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: DP15-0153
Parcel: 11445262J

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP15-0153
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
09/22/2015 PAUL BAUGHMAN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: September 22, 2015
DUE DATE: October 8, 2015
SUBJECT: Pad Development at Tanque Verde and Sabino Canyon
TO: Gene Goldstein, RE
LOCATION: 7073 E Tanque Verde Road
REVIEWERS: Paul Baughman, PE, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP15-0153
SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning and Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package. The following items need to be addressed:
1) Per TSM 7-01.4.3E, AM 2-06.4.9N3 and grading plan note 42 on sheet 1, please show the scuppers under the sidewalk in the legend and on the plan with keynote callout and reference to PC/COT detail 204 or 205 depending on the amount of roof drainage from the 10 year storm.
2) Per TSM 7-01.3.3B and C the pedestrian way connection to the dumpster must be adjusted to allow for access when the Dumpster enclosure gates are pinned in the open position. Please extend the pedestrian way on sheets 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8.
3) Per TSM 7.01.4.1G the crosswalk/pedestrian way may not cross any type of stacking area or drive-through lanes. Please update crosswalk/pedestrian way hatching on sheet 2 to not cross the drive-through lane. Please note that the layout on sheet 2 does not match the layouts on sheets 3, 5, 6, 7 or 8. Please be consistent.
4) Per TSM4-01.2.1A6 the hardscape surfaces should be sloped towards the recessed planting areas. Please update sheet 5 to show keynote 11 (ie curb openings) at low spots adjacent to new vertical curb as called out by keynote 2 next to Sabino Canyon Road. Please note that Development Plan Keynote 12 on sheet 3 is not consistent with keynote 2 on sheet 5 and should be updated to reflect vertical curb instead of extruded curb.
5) Per AM 2-03.4.2H, AM 2-06.3.10, AM 2-06.4.8D and AM 2-06.4.9H14 the power pole shown on sheet 3 on the southwest corner of the northern curb opening should be shown in the legend.
6) Per AM 2-03.4.2H, AM 2-06.3.10, AM 2-06.4.8D and AM 2-06.4.9H14 the utility pedestals shown on the northwest corner of the southern curb opening should be shown in the legend.
7) Grading plan keynote 10 on sheet 5 will result in 6" of excavation to create depressed landscaping and then 12" of ripping the soil for a minimum soil disturbance depth of 18" over potential electric and communication service lines that could serve other adjacent developments. Please verify with utility companies that their infrastructure will not be damaged by ground disturbance at this depth over their lines. Per AM 2-03.4.2H please show their lines.
8) Per TSM 8-01-5.1D please add a general note stating, "A single property owner or property management company will be responsible for the management and maintenance of the solid waste collection services and storage area(s) for all development/business occupants.
9) Per AM 2-03.5.4D2 please show spot grades that correspond to minimum pavement grades. Please note that the EP grades between the pads as shown on sheet 5 (ie. 22.6 and 22.4) do not provide the minimum 0.5% pavement slope as called out on the plan sheet 5. The grades south of pad H (ie. 23.3 to 23.0) do not provide the minimum 0.5% pavement slope as called out on the plan sheet 5. Please revise spot grades and show high points and watershed boundaries for existing and proposed conditions.
10) Per AM 2-03.5.4D2 and AM 2-06.4.8E1 please show existing and proposed spot grades in the same locations such that changes in grades can be determined. A drainage statement will be required if changes in grade do not support an assumption that discharge amounts and locations are unchanged.
11) There are 2 stray call outs east of pad "H" on sheet 5 that are missing a plan keynote clarifier. Please clarify.
12) Per AM 2-06.4.3 please provide the development package number (DP15-0153) as part of the title block.
13) Per AM 2-06.4.7D please add the following utility 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."
14) Per AM 2-06.4.7E1d and AM 2-06.4.7E3 the following note will be placed on all plans/plats if the proposed project is a commercial or industrial project; "Any wastewater discharged into the public sanitary sewerage system shall meet the requirements of Pima County Ordinance No. 1991-140, or as amended."
15) Per AM 2-06.4.7E4 the following note will be provided if public and private sewers are proposed for construction or if public sewers are existing" "On-site sanitary sewers, except public sewers within public sewer easements or rights-of-way, will be private and will be constructed, operated, and maintained on a private basis. The location and method of connection to an existing public sanitary sewer is subject to review and approval by the Pima County Wastewater Management Department at the time of submittal of plumbing or building plans."
16) Per AM 2-06.4.8F please show the adjacent 24" and 54" RCP storm drains that are adjacent to this site.
17) Per AM 2-06.4.8H and AM 2-06.4.9N2 please show the flow arrows for adjacent parking areas where existing drainage is flowing away from or towards the area of site disturbance.
18) Per AM 2-06.4.9N, if drainage is altered based on flow arrows and proposed development, a drainage statement will be required.
19) Per AM 2-06.4.9G please show utility connections for Pad H on sheet 5, such as water and wastewater connections as part of phase 1 - Pad H.
20) Development plan keynote 18 is called out on sheet 3 where the "Enlarged site plan phase 1" shows a drive though. This keynote is listed as calling for existing asphalt to remain. The shading indicates that the existing asphalt is to be removed. Please use Development plan keynote 19 where appropriate.
If you have any comments questions or wish to discuss new information, please call or email me at 520-837-5007 or paul.baughman@tucsonaz.gov.
09/24/2015 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
10/07/2015 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved
10/07/2015 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:

Rezoning case;

Subdivision case;

Board of Adjustment case;

Design Development Option case;

Development Review Board (DRB) case; and/or,
Any other relevant case number for reviews or modifications that affect the site.

This site is within UDC 5.3. SCENIC CORRIDOR ZONE (SCZ)

5.3.4. SCENIC ROUTE BUFFER AREA

A. Requirement (apply to this development area only)

1. A buffer area 30 feet wide, adjacent to the MS&R future right-of-way line, is
required and shall be preserved and maintained in its natural state;

2. No development or improvements shall occur in a Scenic Route buffer area except
as provided in Section 5.3.4.C, Permitted Improvements; (See Figure 5.3-B.)

3. The buffer area shall be restored as closely to its natural state as possible In
areas where public safety or the delivery of public services precludes preservation
of existing vegetation; and,

4. The buffer area is in lieu of the landscape border required along street frontages
under Section 7.6, Landscaping and Screening Standards.

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

Additional comments may apply.
10/08/2015 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change 1. The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary cleanout (2523.1') is less than 12" below the first floor elevations (2523.1' and 2523.8'). Provide a note on the plans requiring the installation of a backwater valve when future plumbing activities take place. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.
2. Relocate the cleanout for the building sewer from Pad I to outside of the public sewer easement. Reference: Standard Detail RWRD 401 (HCS), 12/2012.
3. Note that the 4" private building sewer connections to the existing 6" public sewer must be made with wye-fittings and cannot be made using tapping saddles.
4. Show the limits of the public sewer easements.
10/09/2015 MICHAEL ST. PAUL ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Michael St Paul
Planning Technician

PROJECT: DP15-0153
7073 East Tanque Verde Road
Dunkin Donuts

TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 8, 2015

DUE DATE: October 8, 2015

1) COMMENT: 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

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

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.8 - For development package documents provide:

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

2) COMMENT: Include the tailor shop (PAD D) and the food service (PAD E) in the calculation. It is part of the cross access and parking on the site.

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; rezonings; 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.

3) COMMENT: This site is located in the Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ) (UDC Section 5.3). The entire new development is within four hundred (400) feet of the future right-of-way (F/ROW) and is subject to the development requirements for the SCZ (UDC Section 5.3.3.A). Demonstrate compliance with the structural eight requirements (UDC Sections 5.3.5.A & .B) on the site plans. Demonstrate compliance with the "additional design considerations" for the SCZ (UDC Section 5.3.10.A & .B).

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.

4) COMMENT: Provide the calculations for the entire site. List all the existing food services along with the other uses, such as retail. Demonstrate that with the new food services the site is more than fifty percent (50%) retail or equivalent with the calculations on the cover sheet.

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.G - If the project is to be phased, provide calculations, setbacks, etc., to indicate that each phase complies with all requirements as a separate entity. Show phase lines on the drawing. Show and label any temporary improvements that may be needed to make the site function for each phase as one entity. If such temporary improvements are off the site of the phase under consideration, a temporary easement or other legal documentation to assure legal use of the property is required. Note recording information.

5) COMMENT: Provide the calculations for each phase of the project.

2-06.4.9.H - Proposed Traffic Circulation

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.

6) COMMENT: Provide the parking calculations for the entire shopping center. See comments two and four.

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.

7) COMMENT: Provide the location for the long-term bicycle parking on the second phase of the project.

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.

8) COMMENT: Provide any proposed easements on the site 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.

9) COMMENT: Revise the pedestrian crosswalk for phase 2. Remove the angled crosswalk, as it is behind parking spaces.


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: All proposed signs must comply with SCZ requirements (UDC Section 5.3.10.C). Signs shall require separate permits.

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.

11) COMMENT: Demonstrate compliance with the Scenic Route Buffer Area (UDC Section 5.3.4.A). See comments by the landscape review section.

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.

Provide two copies of the revised plans and one copy of the previous plans.
10/09/2015 MSTPAUL1 ADA REVIEW Passed
10/09/2015 MICHAEL ST. PAUL H/C SITE REVIEW Approved

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
10/30/2015 KROBLES1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed