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: T10CM01987
Parcel: 12112060B

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T10CM01987
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
07/16/2010 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed Not a COT owned or operated project
07/19/2010 DAVE MANN FIRE REVIEW Approved
07/21/2010 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1. Within a vehicular use area, one (1) canopy tree is required for each four (4) motor vehicle parking spaces LUC 3.7.2.3 Additional trees are required.

2. Water Harvesting Infiltration Areas:

Stabilization for dust control purposes:

Techniques could include spreading ½-inch or larger rock, hydro-seeding with native seed mixes, or using other stabilizing techniques and materials. Fine-grained particles that could block water infiltration by clogging soil pores should be washed from materials prior to placement. Avoid the use of fine-grade decomposed granite within or directly adjacent to Water Harvesting Infiltration Areas due to the potential for shed silts and clays to reduce water infiltration DS 10-3.3.1.A.9. Identify dust control for infiltration areas

Note: Organic mulch is appropriate for reducing evaporation, controlling dust and increasing soil quality in Water Harvesting Infiltration Areas in those locations where the vegetation, water collection, erosion conditions, and slope characteristics are amenable to its use.

3. Indicate spot elevations for the bottoms of water harvesting structures, at spillways, and to define other grades as needed.

4. Add the following notes to the Rainwater Harvesting Plan:

10-03.6.1 MAINTENANCE

MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS: All Passive and Active Water Harvesting System components, Water Harvesting Infiltration Areas, and other site improvements necessary for the water harvesting system to function properly, should be regularly inspected and maintained. The following maintenance requirements should be addressed on the Implementation Plan.

Passive Systems. In addition to requirements for all systems, to ensure proper functioning of Passive Water Harvesting Systems, periodically inspect and maintain Sub-watershed surfaces and infrastructure associated with the system such as French drains, spillways, scuppers and other elements. Repair and correct problems as needed.

Monitoring of water use and related information at the site shall be the responsibility of the property owner. Monitoring is required to verify compliance with the approved Water Harvesting Implementation Plan. Monitoring data shall be compiled, along with other necessary information, into an annual report to be submitted to the City by January 30 of each year per DS 10-3.7.1.

5. Ensure that all Engineering comments and concerns are addressed.

6. Additional comments may apply.
07/23/2010 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Denied Provide documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants.
07/27/2010 LAITH ALSHAMI ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 07/27/2010,


Drainage Report:

1. Address waterharvesting and show how it will be maximized by directing roof drainage towards waterharvesting basins.
2. It appears that the waterharvesting basin, south of the building might be too close to the proposed building. Provide a revised Geotechnical Report that addresses building setback from ponding water and revise the drainage report accordingly.
3. Show on the onsite drainage exhibit all waterharvesting basins and roof drainage arrows. Clarify how the roof drainage will be directed to the waterharvesting areas.
4. Show on the drainage exhibit existing spot elevations/contour lines.
5. Show on the drainage exhibit all proposed drainage solutions/structures with all required details (i.e. type, materials, location, size and dimensions, slopes, grades, scuppers, high and low points, water ponding and slope setback lines, , waterharvesting basins, , cross section locations and details, etc.) that would clarify how the proposed drainage scheme will work. The drainage information shown on the development plan and grading plan will be based on the information provided in the drainage report text and drainage exhibits.

Site/Grading Plan:

1. Show and label grading limits. Include the grading limits symbol in the legend.
2. Show on the plan the basis of bearing, between two established benchmarks, and the tie between the basis of bearing and one of the project corners. Provide the bearings and distances for the basis of bearing and the tie.
3. Provide the Site and Grading Plan Case numbers.
4. Title the Site Plan Sheet and The Grading Plan Sheet as "Site/Grading Plan".
5. All easements proposed to be abandoned, must be processed by a separate instrument and the easements shall not be shown on the plans. Provide documentation verifying abandonment.
6. It appears that, currently, the project consists of three different lots. Lot combo might need to be processed to remove the different lot lines before the submittal can be approved. Refer to Zoning comments for additional information.
7. Show the existing contours around the site at least 25' from property lines.
8. The proposed trash enclosure is located in the public right of way, which is not acceptable. Relocate the enclosure within the project.
9. Reference the trash enclosure standard detail on Detail #19/C4.
10. Provide the pedestrian sight visibility triangles at the entrance.
11. Provide the radii for all curb curves.
12. Show and label clearly the parcel's perimeter wall.
13. Provide the building's roof drainage arrows. Additionally, show any required sidewalk scuppers that might be needed to convey roof drainage underneath the concrete walkway next to the building, to the parking lot.
14. Show and label, on the Site/Grading Plans, the waterharvesting basins. Additionally, verify that the waterharvesting basin depths will not exceed 6".
15. Show the required setback from the waterharvesting basin, south of the proposed building. The setback shall be in accordance with the recommendation of the geotechnical report.
16. Add the following general notes:

a. Any proposed engineering work to be done below grade (i.e. toe-downs, cutoff walls, drainage pipes/structures, etc.) shall not be back filled until Development Services Inspector inspects the work and approves it.
b. The contractor is not permitted to make an autonomous decision to carry out construction field changes without prior written approval from the Engineer of Record and the City of Tucson Development Services Department.
c. The project will be in compliance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (Excavation and Grading).
d. A copy of the approved Grading Plan, Grading Permit, and any Geotechnical Reports shall be kept at the site at all times, until final grading approval.
e. Any revision to the Grading Plan MAY require a re-submittal of a revised grading plan for review. Contact DSD Engineering at 791-5550 to discuss changes in grading design.
f. If grading construction is expected to last longer than the expiration date of the grading permit, contact DSD to renew/extend the Grading Permit. If Final Grading Inspection has not been completed before the Grading Permit expires, and the permit has not been renewed, additional fees and reviews may be required.
g. Contact Permits and Codes at 791-5100 for any questions regarding any right-of-way permit requirements.
h. As-builts and letters of completion for basin and overall project are required.
i. The Engineer of Record shall submit a statement of conformance to as-built plan and the specifications.
j. The permitee shall notify the DSD when the grading operation is ready for final grading inspection. Final grading approval shall not be given until all work, including installation of all drainage facilities and their permanent protective devices, and all erosion control measures have been completed in accordance with the approved grading plan and grading permit, and any required reports have been submitted.
k. Depress all landscaped areas a maximum of 6" for waterharvesting"

17. Revise the Site/Grading Plan in accordance with the drainage report revisions.

Landscape Plan:

1. Ensure that the landscaping within the sight visibility triangles does not obstruct sight
07/29/2010 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Denied PDSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Window Depot
T10CM01987
Site Plan (1st Review)

TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 30, 2010

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. It appears this site is comprised of three (3) separate parcels and requires a lot combination. Prior to approval of this site plan provide a copy of the approved Pima County Combination Request Form, and a copy of the recorded Covenant Regarding Development and Use of Real Property along with the recordation information, docket and page.

3. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7 Based on the "BUILDING HEIGHT 23'-8"" shown under "DEVELOPMENT DATA" the required street perimeter yard should be 23.67' not the 23.5 as shown on the plan.

4. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.10 Show all existing and future sight visibility triangles on the site plan.

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

6. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12 There is a box shown within the sidewalk that runs along the east side of the proposed building. Clarify what this box is and provided dimensions so that the minimum width of the sidewalk can be verified.

7. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13 If applicable for all proposed or existing signs provide the following information on the site plan; location, type, size, and height.

8. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.14 Under the "LEGEND" the loading space is called out as "12'X55' and the plan appears to show 12'X25', please clarify.

9. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.20 All easements shown "TO BE ABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT" need to be abandoned prior to approval of the site plan. Provide a copy of the recorded document used to abandon the easements.

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

11. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.25 Provide the zoning for the parcels on the south side of Speedway Blvd.

12. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.32 It appears that the proposed location shown for the refuse container is within the right-of-way. Relocate the refuse container so that it is on site. For your information there has been a revision to the LUC Supplement No. 51 which states, LUC Section 3.4.4.1.C Loading zones may be co-located within the approach area for dumpster containers…

13. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4 The proposed MS&R parking reduction does not appear to be correct. Per LUC 2.8.3.7.B the calculation is based on the area that is within the MS&R right-of-way (ROW). That said based on the site plan the area within the future is an area of 10' x 165.94 for a total of 1,659.4 sq. ft. / 41,976 = .0395 or 4%. 4% x 200 = 8, which equals 1 vehicle parking space per 208 sq .ft of gross floor area, therefore requiring 13,200/208 = 63 vehicle parking spaces. A Board of Adjustment for Variance is required to reduce the number of required vehicle parking spaces to 59.

14. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4 The bicycle parking space calculation is not correct. Per LUC 3.3.4, RETAIL TRADE USE GROUP, Construction Material Sales, Bicycle: Eight (8) percent - fifty (50) percent Class 1 and fifty (50) percent Class 2. That said based on 59 vehicle parking spaces provided (59x8%) 5 bicycle parking spaces are required, 2 Class 1 and 3 Class 2.

15. Provide a note on the plan stating "THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE CRITERIA FOR THE MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES (MS&R) SETBACK ZONE".
16. 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\t10cm01467

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan.
08/09/2010 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Approved
08/11/2010 RONALD BROWN ZONING HC REVIEW Denied SHEET C1
1. Pedestrian access to the dumpster is not required to be accessible. Please eliminate the two curb ramps. One is at the North East corner of the building and the other is at the dumpster area.
2. A 6" high curb is indicated at the accessible parking aisles on sheet C2. Curbs ramps or sidewalk ramps are required for access to the accessible route as per ICC (ANSI 117.1), Sections 405 and/or 406.
3. The curb ramps at the drive entrance are within the property boundaries and all accessibility requirements are subject to compliance with ICC (ANSI 117.1 2003 Edition).
a. Please provide a marked crossing at this drive entrance complying with Sections 106 and 406 including all ramps, slopes, markings and detectable warnings.
4. Please show accessible parking signage locations.
SHEET C2
5. Something is amiss with the finished floor elevation of 8.00, a 1% sloped sidewalk away from the building and a top of curb elevation at 8.04. This is great for an accessible entrance but not so good for drainage. Please clarify.
6. Please clarify access from the accessible parking aisles to the accessible route over a 6" high curb. Need a ramp or two somewhere.
SHEET C4
7. Detail 2/C4 does not depict the actual parking design situation as shown on sheet C1. Generic details are not acceptable.
a. Please rework this detail to show all three accessible parking spaces, the two parking aisles, all required dimensions, access ramps to the accessible route, the Van Accessible space, signage, grade slopes, all markings, stripes and symbols
8. Detail 20: The current fine assessment is now $532.00.
END OF REVIEW

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
08/11/2010 CPIERCE1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
08/11/2010 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed