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: DP14-0041
Parcel: 116206330

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP14-0041
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
03/18/2014 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
03/20/2014 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: March 26, 2014
SUBJECT: West End Station Development Plan Package- Engineering Review
TO: MetroTED; Attn: Lisa Bowers
LOCATION: 855 W Congress St; T14S R13E Sec14
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP14-0041


SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package, Drainage Report (The WLB Group, Inc.; 14MAR14) and Geotechnical Engineering Report (Terracon Consultants, Inc.; 10OCT13). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administration Manual (AM) and Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Refer to the following link for further clarification:
http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az

The following items need to be addressed:


SITE PLAN:

1) AM Sec.2-06.4.1: Revise the development plan package to provide the email addresses for the primary property owner of the project. Information shall be provided under the Owner/Developer Section.

2) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP14-0041) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets.

3) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: Revise the development plan package to provide the correct administrative street address for the subject parcel. Currently the plans call out 839 W Congress, but it should be 855 W Congress.

4) AM Sec.2-06.4.4.B: Revise the development plan package and project location map to label the regional water course (Santa Cruz River) within the one square mile area.

5) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.A.6: Revise the development plan package and General Note #5 with the correct 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.

6) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.B.2.a: Revise the development plan package and General Note #3 to correctly state 1 of 2 things. Either provide the LOMR-F case number that shows that the property has been removed from the floodplain per LOMR #11-09-1389A revalidated 07-09-1469V or state that a portion of the property is effected by a FEMA Zone AE floodplain limits as shown on the FIRM Panel and on Sheet 4 of the development plan package. Any removal or relocation of the fill that was installed to remove the property from the floodplain will void the current LOMR-F.

7) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.B.2.b: Revise the development plan package to provide the note per the referenced section. Since the lot and fill is to be removed, revised which will void the existing LOMR-F then the portion of the property that has delineated FEMA floodplain will require a floodplain use permit and elevation certificates.

8) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.C.2: Revise the development plan package and Streets and Road Note #1 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.

9) 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.

10) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.F: Revise the development plan package to label the existing drainage infrastructure located within the public right-of-way, include the infrastructure improvement plan number in plan view.

11) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.A: Provide a Final Plat application for the split of Block A as proposed on the development plan package. The development plan package can not be approved prior to final approval of the Final Plat.

12) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Provide approval from TDOT and Suntran for all proposed work within the Public right-of-way. The relocation of the bus stop will require prior approval from all entities that have an interest and a PIA will be required to be processed through TDOT Permits and Codes.

13) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Provide approval from TDOT for the proposed discharge location within Congress Street at the light rail track location. Verify if TDOT will allow the site to drain water directly onto the existing light rail track.

14) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Provide approval from TDOT for the track access permit that is required when any work is being proposed along the streetcar route. The permits can be obtained from TDOT Permits and Codes.

15) 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 and street intersections, 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.

16) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.4: Revise the development plan package to provide the recordation information for the abandonment of Paseo De Los Zanjeros from a public right-of-way to a private street. The proposed improvements can not be approved within the public right-of-way until the street is abandoned and made private.

17) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension all portions of the proposed angled parking as shown in the UDC Figure 7.4.6-A and Table 7.4.6-1.

18) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to label and dimensions all areas of the vehicular use area to show conformance with UDC Sec.7.4.6. The proposed plan is lacking in dimensions.

19) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to clearly show all proposed work onsite of the subject parcel. It appears that there is a portion of the vehicular use area within the Paseo De Los Zanjeros right-of-way (proposed to be abandonded) that is being constructed within the public right-of-way of Avenida Del Convento. All private improvements must be constructed onsite or an easement will be required with prior approval form TDOT.

20) 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.

21) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Revise the development plan package and Grading Note # 27 specifying conformance with City of Tucson Technical Standards Manual Sec.2-01 (excavation and grading requirements) not the old Development Standard reference.

22) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Revise the development plan package and General Note #30 to include the correct reference to the Geotechnical Report prepared for this project. Provide the date, job number, engineer who prepared the report, etc.

23) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.1: TSM Sec.4-03.2.2: Revise the Retention Design Section in the Drainage Report to accurately state and argue the proposed detention/retention waiver. Threshold retention requirements may be waived in certain cases when Stormwater retention is not feasible (must be verified with the Geotechnical Report) due to site constraints. In such cases the following detention criteria may be imposed in lieu of threshold retention requirements and in addition to any other applicable detention requirements: The detention requirement will be at a minimum the difference in volume between the developed and existing 2-year run-off volumes or the difference in peak discharges whichever is more restrictive with the difference in volume and or peaks between the developed and existing 5-year runoff volumes being maximum to be detained. Provide a statement within the report to reflect this language and verify how the site will provide direct discharge into the Santa Cruz River in order to waive the detention requirements.

24) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.6: Be advised that the subject parcel currently has a LOMR-F that was approved under Case #11-09-1389A by FEMA. Per the proposed work any removal of fill or placement of an underground parking lot will effect the LOMR-F and place the property back into the FEMA special flood hazard area Zone AE of the Santa Cruz River requiring federal flood insurance for any new structure that is constructed within these limits. The Drainage Report needs to provide a discussion about the current LOMR-F and how the proposed project will affect it.

25) 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.

26) 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.

27) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to provide the required pedestrian circulation connection from the building to all adjacent public right-of-ways refer to TSM Sec.7-01.3.3.A

28) 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.

29) 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.

30) 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 specific details on the development plan document for construction purposes. 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:

31) TSM Sec.4-03.2.2: Revise the Retention Design Section in the Drainage Report to accurately state and argue the proposed detention/retention waiver. Threshold retention requirements may be waived in certain cases when Stormwater retention is not feasible (must be verified with the Geotechnical Report) due to site constraints. In such cases the following detention criteria may be imposed in lieu of threshold retention requirements and in addition to any other applicable detention requirements: The detention requirement will be at a minimum the difference in volume between the developed and existing 2-year run-off volumes or the difference in peak discharges whichever is more restrictive with the difference in volume and or peaks between the developed and existing 5-year runoff volumes being maximum to be detained. Provide a statement within the report to reflect this language and verify how the site will provide direct discharge into the Santa Cruz River in order to waive the detention requirements.

32) TSM Sec.4-04: Revise the Drainage Report to accurately reflect the FEMA Floodplain delineation and the existing LOMR-F (Case #11-09-1389A) that the parcel currently has. Per the proposed work any removal of fill or placement of an underground parking lot will effect the LOMR-F and place the property back into the FEMA special flood hazard area Zone AE of the Santa Cruz River requiring federal flood insurance for any new structure that is constructed within these limits. The Drainage Report needs to provide a discussion about the current LOMR-F and how the proposed project will affect it.


SWPPP:

33) Revise the SWPPP Exhibits and all language to verify that it meets the minimum requirements of the AzPDES 2013 Construction General Permit (CGP). Currently the Exhibits still provide language for the old 2008 Permit.


GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised Development Plan Package, Drainage Report, 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 and the acknowledgment that variances and special actions will be required for the proposed project 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 Report 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
03/25/2014 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied Where the finish floor elevation is less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole in the public sewer or private sewer collection system, a backwater valve shall be installed in the building drain or branch of the building drain serving that floor. Floors discharging from above that reference point shall not discharge through the backwater valve. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.
03/25/2014 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Denied 1) Based on fire flow requirements (Appendix B of the 2012 International Fire Code) and hydrant spacing requirements (Appendix C), one additional fire hydrant is required in the southwest corner of the project.
2) "No Parking-Fire Lane" will be required where vehicle parking may reduce fire access to less than 20' (utility easement islands).
03/25/2014 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Reqs Change Submit NPPO plan as determined by A.M. Section 2-11 or Provide acceptable documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants. Such documentation includes photographs of the site taken from all sides of the property.
03/25/2014 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE

ARTICLE 7: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING

To enhance the visual appearance of the streetscape, a street landscape border is required in accordance with Table 7.6.4-1 along the street frontage of a site as follows:

Minimum Width
Street landscape borders must be a minimum of ten feet wide as measured from the street property line. On streets designated as Major Streets and Routes (MS&R), the street landscape border must be measured from the future MS&R right-of-way line as determined by Section 5.4.4, Establishment of MS&R Right-of-Way Lines and Gateway Routes.

Street landscape borders must be located entirely on site, except that, if approved by the City Engineer or designee, up to five feet of the required ten foot width may be placed within the adjacent right-of-way area or within the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) right-of-way area on MS&R streets.

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.

Interior landscape borders are required as determined in Table 7.6.4-1, which ranks land uses and zones based upon their land use intensity and the impact a use will have on adjacent land uses.

One canopy tree is required for every 33 linear feet of landscape border or fraction thereof, excluding vehicular ingress or egress points.

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 all screening elements.

Within a vehicular use area, one canopy tree is required for each four motor vehicle parking spaces or fraction thereof.

The canopy trees must be evenly distributed throughout the vehicular use area. Every parking space must be located within 40 feet of the trunk of a canopy tree (as measured from the center of the tree trunk).

Submit NPPO plan as determined by A.M. Section 2-11 or Provide acceptable documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants. Such documentation includes photographs of the site taken from all sides of the property.

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

Additional comments may apply.

Grading Information

Grade changes across the site indicated by one-foot interval contour lines or by spot elevations;

Percent slope across the site and the direction of the slope of paved areas;

Existing grades on adjacent rights-of-way and adjacent sites. If an adjacent right-of- way or site is under construction, show the proposed finish grade

Extent of grading boundaries if a portion of the site is to be kept in its natural undisturbed state.

Indicate natural contours of undisturbed areas;

Areas of detention/retention, depths of basins, and percentage of side slope;

The methods by which water harvesting or storm water runoff is used to benefit the planting areas on the site.


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;
03/25/2014 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Reqs Change 1. There is no accessible route to the accessible parking.
2. Show all the parking in the boundaries of private property and not in a public right of way.
3. At the large scale detail of the accessible parking 3/18 show all accessible requirements as required by the 2012 IBC Chapter 11 and ICC A117.1 such as dimensions, markings, access to the accessible route in front of the parking and not in the PAAL, grade slopes, curb ramps as required, van accessible parking space and signage.
4. Provide a large scale detail of the marked crossings showing all accessible requirements such as dimsensions, grade slopes, markings, ramps and detectable warning strips.
b. At note 5: Delete the reference to STD DTL 207 and reference the 2009 ICC A 117.1, Sections 405 or 406 as applicable.
5. Provide a typical note stating that all accessible route slopes are to comply with the 2009 ICC A177.1, Section 403.3; 5% maximum running slope and 2% maximum cross slope.
6. Provide a large scale detail of the ramp and show all accessible requirements such as landings, slopes and handrails.
a. Provide a large scale elevation of the handrails.
7. Insure and show accessible access to the swimming pool area and into the pool such as stairs, handrails, sloped ramps and or lifts as required by ICC A117.1, Section 1109.
8. At note 19 delete the STD DTL 105 and reference ICC A117.1, Sections 405 and 505.
9. On sheet 1, General Notes: Change the 2003 year reference to 2009.
END OF REVIEW
03/27/2014 MICHAEL ST. PAUL ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Michael St Paul
Planning Technician

PROJECT: DP14-0041 (Place this number in the lower-right corner of all sheets.)
855 West Congress Street
Apartments & Retail C-3 & I-1

TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 27, 2014

DUE DATE: March 28, 2014

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Unified Development Code, The Administrative and Technical Manuals were addressed.

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

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 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 March 18, 2015.

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

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

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.

2-06.1.2 APPICABILITY
This standard shall be used for all site plans and tentative plats submitted to PDSD for review.

2-06.2.1 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Development Package applications are available from PDSD. Completed applications and accompanying materials shall be submitted to PDSD. Incomplete or inaccurate applications will not be accepted, nor will any application in which the pre-application conference or neighborhood meeting requirements have not been met. The types of documents and the specific number of copies required of each of the documents are on the PDSD website or may be obtained from PDSD. Resubmittals of development packages require a comment response letter that details how all previous comments have been addressed. Provide the same number of copies of the comment response letter as plans provided.
The following documents and information shall be submitted upon application:

2-06.2.1 Application Form
A completed application signed by the property owner or authorized designee;

2-06.2.2 Development Package
A development package must be prepared to the format and content requirements described herein;

2-06.2.3 Related Reviews
In addition to the plan process, a project may require review for other types of plans and documents. The applications for those processes are submitted to the appropriate department for review and approval. These related reviews can be applied for so that review can occur concurrently with the development package application. However, it must be understood that, should the related application be approved subject to conditions or denied, this may affect the;

2-06.2.4 Concurrent Reviews
The development package is designed to allow for concurrent review of any site related reviews. Concurrent review means that all plans and documents needed for the review are submitted as one package. Examples of site related reviews include but are not limited to: site plans, landscape plans, NPPO plans, water harvesting plans, grading plans, SWPPP plans, floodplain use permits, and overlay reviews. Separate applications are often required for the different site related reviews even if the plans are submitted concurrently; and,

2-06.2.5 Fees
Fees in accordance with Section 4-01.0.0, Development Review Fee Schedule.

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.1 - The name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s), or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional, such as a surveyor, architect, landscape architect, or engineer. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines.

1) COMMENT: Provide the email address for the owner/developer.

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

2-06.4.2.C - The number of proposed lots and common areas are to be noted.

2) COMMENT: When the subdivision is determined this development package should be tied to the final plat and the number of lots and common area should be provided in the title block.

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: Provide the correct address for this site (Parcel 116-20-6330) on the plans. The correct address is 855 West Congress Street.

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.B - Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and all streets that abut the subject property; and,

4) COMMENT: Provide and identify the regional watercourses (Santa Cruz River) in the projection map.

2-06.4.7.A.2 - List the gross area of the site/subdivision by square footage and acreage.

5) COMMENT: Specifically identify the square footage of each zone. The residential use is limited to the C-3 zone. No residential use can be placed in the I-1 zone. The number of units presented (168) exceeds the maximum density for the entire parcel. [83,707 / 43560 = 1.921648301 (87) = 167 maximum units] When the final configuration of the residential portion of the entire project is determined, the density must not exceed the maximum density for the residential use area within the C-3 zone (UDC Table 6.3-4.A). (See comments #13 & 14.)

2-06.4.7.A.3 - If the plan/plat has been prepared in conjunction with a rezoning application, add the following note next to the existing zoning note: "Proposed zoning is ____." List the applicable rezoning file number and conditions of approval. Also place the C9-__-__ (if applicable) and the plan/plat file numbers in the lower right corner of each sheet.

6) COMMENT: Due to the proposed density of the site, a rezoning should be considered.

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.

7) COMMENT: This site is located within the Rio Nuevo District (UDC Section 5.11 & Figure 5.11-A: Rio Nuevo District Map; p. 313). A pre-application conference is required for all development in the Rio Nuevo District (RND) to determine whether the project shall be reviewed through the Minor or Major Project Design Review Procedure (UDC Section 5.11.8). You may also want to look at the Modification of Development Regulations (MDR) for development of this site (UDC Section 5.11.9). Contact Russlyn Wells at 837-4948 or Russlyn.Wells@tucsonaz.gov for information concerning the Rio Nuevo District and process.

8) COMMENT: This site is also locater in the Infill Area Incentive District (UDC Section 5.12). The Infill Area Incentive District (IID) offers development incentives by use of the MDR process (UDC Sections 5.12.1.C and 5.12.4). This site is within the Downtown Core Subdistrict (DCS) of the IID (UDC Figure 5.12-A: Illustrative Map; p. 324) and offers some relief relative to the RND requirements (UDC Section 5.12.5). You may also contact Russlyn Wells for this information.

9) 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.

10) COMMENT: Provide the application numbers and description on the plans as described above.

2-06.4.7.A.6.b - If there is more than one lot within the site, the note should specify which lots are affected by the additional applications or overlay zones.

11) COMMENT: Provide the specific information for each proposed parcel, and coordinate this information with a final plat.

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

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

12) COMMENT: List the floor area for each building.

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

13) COMMENT: The maximum lot coverage for the residential portion of this project is eighty percent (80%) (UDC Table 6.3-4.A: Dimensional Standards; p. 339). (See comment #5.)

2-06.4.7.A.8.d - When the proposed site is part of a larger site, the calculations encompass the entire site, whether existing or proposed. If the project is being phased, calculations must show that, at each phase, requirements are being met.

14) COMMENT: When the actual site area is finally determined provide the calculations for the entire site, each parcel and each use within each parcel. For example the density for the residential use in the C-3 zone, of the proposed Block A2, allows for a maximum number of 116 units (UDC Table 6.3-4.A: Dimensional Standards; p. 339). (Additional information was sent by David Little. The C-2 section of the proposed site in Block A2 is 58,461 square feet. [58,461 / 43,560 = 1.34107989 (87) = 116 units]. (See comments #5 & 13.)

2-06.4.7.C - Streets and Roads Notes

2-06.4.7.D - Utilities Note

2-06.4.7.E.2 - The following notes will be provided on the plans/plats if private sewers are proposed for construction on the property.

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.

15) COMMENT: Provide the dimensions for all the adjacent streets, including centerline, curbs, sidewalks, paving, streetcar track and all right-of-way related conditions. (See comment #17.)

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.

16) COMMENT: Provide all the existing easements, if any, with use description and dimensions on the site plan.

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.

17) COMMENT: Fully dimension the right-of-ways. Include the curb, sidewalk, paving centerline dimensions. (See comment #15.)

2-06.4.8.D - The following information regarding existing utilities shall be provided: the location and size of water wells, water pumping plants, water reservoirs, water lines, fire hydrants, sanitary and storm sewers, including the pipe diameter and the invert and rim elevations of all manholes and cleanouts; the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD) reference number; locations of gas lines, electric and telephone lines, poles, and communications cables, on-ground junction boxes, and street lights. If water mains and sewers are not located on or adjacent to the tract, indicate the direction, distance to, and sizes of those nearest the property.
Identifying the locations of all utilities and service equipment immediately adjacent to the project is especially important in situations where pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation or landscaping can be in conflict. By knowing the location of the existing utilities, design of the project can take those elements into consideration and can help avoid expensive and time-consuming relocation of utilities, major redesign, or requests to vary regulations after commencement of construction.

18) COMMENT: Provide all the utility information listed above (2-06.4.8.D), that may be relative to this site, on the site plan.

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.A - Draw in all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements.

19) COMMENT: Provide the dimensions and bearings for the proposed lot lines.

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

20) COMMENT: Provide the additional information for the subdivision.

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.

21) COMMENT: In addition to providing the zoning information as described above (2-06.4.9.F) on the site plan, located and dimension the split-zoning line for C-3 and I-1 on the site plan. The distance for the zoning line is 290.00 feet south of and parallel to the center line of West Congress Street.

2-06.4.9.G - If the project is to be phased, provide calculations, setbacks, etc., to indicate that each phase complies with all requirements as a separate entity. Show phase lines on the drawing. Show and label any temporary improvements that may be needed to make the site function for each phase as one entity. If such temporary improvements are off the site of the phase under consideration, a temporary easement or other legal documentation to assure legal use of the property is required. Note recording information.

22) COMMENT: The statement concerning the garage (Note to Reviewers #5) indicates an intention to do this project in phases. Provide the information above (2-06.4.9.G) in the development package and on the site plan.

2-06.4.9.H - Proposed Traffic Circulation

2-06.4.9.H.1 - Proposed traffic circulation will be designed in accordance with Section 10-01.0.0, Street Technical Standards, of the Technical Standards Manual, to include streets, intersections, street names, right-of-way widths, curve radii of centerlines and curb returns, and proposed improvements, such as pavement, curbs, access points (driveways), accessible ramps, and sidewalks. Street improvements, such as sidewalks, curbs, pavement, and accessible ramps, do not need to be drawn on the plan if such information is provided on typical street cross sections.
Please be aware that, if a new street is created (for other than for subdivisions) which divides the property into two or more lots, a subdivision plat is required (refer to the definition of subdivision in Section 11.4.20 of the UDC).

23) COMMENT: The proposed street information, when determined, shall be provided on the site plan. See comments from Engineering and Transportation.

2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show future and existing sight visibility triangles. On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section.

24) COMMENT: Provide the sight-visibility triangles (SVTs) on the site plan. See Engineering comments.

2-06.4.9.H.3 - Indicate fire circulation, including accessibility and vehicle maneuverability.

25) COMMENT: See Fire comments.

2-06.4.9.H.4 - Indicate if existing streets are public or private; provide street names, widths, curbs, sidewalks, and utility locations, all fully dimensioned.

26) COMMENT: See previous comments #15 and #17).

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.

27) COMMENT: Provide the dimensions for the proposed parking area (PAAL or street) on Sheet 3.

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.

28) COMMENT: The parking calculation should be provided with the proposed Individual Parking Plan (IPP) and once approved referenced and provided with the development package and on the site plan.

2-06.4.9.H.5.b - If any of the required parking is located off-site as permitted by the UDC, a drawing of that parking area is to be provided, together with the city's required parking agreement (include a copy of the lease agreement if applicable) must be provided. Please remember that in these situations, if the off-site parking location is a new parking area, it must comply with all parking area requirements and must be allowed as a principal use by the zoning classification of that property. If the off-site parking area location is an existing parking lot, the parking spaces utilized for the proposed land use must be non-required parking for the existing use for which the parking area was established.

29) COMMENT: See the previous comment concerning the IPP.

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.

30) COMMENT: Provide all required and provided bicycle parking on the site plan, with specification, dimensions, details and calculations. Also see instructions for the IPP.

2-06.4.9.L - All proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. The easements may have to be recorded and the recordation information added to the development package prior to approval.

31) COMMENT: If there are any proposed easements, provide the easements as described above (2-06.4.9.L) on the plan.

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.

32) COMMENT: Provide the required setback lines to each property line and right of way on the site plan. Provide the height for each building's wall facing the right of way (ROW) or property lines. The required setback to the Major Street (Congress) is the greater of twenty-one (21) feet or the height of each building's wall facing the curb. The setback is also the greater of twenty-one (21) or the height to the travel lane facing the other streets for each building (UDC Section 6.4.5.C.2.a; Table 6.4.5.C-1). Architectural plans are referred to in the submittal, but not architectural plans or elevations have been provided.

2-06.4.9.T - Show refuse collection areas, including locations of dumpsters, screening location and materials, and vehicle maneuverability, fully dimensioned, and access route. If dumpster service is not proposed, indicate type of service. For specific information on refuse collection, refer to Section 8-01.0.0, Solid Waste and Recycle Disposal, Collection, and Storage, of the Technical Standards Manual. Refuse collection on all projects shall be designed based on that section, even if collection is to be contracted to a private firm.

33) COMMENT: See Engineering comments.

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.

34) COMMENT: Provide proposed sign information.

2-06.4.9.X - Show compliance with landscaping and screening requirements by locations, material descriptions, and dimensions. Specific plant or hardscape material shall be detailed on a landscape plan. A detailed landscape plan is required. In accordance with Section 2-11.0.0, Landscape Plan Requirements.

35) COMMENT: See Landscaping comments.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Michael St. Paul, (520) 837-4959.

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package site plan and any requested documents.

Provide copies for the overlay application(s), and the IPP plan.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
03/28/2014 SHANAE POWELL OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
03/28/2014 CPIERCE1 REJECT SHELF Completed