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
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING
Permit Number - DP14-0031
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/27/2014 | RBROWN1 | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 03/04/2014 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/05/2014 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: FedEx Ground Co-Location Grading Plan (1st Review) DP14-0031 TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 5, 2014 1. The grading plan has been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 2. Zoning cannot approve the grading plan until the development package has been approved. 3. Zoning will re-review the grading plan on the next submittal to insure compliance with the approved development package. Additional comments may be forthcoming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956 |
| 03/07/2014 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: March 8, 2014 SUBJECT: FEDEx Ground Grading Plan- Engineering Review TO: DOWL HKM; Attn Thomas Meehan, PE LOCATION: 7050 S Palo Verde Rd; T15S R14E Sec16 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: DP14-0031 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Grading Plan application, Drainage Report (DOWL HKM, 26FEB14), Geotechnical Engineering Report (Pattison-Evanoff Engineering, LLC, 24OCT13) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (DOWL HKM, 26FEB14). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Grading Plan application 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: GRADING PLAN: This review was for grading and SWPPP purposes only. Verify that the grading plan sheets match the last approved site plan and that all comments generated under activity #DP14-0030 are shown on these sheets along with the following comments. 1) AM Sec.2-06.3.12: Revise the drawing index to only include the Grading and SWPPP Plan Sheets. Provide a copy of the approved site plan (DP14-0030) for review to show conformance with the proposed grading plan, verify the sheet index matches the page number and total number of pages. 2) AM Sec.2-06.4.1: Revise the development plan package to provide the email addresses for the primary property owner, architect, civil and contractor of the project. Information shall be provided under the appropriate section. 3) 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. To include the Grading and SWPPP Plan Sheets only. 4) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case numbers (DP14-0030 and DP14-0031) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets. 5) 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. 6) 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 required vehicle separation within the vehicle use area. Either provide a reference to a PC/COT Standard Detail or provide a separate detail for construction purposes. Per UDC Section 7.4.6.H.1 Barriers, such as post barricades or wheel stop curbing, are required in a vehicular use area to prevent vehicles from extending beyond the property lines, to prevent cars from damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings, overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas, and/or driving onto unimproved portions of the site. There are numerous areas of the site that does not meet this standard up to and including the proposed fire access road to Corona Road. 7) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package and Detail 17 on Sheet 21 to correctly dimension the 2.5-foot overhang at the curb stop within the parking stall, refer to UDC Sec.7.4.6.H.3. 8) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.L: Revise the development plan package to provide for the required easement for the proposed public sidewalk that is shown to be constructed on site along Corona Road. Provide the SEQ# in plan view or as a note under the General Note Section. 9) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.L: Revise the development plan package to provide for the required pedestrian access easement for the private sidewalk that appears to cross on to the adjacent property to the east that is shown on Sheet 8. Provide the SEQ# in plan view or as a note under the General Note Section. 10) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Revise the grading plan to provide the required basin access ramp per TSM 4-04.14.3.4; A minimum of one 15-foot wide vehicular access ramp shall be provided into each basin. The maximum roadway or access ramp slope shall not exceed 15 percent. 11) 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." 12) 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." 13) 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." 14) 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" 15) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Revise the development plan package to provide construction details and dimensions for the proposed stationary compactor. Since 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. 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 REPORT: 16) TSM 4-03.3.3.2: Revise the Drainage Report to provide calculations and the table for storage-indication method of flood routing. It is acknowledged that the graph for the routing has been provided however the table should be included for review also. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: 17) TSM Sec.4-03.3.5.1.3.a and 4-04.14.2.6: Provide a revised Geotechnical Report or addendum to provide percolation rates for the retention basin for 5-year threshold to show that the drain down time meets the maximum (24 hours) per TSM Sec.4-03.3.5.1. SWPPP: 18) CGP Sec.6.3.5.c: Revise the SWPPP Report to provide the percentage of the site that is impervious before and after construction. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Grading Plan Package, last approved Site Plan (DP14-0030), Drainage Report, and SWPPP 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 |
| 03/07/2014 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Jason, the Traffic study recommends improvements to the south west corner of Valencia Rd and Palo Verde Rd in order to cater for a WB-50 turning radius. It is recommended the curb be redesigned and some utilities relocated. A private improvement agreement with Engineering Permits and Codes will be required. No other traffic impact improvements were recommended. Zelin >>> Jason Green 03/07/2014 11:15 AM >>> Dropped it off for you with the ladies at the front. Let me know if anything stands out. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division COT Planning & Development Services *Phone: (520) 837-4929 Jason.Green@tucsonaz.gov >>> Zelin Canchola 03/05/2014 3:16 PM >>> Yes, I can look at it. Im here till 430. >>> Jason Green 03/05/2014 2:10 PM >>> Zelin, I am doing a review for the new FEDEx ground facility at 7050 S Palo Verde Rd. Part of the package included a TIA for the site from Kittelson & Associates. TDOT is not part of the review, but I was hoping that you could take a look at the TIA to make sure Traffic doesn't have any issues that might come forth after our approval and during Permits & Codes review under the right-of-way use permit. Please let me know if you can help me out. If so I have the copy at my desk or I can run it up to you later today or hand it off during our 10:30 meeting tomorrow. Regards, Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division COT Planning & Development Services *Phone: (520) 837-4929 Jason.Green@tucsonaz.gov |
| 03/19/2014 | RONALD BROWN | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Provide a large scale detail of the accessible parking showing all accessible requirements such as dimensions, grade slopes, spot elevations, markings, signage, accessible route, access to accessible route, ramps as necessary and van accessible parking. 2. Provide a larges scale detail of the accessible parking signage. Include a van accessible sign. 3. Provide large scale details of both marked crossings showing all accessible requirements such as dimensions, markings, grade slopes, spot elevations, ramps and detectable warnings. 4. The latest aerial photos show an accessible route gap access to the Palo Verde Road right of way. Insure a complete accessible route connection to the Palo Verde Road right of way. Otherwise provide an accessible route connection on your property to the Corona Road right of way. 5. Insure all accessible route slopes comply with 2009 ICC A117.1, Section 403.3, 5% running slope maximum and 2% cross slope maximum. END OF REVIEW |
| 03/19/2014 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | The grading plan has been reviewed by the Landscape / NPPO Section but cannot approve the plan until all Engineering, comments, concerns, and appropriate revisions have been addressed. |
| 03/19/2014 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/24/2014 | LEERAY HANLY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03/25/2014 | AROMERO4 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 03/25/2014 | GERARDO BONILLA | REJECT SHELF | Completed |