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 - T07CM00963
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/16/2007 | DAVE MANN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/28/2007 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: T07CM00963 1701 W. Grant Rd. Site Plan TRANSMITTAL: 03/30/07 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. Provide a copy of the last stamped and approved site plan. This is required in order to complete this current review. 2. There has been a tax parcel lot combination completed for this site. A Covenant Regarding the Use of Real Property is required to be completed and recorded. Provide a copy of the covenant and provide on the site plan the recording (docket and page) information. 3. DS 2-02.2.1.8 Per LUC Sec. 3.3.7.3 all vehicular use areas shall be surfaced with one (1) of the following materials. A. Asphaltic concrete B. Cement concrete C. A penetration treatment of bituminous material and seal coat of bituminous binder and mineral aggregate. The indicated existing equipment storage area is considered a vehicular use area and must comply with the above mentioned section of the LUC. Recycled asphalt over compacted subgrade does not meet this code requirement. The number of required handicap parking spaces is based on the IBC Sec. 1106. With 156 parking spaces provided the number of handicap parking spaces required is six (6) with a least one of the spaces being van accessible. Revise plan. Provide in the calculations the number of required handicap parking spaces and the number of provided spaces. The site plan indicates that the handicap parking signs are located between the wheel stop and the sidewalk. This area is for overhanging of the vehicle and the sign cannot be located in this area. Revise. On the detail for the handicap parking spaces clearly indicate the maximum slope of the parking and access aisle surfaces as 1:48 as per ANSI 117.1-2003 Sec. 502.5. The access aisles as per note #12 are called out as handicap ramps. Per ANSI 117.1-2003 Sec. 502.5 access aisles must be at the same level as the parking spaces they serve. Provide handicap ramps at the front of the access aisle in the sidewalk area. (provide details of handicap ramps) Per DS 3-05.2.3.C.1 Vehicular use areas must be provided with post barricades or wheel stop curbing to prevent damaging landscape areas and overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas. Provide for the parking spaces along the south property line (overhanging into landscape) and for the parking spaces on the north side of the building (overhanging sidewalk area, minimum sidewalk width 4'). The number of parking spaces indicated in the calculations does not match the number of indicated parking spaces on the site plan. Clarify. The number of parking spaces along the east property line is indicated as 47 spaces but by count it appears to be 42. The required number of parking spaces is 154 and 153 have been indicated on the site plan. 4. DS 2-02.2.1.9 Note #17 indicates class one bicycle parking located inside of the building. A note on the building foot print indicates class one parking out side of the building. Clarify. If the class one parking spaces are located inside the building clearly indicate the location on the floor plan and indicate the required 5' access area. Bicycle parking calculations and notes on plans indicating the number of required and provided spaces are in conflict. Clarify Please provide a plan view detail of the proposed class 1 and class 2 bicycle parking spaces. Single rack spaces placed in a row will allow a minimum of seventy -two (72) inch length per bicycle parking space and a minimum of thirty (30) inches between outer spaces of racks. A five (5) foot wide access aisle measured from the front or rear of the seventy-two (72) inch long parking space will be provided beside each row. Lighting will be provided such that all facilities are thoroughly illuminated and visible from adjacent sidewalks, parking lots, or buildings, during working hours. The surface of the facility can be surfaced the same as for motor vehicle parking or with a minimum of one (1) inch thickness of one-fourth (1/4) inch aggregate material. DS 2-09.5.1, DS2-09.5.2, DS 2-09.5.4, & DS 2-09.6.2 Bicycle parking provided on the site plan does not meet the requirements of revised DS (Development Standard) 2-09. Per DS 2-09.4.1 Class 2 bicycle parking facilities will be located no more than fifty (50) feet from the main building entrance(s) and will be along the front side of the building as well as along other sides of the building that has an entrance. Bicycle access through the development will be separate from the pedestrian ways. Vehicular access may be used as bicycle access. Bicycle access to a parking facility may cross a pedestrian way at a right angle (DS2-09.3.2). The class 2 bicycle parking spaces cannot be located in a vehicular use area without a barrier or sufficient distance to prevent damage to the parked bicycles. . See DS 2-09.4.3 Multiple rack bicycle parking require a minimum thirty (30 inches between outer spaces of posts or racks (DS 2-09.5.1.A). The type of rack for the class 2 parking spaces proposed does not provide two-point support for bicycles. Please review DS 2-09.8.0 Figure 2 - 7 for acceptable and unacceptable rack designs, Figure 8 for rack location, and Figure 9 for dimensional requirements. Please review the revised DS 2-09 and provide the necessary corrections to the bicycle parking as required. Once changes are provided and reviewed further comments may result. The revised DS may be found on the web at: http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Codes___Ordinances/DevStd209.pdf 5. DS 2-02.2.1.11 The indicated widths of the PAAL's will be required to be revised based on following comments regarding pedestrian circulation. One of the problem areas may be at the northeast corner and the south side of the building. The indicated width of the PAAL at 27.40' and 24.70' does not leave enough space to include a 5' pedestrian refuge. Per the aerial maps the indicated 6' chain link fence is not located completely around the perimeter as indicated. Provide location of the fence and any gates that may be used to provide separation between public and nonpublic areas. Provide a note indicating that any gates will remain open during business hours. 6. DS 2-02.2.1.12 A 5' pedestrian refuge with sidewalk will be provided adjacent and parallel to any PAAL on the side where buildings are located. All sidewalks are to be flood free for all storm discharges of up to ten (10) year flood event. Sidewalks are to a minimum of four (4) feet wide and be installed to avoid any obstruction which decreases the minimum width to less than four (4) feet. The cross slope on all sidewalks will not exceed two (2) percent. DS 2-08.4.1.B, DS 2-08.5.1.A & D Per the above comment the pedestrian refuge area with sidewalk will be required around the entire existing and proposed building. A 5' striped pedestrian refuge may be used at areas that are not for public access and at areas that are for vehicle entrance into buildings. On the site plan indicate the location of all openings in the buildings which are for vehicular use. See DS 2-08.3.1 The crosswalk indicated near the northeast corner of the property connecting to the sidewalk cannot be located in the PAAL entrance to the site. Provide handicap ramp and sidewalk connecting to the sidewalk located in the right of way. Provide details of all types of handicap ramps used including locations of truncated domes, slopes, widths, landings, etc.. Note #12 is not adequate. Access ramps at crosswalks connecting to sidewalks must be provided. In addition Truncated Dome (early warning systems) must be added to all access ramps where transitioning from the pedestrian area to the vehicular use area or at HC access aisles transitioning to the sidewalk area. 7. DS 2-02.2.1.13 Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, freestanding, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Also indicate if there are existing billboards on site. Billboards will be required to meet all LUC requirements as stated in LUC Sec. 3.5.4.26. DS 2-05.2.4.W & LUC 3.5.4.26 Per the aerial photo maps there appears to be a billboard located near the northwest corner of the property. Indicate the location of the billboard on the site plan and indicate how the billboard meets all of the requirements of LUC Sec. 3.5.4.26 The sign located to the north of the existing building is indicated as a billboard in note #14. It does not appear to be a billboard. Clarify. This sign is indicated as being located partially in the right of way. Provide documentation from the Real Estate Division of the City of Tucson that a Temporary Revocable Easement has been granted for this sign. 8. DS 2-02.2.1.If applicable, please draw all existing easements on the plan along with recordation information, location, width, and purpose. If an easement is no longer in use and scheduled to be vacated or has been abandoned, so indicate. If none exist provide response to reviewer's comments. 9. DS 2-02.2.1.25 If applicable, provide the existing and proposed lighting lay out and type of light pole and fixture. 10. DS 2-02.2.1.31 In the existing and proposed use, note#2, provide the development designator "34" at the end of the use. 11. DS 2-02.2.1.32 Provide the refuse container location, size and access thereto fully dimensioned. 12. DS 2-02.2.2.A.1 The net area of the lot indicated in the calculations is not required for this type of project. Please remove. 13. DS 2-02.2.2.A.3 Provide the allowed and the proposed Floor Area Ratio. 14. DS 2-02.2.2.A.5 The required size of the loading zones is not 12x55. See LUC Sec.3.4.5.3. Revise the required size to 12x35. Providing a 12x55 is not a problem. 15. Depending on changes to this plan and responses to the above comments, additional comments may be forth coming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 837-4961 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site, Landscape and NPPO Plans and any additional requested documents |
| 04/03/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Street landscape borders shall be located entirely on site, except that if approved by the City Engineer or designee, up to 5 feet of the required 10 foot width be placed within the adjacent right-of-way area or within the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) right-of-way area on MS&R streets. Provide approval documentation for landscape within ROW. 2. One (1) canopy tree must be provided for every thirty-three (33) linear feet of landscape border per LUC 3.7.2.4. Street landscape border along Grant Rd. does not meet requirement. 3. Landscape border width needs to be determined for the purposes of calculating the fifty 50 % vegetative coverage requirement, Per LUC 3.7.2.4. The width is the area between the required screen and the property line per Sec. 2-06.3.4.C.1. The basin must be included in street border calculations along Sahuaro Dr. 4. Any storm water detention/retention basins shall be landscaped to enhance the natural configuration of the basin. Design criteria are set forth in Development Standard 10-01.0. LUC 3.7.4.3.A 5. Revise the site and landscape plans to provide curbing or other suitable barrier for landscape areas within and adjacent to the vehicular use, display or storage areas. LUC 3.7.2.3.B 6. An unpaved planting 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. Provide dimensions for tree planters within east parking lot. 7. A 6' wall is required to screen loading zone from Sahuaro Dr. per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. 8. Show the location of the billboard on the site and landscape plans and indicate how the billboard meets all of the requirements of LUC 3.5.4.26. Refer to Table 3.7.2-I for landscaping and screening requirements for billboards. A 6' screen is required along Grant Rd. 9. The site plan and landscape plan must show identical site layout to avoid conflict between the two plans. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape plans. 10. Additional comments may apply. |
| 04/04/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | Exception |
| 04/16/2007 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 05/21/2007 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Pete Salonga, PE REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach, PE ACTIVITY NUMBER: T07CM00963 SUBJECT: 1701 W Grant Rd submittal Site Plan Review LOCATION: T14S R13E Sec3, Lots 18, 19, 20, 25, and 26 of Grant - Dragoon Industrial Park WARD: 1 SUMMARY: The west portion of the parcel lies partially within the Grant Auto Care Center Development Plan and within lots 18, 19, 20, 25, and 26 of Grant - Dragoon Industrial Park. Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the plan submittal and does not recommend approval at this time. Address the following comments. PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS: 1) Tucson Code Sec.26-11: Submit a Floodplain Use Permit Application for the project. 2) Tucson Code 26-8(b)(1): The plan submitted shall show the location of the areas subject to flooding and/or erosion. The location shall also include the direction and magnitude of any flow, water surface elevations, and the limits of inundation from the base flood. In order to provide a complete evaluation of the existing drainage conditions at the site, address the following floodplain comments: a) The FIS Studies indicate that the Silvercroft Wash at this location may not contain the 100-year flood. Provide a floodplain analysis at this location to determine 100-year floodplain limits. Discuss in the report, containment and any breakout conditions for the site in the Drainage Report based on the floodplain analysis. b) For the floodplain analysis, include superelevation consideration at the bend in the Silvercroft Wash just upstream of the project. c) Delineate the FEMA Zone AE floodplain line and label Zone X-Shaded and Zone AE on planview. 3) Tucson Code Sec.26-6.2, Development Standards (DS) Section 10-01.2.2: There is a closed Dragoon landfill (operational dates 1964-1966) within the project boundaries of this site. Soil type "B" is indicated for portions of this site, per TDOT map guide and as stated in the submitted drainage report. a) Due to the subsurface constraints at this site, retention is waived per DS 10-01.2.2. Retention is not acceptable at landfill sites, as infiltration into potential landfill soils is to be avoided per floodplain ordinance. The City will not require any additional detention requirement per this section of the manual. Revise drainage report to reflect landfill constraint; update portion 2.1 in the Drainage Report to reflect existing subsurface conditions at the site. b) The design objective should be reflected in the drainage report to show that there is limited percolation at the site and surface flows are directly discharged onto impermeable surface areas and toward the downstream drainageway with minimal impact to the existing landfill. If there is no adverse impact to downstream areas or adjacent parcels, reduced detention volume may be considered. c) Design for parking area should reflect a pavement structure design that is impervious to reduce potential for infiltration into the closed landfill subsurface. d) Increased runoff should be expected and detained within a basin that does not allow infiltration. Show lining, impervious treatment to basin area on planview and details. e) DS Sec.2-08.5.1.E: At any point where a 10-year flood discharge starts to cross a sidewalk or a pedestrian access, the sidewalk/access shall be designed and constructed to convey the 10-year flood flows under the sidewalk/access. Show locations of any existing and proposed scuppers. Provide sidewalk scuppers along southwest boundary to reflect the runoff from the site. f) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C: Submit a geotechnical report that discusses existing soils and testing results at the site. 4) DS Sec.2-08.4.1.E: Sidewalks shall be flood free for all storm discharges of up to a 10-year flood event. Provide locations for proposed roof drains for the Building Extension structure on plan view and indicate flow directions. 5) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C.3: On the Grading Plan, provide estimated cut and fill quantities for the addition, new vehicular access area, and associated grading. 6) Tucson Code Sec.29-23.A.1: There is a closed City of Tucson Landfill located at this site; development on or within 100 feet of a landfill requires Environmental Services review. The project shall comply with any Environmental Services requirements; see comments from Environmental Services. 7) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.32 Provide the refuse container location, size and access thereto fully dimensioned. 8) DS Sec.2-02.2.1: Show all existing easements on the plan along with recordation information, location, width, and purpose. If an easement is no longer in use and scheduled to be vacated or has been abandoned, so indicate. 9) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.12: Address the following ADA comments: a) Provide a detail for the curb access ramps with notation to provide truncated domes per ADAAG. This is an update to COT standard detail 207. b) Provide handicap ramp details with spot elevations at the front of the access aisle in the sidewalk area. c) Provide spot elevations in areas for ADA access to assure slopes are shown to conform to ADA requirements. The cross slope on all sidewalks will not exceed 2 percent. 10) LUC Sec.3.3.7.3: Explain in response letter and label on plan, the process for preparation of recycled asphalt to be used at the site for keynote 4 on the Grading Plan sheet 1. Engineering review will determine whether the pavement structure is acceptable for this project design. 11) Address the following comments on the Grading Plan: a) On sheet 1 of the Grading plan, address the following: i) Call out Development Plan Bk7pg44 on planview. In response letter state intent of project and any impact to the approved Development Plan design. ii) Remove the words related to retention from all planview, and notes. iii) Remove general grading note 16 from plan, including general note 15. iv) Revise general note 6 to reference Grading Standards DS Sec.11-01, not 'grading ordinance'. v) Add the following general grading notes to the Grading Plan: (1) Call for Pre-construction meeting, intermediate and final inspections. For a DSD Engineering Inspection, call IVR (740-6970), or contact DSD Engineering at 837-4991, or schedule inspections online at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Online_Services/Online_Permits/online_permits.html (2) If grading construction is expected to last longer than the expiration date of the grading permit, contact DSD to renew/extend the Grading Permit. If Final Grading Inspection has not been completed before the Grading Permit expires, and the permit has not been renewed, additional fees and reviews may be required. (3) Separate building permit applications are required for any walls. (4) The permitee shall notify the DSD when the grading operation is ready for final grading inspection. Final grading approval shall not be given until all work, including installation of all drainage improvements and their permanent protective devices, and all erosion control measures have been completed in accordance with the approved grading plan and grading permit, and all conditions of permit are completed. (5) Prior to request for final inspection approval, all outstanding fees shall be paid. (6) There shall be no disturbance outside of the disturbance/grading limits, and no grading shall begin until all required SWPPP controls are installed. (7) Contact Permits and Codes (791-5100) for any questions regarding any right-of-way permit requirements. (8) Truncated domes are required for access ramps per ADAAG. (9) Minimum 2' setback from property line to disturbance limits shall be maintained. vi) General Note 17 shall be revised to reflect impervious material for all constructed slopes. vii) Show cross section at Sahuaro Drive with sidewalk along frontage and label width. b) On sheet 2 of the Grading plan, address the following: i) Revise sections C and D to reflect required 2-ft minimum setback from property line to constructed slope. ii) In pavement section B and detail 3, show any proposed geotextile material to be used for restricting permeability. iii) Remove the words retention from all details, including sections C and D. 12) Address the following comments on the Site Plan: a) Remove reference to retention on the site plan sheets. b) Reference geotextile in keynotes 1 and 2. c) Show cross section at Sahuaro Drive with sidewalk along frontage. For resubmittal provide three copies of the revised Site Plan sheets, three copies of the grading plan sheets, a Floodplain Use Permit Application, and a response letter. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 2204. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Development Services |
| 06/21/2007 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | see zoning comments |
| 06/21/2007 | SREEVES1 | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | not a cot job |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 06/21/2007 | SUE REEVES | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 06/21/2007 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |