Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D07-0001
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/28/2007 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 10/02/2007 | CDRC1 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | October 2, 2007 To: Eduardo Ornelas E.J. Ornelas & Associates Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA Pima County Development Services Department Development Review Division (Wastewater) Subject: Elliot Electronic Supply Development Plan - 3rd Submittal D07-001 The drawings for the proposed Development Plan for 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 HCS should be labeled as 4" Private BCS. There should be a symbol for the BCS in the legend and it should match what is on plan. Currently the proposed sewer on plan does not match the Legend. 2. SHEET 1. Show the rim and invert elevations of the proposed COs. This is the 3rd request. 3. SHEET 1. Show the information pertaining to the point of connection of the new 4-inch sewer line to an existing sewer line. If the existing sewer is a public sewer, label it as such. This is the 3rd request. 4. SHEET 1. Use different line types for existing and proposed sewers. This is 3rd request. 5. SHEET 1. The proposed manhole and existing manhole symbols shown on the plan do not match what is shown in the Legend. Also the cleanout symbols do not match. 6. SHEET 1. Is MH # 1 a proposed MH? The connection of the 4" BCS should be directly connected to the 8" Public sewer without a new manhole. The rim and invert elevations are required for all of the existing public manholes shown on plan. 7. SHEET 1. Show the public sewer line continuing on plan instead of ending abruptly and show the sewer flow direction. 8. SHEET 1. The BCS should be a minimum of 2% slope. 9. 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 4th submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $38.00 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, Tom Porter Telephone: (520) 740-6579 Copy: Project File |
| 10/08/2007 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) The vehicular use area must be provided with post barricades or wheel stop curbing designed to prevent vehicles from extending beyond the property lines; damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings and to prevent vehicles from accessing the alley. DS 3-05.2.3.C., C9-89-30 Revise the plans to provide a barrier to protect all landscape areas. (tree planters in parking lot) 2) Submit an irrigation plan that includes the water meter, main lines. LUC 3.7.4.5.C 3) The request for NPPO exception is denied. Submit the request using the prescribed application. A) Clarify the status of the mesquite trees in photo 8. B) Clarify the Native Plant Inventory sheet. @ plants are identified as PIP, but the summary statement indicates that all plants are to be removed. C) Show any PIP or mitigation plants on the landscape plans. A native plant preservation may be required. 4) Landscape plans shall include a summary of Native Plant Preservation requirements identify existing plants to remain in place on the landscape plan. DS 2-07.2.2.A.1.e 5) A Native Plant Preservation plan may also be required for plants in the adjacent right of way (ROW). A permit is required to remove any ROW vegetation. Show any existing plants to remain in the right of way on the landscape plan and obtain necessary approvals from TDOT. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED INCLUDING NATIVE PLANT PRESERVATION PLANS. |
| 10/17/2007 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: D07-0001 Elliot Electronics Supply Development Plan --3rd review TRANSMITTAL: 10/17/07 DUE DATE: 10/26/07 COMMENTS: 1. This comment has not been addressed. DS 2-05.2.2.A.1 List the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the primary developer of the project. 2. This comment has not been completely addressed. DS2-05.2.2.B.3 Lot coverage calculations are not required, remove, and provide the correct FAR calculations. Proposed FAR calculations have not been provided. 3. . This comment has not been addressed. DS 2-05.2.4.A A Covenant Regarding Development and Use of Real Property will be required to be completed and recorded. Provide docket and page recording information on the site plan. The covenant provided is not complete. In section B. of the covenant provide the Case No. D07-0001. Once the form is complete it must be recorded. Provide a copy of the recordation information and indicate on the plans that a covenant has been recorded with the docket and page information. 4. DS 2-05.2.4..I This comment has not been addressed. Provide a separate document clearly indicating how each of the rezoning conditions has been complied with. Remove note from site notes on page 1 regarding MS&R criteria (project has nothing to do with MS&R), remove note regarding backup spur (there is no backup spur indicated) 5. This comment has not been addressed. DS 2-05.2.4.K Provide a detail of the handicap ramp clearly indicating slopes and location of truncated domes. The truncated domes indicated in note #5 are to be located where the access aisle for the handicap parking space meets the landing and must be a minimum of 24" in width. The indicated cross walk where located between the parking spaces is required to be a minimum 4' wide sidewalk, physically separated from the vehicular use areas. Handicap ramps with truncated domes will be required at the ends of the required sidewalks. 6. DS 2-05.2.4.P This comment has not been addressed. Provide a detail of the required handicap parking signage. Indicate the minimum distance from grade to the bottom of the handicap sign per City of Tucson standards as seven (7) feet. 7. This comment has not been addressed. DS 2-05.2.4.Q Please provide a plan view detail of the proposed class 2 bicycle parking spaces. Single rack spaces placed in a row will allow a minimum of seventy -two (72) inch length per bicycle parking space and a minimum of thirty (30) inches between outer spaces of racks. A five (5) foot wide access aisle measured from the front or rear of the seventy-two (72) inch long parking space will be provided beside each row. Lighting will be provided such that all facilities are thoroughly illuminated and visible from adjacent sidewalks, parking lots, or buildings, during working hours. The surface of the facility can be surfaced the same as for motor vehicle parking or with a minimum of one (1) inch thickness of one-fourth (1/4) inch aggregate material. DS 2-09.5.1, DS2-09.5.2, DS 2-09.5.4, & DS 2-09.6.2 The type of rack required must provide two-point support for bicycles. Please review DS 2-09.8.0 Figure 2 - 7 for acceptable and unacceptable rack designs, Figure 8 for rack location, and Figure 9 for dimensional requirements. Please review the revised DS 2-09 and provide the necessary corrections to the bicycle parking as required. Once changes are provided and reviewed further comments may result. 8. This comment has not been addressed. 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. 9. A Design Development Option has been applied for the southern building setback which does not meet minimum requirements. Provide as a general note the case # of the DDO, date of approval and any conditions of approval. Add the DDO case number to the lower right corner of all sheets. 10. Provide a written response to all of the above comments. NOTE: A response of "provided" or "noted" does not constitute a written response. 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\D07-0001-3dp.doc |
| 10/19/2007 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. No detail of refuse enclosure provided. Must provide detail drawing of refuse enclosure with on appropriate dimensional requirements. Refer to DS6-01.4.2. 2. DP notes that alley is to be paved by owner. Paved alley is acceptable for service vehicle access and travel. Must comply with DS 3-01.3.1 and meet city engineer approval. Please correct and provide items noted above on resubmittal. |
| 11/01/2007 | BIANCA RAMIREZ | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: November 1, 2007 SUBJECT: Elliot Electronics TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC/Zoning Manager LOCATION: 1301 S Tyndall Ave, T14S R1E Sec 19, Ward 5 REVIEWER: Bianca Ramirez, CFM ACTIVITY: D07-0001 (3rd Review) RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Plan The Development Plan have been reviewed by the Engineering Division and we do not recommend approval at this time. The following review comments must be addressed prior to approval: Development Plan: 1. Complied. 2. As previously commented. revise the drainage statement and development plan to show the existing and proposed floodplain boundary (COT 100-year Floodplain). The floodplain is the area that is subject to inundation by a 1- percent chance storm where the discharge is at least 100 cubic feet per second. Add a note indicating that a floodplain use permit will be required for the development. (See Development Standard 2-05.2.2.C.2) 3. As previously commented., show water surface contours at a minimum of two locatons. 4. Complied 5. As previously commented., DS 2-05.2.1 H. List the contour interval near the north arrow. 6. Complied. 7. As previously commented. show more existing and proposed spot elevations on the parcel. Show that drainage patterns will be achieved and positive drainage from the building will be provided. A grading permit will be required for this project. 8. As previously commented. clearly indicate with section details, how the grades will be made from the street grade through the property. Show how the new street pavement and curbs will be accommodated. 9. As previously commented. clearly show the water harvesting areas in the section details. Show sufficient grade information to show that the water harvesting areas will be level to collect water. Show how water will be directed to these areas. 10. Complied 11. Complied 12. Complied. 13. Complied 14. Complied 15. Include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the Site Plan. 16. Revise site address to read 1301 S Tyndall Ave. 17. List estimated cut & fill quantities per D.S. 2-02.2.1.17. 18. DS Sec. 2-05.2.4.H.2: Provide the right-of-way (ROW) recordation information for Tyndall Ave and 23rd St. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 520.837.4928 or Bianca.Ramirez@tucsonaz.gov . Bianca C. Ramirez 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 |
| 11/01/2007 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES November 1, 2007 Eduardo J. Ornelas Arquitecto E. J. Ornelas 100 North Stone Avenue, #1002 Tucson, Arizona 85701 Subject: D07-0001 Elliot Electronics Supply Development Plan Dear Eduardo: Your submittal of October 1, 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 6 Copies Revised Development Plan (ESD, Wastewater, Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO Plan (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Recorded Lot Combo Covenant (Zoning, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. 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: 624-0747 dp-resubmittal |