Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D07-0016
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/27/2007 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 08/29/2007 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | August 29, 2007 To: Steve Wollerman, Southwestern Consulting Engineers 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 Environmental Quality Subject: M & B Mechanical Development Plan – 2nd Submittal D07-0016 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. Obtain a letter from the PCWMD's Development Services Section, written within the past 90 days, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for the project is available in the downstream public sewerage system and provide a copy of that letter to this office. The required form to request such a letter may be found at: http://www.pima.gov/wwm/forms/docs/CapResponseRequest.pdf. The development plan for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. 2nd request. This office will require a revised set of bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. Pima County Code Title 13.20.030.A.2 requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the development plan. The fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet. The next submittal of this project will be the 3rd submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $39.00(made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) must accompany the revised set of blue lines and response letter. 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 . |
| 09/11/2007 | BIANCA RAMIREZ | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: September 17, 2007 SUBJECT: M&B Mechanical Dev. Plan - Eng. Review TO: Patricia Gehlen LOCATION: 1101 S Santa Rita Ave, T14S R14E Sec 18, Ward 5 REVIEWER: Bianca Ramirez, CFM ACTIVITY: D07-0016 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Development Plan SUMMARY: The Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed development plan and Drainage Statement (Southwestern Consulting Engineers, LLC, 04APR07). Engineering does not recommend approval of the development plan. The drainage statement was reviewed for development plan purposes only. The following items need to be addressed prior to approval: DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 1. DS Sec. 2-05.2.4.H.2: Provide the right-of-way (ROW) recordation information for Mountain Ave and 21st St. 2. DS Sec.2-05.1.4.H.2: Review and approval from TDOT Permits and Codes for all proposed improvements within the public right of way will be required. A right-of-way use permit application will be required prior to construction. Contact Steve Tineo at 741-3115 for all right-of-way requirements and permit applications. 3. DS Sec.11-01.9: According to development plan, cross-sections have been provided. However, per cross-section (K) minimum setback has not been illustrated. Verify that the required 2-foot setback from property lines to the proposed limits of grading and proposed water harvesting area fill slopes have been met. Provide sufficient room to allow for the 2-foot setback from property line to the top of toe fill slopes. 4. DS Sec.2-8.0: All accessible access aisles to accessible parking spaces shall have truncated domes installed that shall be twenty-four (24) inches minimum in the direction of travel and extend the full width of the access aisle. The domes shall be located so the edge nearest the edge of the pedestrian path is six (6) inches to eight (8) inches from edge. Please revise the Development Plan, plan view and detail E/3 adding truncated domes. ANSI 406.12, ANSI 705 5. DS Sec.2-08.3.1: The sidewalk provided adjacent to the dumpster is not necessary. It does not provide a connection to the interior of the site and a pedestrian connection to Mountain Avenue is provided east of the building. If the sidewalk is not removed an accessible ramp and crosswalk would be required to connect to the building. Please provide stripped crosswalk across PAAL for pedestrian access. 6. DS Sec.2-08.5.1.A: Please dimension the sidewalk that extends from 21st Street in the west side since it is not shown in property cross-sections. Minimum width is four (4) feet. GRADING PLAN: 7. DS Sec.11-01.2.1: A grading permit will be required for this project due to the fill quantities provided at resubmittal. A grading plan and a grading permit application will be required after development plan approval and prior to any construction activity. 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 development plans 8. Please ensure that any future grading plan will be consistent with the development plan and drainage statement. Grading standards may be accessed at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf 9. 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. For any questions, or to schedule a meeting call me at 837-4928. 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 |
| 09/12/2007 | FRODRIG2 | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Karol Aragonez Planner PROJECT: D07-0016 M&B Mechanical Development Plan Resubmittal TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 11, 2007 DUE DATE: September 25, 2007 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. Per phone conversation with applicant. A notarized letter from the owner will be submitted verifying the intended use and ownership of the site and will be provided to Zoning Review staff and Rezoning. 2. 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 one-year expiration date for this development plan is April 16, 2008. 3. Please provide a separate response letter detailing compliance with rezoning conditions for case number C9-05-09. DS 2-05.2.4.U 4. Please revise general note 1 to read "Existing zoning is R-2. Proposed zoning is C-3". Please add the CDRC case number D07-0016 to the elevation drawing. DS 2-05.2.2.B.1&2 5. Please revise general note 2 by listing the proposed use as "Commercial Storage, Subject to LUC Sec. 3.5.10.1, Development Designator 34". DS 2-05.2.2.B.3 6. The number of provided spaces in the parking calculation (19) do not match what is shown in plan view (18). Please match. 7. Please indicate in the parking calculation that the one (1) required handicap space is van accessible. 8. Please dimension the wheel-stop curbing in detail E/3. The curbing is to be placed two and one-half (2 ½) feet from the edge of the pedestrian path. DS 3-05.2.3.C.2 9. Please remove rear garage doors from the architectural exterior elevation. These doors are opening out into a drainageway and would be unusable. Please revise. 10. Entrances through garage doors are to be striped and signed as "no parking". 11. Please remove the setback line shown on the DP. Developing area setbacks of the greater of twenty-one (21) or building height from adjacent travel lane is required from all three (3) street frontages. Dimensions provided in details confirm setbacks being provided. 12. Please add dimension between building and rear property line. This can be shown in plan view or in detail K/3. DS 2-05.2.4.I 13. A least one (1) sidewalk will be provided to project from each street on which the project has frontage, unless there is no vehicular access from the street because of a physical barrier. Please provide if this is the case with Santa Rita Avenue. If a physical barrier does not exist please provide four (4) foot wide sidewalk connection. DS 2-08.4.1.A 14. A sidewalk will be provided adjacent to any parking space accessed by a PAAL where the space is located on the same side of the PAAL as any building. A DSMR would be required to substitute a striped pedestrian refuge for a four (4) foot sidewalk. DS 2-08.4.1.C 15. All accessible access aisles to accessible parking spaces shall have truncated domes installed that shall be twenty-four (24) inches minimum in the direction of travel and extend the full width of the access aisle. The domes shall be located so the edge nearest the edge of the pedestrian path is six (6) inches to eight (8) inches from edge. Please revise the DP plan view and detail E/3 adding truncated domes. ANSI 406.12, ANSI 705 16. The sidewalk provided adjacent to the dumpster is not necessary. It does not provide a connection to the interior of the site and a pedestrian connection to Mountain Avenue is provided east of the building. If the sidewalk is not removed a accessible ramp and crosswalk would be required to connect to the building. 17. Please dimension the sidewalk that extends from 21st Street in the west side since it is not shown in property cross-sections. Minimum width is four (4) feet. DS 2-08.5.1.A 18. Per DS 2-09.4.1 Class 2 bicycle parking facilities will be located no more than fifty (50) feet from the main building entrances. The current location only reaches the nearest entrance and does not meet the location requirement for the other entrances to the building. Please revise. 19. Please revise the bicycle parking calculation. The minimum number of bicycle parking required is two (2) per LUC 3.3.3.5. of those two (2) spaces ninety (90) percent (2) are to be Class 1 and ten (10) percent are to be Class 2 (1). Because there are less than fifty (50) motor vehicle parking spaces Class 2 may be substituted for Class 1 spaces. LUC 3.3.7.8.A 20. The required size of the off-street loading space per LUC 3.4.5.2 is twelve (12) by fifty-five (55). The off-street loading space provided on the plan is dimensioned at twelve (12) by thirty-five (35). Please revise. 21. 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. Any free standing signage proposed must meet requirements of rezoning condition 8 and be submitted with the development plan. DS 2-05.2.4.W & LUC 3.5.4.26 22. All changes, modifications, and/or corrections must be made on all applicable plans including the development plan, landscape plan, and NPPO. Once changes, modifications, and/or corrections are made and reviewed further comments may result. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Karol Aragonez, (520) 837-4960. KAA S:\zoning review\karol\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D07-1116dpr.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan, architectural elevations, and additional requested documents. |
| 09/18/2007 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D07-0016 M&B Mechanical 09/18/07 ( ) Tentative Plat (XXXX) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment ( ) Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-89-05-09 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Greater South Park GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 9/25/07 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 Additional Comments Attached ( ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: (XXXX) Resubmittal Required: ( ) Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan (XXXX) Other - Sign Details REVIEWER: drcorral 791-4505 DATE: 9/24/07 1. Rezoning condition #8 states "free standing signs to be integrated into the overall landscape plan". Details of signs are to be submitted as part of the development plan. Free standing, business signs, are to be of appropriate scale, height and color and are to integrate with new development. Per Design Guideline I.B.4.a, signs shall be integrated with the overall landscape plan, in such a way that it sends a clear message, but that the sign is not the dominant feature. Please submit sign details and illustrate how the sign shall be integrated into the the overall landscape plan. DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D07-0016 M&B Mechanical 05/15/07 ( ) Tentative Plat (XXXX) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment ( ) Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-89-05-09 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Greater South Park GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 05/15/07 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 Additional Comments Attached ( ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: (XXXX) Resubmittal Required: ( ) Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan ( ) Landscape Plan (XXXX) Other - Sign Details REVIEWER: drcorral 791-4505 DATE: 05/15/07 2. Rezoning condition #8 states "free standing signs to be integrated into the overall landscape plan. Details of signs are to be submitted as part of the development plan. Please submit details of signs integrated into the landscape plan to satisfy this requirement. 2. Add case number D07-0016 to development plan, elevation and landscape sheets. |
| 09/25/2007 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) The refuse enclosure may not be located in the street landscape border. LUC Table 3.7.2-I 2) Revise the tree planters such that they are at least four feet wide per LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.c. |
| 09/27/2007 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/27/2007 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES September 27, 2007 Steve Wollerman Southwestern Consulting Engineers 435 East 9th Street Tucson, Arizona 85705 Subject: D07-0016 M&B Mechanical Development Plan Dear Steve: Your submittal of August 28, 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 (Wastewater, Zoning, Landscape, ESD, DUPD, Engineering, DSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Landscape, DUPD, Engineering, DSD) ESD has been left in the review cycle due to Landscaping comment #1. 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: 628-1063 |