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: DP14-0146
Parcel: 10408075Q

Address:
4421 N ORACLE RD

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: DEV PKG

Permit Number - DP14-0146
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
09/02/2014 SPOWELL1 START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
09/02/2014 RONALD BROWN ADA REVIEW Passed
09/03/2014 MARTIN BROWN COT NON-DSD FIRE Denied
09/12/2014 MICHAEL ST. PAUL ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Michael St Paul
Planning Technician

PROJECT: DP14-0146
4425 North Oracle Road
Longhorn Stackhouse (Food Service)

TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 12, 2014


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

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

The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az

This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above

1. Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, An applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One year Expiration date is .

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

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.1.1 PURPOSE
This standard has been prepared for the purpose of informing applicants of the submittal and review requirements for development package documents to assure proper and adequate information is presented in a consistent manner, thereby providing the basis for an efficient and timely review. The development package documents are prepared in support of applications for building permits and related reviews.

The information that is requested establishes the basis upon which the project will be approved and could affect what is required of the property in the future, should there be a proposal for expansion or for a different use of the property.

This standard does not waive any applicable city regulations or codes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS


2-06.3.10 - A legend that shows and describes all symbols used on the drawing is to be provided, preferably on the first sheet.

1) COMMENT: Provide a legend on the first sheet for all symbols.

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

2) COMMENT: Provide a key plan on the first sheet.

2-06.3.12 - An index of sheets in the development package shall be provided on the first sheet.

3) COMMENT: Provide continuous number for all the sheets and in the sheet index. Do not include sheets that are not to be in the set.

2-06.4.0 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).

4) COMMENT: Revise the numbering on the sheets to match the numbering index.

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.

5) COMMENT: Provide the Development Package number (DP14-0146) adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

2-06.4.4 - The project-location map to be located on the first sheet of the development package in the upper right corner, shall cover approximately one square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of three inch equals one mile, and provide the following information.

2-06.4.2.B - Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and all streets that abut the subject property; and,

6) COMMENT: Add the Auto Mall Wash to the location map.


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.D - Utilities Note
All development package documents are to include the following note: "Any relocation or modification of existing utilities and/or public improvements necessitated by the proposed development will be at no expense to the public."

7) COMMENT: Provide the above note on the site plan.


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.

8) COMMENT: Provide all the street information for Wetmore Road and Oracle Road on the site plan. (The ALTA provided with the set, does not provide such information, mislabels the street and cannot find the zoning.) Provide all the adjacent parking area information on the site plan. Provide fully dimensioned PAALs and parking for the adjacent parking area within fifty (50) feet of the new development and parking.

2-06.4.8.B - All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is/are provided.

9) COMMENT: Identify, delineate and dimension all existing easements as described above.

2-06.4.8.C - The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks.

10) COMMENT: Provide the information on the site plan for both Oracle Road and Wetmore Road.

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

11) COMMENT: Provide all the existing utility information on the plans. Remove the note on Sheet 4 that states: "Drawings do not purport to show all existing utilities."

2-06.4.8.G - Other significant conditions on the site, such as major rock outcrops, structures, fences, walls, etc., shall be shown. These elements should be indicated in a different line weight than the proposed improvements and labeled "to be removed" or "to be retained."

12) COMMENT: Provide all the relevant information, as described above, within fifty (50) feet of the new development.

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

2-06.4.9.A - Draw in all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements.

13) COMMENT: Provide the above lot line information on the site plan.

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

14) COMMENT: It appears that there may be a lot split or reconfiguration. So, is there? If a lot split is in the offing a subdivision may be required.

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

15) COMMENT: Provide the existing and future sight-visibility triangles (SVTs) for both Wetmore and Oracle Roads on the site plan.

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

16) COMMENT: Provide the above information for both streets on the site 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.

17) COMMENT: Provide all of the above information on improved and effected areas of the parking lots.

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.

18) COMMENT: Provide the additional information, such as the PAALs with dimensions on the adjacent vehicle use areas.

2-06.4.9.H.5.c - Show all loading zones, vehicle maneuverability fully dimensioned, and access route. Provide as a note the number of loading spaces required, the number provided, whether the loading space is a Type A or B as provided in UDC Section 7.5.4.

19) COMMENT: Clearly delineate, in a plans view, with dimensioned the loading spaces required and provided. The required is one (1) Type A (12 x 35). Revise the calculation to indicate both the actually required and the provided. Depict the maneuverability as required on the site plan. You refer to a sheet that does not exist.

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.

20) COMMENT: Provide fully dimensioned plan view details. Also dimension the bicycle use areas on the site plan. Leave nothing ambiguous about this in the details and on the site plan.

2-06.4.9.J - If street dedication is not required or proposed and the project site is adjacent to a Major Street or Route, draw the Major Street right-of-way lines for those streets. (Add the MS&R future sidewalk, right-of-way lines, sight visibility triangles, etc.)

21) COMMENT: Depict the future right-of-way (F/ROW) on Wetmore Road and Oracle Road. Provide, with dimensions, the current a future curb locations, sidewalks, SVTs and the like on the site plan.. The F/ROW on Wetmore is one-hundred twenty (120) feet plus the intersection widening which brings it out to one hundred fifty (150) feet to the taper. See comments from Traffic and Engineering for further details. The plans presented do not reflect the F/ROW.

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.

22) COMMENT: If there are any proposed easements provide all the above information on the site plan.


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

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


There is no real site plan sheet. Create one.

The incomplete information for Wetmore and the future right-of-way must be properly addressed.

Provide the cross-access and cross-parking agreement.
09/17/2014 RONALD BROWN ZONING HC REVIEW Reqs Change SHEET C1.1
1. Provide an accessible route from the new Longhorn's to the existing Ross building complex.
SHEET C1.3
2. Accessible Parking Area Detail
a. Provide concrete wheel stops as required by zoning, verify with zoning.
b. The ramp detail on sheet C7.1 reference from the ramps in front of the accessible parking is a curb ramp as depicted at the trash loading area. Provide a separate detail for these two sidewalk ramps without detectable warning strips.
c. The note "Flush Curb" arrows are pointing to the wrong element.
SHEET C3.1
3. Referece comment 1 above.
SHEET C6.1
4. Insure all accessible route slopes comply with the 2009 ICC A117.1, Section 403.3; 5% max running slope and 2% max slope cross slope.
END OF REVIEW
09/18/2014 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change 1. 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. Remove any notes relating to how the site utilities are to be constructed.
2. Provide the rim elevation and invert of the next upstream sanitary manhole (Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD) reference number 9743-03). Determine the need for a backwater valve per Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.
09/24/2014 ZELIN CANCHOLA COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Approved Please indicate location of new and/or proposed fire hydrants. Refer to section 503 of the 2012 International Fire Code for spacing requirements.
Fire Department would prefer FDC (fire department connection) not be located in the back of the building. This can be addressed during (deferred) fire sprinkler submittal.
Please be advised that the underground fire service is also a deffered submittal. Approval of the development plan will not constitute approval of the underground fire service.
09/25/2014 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied On sheet 4, Grading and drainage notes 5 please reference the current standards. The Development Standards are no longer effective. Please refer to the correct technical standards (TS) throughout the plans.
Complete the sentence in note 15 on the same sheet.
Complete and submit a complete SWPPP. Include a copy of the ADEQ checklist and indicate where each required element is presented. (Tucson Code 26-42.b)
Provide the hold harmless note as required by TS 2-06.4.B.1
This project is part of a larger site, show how the whole site functions on completion of this project. AM 2-06.4.8.A
Clearly show existing and proposed drainage facilities for the site. The grading and drainage notes reference proposed underground drainage facilities. Show the referenced facilities on the plans. AM 2-06.4.8.F
Clarify the right-of-way adjacent to the project. The information on the civil site plan doesn't seem to match the ALTA survey. Clearly indicate the existing and future right of way boundaries. Clearly show sight visibility triangles for all driveway locations. TS 2-06.4.H.
Clearly dimension the solid waste container enclosures and ensure they meet the dimensional requirements of TS 8-01
Clearly show the turning radii for the access route to the solid waste enclosures to demonstrate compliance with TS 8-01.
Provide sufficient detail for the solid waste enclosures to demonstrate compliance with TS 8-01.
Clarify the elevations on the grading and drainage plan. General Grading and Drainage Note 15 is not consistent with General Note 2. Revise this and all other notes where inconsistencies occur.

Loren Makus, EIT
Senior Engineering Associate
09/25/2014 TOM MARTINEZ OTHER AGENCIES AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION Reqs Change The Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) has reviewed the Development Plans for the proposed Longhorn Steakhouse to be located on the west side of SR 77 (Oracle Road) north of the Oracle Road/Wetmore Road intersection. The following comments are provided:

The perpendicular sidewalk connection from the proposed Longhorn Steakhouse to the existing sidewalk along SR 77 (Oracle Road) is acceptable. Adequate space needs to be provided between the sidewalk connection and on-site parking.
A Detail needs to be provided on the plans showing how the perpendicular sidewalk ties into the existing sidewalk along Oracle Road. An expansion joint shall be provided where the perpendicular sidewalk ties into the existing sidewalk.
The existing screen wall located parallel to the property line along Oracle Road is within ADOT right-of-way. We are requesting to remove the existing screen wall including the foundation. If the developer desires a screen wall, it needs to be located outside ADOT right-of-way.
ADOT right-of-way shall be labeled on the plans.
Sheet C3.1 - Paving Construction Notes B and K: Since all work in ADOT right-of-way shall be to ADOT standards and specifications, Notes B and K do not apply for work in ADOT right-of-way. The plans need to be revised accordingly.
As per Intergovernmental Agreement between the State of Arizona and the City of Tucson, the City will issue the “State Highway Right-of-Way Encroachment Permit” for work in the State right-of-way at this location. ADOT will assist the City with reviewing and approving the “Off-Site Improvement Plans” for this project.

We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Development Plans and are looking forward to working with the City of Tucson towards the satisfactory completion of the development.



Maria Deal

Transportation Engineering Specialist

1221 S. 2nd Ave.

Tucson, AZ 85713

520.388.4235

mdeal@azdot.gov
09/26/2014 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change 1) Revise the plans to provide a street landscape border at Wetmore Rd. UDC 7.6.4.C

2) Revise the parking areas to comply with UDC 7.6.4.B.1.a.1. "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)."

3. Demonstrate compliance with UDC 5.4., if applicable. No portion of the MS&R right-of-way area that is publicly owned shall be used toward complying with UDC standards, unless specifically stipulated.
09/26/2014 JOE LINVILLE NPPO REVIEW Approved
09/29/2014 PATRICIA GEHLEN ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Reqs Change This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items:

1) Two rolled sets of the plans
2) A disk containing all items submitted
3) All items requested by review staff
4) All items needed to approve these plans

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
11/06/2014 AROMERO4 APPROVAL SHELF Completed
11/06/2014 AROMERO4 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
11/06/2014 CPIERCE1 REJECT SHELF Completed