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: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D03-0021
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/05/2003 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/07/2003 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | The Development Plan is approved, 5/7/03. |
| 05/08/2003 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 05/08/2003 | TIM ROWE | 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 23, 2003 TO: Dave Gibson, RHL Design Group, Inc. (fax 707-765-9908) Tony Bouchet, Hunter Engineering (fax 480-991-3986) THRU: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Development Services FROM: Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (Wastewater) Pima County Development Review Division SUBJECT: Eckerd Drugstore #5324 Development Plan - 1st Submittal D03-0021 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. Per Pima County Wastewater Management’s Planning Services, there is currently capacity in the existing downstream sewerage system for this development. This response is not to be construed as a commitment for conveyance capacity allocation, but rather an analysis of the existing sewerage system as of this date. 2. Based on the preliminary sewer layout as shown on the referenced development plan, this project would qualify for Non-Participating sewer connection fee rates. 3. Add the development plan case number, D03-0021, and cross reference case number, CO1277-131 to the title block of each sheet. The development plan case number should be shown larger or bolder than the cross reference numbers. 4. Sheet 1: Revise the legend to accurately show the linetype used to depict the property lines on the following page. 5. Sheet 1: Delete General Notes 7, 11 & 12. 6. Sheet 1: Add a General Note that states: THE PROPOSED TOTAL NUMBER OF WASTEWATER FIXTURE UNIT EQUIVALENTS FOR THIS PROJECT IS . (with this blank appropriately filled in per Table 13.20.040(F)(1) in Pima County Code 13.20.040(F).) 7. Sheet 2: Show the plan number (G-145) for the existing public sewer line in Wetmore Road. 8. Sheet 2: Show the plan number (M-568) for the existing sewer line on the property to the west. 9. Sheet 2: Show the existing 15' public sewer easement recorded in Docket 5362, Page 198 for sewer line M-568. 10. Sheet 2: Delete the duplicate labels for the existing manholes. 11. We will require a complete set of the revised bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. Pima County Ordinance 2003-29 went into effect on April 11, 2003. This ordinance requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of a development plan or subdivision plat. The review fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet. The next submittal of this project will be the second (2nd) submittal. Please include a $100.00 check for the wastewater review fees (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) with the revised set of bluelines and response letter. If other sheets are revised in such a manner that the sewer design is impacted, please adjust the review fee accordingly. 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 |
| 05/08/2003 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 KAY MARKS ADDRESSING OFFICIAL PH: 740-6480 FAX #: 740-6370 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: KAY MARKS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL SUBJECT: D03-0021 ECKERD DRUGSTORE / DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: May 7, 2003 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and the following matters must be resolved prior to our approval: 1: Correct Section, Township and Range on Location Map. |
| 05/13/2003 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: May 08, 2003 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks, Parks and Recreation RE: CDRC Transmittal, Project D03-0021 Eckerd Drugstore: Development Plan CC: Craig Gross, Development Services Staff has reviewed the development plans and has no comments. |
| 05/21/2003 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Craig Gross Planning Administrator SUBJECT: 4365 N. Oracle Road Development Plan D03-0021 (First Review) T13S, R13E, Section 23 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Plan and Drainage Report. The Development Plan (DP) and Drainage Report (DR) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Development Plan: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies with re-submittal. 2. Label existing and future sight visibility triangles per D.S. 2-02.2.1.10. 3. A grading plan will be required. 4. Show all points of egress and ingress including locations and width of driveways and parking area access lanes (P.A.A.L.) per D.S. 2-02.2.1.11. Dimension ingress at the SE corner of the site. 5. Please provide Drainage patterns and finished grades per D.S. 2-02.2.1.16. 6. Please list estimated cut & fill quantities per D.S. 2-02.2.1.17. 7. Please show dimensioned right-of-way, including any applicable Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan right-of-way per D.S. 2-02.2.1.19. The future right-of-way width for Wetmore Road is 120'. Please correct. 8. Add the basin(s) maintenance responsibility note per S.M.D.D.F.M. 2.3.1.6 C 1 and 2 to the DP. 9. Dimension from street monument lines to existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, driveways, and utility lines per D.S. 2-02.2.1.21. 10. Please provide existing topographic contours at intervals not exceeding two (2) feet and/or spot elevations as pertinent and Bench Mark based on City of Tucson Datum, including City Field Book and page number per D.S. 2-02.2.1.23. 11. Show Development plan number (D03-0021) on all sheets per D.S. 2-02.2.1.29. 12. A private improvement agreement will be necessary for the deceleration lane proposed within the Right-of-way. Contact Permits and Codes at (520) 791-5100 for PIA information. An approval from ADOT concerning the deceleration lane is required prior Development plan approval. 13. Please show the proposed roof drainage patterns, 100% of the 10-year flow must be conveyed under the sidewalks. Please provide supporting calculations to demonstrate compliance with D.S. 3-01.4.4. If the location(s) of the roof scuppers have not yet been decided, a general note indicating sidewalk scuppers will be used when the roof scuppers locations have been designed and located will suffice. 14. Add note: "Depress all landscaped areas 6" maximum for water harvesting". 15. A Stormwater pollution prevention plan is required. Contact Paul P. Machado at 791-5550 x1193 for additional information. Drainage Report: 1. Please include a comment letter along with the next submittal. 2. It must be shown that the remainder of the basin will sufficiently retain the 5 year threshold amount of storm water. 3. The Drainage report was reviewed for Development plan purposes only. 4. The Drainage report cannot be accepted as is. Content and format of Drainage report should follow the requirements per S.M.D.D.F.M., chap. II, 2.3.1. A S.M.D.D.F.M is available through this web site: http://tdotmaps.transview.org/mandr/Download/ 5. A $150.00 review fee for the Drainage Report is required. 6. Please show the project address on the cover of the Drainage report. 7. Add the basin(s) maintenance responsibility note per S.M.D.D.F.M. 2.3.1.6 C 1 and 2 to the DR. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1193 or pmachad2@ci.tucson.az.us Paul Machado Senior Engineering Associate |
| 05/30/2003 | GLYNDA ROTHWELL | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | TEP is in receipt of the third submittal of the above subject project. Â This Company has no objections to the Development Plan for this project. A letter received in this Office from Hunter Engineer, dated May 21, 2003, stated acknowledgement of an existing electrical cabinet that will be in conflict with the proposed improvements and will be relocated by TEP at the developer's costs. |
| 05/30/2003 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | An additional submittal of the Development Plan/Landscape Plan is required. If no 'protected native plants' (as listed in LUC 3.8.5) exist on the site, then no native plant preservation plan is required. Please clarify the note on sheet L-1 as necessary. The applicant shall submit a detailed letter of explanation with the re-submittal. The letter will address each comment that follows and report revisions made to the plan or documents arising from those comments. 1) Revise the landscape plan to correctly identify the MS&R right of way line. The street landscape border is measured from the MS&R right of way line. LUC 3.7.2.4.A.1, DS 2-07.2.0 2) Per LUC 3.7.2.4.A.4 "Fifty (50) percent or more of the area of the street landscape border must be covered with shrubs or vegetative ground cover. The required ground coverage must be achieved within two (2) years from the date of planting." Revise the landscape plan to include the required coverage. 3) Screening per LUC Table 3.7.2-I is required between the site and Wetmore and Oracle Road. DS 2-06.3.7 4) Per DS 2-06.3.7 "The screening requirement is in addition to the landscape requirements. The use of vegetation to satisfy the screen requirement is allowed only to provide for alternative treatment and is not in any way meant to imply that the vegetative screen can also be used to meet the landscape requirement." Revise the plans to provide the required coverage, exclusive of any plant material utilized for screening. 5) Per LUC 3.7.3.2.C.2 "Hedges and other vegetative screens shall not extend more than three (3) feet into the street landscape border. If, based on the growing characteristics of the type of plant used, the ultimate width of the vegetative screen will be greater than three (3) feet, the vegetative screen must be sufficiently set back from the landscape border to accommodate the wider growth." Revise the plans to provide the required screening without encroachment into the street landscape in excess of the area allowed. DS 2-06. Figure 7 6) Per LUC 3.7.3.4 "Sight Visibility Triangle. Any screen higher than thirty (30) inches must be located outside of the sight visibility triangle." Revise the plans to show the future sight visibility triangles based on the MS&R right of way lines and revise the plans to locate plantings that grow to more than thirty inches in height outside of these areas. 7) An irrigation plan is required. LUC 3.7.4.5.C 8) Any non-required landscaping located within the public right of way must be "approved by the City Engineer or designee and complies with the City Engineer's requirements on construction, irrigation, location, and plant type." LUC 3.7.2.9.A Provide verification in writing that the proposed landscaping is acceptable to the City Engineer. 9) Per DS 2-06.3.3.E "Parking spaces may be designed so that the front of a vehicle overhangs into planter areas that are within a vehicular use area but cannot overhang into the street landscape border. Revise all plans as necessary to ensure that parked vehicles will not overhang the required 10' wide street landscape borders. 10) The trash enclosures must include a minimum 6' high screen for the opening. Provide information or a detail of proposed screening. LUC Table 3.7.2-I |
| 06/03/2003 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Passed | Sandy White Senior Research / Statistical Analyst Pima Association of Governments ph: 520-792-1093 x508 fax: 520-792-9151 swhite@pagnet.org |
| 06/03/2003 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | Traffic Engineering recommends APPROVAL of this DP D. Dale Kelch, EIT Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dkelch1@ci.tucson.az.us |
| 06/03/2003 | CRAIG GROSS | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | |
| 06/03/2003 | 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 May 4, 2004. 2. All mapped data on the development plan shall be drawn at an engineering scale having no more than forty (40) feet to the inch. Revise scale on bottom of sheet DP2 to comply. D.S. 2-05.2.1.B 3. Under the proposed land use note, please note the proposed land use class as it is listed in the Land Use Code: "General Merchandise Sales development designator "34" subject to Sec. 3.5.9.2.A." D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.3 4. Note the development plan case number in the lower right corner of each sheet on all plans. This project has been assigned case number D03-0021. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2 5. List the gross site area by acreage. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.11 6. If applicable, all existing and proposed easements on this site must be shown on the plan, including the type, width, recordation information, and whether they will be private or public. D.S. 2-05.2.3.B/ D.S. 2-05.2.4.G 7. a) Per the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan, Oracle Road is designated for 200 feet of right-of-way. The plan shows 175 feet of right-of-way. b) Label and dimension the future curb location along Wetmore and Oracle Roads. Building setback requirements may not be verified until this information is accurately depicted on the plan. Per the MS&R, face of future curb for a 120' right-of-way is located nine (9) feet in front of the future property line and 12 feet in front of the future property line for a right-of-way of 150 feet or greater. D.S. 2-05.2.4.F 8. a) A vehicle cross access agreement with the adjacent property is required. Provide a copy of the recorded cross access agreement. b) The minimum drive-through lane width leading to the window must be eleven (11) feet and must be striped, marked, or otherwise clearly delineated. The minimum drive-through lane width at the window is nine (9) feet. No more than two (2) car lengths may be less than the minimum width of 11 feet. c) The required stacking capacity of each lane is four (4) spaces, including the spaces at the windows. The length of a stacking space is 18 feet. Label and dimension the vehicle stacking spaces. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3/ D.S. 3-05.2.1.C.2 9. The gross floor area of the building is noted as 13, 824 S.F. on sheet DP2 and 14, 146 S.F. on sheet DP1. Revise for consistency. D.S. 2-05.2.4.M 10. a) Provide the number of loading zone spaces required and provided. Refer to LUC Sec. 3.4.5. b) The proposed loading space area does not allow a delivery vehicle to maneuver in and out of the rear loading space if there is a delivery vehicle already parked in the front space. Revise the loading space area so that a delivery vehicle may maneuver in and out of the space freely. D.S. 2-05.2.4.O/ L.U.C. 3.4.4.2.C 11. a) Fully dimension the angle parking spaces or provide a fully dimensioned parking space detail. Refer to LUC Table 3.3.7-I for motor vehicle area dimensions. Parking angle, space width, spaces depth, and curb length must be provided. b) Provide a fully dimensioned disabled parking space detail, which complies with ANSI A117.1-1998 Sections 406 and 502 curbs, ramps, and parking spaces. D.S. 2-05.2.4..P 12. a) Provide, as a note, calculations on the number of bicycle spaces required and the number provided. Refer to LUC Sec. 3.3.4 "General Merchandise Sales" for number and type required. b) Show, on the drawing, off-street bicycle parking locations, including materials for lighting and paving, type of security, dimensions, specific type of rack and the number of bicycles it supports, and the location and type of directional signage. When adjacent to pedestrian paths, indicate the width of clearance available for the pedestrian area. For specifics, refer to Development Standards 2-09.0. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q 13. Label and dimension existing and future sight visibility triangles. D.S. 2-05.2.4.R 14. What does the note "parking spaces removed ?14" on sheet DP-1 refer to? 15. All requested changes must be made to the tentative plat/development plan and landscape plans. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro, (520) 791-5608. |
| 06/04/2003 | JIM STOYANOFF | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | No Comments. |
| 06/04/2003 | 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 D03-0021 Eckerd Drugstore: 06/04/03 () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-8248 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: None GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Yes COMMENTS DUE BY: 6/02/03 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 (X) Proposal Complies with Annexation () RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies () See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: () Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: msp 791-4505 DATE: 6/02/03 |