Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D05-0043
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/30/2006 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/31/2006 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Coordinator DATE: May 31, 2006 SUBJECT: Engineering review of the Western Financial Partners Development Plan. The activity number is D05-0043. SUMMARY: The Development Plan, D05-0043 was received by Engineering on May 30th, 2006. Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Development Plan or the Drainage Report. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: DEVELOPMENT PLAN GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Submittal of the City of Tucson stamped approved Development Plan is required for Site plan approval. A site plan application (yellow card) must be submitted with the City of Tucson stamped approved Development Plan. 2. The Grading Plan was reviewed for Development Plan purposes only. 3. A Grading Plan and Permit may be required. The next submittal must address the following items: DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1. Indicate the sidewalk along Craycroft road is proposed. 2. The 325' near side length is incorrect. The near side length for the SVT is 345'. Correct the length on the Development Plan. 3. It is acknowledged that John Clark of the Environmental Services Department accepts the current design solid waste proposal. However the current proposal does not meet Development Standard 6-01 and will require a Development Standards Modification Request (DSMR). Please contact Patricia Gehlen, Community Design Review Committee (CDRC) Manager for DSMR submittal criteria. The above comment is from the first review. It is acknowledged the DSMR has been approved by the Engineering Division. Provide the DSMR case number and any required conditions on the development plan in a general note. 4. Include cut and fill quantities (in cubic yards) on the Development Plan. If the cut and fill quantities equal zero, indicate on the Development Plan. The response to the above comment was the earthwork will be balanced. The response to the comment is not sufficient. The cut and fill quantities are required to be on the Development plan when a site will be balanced. Provide the cut and fill quantities in cubic yards on the Development Plan. |
| 06/05/2006 | MARILYN KALTHOFF | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approv-Cond | June 5, 2006 TO: Kelsi Montgomery Randel Jacob Design Group, PLLC THRU: Patricia Gehlen City of Tucson, Development Services Department FROM: Michael Henrich Pima County Development Services Department Development Review Division (Wastewater) SUBJECT: Western Financial Partners, LLC Development Plan - 2nd Submittal D05-043 The proposed sewer collection lines to serve the above-referenced project have been reviewed on behalf of the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) and the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. 1. SHEET 1. The existing public sewer to which this project is connecting, including the size and Pima County plan number has been shown. Also, call out the existing clean out at the point of connection and provide the rim and invert elevations of the clean out. 1. Subject to the above required revisions, the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality and Wastewater Management Department hereby approve the above referenced submittal of the development plan. Please note the following: Approval of the above referenced submittal does not authorize the construction of public or private sewer collection lines, or water distribution lines. Prior to the construction of such features, a Construction Authorization (Approval To Construct) may need to be obtained from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality. Also, air quality activity permits must be secured by the developer or prime contractor from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality before constructing, operating or engaging in an activity which may cause or contribute to air pollution. If you have any questions regarding the above mentioned comments, please contact me. Sincerely, Michael Henrich Telephone: (520) 740-6380 Copy: Project |
| 06/06/2006 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | The Landscape Section does not recommend approval at this time. Revise all plans as necessary. Resubmittal of all plans is required. Include a response letter. 1. Refer to DS 2-07.2.2.A 2 for required calculations. Add the correct site square footage to the landscape plan. Add a calculation stating the correct square footage of all landscaped areas and the percentage of vegetative cover. DS 2-07.2.2.A.2.g The plans submitted do not correspoind with the information on sheet DP. 2. The statement on sheet L-1 that the property is exempt from NPPO requirements is inconsistent with the photos included in the General Site Inventory/Design Compatibility Report, which show mature native trees on the site. Submit an NPP plan or an Application for Exception along with all submittal requirements. Refer to DS 2-15.3 for submittal requirements. 3. It is indicated under the "Vegetation" heading in the Inventory Report that efforts will be made to preserve vegetation occurring at the eastern edges of the lot. Indicate which plants are to be preserved in place. Refer to DS 2-07 for plan content, which includes the requirement to show the location, size, and name of existing vegetation to remain in place. DS 2-07.2.2.A.1.e 4. Revise the landscape plan to show the minimum width of the tree planting area located on north side of the parking area. DS 2-07.2.2.A.2.e The minimum width required is four feet. 5. Refer to DS 2-07.2.2 and DS 2-06.5.4 for the specific content required in the following elements of the landscape plan: Maintenance Schedule, Grading Information, Irrigation Plan, Construction Details. Revise landscape plan to include required content and specifications. Grading information on the landscape plan shall include contour lines, spot elevations, percent slope across the site and direction of slope of paved areas, existing grades on adjacent rights-of-way and adjacent sites, and the methods by which water harvesting/ storm runoff is used to benefit planting areas on the site. DS 2-07.0 6) Identify how the gate for the refuse storage provides the required 6' high screen. LUC Table 3.7.2-I 7) C9-04-21 requires DRB review and comment prior to submittal of the development plan. DRB review comments are required to be included with the CDRC submittal. 8) Clarify how the proposed screen wall comply with the conditions of C9-04-21. 9) The screen walls are to be constructed so that the minimum height is attained on the development side of the wall. Measurements are to be above finished grade of the parking areas. Provide reference points for wall heights. 10) The proposed loading area include openings. The code allows decorative openings only in the upper twenty (20) percent of an otherwise solid masonry wall located along a street frontage. LUC 3.7.3.7.A.2 11) Show the proposed parking shade structure on the landscape plan. DS 2-02.2.1.C 12) Per C9-04-21 MS&R dedication is required along Fort Lowell Road. Show all right-of-way dedications on or abutting the site and label. DS 2-05.2.4.E 13) Revise the grading plan to correctly identify the MS&R right-of-way along Craycroft Road. 14) Correct the sheet numbering of the landscape sheets for legibility. The plans received were misprinted. |
| 06/16/2006 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | Traffic Engineering recommends approval of proposed development plan. |
| 06/16/2006 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D05-0043 Western Financial Partners 06/14/06 (XXXX) Tentative Plat () Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-04-21 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Arcadia Alamo GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: June 27, 2006 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 () See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: (XXXX) Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan (XXXX) Other – DRB Review Comments REVIEWER: D. Estolano 791-4505 DATE: 06/15/06 Rezoning Condition #14 states “to ensure compatibility with adjacent development, building architecture, site, and landscape design shall be submitted for review and comment by the Development Review Board (DRB) prior to submittal of the development plan. DRB review comments shall be included with the Community Design review committee (CDRC) submittal”. Please submit DRB review comments. |
| 06/28/2006 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Denied | Please submit the following items per rezoning conditions no. #2 and #3, 1. Title report dated within 30 days for the subject property, 2. Legal description and sketch for the additional right of way to be dedicated, including the 25 foot spandrel, Submit the above items to the Real Estate Division on the 6th Floor of the Public Works Building. |
| 07/14/2006 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Center Plans Coordination Office FROM: Peter McLaughlin Senior Planner FOR: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: D05-043 Western Financial Partners 1816 N. Craycroft Road Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: July 14, 2006 DUE DATE: June 27, 2006 1. Continuous pedestrian circulation must connect the building to sidewalk within the Craycroft Road right-of-way. Revise to show direct connection with crosswalks if necessary. Dimension width of all pedestrian sidewalks clearly on the drawing. The minimum required width for sidewalks is 4 feet. Revise drawing accordingly. DS 2-08 2. Where not directly visible and obvious from the public right-of-way, project entry and directional signage shall be provided to direct bicyclists from the public right-of-way to the bicycle parking area. The location of directional signage should be near the main access points to the site so that they are easily visible to bicyclists entering the site. Revise development plan. DS 2-09.5.1 3. Where the side of a parking space abuts a vertical obstruction over 6 inches high, the width of that parking space shall be a minimum of 10 feet to allow passengers to enter and exit the vehicle. The westernmost vehicle parking space, which is adjacent to the 30" screen wall must be revised to meet this requirement. Dimension the width of this parking space on the development plan drawing. DS 3-05.2.1.B.3 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 |
| 07/18/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES July 18, 2006 Kelsi Montgomery Randel Jacob Design Group, PLLC 2980 North Swan Road, Suite 222 Tucson, Arizona 85712 Subject: D05-0043 Western Financial Partners, LLC Development Plan Dear Kelsi: Your submittal of May 30, 2005 for the above project has been reviewed by the Community Design Review Committee and the comments reflect the outstanding requirements which need to be addressed before approval is granted. Please review the comments carefully. Once you have addressed all of the comments, please submit the following revised documents and a DETAILED cover letter for each agency explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLUELINES MUST BE FOLDED 6 Copies Revised Development Plan (Real Estate, Community Planning, Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plans (Zoning, Landscape, Community Planning, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies NPPO Plans (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies DRB Review Comments (Community Planning, DSD) 2 Copies Legal Description and Title Report (Real Estate, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608, ext. 1179. Sincerely, Patricia Y. Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 321-0152 |