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 - D06-0027
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/23/2006 | MARILYN KALTHOFF | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 06/30/2006 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the NPPO Plan to show the proposed location of all Ferocactus wislizenii to be transplanted, along with the 7 proposed. Only 10 are shown on the landscape plan drawings, which does not match with the numbers indicated in the table. Clarify the meaning of the asterisk associated with the TOS label for specimen #s 9-22 in the table on sheet NPPP-1. DS 2-15.3.4.B.2 2) The landscape plan labels earthen basins near the west and south property lines as having 3:1 and 4:1 slopes respectively. However, the details on development plan sheets 4 of 5 and the cross sections on sheet 5 of 5 indicate bank-protected basin side slopes of 1:1 and 2:1 along the basin perimeter. Revise the landscape plan to be consistent. Basin slopes in most instances are required to have slopes no steeper than 4:1 where depths exceed three feet; 3:1 for unprotected slopes and 2: 1 for protected slopes for depths less than three feet. Revise landscape plan details and cross-sections accordingly. DS 10-01.4 3) A 10-foot landscape border and a 30-inch screen are required to screen the parking area from the adjacent Alvernon Way right-of-way to the east. On streets designated as Major Streets and Routes (MS&R), the street landscape border is measured from the MS&R right-of-way line as determined by Sec. 2.8.3.4. LUC 3.7.2.3 LUC 3.7.2.4.A.1 4) additional comment (added to folder 9/2706): It has being disclosed through additional review that the proposed development is within a mapped riparian habitat and the Critical and Sensitive Biological Communities (Shaw, 1986) and that no unnecessary development is allowed within this riparian habitat area. |
| 06/30/2006 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | NO COMMENT D06-0027 URBAN ENGINEERING AVN PROPERTIES LLC -------------------------------------------------------- Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are intended for use by the person(s)/entity(ies) named above and may contain confidential/privileged information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by e-mail, and delete or destroy all copies plus attachments. |
| 06/30/2006 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | Fire Access roads and turnarounds are required per International Fire Code 503.1.1. and the Development Standards. |
| 07/11/2006 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Denied | Development Review Division, 201 N. Stone, 2nd Floor, Tucson, AZ 85701, phone (520) 740-6315 Date: July 7, 2006 To: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager From: Maggie Shaw, Senior Civil Engineering Assistant, Development Review Division (Transportation and Flood Control) Re: City of Tucson Development Plan, AVN Properties LLC D06-0027 Development Review Report: Transportation Comments: The proposed access is located on Alvernon Way, which is maintained by Pima County. The driveway shall be located so that access is shared between this parcel and the parcels located both north and south, with shared PAAL’s to each. Access agreements may be required as well as access easements for future access to this site. Access is required to have minimum driveway spacing of more than 275 feet since the speed limit on Ajo Road is 55 MPH and no more than two driveways per 300 feet of frontage per Subdivision and Development Street Standards 8.1.1.1. MS/ms |
| 07/18/2006 | RICHARD WILLIAMSON | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | WATER SUPPLY Tucson Water has been designated by the State of Arizona, Department of Water Resources, as having an assured water supply. This does not mean that water service is currently available to the proposed development. This development lies within the exterior boundary of Tucson Water's planned 50-year service area. Therefore, water supply is assured. WATER SERVICE The approval of water meter applications is subject to the availability of water service at the time an application is made. The developer shall be required to submit a water master plan identifying but not limited to: Water Use Fire Flow Requirements Offsite / Onsite Water Facilities Loops and Proposed Connection Points to Existing Water System Easements / Common Areas Any specific area plan fees, protected main / facility fees and / or other needed facilities' cost are to be paid by the developer. If the existing water system is not capable of meeting the requirements of the proposed development, the developer shall be fiscally responsible for modifying/enhancing the existing water system to meet those needs. This letter shall be null and void one year from the date of issuance. Issuance of this letter is not to be construed as agency approval of a water plan or as containing construction review comments relative to conflicts with existing water lines and the proposed development. If you have any questions, please call New Development at 791-4718. Sincerely, Richard S. Williamson, P.E. Manager, New Development RW:bjh |
| 07/19/2006 | 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: D06-027 Rita Houghton Retail Center Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: July 19, 2006 DUE DATE: July 24, 2006 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 full CDRC review. The one year expiration date for this development plan is June 26, 2007. 2. Place the development plan number (D06-027) on each sheet of the site plan, landscape plan and NPPO plans in the lower right hand corner near the title block. DS 2-02.2.1.A.38 3. A one-way parking area access lane (PAAL) within a development for storage must be a minimum of twenty (20) feet in width, with a minimum four (4) foot wide pedestrian refuge area delineated on one (1) side of the PAAL. A two-way PAAL within a development for storage must be a minimum of thirty (30) feet in width, with a minimum four (4) foot wide pedestrian refuge area delineated on one (1) side of the PAAL. The PAAL is not wide enough to provide for two-way traffic as it enters/exits the site adjacent to bldgs A & B. Revise development plan. Also, revise development plan to show proposed direction of traffic flow, location and width of required pedestrian refuge areas, width of PAALs, location of any one-way directional signage and pavement striping. LUC 3.3.7.2.C.4 4. A handicapped parking space must be provided. The space must be designed to be van accessible. Revise to show required handicapped parking and provide a calculation of h/c parking. Indicate the maximum slope of the H/C ramps and aisles on a h/c parking detail drawing. Show required truncated domes on the detail. DS 2-05.2.4.P IBC/ANSI 5. Add a vehicle parking calculation to the plan stating the number of spaces required and provided, including handicapped spaces (see comment 7). No parking is required for storage units, if storage units have direct vehicular access, and a minimum of two (2) for any associated office. One (1) space per four thousand (4,000) sq. ft. GFA, if storage units do not have direct vehicular access, and a minimum of two (2) for any associated office. LUC 3.3.4 DS 2-05.2.4.P 6. Add a bicycle parking calculation to the plan stating the number of spaces required and provided. None (0) are required for storage units; a minimum of two (2) for any associated office - all Class 2. DS 2-05.2.4.Q LUC 3.3.4 7. Label the location of the required class 2 bicycle parking on the plan and provide a fully dimensioned detail showing length and width of spaces along with the additional 5-foot dimensioned area for maneuvering of bicycles into spaces. DS 2-09.6 DS 2-05.2.4.Q 8. In the parking detail dimension the distance of wheelstop curbs from the front of parking spaces. Wheelstops must be located 2-½ feet from the front of parking spaces. DS 3-05.2.3.C.2 9. Add a loading zone calculation stating the number of spaces required and provided. If direct access is provided to all storage buildings no loading zones are required. If this is the case, the loading zone calculation should read 0 spaces required, 0 provided. DS 2-05.2.4.O 10. Add the development designator ("34") to the general notes along with the restrictions that the proposed storage use is subject to. The storage use in the I-1 zone is subject to LUC 3.5.10.3.C and .F. Add a note stating that all walls or doors visible from adjacent streets shall be surfaced with a nonreflective material. Add another note stating that the facility's exterior façade visible from adjacent street frontage shall be earth tone in color and of masonry, stucco, or similar materials. 11. Add a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) calculation stating the maximum allowed FAR and the proposed FAR. The FAR is calculated as the gross floor area divided by the gross site area. The max. allowed FAR for the proposed personal storage use in the I-1 zone is 2.00. LUC 3.2.11 12. Between any building and PAAL a five (5) foot pedestrian refuge with a four (4) foot sidewalk is required. There is no sidewalk/refuge shown adjacent to the office. Revise. LUC 3.2.6.5 DS 2-05.2.4.I 13. Add dimensioned future curb location and site visibility triangles along Alvernon Way. DS 2-05.2.4.R 14. Dimension the correct existing and future MS&R right-of-way for Alvernon Way. Add the MS&R future sidewalks along Alvernon. DS 2-05.2.4.F 15. Add a note stating that this development is subject to annexation conditions for Country Club/Valencia Annex. District (C15-88-1, zoning ord #7090). List the conditions of development for annexation case number C15-88-1, from zoning ordinance 7090 on the d.p. Demonstrate compliance with all applicable annexation conditions. DS 2-05.2.2.B.7 DS 2-05.2.4.U 16. State the proposed height of each building on the plan. DS 2-05.2.4.N 17. Show refuse collection areas, including locations of dumpsters, screening location and materials, vehicle maneuverability, fully dimensioned. DS 2-05.2.4.T 18. If easements exist or are proposed on the property, show their location, width, type, and provide recordation info. DS 2-05.2.3.B 19. Revise the scale in the location map to be correct. Provide a scale for the Composite Map DS 2-05.2.1 20. Continuous pedestrian circulation must provide a connection between the office building and adjacent right-of-way. Refer to DS 2-08 for pedestrian circulation requirements. Dimension width of all pedestrian sidewalks clearly on the drawing. All sidewalks must be ADA compliant with the required truncated domes rather than the grooves indicating grade changes and pedestrian crosswalks. Indicate the truncated domes on the development plan as required. DS 2-08.4.1.A ANSI 21. If any new freestanding as part of this development, indicate location and type. 22. Show the location, height and dimensions of any proposed freestanding signage. DS 2-05.2.4.W 23. This property has been recently split. Provide copies of approved lot split documents. If the lot split has not been approved and the number of splits in the last twenty years has exceeded the maximum allowed, a subdivision plat will be required. Provide a copy of any required recorded cross access agreements and add recordation information to the development plan. 24. All requested changes must be made to the Development Plan and Landscape Plan. DS 2-07.2.1.A If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608. PSMc\H\MyDocs\D05-011rev1.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS IS REQUIRED: revised development plan, landscape plan, lot split approval documents. |
| 07/19/2006 | 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: D06-0027 AVN PROPERTIES/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 7/19/06 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: Delete direction from all street names in Location Map. Correct Building letters to Building numbers. Label Alvernon Way on the 100’1/2 R.O.W. on sheets 1 & 3. es |
| 07/20/2006 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | July 20, 2006 TO: Wayne Royce Urban Engineering THRU: Patricia Gehlen City of Tucson, Development Services Department FROM: Dickie Fernández, E.I.T. Pima County Development Services Department Development Review Division (Wastewater) SUBJECT: AVN Properties LLC Development Plan – 1st Submittal D06-0027 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. Provide a letter from PCWWM Planning Services, written within the past 90 days, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for this project is available. A capacity request form may be found at http://www.pima.gov/wwm/forms/docs/CapResponseRequest.pdf. ALL SHEETS. Add the project number, D06-0027, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than any cross-reference numbers. Based on the evaluation of the proposed sewer design, this project qualifies for Standard sewer connection fee rates. SHEET 1. Add the following General Note and fill in the blanks appropriately. THIS PROJECT HAS ____ PROPOSED AND ____ EXISTING WASTEWATER FIXTURE UNIT EQUIVALENTS, PER TABLE 13.20.045(E)(1) IN PIMA COUNTY CODE 13.20.045(E). SHEET 1. Add the following General Note ANY RELOCATION, MODIFICATION, ETC., OF THE EXISTING UTILITIES AND/OR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL BE AT NO EXPENSE TO THE PUBLIC. SHEETS 2 & 3. Clearly show any existing public sewer easements by showing the limits of the easements, the recording information and labeling them as public sewer easements. SHEETS 2 & 3. Show any existing public sewer lines that are within the project property and up to 100 feet away from the project property boundary. This existing public sewer information shall include the size, Pima County plan number and six-digit Pima County manhole number(s) for any existing public manholes. SHEETS 1-3. Sheet 1 indicates that this project proposes private sewers. Sheet 3 indicates the sewers are public. Are they private or public? Please revise sheet 3 to have the proposed sewer be private. SHEET 3. Show the rim and invert elevation for the existing public manhole to which this project is connecting. SHEET 3. Show the length, size and slope of the proposed private sewers. SHEET 3. Show the rim and invert elevations of any proposed private cleanouts. 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 2nd submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $150.00 made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER must accompany the revised set of bluelines and 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 mentioned comments, please contact me. Sincerely, Dickie Fernández, E.I.T. Telephone: (520) 740-6947 Copy: Project |
| 07/24/2006 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | * No known landfill with in 1000 feet of this development. * No provisions shown for refuse service. |
| 07/24/2006 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | No comment |
| 07/24/2006 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: July 24, 2006 SUBJECT: AVN Properties LLC- Development Plan Review TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: Parcel ID: 140-41-135D T15S R14E Sec16, Ward 5 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: D06-0027 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the submitted development plan, landscape plan and drainage report. The drainage report was reviewed for development plan purpose only. The development plan is not approved at this time. Please address the following comments: DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS: The proposed development plan as submitted can not be approved. Relocate the proposed storage units on the parcel so that the units are located outside of the regulatory floodplain and mapped riparian habitat. Per Chapter 26 Section 5.2, Floodway fringe development: No development, storage of material or equipment, or other uses shall be permitted which, acting alone or in combination with existing or future uses create a danger or hazard to life or property. Development in the floodway fringe, including but not limited to, shall: (a) not generate adverse impacts, including but not limited to erosion, upstream or downstream; (b) not unnecessarily alter riparian habitats of watercourses and adjacent bank areas; (c) not increase the base flood elevation more than one-tenth of a foot; (d) not significantly increase channel or bank erosion; (e) not result in higher floodwater velocities which significantly increase the potential for flood or erosion damage. An erosion hazard setback analysis must be determined by an Arizona Registered Civil Engineer that establishes a safe building location from the banks of the regulatory wash. DS Sec.2-05.2.3.I: Revise the development plan to include the location of the regulatory 100-year floodplain limits with water surface elevations (WSEL) as established in the drainage report. The linear distance between WSEL contours should not exceed 200 feet. Chapter 26 Section 5.2.9: Evaluate the base flood elevation at the upstream end of each of the proposed storage units. Each of the storage units must show its finished floor elevation and any attached appliances elevated a minimum of one foot above the calculated base flood elevation. Delineate on the development plan the Xero-riparian habitat and the mapped Critical and Sensitive Biological Communities (Shaw 1986). No unnecessary development is allowed within these mapped riparian habitats. DS Sec.2-05.2.1.D: Revise the project location map on Sheet 1 of 5 to show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area. Identify conditions within the square mile area, such as major watercourses. DS Sec.2-05.2.1.K: The correct development plan number (D06-0027) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plans and provide the applicable annexation number on all sheets of the development plan. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the development plan, drainage report, and geotechnical report reviews. DRAINAGE REPORT: DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.6.A: Revise Section 1.3 Methodologies and Procedures and Section 3 Developed Onsite Drainage Conditions of the drainage report to state that the 100-year developed discharge will be reduced by 15% (not 10% as called out) from the existing discharge along with the 5-year threshold retention provided. Revise the drainage report to meet the minimum standards for development within a Critical Basin. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the development plan, drainage report, and geotechnical report reviews. GRADING PLAN: DS Sec.11-01.2.1: A grading permit may be required for this project after the revised development plan submittal review. A grading permit may not be issued prior to development plan approval. Subsequent comments may be necessary, depending upon the nature and extent of revisions that occur to the plans Please ensure the grading plan is consistent with the development plan and drainage report. Grading standards may be accessed at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf Provide a General Note to reference conformance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (excavation and grading requirements). Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) requirements are applicable to this project. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) and text addressing stormwater controls for all areas affected by construction activities related to this development will be required with a grading plan submittal. For further information, visit www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a, 10-02.14.2.6: A geotechnical evaluation needs to be submitted for review, addressing the following: a) Soils report should provide conformance with DS section 10-02.14.2.6 regarding 30-foot boring for basin, and provide discussion of potential for hydro-collapsible soils and any recommendation for setbacks from building to revised basin. b) The soils report shall provide identification / assessment of any potentially hazardous geotechnical areas, and state any geotechnical recommendations and whether there are special provisions for the soil preparation for this development. c) Provide slope stability recommendations for any proposed constructed slopes. d) Provide pavement structure design recommendations. e) Provide percolation rates for the detention/retention basin for 5-year threshold retention. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised development plan, a revised drainage report, and a geotechnical report that address the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the revised development plan, drainage report, and geotechnical report reviews. For any questions or to schedule a meeting, call me at 791-5550, extension 1189. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 07/24/2006 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | July 24, 2006 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D06-0027 PROJECT NAME: AVN Properties LLC PROJECT ADDRESS: Alvernon Way/East Corona Road PROJECT REVIEWER: Jose E. Ortiz PE, Traffic Engineer Resubmittal Required: Traffic Engineering does not recommend approval of the Development Plan; therefore a revised Development Plan is required for resubmittal. The following items must be revised or added to the plan. 1. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. 2. Due to the velocity of the vehicles on Alvernon Way a right turn deceleration lane shall be required for southbound motorists entering the proposed site. 3. Sheet 3: List the name, ROW width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving. (DS 2-05.2.2.D) If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x305 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 07/26/2006 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Denied | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR# 165242 July 25, 2006 Urban Engineering ATTN: Mr. Wayne A. Royce 877 S. Alvernon Way, Suite 200 Tucson, AZ 85711 Dear Mr. Royce: SUBJECT: AVN Properties, LLC D06-0027 Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has reviewed the plan submitted June 26, 2006. TEP is unable to approve the plan at this time. TEP facilities do not appear to be properly indicated on the plan. In order for TEP to approve the plan, the overhead facilities along Alvernon Road must be depicted on the plans. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facility map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. All cost associated with the relocation of the facilities in conflict will be billable to the developer. Please resubmit two revised bluelines to the City of Tucson for TEP’s review. You may contact the area Designer, Todd Stocksdale, at (520) 917-8715 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Ann Slusser Scheduling Coordinator Design Build Enclosure cc: P. Gehlen, City of Tucson (by e-mail) F. Rodriguez, City of Tucson (by e-mail) T. Stocksdale, TEP |
| 07/28/2006 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | Estimated daily trips - 136 |
| 08/04/2006 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approv-Cond | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D06-0027 Avn Properties LLC 08/04/06 () Tentative Plat (XXXX) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C15-88-4 - Annexation Ordinance #7090 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: General Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 07/24/06 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 (XXXX) See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: () Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: DCE 791-4505 DATE: 07/17/06 Urban Planning and Design Comments D06-0027 AVN Properties LLC July 17, 2006 NOTE: The zoning of the subject site is I-1® and must be in conformance with annexation ordinance #7090 conditions: Therefore, please add the following note to the development plan general notes section. 1. Development plan is subject to Annexation Ordinance #7090 conditions; therefore, building heights shall be limited to 39 feet in height. Development Services staff to check mylar for inclusion of the above note. |
| 08/10/2006 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: August 09, 2006 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov CC: SUBJECT: D06-0027 AVN Properties LLC: Development Plan(6-27-06) Staff has no comments. |
| 08/21/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES August 21, 2006 Wayne Royce Urban Engineering 877 South Alvernon Way, Suite 200 Tucson, Arizona 85711 Subject: D06-0027 AVN Properties LLC Development Plan Dear Wayne: Your submittal of June 27, 2006 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 11 Copies Revised Development Plan (Fire, ESD, TEP, Pima County Development Review, Landscape, Traffic, Addressing, Wastewater, Engineering, Zoning, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plans (Zoning, Landscape, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO Plans (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Geotechnical Report (Engineering, 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: 318-3808 |