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: T07CM03962
Parcel: 140270580

Address:
2630 E GINTER RD

Review Status: Active

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T07CM03962
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Active
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
10/05/2007 DAVE MANN FIRE REVIEW Approved
10/08/2007 HEATHER THRALL ZONING REVIEW Denied TO: Development Services Department, Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Heather Thrall, Senior Planner

PROJECT: T07CM03962, 2630 E. Ginter Road, zoned I-1
New Construction Service, Sunland Asphalt Yard & Maintenance Facility
Commercial Site plan, 1st Review

TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 8, 2007

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 project was reviewed for compliance with the Land Use Code (LUC), Development Standards (DS), American National Standard Institute (ANSI), and International Building Code 2006 (IBC). Specifically, this project was reviewed for site plan content required under DS 2-02.

Zoning reviewed all the pages of the plan and made comments throughout. Some comments may be specific to each page, some may be in general. I tried to group them as efficiently as possible for you.

2. Provide a note on sheet 1 that this project will comply with the Airport Environs Overlay Zone - LUC 2.8.5., specifically the AHD and CUZ-2 divisions of the AEZ.

3. Per DS 2-02.2.1.4, on the location map - please revise the adjacent township, range and section numbers to show correct adjacent numbers. Please see my notes on the plan.

4. Per DS 2-02.2.1.6, regarding the building:
A) clarify if there are any roof overhangs, canopies
B) clarify where vehicle and pedestrian entries to buildings are
C) clarify what activities will be in the building - just vehicle maintenance or any storage of hazardous materials?
D) Any outdoor storage areas proposed? clarify
E) clarify what type of roof is proposed - flat with parapet, ridge?
F) Clarify where the 24' height is measured from - grade to top of flat roof and add in parapet, or grade to midpoint of ridge and add in top of ridge?
G) Clarify what uses are in the building for this business - office and garage area?
H) Please provide elevation and floor plans when available

5. Per DS 2-02.2.1.7, please modify note 19 on sheet 1 to indicate the "perimeter yard" setbacks required is 0'.

6. Per DS 2-02.2.1.8, regarding parking:
A) I see the 1:250 parking ratio, but not the square footage of the building in the calc - please list in parking calc.
B) Per DS 2-08.4.1, sidewalks must be physically separated from vehicular use area - including parking. On sheet 2, keynote 27 shows a flush notation of asphalt to sidewalk. To protect the sidewalk area, please add wheel stops in the parking spaces, or raise the concrete from the sidewalk.
C) On sheet 3, please clarify the depth of the tree well intrusions into the parking spaces - no more than 2.6" possible to not compromise the parking space length required.
D) On sheet 5, detail 10, please revise the height of the post for the handicapped parking sign to ensure it is exactly 7' from grade to bottom of the sign
E) On sheet 5, detail 10, please revise the notation for the sign to read a $518.00 minimum fine for illegal parking.

7. Per DS 2-02.2.1.9, regarding bicycle parking:
A) on sheet 2, please dimension a 5' wide access aisle area behind or in front of the row of bike parking spaces, per DS 2-09.5.2
B) on sheet 2, please provide a dimension that indicates all bicycle parking is within 50' of the entry to the building, per DS 2-09.4.1

8. Per DS 2-02.2.1.10. please add sight visibility triangles

9. Per DS 2-02.2.1.11, regarding PAAL widths and entries/exits:
A) dimension the widths of the garage door entries for issuance of building permits.
B) Please call out the location of the curbs - where they specifically transition to flush - near the garage entries to the building.

10. Per DS 2-02.2.1.12, regarding pedestrian and disabled access:
A) per DS 2-08.3.1 and 4.1.A, a pedestrian route must be provided from the street to the building and the dumpster must also connect to a pedestrian route from the building
B) please provide a detail drawing of a typical disabled access ramp, with truncated domes - dimensioned and with slopes
C) please provide a strip of truncated domes, 2' wide - running the width of the handicapped access aisle - position these domes on the concrete where abutting the handicapped access aisle. Per ANSI 705.5
D) Specify with keynote if sidewalk is in flush with asphalt at point where crossing garage door entries.
E) Depending upon the response to D, provide a ramp. Regardless of whether there is a need for a ramp on either side of the garage entries, please provide truncated domes per ANSI 705.5
F) Per DS 2-08.4.1.B and DS 3-05.2.2.B.1 -a 5' wide pedestrian refuge area, inclusive of a 4' wide sidewalk, is required between the building and the adjacent surrounding PAAL. Provide the sidewalk along the building at both the east and west sides. Provide ramps with truncated domes where transitioning in front of the garage door area and to the edge of the building where meeting the south wall.
G) It is apparent from the submittal that the south side of the building is not for public access. Please provide a striped 5' wide cross walk along the south side of the building for a sufficient employee pedestrian refuge area.

11. Per DS 2-02.2.1.13, please declare any proposed free-standing signage with heights, pole base width, etc. and whether there are any billboards existing or proposed on here.

12. Per DS 2-02.2.1.14, regarding loading zones:
A) per LUC 3.4.5.3, please provide two (2) loading zones at 12x35 for this project, only one is seen on the plan. Please dimension both loading zones on the revision.
B) Per LUC 3.4.4.6, stripe the loading zones
C) Per DS 3-05.2.1.c.1 - the required minimum width of a two way PAAL (parking area access lane) is 24'. The loading zone proposed at the east side of the site is within the PAAL circulation area for two way traffic. Please relocate the loading zone(s) outside of the PAAL circulation areas.

13. Per DS 2-02.2.1.20, please ensure any/all applicable easements are graphically depicted with type, dimensions and recordation information.

14. Per DS 2-02.2.1.25, site lighting is shown. Provide the vertical clearance of the light poles, with the width of the pole base to ensure that vehicle clearance can be met.

15. Per DS 2-02.2.1.31, please clarify the current use of the site. TDOT aerial photos from 2005 show the site covered in single wide trailers - possibly illegally stored on the site. Please clarify if those have been removed and whether the site is vacant.

16. Per DS 2-02.2.2.A.2, please revise the Floor Area Ratio calculation to show the square footage of the building footprint divided by the lot area. The resulting number should be expressed in a decimal format (i.e. .158 FAR) please. If you need assistance on FAR calcs, see LUC 3.2.11. Please remove reference to percentage of building coverage.

17. Please add a note "the maximum height allowed for the tallest point of the structure on this site is 65' above the elevation at the end of the NE runway. The elevation at the end of the NE runway is 2567 MSL". The approximate elevation of the site (please confirm and ensure it is noted on the site plan) is 2588, adding 24 feet is 2612. The elevation of 2567 + 65 = 2632, which means the building elevation proposed, at the tallest point, is 20' less than the maximum building elevation height than is permitted by the LUC 2.8.5 and maps. Please provide such notes on the site plan.

18. Please note, further review comments may be forthcoming, depending upon responses provided. Email me at Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov or call 837-4951 for questions.

HCT C:\planning\site\DSD\T07CM03962 2630 e ginter.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents
10/09/2007 HEATHER THRALL ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Denied Please see zoning review comments.
10/09/2007 SREEVES1 ADA REVIEW Passed not a COT project
10/10/2007 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1. The site contains regulatory floodplain areas that may contain riparian habitat. This habitat may not unnecessarily altered per TCC Sec. 26-5.2. Refer to DS 2-13 for the preparation, submittal, and review procedures for development within areas that have environmental habitat in conformance with Article 1, Division 1, Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Area Regulations.

2. Submit an Environmental Resource Report (ERR) per DS 2-13.2.5.B.1. The report will document (1) the areas that contain riparian and wildlife habitat that is to be preserved and (2) those areas without such habitat within the regulatory floodplain.

3. All site plans, plot plans or other plans providing for approval of development within property that includes any Regulated Area as defined in Development Standard 2-13.2.2.A shall identify and delineate the Regulated Areas and the Protected Riparian Area. Verify that floodplain is correctly delineated.

4. All development within the Protected Riparian Area shall be reviewed to insure that there is no unnecessary disturbance of the riparian resources. Refer to DS 2-13.2.5.B.2 for Development Restrictions.

5. Where any development encroaches within the Protected Riparian Areas, mitigation will be required. A mitigation report shall be submitted with the Environmental Resource Report per DS 2-13.2.5.C

6. A summary of mitigation and preservation requirements shall be included. The plans shall show the location of mitigation areas; methods used for mitigation of preserved natural areas, restoration and re-vegetation of disturbed areas.

7. Landscape plans shall document compliance with the mitigation plan requirements. A summary of mitigation and preservation requirements shall be included on the plans.

8. Include a description of the maintenance program that provides for revegetated/restored or enhanced areas. The program shall include irrigation to establish native plants, provide for regular inspection, removal of invasive species, and native plant replacement as necessary to successfully establish the mitigation habitat. All mitigation plantings and related improvements shall be maintained for at least three years following installation.

9. Any Protected Riparian Area on the property shall be protected through a conservation or public easement or other legal restriction. DS 2-13.2.6.D

10. In situations where the street landscape border is wider than the minimum ten (10) foot requirement, the landscape border width needs to be determined for the purposes of calculating the fifty (50) percent vegetative coverage requirement, Sec. 3.7.2.4 of the LUC. The width is that area between the required screen and the property line per DS 2-06.3.4.C.2. Portions of the landscape border along Sea are wider then 10'. Revise landscape plan as necessary to meet coverage requirements.

11. A 30" continuous screen along street frontages for all of the vehicle use area must be provided per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. Identify screening elements on the landscape plan.

12. The screening requirement is in addition to the landscape requirements. Vegetative screens can encroach three (3) feet into the street landscape border.

13. A vehicular use area must be provided with post barricades or wheel stop curbing designed to prevent vehicles from damaging landscaping, walls, buildings, and to prevent vehicles from driving onto unimproved portions of the site per DS 3-05.2.3.C.Revise the plans as necessary.


14. 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 plan.

15. Additional comments may apply.
10/10/2007 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Denied 1. The site contains regulatory floodplain areas that may contain riparian habitat. This habitat may not unnecessarily altered per TCC Sec. 26-5.2. Refer to DS 2-13 for the preparation, submittal, and review procedures for development within areas that have environmental habitat in conformance with Article 1, Division 1, Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Area Regulations.

2. Submit an Environmental Resource Report (ERR) per DS 2-13.2.5.B.1. The report will document (1) the areas that contain riparian and wildlife habitat that is to be preserved and (2) those areas without such habitat within the regulatory floodplain.

3. All site plans, plot plans or other plans providing for approval of development within property that includes any Regulated Area as defined in Development Standard 2-13.2.2.A shall identify and delineate the Regulated Areas and the Protected Riparian Area. Verify that floodplain is correctly delineated.

4. All development within the Protected Riparian Area shall be reviewed to insure that there is no unnecessary disturbance of the riparian resources. Refer to DS 2-13.2.5.B.2 for Development Restrictions.

5. Where any development encroaches within the Protected Riparian Areas, mitigation will be required. A mitigation report shall be submitted with the Environmental Resource Report per DS 2-13.2.5.C

6. A summary of mitigation and preservation requirements shall be included. The plans shall show the location of mitigation areas; methods used for mitigation of preserved natural areas, restoration and re-vegetation of disturbed areas.
12/06/2007 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: December 10, 2007
SUBJECT: 2630 E Ginter Road Site Plan- Engineering Review
TO: Jerry Zillman
LOCATION: T15S R14E Sec08 Ward 5
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: T07CM03962


SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the site plan, Drainage Report (The WLB Group, 18SEP07) and Geotechnical Engineering Report (Terracon, 09MAR07) for the above referenced property. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the site plan, Drainage Report or Geotechnical Engineering Report at this time. The following items need to be addressed:


DRAINAGE REPORT:

1) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.4.D: Revise the Drainage Report and site plan layout to show, with an encroachment analysis that the proposed water surface elevations do not raise the depth of flow by more than 0.1-feet from the existing water surface elevations. Per the proposed Drainage Report both cross sections 3 and 4 show an increase in the base flood elevation by more than the 0.1-foot requirement.

2) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.4.D: Revise the basin cross section and provide a discussion within the report to show how the 5-yr threshold retention percolates into the basin bottom. Per the cross section the basin side slopes and bottom are to be grouted rock riprap, this will not allow the 5-year threshold retention to percolate into the soil to meet the minimum requirements within the Detention/Retention manual, revise.

3) Per the Geotechnical Report all slopes that are greater than 1.5:1 require a slope stability analysis. The Drainage Report and site plan show a 1:1 slope within the basin which does not satisfy the geotechnical requirements, revise or provide an addendum to the Geotechnical Report.

4) Tucson Code Chapter 26 Sec.26.5.2.4: Revise the Drainage Report, site plan and the location of the development to show no unnecessary disturbance of the riparian 100-year floodplain. The construction of the proposed building within the mapped 100-year floodplain located entirely within the subject property is not considered a necessary disturbance. Review and approval for the disturbance and proposed mitigation is required by the Landscaping Department prior to site plan approval.

5) DS Sec.2-13 Refer to this section for the preparation, submittal, and review procedures for development within areas that have environmental habitat in conformance with Article 1, Division 1, Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Area Regulations. Any disturbance of the riparian habitat will require an Environmental Resource Report (ERR) approval from DSD Landscaping prior to site plan approval.

6) Tucson Code Chapter 26: In addition to the information required in Chapter 26.5.2.4, Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Area Regulations, the hydrology/hydraulic study shall contain the following elements:

a) Soil conditions in and adjacent to the watercourse, and the erosion potential (Refer to the Geotechnical Report).

b) Existing rights-of-way or easement dedication along the wash. Any Protected Riparian Area on the property shall be protected through a conservation or public easement or other legal restriction refer to DS 2-13.2.6.D.

c) The existing and proposed ownership of any drainageway facilities on or adjacent to the site and identification of the persons responsible for the maintenance of such facilities.

d) Existing and proposed utilities to and across the site.

e) Any other elements that may be characteristic of the watercourses on or adjacent to the site.

7) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.K: A revised Geotechnical Report is required for this project. The soils report needs to discuss suitability and feasibility of the project. Description of existing soil constraints for the site, structural design recommendations, and other typical geotechnical data is needed. The soil report shall provide identification / assessment of any potentially hazardous geotechnical areas. The Geotechnical Report shall specifically address all criteria listed in this section. Recommendations need to be incorporated into the site plan and Drainage Report.

8) DS Sec. 3-01.4.4.F: Provide a revised Drainage Statement showing scupper calculations that demonstrate that the 10-year flood flow is contained under the sidewalk at all scupper concentration points. Provide details and dimensions in plan view for the scuppers on the proposed site plan.


SITE PLAN COMMENTS:

9) DS Sec.2-13.2.2.A: All site plans, development plans, tentative plats, plot plans or other plans providing for approval of development within property that includes any Regulated Area as defined in Development Standard 2-13.2.2.A shall identify and delineate the Regulated Areas and the Protected Riparian Area. The Regulated Areas on this site are the existing 100-year floodplain limit. Revise the site plan as necessary to clearly document the locations of the exiting 100-year floodplain limit. Show the same information (regulatory limits) on the plant inventory, landscape/mitigation plans, and future grading plan.

10) Tucson Code Sec 26-5.2.4: The proposed development can not unnecessarily alter the regulatory Xeroriparian habit that is located within the 100-year regulatory floodplain that is contained on the entire property. This habitat may not unnecessarily altered per TCC Sec. 26-5.2. The Xeroriparian vegetation is protected per DS 2-13.2.2.C. Review and approval for the disturbance and proposed mitigation is required by the Landscaping Department prior to site plan approval.

11) DS Sec.2-13.2.5: Per TCC Sec.26-5.2 the proposed limits of grading shown does not meet the requirements within this section.

12) DS Sec.2-13.2.5.B.2: All development within the Protected Riparian Area shall be reviewed to insure that there is no unnecessary disturbance of the riparian resources. Refer to this section on Development Restrictions and revise the plans as necessary. Necessary development shall include only the crossing of riparian habitats with roadways, bikeways, paved walkways and utilities as listed below where there is no viable alternate crossing available and the crossing is necessary for the reasonable development of the property. A written explanation as to why the development is necessary shall be submitted with the appropriate plans. The Drainage Report and site plan indicates that a full build out of the property within the existing 100-year floodplain is proposed. This is not consistent with the provisions for "necessary development".

13) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.2: Provide the legal description of the subject property on the site plan and label the Book and Page reference for the referenced subdivision.

14) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.4: Revise the location map on Sheet 1 to correctly label the section corners as indicated by the redlines on Sheet 1.

15) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.8: Verify the minimum 15.5-foot parking space dimension at the parking stall locations shown at the landscape islands within the proposed parking lot. Verify the 2.5-foot overhang along all-landscaping areas and pedestrian circulation areas.

16) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.10: Provide the sight visibility triangles (SVTs) in plan view for the access points for the proposed parking lot. The SVTs must be shown for a PAAL intersecting a local road, revise Sheet 1 to show the proper dimensions for the SVTs. Refer to DS Sec.3-01.5 for further clarification.

17) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.11: Revise the site plan to provide the minimum PAAL distance required for two-way traffic within the back of the proposed building once the pedestrian circulation is shown correctly. Pedestrian circulation must be unobstructed, refer to the following comment.

18) DS Sec2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the pedestrian circulation that is shown in the back of the proposed building. All pedestrian circulation must be unobstructed. Per keynote #24 2-concrete equipment pads are proposed in the middle of the pedestrian circulation. These pads can not obstruct the required pedestrian circulation. The pedestrian circulation must connect around the pads and maintain the minimum 5-foot width dimension for a pedestrian circulation adjacent to a PAAL.

19) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to keynote if the sidewalk is flush with asphalt at the point where it crosses the garage door entries. Truncated domes are required on both sides of the garage doors regardless of whether there is a need for a ramp.

20) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Provide a minimum 5-foot wide pedestrian circulation route, inclusive of the 4-foot sidewalk along the building at both the east and west sides adjacent to the PAAL. Provide ramps with truncated domes at the transition in front of the garage door area and the vertical curbing.

21) DS Sec2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to label and dimension the required curb and 5-foot sidewalk along the entire street frontage of Ginter Road that is shown on the site plan. All new development shall provide a curb and 5-foot wide sidewalks along the entire length of street frontage. If a sidewalk already exist along the frontage provide photo documentation showing that the existing sidewalk is in good condition. If the sidewalk is missing in spots or is cracked and buckled a new 5-foot sidewalk will be required.

22) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to show the required pedestrian circulation path that is required to connect the proposed building and vehicular use area to the required sidewalk along Ginter Road. Label and dimension all pedestrian circulation paths.

23) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to show the required pedestrian circulation path that is required to connect the proposed building to the refuse container location. Label and dimension all pedestrian circulation paths.

24) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to show that all proposed and revised handicap access ramps meet the design requirements per ANSI Standards A117.1-2003 Section 406.13. Specifically revise keynote #32 to state that truncated domes are required at all transitions from pedestrian circulation to vehicular circulation. Provide a detail of a typical handicap access ramp with dimensions and slopes showing truncated domes.

25) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.14: Revise the loading zone location to show the minimum 24-foot PAAL width. The loading zone can not interfere with the required 24-foot PAAL width, revise.

26) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: A Floodplain Use Permit (FUP) is required at the next site plan submittal for the proposed encroachment within the mapped regulatory 100-year floodplain. Per Chapter 26 of the Tucson Code a Floodplain Use Permit is required for any improvements within a mapped 100-year floodplain. Provide the FUP application with the resubmittal for review and approval.

27) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Revise the site plan to label and dimension the 100-year floodplain limits as shown on Figure 3 within the proposed Drainage Report, the linear distance between the water surface contour intervals should not exceed 200-feet. Verify that the lowest finished floor is elevated 1-foot above the calculated WSEL on the upstream end of the building. The 100-year floodplain must be shown in a surveyable manner.

28) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Please be advised that since the subject property is located within a regulatory 100-year floodplain, it will be required that 2 elevation certificates for the proposed building be filled out by an Arizona Registered Land Surveyor showing that the finish floor elevation and the lowest point of any attached appliances is above the regulatory flood elevation (one foot higher than the calculated water surface elevation of the base flood) at building plan approval, and returned to our office. The first elevation certificate will be required prior to the pouring of the concrete for the floors and the second elevation certificate will be required prior to final inspection.

29) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Provide flow arrows for the roof of the proposed building to show concentration points and scupper locations at the pedestrian circulation. A detail for the dimension of the proposed scuppers that are used for collecting onsite roof drainage at all pedestrian sidewalk is required. Any scuppers proposed under the sidewalk will be designed and constructed to convey the 10-year flood flow. Provide a drainage statement showing scupper calculations that demonstrate that the 10-year flood flow is contained under the sidewalk.

30) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Provide the riprap dimensions along with rock size, thickness, and method of placement for the proposed weir outlet as called out in the proposed Drainage Report. All riprap must conform to the Drainage Report and Geotechnical Report.

31) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.17: Provide cut and fill quantities on the revised site plan for future grading plan purposes.

32) DS Sec.2-01.2.1.A.20: Verify that all existing and proposed easements are drawn with recordation information, location, width, and purpose of on the site plan.

33) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.27: Provide a General Note stating that all fences or walls will require a separate permit for review and approval by all necessary Development Services Departments.

34) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.C: Verify that the landscape plan matches the revised site plan and the site plan labels and dimensions the required SVTs.

35) Additional comments may be forth coming with the resubmittal of the site plan and ERR review.


ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE REPORT:

36) DS Sec.2-13.2.2.C: Within floodplains that are not designated as ERZ or WASH watercourses, Development Standard 2-13.2.2.A and B, the Regulated Area is the area within the one hundred (100) year floodplain for watercourses with flows of one hundred (100) cfs or more including, by not limited to, those areas which contain any of the following:

a) Hydroriparian, Mesoriparian, or Xeroriparian Types A, B or C habitats as delineated by Pima County as part of Article X of the Pima County floodplain and Erosion Hazard Ordinance.

b) Hydroriparian, Mesoriparian, or Xeroriparian High or Xeroriparian Intermediate Habitats as delineated in the TSMS Phase II Stormwater Master Plan.

c) Xeroriparian Low Habitats as delineated in the TSMS Phase II Stormwater Master Plan or Type D habitat as delineated by Pima County for connectivity between higher habitat classes, if low-volume, high-value habitats are present, including tabosa swales or similar habitats.

d) Unclassified or undocumented riparian habitat of equivalent value to the above criteria.

37) DS Sec.2-13.2.5.B: If the project proposes encroachment within the Regulated Areas, it shall conform to the following.

a) Environmental Resource Report. Applicants are required to submit an Environmental Resource Report as defined in Sec. 6.2.5 of the LUC. The supporting material for preparation of the Environmental Resource Report is based on information from the Hydrologic Data and Wash Information maps on the Tucson Department of Transportation internet web site: The Critical and Sensitive Wildlife Habitat Map and Report, the Mayor and Council Interim Watercourse Improvement Policy and subsequent adopted policies, the Tucson Stormwater Management Study, the following Basin Management Plans: 1) West Branch, Santa Cruz; 2) Houghton East; 3) Este Wash; and 4) Arroyo Chico. The Tucson Stormwater Management Study, Phase II and field observation. An application may request that an element listed below be waived or that the report addresses only a specified area where a full report is not applicable to the proposed encroachment. DSD may grant such waivers where the elements or full report are not required by code. The Environmental Resource Report must include all items (a-x) within this section.


GRADING PLAN COMMENTS: Sheet 2 was reviewed for grading plan purposes, however until all site plan and Drainage Report comments are addressed and a grading plan application is submitted the grading plan could not be shown to be in conformance with an approved plan.

38) Revise Cross section H/4 on Sheet 4 to provide the design requirements within the Drainage Report and Geotechnical Report. Provide the slope stability analysis for the 1:1 (H:V) side slopes per the Geotechnical Report. Refer to the Drainage Report and Geotechnical Report for method of placement, riprap size, thickness and toe down depths for all required riprap side slopes.

39) Revise the grading plan to label and dimension the outflow weir from the retention basins per the Drainage Report. The grading plan must provide details on how the weir is to be constructed and any proposed erosion protection. All basins are required to provide a low-flow bleed pipe to prevent standing water and mosquito infestation.

40) Provide a note on the grading plan that references the required Geotechnical Report and any addendums for the proposed site.

41) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C.4: Provide a General Note stating that all Fencing and walls will require a separate permit for review and approval by all necessary Development Services Departments.

42) Provide a general note on the grading plan to state the following; "Call for a Pre-construction meeting prior to start of earthwork. To schedule a DSD Pre-construction meeting, SWPPP inspection or general Engineering Inspections, call IVR (740-6970), or schedule with a Customer Service Representative at the Development Services Department, or contact DSD Engineering at 791-5550 extension 2101, or schedule inspections online at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Online_Services/Online_Permits/online_permits.html

43) DS Sec.11-01: Provide general grading notes, including a grading/drainage note specifying conformance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (excavation and grading requirements).

44) DS Sec.10-02.14.3.2: Provide a note on the grading plan stating that, (a) the owner or owners shall be solely responsible for operation, maintenance, and liability for drainage structures and detention/retention basins; (b) that the owner or owners shall have an Arizona Registered Professional Civil Engineer prepare a certified inspection report for the drainage and detention/retention facilities at lease once each year, and that these regular inspection reports will be on file with the owner for review by City staff, upon written request; (c) that City staff may periodically inspect the drainage and retention/detention facilities to verify that scheduled and unscheduled maintenance activities are being performed adequately; and (d) that the owner or owners agree to reimburse the City for any and all costs associated with the maintaining of the drainage and detention/retention facilities, should the City find the owner or owners deficient in their obligation to adequately operate and maintain their facilities".

45) Please ensure that any future grading plan will be consistent with the site plan, Drainage Report, and Geotechnical Report. Grading standards may be accessed at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf

46) Approval from TDOT Permits and Codes for all improvements within the public right-of-way will be required. A right-of-way use permit application will be required prior to construction. Contact Thad Harveston at 741-3115 for all right-of-way requirements and permit applications.


GEOTECHNICAL REPORT:

47) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a, 10-02.14.2.6: Provide a revised 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 the basins, and provide a discussion of the potential for hydro-collapsible soils. The submitted report did not address either of these requirements.

b) Provide percolation rates for retention/detention basins for 5-year threshold retention to show that the drain down time meets the maximum per DS Sec.10-01.3.5.1.

c) Provide a slope stability analysis for the 1:1 side slopes that are proposed within the basin. Per the last submitted Geotechnical Report any slopes steeper than 1.5:1 requires a slope stability analysis to determine how the slope must be designed to protect it from erosion.


GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised site plan, grading plan, Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, and Environmental Resource Report that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Enclose "redlines" with the resubmittal package.

Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the site plan review.

If you have any questions, or to schedule an appointment, I can be reached at 837-4929.



Jason Green, CFM
Senior Engineer Associate
Engineering Division
COT Development Services

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
10/04/2007 ANY REJECT SHELF RECEIVED