Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: DP13-0199
Parcel: 117042630

Address:
222 E 5TH ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP13-0199
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
10/11/2013 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
10/17/2013 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
10/22/2013 MICHAEL ST. PAUL ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Michael St Paul
Planning Technician

PROJECT: DP13-0199
222 East 5th Street
Administrative Office

TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 22, 2013

DUE DATE: November 7, 2013

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Unified Development Code, The Administrative and Technical Manuals were addressed.

This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Package Standards listed in section 2-06 of the City of Tucson Administrative Manual. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC).

The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az

This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above

1. Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, An applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One year Expiration date is .

2. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS)
Section

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS
2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD) - ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.1.1 PURPOSE
This standard has been prepared for the purpose of informing applicants of the submittal and review requirements for development package documents to assure proper and adequate information is presented in a consistent manner, thereby providing the basis for an efficient and timely review. The development package documents are prepared in support of applications for building permits and related reviews.

The information that is requested establishes the basis upon which the project will be approved and could affect what is required of the property in the future, should there be a proposal for expansion or for a different use of the property.

This standard does not waive any applicable city regulations or codes.

2-06.1.2 APPICABILITY
This standard shall be used for all site plans and tentative plats submitted to PDSD for review.

2-06.2.1 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Development Package applications are available from PDSD. Completed applications and accompanying materials shall be submitted to PDSD. Incomplete or inaccurate applications will not be accepted, nor will any application in which the pre-application conference or neighborhood meeting requirements have not been met. The types of documents and the specific number of copies required of each of the documents are on the PDSD website or may be obtained from PDSD. Resubmittals of development packages require a comment response letter that details how all previous comments have been addressed. Provide the same number of copies of the comment response letter as plans provided.
The following documents and information shall be submitted upon application:

2-06.2.1 Application Form
A completed application signed by the property owner or authorized designee;

2-06.2.2 Development Package
A development package must be prepared to the format and content requirements described herein;

2-06.2.3 Related Reviews
In addition to the plan process, a project may require review for other types of plans and documents. The applications for those processes are submitted to the appropriate department for review and approval. These related reviews can be applied for so that review can occur concurrently with the development package application. However, it must be understood that, should the related application be approved subject to conditions or denied, this may affect the;

2-06.2.4 Concurrent Reviews
The development package is designed to allow for concurrent review of any site related reviews. Concurrent review means that all plans and documents needed for the review are submitted as one package. Examples of site related reviews include but are not limited to: site plans, landscape plans, NPPO plans, water harvesting plans, grading plans, SWPPP plans, floodplain use permits, and overlay reviews. Separate applications are often required for the different site related reviews even if the plans are submitted concurrently; and,

2-06.2.5 Fees
Fees in accordance with Section 4-01.0.0, Development Review Fee Schedule.

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.8.B - 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.

COMMENT: Identify and depict all existing easements, as required, on the site plan/

2-06.4.8.G - Other significant conditions on the site, such as major rock outcrops, structures, fences, walls, etc., shall be shown. These elements should be indicated in a different line weight than the proposed improvements and labeled "to be removed" or "to be retained."

COMMENT:


2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show future and existing sight visibility triangles. On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section.

COMMENT: Depict and dimension all sight-visibility triangles (SVTs) on the site plan.


2-06.4.9.H.5 - If utilizing parking area access lanes (PAALs), they shall be designed in accordance with Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

COMMENT: Dimension the PAALs on the site plan. The minimum width faor a two-way PAAL is twenty-four (24) feet (UDC Table 7.4.6-1). The minimum setback for the proposed covered parking is one (1) foot from the edge of the PAAL (UDC 7.4.F.2.a). Also dimension the proposed covered parking to the front right-of-way.

2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

COMMENT:

2-06.4.9.H.5.b - If any of the required parking is located off-site as permitted by the UDC, a drawing of that parking area is to be provided, together with the city's required parking agreement (include a copy of the lease agreement if applicable) must be provided. Please remember that in these situations, if the off-site parking location is a new parking area, it must comply with all parking area requirements and must be allowed as a principal use by the zoning classification of that property. If the off-site parking area location is an existing parking lot, the parking spaces utilized for the proposed land use must be non-required parking for the existing use for which the parking area was established.

COMMENT: The reference for a parking easement (DK 13108 Pg 952) provides none of the required information for the off-site parking. Provide approved site plans for the off-site parking and provide all the information identified above.

2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Section 7.4.9, Bicycle Parking Design Criteria, of the UDC. Provide, as a note, calculations for short and long term bicycle spaces required and provided.

COMMENT: Provide a detail with all the required information (UDC Sec 7.4.9.D) with the site plan.

2-06.4.9.L - 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. The easements may have to be recorded and the recordation information added to the development package prior to approval.

COMMENT: Provide the recording information for the proposed easement.

2-06.4.9.X - Show compliance with landscaping and screening requirements by locations, material descriptions, and dimensions. Specific plant or hardscape material shall be detailed on a landscape plan. A detailed landscape plan is required. In accordance with Section 2-11.0.0, Landscape Plan Requirements.

COMMENT: See comments by landscaping review.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Michael St Paul, (520) 837-4959.

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package site plan and any requested documents.
10/30/2013 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: November 1, 2013
SUBJECT: Mister Carwash Development Plan Package- Engineering Review
TO: Metro TED; Attn: Lisa Bowers
LOCATION: 222 E 5th St; T14S R13E Sec22
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP13-0199


SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package and Drainage Statement (Cypress Civil Development, 04OCT13). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administration Manual (AM) and Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Refer to the following link for further clarification:
http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az

The following items need to be addressed:

SITE PLAN:

1) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP13-0199) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets.

2) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.A.6: Revise the development plan document to reference the special overlay zone that is applicable to this site, specifically state that "the project is designed to meet the overlay zone criteria for Sec.5.4, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone."

3) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.C: Revise the development plan document to dimension the existing width of the sidewalk for 6th Avenue in plan view.

4) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.C: Revise the development plan document to clarify or remove the Keynote #4 reference located along the south property line near the PAAL entrance. The Keynote is for an existing sidewalk and from the aerial view there does not appear to be a sidewalk at this location.

5) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.C: Revise the development plan document to clarify the "3'R" label as shown in the middle of the south PAAL entrance. It appears that this label should be revised to reflect the proposed curbing at the landscape island just to the east, revise.

6) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Revise the development plan document to label the required 25-foot radii at all driveway locations on the MS&R Street per City of Tucson Transportation Access Management Guidelines (TAMG), Section 5.5. Refer to TSM Sec.10-01 for street development standards.

7) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan document to label and dimension the existing and/or future SVTs for both driveway entrances. Arterial Streets require a 20'x345' near side and a 20'x125' far side SVT.

8) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan document to clearly dimension all PAAL widths to verify minimum requirements, specifically the PAAL located adjacent to the proposed covered parking. Verify the 1-foot separation from the structure and 24-foot PAAL per UDC 7.4.6.F.2.a.1.

9) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan document to label and dimension the minimum 24-foot clear PAAL width for the vehicular use areas.

10) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan document to dimension the proposed vehicle turn around area, provide the width and length of the parking stall.

11) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Provide the recordation information for the new proposed 15'x15' electrical easement for the new transformer area. The SEQ# must be provided in plan view.

12) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.2: Revise the development plan document to label and dimension curb cuts into the landscape areas to alleviate offsite flows due to the increase in impervious area of the site. Provide a detail for construction purposes at areas shown on Sheet 2 where associated with spot grades that would allow water to drain into these areas.

13) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all handicap accessibility comments that may be associated with this project.

14) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Revise the development plan document and any associated details for the refuse enclosures to show that it meets TSM Sec.8-01. The detail must match TSM Sec.8-01, Figure 2 and Figure 3b for the required enclosure walls with gates, concrete thickness and compressive strength, concrete approach apron dimensions, space from wall to bollards, anchoring bolts, 14'x40' clear approach for each container, etc. Any deviation from the standard will require a Technical Standard Modification Request (TSMR), it is advisable that prior to submitting the TSMR to contact Environmental Services to see if they would support the modifications.

GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised Development Plan Package that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments.

For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929.



Jason Green, CFM
Senior Engineer Associate
Engineering Division
Planning & Development Services Department
11/01/2013 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (8808-76A, 2384.25') is higher than the basement floor elevations (2371.68' and 2373.90'). If there are any existing or planned plumbing drains in the basement, add a note to the drawing calling for a backwater valve to be installed per Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.
2. The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (8808-76A, 2384.25') is less than 12" below the first floor elevation (2385.00'). Add a note to the drawing calling for a backwater valve to be installed per Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. drains discharging from above the ground floor shall not discharge through a backwater valve.
11/04/2013 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Denied SHEET 2
1. Provide an accessible entrance into the courtyard from the accessible parking.
2. From the accessible parking layout, reference to the (soon to be enumerated) large scale detail 1/4
3. Insure and note to that effect that all slopes of the accessible routes are to comply with ICC A117.1, Section 403.3; 5% maximum running slope and 2% maximum cross slope.
4. Show all building entrances and exits on plan.
5. At note 19, delete the ADA reference and insert ICC A117.1, sections 405 and 406.
SHEET 3
6. At detail 1, provide all dimensions for ramp and landings as required.
7. Provide detail number 2 for the Courtyard Plan.
a. Provide all required accessible dimensions
b. Provide an accessible entrance to the courtyard from the accessible parking.
SHEET 4
8. At detail A delete the 8'-8" dimension and change the 6'-8" to 7'-0".
9. Provide detail number 1 for the Typical Parking Detail.
a. Reference the accessible parking signage detail.
END OF REVIEW
11/06/2013 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL SECTION 2-10.0.0: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS

Identification and Descriptive Data

All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the landscape plan will be identical in size and location to those shown on the base plan (site plan or tentative plat). Should amendments be required to the base plan through the review process, the same amendments will be made to the landscape plan which will then be resubmitted along with the base plan.

The landscape plan will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet:

Any relevant case number for reviews or modifications that affect the site.

A complete or partial exception to Section 7.6, Landscaping and Screening Standards, may be granted when shade is provided for pedestrians and customers, such as along sidewalks, pedestrian circulation paths, and outdoor patios, in accordance with Section
5.12.6.A.2.

UDC 5.12.4.C.6

b. The following types of landscaping and improvements may be used
to comply with this section:

(1) Existing landscaping;

(2) Shade trees in the right-of-way;

(3) Green walls or green roofs; and/or,

(4) Shade structures, such as awnings. Shade shall be provided for at least 50% of all sidewalks and pedestrian access paths as measured at 2:00 p.m. on June 21 when the sun is 82 degrees above the horizon. Shade may be provided by trees, arcades, canopies, or shade structures. The use of plantings and shade structures
in the City right-of-way is permitted to meet this standard. The shade provided by
a building may serve to meet this standard.

2. Shade

a. Except as provided below, shade shall be provided for at least 50% of all sidewalks and pedestrian access paths as measured at 2:00 p.m. on June
21 when the sun is 82 degrees above the horizon. Shade may be provided by trees, arcades, canopies, or shade structures. The use of plantings and shade structures in the City right-of-way is permitted to meet this standard. The shade provided by a building may serve to meet this standard. UDC 5.12.6.C.2.

b. Exception

The PDSD Director may approve an IID Plan providing less than 50% shade
where compliance is not feasible due to a project sites location and/or building
orientation and the applicant has made a reasonable attempt to comply with this standard. Provide shade calculation for street landscape border along Arizona Ave.

Street Landscape Borders

To enhance the visual appearance of the streetscape, a street landscape border is required in accordance with Table 7.6.4-1 along the street frontage of a site as follows

Minimum Width

Street landscape borders must be a minimum of ten feet wide as measured from the stree tproperty line. On streets designated as Major Streets and Routes (MS&R), the street landscape border must be measured from the future MS&R right-of-way line Dimension and include calculation for street landscape buffer along Arizona Ave.

Continuous screens along street frontages for vehicle use area must be as determined by Table 7.6.4-I. A 5' wall is required for vehicle use area adjacent to residential zoned properties. Provide appropriate screening.

Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed.

Additional comments may apply
11/06/2013 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
11/07/2013 CPIERCE1 REJECT SHELF Completed