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 - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D06-0003
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/23/2007 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/24/2007 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 05/29/2007 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | May 29, 2007 TO: Gary Gretcher Gretcher Designs LLC THRU: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson, Development Services Department FROM: Chandubhai C. Patel, P.E. Pima County Development Services Department Development Review Division (Wastewater) SUBJECT: Tutor Time Day Care (fka: Northwest Corner of Harrison & Old Spanish Trail) Development Plan – 5th Submittal D06-0003 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. SHEET 4. Label the existing MH as existing manhole # 2, and show the flow direction in the existing sewer line. SHEET 4. Label the proposed 6-inch sewer line as New BCS. SHEET 4. You are proposing to connect the new BCS into the existing public manhole. Please note that an approval from the PCWMD will be required for such a connection.. SHEET 1. In the General Note 16, show the proposed wastewater fixture unit equivalents. Whether you will need to sign a Sewer Service Agreement with the PCWMD or not depends on the number of the proposed FUE for this development. SHEET 1. Show in the LEGEND a symbol for the proposed sewer line. We will require a revised set of drawings and a response letter addressing each comment. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. The next submittal of this project will be the 5th submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $78.00 made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER must accompany the revised set of bluelines and the response letter. For any questions regarding the fee schedule, please go to http://www.pimaxpress.com/SubDivision/Documents/Fees.PDF where you may find the appropriate wastewater review fees at the bottom of page 1. If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly. If you have any questions regarding the above comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Chandubhai C. Patel, P.E. Telephone: (520) 740-6563 Copy: Project File |
| 06/14/2007 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/19/2007 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: D06-0003 Tutor Time Day Care Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: 06/19/07 DUE DATE: 06/21/07 COMMENTS: 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 extended expiration date for this development plan is 01/18/08. 2. DS 2-05.2.2.B.3 The general note #3 for the proposed use is not correct. Day Care use does not have a subject to: section. Remove 3. DS 2-05.2.4.A By comparing the previously submitted plan, this plan and county assessors records there appears to be conflicting information provided in regards to the property boundary lines. Right of way dedication was not indicated on the previous plan nor is it indicated being required in the county assessors records. The plan submitted for review appears to have incorrect distances on several of the boundary lines, example: west property line is indicated as 264.36' but scales at approximately 275', the south property line indicated on the portion for dedication is shown at 34.4' but scales at approximately 50', the north property line does not appear to be correct in regards to scale. Please check all property lines for distance and bearings and revise plans. Contact the Real Estate Division of the City of Tucson to verify whether right of way dedication is required. 4. DS 2-05.2.4.B Indicate the zoning (R1) of the adjacent property located along the north property line near the northwest corner of the property. 5. DS 2-05.2.4.K A pedestrian circulation path must be provided to the trash enclosure per DS 2-08.3.1. Clearly indicate the required sidewalk with a minimum width of 4'. Clearly indicate that the sidewalk along the south side of the entrance form Harrison Rd. connects to the sidewalk in the right of way. 6. DS 2-05.2.4.P The number of provided vehicle parking spaces indicated as 100 spaces in the parking calculations does not match the number of vehicle parking spaces (109) indicated on the plan. Revise calculations or plan. If the 109 vehicle parking spaces ( or more than 100 ) are to remain as indicated of the plan a total of five (5) handicap parking spaces will be required as per IBC Sec. 1106.1. On detail A - 2 of 6 clearly indicate the minimum distance from grade to the bottom of the handicap sign as seven (7) feet as per City of Tucson standards. On detail A - 2 of 6 the criteria for the truncated domes is per ANSI 117.1-2003 Sec. 705.5., Sec. 406.12 and Sec 406.13. Revise note. Clearly indicate the minimum depth of 24" for the truncated domes. 7. DS 2-05.2.4.Q The "ribbon" type bicycle rack indicated on detail C-2 of 6 is not an approved type of bicycle rack for class 2 spaces. See DS 2-09.2.3 and figures 2, 3 and 4 for acceptable and non-acceptable types of racks. Provide a detail of the type of class 2 bicycle rack and revise the detail C-2 of 6. See DS 2-09.5.1.A for spacing between bicycle racks. Provide dimensions on the detail for the spacing. 8. DS 2-05.2.4.U Provide a separate response letter indicating how each of the rezoning conditions have been complied with. 9. DS 2-05.2.4.V Please indicate the location and type of postal service to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements. If mail is to be delivered to an area within a building please state so on the plan. 10. DS 2-05.2.4.W Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, freestanding, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Also indicate if there are existing billboards on site. Billboards will be required to meet all LUC requirements as stated in LUC Sec. 3.5.4.26. If none exists please state so. 11. Depending on changes to the plan and responses to the above comments further comments may be forth coming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 837-4961 TLS C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D06-0003-resubdp.doc |
| 06/22/2007 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: June 22, 2007 TO: DSD_CDRC@ tucsonaz.gov FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov SUBJECT: D06-0003 Tutor Time Day Care(5-23-07) Approved. |
| 06/22/2007 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approv-Cond | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN (fourth review; 2nd w/new configuration) Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application (see D03-0016) CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D06-0003 Tutor Time ( ) Tentative Plat () Development Plan – new configuration () Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment () Other – Color Elevations CROSS REFERENCE: C9-01-19, D03-0016 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Pantano East Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Old Spanish Trail is a Gateway Route west of Harrison; it’s a Scenic Route east of Harrison COMMENTS DUE BY: June 21, 2007 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 Comments Attached ( ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments - Submitted on () Resubmittal Required: ( ) Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan ( ) Other – Color Elevations REVIEWER: Joanne Hershenhorn 791-4505 DATE: 6/20/07 Tutor Time D06-0003 Thank you for addressing the previous comments. The only outstanding comment is as follows: Please add a note to the decorative screen wall detail (Detail N, sheet 4/6 of the Landscape Plan) indicating that the wall will be constructed of/or painted with graffiti-resistant materials. |
| 07/09/2007 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES July 9, 2007 Eduardo Gonzales Rick Engineering Company 1745 East River Road Tucson, Arizona 85718 Subject: D06-0003Tutor Time formally Village Square Development Plan Dear Eduardo: Your submittal of May 23, 2007 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. 3 Copies Revised Development Plan (Wastewater, Zoning, DSD), 2 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. 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: 322-6956 760-4539 ATTEN: Gary |