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: DP14-0103
Parcel: 113100080

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP14-0103
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
06/16/2014 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
06/18/2014 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
06/18/2014 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: June 18, 2014
SUBJECT: Campbell Facade Development Plan Package- Engineering Review
TO: Metro TED; Attn: Lisa Bowers
LOCATION: 2723 N Campbell Avenue; T13S R14E Sec31
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP14-0103


SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package and Drainage Statement (Cypress Civil Development, 12JUN14). 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 (DP14-0103) 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 to provide a General Note to reference 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.2-06.4.8.C: Revise the development plan package to dimension the existing width of curbs, curb cuts, curb to property line and sidewalks within the public right-of-way.

4) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.A: Revise the development plan package to provide a lot combination approval through Zoning to eliminate the lot lines that run through the parcel. The parcel functions as 1 site and should be on parcel without the additional lot lines.

5) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the existing and future SVTs for the access PAAL to the Arterial MS&R Street. Refer to TSM Sec10-01.5.3 for the Near and Far Side dimensions for a PAAL/Drive to an Arterial Street.

6) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to dimension the width of the existing access along the north side of the property. Verify if this is a one way access and provide signage for clarification if it does not meet the minimum 20-foot access lane for two way traffic.

7) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to dimension the space between the proposed bollards located at the access lane between the 2 existing buildings. Verify the minimum 20 foot width for two way traffic.

8) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to clarify the accessibility of the existing angled parking space located adjacent to the southern building. The proposed sidewalk adjacent to the space seems to encroach into the access to the parking stall, clarify.

9) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.J: Revise the development plan package and the associated detail on Sheet 4 to include all dimensions for the MS&R Street adjacent to the project. Provide dimensions for future right-of-way, sidewalk area, intersection tapering (Campbell Ave and Glenn Street), SVTs, etc. Verify that required improvements are not constructed within this area.

10) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.3: Revise the development plan package to provide a Paving and Grading Note to state that a special inspection is required for the proposed 10-6" drainage pipes. The inspection must be scheduled with the acting grading inspector and the civil engineer of record along with the contractor prior to the drain pipes being covered up with the asphalt and ABC to ensure that it has been constructed properly and to prevent damage to vehicles.

11) 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.

12) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.S: Revise the development plan package to provide a 6-foot sidewalk along the frontage of the parcel in the adjacent right-of-way. Or provide written approval from TDOT Permits and Codes if the sidewalk is not required at this time.

13) 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.

14) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Per the General Note #19 on the development plan package the applicant is requesting to use one 4 cubic yard waste container and is not providing either a double enclosure or an enclosure area that is screened. Provide approval from Environmental Services for the use of one 4 cubic yard container. If the 4 cubic yard container is approved revised the development plan package to clearly show the location with construction detail.


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
06/18/2014 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Campbell Facade
Development Package (1st Review)
DP14-0103

TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 18, 2014

DUE DATE: July 15, 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 June 15, 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

2-06.1.0 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;

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, DP14-0103, adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

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

2. COMMENT: Under General Note 4 the proposed useS should be listed as "GENERAL MERCHANDISE SALES SUBJECT TO USE SPECIFICE STANDARDS 4.9.9.B.3 and 4.9.13.O, AND FOOD SERVICE SUBJECT TO USE SPECIFICE STANDARDS 4.9.4.M.1 & 5 and 4.9.13.O"

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.

3. COMMENT: Provide a general note on the cover sheet stating "THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC ARTICLE 5.4 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R) & UDC ARTICLE 5.5 GATEWAY CORRIDOR ZONE (GCZ)."

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.

2-06.4.8.A - Provide site boundary/subdivision perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system.

4. COMMENT: This site is comprised of four (4) parcels, 113-10-0050, 113-10-0060, 113-10-0070, & 113-10-0080 a lot combination is required. Provide a copy of the approved Pima County Combo Request with your next submittal.

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

5. COMMENT: Show the existing and future SVTs on the plan.

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: It appears that vehicle access is propose along the north end of the northern most building. Provide a wide dimension for this access and if utilizing the property to the north provide either a access agreement or and easement.

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.

7. COMMENT: There is an angled vehicle parking space shown at the southwest corner of the southern most building. With the addition of the proposed sidewalk shown on the plan this parking space is no longer accessible to a parking vehicle. Revise the plan or remove the parking space from the plan and if necessary revise the vehicle parking space calculation.

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.

8. COMMENT: The bicycle parking space calculation is not correct. Per UDC Table 7.4.8-1 RETAIL TRADE USE GROUP, The required number of bicycle parking spaces for multiple or mixed use development composed of more than one building are be calculated on a per building basis using the formulas provided above. That said Retail Trade Uses Less Than 50,000 sq. ft. GFA, Short-Term 1 space per 5,000 sq. ft. GFA. Minimum requirement is 2 spaces, Long-Term 1 space per 12,000 sq. ft. GFA. Minimum requirement is 2 spaces. Based on two (2) buildings Short-Term required 4, Long term required 4.

9. COMMENT: The proposed Short-Term bicycle parking location does not meet the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.C.2.a, .c & .d.

10. COMMENT: For the Short-Term bicycle parking demonstrate on the details or plan how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1.d, & .e, 7.4.9.B.2.g & .h are met.

11. COMMENT: For the Long-Term bicycle parking demonstrate on the details or plan how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.B.1.e are met.

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.

12. COMMENT: Provide a street perimeter yard dimension for the proposed façade based on the future curb location for Campbell Avenue.

13. COMMENT: Under General note 14 "PERIMETER YARDS:" clarify what the "NORTH " and "SOUTH" call outs shown under "PROVIDED" are in reference to.

14. COMMENT: Under General note 14 "PERIMETER YARDS:" "EAST (STREET)" the reference to "1.5H FROM PL (22.5)" is not correct. Per UDC Article 6.4.5.C.2 and UDC Table 6.4.5.C-1, ADT of 1,000 or greater the required setback is the great of 21' or the height of the proposed exterior building wall, measured from the back of future curb location.

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).

15. COMMENT: Provide the total square footage of each building and the height within the footprint of each building.

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.

16. COMMENT: Near the southwest corner of the southern most building there is a Keynote 15 calling out a new sidewalk but no sidewalk is shown, clarify.

17. COMMENT: As the new façade effects the existing sidewalk shown along the east side of the existing buildings, demonstrate on the plan how the requirements of TSM 7-01.4.3.A are met.

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.

18. COMMENT: Clearly show the refuse collection area on the plan.

Additional Comments;

19. COMMENT: Provide a copy of the last approved site plan with you next submittal.

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, approved combo request form.
.
07/01/2014 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Passed
07/11/2014 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Reqs Change SHEETS 2 AND 3
1. Identify all sidewalk ramps with a down directional arrow and slope percentages.
2. All new accessible routes are to comply with ICC A117.1, Section 403.3; 5% maximum running slope and 2% maximum cross slope. Add a note to that effect.
3. Show the sign locations for all accessible parking details.
END OF REVIEW
07/15/2014 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change 1) Submit a landscape plan in compliance with UDC 7.6., A.M. 2-10, & TSM 5-01.
07/15/2014 JOE LINVILLE NPPO REVIEW Passed exception

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
08/01/2014 FERNE RODRIGUEZ OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed