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: DP14-0005
Parcel: 124082240

Address:
50 N MOUNTAIN AV

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL

Permit Number - DP14-0005
Review Name: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
06/27/2014 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Mountain Group Home
Development Package (2nd Review)
DP14-0005

TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 2, 2014

DUE DATE: July 25, 2014

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 January 06, 2015.

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.12 - An index of sheets in the development package shall be provided on the first sheet.

1. COMMENT: The drawing index does not include all sheets submitted, i.e. A4.1.

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet:

COMMENT: In the title block under "MOUNTAIN GROUP HOME" you list "SITE PLAN NO. T14CM00090", T14CM00090 is not a site plan. Remove this statement from the development package.

2-06.4.2.B - A brief legal description and a statement as to whether the project is a resubdivision are to be provided. On resubdivisions, provide the recording information of the existing subdivision plat;

2. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Provide a brief legal description within the title block.

2-06.4.2.D - The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx).

3. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Provide the page number and total number of development package pages, (sheet x of y) on all sheets.

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.

4. COMMENT: Provide the DDO case number, DDO-14-05, adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

2-06.4.4 - The project-location map to be located on the first sheet of the development package in the upper right corner, shall cover approximately one square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of three inch equals one mile, and provide the following information.

5. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Provide a location map the meets the three inch equals one mile scale.

2-06.4.2.C - Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled.

6. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Label the section corners on the location map.

7. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Label the scale on the location map.

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.4 - Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses.

8. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Identify the existing use on the plan.
2-06.4.7.A.6.a - List additional applications and overlays, by case number (if applicable), in lower right corner of each sheet. As a general note provide the type of application processed or overlays applicable, a statement that the project meets the criteria/conditions of the additional application or overlay, the case number, date of approval, what was approved, and the conditions of approval, if any.

9. COMMENT: Provide a general note stating the DDO case number, date of approval, what was approved and any conditions of approval on the plan.

10. COMMENT: The site plan and elevations will need to be stamped by the DDO section prior to approval of this development package.

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.C - 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.

11. This comment was not addressed. Provide type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. COMMENT: Provide the above information for both 10th Street and Mountain Avenue.

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.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.

12. COMMENT: Per UDC Article 7.4.6.F.2.b Access lanes and PAALs must be setback at least two feet from a wall, screen, or other obstruction over six inches. That said show the required setbacks to the proposed refuse enclosure walls.

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.

13. COMMENT: The vehicle parking space calculation should state "REQUIRED 32 UNITS X 0.5 = 16 SPACES PLUS 2 SPACES FOR RESIDENT FAMILY MINUS 4 SPACES REDUCTION FOR 24 ADDITIONAL BICYCLE PARKING SPACE PER UDC ARTICLE 7.4.5.e.3". Until the requirements for the additional bicycle parking are provided, see comments 19 & 20, the proposed reduction cannot be verified.

14. COMMENT: Under the vehicle parking calculation you state "4 ON STREET SPACES PURCHASED BY OWNER" the on street vehicle parking spaces do not count toward the required vehicle parking spaces. Remove this statement from the plan.

15. This comment was not fully addressed. Show the number of residences in the vehicle parking space calculation. COMMENT: Provide a vehicle parking space calculation that includes the ratio used, number of required and provided standard and accessible vehicle parking spaces.

16. COMMENT: The location shown for the wheel stops on the typical vehicle parking space detail is not correct, see UDC Article 7.4.6.H.3 & Figure 7.4.6-C.

17. COMMENT: What appears to be a detail for typical and accessible vehicle parking spaces does not match what is shown on the plan. The accessible asile widths do not match. Based on the dimensions shown on the typical vehicle parking space detail you are not providing the required van accessible vehicle parking space.

18. COMMENT: There is an accessible sign shown on what appears to be a detail for typical and accessible vehicle parking spaces that appears to encroaches into the 4' sidewalk area. Clearly demonstrate on the plan that this sign does not reduce the width of the sidewalk.

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.

19. COMMENT: The location shown for the short term bicycle parking does not appear to be able to accommodate 12 short term bicycles, clarify.

20. This comment was not completely addressed. Provide a detail for the proposed short term bicycle parking. COMMENT: Show the location of the short term bicycle parking on the plan and provide a detail that shows how the requirements of UDC Sections 7.4.9.B & C are met.

21. COMMENT: Per Glenn Moyer provide a detail that demonstrates that there is a available space for the long term bicycle parking within each unit.

22. COMMENT: Under the bicycle parking space calculation you show "24.8 ADDITIONAL BICYCLE PARKING SAPCES PROVIDED" demonstrate on the plan how you provide 0.8 of a space.

2-06.4.9.O - All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown.

23. COMMENT: There are numerous setback dimension strings that are to small to read.

24. COMMENT: The provided elevations do not match what is shown on the plan. On the site plan you show the stair case between the buildings. On the south elevation you show the stair cases on the south end of the building. Provide elevations that match what is shown on the plan.

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).

25. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Provide the square footage and height of the buildings within the footprint.

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.

26. COMMENT: It appears that a vertical curb is proposed along the north side of the vehicle parking area. If this is vertical curb with adjacent sidewalk than the sidewalk width cannot include the vertical curb. Clarify what type of sidewalk & curb is proposed, vertical curb & sidewalk or mono pour. Provide a sidewalk dimension at the end of the building pop-out shown to the edge of curb.

27. COMMENT: Provide a sidewalk connections to Mountain Avenue, see TSM Section 7-01.4.1.A.

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
.
07/09/2014 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: July 9, 2014
DUE DATE: July 25, 2014
SUBJECT: Mountain Group Home Development Plan Package- 2nd Engineering Review
TO: Kurt Brown
LOCATION: 1300 E 10th St; T14S R14E Sec07
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP14-0005

SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package. 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) Completed.
2) Completed.

3) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.3.5: Revise the development plan package to include the approval stamp in the lower right quadrant of each sheet, Sheets A4 and A4.1 do not have the required stamp, revise. The link to the stamp can be found here: http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/cdrc-rezoning/cdrd-stamp

4) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.3.8: Revise the development plan package to include the north arrow, contour interval and scale to each sheet and placed together in the upper right corner of each sheet. The scale and north arrow have been added to the sheets however they are not in the correct location per the referenced code.

5) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.3.12: Revise the development plan package and Index Section to include all Sheets associated with the development plan package. Specifically Sheet A4.1 should be included in the Index.

6) Completed.

7) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.2.B: Revise the development plan package to include a brief legal description of the subject property within the Title Block.

8) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.2.D: Revise the development plan package and the Title Block to include the page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., Sheet XX of XX).

9) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.3: It is acknowledged that the relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP14-0005) was added to the lower right hand corner of the plan however the associated building plan number T14CM00090 should reference Building Plan not Site Plan as currently show.

10) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.4.A: Revise the development plan package and project location map to show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area.

11) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.4.B: Revise the development plan package and project location map to identify the major watercourse, Arroyo Chico and High School Wash, if it falls within the one square mile area shown once revised to center the subject parcel.

12) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.4.C: Revise the development plan package and project location map to label the sections corners, scale and have it cover approximately one square mile. Standard scale is 3"=1 mile for a location map.

13) Completed.
14) Completed.
15) Completed.
16) Completed.
17) Completed.
18) Completed.

19) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.8.C: Revise the development plan package to dimension the existing width, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, sidewalks and on street parking for both roadways.

20) Completed.

21) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Revise the development plan package to label the required 18-foot radii at the driveway entrance per TSM Sec.10-01.3.2.C and Figure 6. A TSMR application with fee will be required to modify the 18-foot radii in order to keep a standard driveway entrance.

22) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1:Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the proposed driveway setbacks from adjacent driveways and/or street intersections along with any existing street lights, fire hydrants, electrical pole, etc per Chapter 25 of the Tucson Code Sec.25-38.

23) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Revise the development plan package and provide a Keynote 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. Existing curb cuts that are no longer used must be closed off per Tucson Code Chapter 25 Sec.25-43.

24) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Revise the development plan package to label the required handicap access ramps at the driveway locations per 10-01.3.3.E, if applicable. Label a Keynote in plan view to ensure that the ramps are constructed under this project and provide a description of the Keynote in the Keynote Legend to verify conformance with PC/COT Standard Detail #207.

25) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the existing SVTs for the proposed driveway entrances and the street intersection of 10th Street and Mountain Ave, refer to TSM Sec.10-01.5.3 for line of sight matrix.

26) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan package to verify and dimension the on street parking along 10th Street for use with the SVT matrix.

27) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to dimension the required 2-foot setback from the access lane and the proposed refuse enclosure wall per UDC Article 7.4.6.F.2.b Access lanes and PAALs must be setback at least two feet from a wall, screen, or other obstruction over six inches.

28) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to provide a Parking Space Detail 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 or landscape area.

29) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to ensure all dimensions are labeled for the vehicular use area.

30) Completed.

31) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to label in plan view and to provide a Keynote call out for the proposed 6-inch curbing within the vehicle use area. Either provide a reference to a PC/COT Standard Detail or provide a separate detail for construction purposes.

32) Completed.
33) Completed.

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

35) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to provide a call out for PC/COT Standard Detail #200 for the proposed sidewalk or provide a separate detail for construction purposes.

36) Completed.

37) Restated: 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. Provide a sidewalk connection to Mountain Avenue from the project site per TSM Sec.7-01.4.1.A.

38) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.S: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the minimum 5-foot requirement for the sidewalk within the right-of-way of both roadways. Provide a Keynote to call out the PC/COT Standard Detail #200 for the required sidewalk to ensure conformance with the minimum City of Tucson requirements.

39) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Revise the development plan package to provide for centralized onsite solid waste and recycle collection service pick up per TSM Sec.8-01.5.1.A. Provide a construction detail for the refuse enclosures. The detail must match TSM Sec.8-01 and Figure 3a for the required enclosure walls, gates, concrete thickness and compressive strength, concrete approach apron dimensions, 14'x40' clear approach for each container, etc. The enclosure doors can not encroach into either the alleyway or the proposed access lane when open.

40) Completed.


DRAINAGE STATEMENT:

41) Restated: Provide a Drainage Statement that addresses the proposed development and new vehicular use area with an increase in impervious surface. The drainage statement must clearly show pre and post imperviousness and must show that post developed offsite flows do not increase into the right-of-way from pre-developed conditions. Utilize curb cuts in the vehicular use area and required landscape areas to alleviate offsite flows into the public-right-of-way. No Drainage Statement was submitted with the 2nd submittal.


GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised Development Plan Package and 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
07/10/2014 KEN BROUILLETTE FIRE REVIEW Approv-Cond
07/21/2014 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change ARTICLE 7: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING

Fifty percent or more of the area of the street landscape border must be covered with shrubs or vegetative ground cover. The required ground coverage must be achieved within two years from the date of planting. Provide coverage calculation.

Screening for individual land uses and zones must be provided as determined in Table 7.6.4-1 and in addition to the required landscape borders. Screening is not required between similar uses in accordance with Table 7.6.4-1 Identify height and material(s) for screening element(s)

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

Additional comments may apply.
07/22/2014 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved
07/22/2014 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Reqs Change GENERAL
1. No written responses included in resubmittal. Please provide written responses for the third submittal.
SHEET T1
2. Draw accessible parking layout on the site plan to that as depicted on the large scale accessible parking detail including the curb ramp.
3. At the large scale accessible parking detail:
a. Show accessible signage at the lower accessible parking space
b. Indicate a 2% maximum grade slope for all accessible parking spaces and aisles
c. Call out a maximum slope of 1:10 at the flared sides of the curb ramp.
4. At detail 1, blow up this detail so that the lettering is 3/32" high, COT PDSD mimimum lettering standard.
SHEET G1
5. Add a note as per previous review comment number 2. "Insure and note to that effect that all accessible route slopes comply with the 2009 ICC A117.1, Section 403.3; 5% maximum running slope and 2% maximum cross slopes."
END OF REVIEW
07/23/2014 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change Revise the site drawing to include the following existing utility information:
a. The size of sanitary sewers, including the pipe diameter and the invert and rim elevations of all manholes and cleanouts; along with the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD) reference number.
b. The locations of gas lines and street lights.
c. The first floor elevation for the buildings
Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual No., Section 2-06.4.8D and Section 107.2.13, IBC 2012.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
08/28/2014 SHANAE POWELL OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
08/28/2014 CPIERCE1 REJECT SHELF Completed