Package according to the Drainage Report revisions.

Landscape Plan:

1. Ensure that the proposed landscaping does not conflict with the basin inlets, outlets, and access ramps.
2. Ensure that the proposed landscaping does not obstruct visibility within the sight visibility triangles.

Grading Plan:

1. Show and label grading limits. Include the grading limits symbol in the legend. Additionally, provide the disturbance area.
2. The location of the cross section detail 3/C3.2 shown on the grading plan is different from the one shown on the site plan. The Detail on Sheet 10 of 20 does not show the proposed 14" X 23" RCP. Revise the plans to show the two different cross section details.
3. Keynote #8 callout at the southwest corner of the building, is not pointing to a sidewalk scupper as described on Sheet 9 of 20. Revise as necessary.
4. Keynote callout, at the northwest corner of the building, between Keynotes #6 and #1 callouts, is overlapped by the contour line and number and it is not readable. Revise.
5. Show the driveway widths and curb radii.
6. Revise the name of the Telephone Company on Sheet 8 of 20 to "CenturyLink".
7. How will the area between sidewalk ramp and face of the building, shown on Detail 2/C3.2, drain. Provide additional ground elevations to clarify how it drains (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.4).
8. According to D.S. 11-01.9.0, the minimum cut or fill setback shall be 2' from the parcel line. Verify compliance with this requirement.
9. Provide grades, slopes, details and all dimensions (i.e. length, width and depth, etc.) for the proposed drainage structures (i.e. basins, erosion control pads, scuppers, etc.). Verify if slope protection is needed.

Geotechnical Report:

1. Submit a Geotechnical Report that addresses retention basin soils percolation rates.
2. Provide the recommended fill/cut slope treatment.

SWPPP:

1. There is a missing word, after the words "the site will be…" in the first line of Section 2.1.2 Sequence of Activities. Add the missing word.
2. Revise "Sequence of Major Construction Activities" section, to include the following first two activities:

a- Determine the disturbance limits.
b- Install the proposed BMP's within these limits.

3. Include a copy of the completed (signed by the owner) NOI form that was submitted to ADEQ (Part III.D.3). Provide some blank forms for the unknown operators. (Part IV.F) Each operator is responsible for submitting a completed NOI to ADEQ and to the City of Tucson. Please note that the remaining signatures from the operators must be on the onsite copy of the SWPPP at or before commencement of construction.
4. Include a copy of the authorization certificate received from ADEQ (Part III.D.2).
5. Include a dated and signed certification form for each known operator (including the owner) in accordance with Part VII.K. (Part IV.J.1).
6. Identify any city or county which received a copy of the authorization certificate (Part III.D.4).
7. Working outside the parcel lines requires permission from adjacent property owners and easements. If permission is not granted, revise the clearing and grading limits.
8. BMP's are required around the existing and proposed grate inlets.
9. It is recommended to protect the inlets of the basins in order prevent fine sediments from entering the basins during construction.
10. Revise the SWPPP exhibits in accordance with the Site and Grading Plan comments.

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4933 or Laith.Alshami@tucsonaz.gov


RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Development Plan Package, drainage report and Geotechnical report
01/25/2012 JOSE ORTIZ COT NON-DSD TDOT Approved DP12-0009 Approved by TDOT Traffic Engineering
01/26/2012 GWITTWE1 LANDSCAPE REVIEW Approv-Cond PDSD Landscape

J. Linville 1/26/2012


Preliminary Comments

1) Revise the landscape plans to include the calculations for Minimum Landscape Area. At least 25% of open space at ground level must be landscaped. C-3 Table 1

2) Clarify how the open space requirements were calculated for this mixed-use project. (Sht.1) C-3 Table 1

3) Landscaping 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. Provide verification, in writing, of any approvals obtained. Contact Gary Wittwer, DOT Landscape Architect for specific requirements.

4) Note any screening provided on the landscape plans. C-7

5) Submit a Native Plant Preservation plan or request for exception. LUC 3.8

6) Landscape Irrigation systems shall be designed with smart or central control systems integrated with building systems and combined with soil moisture sensors and monitors. C-13.f.
01/27/2012 GARY WITTWER COT NON-DSD TDOT Approved John,
I'm fine with this.
Gary
01/30/2012 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Denied CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office
FROM: David Rivera
Principal Planner

PROJECT: DP12-0009
Campus Acquisitions/Tyndall HO:
Development Package

TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 27, 2012

DUE DATE: January 30, 2012

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.

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 January 12, 2013.

2. DS 2-01.3.3, this project has been assigned the development package case number DP12-0009. List the case number adjacent to the title block of all plan sheets. If the UOD
Is assigned a case number or ordinance please list it adjacent to the title block of all plan sheets.

3. DS 2-01.3.4, the location map appears to be incomplete. The map does not appear to cover a one square mile and does not include the information required by this standard and subsections. Revise the map to comply with DS 2-01.3.4.A, B, C.


**Note: All comments related to zoning requirements must be addressed on both sheet 1 and 6. All zoning comments must be addressed on sheets where applicable where the notes or criteria are providing the same information related to zoning.

4. DS 2-01.3.7.A.1, include under the Project Data Sheet one (1), Zoning note, the UOD number or whatever zoning designation is assigned to the UOD. Both sheet 1 and 6 must be updated with all zoning notes and must be consistent.

5. DS 2-01.3.7.A.3, this plan has been prepared in conjunction with a rezoning application; add the following note next to the existing zoning note: "Proposed zoning is ____." List the applicable rezoning file number and conditions of approval. Also place the C9-__-__ (if applicable) and the plan file numbers in the lower right corner of each sheet.

6. DS 2-01.3.7.A.4, identify the proposed use of the property as classified per the UOD. The uses must be consistent and should be listed as described or labeled in the UOD. Sheet 1 and 6 should be consistent with this information.

7. DS 2-01.3.7.A.5, list the number of units and bedrooms on sheet 6.

8. DS 2-01.3.7.A.6, if applicable, list special exceptions, zoning variances, zoning and development standard modifications, overlay zones, and other reviews that are applicable to the project. (UOD, name and number)

9. DS 2-01.3.7.A.6.a, HPZ approval prior to demolition permit approval is required due to the age of the buildings. Contact Jonathan Mabry (837-6908) for process requirements. As a general note state that the project is designed to meet the HPZ overlay zone(s) criteria, and provide the case number, date of approval, what was approved, and conditions of approval.

10. DS 2-01.3.7.A.8, several parcels are to be combined to develop the proposed project. In any of the previous meetings leading up to the submittal of the development package, clarify whether or not PDSD staff ever discussed or indicate that a final plat would be needed in order to clean up any potential issues with property lines. Clarify if a record of survey has been or will be created to combine the existing lots into one overall parcel.

11. DS 2-01.3.8.A, provide the site boundary information on the civil site plan sheet 6. The information should be the consistent on the civil and architectural site plan sheets. Please revise the plans sheets to match or provide consistent information.

12. DS 2-01.3.8.B, if applicable, all easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided.

13. DS 2-01.3.8.F, label the zoning classification adjacent to the proposed development site, including the zoning classifications across the streets.

14. DS 2-01.3.9.H.5.c, demonstrate fully dimensioned maneuverability into and out of the loading dock areas.

15. DS 2-01.3.9.L, if applicable to this project, all proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private.

16. DS 2-01.3.9.M, the conceptual grading plan has been reviewed as part of the development package and in conjunction with the site review. The grading plan may have to be revised several times for consistency with the site plan. Once the site plan has been approved by zoning as part of the DP the grading plan is assumed to be approved as well. Any revisions to the site plan will require revisions to the grading plan and visa versa. At this time the site plan has not been approved by zoning therefore the grading plan is not approved. Ensure that all changes that are made to the site plan are incorporated into the grading plan and visa versa.

17. DS 2-01.3.9.V, indicate the location and type of mail service that will be provided for this development. If a central location is proposed within the interior of the building add a general note stating so. If multiple mailboxes are proposed outside the building draw and label the location. Ensure that pedestrian or vehicular access is not obstructed.

18. DS 2-01.3.9.W, if applicable to this project, draw and label the locations of free standing monument signs or similar type signage proposed and include applicable dimensions height, length and width of each sign.

19. DS 2-01.4.2.F, as of this review the MGD UOD document has not been finalized and is an evolving document from what I can tell. This comment has been added as a caveat that any changes to the plan or document that are not addressed in the final UOD document could require additional process approval. At this time I do not see any issues that arise based on the draft MGD UOD but additional comments may be forthcoming on the next review based on any changes to the site plan and MGD UOD.

20. DS 2-01.4.2.G, should the proposed project be subject to review for overlay zone requirements, such as a Historic Preservation Zone (HPZ), The application for the overlay zone must be submitted simultaneously with the development review document application to DSD so that concurrent review can occur. These submittals may occur after the first review of the development review documents by the Development Services Department

21. The following comments are related specifically to the MGD UOD requirements. Address as required in addition to what is required for compliance with DS 2-01 Development Package.

22. B-1.e, for a proposed development within the MGD UOD the underlying zoning classification must include the "U" designation, i.e. UR-3.

23. C-2.b.1, clarify if the use listed under the use description group is to be a listed in the revised UOD document. None of the uses under section C.2 Land Use includes a Residential Mixed Use. I would say that based on the listed uses this project use would be classified as Mixed Use and the main component would be residential with additional use components listed would include office, accessory assemblies and recreation areas etc.

24. C.5.b.1.iii, the 18 short term bicycle parking spaces along the west side of the building do not appear to be within fifty feet of a building entrance. Revise the location to comply with the minimum 65% requirement or indicate on the plan that there is a building entrance within fifty feet of these 18 short term spaces.

25. C.5.c.6, it is my understanding from the PDSD Building Official that the there is no height clearance or requirement for parking structures written into the building codes. Clarify the types of vehicles that may have access to the parking structure, other than the typical passenger car or truck. If for any reason large vehicles such as refuse, delivery, buses, etc will or may have access to the parking structure the minimum clearance must be noted somewhere at the entrance drives to limit access to vehicles over a specific height or limit access to any and all vehicles that may be over the height limitation that is proposed by the designer.

26. C-05.0, this section refers to development standard 3-05. DS 3-05 standards have been removed from the development standards manual and applied to LUC section 3.3.1. Revise the UOD document to reflect this change.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608.

DGR C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\DP120009dp.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan, and UOD documents.
01/31/2012 TIM ROWE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Denied PIMA COUNTY
REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT
201 NORTH STONE AVENUE
TUCSON, ARIZONA 85701-1207
JACKSON JENKINS PH: (520) 740-6500
DIRECTOR FAX: (520) 620-0135


January 30, 2012



To: GRENIER ENGINEERING, INC.

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


____________________________________________
From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6719), Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department

Subject: TYNDALL AND PARK HOUSING CAMPUS ACQUISITIONS HOLDINGS
Development Plan – 1st submittal
DP12-0009

The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD) has reviewed the proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project. The following comments are offered for your use:

1. Sheet 1: Obtain a letter from the PCRWRD’s Development Liaison Unit, written within the past year, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for the project is available in the downstream public sewerage system and provide a copy of that letter to this office. The required form to request such a letter may be found at:

http://www.pima.gov/wwm/developer.htm#permits

The development plan for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. Ref. A.

2. Sheet 6: Revise General Note #20 to read as follows (Ref. A):

THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE ______ EXISTING AND______ PROPOSED WASTEWATER FIXTURE UNIT EQUIVALENTS PER TABLE 13.20.045(E)(1) IN PIMA COUNTY CODE 13.20.045(E).


3. Sheet 3: Please provide an explanation for the need for three separate connections to the public sewer system. All BCSs that are proposed will need to be connected via newly constructed public manholes. Private assets outside of the proposed manholes will be private and shall not become RWRD facilities. Ref. A and E


4. Sheet 13: Call out the length and slope of the proposed BCS and call it out as private. Ref. A

5. Sheet 13: Call out the construction plan # for the existing public sewer line on plan. Ref. A

6. Access to all proposed new and existing sewer assets shall be maintained at all times. Ensure access to the sanitary sewer assets by designating “No-Parking” over the existing sewer line and proposed new assets, located within the alley. Install appropriate signage and provide adequate enforcement capabilities for this designation. Ref. D

7. Contractor shall obtain all required RWRD permits and shall conduct all necessary RWRD inspections when performance of construction activities occurs within the vicinity of RWRD assets. Ref. D

8. It appears the existing gas line is very close to the existing sewer. Contractor shall resolve any and all potential underground gas line conflicts, to avoid all existing and proposed sanitary sewer facilities. Ref. D

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.


cc: Chad Amateau, PE Checked by:_________
Kristin Greene, PE, DLU Manager
DLU Project folder

Ref. A. Development Plan Checklist Requirements – Chapter 18.71 of the Pima County Code - Section J
http://www.pimaxpress.com/SubDivision/Documents/2006/DP_Requirements2Aug04.pdf

Ref. C - Arizona Administrative Code, Title 18, Chapters 5 & 9 (R18-5-205)
http://www.azsos.gov/public_services/Title_18/18-05.htm
and (R-18-9-E301)
http://www.azsos.gov/public_services/Title_18/18-09.htm

Ref. D - PCRWRD Procedures, Preliminary Sewer Layout Requirements, 1984 (revised April 1988)
http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/stddet/pdf/procedures.pdf

Ref. E - PCRWRD Design Standards for Public Sewerage Facilities, 1983 (revised April 1988)
http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/stddet/pdf/design_standards.pdf

Ref. F - City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Details
http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/stddet/pdf/all_det.pdf

Ref. G - Pima County Code of Ordinances, Title 13 - Public Services, Division II - Sewers
http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientID=16119&stateID=3&statename=Arizona

Ref. H - City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Specifications for Public Improvements, 2003 Edition
http://dot.pima.gov/transeng/stdspecsdet/standardspecs2003.pdf

Ref. I - PCRWRD Engineering Directives
http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/directives/
01/31/2012 JWILLIA4 ENV SVCS REVIEW Approv-Cond Date Case Number Project Address
January 30, 2012 DP12-0009 TYNDALL AND PARK HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Comments: The proposed Plan for the TYNDALL AND PARK HOUSING, Development Plan
Case No. DP12-0009, is hereby Approved with the following condition.
A Note must be added to the Site Plan Permitting Notes, Sheet 6 of 20,
Stating the following:

Note:
On the days of Solid Waste and Recycle Service collection the facility
maintenance personnel shall be responsible for positioning the Solid Waste and
Recycle Containers to the edge of the public alley, for Service Vehicles to see the
containers to be serviced.


Environmental Services Department
Development Plan Review
Reviewer: Tony Teran
Office Phone (520) 837-3706
E-mail: Tony.Teran @tucsonaz.gov
01/31/2012 JOHN WILLIAMS ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Denied COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

January 31, 2012

Alison Rainey
Shepley Bulfinch
1437 N. 1st Street # 201
Phoenix, Arizona 85004

Subject: DP12-0009 CAMPUS ACQUISITIONS Development Package

Dear Alison:

Your submittal of January 13, 2012 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 9 sets of the DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed:

ALL BLACKLINES NEED TO BE FOLDED

9 Copies Revised Development Package (HC Site, Fire, Engineering, Landscape, Zoning, Design Pro, Env Svcs, Wastewater, PDSD)

2 Copies Revised Geotechnical Report (Engineering, PDSD)

2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, PDSD)

2 Copies NPPO Exception Application, if applicable (Landscape, PDSD)

1 Check Made out to “Pima County Treasurer” for $150.00 (Wastewater)

Should you have any questions, please call me at (520) 837-4893.

Sincerely,



John Williams
Planning Technician

All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/

Hand Delivered to Lisa Bowers, Metro Ted.