Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D06-0055
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/11/2007 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 01/16/2007 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 01/18/2007 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) For the calculation of plant growth coverage, two years' growth will be used as a base for shrubs and ground covers. Revise the coverage calculations as necessary. DS 2-06.3.5.b 2) The plants included for coverage in the street landscape borders would cover a maximum area of twenty square feet (assuming a five-foot diameter) in two years. Revise the calculations. 3) Dimension the width of landscape borders on the landscape plan per DS 2-07.2.2.A.2.f. The coverage requirements are based on the width of the border (the area between the property line and the required screen or building on the site). DS 2-06.3.4.C.2 4) Revise the landscape plans to correct the limits of grading. The grading plans indicate new contour in areas labeled as natural desert. DS 2-07.2.2.B.5 5) Revise the native plant preservation plans to show correct limits of grading. DS 2-15.3.4.A 6) The Native Plant Preservation Plan shall affirm, by a statement on the Plan, conformance with the requirements of the Arizona Native Plant Law. LUC 3.8.4.5 Revise or add notes as necessary. 7) Revise the grading plan to identify the limits of grading and identify any areas ro remain natural. Coordinate with native plant preservation and landscape plans. DS 11-01.4.0 8) The proposed Fire Dept. turnaround may not be located in the street landscape border. Per LUC Table 3.7.2-I a street landscape border and screening is required between this vehicular use area and the public street. 9) The general note related to the landscape requirement south of the driveway is not consistent with the code provisions. The landscape border would not be required only if there was no disturbance in this portion of the site, The proposed cul-de-sac disturbs this portion of the site, thus when it is removed, a landscape border or natural area recvegetation will be required. Revise as necessary to comply. LUC 3.7.2.7, LUC 3.7.2.4 10) A native plant preservation plan is required for off-site or public right-of-way construction. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQURED. |
| 01/18/2007 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 01/19/2007 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: D06-0055 Springs Gymnastics Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: 01/19/07 DUE DATE: 01/19/07 COMMENTS: 1. DS 3-05.2.3.C.1 The vehicular use area (paved area) must be provided with curbing or post barricades to prevent vehicles from driving on to unimproved portions of the site. The opening in the curbing near the loading zone must be provided with post barricades (provide on site plan with dimensions between posts). The required posts or barricades for this area can be removable in order to provide access to the retention/detention basin. (posts with a chain, removable posts with a minimum 5' distance between them, etc.) 2. DS 2-05.2.4.K See DS 2-08 for required pedestrian circulation criteria. DS 2-08.4.1.A At least one (1) sidewalk will be provided to a project from each street on which the project has frontage. Provide a sidewalk from Distribution Way with a handicap ramp from the vehicular use area to the right of way line. Per DS 2-08.5.1.C.3 asphalt cannot be used as a sidewalk (except at cross walks) which is part of an accessible route. A handicap ramp is required at the sidewalk at the east end of the crosswalk as well as at the west end of the crosswalk. Truncated domes are required when transitioning from a pedestrian use area to a vehicular use area. These will be required at the crosswalk at each end where the crosswalk goes between the curb islands. Also required at the above mentioned handicap ramps. 3. DS 2-05.2.4.Q Provide a detail of the class 1and class 2 bicycle parking spaces. The bicycle rack indicated on detail 18 of Sheet C-3 does not meet the requirements of DS 2-09 for a class 2 bicycle rack. See DS 2-09.2.2 for class 1 requirements and DS 2-09.2.3 for class 2 requirements. See DS 2-09.4 for location requirements for class 1 and class 2 bicycle parking spaces. Note: Class 2 bicycle parking spaces must be located within 50' of the main entrance and along other sides of the building which have entrances. The bicycle parking spaces cannot be located in a vehicular use area. See DS 2-09.5.6 for Parking Area Delineation.. See DS 2-09.5 for bicycle parking layout and security measures. Provide a detail clearly indicating the required clearances, parking area delineation, aisle widths, covering for class 1 parking spaces, surface materials, etc. 4. 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) 791-5550 ext. 2000. TLS C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D06-0055-2dp.doc |
| 01/19/2007 | 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: D06-0055 SPRINGS GYMNASTICS/REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 1/19/07 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: Correct Legal Description to read: Lot 55 of Rita Ranch Commerce Center, Recorded in Bk 49, Pg 34. (Delete the rest of the information). es |
| 01/24/2007 | AVERA1 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | * Detail on page (3) requires a minimum 10 ft clear between wall protection (post) as noted in previous review (only difference in detail is it was turned 90 degrees). * No provisions for recycling, recommend construction of a double enclosure to provide for recycling in the future. * Access to and service of enclosure will work. |
| 01/29/2007 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | January 29, 2007 TO: Civil Works Engineering THRU: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson, Development Services Department FROM: Chandubhai C. Patel, P.E., Civil Engineering Manager Pima County Development Services Department Development Review Division (Wastewater) SUBJECT: Springs Gymnastics School Development Plan – 2nd Submittal D06-055 The proposed sewer collection lines to serve the above-referenced development 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. ALL SHEETS. The project number, D06-055 should be shown larger or bolder than the cross-reference numbers shown. SHEET 1 & 2. In the LEGEND, show the symbol for existing public manhole, and call out the EXISTING SEWER LINE as EXISTING PUBLIC SEWER LINE. SHEET 1 & 2. In the LEGEND, show a line symbol for the NEW PRIVATE SEWER LINE. SHEET 1. Add a General Note that states: THIS PROJECT HAS --------- PROPOSED AND--------- EXISTING WASTEWATER FIXTURE UNIT EQUIVALENTS, PER TABLE 13.20.040(F)(1) in PIMA COUNTY CODE 13.20.040(F) Also, fill in the blanks in this note. This information will determine whether you need a Sewer Service Agreement or not. SHEET 1. Add a Permitting Note that states: A PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FROM THE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. 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 $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 |
| 02/06/2007 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES February 6, 2007 Pete Palmer APN Builders PO Box 17928 Tucson, Arizona 85731-7928 Subject: D06-0055 Spring Gymnastics Development Plan Dear Pete: Your submittal of January 12, 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 explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 7 Copies Revised Development Plan (Engineering, Landscape, Addressing, ESD, Zoning, Wastewater, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Engineering, Landscape, Zoning, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO Plan (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608 extension 1179. Sincerely, Patricia Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 320-0191 |
| 02/06/2007 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 02/06/2007, To: Patricia Gehlen DATE: February 6, 2006 CDRC/Zoning Manager SUBJECT: Springs Gymnastics, 9694 E. Rita Commerce Dr. Development Plan D06-0055 (First Review) T15S, R15E, Section 26 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Plan and Drainage Report. The Development Plan (DP) and Drainage Report (DR) cannot be approved as submitted. Address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Include a detailed response letter that explains what, where and how corrections were made. General statements, such as " these are shown or this number has been shown", are not acceptable. Development Plan: 1. Show the location and orientation of existing major physical features, such as railroad tracks and drainageways per D.S. 2-02.2.1.22. 2. Show the Basis of Bearing and how the proposed subdivision ties into it (D.S. 2-05.2.3.A.). Please be advised that the basis of bearing shall be established between two found, physically monumented points. 3. Revise the refuse container detail to show 10' X 10' clear area between the post barricades inside the enclosure. Additionally, the structural detail of the enclosure shall be included on the grading plan. A trash enclosure standard detail can be obtained from this office (D.S. 2-02.2.1.32 and D.S. 6-01.0.). 4. Provide the proper documentation that verifies that a temporary revocable construction easement has been dedicated for the proposed cul-de-sac encroachment. The dedication information shall be reflected on the Development Plan. Drainage Report: 1. Although it is stated in the DR that surrounding improvements will significantly reduce the amount of off-site water affecting the site, it will not be completely eliminated. All sites must accept and discharge at the historic points. Revise retention calculations in the DR. The response to this comment, that was made previously, does not clarify if this issue was addressed in the drainage report. Additionally, does offsite runoff acceptance and discharge affect the detention/retention design? 2. The drainage structure maintenance responsibility shall be addressed in the drainage report and the maintenance checklist shall be included in the report (S.M.D.D.F.M. 2.3.1.6 C 1 and 2). If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1193 or Paul.Machado@ci.tucsonaz.govs 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:/9694 E. Rita Commerce Dr. CDRC |