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: T09CM00320
Parcel: 13609004A

Address:
10720 E 22ND ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T09CM00320
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
03/24/2009 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed NOT A COT OWNED/OPERATED PROJECT
03/25/2009 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Denied Please indicate location of existing and/or proposed fire hydrants, with dimensions to propose building. Refer to C.O.T. amendments to 2006 IFC Section 503 for spacing requirements. Inclusion of fire sprinklers will allow additional distance from hydrants.
03/25/2009 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Academy of Tucson - Expansion
T09CM00320
Site Plan (1st Review)

TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 26, 2009

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 due to an expansion of building and vehicle use area greater than 25%.

2. Per LUC Section 3.5.3.7.B for the proposed number of students 227 the minimum lot size would be 329,604 sq. ft or 7.57 acres. This said a Zoning Examiner Full Notice Procedure, Special Exception is required. Contact Michael Wyneken @791-4505 in regards to this procedure. If the Special Exception is approved provide the Special Exception case number, Date of approval, and any Conditions of approval on the site plan. Also the proposed use listed under L.U.C. PROJECT DATA will need to be revised to reflect the Special Exception. The site plan cannot be approved until the Special Exception has been approved.

3. Provide a copy of the site plan that approved the shade structures that are currently on site. Show all these structures on the site plan.

4. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.2 Provide a property description (legal description) on the site plan.

5. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.4 The section corners shown along the east section line of the location map are not correct, see redline.

6. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6 For all existing and proposed buildings and structures, provide overall dimensions, height and identify all canopies and awnings on the site plan.

7. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7 The perimeter yard setback shown to Avenida Los Reyes is not shown correctly. This setback should be measured from the back of future curb location.

8. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7 Provide a setback dimension from the proposed Building #4 to the east property line.

9. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7 The required and provided street perimeter yards shown under L.U.C. PROJECT DATA are not correct. Per LUC Section 3.2.6.5.B, ADT of 1,000 or greater, these setbacks are measured from the back of existing curb or future curb location.

10. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7 Provide dimensions between all buildings on site.

11. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Provide a detail for a standard vehicle parking space.

12. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 Per D.S. 3-05.2.3.C.1 wheel stop curbing is required along the east vehicle parking area. Show these on the site plan.

13. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8 As the proposed and existing sidewalk along the west side of the existing and proposed vehicle parking area is less than 6'-6" wide, per D.S. 3-05.2.3.C.1 wheel stop curbing is required for all vehicle parking spaces. Show these on the site plan.

14. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9 Provide an off-street bicycle parking detail, including materials for lighting, paving, and security; fully dimensioned layout; location; specific type of rack and the number of bicycles it supports.

15. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.10 Show existing and future sight visibility triangles (SVT's) on the plan

16. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 Provide width dimensions for all proposed sidewalks on the site plan.

17. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13 If applicable show the location, type, size, and height of existing and proposed signage.

18. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.18 Label 22nd Street as an MS&R route.

19. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.21 Show the location of the future curb and sidewalk on the site plan.

20. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.25 If applicable show all existing and proposed lighting layout and type.

21. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.28 The adjacent zoning shown for the parcel located on the west side of Avenida Los Reyes is not correct. This zoning should be shown as RX-1.

22. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.28 The adjacent zoning shown for the parcel located on the north side of 22nd Street is not correct. This zoning should be shown as R-1.

23. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.3 Per LUC Section 3.2.3.2.A and Development Designator "5" the proposed 24% lot coverage exceeds the allowed lot coverage of 15%. A Board of Adjustment for Variance is required prior to approval of the site plan. If the variance is approved provide the Variance case number, Date of approval, and any Conditions of approval on the site plan. The site plan cannot be approved until the Variance has been approved.

24. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4 The bicycle parking calculation is not correct. Based on 227 students and 20 employees = 247/10 = 25 bicycle parking spaces required.

25. Depending on how the above comments are addressed addition comments may be forth coming.

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

C:\planning\site\t09cm00320

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents.
04/02/2009 RONALD BROWN ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Denied 1. Please provide a large scale plan detail of the marked crossing and all associated ramps, slopes and detectable warnings. It does not appear to work properly, too small and not enough detail to determine.
2. Provide accessible passenger loading zones as per IBC 2006, Chapeter 11, Section 1106.7 and ICC/ANSI 117.1, Section 503.1
04/03/2009 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: April 6, 2009
SUBJECT: 10720 E 22nd Street Site Plan- Engineering Review
TO: Grenier Engineering, ATTN: Kent Delph, P.E.
LOCATION: T14S R15E Sec24 Ward 4
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: T09CM00320 (Site Plan)


SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the site plan (T09CM00320) and Drainage Statement (Grenier Engineering, Inc., 12MAR09) for the above referenced property. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the site plan or Drainage Statement at this time. The following items need to be addressed:


SITE PLAN COMMENTS: This project consists of a greater than 25% expansion for the new charter school expansion, per the Zoning Section review. The greater than 25% expansion requires that the entire site is reviewed and brought up to current full code requirements of the Development Standards and Land Use Code (this includes that all details and dimensions be shown on the proposed plan).

1) Due to the full code expansion requirement per the Zoning Section this comment letter does not reflect all of the comments or quality control comments that must be addressed prior to resubmittal of the site plan. Make sure that all dimensions, details, sections, keynotes, proposed improvements and all other aspects of this project meet the minimum requirements within DS Sec.2-02, 3-01, 3-05 and 6-01 and are reflected on the site plan sheets.

2) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.2: Revise the site plan to include a location map.

3) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.8: Revise the site plan to include 6-inch curbing around the entire proposed vehicular use area. Curbing is required to prevent encroachment onto the undeveloped portion of the property. Provide a label with an associated keynote to verify locations.

4) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.10: Revise the site plan to label and dimension the sight visibility triangles for both PAAL access points. Provide the dimension for both the near and far side of the triangles per DS Sec.3-01.5.3.

5) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.11: Verify and label the 25-feet radii and concrete curbs per City of Tucson Transportation Access Management Guidelines (TAMG), Section 5.5 at both driveway entrances located on 22nd Street. Refer to DS Sec.3-01.3.2.C for street development standards.

6) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to show the required 6-foot wide sidewalk with curb along the street frontage of 22nd Street. Per the adopted Mayor and Counsel policy all sidewalks along MS&R right-of-ways for arterial and collector streets require 6-foot wide sidewalks. If a sidewalk is existing along the entire street frontage provide photo documentation showing that the sidewalk is in good condition and is not buckled or cracked in spots, if the sidewalk is not in good condition then a new 6-foot sidewalk will be required.

7) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to provide or verify the required 5-foot sidewalk within the public right-of-way of Avenida Los Reyes. If a sidewalk already exists within the right-of-way provide photographic documentation that it is in good condition and is not buckled or cracked in spots.

8) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to label and dimension the required pedestrian circulation path that must connect the existing building to the required sidewalk located along the frontage of 22nd Street. The pedestrian circulation must meet the requirements within DS Sec.2-08. The site plan needs to clearly dimension the existing pedestrian circulation path and it connecting to the required 6-foot sidewalk along 22nd Street.

9) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to label and dimension all existing onsite pedestrian circulation areas. Pedestrian circulation must provide a clear 4-foot minimum width unless adjacent to a PAAL which would require a 5-foot width. Specifically the sidewalk required from the parallel parking spaces to the building.

10) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to show that all existing and proposed offsite handicap access ramps within the public right-of-way meet the design requirements per the public standard detail #207. Provide details and minimum slope requirements at all transitions from pedestrian circulation to vehicular circulation.

11) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all onsite handicap and ANSI Standard requirements that apply to this project.

12) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Revise the site plan to label all proposed flow arrows onsite to verify stormwater drainage from the vehicular use area, roof drainage, basin bottoms, etc.

13) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Revise the site plan to provide the water surface elevation for the existing basin adjacent to the proposed building to verify finished floor elevation. All structures must be elevated 1-foot above the calculated water surface elevation of any adjacent basin. Provide the water surface elevation for the proposed basin as well.

14) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Revise the site plan and any necessary changes to the Drainage Statement to label and dimension all drainage infrastructure locations for the proposed detention/retention basin to include but not limited to, basin inlets and outlets, proposed scuppers, curb opening, erosion hazard cut off wall, etc. for design purposes. Verify that all drainage improvements that are within the Drainage Statement are clearly labeled with details and dimensions on the revised site plan.

15) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Per Division Directive the site plan must label and dimension all basin outlets and bleeder pipes that are required at the basin outlets to ensure positive drainage. Provide the location and dimensions of the bleeder pipe in the detail for the basins. All basins must be designed to eliminate standing water and mosquito infestation. Infiltration test will be required prior to site plan approval to ensure that the basin drains within the 12-hour requirement.

16) DS Sec.10-02.14.3.3: Revise the site plan to provide for the required maintenance access ramp into all proposed basins. A minimum 15-foot wide vehicular access ramp with a maximum 15 % slope is required into the basins; verify that the landscape plans do not interfere with the required 15-foot access ramp.

17) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.17: Provide the cut and fill quantities on the site plan.

18) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.19: Revise the site plan to label 22nd street as either public or private and as a MS&R Arterial route.

19) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.19: Revise the site plan to label and dimension the required 12-foot setback measured from the future curb to the future right-of-way, for the location of the future 6-foot sidewalk and required space.

20) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.20: Verify that all existing and proposed easements are drawn with recordation information, location, width, and purpose of on the site plan.

21) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.21: Provide dimensions from the street monument lines to the existing and/or proposed curb, sidewalk, driveway and any utility lines. Clearly label the centerline of the road.

22) 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.

23) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.32: Revise the site plan to provide a detail and dimensions for the proposed refuse container. Refer to DS Sec.6-01 (Figure 3) for all required refuse enclosure dimensions and construction details.

24) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.32: Verify the maneuverability for the required 36-foot and 50-foot radii for the refuse container; clearly label these in plan view. Provide the required 14-foot by 40-foot clear approach. Refer to DS Sec.6-01 for all refuse requirements.

25) Be advised that further comments may be forth coming on resubmittal of the site plan due to the full code requirement status.


DRAINAGE REPORT:

26) Revise the Drainage Statement to provide the calculations for the scour depth of the regulatory wash that was used to determine the bottom of the wall elevation for scour protection. Revise the Drainage Statement and Exhibit 3 to show at a minimum the proposed erosion hazard cutoff wall extending to the erosion hazard setback (EHSB) line. The Cutoff wall needs to be keyed in to the EHSB to prevent undermining of the wall.

27) Revise the Drainage Statement to include calculation sheets, tables, hydrographs, etc to verify that the proposed and reconfigured basins meets the recommendations of the report for balanced basin requirements. Verify that all requirements within DS Sec.10-01 and 10-02 have been addressed in the statement.

28) Revise the Drainage Statement to include all details and dimensions for both the proposed detention/retention basin and the reconfigured detention basin. Provide minimum percent slope for basin bottom, side slopes, basin inlet and outlet locations, length, width, height, water surface elevation, etc.

29) Revise the Drainage Statement to provide the new water surface elevation for the reconfigured basin to verify finished floor elevation requirements for the proposed building.


GRADING PLAN:

30) DS Sec.11-01.2.1: A grading permit may be required for this project depending on the proposed cut and fill quantities. A grading plan and a grading permit application will be required after site plan approval and prior to any construction activity. A grading permit may not be issued prior to site plan approval.

31) A Floodplain Use Permit is required for this project due to the proposed improvements within the mapped erosion hazard setback area. If a grading plan is required for this project then the floodplain use permit will be required at grading plan application submittal. If a grading plan is not warranted then the floodplain use permit must be submitted under the site plan application submittal for review and approval of the erosion hazard abatement wall.

32) 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

33) Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) is applicable to this project due to the proposed area of disturbance (1.45 acres per the Drainage Statement). Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) and text addressing stormwater controls for all areas affected by construction activities related to this development may be required. For further information, visit www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html.


GEOTECHNICAL REPORT:

34) 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 proposed basin, and provide a discussion of the potential for hydro-collapsible soils. Report should address building setback from the proposed water harvesting basins and the proposed retention basin.

b) Provide slope stability recommendations for all proposed constructed slopes.

c) Provide pavement structure design recommendations.

d) Provide percolation rates for retention/detention basins for 5-year threshold retention.


GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised site plan, Drainage Report and a 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.

For questions, or to schedule an appointment, I can be reached at 837-4929.



Jason Green, CFM
Senior Engineer Associate
Engineering Division
COT Development Services
04/08/2009 PETER MCLAUGHLIN LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1. Development may not encroach into the designated Natural Undisturbed Open Space (NUOS) as shown on the submitted site plan. Revise plan.

2. The site plan must be accompanied by a landscape plan and irrigation 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. The review will continue when documents are included with re-submittal.
04/09/2009 PETER MCLAUGHLIN NPPO REVIEW Denied 1. Development may not encroach into the designated Natural Undisturbed Open Space (NUOS) as shown on the submitted site plan. Revise plan.

2. Submit a native plant preservation plan. LUC 3.8.4.2
04/20/2009 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied Revise the current site drawing to include the following information:
a. the location and size of the water meter
b. the location of the main water lines
c. the location and size of the public sanitary sewer and
d. the location, invert, and rim elevation of all manholes.
Reference: City of Tucson Development Standard No. 2-05.0 2.3 and Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
04/27/2009 CINDY AGUILAR OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
04/27/2009 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed