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
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE
Permit Number - T06CM05979
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/22/2006 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied | Provide fire hydrants within 300 feet of all parts of all buildings. See IFC 508.5.1. |
| 11/30/2006 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | See Zoning Comments |
| 11/30/2006 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Airport Run Tucson Commerce Center Site "A" Lots 117, 118, 119, 120 - 33,442 Sq. Ft. T06CM05952, T06CM05958, T06CM05979 & T06CM05980 Site Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 30, 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 site plan was reviewed for full code compliance with the City of Tucson Development Standards (D.S.) and Land Use Code (LUC). 2. Provide a site plan for each of the five (5) different sized parcels. These plans should have all of the information at a scale, which is clearly legible; this includes all dimensions, keynotes and detail call outs, keyed to an overall plan. Additional comments may be forth coming. 3. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.4 Provide a project address on the plan. 4. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.4 Provide a location map which meets the minimum requirements of D.S. 2-05.2.1.D, show the subject property approximately centered in the one (1) square mile area, identify conditions within the square mile area, such as City of Tucson city limits boundary. 5. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7 Provide the street setback from the back of curb to the building for Elvira Road. This setback is twenty-one (21) feet or the height of the building, which ever is greatest, measured from the back of curb. 6. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Provide a fully dimensioned layout of the off-street parking & PAAL's 7. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Dimension the required two (2) foot setback from the building to the PAAL D.S. 3-05.2.2.3 Provide a dimension from this setback to the northeast corner of the proposed refuse enclosure. 8. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Provide a dimension for the radius of the backup spur located at the southeast corner of the site. Also provide a dimension from the face of curb to the proposed fence, see D.S. 3-05.2.2.D 9. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 There appears to be a gate located just south of the refuse enclosure, label the gate and provide a clear dimension. 10. D.S. 2-02.A.2.1.9 & D.S. 2-09.0 Provide off-street bicycle parking; including materials for lighting, paving, and security; fully dimensioned layout; location; specific type of rack and the number of bicycles it supports; and the location and type of directional signage if required. See comment 18. 11. D.S. 2-02.A.2.1.11 Provide a dimension for the entrance PAAL. 12. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Provide dimensions for the width of all proposed sidewalks. There are no dimensions for the sidewalks along the north and east side of the building. There is a dimension shown on the north side of the building of 18' for the depth of the vehicle parking space and then 6'-6" to the building. Provide an overall dimension for the sidewalk. 13. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Provide a dimension for the width of the crosswalk which runs from the handicapped access aisle across the PAAL to the north. 14. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Provide a five (5) foot pedestrian refuge between the west side of the building and the PAAL. D.S. 2-08.3.1 Extend the proposed sidewalk which runs along the north side of the building to this pedestrian refuge. 15. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Detectable warnings (truncated domes) will be required at what appears to be a curb access ramp at the northeast corner of the property, clarify. ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 Sec. 406.13 16. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13 If applicable provide the location, type, size and height of existing and proposed freestanding signage and billboards. 17. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.14 Show the maneuvering area for the proposed loading zone. 18. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.25 If applicable provide existing and proposed freestanding lighting layout and type. Provide a detail; list the height of pole and type of lighting. 19. D.S. 2-02.2.2.4 The bicycle parking calculation is incorrect. Based LUC Sec 3.3.4 - 8% of the total vehicle parking spaces provide, 90% Class 1 and 10% Class 2, the requirement would be one (1) Class 1 & one (1) Class 2. LUC Sec 3.3.7.8.B Allows Class 1 may be substituted on a space-by-space basis, provided the Class 2 is not reduced more than fifty (50) percent. Per LUC Sec 3.3.7.8.A any use providing less the fifty (50) motor vehicle parking spaces may substitute Class 2 for Class 1. Revise the bicycle parking calculations to reflect either one (1) Class 1 & one (1) Class 2 or two (2) Class 2. 20. There appears to be a man gate approximately centered along the east side of the building, label. 21. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape & grading plan. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 791-5608 ext. 1180. C:\planning\site\t06cm05952.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents |
| 11/30/2006 | SREEVES1 | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | not a COT job |
| 12/08/2006 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. The site plan and landscape plan must show identical site layout to avoid conflict between the two plans. 2. Provide a site plan for each of the five (5) different sized parcels per Zoning comments. Revise landscape plans as necessary to comply with subsequent site plan submittals. 3. The landscape plan has been reviewed and no major issues were found, but cannot approve the plan until Zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 4. Additional comments may apply due to site plan changes. |
| 12/08/2006 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 12/28/2006 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: December 28, 2006 SUBJECT: Site "A" Lots 117, 118, 119, & 120- 3160-3260 E Elvira Rd- Engineering Review of site plan TO: MPE LOCATION: T15S R14E Sec16, Ward 5 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: T06CM05952, T06CM05978, T06CM05979 and T06CM05980 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the site plan, Drainage Report (prepared by DOWL Engineers), and 3-Flood Plain Use Permits (FUPs) for the above referenced property. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the site plan or FUPs at this time. The following items need to be addressed: SITE PLAN COMMENTS: 1) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.3: Provide the project address(s) on the site plan. 2) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.4: Revise the project location map on Sheet A1.0 to identify conditions within the square mile shown, such as watercourses and subdivisions adjacent to the site. Reference recorded subdivision plats by book and page numbers. 3) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.8: Provide a fully dimensioned offsite street-parking layout. Provide dimensions for PAALs and parking spaces. 4) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.8: Provide a back-up spur at the end of the row of parking located in the southeast corner of each building on the lots with a minimum of 3 feet in depth, 3-foot radii, and a wheel barrier to prevent encroachment onto any unsurfaced area. Label all dimensions for proposed back-up spurs. 5) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.8: Provide the location of all proposed gates/fences, if applicable. A minimum 24-foot width is required for all PAALs, verify that any proposed gates/fences do not encroach into the 24-foot width. 6) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.10: Provide a section for Elvira Road to verify where the Sight Visibility Triangles (SVT) are dimensioned. SVTs must be dimensioned from either the face of the existing curb or the edges of existing travel lane if on street parking is allowed. Revise keynotes # 20 and 21 for description clarification. 7) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.11: Provide minimum dimensions for all access points, labeled and shown. Refer to Tucson Code, Chapter 25, Section 25-39 for driveway and curb cut requirements. 8) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.11: Verify and label the 18-feet radii and concrete curbs per City of Tucson Transportation Access Management Guidelines (TAMG), Section 5.5 at the driveway entrances located on Elvira Road and Palo Verde Road. Refer to DS Sec.3-01.3.2.C for street development standards. For use of standard driveway aprons approval from City of Tucson Traffic Engineering is required, contact Jose Ortiz, P.E. at 791-4259 for further information. 9) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to show cross access agreements, with recording information, between the 14 parcels. Since the parcels are identified as having separate tax code identification numbers a cross access agreement is required for all access points from one parcel to the other parcel. Or provide the 6' wide landscape island that will allow for a back-up spur at the end of the row of parking with a minimum of 3 feet in depth, a 3-foot radius, and a wheel barrier to prevent encroachment onto any unsurfaced area. 10) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to show that all transitions from pedestrian circulation to vehicular use area have truncated domes per ANSI Standards A117.1-2003 Section 406.13. Provide the dimensions on the details with the minimum requirements. 11) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to label the required 5-foot wide sidewalk along both adjacent roadways and pedestrian circulation areas adjacent to a PAAL. Label all proposed pedestrian circulation paths around the buildings as 4-feet or 5-feet where adjacent to a PAAL or parking stalls. 12) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.14: Label and show on the site plan the required maneuvering area for all loading zones that are shown on the site plan. Refer to AASHTO for the national standards for turning radii. Relocate the loading zone so that it does not impede refuse collection access or minimum width requirement of PAAL. 13) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Revise the site plan to show and label the calculated 100-year floodplain limits per the submitted drainage report. Show and label the floodplain limits in a surveyable manner on the site plan. Lots 118, 119, and 120 are within a platted 100-year floodplain, per Airport Commerce Center (Bk37 PG83); the FUPs must be approved prior to site plan approval. 14) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Revise the site plan, Sheet A1.2, to label the correct finished floor elevation (FFE) and water surface elevation (WSE) as called out on the Post Development Conditions Drainage Map (Fig H-2) in the proposed drainage report. The FFE must be elevated 1-foot above the calculated 100-year WSE. 15) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Be advised that 2 elevation certificates will be required for the construction of all proposed buildings. The first elevation certificate will be required prior to the 1010/1015 inspection and the second elevation certificate will be required prior to the Certificate of Occupancy. 16) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.17: Provide on the site plan the proposed cut and fill quantities for grading plan purposes. 17) DS Sec.2-01.2.1.A.19: Revise the site plan to label the recordation information for both Elvira Road and Palo Verde Road. 18) DS Sec.2-01.2.1.A.20: Verify that all easements (utilities and sewer) have been shown on the site plan with recordation information. 19) DS Sec.2-01.2.1.A.21: Provide dimensions from street monument lines to existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, driveways, and utility lines. 20) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.32: Revise the location of the refuse containers. Collection vehicles can not impede driveway entrances or pedestrian access. Refer to DS Sec.6-01.4.2 for specifications and requirements on access and placement of containers. 21) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.33: Provide the location of existing and proposed fire hydrants within and adjacent to the site boundaries. Provide on the site plan locations of existing storm drains, catch basins, and sidewalk scuppers to verify setback dimensions from driveway access points. 22) DS Sec.11-01.9: Provide on the site plan cross section at property boundaries to ensure that the required 2-feet setback from all property boundaries to the proposed limits of grading, fill slopes, water harvesting areas, and associated erosion protection have been met. DRAINAGE REPORT: 23) DS Sec.2-02.2.2.C: Revise the Drainage Report so that the following comments have been addressed: a) The FFE and WSE on the proposed site plan must match the FFE and WSE called out in Fig. H-2 per the submitted drainage report. FFE must be 1-foot above the calculated WSE, Lot 119 shows a FFE at 0.9-feet. b) Provide a discussion in the revised drainage report showing that the post development Q2, 10, and 100 -year discharge is less than the existing Q 2, 10 and 100 -year discharge. Provide a table in an appendix that clearly shows the existing, developed and developed with basin Q2, 10, and 100 -year discharge values. The post development discharge must be less than the existing for all three storm events. c) Verify that the recommendations in the required geotechnical report have been addressed in the drainage report and the basin design and location. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: 24) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a, 10-02.14.2.6: Provide a Geotechnical Report Evaluation that addresses the following: a) Soils report should provide conformance with DS Section 10-02.14.2.6 regarding 30-foot boring for basin, and provide a discussion of the potential for hydro-collapsible soils and any recommendation for setbacks from building to proposed retention/detention basins, water harvesting basins and constructed channel. b) The soils report shall provide identification / assessment of any potentially hazardous geotechnical areas, and state any geotechnical recommendations and whether there are special provisions for the soil preparation for this development. c) Provide slope stability recommendations for any proposed constructed slopes. d) Provide percolation rates for retention basin for 5-year threshold retention requirements. GRADING PLAN: 25) DS Sec.11-01.2.1: A grading permit will be required for this project. Provide the cut and fill quantities on the revised site plan. Grading plan and a grading permit application will be required after site plan approval and prior to any construction activity. 26) Please ensure that any future grading plan will be consistent with the site plan, geotechnical report, drainage report, and all addenda. Grading standards may be accessed at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf 27) Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) requirements are applicable to this project. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) and text addressing stormwater controls for all areas affected by construction activities related to this development will be required with a grading plan submittal. For further information, visit www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised site plan, a revised drainage report and a geotechnical report that address the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the site plan, drainage report and geotechnical report. Please enclose "redlines" with the resubmittal package for reference. If you have any questions, or to schedule an appointment, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 1189. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01/03/2007 | VFLORES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |