Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Number: D07-0006
Parcel: 14029212B

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN

Permit Number - D07-0006
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
10/22/2007 FERNE RODRIGUEZ START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
10/31/2007 FRODRIG2 PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Approv-Cond October 31, 2007

To: Kevin Parker
LEADS, Inc.

Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager
City of Tucson Development Services Department

___________________________
From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6579), representing the Pima County
Departments of Wastewater Management and Environment Quality

Subject: Tutor Time, NWC Valencia Road & Hemisphere Loop
Dev. Plan – 3rd Submittal
D07-006


The proposed sewer collection lines 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.

Sheet 1: The blank in General Note #7 needs to have a value greater then zero for the proposed wastewater fixture units. 2nd request.

Change the construction plan # for the 8”public sewer on plan from 6-98-122 to G-98-122.

Subject to the above, the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality and Wastewater Management Department hereby approve the above referenced submittal of the . The required revision(s) may be shown on the Mylars.

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 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.
11/01/2007 KAROL ARAGONEZ ZONING REVIEW Approved CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Karol Aragonez
Planner

PROJECT: D07-0006
Tutor Time Daycare
Development Plan Resubmittal

TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 30, 2007

DUE DATE: November 20, 2007

COMMENTS:

The Zoning Review Section approves the development plan for this project. However, should there be any changes requested by other CDRC members, the Zoning Review Section approval is void, and we request copies of the revised development plan to verify that those changes do not affect any zoning requirements.


If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608.

KAA S:\zoning review\karol\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D07-0006dpr1.doc
11/06/2007 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1) Canopy trees must be evenly distributed throughout the vehicular use area. Every parking space shall be located within forty (40) feet of the trunk of a canopy tree (as measured from the center of the tree trunk).
The trees are required to be located within the paved vehicular use area or in landscape areas within ten (10) feet of these areas. Revise the landscape plan as necessary. LUC 3.7.2.3.A, LUC 6.2.
We suggest that at least two of the trees in the Valencia Road landscape border be moved north (centered between the trees proposed on the north side of the parking lot) to within ten feet of the paved area.

2) Please clarify that the xero-riparian habitat identified on sheet C-2 is non-regulated. Only habitat areas within the floodplain are regulated. No notes or clarifications were noted. DS 2-13.1.0

3) Show all proposed screen walls or fences on the development and landscape plans. Label the 5' wall along Hemisphere Loop on the landscape plan and increase the height of this wall to six feet to screen the loading area per LUC Table.3.7.2-I. DS 2-05.2.4.X., DS 2-07.2.2.A.3

4) Add the CDRC case number and any related case numbers to the landscape and native plant preservation plans (in the lower right corner). DS 2-07.2.1.B



RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED
11/19/2007 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: November 19, 2007
SUBJECT: Tutor Time Daycare Development Plan- 3rd Engineering Review
TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager
LOCATION: Parcel ID: 140-29-212B; T15S R14E Sec09 Ward 5
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: D07-0006


SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the revised development plan, landscape plan, Drainage Statement (LEADS, Inc., 25JAN07, revised 13JUL07, revised 18OCT07) and Geotechnical Engineering Report (Ricker-Atkinson-McBee-Morman and Associates, Inc, 10OCT06 with addendum 12OCT07 and 17OCT07). The Drainage Statement was reviewed for development plan purposes only. The development plan is not approved at this time. Please address the following comments:


DRAINAGE STATEMENT: The 3rd submittal of the development plan has changed in drainage design from the previous 2 submittals. This submittal calls out a drywell system to be used with the underground stormwater system that has been proposed from the beginning.

1) Dry wells are highly discouraged due to substantial drywell failure within the City of Tucson. Revise the Drainage Statement to include discussion on all requirements within DS 10-01.3.5.5 and 10-02.14.5 (1-10) for all systems, which utilize a method of subsurface disposal, i.e. dry wells and underground storage chambers. The Drainage Statement must meet or exceed the minimum criteria within both Development Standards.

2) Floodplain Ordinance Tucson Code Section 26-10(c) states: The design of a detention or retention system, as reviewed and approved by the city engineer, shall include consideration of the degree of existing development within the basin and the capacity of the downstream drainage facilities. The systems will be designed with strict conformance to the public's health, safety and welfare. The effects of recharging storm runoff and possible pollution of the groundwater shall be evaluated for all systems employing infiltration systems, such as dry wells, in order to prevent contamination of the groundwater aquifer. The more technical requirements are listed in the City's drainage manual DS Sec.10-02.14.5. For review of a project we would need to see a Drainage Statement discussing and showing that the proposed dry well conforms to items 1-10 of this section.

3) Clarify Section 3.0 of the Drainage Statement and the datum reference (NAVD88) shown versus the datum reference shown on Sheet C-2 of the development plan. The development plan calls out a datum reference of NGVD29 which differs from the drainage report, clarify.


DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS:

4) DS Sec.10-02.10.9.1.8: Provide an additional clean outs or manholes for the intersection of the 2 H.D.P.E. pipes adjacent to the proposed loading zone. The intersection will need to provide a manhole or clean out at this location along the system so that sediment/debris can be removed from the stormwater chambers as per the manufacture recommendations.

5) Provide references from the manufacture where these types of underground stormwater systems have been used and their applicability to this project. All references should include use and maintenance of the underground stormwater system and how that system is achieving design criteria. The specific project references stated in the comment letter could not be located as part of this submittal showing where these types of systems have been used and how those systems are achieving design criteria. Proposed underground storm systems and dry wells must meet the minimum requirements and prove that they will function as shown prior to City of Tucson approval.

6) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.E: Revise the benchmark sections on Sheet C-1 and C-2 to match the revised drainage report or revise the drainage report to match Sheet C-2. Section 3.0 of the Drainage Statement shows a datum reference of NAVD88. The datum reference shown on Sheet C-2 of the development plan shows NGVD29, clarify.

7) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.3: Revise Sheet C-3 to provide a keynote call out for the transitions of the storm drain to the existing channel. The plan view calls out Keynote #22 at this location, which is a call out for a dry well system not a curb opening as shown in Detail 6 on Sheet C-4.

8) DS Sec.2-05-2.4.T: Revise the Trash Enclosure Detail on Sheet C-4. Provide the minimum refuse enclosure requirements per DS Sec.6-01. Refer to the attached Figure 3 (included with the hard copy of the comment letter) per DS Sec.6-01 for the required refuse enclosure dimensions and construction. No other detail will be accepted for the refuse enclosure.

9) DS Sec.10-02.14.3.2: Provide a note on the development plan stating that, (a) the owner or owners shall be solely responsible for operation, maintenance, and liability for drainage structures, underground MaxWell™ Plus Drainage System and the Envibro™ dry well system; (b) that the owner or owners shall have an Arizona Registered Professional Civil Engineer prepare a certified inspection report for the drainage and detention/retention facilities at lease once every 6-months, and that these regular inspection reports will be on file with the owner for review by City staff, upon written request; (c) that City staff may periodically inspect the drainage and retention/detention facilities to verify that scheduled and unscheduled maintenance activities are being performed adequately; and (d) that the owner or owners agree to reimburse the City for any and all costs associated with the maintaining of the drainage structures, underground MaxWell™ Plus Drainage System and the Envibro™ dry well system, should the City find the owner or owners deficient in their obligation to adequately operate and maintain their facilities."

10) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.2: Review and approval from TDOT Permits and Codes for all improvements within the public right-of-way will be required. A right-of-way use permit application will be required prior to construction. Refer to the following links for TDOT Forms and applications:

a) http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Forms_Fees___Maps/Applications/applications.html /

b) http://www.dot.ci.tucson.az.us/engineering/pia.php

c) Or contact Thad Harveston at 741-3115 for all additional questions regarding r-o-w.


GRADING PLAN:

11) DS Sec.11-01.2.1: A grading permit is required for this project. 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.

12) Please ensure the grading plan is consistent with the development plan and Drainage Statement. Grading standards may be accessed at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf

13) Provide a General Note on the grading plan to reference conformance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (excavation and grading requirements).

14) 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.


GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised development plan, drainage statement and approval from DSD Landscaping Division that addresses 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 statement and DSD Landscaping Division reviews.

For any questions or to schedule a meeting, call me at 520-837-4929.



Jason Green, CFM
Senior Engineer Associate
Engineering Division
Development Services
11/20/2007 PATRICIA GEHLEN ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Denied COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

November 20, 2007

Hank Hulbert
Leads, Inc.
2400 North Central Avenue, Suite 203
Phoenix, Arizona 85004

Subject: D07-0006 Tutor Time DayCare Development Plan

Dear Hank:

Your submittal of October 22, 2007, 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

4 Copies Revised Development Plan (Landscape, Wastewater, Engineering, DSD)

3 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Landscape, Engineering, DSD)

2 Copies Revised Drainage Statement (Engineering, 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: (602) 254-1700