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: DP14-0044
Parcel: 10707014B

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP14-0044
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
03/26/2014 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
03/28/2014 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Complete Landscaping
Development Package (1st Review)
DP14-0044

TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 1, 2014

DUE DATE: April 22, 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 March 24, 2015.

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

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

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

1. COMMENT: Provide the page number and total number of pages on the landscape 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.

2. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP14-0044, adjacent to the title block on all sheets.

2-06.4.7 - General Notes

The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable.

2-06.4.7.A.4 - Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses.

3. COMMENT: Permitting note 3, the proposed use should be listed as BUILDING AND GROUND MAINTENANCE, subject to Use Specific Standard 4.9.13.Q.


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.

4. 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.a - Floor area for each building;

5. COMMENT: As a note provide the floor area for each building.

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.

2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development
The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes.

2-06.4.9.H.5 - If utilizing parking area access lanes (PAALs), they shall be designed in accordance with Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

6. COMMENT: Per UDC Article 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 it appears that some type of porch or building overhang is proposed along the southeast side of the new 5,676 sf and 1,645 sf building. Show the required one (1) foot setback on the plan.

7. COMMENT: There are several proposed gates, near the south corner of the 5,676 sf building, north of the 2,630 sf office/storage, west of the existing 1,275 sf building, provide width dimensions.

8. COMMENT: At the entrance PAAL, southwest of the existing 2,090 sf building there is a vehicle parking space that appears to encroach into the 24' PAAL. Provide a width dimension from the vehicle parking space to the curb.

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.

9. COMMENT: Per UDC Article 7.4.3.A.2 Each Land Use Group (Group), except for Residential and Storage, has a standard minimum parking formula. The standard formula applies to every Land Use Class (Class) within that Group, except for those Classes specifically listed in the parking tables. That said the vehicle parking requirement for this project is based on UDC Table 7.4.4-1: MINIMUM NUMBER OF MOTOR VEHICLE SPACES REQUIRED, COMMERCIAL SERVICES USE GROUP, 1 space per 300 sq. ft. GFA. Per UDC Article 11.4.8 Gross Floor Area (GFA) is the sum of the horizontal areas of all floors of all buildings, including accessory buildings on a lot, measured from the exterior faces of the exterior walls or from the centerline of walls separating two buildings and includes elevator shafts and the stairwells at each story. Gross floor area includes floor space with structural headroom of six feet and six inches or more used for mechanical equipment; penthouses; attic space; interior balconies; mezzanines; and service bays but does not include any interior space used for parking, loading, or loading space that is incidental to the principal use. That said the vehicle parking space calculation is not correct. Provide a vehicle parking calculation that addresses the total gross floor area for the entire site.

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.

10. COMMENT: The bicycle parking space calculation is not correct. Per UDC Article 7.4.3.A.2 Each Land Use Group (Group), except for Residential and Storage, has a standard minimum parking formula. The standard formula applies to every Land Use Class (Class) within that Group, except for those Classes specifically listed in the parking tables. Per UDC Table 7.4.8-1: Minimum Required Bicycle Parking Spaces, COMMERCIAL USE GROUP, Short Term required 2, Long Term required 1 space per 12,000 sq. ft. GFA, minimum requirement is 2.

11. COMMENT: Detail 15, Sheet C6.1 dimensions are not correct. Review UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.2.f, & .g. and Figure 7.4.9-C. For your information per UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.2.d A single rack is designed and located to accommodate two bicycles.

12. COMMENT: There appears to be two (2) short term bicycle racks shown along the west side of the existing 1,275 sf building. Per UDC 7.4.9.B.1.g Short- and long-term bicycle parking are permitted in vehicular use areas provided the parking area is separated from vehicular parking and drive areas by a barrier or is located a sufficient distance from vehicular uses areas to prevent damage to the parked bicycles

13. COMMENT: Show the required long-term bicycle parking on the site plan and provide a detail that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.D are met.

14. COMMENT: Demonstrate on the plan or detail how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.B.1.e are met.

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.

15. COMMENT: Provide the recordation information for all proposed easements 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.

16. COMMENT: Per UDC Article 6.4.5.C.2 and Figure 6.4.5.C-I ADT of 1,000 or greater the required street perimeter yard is measured from the back of future curb. That said provide a setback dimension from the back of future curb to the proposed 2,620 sf office.
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.

17. 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, and all other common use areas. That said show the required pedestrian circulation to all buildings on the plan.

18. COMMENT: Per TSM 7-01.4.1.C A sidewalk is required adjacent to any parking space accessed by a PAAL where the space is located on the same side of the PAAL as any building and no other parking spaces or PAALs intervene. That said provide a sidewalk along the north side of the 2,630 sf office building

19. COMMENT: Per TSM 7-01.4.1.B A sidewalk is required adjacent and parallel to any access lane or PAAL on the side where buildings are located. Provide a sidewalk along;
The east side of the new 1,645 sf building
The west side of the new locker room
The west side of the new 2,630 sf building

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.

20. COMMENT: If applicable show the locations, and type of proposed signs on the plan.

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
.
03/31/2014 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Denied Please provide location of existing and/or proposed fire hydrants with dimensions to property lines.
Please provide fire flow requirements for site (refer to appendix B of the 2012 International Fire Code).
04/15/2014 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Approved An approved development plan is not to be used for construction of on-site utilities (e.g. water service to the building, building sewer, site lighting, or electrical service to the building). The construction of the on-site utilities may be included with the permit for constructing the building or as a separate permit.
04/21/2014 ELIZABETH EBERBACH ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change TO: Clint Glass P.E., Richard Macias P.E.
SUBJECT: DP14-0044 Complete Landscaping Development Package (SP/GP/SWPP) 1st submittal Engineering Review
ADDRESS: 2474 N FLOWING WELLS RD, Ward 3
LOCATION: T13S R13E Section 35
FLOODPLAIN: FEMA zone X-unshaded, 1688L
REVIEWER: Elizabeth Leibold, P.E.

SUMMARY: Engineering has reviewed and provides comments to the Development Package including and Drainage Report. Engineering does not recommend approval of the Development Package or the Drainage Report at this time. Prior to resubmittal, address the following comments based on Tucson Code Chapter 26, Technical Manual section and/or Administrative Manual.

MASTER COVER SHEETS/ GENERAL NOTES:
1) Tech Man Sec.2-01.4.1.C:: Address the following Development Package general note comments:
i) Add on sheet C1.1 the proposed disturbance area in square feet or acreage.
ii) Under General Grading Notes, add as note: Engineer of Record shall provide As-builts (Final Revised Grading Plan), a statement of conformance for substantial completion, a letter stating drainage facilities were constructed to meet City of Tucson drainage requirements, and constructed per approved plans & reports.
iii) Add the following notes, otherwise these will be added to permit as permit conditions:
(1) Add verbiage for drainage maintenance per this section of drainage manual: DS Sec.10-02.14.3.2.
(2) Call for DSD Engineering Inspection meetings. For a DSD Engineering Inspection, call IVR (740-6970), or schedule with a Customer Service Representative at the Development Services Department, or contact DSD Engineering at 837-4888, or schedule inspections online at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Online_Services/Online_Permits/online_permits.html
(3) Any engineering work to be done below grade (i.e. toe-downs, cutoff walls, drainage pipes/structures, etc.) shall not be back filled until Planning and Development Services Inspector inspects work and accepts it.
(4) If grading construction is expected to last longer than the expiration date of the grading permit, contact PDSD to renew/extend the Grading Permit. If Final Grading Inspection has not been completed before the Grading Permit expires, and permit has not been renewed, additional fees / reviews may be required.
(5) The permitee shall notify the PDSD when the grading operation is ready for final grading inspection. Final grading approval shall not be given until all work, including installation of all drainage facilities and their permanent protective devices, and all erosion control measures have been completed in accordance with the approved grading plan and grading permit, and any required field reports or other closure documentation has been submitted.

BASE LAYER SHEET COMMENTS:
2) DS Sec.2-01.3.3.3: Add DP14-0044 case number to Development Package sheets.

SITE PLAN SHEET COMMENTS:
3) Show proposed stormwater storage tanks on sheet C3.0.
4) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.2, E, &L: Label MS&R 'Collector' on sheet C3.0.

DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS:
5) Address the following drainage report comments:
a) Tech Man Sec.4-04.12.3.4: Parking lot depth may not exceed 1-foot during 100-yr event. Revise parking-basin design. Delineate any areas that exceed 1-foot for 100-yr event and revise proposed parking allocation.
b) Tech Man Sec. 4-03.3.5.10: Although spot elevations and details indicate compliance, depth of ponding label shall be clarified on Figure 4 so that FFE's are clearly labeled to meet 1-ft freeboard.
c) Tech Man Sec.4-03.3.5.2: Label valley gutter on Figure 4; keynote labels should also be provided on this exhibit.
d) Tech Man Sec.4-04.1.5.2: Provide a basin maintenance checklist, include basin, basin slopes, inlets, stormdrain pipes, bubbler, and outlets in a drainage maintenance list in the Drainage Report.
e) Tech Man Sec.4-03.3.3.4: Provide embankment protection along basin berm for long term erosion protection so volume of the basin is maintained over time. Figure 4 cross section A-A shall be revised to clarify protection.
f) Tech Man Sec.4-04.10.9.2: Explain design for bubbler outlet for proposed stormdrain system, and specifically if stormwater will actually be able to outlet from pipe with proposed grades.
g) Tech Man Sec.4-03.5.2.6: Provide additional clarification of percentages of detention reduction for stormwater harvesting tanks and basin.

LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS:
6) DS Sec.3-01.5.1.A.1: Regarding landscape sheets address the following comments:
a) Tech Man Sec.10-01.5.1B: Label SVT's on planviews on landscape plan to match civil sheets; assure proposed vegetation is not in conflict. Proposed trees appear to be in conflict with safety requirements - please revise.
b) Add a landscape note to landscape plans that states that any existing trees or transplanted trees from onsite within existing/remaining & proposed SVT's shall be checked & trimmed to assure they are clear of leaves & branches to a height of at least six feet above grade. Location of trees within existing and future sight visibility triangles may be restricted or modified as determined by City of Tucson Inspectors in order to preserve visibility.

GRADING, PAVING, DETAIL SHEET COMMENTS:
7) Tech Man Sec.2-01.4.1.C: Address the following grading comments for sheet C4.0:
a) Show and label local benchmark elevation location on planview.
b) Label slopes of proposed stormdrain pipe and grated inlet inverts at junction on plan view.
c) Remove last two rows on Typical Slope Treatment table or clarify that slopes more than 2:1(H:V) are not allowed per geotechnical report and/or that retaining walls then would be required.
d) At location of shortest distance on planview, label dimension from exterior pavement improvements along boundary to parcel limit. Typically 2-ft minimum setback for grading is required; for areas where no fill or cut exist lesser dimensions may be considered.
e) Tech Man Sec.10-01.5.1B: Label SVT's on planviews. Proposed trees on landscape plans appear to be in conflict with sight visibility - revise landscape plans - see landscape comments.
8) Tech Man Sec.4-03.3.3.4: Provide embankment protection along basin berm for long term erosion protection so that the volume of the basin is maintained over time. Revise grading and detail sheets.

UTILITIES / EASEMENTS COMMENTS:
9) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.8.B: Address the following easement foments:
a) Add recording information on planview on sheet C5.0 and grading sheet C4.0; show any existing easements for project site.
b) No improvements or construction activity shall occur offsite without temporary construction easements obtained.

STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN COMMENTS:
10) Tucson Code Chap.26 Article II: Sheet C8.0 shall be revised to place storage areas outside of ponding limits.
11) Provide SWPP report with general permit.

SOILS/GEOTECHNICAL REPORT COMMENTS:
12) No comment.

Please provide a revised Development Package plan sheets, revised Drainage Report, geotechnical report, SWPPP report, and comprehensive response letter that address the comments provided above. It is recommended that a meeting is held prior to resubmittal. If you have questions, call me at 837-4934.

Elizabeth Leibold, P.E., CPM, CFM
Civil Engineer
Engineering Division
Planning & Development Services Department
04/22/2014 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved
04/22/2014 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE

ARTICLE 7: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING


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. Obtain permission for use of ROW.

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.

Continuous screens along street frontages for vehicle use area must be as determined by Table 7.6.4-I. Identify screening elements.

Note: Screening is in addition to vegetative coverage.

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). Verify trees within vehicle use area meet requirement.

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

Additional comments may apply.

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.

Grading Information

The methods by which water harvesting or storm water runoff is used to benefit the planting areas on the site.
04/22/2014 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Reqs Change SHEETS C3.0 AND C4.0
1. Provide and identify 1 Van accessessible parking space.
2. Provide a large scale detail of all the different accessible parking layouts.
3. Delete the detectable warning strip at the 2 accessible parking spaces aisle located at the north east corner of the octagon building.
4. Provide an accessible route to all the buildings on the site as required by the 2012 IBC, Section 1104. Reference all exceptions.
a. Provide all required marked crossings including detectable warning strips.
b. Note that all accessible route are to comply with ICC A117.1, Sectiion 403.3; 5% max running slope and 2% maximum cross slopes.
5. How does one access the accessible route from the single accessible parking space aisle?
SHEET C6.0
6. Delete detail 2. Generic accessible parking details are not acceptable. Provide a large scale detail of each different accessible parking layout showing all the accessible requirements such as dimensions, grade slopes, ailses, access to accessible routes, markings, signage and ramps.
a. Do not include detectable warning strips unless the accessible parkings aisle is part of a marked crossing.
b. Provide a large scale accessible parking sign detail including a van accessible sign.
7. At details 4, 5 and 6: Delete all note references to the detectable warnings strips and substitute reference to ICC A117.1, Sections 406.12, 13 and 14 as applicable.
a. Detectable warning strips are to used only when part of a marked crossing.
END OF REVIEW

Final Status

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