City of Tucson

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 Number: DP14-0018

Parcel: 13323164A

Address:

7150 E SPEEDWAY BL

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP14-0018

Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING

Review Status: Completed

Review Date	Reviewer's Name	Type of Review	Description	Status	Comments
02/12/2014	STEVE SHIELDS	ZONING	REVIEW	Reqs Change	CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Wal-Mart Supercenter #1291-07 Development Package (1st Review) DP14-0018 TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 14, 2014 DUE DATE: March 12, 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 February 10, 2015. Based on a building expansion of greater than 25% this development package was reviewed for full compliance of UDC Sections 7.4, 7.5, 7.6, and TSM Section 7-01. 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. 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.3.1 - Each sheet shall measure 24 inches by 36 inches and include a minimum one inch margin on left side and one-half inch margin on all other sides to facilitate efficient record keeping. A larger sheet format may be used with the approval of the Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD). 2-06.3.2 - All mapped data shall be drawn at an engineering scale having no more than 50 feet to the inch. This scale is the minimum accepted to assure the plan will be legible during review and when digitized and/or reduced for record-keeping purposes. The same scale shall be used for all sheets within the set. Smaller scales (60:1 or greater) may be used for some or all of the sheets with the prior approval of PDSD when it is determined legibility and the ability to be digitized and/or reduced for archiving will not be affected. 2-06.3.3 - All lettering and text (upper or lower case), and numbering, shall be a minimum of three-thirty-seconds inches in height to assure the plan will be legible during review and when digitized and/or reduced for archiving. 1. COMMENT: Sheet 8, "STANDARD PARKING STRIPING" & "THREE SCCESSIBLE STALLS PARKING STRIPING" details are difficult to read and do not meet the three-thirty-seconds inches in height for text. 2-06.3.5 - A three-inch by five-inch space shall be reserved in the lower right quadrant of each sheet for an approval stamp. 2. COMMENT: Provide the PDSD Development Package approval stamp on all sheets. The stamp can be found at http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/files/dsd/CDRC/acad-cot_stamp_model_1.pdf 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet: 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; 3. COMMENT: Provide a brief legal description within the title block on all sheets 2-06.4.2.D - The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx). 4. COMMENT: The total number of sheets for the development package should include all sheets listed in the drawing index, i.e. ALTA and landscape plans. Zoning recommends that the ALTA be removed as it is only for reference but if included provide the sheet x of y on all sheets. Based on the drawings submitted the total number of sheets should be X of 22. 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. 5. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP14-0018, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 6. COMMENT: Provide the administrative street address adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 7. COMMENT: Provide the rezoning case number, C9-83-SP-3, 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. 8. COMMENT: Provide a project-location map that meets the above requirements. 2-06.4.2.A - Show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area; 9. COMMENT: Provide a project-location map that meets the above requirements. 2-06.4.2.B - Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and all streets that abut the subject property; and, 10. COMMENT: Provide a project-location map that meets the above requirements. 2-06.4.2.C - Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled. 11. COMMENT: Provide a project-location map that meets the above requirements. 2-06.4.6 - If the project is located within the boundaries of a Planned Area Development (PAD) zone, include a reduced-scale map of the PAD on the first sheet, indicating the location of the portion being developed. 12. COMMENT: Provide a reduced-scale map of the PAD on the first sheet, indicating the location of the portion being developed. 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.1 - List as a general note: "Existing zoning is ____." 13. COMMENT: Remove the reference to "C-3" zoning from sheet 1 under "ZONING" and from sheet 2 under "CITY OF TUCSON GENERAL NOTE 1" as it is not 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. 14. COMMENT: "CITY OF TUCSON GENERAL NOTE 3" lists the use as "RETAIL TRADE - SHOPPING CENTER" per PAD 3 Section II.D.1.a the use should be listed as "RETAIL COMMERCIAL". 2-06.4.7.A.6 - If a plan or plat is prepared in conjunction with other applications or overlays or the parcel being developed is subject to conditions of an application processed previously, additional information must be added to the plan. Such applications and overlays include, but are not limited to: annexations; rezonings; special exceptions; Board of Adjustment variances; Design Development Options; Technical Standard Modification Request; overlays (Airport Environs Zone, Environmental Resource Zone, Gateway Corridor Zone, Hillside Development Zone, Historic Preservation Zone, Major Streets and Routes, Rio Nuevo District, Scenic Corridor Zone, WASH); Modification of Development Regulations through the Downtown Area Infill Incentive District or Rio Nuevo District; Downtown Heritage Incentive Zone; or, Design Review Board. Provide the following information on the plan. 15. COMMENT: As Kolb Road is listed as a Gateway Arterial street and Speedway Blvd is listed as an Arterial street on the Major Streets and Routes plan provide a general note stating "THIS PROJECT IS DESINGED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC SECTION 5.4 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R) AND UDC SECTION 5.5 GATEWYA CORRIDOR ZONE (GCZ)." 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Percentage and area in square feet of building and accessory building coverage; 16. COMMENT: It does not appear that the provided "BUILDING COVERAGE" calculation is correct. Per PAD 3 Section II.A.1.b Building Coverage (Lot Coverage). Building coverage includes all structural buildings and paved areas, including vehicular parking lots and driveways. 17. COMMENT: Provide a floor area ratio calculation on the plan. See PAD 3 Section II.A.1.f. 2-06.4.7.A.8.c - Percentage of building, lot area, or vehicular use area expansion. If the building(s) or lot area have been previously expanded, those calculations shall be included; and, 18. COMMENT: The "PROPOSED BUILDING EXPANISON" calculation does not appear to be correct. As the bank building was developed as a stand alone site it would be considered and expansion of building square footage and lot area when combined with the Wal-Mart site. As the bank building is scheduled to be demolished the square footage is a non factor in the expansion calculation. That said the building expansion calculation would be based on the proposed 53,367 sf addition/ 125,156 sf existing building = 42.6%. 19. COMMENT: Provide a lot area expansion calculation on the plan. This calculation should be based on the bank site being added to the Wal-Mart site. 2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions Unless otherwise stated the following comments are based on sheet 4. 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. 20. COMMENT: Provide the recordation information and purpose of all easements shown on the plan. 21. COMMENT: There is a "10' ESMT" shown running under the "BALE AND RECYCLE" area and under a portion of the proposed building. This easement will need to be abandoned prior to approval of the development package. 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. 22. COMMENT: Provide the above information for all right-of-ways adjacent to this site. 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.F - All existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) shall be indicated on the drawing with zoning boundaries clearly defined. If the property is being rezoned, use those boundaries and classifications. The basis for this requirement is that some zoning requirements on a project are based on the zoning classification of adjacent property. Also, in some instances, each zone has to be taken into consideration on property that is split by two or more zoning classifications, as each may have different requirements. 23. COMMENT: Provide the zoning for the parcels north of Speedway, west of Kolb, east of Finance Center and south of Rosewood on the plan. 2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show future and existing sight visibility triangles (SVT's). On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section. 24. COMMENT: Show all required SVT's on the 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. 25. COMMENT: There is a Construction Note 6 called out just west of the vehicle entrance off of Speedway Blvd. If this light pole is to remain some type of modification will be required for vehicle access. 26. COMMENT: Provide a width dimension for the access lane shown between the proposed "COMPACTOR" and the "BALE & PALLET RECYCLE AREA". Minimum width for a two-way access lane is 20', see UDC Table 7.4.6-2. Also Access lanes and PAALs must be setback at least two feet from a wall, screen, or other obstruction over six inches. The additional area is necessary to provide clearance for fire, sanitation, and delivery vehicles. 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. 27. COMMENT: Provide a vehicle parking space calculation that has the ratio used and the number of required vehicle parking spaces. Based on a retail use 179,724 S.F/300 = 599 spaces required. 28. COMMENT: Remove the cart corrals from the provided vehicle parking space total as they will not count for vehicle parking spaces. 29. COMMENT: Provide a Space Depth dimension as shown in the UDC Figure 7.4.6-A and Table 7.4.6-1 for all angled vehicle parking shown on the plan. 30. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.6.D.2.b Minimum Width Requirement When Adjacent to Barrier. A motor vehicle off-street parking space must have a minimum width of ten feet when the side(s) of the parking space abuts a vertical barrier over six inches in height, other than a vertical support for a carport. That said demonstrate on the plan that all vehicle parking spaces adjacent to the cart corrals meet this requirements. 31. COMMENT: Demonstrate on the plan that the existing light pole bases do not encroach into the 18' minimum length of the vehicle parking spaces. 2-06.4.9.H.5.c - Show all loading zones, vehicle maneuverability fully dimensioned, and access route. Provide as a note the number of loading spaces required, the number provided, whether the loading space is a Type A or B as provided in UDC Section 7.5.4. 32. COMMENT: Provide a loading zone calculation the shows the number of loading spaces required. Also specify what type of loading spaces`` 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. 33. COMMENT: Show all required short and long term bicycle parking on the sheet 4. 34. COMMENT: Provide short and long term bicycle parking calculations that provide the number required and provided. 35. COMMENT: Provide a short term bicycle parking space detail(s) that demonstrate how the requirements of UDC Sections 7.4.9.B & .C are met. 36. COMMENT: Provide a long term bicycle parking space detail(s) that demonstrate how the requirements of UDC Sections 7.4.9.B & .D are met. 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. 37. COMMENT: Provide a building setback dimension from the proposed addition to the property line along Kolb Road. 38. COMMENT: Provide a building setback dimension from the proposed addition to the property line along Rosewood Street. 39. COMMENT: Until the wall height for the proposed "BALE & PALLET RECYCLE AREA" is provided the setback requirements cannot be verified. Provide a setback dimension from the proposed wall to the property line along Rosewood Street. 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). 40. COMMENT: Provide the height of the buildings within the footprint on sheet 4. 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. 41. COMMENT: Provide a width dimension for the existing sidewalk shown along the east side of the outdoor living area. If this sidewalk is less than 6'-6" wide wheel stops are required for the vehicle parking spaces adjacent to this sidewalk. 42. COMMENT: Clearly identify the required pedestrian circulation, sidewalk, that provided a connection from the building to Speedway Blvd., see TSM Section 7-01.3.3.A 43. COMMENT: Clearly identify the required pedestrian circulation, sidewalk, that provided a connection from the building to Rosewood Street, see TSM Section 7-01.3.3.A 44. COMMENT: At the northwest corner of the building is there an accessible ramp? 45. COMMENT: Provide a sidewalk along the southern end of the proposed addition, see TSM Section 7-01.4.1.B. 46. COMMENT: There is a "CONSTRUCTION NOTE" 8 shown near the southern end of the proposed addition that appears to encroach into the sideway. Cleary show that the minimum 4' sidewalk width is maintained, see TSM 7-01.4.3.A. 47. COMMENT: Per TSM 7-01.4.2.A Sidewalks associated with PAALs must be physically separated from any vehicular travel lane by means of curbing, grade separation (minimum six inches), barriers, railings, or other means, except at designated crosswalks. That said along the north side of the building if the sidewalk is flush with the vehicle use area some type of barrier is needed. 48. COMMENT: There is a sidewalk called out under "CONSTRUCTION NOTE" 5 located near the northwest corner of the proposed addition. "CONSTRUCTION NOTE" 5 states "(WIDTH AS SHOWN ON PLAN)". There is no width provided for this sidewalk. 49. COMMENT: There is a sidewalk called out under "CONSTRUCTION NOTE" 5, located on the south side of the northern most entrance access lane off of Finance Center Drive, "CONSTRUCTION NOTE" 5 states "(WIDTH AS SHOWN ON PLAN)". There is no width provided for this sidewalk. 50. COMMENT: Provide width dimension for all existing sidewalks shown on the plan. 2-06.4.9.W - Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Indicate if there are any existing billboards on site. Compliance to the Sign Code, Chapter 3 of the Tucson Code, is required. 51. COMMENT: Provide the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. 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 .
02/12/2014	RBROWN1	ADA	REVIEW	Passed
02/13/2014	KEN BROUILLETTE	FIRE	REVIEW	Denied	Unable to find "Allowable Area" calculations. Please include. On sheet 4 of 11, note 15 indicates location of "No Parking Fire Lane" signs. Unable to find note 15 on plans. Be advised, if fire lane signs are required, detail for sign on sheet 9 of 11 is incorrect. Refer to Development Standards for correct detail.
02/20/2014	JASON GREEN	ENGINEERING	REVIEW	Reqs Change	DATE: February 20, 2014 SUBJECT: Walmart Expansion Development Plan Package- Engineering Review TO: MetroTED; Attn: Lisa Bowers LOCATION: 7150 E Speedway Blvd; T14S R15E Sec08 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: DP14-0018 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package and Drainage Statement (Manhard Consulting LTD; 31JAN14). 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.2-06.3.3: Revise the development plan package and details so that all lettering and text (upper or lower case) and numbering meeting the minimum of three-thirty-seconds inches in height. Specifically on Sheet 8 the details for the parking and striping are difficult to read and do not meet the three-thirty-seconds inches in height for text. 2) AM Sec.2-06.3.5: Revise the development plan package to include the approval stamp in the lower right quadrant of each sheet. The link to the stamp can be found here: http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/cdrc-rezoning/cdrd-stamp 3) AM Sec.2-06.3.8: Revise the development plan package to include the contour interval on each sheet and placed together with the North arrow and scale. 4) AM Sec.2-06.3.12: Revise the Sheet Index to either include the attached Alta Land Survey Sheets that are in the package or remove them from the set. Verify the correct page sequence numbering. 5) AM Sec.2-06.3.12: Revise the Sheet Index to include the SWPPP Exhibits that are to be part of the development plan package. Provide the required SWPPP and Report for review and approval. 6) AM Sec.2-06.4.1: Revise the development plan package to provide the email addresses for the primary property owner, architect, surveyor, civil, etc. of the project. Information shall be provided under the Prepared By and Owners Section. 7) 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) AM Sec.2-06.4.2.D: Revise the development plan package and the Title Block to include the correct page number and the total number of pages in the package, this is to include the Alta Land Survey Sheets and SWPPP Exhibits. 9) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP14-0018) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets. 10) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: Revise the development plan package to provide the administrative street address adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 11) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: Revise the development plan package to provide the rezoning case number, C9-83-SP-3, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 12) 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. 13) AM Sec.2-06.4.4.C: Revise the development plan package and project location map to label correct scale and have it cover approximately one square mile. Standard scale is 3"=1 mile for a location map. 14) AM Sec.2-06.4.4.C: Revise the development plan package and project location map to label the Section, Township and Range along with the Section Corners. 15) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.A.6: Revise the development plan package to provide a General Note with the code reference for the overlays applicable to the 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 and Sec.5.5, Gateway Corridor Zone (GCZ)." 16) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.B: Revise the development plan package to provide the recordation information and purpose of all easements as shown on the plan set. Provide the type of easement and label them as to public or private. 17) AM.2-06.4.8.B: The "10' ESMT" shown running under the "Bale and Pallet Recycle Area" and under a portion of the proposed building will required to be abandoned. This easement will need to be abandoned prior to approval of the development plan package. 18) AM.2-06.4.8.B: The "10' ESMT" shown running under the proposed retention basin must either be abandoned or at a minimum provide written notarized approval from all parties that have a vested interest in said easement. 19) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.C: Revise the development plan package to dimension the existing width of all public right-of-ways for streets that are adjacent to the site in plan view. Provide right-of-way (ROW) width, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. Label all roadways as "Public" and both Kolb Road and Speedway Blvd as "Arterial MS&R." 20) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Revise the development plan package to label the required minimum 25-foot radii at the new driveway entrance per TSM Sec.10-01.3.2.C and Figure 6. 21) 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. 22) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Revise the development plan package to verify conformance with handicap accessibility for the existing sidewalk within all right-of-ways. Provide existing longitudinal and cross slopes to ensure maximum 2% or provide written approval from TDOT Permits and Codes that the existing sidewalk meets accessibility requirements. 23) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Revise the development plan package to provide for the alternative curb access ramp as shown on the top of Sheet 4 of 5 of the PC/COT Standard Detail #207 for the new driveway entrance off of Kolb Road. If there are not sidewalks connecting from the new driveway entrance to the building the alternative ramp can be used. 24) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the existing and/or future SVTs for all existing and proposed driveway entrances, refer to TSM Sec.10-01.5.3 for line of sight matrix. On a designated MS&R street, the SVTs are based on the MS&R cross-section. 25) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.4: Revise the development plan package to indicate if existing streets are public or private. 26) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Clarify on the development plan package the Construction Note #6 labeled just west of the vehicle entrance off of Speedway Blvd that is within the PAAL. Verify the location of the light pole or remove the Construction Note. 27) AM Sec2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the width of the access lane shown between the proposed "Compactor" and the "Recycle Area". Verify the minimum width for a two-way access lane as 20' refer to UDC Table 7.4.6-2. Also Access lanes and PAALs must be setback at least two feet from a wall, screen, or other obstruction over six inches. The additional area is necessary to provide clearance for fire, sanitation, and delivery vehicles. 28) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the parking space depth dimension as shown in the UDC Figure 7.4.6-A and Table 7.4.6-1 for all angled vehicle parking shown on the plan. 29) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the minimum 10-foot parking space requirement for all space adjacent to a barrier greater than 6-inches in height. Per UDC Sec.7.4.6.D.2.b a motor vehicle off-street parking space must have a minimum width of ten feet when the side(s) of the parking space abuts a vertical barrier over six inches in height, other than a vertical support for a carport. Specifically all vehicle parking spaces adjacent to the cart corrals must meet this requirement. 30) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.c: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension all loading zone areas with vehicle maneuverability fully dimensioned to ensure access. Refer to the Design Vehicle Dimension Table from AASHTO Geometric Design of Highway and Streets for minimum inside and outside dimensions for vehicle types. 31) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.L: Revise the development plan package to provide the recordation information for any new or abandoned easements. Provide the SEQ# in plan view or as a note under the General Note Section. 32) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Provide a note on the development plan package 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." 33) 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." 34) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Revise the development plan package and Grading Note # 17 specifying conformance with City of Tucson Technical Standards Manual Sec.2-01 (excavation and grading requirements) not the Town of Prescott Valley. 35) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Provide the Geotechnical Report as stated in the General Note on Sheet 5. The report needs to be reviewed for the proposed retention basin and parking lot requirements. 36) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Revise the development plan package to provide a General Note 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 37) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Per TSM Sec.4-04.14.3.2; Provide a note on the development plan package to state that, "(a) the owner or owners shall be solely responsible for operation, maintenance, and liability for all detention/retention basins, drainage infrastructure, drainage channels and water harvesting areas; (b) that the owner or owners shall have an Arizona Registered Professional Civil Engineer prepare a certified inspection report for the drainage and detention/retention facilities at lease once every 12-months, and that these regular inspection reports will be on file with the owner for review by City staff, upon written request; (c) that City staff may periodically inspect the drainage and retention/detention facilities to verify that scheduled and unscheduled maintenance activities are being performed adequately; and (d) that the owner or owners agree to reimburse the City for any and all costs associated with the maintaining of the detention/retention basins and drainage structures should the City find the owner or owners deficient in their obligation to adequately operate and maintain their facilities." 38) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.1: Revise the development plan package to provide a specific detail for the proposed retention basin. Provide all aspect of construction since the package is to be used as the construction document. Provide cross sections through the basin to label depth of retained water, 2-foot setback from top of slope to property lines, minimum basin bottom slope of 0.5%, etc. 39) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.3: Revise the development plan package to clearly label all existing drainage infrastructure with Improvement Plan #, slopes, inlet elevation (upstream and downstream), etc. 40) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.3: Revise the development plan package to provide details for all new drainage infrastructures for construction purposes. Clarify Grading Note #5 and/or provide the Master Site Specifications as referenced on the development plan package for review and approval to verify that the proposed storm drains and storm drain inlets meet the minimum requirements of the City of Tucson and of the required Drainage Statement. 41) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to clearly dimension all sidewalks onsite to ensure the minimum 4-foot width requirements per TSM Sec.7-01.4.3.A. Per Construction Note #5 it states width as shown on plan however plan view did not show the width for all sidewalk areas. 42) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to verify that all sidewalks associated with PAALs are physically separated from the travel lane by means of curbing, 6-inch grade separation, barriers, railings or other per TSM Sec.7-01.4.2.A. 43) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to provide the required pedestrian circulation connection from the building to both Speedway Blvd and Rosewood Street refer to TSM Sec.7-01.3.3.A 44) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to provide a sidewalk along the southern end of the proposed addition refer to TSM Sec.7-01.4.1.B. 45) 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. Specifically the onsite handicap access ramps must meet ANSI requirements and can not be built to the PC/COT Standard Detail #207, this detail is for ramps in the right-of-way only. 46) 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 all adjacent streets. 47) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.S: Revise the development plan package to verify conformance with handicap accessibility for the existing sidewalk within the right-of-way. Provide existing longitudinal and cross slopes to ensure maximum 2% or provide written approval from TDOT Permits and Codes that the existing sidewalk meets accessibility requirements. 48) 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. If the project is proposing a stationary compactor verify that the construction design meet the minimum requirements of TSM Sec.8-01.5.2.I and J. Provide specific details on the development plan document for construction purposes. The Construction Note references the architectural plans which are not used for site construction. For this type of collection provide prior approval from Environmental Services (ES) in writing for use of the onsite compactors and not the normal double refuse enclosures. Any deviation from the standard will require a Technical Standard Modification Request (TSMR), it is advisable that prior to submitting the TSMR to contact ES to see if they would support the modifications. DRAINAGE STATEMENT: 49) Provide a Drainage Statement to provide calculations, sizing and construction requirements for all proposed storm drain inlets and storm drain pipes as shown on the development plan package. The proposed method of storm water disposal could not be reviewed for conformance with TSM Sections 4-03 and 4-04 since the statement did not provide any calculations. 50) Provide a Drainage Statement stamped, signed and sealed by a civil engineer registered in the State of Arizona for all proposed drainage infrastructure, retention requirements, etc. The Statement was not reviewed since it was not sealed by an engineer and was incomplete not meeting the minimum requirements of TSM Sections 4-03 and 4-04. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: 51) TSM Sec.4-03.3.5.1.3.a and 4-04.14.2.6: Provide the Geotechnical Engineering Report by Terracon dated December 9, 2013 verifying the following requirements: a) Soils report should provide conformance with TSM Section 4-04.14.2.6 regarding 30-foot boring for the retention basin, and provide a discussion of the potential for hydro-collapsible soils and building setbacks from the required basin. b) Provide percolation rates for the retention basin for 5-year threshold to show that the drain down time meets the maximum per TSM Sec.4-03.3.5.1. c) Provide pavement structure design recommendations. d) Provide slope stability recommendations for the constructed slopes that are proposed. SWPPP: 52) Provide a SWPPP for review and approval by the City of Tucson. Verify the SWPPP meets the minimum requirements of the AzPDES 2013 Construction General Permit (CGP). 53) Per City of Tucson Code Ordinance 10209, Chapter 26 Section 26-42.2: "For land disturbing activities that fall under the jurisdiction of this Article, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan must be prepared and certified by an engineer, or a landscape architect and submitted along with the application for a grading permit to the City of Tucson Development Services Department." The SWPPP report and exhibits must be signed and sealed by the engineer of record or by a Registered Landscape Architect, revise. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan Package, Drainage Statement, SWPPP and Geotechnical Report that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Due to the numerous comments additional comments maybe forth coming once all of the above comments have been addressed and depending on the out come of the geotechnical evaluation, Drainage Statement and SWPPP. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Department
03/04/2014	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: Rezoning case; Subdivision case; Board of Adjustment case; Design Development Option case; Development Review Board (DRB) case; and/or, Any other relevant case number for reviews or modifications that affect the site. Include any conditions imposed. Planting Plan Indicate both the proper and common name of existing plant material. Unified Development Code ARTICLE 7: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 7.6.2. APPLICABILITY. Buildings Greater Than 10,000 Square Feet On sites where the gross floor area of the existing building(s) is more than 10,000 square feet, expansion in square footage of land area, floor area, lot coverage, or vehicular use area as follows: a. If the expansion is less than 25%, the standards of this section apply only to the proposed expansion. Existing development on the site is subject to the zoning standards in effect at the time the existing development received zoning approval. b.If the expansion is 25% or greater or if expansions as of February 15, 1991, cumulatively result in a 25% or greater expansion in land area, floor area, lot coverage, or vehicular use area, the standards of this section apply to the entire site. Verify expansion calculations. Continuous screens along street frontages for vehicle use area must be as determined by Table 7.6.4-I. Provide appropriate screening. 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 screening elements on landscape plan. GATEWAY CENTER PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT Applicable landscape requirements noted below Parking Requirements: Required spaces, screening, and landscaping shall be determined at the ratios set forth in Section 3.3.0. (now the UDC) of the City of Tucson Land Use Code (LUC). Minimum Landscape Coverage: ten percent of gross site area. Gateway PAD P. IX-37. Provide calculations. Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. Additional comments may apply.
03/05/2014	RONALD BROWN	H/C SITE	REVIEW	Reqs Change	SHEET 4 of 11 1. The existing pedestrian aisle down the middle of the parking lot is in fact an accessible route to the Speedway right of way and is to remain as such. This is not a cart storage area. a. Provide a marked crossing at both ends of the accessible route, one to connect with the existing walkway to the Speedway pedestrian way and one accross the front entrance PAAL to the store front accessible route. b. Provide all required detectable warning strips as per 2009 ICC A117.1, Sections 406.12, 13 and 14 as applicable. c. Provide all required curb ramps as required as per the 2009 ICC A117.1, Sections 405 and 406 as applicable. 2. The center accessible route between all groups of accessible parking is to have a marked crossing with detectable warning strips at each end as required by 2009 ICC A117.1, Sections 406.12, 13 and 14 as applicable connecting to the front store accessible route. a. The marked crossing is to be the same width as the accessible route down the middle of the accessible parking and is to be physically identified as something different from the painted pedestrian crosswalk shown on the drawings. b. Provide all required curb ramps as required as per the 2009 ICC A117.1, Sections 405 and 406 as applicable. c. Provide detectable warning strips at both end of all marked crossings as required by the 1009 ICC A117.1, Sections 406.12, 13 and 14 as applicable. 3. Provide marked crossings at both extended accessible routes from both Kolb Road and Finance Center Drive to the store front accessible route. a. Reference Comments 2a, 2b and 2c for requirements. 4. Provide large scale details of all of the following: a. Each accessible parking space grouping b. Each different type of ramps including detectable warnings strips and marked crossing. END OF REVIEW
03/06/2014	ANDREW CONNOR	NPPO	REVIEW	Reqs Change	Indicate both the proper and common name of existing plant material.
03/10/2014	ROBERT SHERRY	PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL	REVIEW	Reqs Change	Revise the site drawing to include the rim elevation of the manhole to which the building sewer is connected, along with the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD) reference number.

Final Status

Task End Date	Reviewer's Name	Type of Review	Description
04/28/2014	CPIERCE1	REJECT SHELF	Completed