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: DP13-0221
Parcel: 12314126D

Address:
711 E LESTER ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP13-0221
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
11/08/2013 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: 1ST Lester Homes
Development Package (1st Review)
D13-0221

TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 13, 2013

DUE DATE: December 09, 2013

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.

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

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 & TSM 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 November 07, 2013 .

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.3 - The administrative street address and relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

1. COMMENT: Remove the address from the title block and place it adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

2. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP13-0221, adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

2-06.4.7 - General Notes
The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable.

2-06.4.7.A - Zoning and Land Use Notes

2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide:

2-06.4.7.A.8.a - Floor area for each building;

3. COMMENT: As a note provide the floor area for each building.

2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Percentage and area in square feet of building and accessory building coverage;

4. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 6.4.3.C sidewalks are not included in lot coverage. Remove the sidewalk area from the lot coverage calculation.

2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions
The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided.

2-06.4.8.A - Provide site boundary/subdivision perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system.

5. COMMENT: Clearly show the property lines for this site and provide the boundary perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system.

2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development
The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes.

2-06.4.9.E - Proposed land splits or existing lot lines shall be drawn on the plan with dimensions and the identification number and approximate square footage of each lot. (Please be aware that, if land division occurs and the number of lots falls within the definition of subdivision, a subdivision plat is required.) Land splits require a separate permit and review.

6. COMMENT: It appears that this site is comprised of two (2) parcels, 123-14-126C & 123-14-126D. A lot combo is required. Provide a copy of the approved Pima County Combo Request from with your next submittal.

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.

7. COMMENT: Per UDC Table 7.4.6-1 the minimum PAAL width for access to 90 degree parking is twenty-four (24) feet. The twenty (20) foot wide PAAL proposed does not meet this requirement. A Parking Design Modification Request (PDMR) must be approved prior to approval of this development package. If a PDMR is approved provide the PDMR case number adjacent to the title block on all sheets. As a note provide the PDMR Case number, date approved, what was modified and any conditions of approval on the development package.

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.

8. COMMENT: Provide a dimensioned garage so that the minimum vehicle parking space size requirements can be verified.

9. COMMENT: Detail B Sheet C1 provide a location dimension for the proposed wheel stop, see UDC Section 7.4.6.H.3.

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.

10. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.3.G. Fractional Amounts. When the calculation of required motor vehicle and bicycle parking spaces results in a fractional number, a fraction of one-half or more is adjusted to the next higher whole number, and a fraction of less than one-half is adjusted to the next lower whole number. That said the required short-term bicycle parking calculation is not correct and should be shown as two (2) required. Also it appears that the provided short-term bicycle parking calculation is not correct. Zoning was only able to fine two provided short-term bicycle spaces on the site.

2-06.4.9.Q - Provide the square footage and the height of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building(s).

11. COMMENT: Provide the square footage and the height of each structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building on the development package.

2-06.4.9.R - Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual.

12. COMMENT: Provide width dimensions for all proposed sidewalks and pedestrian crosswalks shown on the plan.

13. COMMENT: Per TSM 7-01.4.1.B A sidewalk is required adjacent and parallel to any access lane or PAAL on the side where buildings are located. That said sidewalks are required;
a. Along the east side of Unit 2
b. Along the west side of Unit 5
c. Along the north side of Unit 7


2-06.4.9.V - For gang mailboxes indicate location to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements, such as pedestrian accessibility, utilities, and landscaping.

14. COMMENT: Keynote 18 calls out "MAILBOX LOCATION". Zoning was not able to locate the mailbox.

Additional comments:

15. Comment: Per UDC Table 6.3-4.A: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE C-1, C-2, C-3, OCR-1, & OCR-2 ZONES, C-1 Zone, the allowed density is 36/acre not 22 as shown on the plan.

16. Comment: Per UDC Section 11.3.7.A.3 Any residential development consisting of three or more dwelling units on an integrated site or single lot is considered a multifamily development. Per UDC Section 6.3.3.D.3 for determining the applicable dimensional standards, Multifamily Development is considered a Nonresidential Use. That said per UDC Table 6.3-4.A: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE C-1, C-2, C-3, OCR-1, & OCR-2 ZONES, C-1 Zone, The allowed height for a Nonres development is thirty (30) feet not twenty-five (25) as shown on the plan.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package, approved copy of Pima County Combo Request from
.
11/12/2013 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
11/14/2013 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: November 15, 2013
SUBJECT: 1st Lester Homes Development Plan Package- Engineering Review
TO: Oracle Engineering Group, LLC; Attn: Peter Salonga. PE
LOCATION: 711 E Lester St; T14S R14E Sec06
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP13-0221

SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package and Storm Drainage Statement (Oracle Engineering Group, LLC, 05NOV13). 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 (DP13-0221) 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 and General Note #12 on Sheet 1 to remove the old reference to the DSMR that is not applicable to this project. If a Technical Standard Modification Request (TSMR) is requested to modify a standard provide the correct TSMR # along with the date of approval and any associated conditions, if applicable.

3) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.C.2: Revise General Note #9 on the development plan document to read per the referenced section; "No structure or vegetation shall be located or maintained so as to interfere with the sight visibility triangles in accordance with Section 10-01.5.0, Sight Visibility, of the Technical Standards Manual." The current language references the old Development Standards which do not apply.

4) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Revise the development plan document to label the required 18-foot radii at the driveway entrance on 1st Avenue per TSM Sec.10-01.3.2.C and Figure 6. Provide written approval from TDOT Permits and Codes that the proposed project does not have to meet the minimum 18-foot radii and a smaller radii or standard driveway apron can be utilized.

5) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Revise the development plan document and all Keynote #21 areas for the existing driveways that are to be closed off to clearly label the curbing and sidewalk dimensions along with a reference to the Standard Detail for Public Improvements to match existing for construction purposes.

6) 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. Or provide a TSMR application to modify the standard to allow the proposed 20-foot PAAL width.

7) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan document and Detail B so that it is designed in accordance with Sec.7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC. Specifically a standard parking stall must be 8.5 feet wide by 18-feet long and the proposed bumper blocks must be placed to allow for the 2.5 foot overhang so that the vehicle does not encroach into the required pedestrian access space.

8) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Provide a note on the development plan document to state; "Approval from TDOT Permits and Codes for all improvements within the public right-of-way will be required. A right-of-way use permit application will be required prior to construction."

9) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Provide a note on the development plan document to state; "All landscaping to be depressed maximum 6-inches for stormwater harvesting. Refer to the Water Harvesting Guidance Manual dated October 25 for further recommendations for stormwater harvesting."

10) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Provide a note on the development plan document to state; "Grading Plan is in conformance with City of Tucson Technical Standards 2-01 (excavation and grading requirements)."

11) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Provide a note on the development plan document to state; Call for a Pre-construction meeting prior to start of earthwork. To schedule a PDSD Pre-construction meeting, SWPPP inspection or general Engineering Inspections, call IVR (740-6970), or schedule with a Customer Service Representative at the Planning & Development Services Department, or contact PDSD Engineering at 791-5550 extension 2101, or schedule inspections online at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Online_Services/Online_Permits/online_permits.html"

12) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Provide a note on the development plan document to state; "All proposed fencing and walls will require a separate permit for review and approval by all necessary Planning & Development Services Departments."

13) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan document to provide for a pedestrian circulation path along the sides of all Units and the proposed PAAL areas. Per TSM Sec.7-01.4.1.B a sidewalk is required adjacent and parallel to any access lane or PAAL on the side where buildings are located, revise.

14) 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.

15) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Provide written approval for the proposed refuse collection location. Per TSM Sec.8-01.5.3.G specifically figure 1 this type of collection requires prior approval from ES. Verify that all dimensions are clearly labeled in plan view to meet the minimum standard. Dimension the angle of approach (45degrees per the Fig 1), clear 14'x40' approach, correct enclosure dimensions per Figure 3B (single Enclosure), etc. Detail D on Sheet C2 does not meet the minimum dimensions or requirements of Figure 3B, revise.

STORM DRAINAGE STATEMENT:

16) TSM Sec.4-04.2.3.2.D: Revise the Drainage Statement to provide hydrologic data sheets for both pre-development (included) and post-development conditions. Due to the decrease in post-development impervious area the post-development hydrologic sheets should show a decrease in flow for the 2-, 10-, and 100-year events. Verify that post-developed flows into 1st Avenue right-of-way have been decreased from pre-developed conditions.

GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised Development Plan Package and Storm Drainage Statement 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
11/20/2013 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
12/02/2013 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved
12/02/2013 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.

The provisions of the UDC apply to all development and uses of land within the City.
Remove reference to LUC within landscape notes.

ARTICLE 7: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING

One canopy tree is required for every 33 linear feet of landscape border or fraction thereof, excluding vehicular ingress or egress points. 3 trees are required along 1st Ave.

Screening for individual land uses and zones must be provided as determined in Table 7.6.4-1. 30" screen is required along Lester St. for exposed vehicle use area

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

Additional comments may apply
12/03/2013 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change 1. The maximum demand flow that is allowed by Tucson Water for the specified 5/8" water meters is 15 GPM. If the demand exceeds 15 GPM, larger water meters will be required.
2. The total flow for the private sewage collection system for this project may be in excess of 3000 gallons per day. If so, the design for the system must be submitted to the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality for their approval prior to obtaining a permit for constructing the sewage collection system from the City of Tucson. Reference A. R. S. 49-104 (B) (13).
3. The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (2404.80') is higher than the first floor elevations for each building. Provide a backwater valve per Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. Plumbing fixtures located on floors discharging from above the first floor elevations shall not discharge through the backwater valves.
12/03/2013 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Denied SHEET 1
1. At note 8, the reference to ICC A117.1, Section 406.12, 13 and 14 mainly deals with curb ramps and detectable warning strips. Where are your detectable warning strips?
a. Provide detectable warning strips at both ends of all of the marked crossings shown on this plan.
b. Add another reference to Section 405 which deals with requirements for sidewalk walk ramps which are used in most all locations of this plan.
2. Show 1:12 maximum slope with a directional arrow on all sidewalk ramps.
3. At note 12 reference to "Marked Crossing".
4. At detail ":B":
a. Indicate a 2% maximum slope in all directions for the accessible parking space and aisle.
b. Finish the dimensions.
c. Show dectectable warnings strips at both ends of the marked crossing.
5. Indicate a 5% maximum running slope and a 2% maximum cross slope for all accessible routes.
SHEET C2
6. At detail "G", provide a 7'-0" dimension from the finished grade to the bottom of the main sign.
END OF REVIEW

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
12/04/2013 CPIERCE1 REJECT SHELF Completed