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: T07OT02408
Parcel: 12915006G

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T07OT02408
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
10/31/2007 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
11/05/2007 HEATHER THRALL ZONING REVIEW Denied TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Heather Thrall
Senior Planner

PROJECT: EXPIRED T06OT02036 - NEW NUMBER T07OT02408
899 E. Silverlake, UPS facility, new parking lot, greater than 25% expansion
Site plan, full code compliance
2nd review

TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 7, 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 requirements of the Land Use Code (LUC), Development Standard (DS), American National Standard Institute (ANSI), and International Building Code 2003 (IBC 2003). Specifically, the project was reviewed for content compliance with DS 2-02, site plan content.

On the previous review, this project was reviewed for the uses of Office and Warehouse per the Zoning Administrator's advisement. In this review, the notes on the project changed to show the use is Transportation Land Carrier Service, and staff re-reviewed the project for full code compliance with the applicable development designators for that use.

Please note that the Zoning Administration division is being consulted on the review of this project as a Transportation Service, Land Carrier, given the last determination by the Zoning Administrator that this development was to be reviewed as Office and Warehouse with separate parking calculations for each of these uses. Further review comments may be forthcoming, or amended.

2. Per DS 2-02.2.1.7, per recent aerial photos, it appears that there are other smaller buildings on the site that are not shown on the drawing. All buildings should be shown. The response indicates that all buildings are shown. I see the storage buildings keynoted as number 5 on the west side of the site, thank you. The aerial photos from 2005 show a small set of detached and attached buildings at the southeast corner of the existing main building. Are these buildings now removed? If so, please just confirm in a response note. If they are there, please provide a keynote and their square footage.

3. Per DS 2-02.2.1.8, with regards to parking/vehicular use areas:
A) Staff is recalling that vehicles are being parked in the area of the site at the southeast corner of the property - is that going to be paved or blocked off to prevent use? If it is going to be used - please add the area to the calcs and show new pavement and striping, otherwise, bollards should be shown to block it off. Thank you.
B) On detail Q-7, revise the wheel stop location to be 2'6" fully contained within the top of the parking space.
C) On detail Q-7, revise the fine and keynote $518.00 fine for illegal parking
D) In parking area along south of building, just show new striping location and keynote it is a re-stripe (rather than showing current striping)

4. Per DS 2-02.2.1.11, re: PAALs
A) please provide dimensions for PAAL widths around the east, north and west side of the buildings for vehicular circulation.
B) It appears vehicle circulation is one way on the truck route around the building at the east, north and west sides of the building - if one way only, provide signage at the east and west entrances to this circulation area advising one way only.
C) PAAL width near the east entrance to the loading areas, between parking and fence (I marked this in pink) is less than the 24' required width. Please revise per DS 3-05 and LUC 3.3.4 parking and PAAL width requirements.
D) The 14' wide exit PAAL at the east side of the site must be marked with signage at the exit off Park to ensure no entry occurs
E) The exit PAAL must also be setback on both the north and the south sides, at least 2' away from the fencing, per DS 3-05.2.2.B.3
F) Please provide the width of the entry of the 14' wide PAAL and provide signage to ensure trucks don't block the exit area
G) Show maneuvering into this exit area to ensure that vehicle access is accomplished between the marked truck spaces - a truck space may have to be removed
H) Provide curbing along this exit PAAL to ensure undeveloped land adjacent is undisturbed

5. Per DS 2-02.2.1.12, with regards to pedestrian and handicapped circulation:
A) Show pedestrian circulation within PAALs and around buildings per DS 2-08. The response indicated pedestrian refuge was not provided around the building separating it from the vehicle circulation system because the area is not public access. Understood. Instead of sidewalks, 5' wide striping is permitted to be painted around the building where abutting the vehicular circulation lane - this is pedestrian refuge areas for employees.
B) Show pedestrian access from Park to the building, per DS 2-08.4.1.A
C) Show pedestrian access from Euclid to the building, per DS 2-08.4.1.A
D) Provide 4' wide sidewalk between the building and the parking spaces located along the south border of the building, per DS 2-08.4.1.C
E) Ensure any disabled access ramps and truncated domes are installed where applicable along the pedestrian route between the parking spaces and the building

6. Per DS 2-02.2.2.A.1, please add a note listing the area of the site that is actually being developed - in square feet and acres (10.6 acres per conversation with applicant at submittal).

7. Per DS 2-02.2.2.A.2, show floor area ratio - include all buildings - in percentage.

8. Per DS 2-02.2.2.a.6, I see percentage of expansion calculations for the vehicular use area, thank you. There are several small buildings on the site - including some in the east are of the site, that should be listed to ensure they are counted within this full code compliance review. Please list their square footages and the dates they were added to the site.

9. Please declare the height of the free-standing light poles (at least 15' in vehicle circulation and parking area per DS 3-05) and provide a note on the pole base width to ensure it does not interfere with parking.

10. Please note, depending upon the responses submitted, further review comments may be forthcoming. Should you have any questions on my review, or wish to meet with me, please contact me at Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov or at 791-4541x1156.


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

HCT C:\planning\site\DSD\T06OT02036 899 e silverlake ups 2nd.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents
11/07/2007 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Denied Revise the native plant preservation plans to show the correct amount of high -medium viable plants per DS 2-15.0. 301 plants are indicated?
11/07/2007 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1. 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 per LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.c. Diamond planters within parking lot are not adequate size. Revise detail as necessary; include dimensions on appropriate plans.

2. Revise the landscape plan to show the locations and note the height and materials used to construct any proposed or required screen walls. DS 2-07.A.3

3. Any required 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

4. Revise the native plant preservation plans to show the correct amount of high -medium viable plants per DS 2-15.0. 301 plants are indicated?
11/07/2007 HEATHER THRALL ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Denied Please see zoning review comments.
11/27/2007 BIANCA RAMIREZ ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: November 26, 2007
SUBJECT: New Parking Lot - Site Plan
TO: Donna Mertes
LOCATION: 899 E Silverlake, T14S, R14E, Section 19, Ward 5
REVIEWERS: Bianca Ramirez, CFM
ACTIVITY: T07OT02408 (First Review)


RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Site Plan

SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed site plan for the above referenced property. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the site plan at this time. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal.

Site Plan:

1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the Site Plan.
2. With next submittal provide initial redlines generated from engineering comments from 10/10/06 for reference of previous comments.
3. As per the Federal ADA requirements, all wheel chair ramps shall have the truncated domes instead of the standard grooves that are shown on COT SD 207. Aside from the Truncated Domes, all wheel chair ramps shall be constructed in accordance with COT SD 207.
4. Provide project address per D.S. 2-02.2.1.3.
5. Add dimension and bearings for northern property line on sheet two (2) per D.S. 2-02.2.1.5
6. Revise the title Development Plan to read Site Plan.
7. D.S. 2-02.2.1.10: Show all existing and future site visibility triangles (SVT) on plan view for all (proposed and existing) PAAL access points. Revise the SVTs shown for Silverlake Road to reflect the dimensions for a Collector Street. Revise the SVTs for Park Avenue to reflect the dimensions for an Arterial Street. Verify that both existing and future SVTs depicted on site plan. If there is a stop sign from Euclid Avenue onto or across Silverlake Road provide SVT.
8. Label all points of egress and ingress per D.S. 2-02.2.1.11. Per DS Sec.3-01.3.2.C: Depict and label 25-feet radii concrete curbs per City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Detail 213 (PC/COT SD 213) and the Transportation Access Guidelines (TAMG) at all of the existing and proposed driveway entrances located on Silverlake Road and Park Avenue. Dipict and label the 18-feet radii concrete curbs at the proposed driveway entrances located on Euclid Avenue. The curbs should be constructed at the edge of pavement and entirely on the subject property, which must also be depicted on the site plan. Indicate curb returns for MS&R and call out radius on plans. Site is being reviewed for full code compliance, which requires curb returns. For any questions and or requests regarding curb returns please contact Jose Ortiz with TDOT at 791-4259.
9. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Indicate on the site plan and in details that all handicap access ramps at crosswalks or at the transition of a pedestrian circulation area to a vehicular use area have required detectable warning devices (truncated domes).
10. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Provide continuous pedestrian circulation path that connects all public access areas of the proposed circulation path located on Euclid Avenue.
11. D.S. 2-02.2.1.14: Dimension the required maneuverability area for all loading zones that are indicated on the site plan. Refer to AASHTO for the national standards for turning radii.
12. DS Sec 2-02.2.1.A.15: Provide the 100-year floodplain limits with the calculated water surface elevation for the required retention basin located on sheet S4.
13. Add drainage arrows to legend and differentiate between the arrows indicated on the plans.
14. DS Sec 2-02.2.1.A.19: Provide the dimensioned MS&R right-of-way width(s) for Silverlake Road. Label and dimension existing and future right-of-ways along with curb(s) and sidewalk locations (existing curb and sidewalk if maximum right of way taken). Label MS&Rs with appropriate street designations (ie Arterial, Collector, Local, etc.).
15. DS Sec 2-02.2.1.A.20: Verify dimensions for right of way for Euclid Avenue.
16. Add the basin(s) maintenance responsibility note to the Site Plan.
17. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Indicate on the site plan and in details that all handicap access ramps at crosswalks and at the transition of a pedestrian circulation area to a vehicular use area have required detectable warning devices (truncated domes).
18. Dimension from street monument lines to existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, driveways, and utility lines per D.S. 2-02.2.1.21.
19. Provide site plan activity number on each sheet in the lower right hand corner per D.S. 2-02.2.1.29.
20. D.S. 2-02.2.1.32: Additional comments may be forthcoming for trash enclosure. Initial engineering redlines needed for further review.
21. A permit or a private improvement agreement will be necessary for any work performed within the Right-of-way. Contact Permits and Codes at (520) 791-5100 for permit information.
22. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Provide locations of all concentration points for drainage.
23. DS Sec. 2-02.2.1.C: Provide the corrected proposed SVTs on the landscape plan. Provide note on the landscape plan stating that landscape areas are to be depressed 6" to maximize stormwater-harvesting areas. For the water harvesting areas provide reger to the City of Tucson Water Harvesting Guidance Manual, Ordinance #10210, for recommendation on how to construct and maintain the proposed water harvesting areas.
24. Detail Q indicates striping for handicap areas. Indicate access ramps and truncated domes for detail and indicate on site plan accordingly.


DRAINAGE REPORT:
25. DS Sec 2-02.2.1.A.15: Provide a copy of the original approved Master Drainage Report for the site that addresses all 100-year flows for the required onsite retention basin and the onsite/offsite drainage. The Master Drainage Report must show that the 5-year retention has been addressed for the existing and proposed impervious cover. 2-year, 10-year and 100-year retention is provided in drainage report. In addition, it appears that detention parameters were used in stead of retention.
26. DS Sec 10-01.2.2: Provide, if the Master Drainage Report does not address 5-year retention, a drainage report showing that the 5-year threshold retention for the proposed parking lot has been addressed. For all commercial development larger than 1 acre in size threshold retention system must be incorporated. The drainage report must meet the minimum standards for development outlined in the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual.
27. Drainage Report Appendix C appears to provide calculations for the required retention volume. Provide details for the proposed basins to demonstrate the volume will be provided. Also demonstrate that the drainage areas that are directed to the basin will provide sufficient volume to the basin to meet the retention requirements in a 5-year event. Provide discussion of the results in the body of the report. Differentiate between retention requirements and detention requirements in your discussion.

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT:
28. 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 shall 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.
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 basing for 5-year threshold.

STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN:
29. 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 the re-submittal. For further information, visit www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html. A SWPPP submittal will be required along with the grading permit. Every Construction General Permit required a separate SWPPP.

Provide a revised site plan, drainage report, geotechnical engineering report and SWPPP that address the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all the above comments.

Further comments may be forthcoming upon resubmittal of the site plan, drainage report, geotechnical report, and SWPPP reviews.

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4928 or Bianca.Ramirez@tucsonaz.gov

Bianca C. Ramirez
Engineering Associate
City of Tucson/Development Services Department
201 N. Stone Avenue
P.O. Box 27210
Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210
(520) 837-4928 office
(520) 879-8010 fax

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
11/30/2007 CINDY AGUILAR OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
11/30/2007 CINDY AGUILAR REJECT SHELF Completed