Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D04-0027
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/07/2004 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/08/2004 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | The Development Plan is approved September 8, 2004. |
| 09/09/2004 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | 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: D04-0027 RINCON MOUNTAIN PRES. CHURCH / REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 2004 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. NOTE: 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. |
| 09/10/2004 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the plans to include curbing or other approved barrier for the truck turn around. DS 3-01.5.0 2) Revise the landscape plan to show the extent of any future development indicated on the development plan. DS 2-07.2.0 Show the NUOS areas. If the landscape plans are not revised, plan approval will limited to phase 1 only. The development plan will require revision to indicate that a new development plan submittal will be required for all development outside of phase 1. 3) Revise the native plant preservation plan to include provisions for site preservation fencing per DS 2-15. Provide fencing for portions of the scenic route buffer to remain natural. 4) Per LUC 3.8.6.4.B "The set aside area shall consist of the area(s) with the highest resource value as determined by the ERR". Include the watercourse in the set-aside area, except where allowing for the required vehicular access. 5) Clearly delineate any NUOS areas on the development plan. LUC 3.8.6.4 Include the correct area to be set aside on the development plan. The native plant preservation plan indicates that 5.6 acres is to be set aside. The NUOS area recording information is to be included on the development plan. DS 2-15.3.5 6) Only permitted improvements per LUC 3.7.5.2.C are allowed within the scenic route buffer area. The buffer is to be preserved in a natural state. Revise the development plan and landscape plan to remove the grading limits from within the scenic route buffer area in the vicinity of the retention basin. 7) Establish a grading limit in the vicinity of the proposed 8" water line in order to preserve vegetation in portions of the buffer not required for the utility installation. 8) Revise the landscape plan to include revegetion per LUC 3.7.5.2 for disturbed portions of the scenic route buffer area and the adjacent public right of way. 9) Revise the native plant preservation plan grading limit line to preserve the riparian corridor. 10) Revise the native plant preservation plan to utilize the same limits of construction/grading shown on the development plan and landscape plans for Phase 1. 11) Per LUC 2.8.2.6.A, within the scenic corridor zone "no grading beyond that necessary for siting of buildings, parking, private yards, and structural improvements will be allowed." and per LUC 2.8.2.13 "Construction plans must be in the review process for permits, or construction permits must have already been issued. Grading permits are to cover only those areas for which building permits are granted." Revise the native plant preservation plans to adjust grading limits accordingly. 12) Revise sheet 1 of the development plan and sheet 2 of the native plant preservation plan to show the same parking design. Provide screening per LUC Table 3.7.2-I along the eastern property boundary. A 5' wall is required to screen the parking area from adjacent residential property. Revise plant note 2 on the landscape plan. The project does not qualify for any screening exceptions. LUC 3.7.2.4.B.3. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED. An SCZ approval is required prior to development plan approval. |
| 09/13/2004 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Craig Gross DATE: September 13, 2004 SUBJECT: 8445 E Tanque Verde Rd., Rincon Mt. Presbyterian church Development Plan D04-0027 (Second Review) T15S, R13E, Section 33 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Plan. The Development Plan (DP) 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 of the DP. 2. Label existing and future sight visibility triangles per D.S. 2-02.2.1.10. The future curb location for a 150' R/W is 12' from the R/W to the face of the future curb. Please add the future SVT. Revise per previous comment. 3. Dimension from street monument lines to existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, driveways, and utility lines per D.S. 2-02.2.1.21. Per previous comment. 4. Minimum paving per L.U.C 3.3.7.3 is required in the turnaround. Key note 19 call out for 3"/6" paving in the turnaround. Note 11's response calls out 2"/4" paving. Please revise. 5. Please list area of total disturbance and show grading limits. The total area listed on the plans does not match the DR. Please revise. 6. 5' sidewalks are required along the frontage property per D.S. 3-01. 3.3.A. Although the sidewalk may lead to "no where", further developments may occur adjacent to the property and contribute to continuous sidewalk. Please revise per previous comment. 7. Add note: "Depress all landscaped areas 6" maximum for water harvesting". Note 30 should read "Depress all landscaped areas….", not "depressed curb". Please edit keynote 30. 8. Please show a Det/Ret basin detail calling out all dimensions. This aids with inspection as well as in construction. No dimensions are on the plans nor on the detail. Per previous comment. Drainage Report: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the DR. 2. The DR is accepted for Development Plan purposes only. 3. Additional comments may be made during the grading plan approval. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1193 or Paul.Machado@tucsonaz.gov Paul P. Machado Senior Engineering Associate City of Tucson/Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210 (520) 791-5550 x1193 office (520) 879-8010 fax C:/8445 E Tanque Verde Rd CDRC 2 |
| 09/17/2004 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Development Services Center Plans Coordination Office FROM: Peter McLaughlin Senior Planner FOR: Patricia Gehlen Principal Planner PROJECT: D04-027 Rincon Mountain Presbyterian Church 8445 E. Tanque Verde Road Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: 9-17-04 DUE DATE: 9-21-04 1. Place the SCZ case number (refer to comment 2), on each sheet of the site plan, landscape plan and NPPO plans in the lower right hand corner near the title block. Although this plan was submitted as a development plan, it does not contain many of the elements, calculations, general notes etc. required. Please refer to DS 2-05 for development plan standards. DS 2-05.2.2.B.2 2. This project area is within the 400-foot Scenic Corridor for Tanque Verde Road. A Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ) application must be approved prior to development plan approval. Include the SCZ case number , date of approval, approved colors and conditions in the general notes. DS 2-05.2.2.B.10 3. Provide a calculation of view corridors on the plan per LUC 2.8.2.6.B. LUC 2.8.2.6 4. All lettering and dimensions shall be a minimum of twelve point (0.12") in size for microfilming/archiving purposes. Revise all text which does not meet this minimum standard. DS 2-05.2.1.C 5. Add the annexation case number (C15-89-2) to the lower right hand corner of the plan near the title block. List the conditions of annexation as a general note. DS 2-05.2.2.B.7 6. Add to the vehicle parking calculations (in general note 19) a calculation of the number handicap parking spaces required and provided. With a total of 266 parking spaces provided, 7 spaces must be handicap accessible. DS 2-05.2.4.P IBC 7. Sidewalks within the project must be physically separated from vehicular travel lanes and parking spaces by means of curbing, except at crosswalks. A pedestrian circulation system may not contain a continuous crosswalk extending through the parking lot. Also, the pedestrian sidewalk must connect all areas of the development and must provide connections between the building to sidewalks along the adjacent street frontages. Refer to sidewalk locational requirements in Development Standards Sec 2-08.4. DS 2-08.4.1 8. Dimension completely the width of pedestrian circulation system on the drawing. DS 2-05.2.4.K 9. In the last line of general note 12 regarding the FAR, correct the development designator to read "6" for the religious use. Remove the reference to R-1 zoning in this line since the site zoning is SR. LUC 2.2.4.2.C.4 10. Remove dimensioned 10-foot building setback from the plan drawings as the correct setback to adjacent SR-zoned property is 25 feet. LUC 3.2.6.4 11. Dimension future buildings 3 and add the proposed building heights for buildings 2, 3 and 4 to the drawing. DS 2-05.2.4.N 12. Revise parking calculation for the three bedroom units to be based on 2.25 vehicle parking spaces per unit. LUC 3.3.4 13. Show proposed sidewalks clearly and completely along adjacent rights-of-way. Sidewalks must comply with accessibility requirements for the handicapped. Per Mayor and Council policy directive, new sidewalks along MS&R rights-of-way are to be 6-feet. DS 2-09 If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS IS REQUIRED: revised development plan, landscape plan, SCZ submittal. |
| 09/21/2004 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Traffic Engineering REJECTS this DP: 1. Entrance and exit drives crossing arterials and collectors are limited to two per three hundred feet of frontage along any major roadway. The nearest pavement edges spaced at least eighty feet apart. (AMG 5.4) The eastern access point to the site is approximately 40' from the existing road along the east property line. 2. A right turn/deceleration lane with a minimum 100' stacking queue and appropriate transition will be required (AMG 5.3) 3. Keynotes 23, 24 denote future SVTs. The SVTs that are shown are existing. The future SVT stem side starts where the future ROW lies. Existing and Future SVTs are coincident only when the roadway is at the full build out IAW the MSRP. 4. Is the ROW as listed existing or future or both? Label appropriately. D. Dale Kelch, EIT Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov |
| 09/21/2004 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/22/2004 | CRAIG GROSS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Completed |