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: DP14-0047
Parcel: 141113800

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP14-0047
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
04/01/2014 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
04/01/2014 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
04/02/2014 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change FROM: David Rivera
Principal Planner

PROJECT: DP14-0047
Lot 17 Rita Ranch
Development Package - Site Review for General Manufacturing Use

TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 2, 2014

DUE DATE: April 28, 2014

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the UDC and Administrative and Technical Standards 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 Unified Development Code (UDC).

The zoning review comments include the actual 2-06 Administrative Manual Standard (AM) first with the applicable AM 2-06 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

Link to the Digital Development Package Plan Stamp for all development package applications. http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/files/dsd/CDRC/acad-cot_stamp_model_1.pdf

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 .

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

A.M. Section 2-06.1.0 GENERAL

A.M. Section 2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

A.M. Section 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

A.M. Section 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

A.M. Section 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.

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

A.M. Section 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:

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

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

A.M. Section 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 development package documents;

A.M. Section 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,

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

A.M. Section 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

A.M. Section 2-06.3.1 - Each sheet shall measure 24 inches by 36 inches and include a minimum one inch margin on left side and one-half inch margin on all other sides to facilitate efficient record keeping. A larger sheet format may be used with the approval of the Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD).

A.M. Section 2-06.3.2 - All mapped data shall be drawn at an engineering scale having no more than 50 feet to the inch. This scale is the minimum accepted to assure the plan will be legible during review and when digitized and/or reduced for record-keeping purposes. The same scale shall be used for all sheets within the set. Smaller scales (60:1 or greater) may be used for some or all of the sheets with the prior approval of PDSD when it is determined legibility and the ability to be digitized and/or reduced for archiving will not be affected.
2-06.3.3 - All lettering and text (upper or lower case), and numbering, shall be a minimum of three-thirty-seconds inches in height to assure the plan will be legible during review and when digitized and/or reduced for archiving.

A.M. Section 2-06.3.4 - A title block shall be provided in the lower right quadrant of each sheet.

1. COMMENT: The title block should be consistent on all plan sheets with consistent information.

A.M. Section 2-06.3.6 - Provide a blank three-inch by five-inch block in the lower right corner of the plan adjacent to the title block on the first sheet of the development package for use by Pima County Addressing.

2. COMMENT: Provide the block for addressing.

A.M. Section 2-06.3.9 - The plan drawing shall be oriented with north toward the top of the sheet. If it is not practical to orient north to the top of the sheet, the plan drawing shall be oriented with north to the left side of the sheet.

3. COMMENT: Orient the plan drawing so north is pointing to the top of the plan sheets.

A.M. Section 2-06.3.11 - A key plan (if provided) shall be located on the first sheet.

4. COMMENT: The key plan on the cover sheet must be oriented with the north pointing to the top of the sheet.

A.M. Section 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

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

A.M. Section 2-06.4.2.A - The proposed name of the project or subdivision, or if there is no name, the proposed tenant's name;

5. COMMENT: Add the name of the project or tenants name in the title block of all plan sheets.

A.M. Section 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;

6. COMMENT: Include in the title block of all plan sheets the legal description of the subdivision and map and plat numbers.

A.M. Section 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.

7. COMMENT: This project has been assigned the PDSD case number Dp14-0047. List the case number in the lower right corner of all plan sheets.

A.M. Section 2-06.4.7 - General Notes
The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable.

A.M. Section 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.

8. COMMENT: Use Specific Standard specifically requires that access shall be from a street. The drawing depicts access to the site over an existing developed parcel. Revise the plans to provide direct vehicle, pedestrian and refuse truck access from the street.

A.M. Section 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; re-zonings; 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.

9. COMMENT: This site is subject to compliance with the Davis Monthan AEZ regulations. Applicable overlays of the DM AEZ are NCD-A 65-70 LDN and ADC -2. The following performance criteria must be met. Provide complete responses to each of the Performance standards noted in UDC Section 5.6.8.B.1.a - .c.

B. ADC-2
1. Performance Standards
The following performance standards apply in the ADC-2:
a. No more than 20 employees per acre of site area at any time may be accommodated by intention, design, or in fact;
b. The minimum project site area is five acres; and,
c. The maximum FAR is .30 of the project site area.

A.M. Section 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.

10. COMMENT: This comment may apply based on the response to comment 8 and as follows: If the lots are used as a site cross assess cross parking, pedestrian circulation etc will be required as well as possible easements. If the intent of this development is to be combined with the adjacent parcel all, zoning will review the two parcels as one site for current code compliance with the UDC and Technical Standards. Clarify what is proposed and expect additional comments if this is to be a two parcel/lot site development. If the two parcels are to be designed to function as one site include all relevant zoning data for the existing development and list as a general note the PDSD case number of the approved DP.

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

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

11. COMMENT: As mentioned in comment 10, if this s a two parcel/lot site development the overall floor area ratio and individual ratio must be included in the FAR calculation.


A.M. Section 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.

12. COMMENT: Same as comments 10 and 11, address as required.

A.M. Section 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.

13. COMMENT: The existing conditions within 50 feet of the site must be detailed on the DP site plan sheets, specifically the areas within 50 feet of the north and west boundaries of the site.

A.M. Section 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.

A.M. Section 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.

14. COMMENT: a. It is not clear why the access requirements to proposed site have been designed over the adjacent parcel. The use specific standard 4.9.5.C.2 requires that access shall be from a street. If the intent is to leave the access as depicted on the drawing perpetual access easements must be recorded prior to approval of the development package. The easements must be delineated on the plan and the recordation information labeled. The easements must be for vehicular (including refuse truck access) and pedestrian access and for maintenance of the required improvements for the proposed development. (Include as reference with the next submittal of this DP, a copy of the approved DP for the adjacent parcel to verify the approved conditions and development criteria)

b. Access lanes and PAALs must be setback at least two (2) feet from wall, screen, or other obstruction over six (6) inches. The width of the PAAL adjacent to the west side of the development must be 26 feet the entire length where adjacent to the existing fence. Adjust the width the PAAL to 26 feet.


A.M. Section 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.

14. COMMENT: Provide a dimensioned detail drawing of the long term facilities proposed within the building.

A.M. Section 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: Refer to comment 14.

A.M. Section 2-06.4.9.M - Grading Plan
A.M. Section 2-06.4.9.M.1 - A conceptual grading plan is required on projects with significant topographic conditions. The PDSD Engineering Administrator or designee will determine the need for such a plan.

A.M. Section 2-06.4.9.M.2 - Concurrent Review. For all projects, grading plans may be included in the development package and will be reviewed concurrently.

16. COMMENT: Zoning has reviewed the grading plan sheet as it relates to the zoning purview. Once the DP package site plan is approved the Grading plan is also approved. Ensure that any changes that are made to the site plan sheets are also made on the grading plan sheet.

A.M. Section 2-06.4.9.Q - Provide the square footage and the height of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building(s).

17. COMMENT: List on the building footprint of the existing development, the square footage and height of the existing building

A.M. Section 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.

18. COMMENT: Additional comments may be forthcoming based on the response to the above comments related to the overall site issues.

A.M. Section 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.

19. COMMENT: If applicable, draw and label the location of any proposed freestanding monument signage.

A.M. Section 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.

20. COMMENT: See the landscape reviewer comments related to landscape buffer and screening requirements.



If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608.

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package site plan and any requested documents.
04/04/2014 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: April 8, 2014
SUBJECT: Lot 17 Rita Ranch Development Plan Package- Engineering Review
TO: Jeff Stanley, PE
LOCATION: 8182 S Camino De Cafe; T15S R15E Sec17
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP14-0047

SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package, Hydrologic/Hydraulic Report (JAS Engineering, 27MAR14) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (JAS Engineering, 19MAR14). 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.2-06.3.6: Revise the development plan package to provide a blank three-inch by five-inch block in the lower right corner of the plan adjacent to the title block on the first sheet of the development package for use by Pima County Addressing.

2) AM Sec.2-06.3.9: Revise the development plan package so that the plan drawing is oriented with north toward the top of the sheet. If it is not practical to orient north to the top of the sheet, the plan drawing shall be oriented with north to the left side of the sheet.

3) AM Sec.2-06.4.2.B: Revise the development plan package and title block on all plan sheets to include the legal description of the existing subdivision with recordation information.

4) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP14-0047) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets.

5) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.E: Revise the development plan package and General Note # 11 and Paving and Grading Note #2 to include the elevation datum (in feet) along with a reference to the datum used per the City Book and Page that is referenced, i.e. NGVD29 or NAVD88.

6) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Provide a recorded copy of a cross access agreement for the proposed use of the shared driveway entrance. Since the project is proposing to use the existing driveway of the adjacent property a cross access agreement is required. The easements must be delineated on the plan and the recordation information labeled. The easements must be for vehicular (including refuse truck access) and pedestrian access and for maintenance of the required improvements for the proposed development.

7) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.L: All proposed easements are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private (i.e. vehicular cross access and pedestrian access). The easements may have to be recorded and the recordation information added to the development package prior to approval.


8) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Revise the development plan package to include the Cut and Fill quantities (in cubic yards) under the Earthwork Quantities Section on the Cover Sheet.

9) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Revise the development plan package and Paving and Grading Note #23 to include the reference to the Geotechnical Report prepared for this project. Provide the date, job number, engineer who prepared the report, etc. Provide the Geotechnical Report for review to address the comments under the Geotechnical Report Section below

10) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension in plan view or with a separate detail the water harvesting basins at the property boundaries. Verify on the plan and/or cross section the minimum 2-foot setback from the top of slope to the property line for grading purposes.

11) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.3: Revise the development plan package to provide a specific detail for the proposed concrete spillway. The detail should show how the spill way is tying into the existing concrete channel and the adjacent riprap spillway so that it prevents erosion and conflicts with the existing drainage infrastructure.

12) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan document to provide for a pedestrian access easement for the proposed sidewalk across the adjacent property. All new work proposed offsite will require a notarized letter from the adjacent property owner and a temporary construction easement for the construction work.

13) 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.


HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULIC REPORT:

14) Revise the Hydrologic/Hydraulic Report to provide a discussion on pre and post imperviousness of the site. It is acknowledged that the site is part of an overall design per the master drainage report for the subdivision; however this report should still provide a discussion on the balanced basin requirements. The discussion should state that the property is located within a balanced basin per the "Balanced and Critical Basin Map for Study Session of January 27, 1987" and provide verification that the master drainage report provided the detention/retention requirements for this site and that it does not have to provide its own separate onsite retention.


GEOTECHNICAL REPORT:

15) TSM Sec.4-03.3.5.1.3.a and 4-04.14.2.6: Provide a Geotechnical Report evaluation that addresses the following:

a) Provide pavement structure design recommendations.

b) Provide slope stability recommendations for any proposed constructed slopes.

c) Description of existing soil constraints for the site.


SWPPP:

16) Per City of Tucson Code Ordinance 10209, Chapter 26 Section 26-42.2: "For land disturbing activities that fall under the jurisdiction of this Article, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan must be prepared and certified by an engineer, or a landscape architect and submitted along with the application for a grading permit to the City of Tucson Development Services Department." The SWPPP report must be signed and sealed by the engineer of record or by a Registered Landscape Architect, revise.


GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised Development Plan Package, Hydrologic/Hydraulic Report and SWPPP 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
04/24/2014 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Reqs Change 1. Provide an accessible route directly from the project property to the public right of way not through an adjacent property.
a. Provide all necessary marked crossings with detectable warnings as required.
2. Provide detectable warning strips at the shown marked crossing to the building entrance as per the 2009 ICC A117.1, Sections 406.12, 13 and 14 as applicable.
END OF REVIEW
04/28/2014 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change 1) Revise the Rainwater Harvesting Plan to calculate water harvesting infiltration for areas that collect water and and support landscape plants.
04/28/2014 JOE LINVILLE NPPO REVIEW Reqs Change 1) Provide the NPP Plan for this lot or have one prepared.
UDC 7.7
04/28/2014 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change Provide the rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (3953-07). Determine the need for 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
05/12/2014 AROMERO4 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
05/12/2014 CPIERCE1 REJECT SHELF Completed