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: DP14-0078
Parcel: 127081910

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP14-0078
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
05/15/2014 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
05/16/2014 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: NWC BROADCROFT Retail
Development Package (1st Review)
DP14-0078

TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 19, 2014

DUE DATE: June 12, 2014

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments 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

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 May 13, 2015.

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

2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD) - ADDITIONAL 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

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

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.

1. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP14-0078, 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 - Zoning and Land Use Notes

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.

2. COMMENT: As Broadway Blvd. is designated as a Gateway Route on the MS&R map revise general note 22 to include 5.5 Gateway Corridor Zone (GCZ).

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

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

2-06.4.9.F - All existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) shall be indicated on the drawing with zoning boundaries clearly defined. If the property is being rezoned, use those boundaries and classifications. The basis for this requirement is that some zoning requirements on a project are based on the zoning classification of adjacent property. Also, in some instances, each zone has to be taken into consideration on property that is split by two or more zoning classifications, as each may have different requirements.

3. COMMENT: Provide the zoning for the parcels east of Craycroft Road and south of Broadway Blvd.

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.

4. COMMENT: Provide a typical parking space detail for both a standard and accessible vehicle parking space. As the vehicle parking spaces shown along the east side of the proposed building will require wheel stops shown the wheel stops on the detail and provide a location dimension, see UDC Article 7.4.6.H.3.

5. COMMENT: Per UDC Article 7.4.6.D.2.b Minimum Width Requirement When Adjacent to Barrier, A motor vehicle off-street parking space must have a minimum width of ten feet when the side(s) of the parking space abuts a vertical barrier over six inches in height, other than a vertical support for a carport. That said the vehicle parking space shown just south of the long term bicycle parking is required to be 10'-0" wide.

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.

6. COMMENT: Under the long term bicycle parking space calculation you state "LONG-TERM SPACES TO BE PROVIDED INSIDE OF THE BUILDING", sheet 2 Keynote 22 calls out "NEW LONG-TERM BIKE PARKING. SEE DETAIL I, SHEET 4". Clarify what you are planning for the long term bicycle parking.

7. COMMENT: The proposed location of the short term bicycle parking does not meet the intent of UDC Article 7.4.9.C.2.c

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.

8. COMMENT: Per TSM 7-01.3.3.A Within all development, a continuous pedestrian circulation path is required as follows: This path must connect all public access areas of the development and the pedestrian circulation path located in any adjacent streets. That said provide a sidewalk from the proposed building to the sidewalk located in the right-of-way along Broadway Blvd.

9. COMMENT: As the proposed sidewalk shown along the east side of the building is not wide enough to maintain a minimum width of 4', see TSM 7.1.4.3.A, if a vehicle overhangs the sidewalk, either provide a 6'-6" sidewalk or wheel stop curbing, see comment 4 above.

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.

10. COMMENT: If applicable show in 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
.
05/20/2014 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: May 21, 2014
SUBJECT: NWC Broadcroft Retail Development Plan Package- Engineering Review
TO: Metro TED; Attn: Lisa Bowers
LOCATION: 5465 E Broadway Blvd; T14S R14E Sec11
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP14-0078


SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package and Drainage Statement (Cypress Civil Development, 09MAY14). 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.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP14-0078) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets.

2) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.A.6: Revise the development plan package and General Note #22 to provide the code reference for all overlays applicable to the site, specifically state that "the project is designed to meet the overlay zone criteria for Sec.5.4, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone and Sec.5.5, Gateway Corridor Zone (GCZ)."

3) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Revise the development plan package to label the required 25-foot radii at all proposed driveway locations on the MS&R Street per City of Tucson Transportation Access Management Guidelines (TAMG), Section 5.5. Refer to TSM Sec.10-01 for street development standards. If a smaller curb return is proposed (18-foot) then a Technical Standard Modification Request (TSMR) application with fees will be required to modify the reduced radii dimension. It is highly recommended to verify with TDOT Permits and Codes first to see if they will support the modification before submitting the TSMR application and fees.

4) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan package to revise the far side sight visibility triangles for both driveway entrances to meet the 20'x30' pedestrian SVT requirements. As proposed currently for both existing and future conditions the 20'x125' far side SVT for Broadway would have an existing sign encroachment from the adjacent parcel that would fall within the line of site. Providing the smaller SVT would eliminate any conflicts.

5) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to provide a typical parking space detail for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. Dimension the required 2.5 foot overhang for the wheel stops per UDC Sec.7.4.6.H.3 to prevent encroachment over the landscape areas and the pedestrian access path.

6) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the minimum 10-foot parking space width for the parking stall located adjacent to the long term bicycle parking per UDC Article 7.4.6.D.2.b.

7) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to label the existing improvements located within the depressed landscape area along the west side of the building. Per the aerial it appears that there is curbing and an existing pay phone located onsite. Verify if these improvements are to remain or to be removed.

8) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.J: Revise the development plan package to verify the required 80-foot separation from the driveway of the proposed lot to the existing driveway located to the west on Broadway Blvd as required by the Tucson Access Management Guidelines (TAMG) Section 5.4.1 and Figure 5-4. Provide written approval from TDOT Permits and Codes for reducing the required setback from the driveway entry points.

9) 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.

10) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to provide the required pedestrian access path from the new building to the sidewalk located along the right-of-way of Broadway Blvd. Per TSM Sec.7-01.3.3.A Within all development, a continuous pedestrian circulation path is required as follows: This path must connect all public access areas of the development and the pedestrian circulation path located in any adjacent streets.

11) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to provide pedestrian access to the existing pay phone location along the west side of the building that now falls within the proposed depressed landscape area. Per TSM Sec.7-01.3.3.B Within all development, a continuous pedestrian circulation path is required as follows: 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.

12) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to provide a minimum 4-foot clear sidewalk width for the sidewalk located along the east side of the building. As the proposed sidewalk shown along the east side of the building is not wide enough to maintain a minimum width of 4-feet revise the dimension to provide a 6.5-foot width or add wheel stops to allow for the 2.5 foot overhang per TSM Sec.7.1.4.3.A.

13) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.2: Revise the development plan package to clarify the proposed curb cut locations in plan view. Verify the black line weight located at 2 locations and if proposed as curb cuts provide Keynote #21 to label for construction purposes.

14) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.S: Revise the development plan package and/or Keynote #4 to dimension the widths for the existing sidewalks located in the adjacent right-of-ways. Verify that the existing sidewalks meet the accessibility requirements.

15) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.S: Revise the development plan package and/or Keynote #15 to dimension the minimum widths for the new sidewalks located in the adjacent right-of-ways. Verify that the new sidewalks meet the minimum 6-foot width requirements per TSM Sec.10-01.4.1.A.1.a.

16) 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 for both waste and recycling containers per TSM Sec.8-01.5.1.A. Provide specific details on the development plan document for construction purposes. The details must match TSM Sec.8-01, Figure 2 and Figure 3a for the required double enclosure walls with gates, concrete thickness and compressive strength, concrete approach apron dimensions, space from wall to bollards, anchoring bolts, 14'x40' clear approach for each container, etc. Verify in plan view the truck turning radii around all proposed landscape planters and the proposed handicap access ramp to ensure maneuverability for the truck into both containers.

17) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Per the General Note #18 on the development plan package the applicant is requesting to use only one waste container and is not providing a recycling area. Provide approval from Environmental Services to modify the standard of having to provide a double enclosure and if accepted provide a TSMR application with fees for the modification of APC usage for the recycling containers.


GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised Development Plan Package 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
05/22/2014 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
06/02/2014 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (2555.53') may be less than 12" below the first floor elevation (2556.5'). If so, provide a note to require the installation of a backwater valve per section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.
06/09/2014 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Reqs Change SHEET 2 OF 1
1. At the flared sided curb ramp:
a. Flare the sides of the ramp to a maximum of 1:10 slope as required by ICC A117.1, Section 406 or remove the flared sides altogether and provide a return curb.
b. Show down slope arrows at a maximum slope of 1:12.
2. At the sidewalk ramp on the west end of the marked crossing, show the down slope arrow at a maximum slope of 1:12.
3. Show the width of the accessible route on the east side of the building; 5'-0" I believe.
4. Show the down slope arrows for the sidewalk ramp for the accessible parking spaces at a maximum slope of 1:12.
END OF REVIEW
06/10/2014 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL SECTION 2-10.0.0: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS

Identification and Descriptive Data

All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the landscape plan will be identical in size and location to those shown on the base plan (site plan or tentative plat). Should amendments be required to the base plan through the review process, the same amendments will be made to the landscape plan which will then be resubmitted along with the base plan.

The landscape plan will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet:

Any relevant case number for reviews or modifications that affect the site

Square footage of the vehicular use area; number of parking spaces, including the required and provided parking space calculations; and the calculation of the required number of canopy trees. Verify parking lot tree calculation is correct..

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

Additional comments may apply
06/12/2014 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
07/03/2014 CPIERCE1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed