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: DP14-0029
Parcel: 13705168A

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP14-0029
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
02/21/2014 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Denied CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Cleanfreak $3 Carwash
Development Package (1st Review)
DP14-0029

TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 25, 2014

DUE DATE: March 20, 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 19, 2015 .

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

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

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.

1. 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.

2-06.4.2.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. COMMENT: Provide a brief legal description within the title block 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.

3. COMMENT: Remove the street address from the title block and provide it adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

4. COMMENT: Provide the development plan case number, DP1-0029, 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.

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

5. COMMENT: Provide the section, township and range under the location map.

6. COMMENT: Label the section corners 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 - Zoning and Land Use Notes

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.

7. COMMENT: The proposed use should be listed as "Self-Service Car Wash, Automotive - Minor Service and Repair"

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.

COMMENT: Provide a general note on the cover sheet stating "THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC SECTION 5.4 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R)."

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;

8. COMMENT: Remove the "Lot Coverage" from the plan as it is not applicable.

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.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.

9. COMMENT: Sheet a1.0, there is an easement called out along the south property line, provide the recordation information and purpose of the easement on the plan.

2-06.4.8.C - The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way (ROW) 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.

10. COMMENT: Sheet a1.0 provide the above information for the existing ROW.

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.

11. COMMENT: Sheet a1.0 provide the adjacent zoning including the parcels north of Irvington.

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.

12. COMMENT: Sheet a1.0 Provide the applicable 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.

13. COMMENT: Sheet a1.0 until the "A Parking angle" is provided for the angled parking/vacuum bays the access lane widths cannot be verified.

14. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.6.F.2.a.(1) Access lanes and PAALs must be setback at least one foot from an open structure, such as a carport or covered pedestrian access path as measured from the closest part of the structure or roof overhang. That said show the required 1' setback from the roof lines shown on the plan.

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.

15. COMMENT: The vehicle parking space calculation shown on sheet a0.1 is not correct. Based on discussions with staff this use is considered a Self-Service Car Wash. That said per UDC Table 7.4.4-1 COMMERCIAL SERVICES USE GROUP, Automotive Washing, Self-Service, 0 vehicle parking spaces are required. Also the vacuum spaces do not count toward required vehicle parking spaces. The vehicle parking space calculation should be 0 - required, 0 provided.

16. COMMENT: Provide an "A Parking angle" for the proposed vacuum bay parking spaces. See UDC Section 7.4.6.D

17. COMMENT: Provide a location dimension for the wheel stops shown on the plan See UDC Section 7.4.6.H.

18. COMMENT: Clarify what the dashed lines are that are shown over the angled vacuum bays shown in the center of the project.

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.

19. COMMENT: Sheet a1.0 the twenty (20) setback shown along Irvington Road is not correct. The required street perimeter yard for Irvington Road is based on UDC Table 6.4.5.C-1. Zoning acknowledges that the proposed street perimeter yard for Irvington exceeds the requirements. Remove the twenty (20) setback from the plan.

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.

20. COMMENT: Per TSM 7-01.3.3.A and 7-01.4.1.A & .D At least one sidewalk is required to a project from each street on which the project has frontage. That said shown the required four (4) foot sidewalk from the proposed building to the sidewalk within the ROW along Irvington Road.

21. COMMENT: Provide width dimensions for all proposed sidewalks shown on the plan.

22. COMMENT: Per TSM 7-01.3.3.B The areas within the development which must be connected include, but are not limited to, all buildings, all bicycle and vehicle parking areas, all recreation areas, all dumpster areas. That said show the required four (4) foot sidewalk from the proposed building to the trash enclosure.

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
02/21/2014 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
02/25/2014 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: February 25, 2014
SUBJECT: CleanFreak $3 Carwash Development Plan Package- Engineering Review
TO: CW Architecture; Cory Wiebers
LOCATION: 837 W Irvington Rd; T15S R13E Sec02
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP14-0029


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) 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

2) 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.

3) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP14-0029) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets.

4) 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.

5) 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)."

6) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.C.2: Revise the development plan package and General Note #18 (Sheet a0.1) and #4 (Sheet c1.0) 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." Revise the package to remove all references to the old Development Standards. All notes should reflect the new Technical Standard Manual with correct corresponding code reference.

7) 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.

8) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.C: Revise the development plan package to dimension on both the site plan and grading plan sheets the existing width of the public right-of-ways for Irvington Road. Provide right-of-way (ROW) width, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. Label on both the site plan and grading plan Irvington Road as "Public" and as "Arterial MS&R."

9) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.I: Revise the development plan package and the Flood Zone Section to remove the reference to the extra FIRM Panel (2287L). There is only one panel that covers the subject property which is the other referenced 2286L as shown in the Flood Statement Section on the same page.

10) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Revise the development plan package to label the required minimum 25-foot radii at the driveway entrance per TSM Sec.10-01.3.2.C and Figure 6. Or provide written approval from TDOT Permits and Codes to keep the existing driveway entrance or to use a smaller curb return.

11) 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.

12) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the existing and/or future SVTs for the 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.

13) 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. Verify with the angled parking that all proposed PAAL widths are dimensioned correctly.

14) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the driveway entrance.

15) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.J: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the future right-of way dimensions for the MS&R Street adjacent to the project. Provide dimensions for future right-of-way, sidewalk area, SVTs, etc. Verify that required improvements are not constructed within this area.

16) 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."

17) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Revise the development plan package to provide a Grading Note specifying conformance with City of Tucson Technical Standards Manual Sec.2-01 (excavation and grading requirements).

18) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Provide the Geotechnical Report as stated in the General Note. The report needs to be reviewed for the existing retention basin and parking lot requirements.

19) 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"

20) 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."

21) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Revise the development plan package and the Onsite Temporary Benchmark Section to clarify if indeed it is taken at the entrance drive from Gilbert Road.

22) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Revise the development plan package and Sections A and B on Sheet c5.0 to reflect the subject property. After review of the cross section it appears that they are not reflective of 837 W Irvington Road.

23) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Revise the development plan package to verify where Detail 1/c5.0 is located in plan view. It appears that this detail is for a curb opening along a street however it is not delineated in plan view. All proposed right-of-way improvements will require a right-of-way use permit.

24) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.1: Provide the regular inspection report for the existing retention basin to show that the basin functions as designed. Or provide new infiltration rates from the Geotechnical Engineer showing that the existing basins still meet the maximum drain down times per TSM Sec.4-03.3.5.1.

25) 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.

26) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.3: Revise the development plan package and Keynote #14 on Sheet c3.0 to reference a PC/COT Standard Detail for Pubic Improvement or provide the referenced MAG detail on the detail sheets for review and approval to ensure conformance with the minimum requirements of the City of Tucson.

27) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to clearly dimension all sidewalks widths onsite to ensure the minimum 4-foot width requirements per TSM Sec.7-01.4.3.A.

28) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to provide the required pedestrian circulation connection from the building to Irvington Road refer to TSM Sec.7-01.3.3.A

29) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan document to provide for a pedestrian circulation path to the refuse containers. Per TSM Sec.7-01.3.3.B all areas of development must be connected to the refuse areas.

30) 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.

31) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.S: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the minimum 6-foot requirement for the sidewalk within the right-of-way along Irvington Road. The existing 4-foot sidewalk does not meet the minimum width requirement for MS&R Arterial Streets, if TDOT provides approval to allow the existing 4-foot sidewalk to remain provide a Technical Standard Modification Request application with fees for approval through all respective review sections.

32) 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.

33) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Revise the development plan package to provide for the required double refuse enclosure and provide associated details for the refuse enclosures to show that it meets TSM Sec.8-01 (revise all keynotes to reflect the TSM not DS code references). The detail must match TSM Sec.8-01, Figure 2 and Figure 3a for the required double 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.

34) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.X: Revise the development plan package and Sheet a0.1 to clarify the symbol used within the labeled Landscape Area. The symbol on the grading plan sheet reflects rock rip rap, verify if this is correct or provide a separate symbol on the site plan sheet with description.


DRAINAGE STATEMENT:

35) Provide a written Drainage Statement with a discussion on pre and post imperviousness of the site. It is acknowledged that the proposed site is providing additional landscaping however the statement must reflect this. The drainage statement must also provide a discussion about the subject property being located with a balanced basin per the "Balanced and Critical Basin Map for Study Session of January 27, 1987. If the civil engineer wants to include the Drainage Statement on the plan sheets as shown under the Retention Statement that is acceptable for this project but it must clearly reflect the subject property and provide a discussion in regards to the balanced basin requirements.

36) Provide percolation rates for the existing retention basin for 5-year threshold to show that the drain down time meets the maximum per TSM Sec.4-03.3.5.1. Or provide the regular inspection report sealed by a civil engineer for the existing basin to show that the basin functions as designed.


GEOTECHNICAL REPORT:

37) TSM Sec.4-03.3.5.1.3.a and 4-04.14.2.6: Provide the Geotechnical Engineering Report by Ricker-Atkinson-McBee Morman & Associated dated 07JAN14 verifying the following requirements:

a) Provide percolation rates for the existing retention basin for 5-year threshold to show that the drain down time meets the maximum per TSM Sec.4-03.3.5.1. Or provide the regular inspection report sealed by a civil engineer for the existing basin to show that the basin functions as designed.

b) Provide pavement structure design recommendations.


GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised Development Plan Package, Drainage Statement and Geotechnical Report 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
02/26/2014 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
03/07/2014 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;

Note: Existing development on the site is subject to the zoning regulations in effect at the time the existing development received zoning approval. Provide previously approved landscape plan.

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

Additional comments may apply
03/10/2014 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved
03/12/2014 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Reqs Change 1. Provide a marked crossing from the East side of the accessible parking space accross the PAAL to the side walk on the east side of the middle row of parking.
a. Provide all accessible requirements as per the 2009 ICC A117.1, including dimensions, grade slopes as per 403.3, ramps as per section 405 and/or 406 as required, markings and detectable warning strips as per 406.12, 13 and 14 as applicable.
b. Reference suggested sketch on site plan.
2. Provide a marked crossing from the North East end of the side walk at middle row of parking directly east accross the PAAL to the landscaped strip. Create a new 4'-0" wide accessible route directly North to the Irvington road right of way.
a. Relocate the dumptser enclosure as required.
b. Provide all accessible requirements as per the 2009 ICC A117.1, including dimensions, grade slopes as per 403.3, ramps as per section 405 and/or 406 as required, markings and detectable warning strips as per 406.12, 13 and 14 as applicable.
c. Reference suggested sketch on site plan.
3. Insure all slopes of the accessible route comply with 2009 ICC A117.1, Sec tion 403.3; 5% maximum running slope and 2% maximum cross slope. Provide a note to that effect on the drawings.
4. Provide a large scale partial plan of the accessible parking showing all accessible requirements such as dimensions, markings, signage, grade slopes, ramps as required, van accessible parking space, accessible parking ailse and show access to the accessible route.
5. Provide a large scale detail of the parking sign including van accessible signage.
END OF REVIEW
03/20/2014 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (55.90') is less than 12" below the first floor elevation of the carwash tunnel (56.80'). Provide a backwater valve per Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
05/01/2014 FERNE RODRIGUEZ OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
03/31/2014 AROMERO4 APPROVAL SHELF Completed
03/31/2014 GERARDO BONILLA REJECT SHELF Completed