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: T09CM03255
Parcel: 104061830

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T09CM03255
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/05/2010 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: David Rivera
Principal Planner

PROJECT: T09CM03255
Rock Solid Solutions
Site Plan

TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 5, 2010

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. Add a text block specifically that describes the property's legal description or revise the description note in the text block to "Howard Industrial lot 3 M/P 48/19".
DS 2-02.2.1.A.2

2. List the subject property address under the Legal Description text block or in the title block.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.3

3. Draw and label the COT/Pima County jurisdiction limits line on the location map.
DS 2-03.2.1.A.4

4. For reference purposes label the distance from the most southern property corner to the southeast corner of the proposed structure or from the south corner along the Miller Avenue frontage to the northeast corner of the building.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.7

5. Revise the setback information listed on sheet 1 of 12 (AS101) to the correct requirements based on developed area setbacks. Miller Avenue is a Non-MS&R street and the street setback requirement is based on the greatest of 20 feet or the height of the structure from the property line. Per the approved and recorded map and plat 48 / 19 the area along the north side of the side was recorded as a private access (street) easement without street parking. The setback requirement for this area along the ingress / egress drive is based on minimum of five feet from the edge of the southern travel lane. In addition per the recorded plat a minimum of five feet adjacent to the access easement was reserved to provide pedestrian access to lot 1 and 2. This has not been demonstrated on the plan. A sidewalk from the Miller St. sidewalk must be provided to the east property line of lot 2.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.7

6. The parking requirements cannot be verified until the specific use is listed. The zoning of the property is I-1. Please review the I-1 zoning section of the LUC and use the specific permitted use listed under the land use group category that best fits this business. Once the actual use is determined the parking ratio can be determined as well.

Bicycle parking is based on the specific use as well. Any bicycle parking requirements must be provided based on the ratio for the specific use.

Assure that the following two items are included on the site plans;

DS 2-02.2.1.A.8. Off-street parking, including fully dimensioned layout, location, parking spaces' size and number, and typical parking space details for both handicapped and standard spaces, together with access thereto.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.9. Off-street bicycle parking, including materials for lighting, paving, and security; fully dimensioned layout; location; specific type of rack and the number of bicycles it supports; and the location and type of directional signage.

7. The sight visibility triangles must also be drawn and labeled for the northern ingress / egress drive.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.10

8. The site plan must be clear on where the vehicular access is proposed. Per the plan it appears that a PAAL system is provided off of Jim Howard Place and Miller Avenue. Also per the plan it does not appear that any separation or barriers between PAAL system and the undeveloped area along the south side of the PAAL and the landscape area in the northeast corner have been provided. Clarify if vehicular access is proposed in the undeveloped areas. If so these areas must be paved.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.11

9. Along with comment 8 assure that the vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian, and handicapped circulation is clearly identified. Continuous pedestrian circulation is to be provided on site connecting all common elements of the site such as buildings, loading zones, dumpsters, parking lots etc. and to each street on which the site has frontage. A sidewalk to Miller Avenue must be provided from the office. Demonstrate how this development standard will be accomplished.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.12 and DS 2-08.

10. If applicable draw and label the location, type, size, and height of existing and proposed signage.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.13

11. Draw and label a fully-dimensioned loading space(s) and maneuvering area(s). As of this review it is not clear if a loading zone is required because the actual use is not verified. Depending on the actual permitted use proposed a loading zone may be required based on the square footage of the building are and any extended areas applicable to the use.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.14

12. Dimensions from street monument lines to existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, driveways, and utility lines must be drawn and labeled on the site plan.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.21

13. A landscape and NPPO plan or NPPO exception is required for this project. See the landscape reviewer comments related to landscape buffers and screening requirements within the parking lot, and street frontages.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.24, DS 2-02.2.1.A.26, DS 2-02.2.1.A.27

14. Draw and label the refuse container location, size, and access thereto fully dimensioned. See engineering reviewer comments related to this item.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.32

15. Location and dimensions of fire lane(s) including type of surface, curbing, and method of restricting public access (if applicable).
DS 2-02.2.1.A.35


16. Add a text block on the site plan sheet related to LUC code data or development criteria. Include the following in the data text block;
a. The proposed use, Development Designator, and any applicable subject to sections,
b. Gross lot size in acres and square feet,
c. The allowed and proposed Floor Area Ratio (FAR),
d. The number of required and provided vehicle parking spaces including accessible spaces,
e. The number of required and provided class one and class two bicycle parking spaces (facilities),
f. The number and size of required and provided loading spaces,
g. Allowed and proposed building height of both structures.

17. The following items must be addressed.
a. When a minimum of one accessible parking space is required, the space must be designed to accommodate a van and a eight foot wide access aisle. The plan indicates a eight foot wide space and a five foot wide aisle. Revise as required,
b. Dimension all on site pedestrian sidewalks. The minimum width allowed is four (4) feet,
c. Provide at all pedestrian crossings access ramps and truncated domes (where required). See the ADA / Building plans reviewer comments,
d. Label the building dimensions for building one,
e. Label the building one proposed setbacks from the west property line and from the edge of the pavement from Jim Howard Place,
f. All proposed gated entries must be reviewed and approved by traffic engineering before zoning can approve the gated entries. Contact Jose Ortiz with Traffic Engineering at 837-6730 to discuss the proposed gated entries along Miller Avenue and Jim Howard Place entry points,
g. Label the zoning along the south property line,
h. Revise and label the accessible parking sign per the attached detail drawing,
i. Some form of dust control (pavement) will be required on non-improved areas where vehicular access is allowed,
j. If additional sheets are required to add the necessary information please include them after the site plan sheet.


18. Additional Comments may forthcoming based on the revisions to the plans and the response stating how all zoning comments have been addressed. Please include all redlines made on this drawing with the next submittal of the revised site plan.

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

C:\DSD\T09CM03255.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents
01/06/2010 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Denied Provide 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 and a signed statement from the property owner that Protected Native Plants are not located on the subject site. Photographs of the site are necessary for NPPO approval per DS 2-15.2.0.C
01/06/2010 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1. Submit a landscape plan to verify that the site meets minimum requirements.

2. A street landscape border, per Sec. 3.7.2.4 of the LUC, is a landscape area with a minimum width of ten (10) feet, running the full length of the street property line(s) bounding the site except for points of ingress-egress. On streets designated as Major Streets and Routes (MS&R), the street landscape border is measured from the MS&R right-of-way line as determined by LUC 2.8.3.4.

3. Fifty (50) percent or more of the street landscape border area must have shrubs and vegetative ground cover per LUC 3.7.2.4

4. Indicate square footage of all landscaped areas and calculation of the percentage of vegetative coverage per DS 2-07.2.2.2.g.

5. One (1) canopy tree must be provided for every thirty-three (33) linear feet of landscape border per LUC 3.7.2.4.

6. A 30" continuous screen along street frontages for vehicle use area must be provided per LUC Table 3.7.2-I

7. Any vegetation or screen higher than thirty (30) inches must be located outside of the sight visibility triangle.

8. Within a vehicular use area, one (1) canopy tree is required for each 10 motor vehicle parking spaces and every parking space shall be located within forty (40) feet of the trunk of a canopy tree (as measured from the center of the tree trunk) per LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.

9. Planting Plan. The planting plan and layout calculations will include the following information:

§ The location of individual plants one (1) gallon or larger.

§ Sizes of plants indicated in boxes, gallon cans

§ Ultimate size of plants indicated by the spread of canopy, circumference of shrubs, or spread of ground cover.

§ Both the proper and common name of each type of plant material.

§ Location, size, and name of existing vegetation to remain in place.

§ Material and areas of inert ground cover.


10. Provide 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 and a signed statement from the property owner that Protected Native Plants are not located on the subject site. Photographs of the site are necessary for NPPO approval per DS 2-15.2.0.C

11. Landscape plan shall include 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.

12. All landscape areas will be depressed to accept water flow from roofs, PAAL, and parking areas. Show by detail or spot elevations how landscape areas will accommodate water harvesting.

13. 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.

14. Additional comments may apply.
12/11/2009 RONALD BROWN ZONING HC REVIEW Denied 1. Zoning will require a pedestrian access (accessible route) to the Miller Av. public right of way. Reference Zoning comments.
2. From this added accessible route to Miller Av. "T" off and provide an accessible route extension to the new yard building for compliance with the 2006 IBC, Section 1103.1.
3. Finish the accessible parking sign:
a. Provide a 7' dimension to the bottom of the sign from the finished grade.
b. Ptovide a "Van Accessible" sign just below the main sign.
c. Show location on site plan.
4. Provide a large scale plan of the ramp leading to the future Office Trailer:
a. Provide all critical accessible dimensions.
b. Show all grade differentations.
c. Show hand rail details and dimensions
d. Show all required construction details and required structural calculations.
12/11/2009 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
12/14/2009 DAVE MANN FIRE REVIEW Approved
12/14/2009 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: December 17, 2009
SUBJECT: 2051 W Jim Howard Pl- Engineering Review
TO: Raymond Ybarra
LOCATION: T13S R13E Sec22 Ward 3
REVIEWER: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITIES: T09CM03255 (Site Plan), T09CM03255 (Building Plan) and T09OT02682 (Floodplain Use Permit)


SUMMARY: Engineering Division of the Planning and Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed site/building plan (T09CM03255), Floodplain Use Permit, Hydrology/Hydraulic Report (Arroyo Engineering, Inc., 26MAY95), and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation (Western Technologies Inc., 30 JUN95) 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:


HYDROLOGY/HYDRAULIC REPORT COMMENTS:

1) Provide a new HH Report to show that detention/retention requirements per DS Sec.10-01 have been addressed for Lot 3. Provide a discussion in a new HH Report with hydrographs and basin calculations to verify Critical Basin requirements have been addressed. The submitted HH Report only covers the detention/retention requirements for Lots 1 and 2 and the construction of the required basin on those 2 lots. Per the HH Report submitted it clearly states "that a stormwater detention/retention plan will need to be prepared at the time that a development plan for Lot 3 is submitted." Per DS Sec.10-02.14.2.1 Retention/detention requirements apply to any commercial development on a site or lot larger than 1 acre in size and to any lot subdivided since September 4, 1984.

2) Verify that the HH Report and site plan design meets all requirements of floodway fringe development per Chapter 26 Sec.26-5.2 of the Tucson Code. Clarify stem wall design for both structures in order to elevate the lowest finish floor 1-foot above the base flood elevation (FEMA SFHA Zone AO1) without increasing the BFE by more than one-tenth of a foot. Both BFE and FFE need to be clearly called out on the plan and in the details.

3) Verify that all proposed drainage infrastructure required for the design of the basin as shown in the HH Report and post drainage exhibit map are labeled and dimensioned on the site and grading plan for site layout and construction purposes.


SITE PLAN COMMENTS:

4) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.5: Revise the plan sheets to clearly delineate the property lines between the shown property pins. Provide a line weight different from the fencing and easement lines.

5) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.5: Revise General Note #3 to include the Basis of Elevation description as required. Provide the floodplain information in a separate note under the Permitting Note section (see comment below for wording). Revise the site plan and the Basis of Elevation note to indicate the ground elevation based on City of Tucson Datum (indicate the COT field book number and page along with the datum reference used).

6) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.6: The site plan is proposing 2 new buildings (1 and 2) and will require at a minimum 2 separate Floodplain Use Permits (FUP) to track the elevation certificates that will be required for the verification of the lowest finished floor elevation for both buildings. Provide an additional FUP for building 2 at resubmittal and verify through Zoning if a separate building application is required for building 2.

7) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.8: Revise the site plan to label and dimension the setbacks from the proposed PAAL along Miller Avenue to any existing poles, scuppers, catch basin etc. to verify conformance per Tucson Code Chapter 25-40 a & b. Clarify the concrete header for the PAAL located along Jim Howard Place and how it is constructed in respects to the adjacent PAAL and any associated concrete headers.

8) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.8: Curbing is required for the north side of the PAAL adjacent to the landscape area in the northeast corner. Provide a label and detail for the required curbing to separate vehicular use area from landscaping. If this area is not required landscaping and is being used as storage area a barrier is required to prevent encroachment into the labeled sight visibility triangle.

9) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.8: Revise the site plan to provide a section label in plan view for the proposed "typical paving section detail" for the transition from vehicular use area to storage area.

10) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.11: Verify and label the radii for both sides of the proposed driveway per City of Tucson Transportation Access Management Guidelines (TAMG), Section 5.5. Refer to DS Sec.3-01.3.2.C for street development standards. Standard driveway entrance design or reduced radii for curb returns will require prior approval, in writing, from TDOT Permits and Codes, Thad Harvison at 837-6592.

11) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.11: Revise the site plan to clarify all curbing and/or concrete headers. Provide the location with a label to the Standard Detail for Public Improvement for the proposed improvement. Specifically the required 6-inch vertical curbing required for the PAAL entrance off of Miller Avenue and the proposed concrete header for the PAAL entrance off of Jim Howard Place. Verify how all curb returns or headers are constructed and that they do not adversely impact existing improvements.

12) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to label and dimension the removal of the existing 5-foot sidewalk and curb within the public right-of-way at the proposed PAAL location along Miller Avenue.

13) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.12: Revise the site plan to label and dimension the required onsite pedestrian circulation path from both right-of-ways to both buildings 1 and 2, a pedestrian circulation between proposed buildings 1 and 2 and also around building 2. Per DS Sec.3-05.2.2.B.1 a pedestrian circulation must provide a clear 4-foot minimum width unless adjacent to a PAAL which would require a 5-foot width.

14) 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.

15) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Revise the site plan to verify it meets the requirements of floodway fringe development per Chapter 26 Sec.26-5.2 of the Tucson Code. Clarify stem wall design for both structures in order to elevate the lowest finish floor 1-foot above the base flood elevation (FEMA SFHA Zone AO1). Clearly label both the base flood elevation and regulatory flood elevation in plan view and in the elevation details for FFE verification.

16) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Revise the site plan sheet to label and dimension the Q100 discharge at the down stream end of the existing culverts and the existing 100-year floodplain limits associated with the FEMA FIRM panel. All flows of 100-cfs or more must be shown along with the existing floodplain limits on the site plan. A Permitting Note may be added in lieu of the floodplain limits as long as it specifically states the following; "This property is located within a FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area Zone AO1 per the Flood Insurance Rate Map 04019C1619K, effective date February 8, 1999. Elevation Certificates will be required for both buildings prior to P2S and P2F inspections."

17) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Provide the Improvement Plan reference number for all existing drainage infrastructure adjacent to the site; i.e. concrete lined channel, culverts, catch basins, scuppers, etc. All existing drainage improvements that are shown on the site plan must have the referenced improvement plan for site verification.

18) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Revise the site plan to label and dimension the required detention/retention basin for Lot 3. Verify that the site plan matches the HH Report in basin location, inlet and outlet design and access to the required basin.

19) DS Sec.2-01.2.1.A.19: Revise the site plan to label and dimension the existing right-of-way for Miller Avenue on the plan sheet. Clearly label the center line of the roadway.

20) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.20: Verify that all existing and proposed easements are labeled with recordation information on the site plan (i.e. 10-foot landscape easement, TEP easements, etc.). The 1-foot No Vehicular Access easement has been abandoned per the submitted documentation therefore the easement must be removed from the site plan for clarity purposes.

21) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.21: Provide dimensions from the street monument lines to the existing curb, sidewalk, driveways and utility lines associated with Miller Avenue.

22) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.32: Revise the site plan to clearly label and dimension the required refuse container and enclosure location for Lot 3. Refer to DS Sec.6-01 (Figure 3) for all required refuse enclosure dimensions and construction details. Verify all refuse maneuverability and minimum turning radii.

23) DS Sec.11-01.9: Revise the site plan to dimension in plan view and within the details the required 2-foot setback from all property boundaries to the proposed limits of grading, and top and toe of fill slopes (the grading plan is also required to label this clearly at all property line cross sections).

24) Review and 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. Refer to the following links for TDOT Forms and applications:

a) http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Forms_Fees___Maps/Applications/applications.html /

b) http://www.dot.ci.tucson.az.us/engineering/pia.php

c) Or contact Thad Harvison at 837-6592 for all additional questions regarding r-o-w.

25) Be advised that further comments may be forth coming on resubmittal of the site plan.


GRADING PLAN:

26) A grading permit and plans are required for the project due to the cut and fill quantities, basin design, and floodplain development. Provide a copy of the stamped approved site plan (T09CM03255). A grading plan can not be approved until verification that all details, locations, dimensions, and plan profiles match the approved site plan. Verify all information associated with the site plan is shown on the grading plan which will be used as the construction document.

27) Provide on the civil sheets a label and dimension for the Q100 discharge at the down stream end of the existing culverts under Miller Avenue, all flows of 100-cfs or more must be shown on the grading plan sheet.

28) Provide the Improvement Plan reference number for all existing drainage infrastructure adjacent to the site; constructed channel, catch basins, storm drains, scuppers, etc. All existing drainage improvements that are shown on the grading plan must have the referenced improvement plan for site verification.

29) Revise the grading plan sheets to include the reference to the Geotechnical Report required for this project. Provide the date, job number, engineer who prepared the report, etc.

30) Provide the following note on the grading plan to read; "A floodplain use permit is required for all work proposed within the limits of the mapped 100-year as shown on the grading plan."

31) DS Sec.10-02.14.3.2: Provide a note on the grading plan to state that, "(a) the owner or owners shall be solely responsible for operation, maintenance, and liability for all detention/retention basins, drainage infrastructure, drainage channels and water harvesting areas; (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 every 12-months, 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 detention/retention basins and drainage structures should the City find the owner or owners deficient in their obligation to adequately operate and maintain their facilities."

32) Provide a General Note to state; "All landscaping to be depressed minimum 6-inches for stormwater harvesting. Refer to the Water Harvesting Guidance Manual Ordinance # 10210 dated October 25 for further recommendations for stormwater harvesting."

33) Provide a General Note on the grading plan to state; "Call for a Pre-construction meeting prior to start of earthwork. To schedule a PDSD Pre-construction meeting, SWPPP inspection or general Engineering Inspections, call IVR (740-6970), or schedule with a Customer Service Representative at the Planning Development Services Department, or contact PDSD 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"

34) Provide a General Note on the grading plan to state; "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."

35) Including a grading/drainage note specifying conformance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (excavation and grading requirements).

36) Provide a General Note on the grading plan to state; "All proposed fencing and walls will require a separate permit for review and approval by all necessary Planning Development Services Departments."

37) Please ensure that the grading plan is consistent with the site plan and HH Report. Grading standards may be accessed at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf.


GEOTECHNICAL REPORT:

38) DS Sec.10-02.14.2: Provide a new geotechnical report that specifically discusses the required detention/retention basin and any recommendations for construction. The geotechnical report evaluation must address the following:

a) Soils report should provide conformance with DS Section 10-02.14.2.6 regarding 30-foot boring for the retention basin, and provide a discussion of the potential for hydro-collapsible soils and building setbacks from the required basin and the existing concrete lined channel.

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

c) Provide pavement structure design recommendations.

d) Provide slope stability recommendations for any proposed constructed slopes that are proposed.


GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised site plan, grading plan, HH 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 and grading 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 Planning & Development Services Department
12/28/2009 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied Revise the site drawing to include the following information:
a. the size of the water meter
b. the location of the main water lines
c. the location and size of the public sanitary sewer
d. the location, invert, and rim elevation of all manholes and cleanouts
e. the location of the connection of the building sewer to the public sewer
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
01/11/2010 SUE REEVES OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
01/11/2010 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed