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: T11CM00459
Parcel: 14028022F

Address:
6360 S TUCSON BL

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T11CM00459
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
05/20/2011 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
05/24/2011 DAVE MANN FIRE REVIEW Approved
05/31/2011 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Needs Review T11CM00459
June 1, 2011

The site plan cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following comments.

1. Provide future sight visibility triangles for the two driveway locations. Also provide both existing and future SVTs for the street intersections.
2. Revise the future right-of-way to 120 feet/60 foot half.
3. Provide the correct activity number on all sheets including the landscape plan.
4. The site plan and landscape plan show different dimensions for the landscape buffer around the property. Revise so that both plans agree.
5. The drainage statement is accepted for site plan purposes. Please continue to include copies of the statement with future submissions of the plans.

Loren Makus, EIT
Senior Engineering Associate
06/02/2011 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: David Rivera
Principal Planner

PROJECT: T11CM00459
6360 S Tucson Blvd.
Site Plan (Proposed Use is Vehicle Storage)

TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 2, 2011

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.

This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the DS 2-02 Site content and Specifications as well as applicable Development standards such as but not limited Pedestrian circulation, vehicle and bicycle parking, loading zones, parking lot design, and LUC development criteria.

1. DS 2-02.A.6 - There appears to be a conflict with the information related tot eh size and height of the proposed building. Also it is not clear if the building is to be site built or if it is a modular structure. (Typically modular structures for this type of use are only 12 to 14 feet in height)

a. Under the notes and calculations text block on sheet 1 of 3 the square footage of the building is listed as 528 square feet and on sheet 2 of 3 on the building footprint the dimensions of the building are labeled as 60 feet by 24 feet. Clarify which is correct and revise accordingly.

b. The proposed building is listed as 12 feet on sheet 1 of 3 under the notes and calculations text block but on sheet 2 of 3 height of the building is noted as 25 feet on the building footprint. Clarify which is correct and revise accordingly.

2. DS 2-02 2.1.A.7 - While the street building setbacks do not appear to be an issue related to compliance the dimensions should be labeled based on the requirements. It is clear that Tucson Boulevard is on the MS&R map and therefore building setbacks are based on the greatest of 21 feet or the height of the structure from existing and future back of curb location. It does not appear on the plan that the dimension is labeled based on the future curb location. The street building setback should also include the dimension based on the existing back of existing curb. Revise accordingly taking into account that the intersection widening may impact the site in the future. (The building setback labeled appears to be based on the existing property line.)

3. DS 2-01.2.1.A.8 - As you may be aware a revised parking ordinance was adopted a few months ago and several of the vehicle parking ratios has changed as well as the bicycle parking requirements. In addition, an appeal to the Board of Adjustments was made to a Zoning Administrator's determination for this type of use. The original determination made by the ZA was that the use is considered a Parking Use. The appeal by the applicant was acknowledged by the Board of Adjustments and the determination was reversed by action of the Board of Adjustments under the case number C10-04-08. The Board determined that the use is considered as a Storage use. We have reviewed other similar projects since this B of A reversal as Commercial Storage Use. The parking ratio must be revised and calculated based on the ratio for a commercial storage use. The parking requirements are to be based on the building GFA and the area used fort the storage of the vehicles which include the PAAL areas to the storage spaces as redlined on the site plan.

The following items must be addressed on the site plan. All parking spaces that abut a sidewalk or landscape area must be provided with a wheel stop or curb barrier which is to be located 2.5 feet from the front of the parking space. This requirement is to prevent vehicles from overlapping onto the sidewalk or vegetation. These barriers should be drawn, labeled and dimensioned on the plan specifically for the three south spaces and the vehicle storage area (15 spaces) adjacent to the landscape area.

Include a detail drawing with dimensions for a standard vehicle parking space or add the width on the site plan and label as typical for all standard spaces.

Label the required parking spaces based on the new ratio and label the storage spaces. Do not include the storage spaces in the required or provided parking calculation unless these spaces will also be utilized for customer or employee parking.

4. DS 2-01.2.1.A.9 - Bicycle parking must also be provided based on the new parking ordinance. Per the new ordinance a minimum of 2 long term bicycle parking spaces is required. See LUC section 3.3.8.2 for bicycle ratio and design requirements. Revise the bicycle parking calculations accordingly. Add the bicycle parking facilities detail drawings and relevant information on sheet 3.

5. DS 2-01.2.1.A.10 - Existing and future Sight visibility triangles must be drawn, labeled and dimensioned on the site plan. (It is acknowledged that the sight visibility triangles based on the existing are shown)

6. DS 2-10.A.12 - Pedestrian circulation has been depicted and labeled on the plan as required. What has not been depicted is the accessible route which should include truncated domes at PAAL crossing that connects to the sidewalk system that provides accessibility to the building from the street sidewalk.

The long term bicycle parking location must be drawn, labeled and dimensioned on the plan and must be located in an area that complies with the design requirements of the revised and adopted Parking ordinance. Review the ordinance for this requirement.

7. DS 2-02.2.1.A.13 - If applicable indicate the location, type, and size of any existing or proposed signage.

8. DS 2-02.2.1.A.14 - A loading zone will be required for this use due to the type of use. While the building is not 1,500 square feet the outdoor storage area must be included in the overall square footage in order to calculate the number of loading zones required. See redlines to for the area that is to be used for the overall area calculation.

9. DS 2-02.2.1.A.19 and .21- Draw, label, and dimension the future curb location for Tucson Boulevard.

10. DS 2-02.2.1.A.25 - If applicable to this site, indicate existing or proposed lighting within the vehicular use areas (parking lots/storage area). The type of lighting, height of poles should be noted.

11. DS 2-02.2.1.A.26 and .27 - See the landscape reviewer comments related to landscape and screening requirements.

12. DS 2-02.2.1.A.31 - Revise the proposed use to a "Storage Use". Per the Board of Adjustment case C10-10-48, a reversal of the Zoning Administrator's determination as to the type of use of Parking this use is now considered a Storage use and must be addressed as such. Revise all applicable development criteria related to he use and ensure that FAR, Setback Indicator, vehicle and bicycle parking, loading zones, etc are for a storage use and not a Parking use. Revise as required and requested.

13. DS 2-02.2.1.A.32 - If applicable to this project indicate the type, location and size of refuse container.

14. The following comments are related to sections or areas of the plan that need to be addressed.

a. All development criteria must be revised to reflect the use as "Storage".

b. The lot size calculations must be revised as follows. It is ok to indicate the overall lot area and labeling the distance and bearings of the lot. In addition to this requirement the area that is to be used must also be defined and noted in the calculations text block. In other words the distance and bearings of the area to be used for this Storage Use must be labeled with the distance and bearings, lot area, and calculations based on the area only to be used. This review is only to approve the area that has already been disturbed and does not include any area outside the paved areas as depicted on the plan. Future expansion of the site will require a full code compliance review and approval with current codes and standards at the time of submittal.

c. I have attached a copy of the AEZ map that affects this site. Review the AEZ map and add the AEZ information relevant to the site. The location of the building and the storage area is not affected but it the does affect the southwest area of the overall site and therefore must be shown and labeled on the site plan. The Height calculation for per the AEZ requirements must be included on the plan. See LUC 2.8.5.for calculations and runway elevations.

d. I have also included a copy of the ZA determination related to this type of use. The letter is not specific to this site but it does affect all uses that fall under the same criteria. The letter has been attached as well for your information.

e. The plan indicates a 10-foot landscape border but I did not see a landscape plan included in the package. Provide a copy of the landscape plan with the next submittal.

f. The sidewalk adjacent to the 3 handi-capped parking spaces will have to be extended to the last parking space farthest to the north to ensure that accessibility is provided to the passenger side of the vehicle.

15. Addition comments may be forthcoming based on the responses letter to the zoning comments and the revisions to the plan and notes.

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

C:\planning\cdrc\DSD\T11CM00459.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan, response memo addressing the zoning comments and additional requested documents
06/08/2011 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Denied 1. The 12.8' PAAL dimension is incorrect.
2. Please provide a marked crossing from the concrete walkway from Tucson Blvd right of way to the existing concrete slab, across the incorrectly dimensioned 12.8' PAAL to the existing concrete walkway in front of Building 1. Please comply with all ICC/ANSI 117.1 reqirements of Sections 106, 406.12 and 406.14 including detectable warning strips..
3. Please confirm all slopes of the accessible route are in compliance with ICC/ANSI 117.1, Section 403.3.
END OF REVIEW
06/10/2011 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1. 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.

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. Add the following notes to the landscape plan :

" All disturbed, grubbed, graded, or bladed areas not otherwise improved shall be landscaped, reseeded, or treated with an inorganic or organic ground cover to help reduce dust pollution LUC 3.7.2.7.


" 2-06.6.0 MAINTENANCE STANDARDS.

A. Any plant material in areas of required landscaping that does not survive will be
replaced with an equivalent size and species within thirty (30) days.

B. Plant material will be pruned as necessary to control size but not to disrupt the
natural growth pattern or characteristic form of the plant except as necessary to
achieve height clearance for visibility and pedestrian passage or to achieve a
continuous opaque hedge if required.

C. Clipping and pruning of the plant material are required to allow maximum shading
while preserving surveillance opportunities and preventing obstructive overhang into walks, curb areas, drives, and line of sight triangles.

For general guidelines on height clearance of tree canopies, refer to Sec. 2-06.3.6.D, Sec. 2-06.3.6.E, Sec. 2-06.3.6.F, and Sec. 2-06.3.7.D.

D. All dead or removed plant material will be replaced with plant material acceptable under the requirements of the xeriscape landscaping regulations. Replacement material will be a minimum fifteen (15) gallon size for trees and five (5) gallon size for shrubs.

E. Regular landscape maintenance should ensure water efficiency and include, but not be limited to, pruning, mulching, weeding, litter removal, aerating and dethatching turf areas, and fertilizing nonnative plant materials.

5. Additional comments may apply.
06/14/2011 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved
06/22/2011 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied Revise the site drawing to include the following information:
a. the location and size of the water meter (if one exists or is planned)
b. the location of the main water lines and fire hydrants
c. the location of the gas meter (if one exists or is planned)
d. the location and size of the public sanitary sewer (if a public sewer is not located on or adjacent to the property, indicate the direction, distance to, and size of the sewer nearest the property)
Reference: City of Tucson Development Standard No. 2-01.0.0, Section 3.8 D and Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
06/29/2011 GERARDO BONILLA OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
06/29/2011 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed