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: DP14-0243
Parcel: 11304112B

Address:
3448 N 1ST AV

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP14-0243
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/07/2015 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
01/07/2015 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
01/12/2015 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change Revise the site drawing to include the following information:
a. The location and size of water lines, water meters, and fire hydrants.
b. The location of sanitary and storm sewers, including the pipe diameter and the invert and rim elevations of all manholes and cleanouts; along with the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD) reference number.
c. The points of connection to existing public sewers.
d. Any existing or proposed utility easements
Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual No. 2-06.0.0, Section 4.8 and Section 107.2.13, IBC 2012.
01/16/2015 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Academy of Math and Science Office Addition
Development Package (1st Review)
DP14-0243

TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 20, 2015

DUE DATE: January 23, 2015

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a detailed 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 December 12, 2014.

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.

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.1 - The name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s), or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional, such as a surveyor, architect, landscape architect, or engineer. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines.

1. COMMENT: The property owner information does not match what is shown on the Pima County Geographic Information Systems

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

2. COMMENT: Remove the address from the title block, see comment 4.

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;

3. COMMENT: Provide a brief legal description within the title block on all 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.

4. COMMENT: Remove the address from the title block and provide it adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

5. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP14-0243, 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.A - Show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area;

6. COMMENT: Show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area

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.

7. COMMENT: Revise General Note 4 to include "SUBJECT TO USE SPECIFIC STANDARD 4.9.13.P".

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.

8. 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)."

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

2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Percentage and area in square feet of building and accessory building coverage;

9. COMMENT: Remove the reference to "F.A.R. CALCULATION" from the plan as it is no longer applicable.

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.

10. COMMENT: Provide the site boundary perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot.

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 (SVT's). On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section.

11. COMMENT: Show all required SVT's 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.

12. COMMENT: Per UDC TABLE 7.4.6-1: MOTOR VEHICLE USE AREA DIMENSIONS 90 degree vehicle parking the minimum PAAL width is 24'. That said the 21' shown on the plan does not meet this requirement.

13. COMMENT: Provide a backup spur at the east end of the proposed vehicle parking that meets UDC Section 7.4.6.F.4.a, .b, & .c.

14. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.6.H.1 Barriers, such as post barricades or wheel stop curbing, are required in a vehicular use area to prevent vehicles from extending beyond the property lines, to prevent cars from damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings, overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas, and/or driving onto unimproved portions of the site. That said provide some type of barrier along the south east vehicle parking area.

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.

15. COMMENT: Under the "PARKING TABULATIONS" the gross floor area does not appear to be correct. 1,840 + 450 = 2,290 not 2,240.

16. COMMENT: The required number of vehicle parking spaces is not correct. 2,290/300 = 7.6 or 8 required. See UDC Section 7.4.3.G.

17. COMMENT: The wheel stop location shown on the plan is not correct, see UDC Figure 7.4.6-C.

18. 2-06.4.9.H.5.b - If any of the required parking is located off-site as permitted by the UDC, a drawing of that

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.

19. COMMENT: Provide a short and long term bicycle parking space calculation on the plan. This calculation should give the number required and provided.

20. COMMENT: The "RACK ELEVATION" shown on detail 1 sheet 3 does not match the short term layout proposed on sheet 2. Also the distance shown between racks is not correct, see UDC Figure 7.4.9-C.

21. COMMENT: The 2'-6" dimension shown from the center of the short rack shown on detail 4 sheet 3 is not correct. Per UDC Figure 7.4.9-C this dimension is from the side of the rack.

22. COMMENT: Show the required 2' x 6' short term bicycle parking space on detail 4, see UDC 7.4.9.B.2.f and UDC Figure 7.4.9-C.

23. COMMENT: Demonstrate on the plan or detail how the requirement of UDC 7.4.9.B.1.e is met.

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.)

24. COMMENT: Show the future curb and sidewalk for 1st Avenue on the plan.

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).

25. COMMENT: Provide the height of the existing and proposed buildings within the footprint on the plan.

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.

26. COMMENT: Per TSM 7-01.4.3.A Width. All sidewalks must be a minimum of four feet wide and installed to avoid any obstruction which decreases the minimum width to less than four feet. That said it appears that the proposed sidewalk width is reduced to less than 4'-0" at the gas meter. A technical Standards Modification Request (TSMR) will need to be processed and approved prior to approval of this plan. If approved as a general note provide the TSMR Case number, date approved what was modified and if applicable any conditions of approval.

27. COMMENT: Provide a width dimension for the proposed sidewalk shown south of the proposed addition.

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.

28. COMMENT: As the existing dumpster is located on the adjacent property provide a copy of a recorded access agreement.

Additional Comments;

29. COMMENT: Provide a copy of the last approved site plan with your next submittal.

30. COMMENT: Remove all building code information from the development package.

31. COMMENT: Why have permitting notes and code tabulations been duplicated on sheets 1 & 2?

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, last approved site plan & recorded access agreement.
01/21/2015 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed prior to landscape approval.

Additional comments may apply
01/21/2015 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: January 21, 2015
DUE DATE: January 23, 2015
SUBJECT: Academy of Math & Science Development Plan Package- Engineering Review
TO: Carhuff & Cueva Architects; Attn: Paul De La Torre
LOCATION: 3448 N 1st Ave
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP14-0243

SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package. 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.2-06.4.2.B: Revise the development plan package to include a brief legal description of the subject property within the Title Block.

2) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: Revise the development plan package to remove the administrative street address from the Title Block and provide it adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

3) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP14-0243) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets

4) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.A.6: Revise the development plan package to provide a general note stating "This project is designed to meet the overlay zone criteria UDC Article.5.4, Major Streets and Routes Setback Zone."

5) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.A: Revise the development plan package to provide the site boundary perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, together with distances in feet for all property lines.

6) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.C: Revise the development plan package to label all streets as "Public" and as "MS&R Arterial."

7) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.C: Revise the development plan package to dimension the existing width of curbs and curb cuts within the public right-of-ways.

8) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.C: Revise the development plan package to dimension the existing width of the alleyway adjacent to the site.

9) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.F: Revise the development plan package to label all existing storm drainage facilities adjacent to the site with the Improvement Plan Number in plan view.

10) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the existing and future SVTs for the driveway entrances, refer to TSM Sec.10-01.5.3 for line of sight matrix. On a designated MS&R street, the SVTs are based on the MS&R cross-section.

11) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan package to provide a detail with dimensions for the proposed angled parking along the northern property line. The parking space dimensions and PAAL widths cannot be verified until all dimensions and angles are provided as per UDC Article 7 Sec.7.4.6.D.1 and Table 7.4.6-1.

12) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the minimum 24-foot PAAL width onsite along the south side of the new parking spaces. Per UDC TABLE 7.4.6-1 the minimum PAAL width for 90 degree vehicle parking is 24 feet.

13) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the required backup spur at the east end of the proposed vehicle parking per UDC Sec.7.4.6.F.4.

14) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a Revise the development plan package to label the required vehicular separation around the parking lot adjacent to the alleyway and the southeast portion of the site. Per UDC Sec.7.4.6.H.1 Barriers, such as post barricades or wheel stop curbing, are required in a vehicular use area to prevent vehicles from extending beyond the property lines, to prevent cars from damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings, overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas, and/or driving onto unimproved portions of the site.

15) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a Revise the development plan package and associated details to correctly label the 2.5 foot overhang for the proposed wheel stop. Refer to UDC Figure 7.4.6-C for the 2.5 foot overhang dimension.

16) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.J: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the future curb and sidewalk widths for the Arterial MS&R Street.

17) 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.

18) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to relocate the onsite handicap access ramp adjacent to the southwest corner of the building to be outside of the vehicular use area. The ramp cannot extend out into the PAAL.

19) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package and associated sidewalk details to either provide the referenced MAG Details or provide a reference to the PC/COT Standard Details for Public Improvements.

20) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension the required 4-foot sidewalk widths per TSM Sec.7-01.4.3.A. Plan view calls out 3-feet which does not meet the minimum requirements. A TSMR application and fess will need to be processed and approved if 3-foot sidewalks are proposed.

21) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Revise the development plan package to label the existing refuse container onsite. It appears from Keynote #16 that the existing dumpster is located in the Alleyway and per aerial view it appears that it is located on the adjacent property. Clarify the location of the refuse container and provide written approval from Environmental Services for the continued use of any refuse containers that do not meet the minimum code requirements.


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
01/22/2015 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved
01/22/2015 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Reqs Change SHEET 2
1. Add a note stating that all accessible route slopes are to comply with the 2009 ICC A117.1, Section 403.3; 5% maximum running slope and 2% maximum cross slope.
SHEET 3
2. At detail 5
a. Add a 9'-0" wide dimension for the van accessible parking space.
b. Indicate maximum 2% grade slopes in all directions for the accessible parking and aisle spaces.
c. Delete the note about walk sloping away from building at 1/4" per foot and add comment 1.
END OF REVIEW

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
01/27/2015 KROBLES1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed