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 - D07-0018
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/01/2007 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/10/2007 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | NO COMMENT D07-0018 CORONADO ENGINEERING & DEVELOPMENT, INC HILTON GARDEN HOTEL @ PARK PLACE -------------------------------------------------------- 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 email, and delete or destroy all copies plus attachments. |
| 05/15/2007 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | May 15, 2007 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D07-0018 PROJECT NAME: Hilton Garden Hotel @ Park PL PROJECT ADDRESS: 5870 E Broadway Blvd 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 re-submittal. The following items must be revised or added to the development plan. 1. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. 2. Provide a revised Traffic Impact Analysis or Traffic Statement as required by rezoning condition 2 noted on sheet 1 0f 4. 3. If applicable a private improvement agreement (PIA) will be necessary for any proposed work to be performed within the Right-of-way. An approved development plan is required prior to applying for a PIA. Contact the PIA Coordinator for additional PIA information at 791-5550 ext. 1107. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x76730 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 05/16/2007 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#181215 May 16, 2007 Coronado Engineering & Development, Inc. Attn: Paul Nzomo, P.E. 1630 S Research Loop, Suite 150 Tucson, Arizona 85710 Dear Mr. Nzomo : SUBJECT: Hilton Garden Hotel at Park Place D07-0018 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted May 1, 2007. It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. TEP will need a full set of approved site, electrical load, paving off-site improvements and irrigation plans. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. Any relocation costs will be billable to the customer. In order to apply for electric service, call the New Construction Department at (520) 918-8300. Submit a final set of plans including approved site, offsite and electrical load plans. Include a CD with the AutoCAD version of the plans. If easements are required, they will be secured by separate instrument. Your final plans should be sent to: Tucson Electric Power Company Attn: Ms. Mary Boice New Business Project Manager P. O. Box 711 (DB-101) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-917-8732 Please call the area Designer Nancy DiMaria at (520) 918-8267, should you have any questions. Sincerely, Elizabeth Miranda Office Support Specialist Design/Build lm Enclosures cc: P. Gehlen and F. Rodriguez, City of Tucson (email) N. DiMaria, Tucson Electric Power |
| 05/16/2007 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 05/17/2007 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | May 16, 2007 To: Paul Nzomo, Coronado Engineering and Development, 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 Environmental Quality Subject: Hilton Garden Hotel at Park Place Mall Development Plan – 1st Submittal D07-0018 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. All Sheets: Add the case number, D07-0018, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than any cross reference numbers. No wastewater review fees will be charged for sheets where this is the only required revision. Sheet 1, 2 & 3: Show the public and private sewer lines using different line-types, so that they can readily be distinguished from each other. Also show and describe examples of these different line types in the legend on Sheet 1. Sheet 1, 2 & 3: The IMS #’s w/rim and invert elevations for all existing manholes within 100’ of this project need to be shown on plan. Also the existing sewer line/manholes need to be marked as public. Sheet 1, 2 & 3: The existing public sewer should be marked with plan # and pipe size. Sheet 1, 2 & 3: The sewer easement width shown should be 20’ and the recordation information should be shown on the plan. Also the easement should extend out to go around MH#1 completely. Sheet 1, 2 & 3: Show the BCS connecting to the 8” proposed private sewer line. Sheet 1: Revise General Note No. 9. The FUE quantity of 150 for an 89,000 sft. hotel appears to be inaccurate. Sheet 1: Revise the description in the legend for the new sewer line. It should not be called HCS but should be called 8” PROPOSED PRIVATE SEWER. Also add the word PUBLIC after EXISTING SEWER MANHOLE in the legend. 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 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. 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 . |
| 05/18/2007 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Add the development plan case number (D07-018) to the lower right hand corner of all sheets of the Development Plan and Landscape Plan. DS 2-03.2.2.B.1 2) Within vehicular use areas, one (1) canopy tree is required for each 10 motor vehicle parking spaces and 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) per LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.a. Show required canopy trees along eastern edge of parking area. 3) The parking area shown on the Landscape plans shows full size planter islands for canopy trees in the parking lot to the west of the proposed hotel. However on the Development/Grading plans there are small diamond shaped islands shown. Revise development plan to match landscape plan layout for parking areas. 4) Dimension all landscape planter areas on the Landscape Plan. Also, label the square footage measured from the inside of tree planters in the vehicle use area. An unpaved area, which is a minimum of thirty-four (34) square feet in area and four (4) feet in width, must be provided for each canopy tree. Revise the diamond-shaped parking lot tree planters on all sheets of the Landscape Plan and Development Plan to meet this requirement. LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.c, DS 2-07.2.2.A.2.e DS 2-07.2.2.A.2.e 5) All lettering and dimensions must be a minimum of 12 point (0.12") in size for microfilming purposes. Revise all text which does not meet this minimum archiving standard. DS2-03.2.1.C 6) Disabled parking spaces are shown on the Development plan at the northwest corner of the hotel where landscaped areas are shown on the Landscape Plan. Also, the bicycle parking location at the north side of the building on the Development Plan conflicts with areas shown with landscaping on the Landscape Plan. Revise Development Plan to be consistent with all aspects of the Landscape Plan and show bicycle parking location on the Landscape Plan |
| 05/23/2007 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | Pima Association Of Governments5/22/07CASE: D07-0018, HILTON GARDEN HOTEL @ PARK PL, DEVEL PLANCOMMENT: NO OBJECTIONS OR ADVERSE COMMENTSDescription/ITE CodeUnitsExpectedExpected PM PeakUnitsDaily TripsTrips - TotalTruck Terminal 030AcresGeneral Light Industrial 110TSF GrossMini Warehouse 151TSF GrossSingle Family Homes 210DUApartments 220DUMobile Home Park 240DUAssisted Living 254DUAll Suites Hotel 311RoomsMotel 320Rooms15084571Health/Fitness Club 493TSF GrossChurch 560TSF GrossDaycare Center 565TSF GrossGeneral Office 710 (Equation)TSF GrossGeneral Office 710 (Rate)TSF GrossMedical Dental Office 720TSF GrossBuilding Materials/Lumber 812TSF GrossHardware/Paint Store 816TSF GrossNursery (Garden Center) 817TSF GrossShopping Center 820 (Equation)TSF GrossShopping Center 820 (Rate)TSF GrossQuality Restaurant 931TSF GrossHigh Turnover/Sit Down Rest. 932TSF GrossFast Food w/o Drive Thru 933TSF GrossFast Food with Drive Thru 934TSF GrossDrive Thru Only 935TSF GrossNot AvailableService Station 944Fuel PositionServ.Station w/ Conven.Mkt 945Fuel PositionTire Store 848Service BaysNot AvailableSupermarket 850TSF GrossConvenien. Mkt (Open 24 hrs) 851TSF GrossConvenien. Mkt (Open 16 Hrs) 852TSF GrossNot AvailableConvenien. Mkt w/ Gas Pumps 853TSF GrossDiscount Club 861TSF GrossPharmacy/Drugstore w/ Drive-thru 881TSF GrossFurniture Store 890TSF GrossWalk-In Bank 911TSF GrossDrive-In Bank 912Drive-In LanesTOTAL84571Expected PM PeakDaily TripsTrips - TotalDaily TripsTrips - TotalFor questions please contact:Tom Cooney, Travel Forecasting ManagerPima Association of Governments177 N. Church Ave, #405Tucson, AZ 85701Tel: (520) 792-1093, Fax: (520) 620-6981Web: www.PAGnet.org and www.RTAmobility.comTrip Generation Using Rates from the 7th Edition ITE Trip Generation Report |
| 05/25/2007 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. DP sheet 2, Does not provide the required 14ft x 40ft clear approach to enclosure area. DS 6-01.4.1.C. In conflict with building. 2. DP sheet 4 trash dumpster detail, A. requires side wall protectors with a minimum 20ft inside clear between, as long as there is no center post for gates. B. If enclosure is equipped with a center post for the gates then will require a minimum 10ft clear between the side wall protectors and the center post. C. A 10ft clear will also be required between the rear wall protectors and the front gates. Requires four rear wall protectors and two each side wall protectors. Any more on the side and can possibly restrict user access around dumpster. DS 6-01.4.1.B & 6-01.4.2.C.2 3. Enclosure gates must be designed with the ability to be secured in the open postion during service. DS 6-01.4.2.C.4 Identify and annotate gate construction design on detail. Recommend the following; A. Gate design minimum std., 3"x3"x1/4 thk. welded steel angle, face w/type B metal deck, with positive locking and (bayonet) anchors. B. Qty of 4-1in. dia. x 6in. long galavanized pipe to be flush with concrete. Recommend mounting gates to the face of the enclosure wall or post with the ability to open a minimum of 180 degrees when possible. Pleas make necessary corrections upon resubmittal. |
| 05/29/2007 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | No comment |
| 06/01/2007 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 06/01/2007 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D07-0018 Hilton Garden Hotel@Park Pl. 06/01/07 ( ) Tentative Plat (ü) Development Plan (ü) Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment ( ) Other CROSS REFERENCE: C0-06-14 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Broadway-Craycroft Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Broadway is Gateway Route COMMENTS DUE BY: June 30, 2007 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 (ü) Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions ( ) RCP Proposal Complies with Plan Policies ( ) See Additional Comments Attached (ü) No Additional Comments (ü) No Resubmittal Required ( ) Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan ( ) Landscape Plan ( ) Other REVIEWER: J. Hershenhorn 791-4505 DATE: 5/29/07 |
| 06/01/2007 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 06/04/2007 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: June 1, 2007 TO: DSD_CDRC@ tucsonaz.gov FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov SUBJECT: D07-0018 Hilton Garden Hotel: Development Plan(5-1-07) Staff has no comments. |
| 06/05/2007 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Hilton Garden Hotel @ Park Place D07-0018 Development Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 30, 2007 DUE DATE: May 30, 2007 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a separate response letter for zoning, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 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 a full CDRC review. The one-year expiration date for this development plan is April 30, 2008. 2. Based on the latest aerial photos it appears that parking area striping was not installed per the last approved development plan. There have been numerous changes through out the site. This said please provide a master plan which depicts the parking as it is on site along with an updated parking calculation so that zoning can verify parking requirements. 3. There is a heavy line that encompasses the proposed building. This line makes it difficult to read areas of the plan. Please remove the line or reduce the line weight so that all areas of the development plan (DP) are readable. 4. D.S. 2-05.2.1.C All lettering and dimension shall be the equivalent of twelve (0.12") point or greater in size to facilitate reproduction and photographically reduced (microfilm) for record keeping. There are keynote call outs and dimension that do not meet this requirement. 5. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.1 General Note 17 lists the existing zoning as C2. Per COT Zoning Maps the existing zoning is C1 & P and the proposed zoning is C2. Revise General Note 17. 6. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.3 Provide a general note stating "THE PROPOSED USE IS TRAVELERS' ACCOMMODATION, LODGING "31", SUBJECT TO: SEC 3.5.13.5". 7. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.11 This site is not being developed as a stand alone site, this said list the gross site area for the entire site by square footage and acreage and provide the area of disturbance by site by square footage and acreage. 8. D.S. 2-05.2.3.B Clarify what the parking easement is for. 9. D.S. 2-05.2.3.C Provide the following information for the South Entry Road: dimensioned width of road, curb location and sidewalk width. 10. D.S. 2-05.2.4.B Show all existing zoning classifications on adjacent parcels. 11. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 The proposed location of the refuse container enclosure appears to encroach into the parking area access lane (PAAL) which runs along the east side of the proposed structure. 12. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 It appears that there is proposed handicapped parking located near the northwest corner of the proposed building. Per keynote 1 there is vertical curbing proposed to run between the handicapped vehicle parking space and the PAAL which should provide access to the parking spaces, clarify. 13. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 The proposed parking located near the northwest corner of the proposed building requires some type of barrier or wheel stop to prevent parked vehicles from overhanging the proposed 4'-6" sidewalk. D.S. 3.05-2.3.C.1 14. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Provide a dimension for the proposed driveway. 15. D.S. 2-05.2.4.I The south end of the building abuts a private named street which as an average daily traffic (ADT) of great than 1000 which requires a twenty-one (21) foot setback to the back of curb, revise drawing. 16. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K For the proposed handicapped parking located near the northwest corner of the proposed building delineate on the plan how the handicapped access the sidewalk. 17. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Show the accessible route from the proposed handicapped parking spaces located near the south end of the proposed driveway, to the proposed building. 18. D.S. 2-05.2.4.N Label the heights and provide dimensions for all structures on the plan. Provide the height of the portico and the building along with overall dimension for the building. 19. D.S. 2-05.2.4.O It appears that there are two (2) loading spaces located near the northeast corner of the proposed building, clarify. 20. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Until comment 2 above has been addressed the required and provided number of vehicle parking spaces, for the entire site, can not be verified. Additional comments may be forth coming. 21. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Provide the required and provide number of handicapped vehicle parking spaces. 22. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q The proposed location for the Class 2 bicycle parking does not meet the requirements of D.S. 2-09.4.1, revise location. 23. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q The proposed Class 2 bicycle parking detail does not meet the requirements of D.S. 2-09.2.3 and figures 2 & 3. Per figure 4 the proposed rack is unacceptable. 24. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Refer to the revised D.S. 2-09.5.0 for layout requirements for Class 2 bicycle parking. 25. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Provide a detail for the Class 1 bicycle parking. 26. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q The bicycle parking calculation shown on the plan is incorrect. Per LUC 3.3.4 Commercial Services Use Group, Travelers Accommodation, Lodging, the bicycle parking requirement is eight (8) percent of the total number of vehicle parking spaces provided. Base on 150 vehicle-parking spaces provide, 12 bicycle parking spaces are required, seventy-five (75) percent Class 1 and twenty-five (25) percent Class 2. Revise the bicycle parking calculation. 27. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape & grading plan. 28. Additional comments may be forth coming depending on how each comment has been addressed. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D07-0018dp.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents. |
| 06/06/2007 | 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: D07-0018 HILTON GARDEN HOTEL@PARK PL/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 5/22/07 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: Delete direction from all street names in Location Map. Delete “Ring Road” on sheet 1. Delete “East” from Park Place Drive. Correct Range 15 to Range 14 in Title Block. es |
| 06/07/2007 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Coordinator DATE: June 5, 2007 SUBJECT: Engineering review of the Hilton Garden Hotel Development Plan. The activity number is D07-0018. SUMMARY: The Development Plan and Drainage Report were received by Engineering on May 1st, 2007. Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Development Plan or the Drainage Report. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: DEVELOPMENT PLAN, DRAINAGE REPORT GENERAL COMMENTS 1. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Development Plan purposes only. 2. A Grading Plan and Permit will be required. Proposed grading in excess of 5,000 yards is designated "engineered grading" and a soils engineering report is required with the Grading Plan submittal. Development Standards 11-01.4.1.C. The Soils Report must also address the requirements detailed in the Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 14.2.6. 3. Proposed developments exceeding 1 acre of disturbance are subject to AzPDES requirements. 4. Proposed fills in excess of two feet above existing grade at any location in the outer one hundred feet of the developing site adjacent to residentially zoned property require the procedure outlined in Development Standards 11-01.8.1. This process must be complete prior to Grading Plan approval. The next submittal must address the following items: DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1. Provide the following drainage notes; a. "The developer, any successors and assigns, will hold the City of Tucson, its officers, employees, and agents harmless from any and all claims for damages related to the use of this development as shown hereon, now and in the future, by reason of flooding, flowage, erosion, or damage caused by water, whether surface flood or rainfall." b. "Drainage will remain in its natural state and will not be altered, disturbed, or obstructed other than as shown on this development plan." 2. List the following note on the development plan: "No structure or vegetation shall be located or maintained so as to interfere with the sight visibility triangles in accordance with Development Standard 3-01.0." 3. Provide on the development plan the following note: "Any relocation or modification of existing utilities and/or public improvements necessitated by the proposed development will be at no expense to the public." DS 2-05.2.2.E. 4. Provide a general note stating, "This property is subject to the City of Tucson Floodplain Regulations." 5. The development plan should be comprised of a separate site plan and a separate grading plan. Provide on separate sheets a site plan and a grading plan. The title block should still incorporate the verbiage "development plan." Revise appropriately. 6. Provide the docket and page for the parking easement. DS 2-05.2.3.B. 7. For the private street named Park Place Drive show on the development plan the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, location of curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. The dimensions are to be from the street centerline. DS 2-05.2.3.C. 8. If applicable provide on the development plan the location of the existing storm drain facilities. DS 2-05.2.3.F. 9. Provide on the site plan sheet the floodplain delineation, indicate the type of zone on each site of the delineation line, provide the 100 year (existing and proposed) water surface elevation and the datum. DS 2-05.2.3.I. 10. Provide on the grading plan sheet the type of zone on each site of the delineation line, provide the 100 year (existing and proposed) water surface elevation and the datum. DS 2-05.2.3.I. 11. Dimension the entry drive for the hotel. Indicate if it is one or two way travel. DS 3-05. 12. Spell trash enclosure correctly. 13. Provide a PAAL dimension adjacent to the solid waste enclosure. It appears the solid waste enclosure is encroaching into the PAAL. DS 6-01. 14. The specific maintenance notes specified in the Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 14.3 must be included on the Development Plan. 15. The 10-year flow must be contained under the pedestrian circulation at all down spout locations. On the site plan provide flow arrows and locations for all roof down spouts and add a note, "All roof down spouts on all structures must be routed under any adjacent sidewalk." DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16, DS 2-08.4.1.E. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS 1. The 10-year flow must be contained under the pedestrian circulation at all down spout locations. Provide calculations, scupper details and discussion stating that the 10-year flow will be contained under the pedestrian circulation at all concentrated locations with. DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16. 2. It is acknowledged the structure is impacted by a Zone X shaded, shallow 100 year flooding because of this the structure is subject to the City of Tucson floodplain requirement and must be elevated above the 100 year water surface elevation. Provide discussion and appropriate calculations to address developing within a Zone X shaded, shallow 100 year flood hazard area. |
| 06/08/2007 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES June 8, 2007 Paul Nzomo, P.E. Coronado Engineering & Development, Inc. 1630 South Research Loop, Suite 150 Tucson, Arizona 85710 Subject: D07-0018 Hilton Gardens Hotel Development Plan Dear Paul: Your submittal of May 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 8 Copies Revised Development Plan (Traffic, Wastewater, Landscape, ESD, Zoning, Addressing, Engineering, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Traffic Impact Analysis/Statement (Traffic, DSD) 2 Copies Master Parking Plan (Zoning, 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: 722-5394 |