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: T06CM01276
Parcel: 10605122E

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T06CM01276
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
03/17/2006 SUZANNE BOHNET ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied To: Nicolas Bond
DATE: March 31, 2006
FROM: Suzanne Bohnet
Engineering Division

SUBJECT: 3730 N. Fairview Ave.
Apartments
Site plan T06CM01276 (First Review)
T13S, R13E, Section 26

Before proceeding any further on your proposed project details, please be aware that N. Fairview Ave. is a mapped Major Street & Route (MS&R) with a future Right-Of-Way (ROW) width of 76 feet. The future ROW has a serious impact on the subject property and needs to be addressed before addressing any comments on the submitted Site Plan and Drainage Report. The MS&R Plan calls for all future ROW's to be located along the section line, which is sometimes not the same as the existing constructed street centerline. Per Paving Plan Number I-72-098, the future ROW centerline of N. Fairview Ave. (the section centerline) will be located along the back of the existing curb, from which one-half of the future ROW width must be measured. Please contact Gary Oaks of Urban Planning and Design, 791-4505, for specific details with regards to N. Fairview Ave. at the location of the subject property before addressing any of the Site Plan and Drainage Report comments listed below.

RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Site Plan, Drainage Report.

The Site Plan (SP) and Drainage Report (DR) cannot be approved as submitted. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the SP with your next submittal.

Site Plan:
1. Please provide the dimensions of the existing ROW from the centerline to existing/proposed curbs, sidewalks, drive and utility lines.
2. Please provide the dimensions of the future ROW from the centerline to existing/proposed curbs, sidewalks, drive and utility lines.
3. The sidewalk width on an MS&R with a future ROW width of 76 feet is 6 feet, per the Active Practices Guidelines effective 1/8/01. Please adjust the proposed sidewalk accordingly.
4. Please provide the future sight visibility triangles.
5. Dumpster enclosures are required to have steel pipes between the container and the enclosure's rear and side (underline emphasis added) walls to prevent the container from damaging the enclosure while being serviced, per D.S. 6-01.4.2C.2. The minimum dimension between the side posts is 10 feet per D.S. 6-01-4.2C.1. Please alter the dumpster enclosure detail C on sheet 4 accordingly.
6. Please include a detail for the proposed drainage openings in the block wall proposed along the eastern boundary to the Detail Sheet of the Site Plan.
7. Please provide a detail for the vertical sidewalk curb in front of the parking area.

Drainage Report:
1. There is a possible typographical error in the first paragraph of the Drainage Report on page 5 in the section discussing Onsite Drainage (section 3.2, line 3) that states, "The runoff generated from the PAAL will be released onto Fairview Avenue, along with the reduced offsite runoff" (underline emphasis added). Should the word "offsite" be "onsite" instead? Please clarify.
2. The calculation for the drainage openings along the eastern property boundary proposed block wall is sound, however the placement of the drainage openings (as shown on Exhibit 2 of the DR and on Sheet 3 of the SP) is of some concern. It appears from aerial pictures that the existing building (and possible wall?) from the subdivision to the east is blocking drainage in the south half of the subject property, which would consequently block the drainage through the proposed drainage holes for that half of the proposed wall. Please re-analyze the location of the drainage holes with respect to the potential blockage of drainage from the building to the east and, if necessary, re-locate the drainage holes to accommodate the off-site runoff without adverse flooding or ponding for the existing development to the east.
3. Exhibit 2 of the DR shows 4 drainage holes along the western water-harvesting basin wall to accommodate flow produced by larger than 100-year events. However, the SP does not reflect the proposed western drainage holes. Please clarify.
4. Please clarify that the 15% reduction in existing onsite runoff will be satisfied by the drainage off the roofs of the structures. If so, please show drainage arrows on the roofs indicating the direction of drainage will be towards the water harvesting basins rather than the PAAL.
5. Please clarify the purpose of the impermeable eastern boundaries of the water harvesting basins.
6. Please clarify the reasoning of the statement, "The reduction in contributing drainage area will provide the required 15% peak-flow reduction" (from Section 3.2 of the DR, 2nd paragraph, 2nd line). The Standards call for a 15% reduction of existing drainage PLUS detention of the entire increase in drainage discharge caused by development. Reducing the contributing drainage area in order to meet the 15% reduction is not acceptable. Please re-analyze.
7. Please clarify the statement from Section 3.2 of the DR, 2nd paragraph that states "… the runoff from the remainder of the site will be directed to two (2) water-harvesting basins …". Per the drainage flows on the SP and Exhibit 2 of the DR, drainage produced by the paving of the parking area is directed to the center of the PAAL to join with off-site runoff directed towards N. Fairview Ave.


Additional Notes:
1. The amount of fill called out on the SP requires a Grading Plan (GP) and Grading Permit. Due to the size of the lot and the amount of fill, there is no need to prepare and submit either a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan or a Soils Report.

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1188.

Suzanne Bohnet, Engineer Associate
City of Tucson / Development Services Department
201 N. Stone Avenue / P.O. Box 27210
Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210
(520) 791-5550 x1188 office
(520) 879-8010 fax
03/24/2006 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
03/30/2006 PETER MCLAUGHLIN NPPO REVIEW Denied 1) Based on the two viable native trees existing on site, an NPP plan is required. Provide a plan detailing mitigation. It is recommended that at least one of the two existing viable velvet mesquites may be preserved in place to meet the 30 percent requirement for mitigation.
DS 2-15
03/30/2006 PETER MCLAUGHLIN LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1) Add the legal description and address of the site to the landscape plan.
DS 2-07.2.1.B.1

2) One canopy tree must be provide for every thirty-three (33) linear feet of landscape border or fraction thereof. To meet this requirement, add one more tree within the landscape border adjacent to the duplex property abutting the eastern 1/3 of the north property line.
LUC 3.7.2.4

3) Dimension the minimum width and label the square footage measured from the inside of tree planters in the vehicle use area. An unpaved area, which is a minimum of thirty-four (34) square feet in area and four (4) feet in width, must be provided for each canopy tree.
LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.c
DS 2-07.2.2.A.2.e

4) Dimension the width of the landscape border on the landscape plan.
DS 2-07.2.2.A.2.f

5) Fairview Avenue is a designated Major Street & Route. A 30" continuous screen along the MS&R frontages for vehicle use area must be provided per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. Indicate the location and height of the screen on the landscape plan.

6) If applicable, add the future sight-visibility triangle (SVTs) to the site plan and landscape plan. Also, regarding existing MS&R street, Fairview Avenue, show dimensions of both future and existing right-of-way, and any utility locations. DS 2-05.2.4.D.2

7) It is unclear from the submitted plans if there is a proposed retention basin near the street frontage along Fairview Avenue. If so, add a cross section detail of the basin. Indicate its slope ratios, depth and area per DS 2-07.2.2.B.5. Basin design is to be in accordance with DS 10-01 Refer to pp. 78 & 79 of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual for design criteria regarding basin slopes/depths. Basin slopes may not exceed 2: 1 for protected slopes for depths less than three feet. However structures, such as retaining walls, are acceptable for up to 35% of the basin perimeter.
DS 10-01.4, LUC 3.7.4.3

8) All disturbed areas including adjacent right of ways shall be treated with ground cover such as decomposed granite to help reduce dust pollution per LUC 3.7.2.7.
04/29/2006 DAVID RIVERA ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Denied see zoning comments
04/29/2006 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office
FROM: David Rivera
Principal Planner

PROJECT: T06CM01276
Fairview Apartments
Site Plan

TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 29, 2006

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with redlines and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed.

1. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with development standards 2-02 and LUC development criteria for a Multi-family Residential Apartment complex. Please address the following comments and resubmit the plans and requested documents for review.

Please remove all references to condominium development from the plan sheets.

2. Add to sheet one the legal description for this property.

Per the most current information on the COT Mapguide, the development is proposed over two separate parcels, which appear to be owned by separate individuals. Please confirm that the same owner owns both parcels to be developed as one.

A Pima County Assessor's tax code combo and a recorded COT lot combo covenant will be required prior to approval of the site plan. A copy of the lot combo covenant has been attached with this packet for your convenience and use. I f you have any questions related to this comment please feel free to call me at 791-5608 ext. 1181.

The legal description must be added based on the combination of the two lots and the existing legal description. Additional comments may be forthcoming on this issue.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.2

3. Add to the location map, the adjacent section corners.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.4

4. All existing structures must be depicted on the plan. A separate sheet may be included that provides the existing conditions of the two parcels. Indicate the location of all structures, parking and utilities and label all structures to be demolished.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.6

5. Please revise the following information related to building setbacks.

a. The required building setback is based on perimeter yard indicator CC. The adjacent zoning to the north, east, and south is R-3. The minimum setback requirement is the greatest of ten feet or three quarters the height of the structure. The height is measured from design grade along any given point of the structure. Please dimension on cross section drawing on sheet four all proposed parapet heights and top of wall for the proposed decks. It appears that a greater than fifteen foot setback may be required along the east boundary and a greater than ten foot setback along the north and south boundaries may be required. Please keep in mind the overall building height is measured from design grade along any given point along the footprint of the building.
b. The street building setback is based on the greatest of 21 feet or the height of the structure not ten feet or ¾ the height as noted per keynote 25. Revise the building setback keynote accordingly. Also, Fairview Avenue is a collector street on the MS&R map and is labeled as a 76-foot right of way. It is important to clearly depict and dimension the existing and future right of way conditions for Fairview Avenue. The existing and future curb locations must be labeled, drawn, and dimensioned on the plan. The existing and future street building setbacks must be dimensioned based on the back of curb location. See the Engineering review comments for more information related to this issue. Additional comments may be forth coming.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.7

6. Based on the type of development one handicapped parking spaces is required. The space must be a van accessible space with an eight-foot wide access aisle. The plan has been depicted with the required parking space but should be relocated as indicated on sheet of the redlines to accommodate a redesign of the pedestrian circulation. See redlines sheet two.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.8

7. The bicycle parking facility has been drawn and labeled as required. A fully dimensioned detail drawing of the facility must be included on sheet four. The detail drawing must be drawn based on the proposed location with all the maneuvering dimensions as listed in DS 2-09, type of surface, manufacturer of the rack, number of bicycles the rack supports, and type of lighting proposed. See DS 2-09 for more information on the facility dimensions, clearances etc.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.9

8. Both existing and future sight visibility triangles must be drawn, labeled, and dimensioned on the plan. See the Engineering review comments related to this issue.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.10

9. The pedestrian circulation must be redesigned. For safety concerns, the crosswalk in front of the Dumpster location must be removed. Also the access ramp in the same location must be removed. It is preferred that the location of the crosswalk and access ramp be relocated to comply DS 2-08 related to continuous pedestrian. See redlines for possible alternative or redesign to provide a safe continuous circulation route.

The H.C. access ramps and crosswalk must be provided at the driveway entrance to the site. The access ramps must be provided with the required truncated domes.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.12

The access ramp for the handicap parking space may not be placed in the access aisle. Also add a keynote and label on the plan the handicapped parking sign.

10. If applicable indicate the location of any proposed or existing freestanding signage on the site including billboards. The location, type, and size must be labeled.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.13

11. The existing and future right of way for Fairview Avenue must indicate don the plan. The recordation information related to the right of way must be labeled. See the Engineering review comments related to the issue.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.19

12. If applicable, all easements of record must be graphically shown on the plan together with recording docket and page reference. The location, width, and purpose must be labeled.
DS 2-20.2.1.A.20

13. If applicable, indicate proposed freestanding Existing and proposed lighting layout and type. The location, type of lighting, and height of the poles and light fixtures must be labeled.
DS2-02.2.1.A.25

14. See the Landscape reviewer comments related to requirements for landscape buffers, screening and NPPO.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.27

15. List the existing use of the sites. DS 2-02.2.1.A.31

16. Please review the lot coverage calculation for compliance. It appears that the lot coverage is 61 percent and the lot coverage listed is 51 percent. Revise as required.
DS 2-02.2.2.A.3

17. Include on sheet one a density calculation, the number of units allowed and the number of units proposed.

18. If additional right of way is required for this development and it will affect the design of the project please ensure that the plan is designed with the future right of way in mind. An additional site plan that depicts how the development will meet in code in the future must be included in the next submittal.

19. Submit copies of the building plans with the next site plan submittal.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608.

DGR C:\planning\cdrc\DSD\T06CM01276.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
06/08/2006 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed
05/19/2006 DELMA ROBEY OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed