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
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D02-0042
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/29/2003 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/02/2003 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | PIMA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION 201 N. Stone Avenue, 2nd Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701-1207 CARMINE DEBONIS, JR. Phone: (520) 740-6586 Director FAX: (520) 740-6380 June 13, 2003 TO: Thomas Saylor-Brown, SBBA , LLC THRU: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Development Services FROM: Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (Wastewater) Pima County Development Review Division SUBJECT: Rita 244 Retail Center Development Plan - 2nd Submittal D02-0042 We have reviewed the above-referenced project on behalf of the Pima County Wastewater Management Department. The following comments are offered for your use: 1. All Sheets: Renumber the sheets properly. Two sheets are labeled Sheet 1 of 8, and no sheet is labeled Sheet 8 of 8. 2. All Sheets: All of the north arrows appear to be upside down. Please use typical north arrows (ones where the pointed end points to north). 3. Sheet DP1: Revise the legend to accurately show how the new and existing manholes have been shown on the following sheets. 4. Sheet DP1: Revise the legend to accurately show and describe how the phasing of the project has been depicted on the following sheets. 5. Sheets DP1.1, DP4, DP5, & DP6: Either delete the legends from these sheets, or revise them to match the legend on Sheet 1. 6. Sheets DP4 & DP5: Item 10 of my review letter dated January 27, 2003 was not adequately addressed. Accurately show the size, length and slope of the proposed private sewer lines that connect to the public sewer system. On Sheet DP4, there are two labels that appear to show this, but neither of these labels shows the correct length of the proposed private sewer, and these labels do not show the same type of material being used. On Sheet DP5, the label does not show correct length of the proposed private sewer line. 7. Sheets DP4 & DP5: Label the two proposed private manholes as NEW PRIVATE MH #1 and NEW PRIVATE MH #2. 8. Sheet DP6: Item 4 of my review letter dated January 27, 2003 was not adequately addressed. Show the manholes in sewer lines G-2001-083 and G-2001-118 as existing, rather than new. 9. Sheet DP6: Delete the extraneous lines connected to MH #2 in G-2001-118. 10. Sheet DP6: Show the future 6" HCS for Pad 1 connecting to MH #3 in G-2001-118. 11. Sheet DP6: Show the invert elevations for Manholes 1& 3 in G-2001-118. 12. Subject to the above, the development plan is hereby approved. Please provide this office with a set of revised bluelines for our records. Clearly indicate on the transmittal sheet that this set of bluelines is for record keeping only, and not for review. 13. Please be advised that this office does not normally approve development with such large numbers of drafting deficiencies, and we will expect SBBA’s future submittals to contain fewer deficiencies of this type. 14. A Joint Use and Maintenance Agreement will need to be prepared for the shared private sewer line that will serve Blocks 11 & 12, but we will not require such an agreement until we receive a development plan for one of these blocks. If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact me at 740-6563. Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (Wastewater) Pima County Development Review Division TR/tr Copy: Project |
| 05/02/2003 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Traffic Engineering REJECTS this DP on the following conditions: 1. Condition 2 on sheet DP3 states that there shall be northbound deceleration lanes at new driveway openings. None are depicted on the plans. 2. There are 2 sheets labeled "1of8" and there is no "8of8" D. Dale Kelch, EIT Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dkelch1@ci.tucson.az.us |
| 05/02/2003 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | KAY MARKS ADDRESSING OFFICIAL PH: 740-6480 FAX #: 740-6370 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: KAY MARKS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL SUBJECT: D02-0042 RITA 244 RETAIL/REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: May 2, 2003 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. 1. Submit a 24 x 36 Reverse Reading Double Matte Photo Mylar of approved Development Plan to City Planning. Signed and dated Mylar will be forwarded to Pima County Addressing prior to assignment of addresses. 2. All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection. |
| 05/05/2003 | DAN CASTRO | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | COMMENTS CODE SECTION/ DEVELOPMENT STANDARD 1. Section 5.3.8.2, LUC, permits a maximum of one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a development plan. If, at the end of that time, the development plan has not been approved, it must be revised to be in compliance with all regulations in effect at that time, and must be resubmitted for a full CDRC review. The one-year expiration date for this development plan is November 23, 2003. 2. Under general note 25, remove the reference to LUC Sec. 3.4.19.C as it is found in the LUC. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2 3. Provide a copy of the recorded cross access and parking agreement. 4. Per LUC Sec. 3.4.5.2 (Storage Use Group), two (2) 12' x 55' loading spaces are required for the 39,400 square foot self storage facility. Revise the loading space calculation and indicate the location of the second loading space on sheet DP4. D.S. 2-05.2.4.O 5. Under the legend block, there are two (2) Class I bicycle parking symbols. Revise to show the correct Class II symbol. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q 6. All requested changes must be made to the development and landscape plans. D.S. 2-07.2.1.A If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro, (520) 791-5608. |
| 05/09/2003 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | SUBJECT: Rita 244 Retail Center D02-0042, T15S, R15E, SECTION 27 RECEIVED: Development Plan, Landscape Plan and Drainage Report on April 29, 2003 The subject project has been reviewed. We offer the following comments: Drainage Report: 1. The main purpose of "Retention Basins" is water recharge. It should be demonstrated that the proposed retention basins would have adequate percolation rate by performing the infiltration tests. If the soil test shows poor percolation rates and if the engineer determines that the retention basins could not be relocated to locations with better percolation rates, then bleeder pipes would be considered. Submit percolation test results, which demonstrate that the proposed retention basin will operate Adequately. Additionally, the Soils report should also address required setbacks from the proposed detention/retention basins. 2. The erosion control requirements for the proposed detention/retention basins inlets and outlets and the proposed culverts outlets should be addressed in the drainage report with the Development Plan review. Provide design calculations as necessary. 3. The Drainage Plan for developed conditions should provide additional and detailed proposed drainage solutions and structures information for the proposed development (i.e. drainage patterns, detention basin dimensions, side slopes, depth, outlet, inlet, erosion control pads, and maintenance access location and dimensions, proposed discharge methods/structures, proposed curb opening dimensions and locations, sidewalk scuppers, water harvesting areas, erosion hazard setback lines etc.). Additionally, show how you propose to convey onsite runoff to the proposed water harvesting basins. 4. Based on the requirements of Section 1.5.2. and Chapter 14 of the Standard Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management in Tucson, Arizona, provide a maintenance access for thew proposed detention/retention basin and address in the Drainage Report the basin maintenance responsibility including a maintenance check list. Provide the required information in a revised drainage report with the revised Development Plan. 5. According to D.S. 3-01.4.4.F. 10-year flow has to be completely conveyed under sidewalks when the runoff crosses any sidewalk. This also applies to roof drainage. Demonstrate compliance with this requirement and include any design calculations in a revised drainage report. Development Plan: 1. Revise the Title Block to include Blocks 9-12 only. 2. Indicate the existing ground elevations as required by D.S.2-05.2.3.E (show existing contour lines). 3. Show and label any existing storm drainage facilities adjacent to the site (D.S. 2-05.2.3.F) (i.e. storm drains, curb inlets, storm sewer, etc.). The drainage report does not appear to have "Exhibit A". Additionally, Sheet DP1.1 does not appear to have the required information. 4. Provide all relevant drainage information as required by D.S.2-05.2.4.H. 5. Show all applicable setback lines including erosion hazard setbacks (D.S.2-05.2.4.I.). 6. Rita Road is considered an arterial road. The proposed sidewalk along Rita Road should be a minimum of 6' wide. 7. Revise the Development Plan according to the Drainage Report revisions. 8. Revisions should be explained clearly in the response letter. Include what revisions where made, on what sheet, at what location, etc. "Setbacks are shown" is not sufficient. Landscape Plan: The Landscape Plan is acceptable for Engineering and Floodplain purposes. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Development Plan and Drainage Report |
| 05/13/2003 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING TASK FORCE COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D02-0042 Rita 244 Retail Center 05/12/03 ( ) Tentative Plat ( X ) Development Plan ( X ) Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment ( ) Other CROSS REFERENCE: C09-00-23; C15-00-05 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Esmond Station GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: May 12, 2003 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: ( ) No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment ( ) Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions ( ) RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies ( X ) See Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: 12/24/02 ( X ) No Resubmittal Required: ( ) Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan ( ) Landscape Plan ( ) Other REVIEWER: JBeall 791-4505 DATE: 05-06-03 |
| 05/16/2003 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) "Site Assessment. An Environmental Resource Report (ERR) per Development Standard 1-07.0 and in conformance with Development Standard 2-15.3.5 shall be prepared for the entire site to determine the general viability, density, and variety of Protected Native Plants within areas on the site. The Report shall include an assessment of such areas of NUOS and shall prioritize the natural resource value of vegetated areas on the site in conformance with the intent and purpose of this Division. The natural resource value for an area shall be assessed by the consideration of factors such as: 1. Health, size, density, and variety of native plant species; and 2. The visual resource value of the area(s); and 3. The potential to maximize the preservation of contiguous areas of NUOS both on- and off-site." LUC 3.8.6.4.A Provide an Environmental Resource Report. The Resource Value Report does not provide the necessary information. 2) Mitigation Requirements. A minimum of thirty (30) percent of the site shall be set aside in perpetuity as NUOS area. The set aside area shall consist of the area(s) with the highest resource value as determined by the ERR…LUC 3.8.6.4.B Revise the proposed set-aside NUOS area as necessary to consist of the areas with the highest natural resource value as demonstrated by the ERR. 3) Any aerial photograph submitted, which was taken more than one (1) year prior to submittal, shall be accompanied by a letter stating that the site is substantially unchanged from the date of the aerial photograph. DS 2-15.3.1.A.3 If the site is substantially changed a new aerial photo is required. 4) Per LUC 3.8.6.4 Set Aside Methodology, "the preservation and mitigation requirements of this Division shall be satisfied by the set aside of an area of the site as Natural Undisturbed Open Space (NUOS)". Revise all plans to identify the set aside area as NUOS. Page 8 of the Landscape Plan includes the term UNOS and the Development Plan (Sht. DP 1.1) only indicates a reserved landscape area (keynote 21) and/or non-use area (open space). 5) Sheet 1 of the Native Plant Preservation Plan should delineate the set-aside areas. LUC 3.8.6.4.D 6) Sheet 3 of the Native Plant Preservation should be revised to identify the Blocks correctly. The area identified as Block 2 is apparently an adjacent property. 7) Sheets DP.1 & DP 1.1 are both identified as sheet 1of 8. Revise as necessary. 8) The area of any drainage or utility easements should be deducted from the NUOS calculation. NUOS areas are to be left undisturbed and preserved in perpetuity. LUC 3.8.6.4.B 9) The NUOS areas will have to be recorded and protective covenants will be required for each block. DS 2-15.3.5 Upon approval of the NPPO plans the NUOS areas will need to be recorded and the recording information, protective covenant and exhibits will be required prior to approval. 10) The drainage basins include a landscape symbol not included in the planting legend. Please identify all plantings. DS 2-07.2.2 11) 35% of the total area of basins located adjacent to arterial thoroughfares should be planted. DS 10-01.0 (p.89) Provide additional plantings where necessary to meet this requirement. If seeding is proposed to help meet this requirement. Add specifications for the native seed mix to the plans including establishment guidelines. DS 9-06.5.0 12) Plantings located within the Wash Ordinance setback must be exclusively native plants as provided in the plans approved in case S01-006. This is especially necessary if any portion of this area is to be proposed as NUOS. 13) Table 1 of the Resource Value Report requires revision as well as any plans which include the information. The preservation credits are available only if the plants are preserved in the area included in the inventory. For instance, if there are 13 whitethorn acacia in the inventory area and only six are viable, then it is impossible to preserve 122 in place. Revise the calculations and plans as necessary. 14) Revise the development plan and landscape plan for consistency regarding screen walls. DP 4 indicates a 5' high screen wall on the plans, while keynote 19 indicates a 6' high wall (required). 15) An interior landscape border is required along the south easterly portion of Block 12 to be developed. The required number of trees is to be located between the easement line and the proposed use on the site. LUC 3.7.2.4.B.3 Notes on the landscape plan indicate that trees are planted in drainage areas. It could not be verified which drainage areas were referred to or that this proposal complies with above section. 16) Trees located within planters adjacent to and within the vehicular use areas must be a minimum of four feet wide. LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.c. Revise the landscape plans for Blocks 10, 11, and 12 as necessary. |
| 05/22/2003 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | DATE: May 22, 2003 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: CDRC Transmittal, D02-0042 Rita 244 Retail Center CC: Craig Gross, Development Services Steve Anderson Applicant needs to arrange a meeting with staff(Glenn Hicks) from City of Tucson Parks and Recreation Department and Pima County Parks and Recreation Department to discuss the design of the linear park and trail before staff can begin to evaluate the plans. Please feel free to call me at 791-4873 x 215 if you have any questions. |