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

Permit Number: T08CM02288
Parcel: 120063210

Address:
4301 S 6TH AV

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL

Permit Number - T08CM02288
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
09/19/2008 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: 4301 S. 6th
T08CM02298
Site Plan (2nd Review)

TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 18, 2008

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed.

1. This site plan was reviewed for compliance with the City of Tucson Development Standards (D.S.) and Land Use Code (LUC) for full code compliance.

2. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.14 Per LUC Section 3.4.4.6 Striping of Loading Spaces. Loading spaces shall be striped in such a manner as to distinguish the space from motor vehicle parking spaces and other uses on the site.

3. Once the above comment has been addressed zoning is willing to provide an over-the-counter review. Please call or email to schedule an appointment.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956.

C:\planning\site\t08cm02298-2nd

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents.
09/19/2008 RONALD BROWN ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Denied 19 SEPTEMBER 2008
T08CM02288/RETAIL-OFFICE STORES - RESUBMITTAL
REVIEWED BY RON BROWN

ACCESSIBLE REVIEW
2006 IBC/ICC 117.1

DENIED: SEE COMMENTS BELOW

SHEET C-03
1. DETAIL 1:
a. OK
b. RELOCATE SIGN TO CENTER LINE OF PARKING SPACE AND JUST OUTSIDE THE REQUIRED 18' LENGTH REQUIRED.
NON RESPONSIVE, RELOCATE SIGN OUTSIDE OF 18' PARKING SPACE
c. OK
2. DETAIL 7:
a. BOTTOM OF MAIN SIGN TO BE 7' ABOVE FINISHED GRADE
NOT TO BOTTOM OF VAN ACCESSIBLE SIGN
3. DETAIL 12:
a. OK
b. OK

END OF REVIEW
09/25/2008 PETER MCLAUGHLIN LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1. Landscape plan shall include complete irrigation specification design and layout per DS 2-06.5.4.A & DS 2-06.5.4.B including source of irrigation, sleeves for driveways and sidewalks, locations of valves, low-flow bubblers or drip irrigation. The irrigation lines are not shown in all required locations.

2. There are two trees (indicated by keynotes A and B) which are stated to be relocated somewhere on the plan. But the symbol for one (the Mexican palo verde) has in the legend that it is to remain in place and the other (Chilean mesquite) is not shown anywhere on the existing landscape plan (sheet L-1). Clarify and revise as necessary.

3. It is not necessary to use many of the individual numbered keynotes for plant types depicted on the drawing. To reduce clutter on the landscape plan and site plan, remove the keynote numbers and indicate type of vegetation only by using it's own unique symbol as shown in the legend.

4. An interior landscape border is required adjacent to the R-3 zoned property to the east in the area where the dumpster is located and where the water harvesting basin is. Relocate dumpster to allow room for the required landscape border. Detail all required landcsaping and irrigation within the interior landscape border. LUC Table 3.7.2-I

5. Per LUC 3.7.2.4.B.3, where motor vehicle parking spaces or parking area access lanes (PAALs) are located next to the property line or where the interior landscape border conflicts with a utility easement, an interior landscape border is not required if:

a. An equivalent number of trees are planted elsewhere on the site between the building(s) and the property line. When the use on the site does not include buildings, the required canopy trees must be located between the principal use and the property line;

b. The trees are evenly distributed over the site; and

c. The minimum planting area required in Sec. 3.7.2.3.A.1.c is provided for each canopy tree.

Revise the landscape plan to comply in that portion of the site adjacent to the R-3 zoned property to the east.

6. Some of the plants (i.e. verbena) are shown in the landscape plan on sheet L-2 but are not shown in the future landscape plan on sheet L-3, yet the coverage calculations are the same for both plans. Revise. Also, clarify what the square footages listed in parentheses next to the vegetation type (i.e. shrubs, groundcover, etc.) is referring to. If these are figures for total square footage provided they do not meet the required coverage for shrubs and groundcover. Revise or clarify and provide total accurate coverage calculations for landscape borders.

7. The numbers of canopy trees required as shown in the street landscape border calculations for 6th Avenue is incorrect. One (1) canopy tree must be provided for every thirty-three (33) linear feet of landscape border or fraction thereof per LUC 3.7.2.4. With 90 linear feet of street landscape border along 6th Ave. 3 canopy trees are required. Revise calculation.

8. Any changes to the site plan must be reflected in the landscape plan. LUC 3.7.2.7

9. Additional comments may apply upon resubmittal.
10/03/2008 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Revise the site drawing to include the location, invert, and rim elevation of the upstream and downstream manholes. Reference: City of Tucson Development Standard No. 2-05.0 2.3 and Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006.
2. Determine the need for a backwater valve per Section 710.1, UPC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson.
10/16/2008 BIANCA RAMIREZ ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: October 16, 2008
SUBJECT: Site Only
TO: Jaca Design
LOCATION: 4301 S 6th Ave, T14S, R13E, Section 36, Ward 5
REVIEWERS: Bianca Ramirez, CFM
ACTIVITY: T08CM02288 (Second 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.

Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the site plan.

Site Plan:

1. The most recent aerial photo of the building does not match what is depicted on the site plan. Please modify site plan to represent actual footprint of building and/or clarify. If there have been demolition permits issued indicate demolition permit numbers on the site plan. Provide building permit number for demolition on each sheet of the site plan.
2. Site plan is to meet all minimum Federal ADA requirements. See comments from Ron Brown, RA, Structural Plans Examiner for all handicap access requirements.
3. Complied
4. Provide all existing and proposed buildings and structures, including location, size, height, overhangs, canopies, and use per D.S. 2-02.2.1.6. Aerial photo indicated that there are two (2) structures on the site.
5. Verify that all Sight Visibility Triangles have been labeled and depicted correctly per D.S. 2-02.2.1.10. Label site visibility triangles on each sheet.
6. Compllied
7. There does not appear to be a loading zone provided on site plan. See zoning requirements for loading zone requirements. Fully dimensioned loading space(s) and maneuvering area(s) per D.S. 2-02.2.1.14. Identify loading zomes and provide maneuverability on site plan.
8. Please provide Drainage patterns and finished grades on site plan per D.S. 2-02.2.1.16.
9. List estimated cut and fill quantities on site plan.
10. DS Sec.2.02.2.1.A.16: Provide drainage arrows and locations of all concentration points. Specifically show roof down spout locations proposed buildings at pedestrian circulation areas. A detail for the dimension of the proposed scuppers that are used for collecting onsite roof drainage at all pedestrian sidewalk is required, refer to City of Tucson details. 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. Provide this information on the site plan.
11. Complied
12. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.19: Label the 9-foot future sidewalk and curb area on the site plan to verify that all improvements are located outside of the future ROW. Verify that the dimensions are called out on each sheet.
13. Complied
14. Complied
15. Complied
16. Complied
17. Complied
18. Per conversation at counter the location of the refuse container is to be modified for location and access thereto per D.S. 2-02.2.1.32 and D.S. 6-01.0. Provide approval from Environemental Services.
19. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.32: Label and show the maneuverability for refuse vehicles in plan view at the proposed refuse container location. Call out 14' X 40' clear approach, show access dimensioning to proposed trash enclosure.
20. Complied
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. Please show a typical cross section of the P.A.A.L. or call out the percentage of slopes. Call out the grade break at the driveway, if applicable. Call out the height of the curb on the site plan within the details.
23. Complied
24. Add note: "Depress all landscaped areas 6" maximum for water harvesting". Add note to site plan.
25. All symbols on plans need to be indicated in legend. Indicate all symbols in legend.
26. DS 3-05.2.2.D -Provide dimension for back up spur. Include dimension on each sheet.
27. Complied
28. Change handicap FINE amount to read $532.
29. Dimension existing parking along Columbia Street. Call out parking space located along northeast corner of proposed development.
31. Parking spaces are located within site visibility triangles. Relocate parking spaced to be outside SVT.
32. Verify that sidewalk dimensions called out on site plan(s) match.
33. Label sidewalk for dimentioned sidewalk.
34. Label curb on site plan.
35. Additional comments may be forthcoming.

Hydrologic/Hydraulic Report:

1. Provide explanation of how parcel is affected by properties located to the east of parcel.
2. Verify that discharge is adequately represented in report.
3. Provide calculations for standard weir and orifice calculations as outlined within report.
4. Provide manning's n calcuation(s) as referenced in report.
5. Provide drainage exhibit defining the drainage characteristics for the design of the project.
Verify that the exhibit shows that Q's entering and exiting the site. In addition, identify that locations of the basins and drainage features such as weirs and orifice(s). Include any setbacks from the proposed buildings.
6. Provide Geotechnical Report for minimum setback recommendations and perc tests.
7. Revise drainage report and project design to meet the minimum critical basin requirements per 10-01.2.1.
8. Additional comments may be forthcoming.


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
10/27/2008 CINDY AGUILAR OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
10/27/2008 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed