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: T07CM04377
Parcel: 132042690

Address:
3262 E 44TH ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T07CM04377
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
11/16/2007 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
11/26/2007 HEATHER THRALL ZONING REVIEW Denied TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Heather Thrall
Senior Planner

PROJECT: T07CM04377, 3262 E. 44th Street
O'Leary Construction, expansion to vehicle use area, office expansion
Commercial Site Plan, 1st Review
Full Code Compliance, greater than 25% expansion of vehicle use area

TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 28, 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.

Revise all notes on the detail page to increase the type face to 12 point for microfilming.

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

2. This project consists of a greater than 25% expansion of existing vehicular use area, which constitutes a full code compliance review applicable to the entire site, Per LUC 3.3.3.12.B. A LANDSCAPE PLAN IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED FOR FULL CODE COMPLIANCE REVIEW AS WELL. PLEASE RESUBMIT THE SITE PLAN CORRECTED TO THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS, AS WELL AS A LANDSCAPE PLAN.

3. Per Zoning Administrator's Determination, a Construction Service is a permitted use in the I-2 zone -with development designator "35" to be used.

4. Per DS 2-02.2.1.4, on the project location map please add 44th Street.

5. Per DS 2-02.2.1.6, regarding buildings:
A) call out height of existing and proposed buildings - from grade to either flat roof and parapet or from grade to top of pitch and midpoint of pitch.
B) Declare type of roof, pitch or flat with parapet
C) Identify any roof overhangs with vertical clearance for pedestrian areas
D) Identify building dimensions
E) Call out all entries to the building
F) Per discussion with Paul Nzomo on 11/27/07, the garage area on the site plan is for the purpose of construction storage and for maintenance of business vehicles. Please revise the garage to be identified as "maintenance" area.
G) Change the use noted throughout the site plan to read "Construction Service"

6. Per DS 2-02.2.1.7., - Regarding building setbacks
A) Please correct the REQUIRED building setback from the street front property line to read "the greater of 20' or 1.5 times the height of the exterior building wall, as measured from the street front property line."
B) Please note the actual provided building setbacks from each property line for records and inspections

7. Per DS 2-02.2.1.8, - regarding parking:
A) revise the parking calculations to show the parking is based upon the total gross floor area of the building - which includes the existing total office storage and maintenance area, and the new office area. The parking should be increased to 23 spaces minimum.
B) Revise the parking to show the space at the far east side of the site to be 10' wide, per DS 3-05.2.1.3
C) Revise the wheel stop detail to show the wheel stop fully contained within the top 2'6" of the parking space
D) Revise the new parking area to show room for a 10' wide landscape border - see Landscape review comments.
E) Please provide wheel stop barriers in the parking spaces in the west lot (existing parking)
F) Provide existing parking lot back up spur dimensions
G) Clearly call out the location of all paving areas for vehicular use - provide curbing for areas that shall not be disturbed by vehicles.
H) Provide truncated domes in a 2' wide strip across the top 2' of the handicapped parking access aisle - where transitioning from the access aisle to the sidewalk

8. Per DS 2-02.2.1.9, regarding bike parking:
A) call out the location of the class 2 bike parking
B) ensure class 2 bike parking is within 50' of the entrance to the building
C) provide a class 2 bike parking detail
D) please ensure bike parking meets requirements of DS 2-09

9. Per DS 2-02.2.1.10, please show all sight visibility triangles, and note further comments may be forthcoming if parking is provided within a sight visibility triangle.

10. Per DS 2-02.2.1.11, regarding Parking area access lanes (PAALs):
A) show that there is 24' ingress/egress in the east parking lot between parking spaces.
B) Clarify if vehicular access is to be provided to the maintenance area of the building, and show any PAAL/asphalt along the building
C) Call out the PAAL width in the west parking lot


11. Per DS 2-02.2.1.12 - regarding sidewalks and handicapped access:
A) provide a dimension on all sidewalks that calls them out a minimum of 4' wide - unobstructed
B) provide clarification if the sidewalks are raised or in flush with the adjacent terrain or asphalt per DS 2-08.4.1 and DS 3-05
C) Clarify the positions of the sidewalks with distinctive lines - it's hard to tell if there is one that is abutting the row of parking in the east parking lot
D) Call out stairs
E) Call out wheel chair access ramps with slope note exceeding 1:12
F) Call out truncated domes where transitioning from pedestrian to vehicular use area
G) Further comments may be forthcoming on pedestrian/handicapped access depending upon responses

12. Per DS 2-02.2.1.13, please call out any new free-standing signage and specs.

13. Per DS 2-02.2.1.14, regarding loading:
A) revise the loading zone calculations to show that Per LUC 3.4.5.3, a Construction Service requires one loading zone at 12x35
B) provide a loading zone at 12x35, show maneuvering as well

14. Per DS 2-02.2.1.19, please dimension the right of way of 44th from the centerline to the edge of travel lane and to the curb.

15. Per DS 2-02.2.1.20, please ensure any and all applicable easements with their type and recordation information are listed.

16. Per DS 2-02.2.1.25, please show any free-standing lighting and specs.

17. Per DS 2-02.2.1.28, please provide the zoning of all surrounding adjacent properties.

18. Per DS 2-02.2.1.32, call out the trash location. Please see Engineering comments too.

19. Per DS 2-02.2.2.A.2. provide the overall Floor Area Ratio proposed for the entire building - expressed in decimal format.

20. Per DS 2-02.2.2.A.6, please revise the percentage of expansion calculations to show the overall square footage of the asphalt area that was existing in the west small parking lot, versus the new total asphalt square footage provided in the east side of the site.

21. Please note that further review comments may be forthcoming, depending upon the responses provided. I can be reached at Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov or call 837-4951.

HCT C:\planning\site\DSD\T07CM04377 3262 e 44th oleary.doc
RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents
11/28/2007 HEATHER THRALL ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Denied Please see zoning review comments.
11/28/2007 HTHRALL1 ADA REVIEW Passed
12/03/2007 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1. The site plan must be accompanied by a landscape plan with information specified in Development Standard 2-07.0. The site plan and landscape plan must show identical site layout to avoid conflict between the two plans.

2. Submit NPPO plan or application for exception. Include acceptable documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants. Such documentation includes photographs of the site taken from all sides of the property per DS 2-15.2.0.C.
12/03/2007 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Denied Submit NPPO plan or application for exception. Include acceptable documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants. Such documentation includes photographs of the site taken from all sides of the property per DS 2-15.2.0.C.
12/19/2007 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: December 19, 2007
SUBJECT: 3262 E 44th St Site/Grading Plan- Engineering Review
TO: Paul Nzomo
LOCATION: T14S R14E Sec28 Ward 5
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: T07CM04377 (Site Plan) and T07BU02392 (Grading Plan)


SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the site plan (T07CM04377), grading plan (T07BU02392), and Drainage Report (Coronado Engineering and Development, 01OCT07) for the above referenced property. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the site plan or grading plan at this time. The following items need to be addressed:


SITE PLAN COMMENTS: Revise all typographical error on the site plan. Refer to "redlines" for the typographical errors found.

1) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.4: Revise the project location map to include the major watercourses adjacent to the site, specifically the Tucson Diversion Channel and the South Interceptor Channel.

2) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.8: Provide a dimension to verify that the PAAL meets the minimum width requirement of 24-feet, specifically at the east driveway entrance adjacent to the proposed parallel parking space.

3) DS 2-02.2.1.A.10: Revise the site plan to provide the required sight visibility triangles at both driveway entrances. Sight visibility triangles must reflect PAAL/driveways intersecting a Local Road. Refer to DS Sec.3-01.5.1 for triangle criteria.

4) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.11: Verify on the site plan, with a dimension, the minimum setback required between each driveway entrances. Refer to the Transportation Access Management Guidelines for minimum setback requirements for the driveways.

5) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.11: Depict and label the 18-feet radii concrete curbs returns per City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Detail 213 (PC/COT SD 213) at the proposed driveway entrances. The curbs should be constructed at the edge of pavement, which must also be depicted on the site plan. Curb returns must be constructed entirely within the subject parcel. Refer to DS Sec.3-01.3.2.C and the Transportation Access Management Guidelines for street development standards. For standard driveway entrances (existing or proposed) review and approval from Tucson Department of Transportation, Jose Ortiz, P.E., is required.

6) DS Sec2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to dimension the required 5-foot wide sidewalk along the street frontage of 44th Street. Refer to DS Sec.3-01 for all curb and sidewalk requirements. If an existing sidewalk is already constructed along the frontage of 44th Street 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. A DSMR will be required for modifying the development standards to allow a sidewalk that does not meet the minimum 5-foot width requirements. The DSMR must be approved prior to site plan approval. All exhibits and discussion must reflect any changes made by the approved DSMR. Provide a General Note to list the DSMR number, the Development Standard being modified along with the date of DSMR approval.

7) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to provide handicap access ramps at all driveway entrances and at all other transitions from pedestrian circulation to vehicular circulation. Show that all existing and proposed handicap access ramps meet the design requirements per ANSI Standards A117.1-2003 Section 406.13. Provide details or keynotes that label truncated domes at all transitions from pedestrian circulation to vehicular circulation. Specifically the truncated domes for the handicap ramps must be revised to be correctly shown.

8) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to show concentration points for all downspout and/or scupper locations. Any scuppers proposed under the sidewalk must be designed and constructed to convey the 10-year flood flow. Provide a revised Drainage Report showing scupper calculations and design that demonstrate that the 10-year flood flow is contained under the sidewalk.

9) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Revise the site plan to show the erosion hazard setback line for the Tucson Diversion Channel. The erosion hazard setback must be determined for the Tucson Diversion Channel and shown on the site plan. If the erosion hazard setback is to be reduced provide a discussion and details that meet the requirements within DS Sec.10-02 Chapter VII and the recommendations within the required geotechnical report. Specifically provide a discussion on the existing bank protection and verify (provide the Improvement Plans) that it has been designed to reduce the required erosion hazard setback.

10) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Provide specific details on the grading plan on how the proposed storm drain ties into the existing concrete bank protection of the Tucson Diversion Channel. A flap gate for the storm drain will be required to prevent storm water from backing up into the proposed storm drain system. Review and approval from Pima County Regional Flood Control District is required for all drainage improvements proposed into their right-of-way and/or drainage infrastructure.

11) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Verify if a maintenance access easement exist or is required along the top of bank for the Tucson Diversion Channel. Provide the dimensions and easement information for the Pima County Flood Control Structure to verify all widths and requirements that must be shown on the site plan.

12) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Revise details 4, 5, 6, and 7 on Sheet 2 to provide the detail reference for the Public Improvement Details to verify that all dimensions, slopes, thickness, rebar, etc meets the minimum requirements within the City of Tucson and Pima County Standard Detail for Public Improvements Manual.

13) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Revise the site plan to show roof drainage arrows and downspout locations to verify scupper concentration points.

14) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.19: Provide the dimensioned right-of-way for 44th Street. Include the recordation information for that right-of-way in plan view.

15) 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.

16) DS Sec.2-01.2.1.A.21: Provide dimensions from the street monument lines to the existing and/or proposed curb, sidewalk, driveway and any utility lines.

17) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.23: Revise General Note #5 to include the bench mark reference based on City Of Tucson Field Book and Page number, along with the datum reference, i.e. NGVD29 or NAVD88.

18) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.23: Provide additional spot elevations on the plan for grading plan purposes. Provide elevations for all top of curbs, top of asphalt/pavement, and storm grate locations.

19) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.32: Provide an approval letter or email from Andy Vera, City of Tucson Environmental Services for approval of existing refuse pick-up. If the property is subject to providing an onsite refuse container then the location and all aspects of the site plan must be brought up to current development standards. The enclosure must have a minimum inside clear dimension of 10 feet by 10 feet between bollards that are required between the container and the enclosure's rear and sidewall. Refer to Figure 3 (attached to the hard copy of this letter) and DS Sec.6-01.4.2 for specifications and requirements on access, placement of containers, bin enclosure and construction. Show maneuverability for refuse vehicles in plan view.


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

20) 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.

21) DS Sec.11-01.9: Revise the site plan and the storm drain cross sections to provide a dimension the location and depths of proposed pipe throughout the project site. Verify that the storm drains are deep enough to prevent damage from heavy traffic loads.

22) 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

23) DS Sec.10-02.14.3.2: Revise the maintenance notes (Notes 23-25) to provide clear language as tot he maintenance of the catch basins and storm drains system. The notes should also address maintenance of the storm drain outlet at the existing channel location. Since the project does not have an associated retention basin the reference to this should be removed from the note.

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

25) 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 Harvison, (520)-837-6592 or Thad.Harvison@tucsonaz.gov for all right-of-way requirements and permit applications.

26) Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) requirements may be applicable to this project due to the proposed disturbed area. 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 if the disturbed area of the project exceeds 1.0 acres. For further information, visit,
www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html.


DRAINAGE REPORT:

27) Revise the Drainage Report Section 1.1 to correctly show that the subject property is partial located within a balanced basin. The Drainage Report states that the entire property is located within a non-designated basin, which is not representative of the Critical and Balanced Basin Maps for the City of Tucson.

28) DS Sec.10-02.2.1 &2.2: Revise the Drainage Report to include a discussion along with basin design for the project. All projects that fall within a balanced basin are required to show that the post developed discharge value for the 2-, 10-, and 100-year storm events are less than or equal to the existing discharge values. Since the project is a commercial development and is larger than 1-acre 5-year threshold retention criteria shall apply.

29) DS Sec.10-01.2.3: Per this section the detention requirements can be waived if the subject parcel is located adjacent to a major watercourse (Tucson Diversion Channel). Threshold retention requirements may also be waived in certain cases when storm water retention is not feasible due to constraints imposed by subsurface conditions, i.e. geotechnical report show that infiltration rates will not meet the required drain down time, close proximity to bedrock or ground water table. A meeting is requested to discuss other options in the basin design for this project.

30) Revise the Drainage Report to provide a discussion on the required erosion hazard setback line for the Tucson Diversion Channel. The erosion hazard setback must be determined for the Tucson Diversion Channel and shown on the site plan. If the erosion hazard setback is to be reduced provide a discussion and details that meet the requirements within DS Sec.10-02 Chapter VII and the recommendations within the required geotechnical report. Specifically provide a discussion on the existing bank protection and verify (provide as-built improvement plans) that it has been designed to reduce the required erosion hazard setback.

31) DS Sec.10-01.2.2: Provide a geotechnical report with building setbacks from the required basin, infiltration rates for the retention basin, and slope stability recommendations for basin design, slope stability, and erosion hazard protection from the Tucson Diversion Channel. Clarify if the Drainage Report and site plan match the geotechnical report. Infiltration rates for watersheds less than 10 acres must have a drain down time of 12 hours per 10-01.3.5.1.3.

32) Provide a revised Drainage Report 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.


GEOTECHNICAL REPORT:

33) DS Sec.10-02.14.2.6: A geotechnical evaluation needs to be submitted for review, addressing the following:

a) Soils report should provide conformance with DS section 10-02.14.2.6 regarding 30-foot boring for the required retention basins, and provide discussion of potential for hydro-collapsible soils and any recommendation for setbacks from building to proposed retention basins.

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 pavement structure design recommendations.

e) Provide infiltration rates for the retention basins.


GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised site plan, grading plan, Drainage Report, and geotechnical 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
12/26/2007 THAUSER1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
12/26/2007 GERARDO BONILLA REJECT SHELF Completed