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 - D07-0038
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/28/2007 | FRODRIG2 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 08/29/2007 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 08/29/2007 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | August 29, 2007 To: Maolin Zheng BSW International 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: Wal-Mart Supercenter, Store 4307-00 Dev. Plan - 1st Submittal D07-038 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. This project will be tributary to the Roger Road Wastewater Treatment Facility via Santa Cruz Interceptor. 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: Show the jurisdiction’s case number, D07-0038, in or near the title block of each sheet. This case number should be shown larger and bolder than any associated cross-reference numbers. Sheet 1: Revise General Note# 5 to read as follows: ANY RELOCATION, MODIFICATION, ETC., OF THE EXISTING UTILITIES AND/OR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL BE AT NO EXPENSE TO THE PUBLIC. Sheet 1: Revise General Note #6 to read as follows: THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE ______ EXISTING AND______ PROPOSED WASTEWATER FIXTURE UNIT EQUIVALENTS PER TABLE 13.20.045(E)(1) IN PIMA COUNTY CODE 13.20.045(E). And fill in the blanks with the appropriate values. Sheet 1: In the Legend there needs to be a symbol for the proposed private manhole which differs from the existing public manhole. Currently the existing manhole is shown twice in the Legend. Also the existing manhole should be marked as public. Sheet 6 and 7: Mark the sewer lines which are shown directed to the buildings on plan as BCS. Sheet 6 and 7: The sewer lines shown on plan should include sewer directional arrows. Sheet 6 and 7: The exact proposed slope for each sewer line segment should be shown. The slopes should match the lengths of the segments along with the manhole inverts given. Sheet 6 and 7: The manholes should be numbered sequentially going down in value with the downstream flow. Sheet 6 and 7: Revise the plan so that all public sewer elements (manholes and cleanouts), that are located on this project or are less than 100’ from this project, are identified. The IMS numbers are the sewer element identification numbers that can be found on the PCWMD Maps and Records (5th floor) basemaps or on PCWMD and PCDOT MapGuide internet websites. IMS #’s are missing and incorrectly stated as in MH 8A is actually MH # 1726-08A. 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 second (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. |
| 08/30/2007 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Approved | Office of the Pima County Assessor 115 N. Church Ave. Tucson, Arizona 85701 BILL STAPLES ASSESSOR TO: CDRC Office Subdivision Review City of Tucson (FAX# 791-5559) FROM: Gary Ault, Mapping Supervisor Pima County Assessor's Office Mapping Department DATE: August 30, 2007 RE: Assessor's Review and Comments Regarding Development Plans D07-0038 WAL-MART SUPER CENTER #4307-00 T151303 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * x Plat meets Assessor's Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor's Office requirements. COMMENTS: THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUBMITTAL. ROSANNA WERNER |
| 09/12/2007 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#187342 September 12, 2007 BSW International, inc. Attn: Maolin Zheng 10835 N 25th Avenue, Suite 250 Phoenix, Arizona 85029 Dear Mr. Zheng : SUBJECT: Wal-Mart Super Center D07-0038 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted August 28, 2007. It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development 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, electrical load, paving off-site improvements and irrigation plans, if available 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 Should you have any technical questions, please call the area Designer Mike Kaiser at (520) 918-8244. Sincerely, Elizabeth Miranda Office Support Specialist Design/Build lm Enclosures cc: DSD_CDRC@tucsonaz.gov, City of Tucson (email) M. Kaiser, Tucson Electric Power |
| 09/13/2007 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | >>> "Douglas Kratina" <DKratina@azdot.gov> 09/13/2007 9:24 AM >>> ADOT has NO COMMENT on this project D07-0038 BSW INTERNATIONAL, INC WAL-MART SUPER CENTER #4307-00 -------------------------------------------------------- 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. |
| 09/25/2007 | 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: D07-0038 WALMART SUPER CENTER #4307-00/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 9/25/07 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: Label section corners on Location Map. Title Block should include brief legal description (ie: A development of Blocks, Subdivision Book and Page). Correct lot 12 to lot 14 on sheet 3. Legal description on sheet 1 indicates that Pad 4 is not included in this project. Please verify this information prior to further review. es |
| 09/25/2007 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Denied | >>> Jim Stoyanoff 09/25/2007 10:08 AM >>> 1.) There is a 15' Public Access Easement created by the subdivision plat Casitas Del Sol Estates 58/48 that appears to have a 6' screening wall and a corner of the building (pad 6) encroaching into it. This easement will need to be abandoned. Below is the link to Real Estate Services (RES) Application for vacation/abandonment of City right of way/easements. http://dot.ci.tucson.az.us/realestate/public.php You will find the Application for Real Estate Services Form (RES FORM) pdf.at the top middle of the page under Real Estate Services. Print it out and submit the completed application with a check in the amount of $200.00 made out to the City of Tucson and the Real Estate Division will process this request. If the requested easement abandonment is not approved by the various departments that have an interest in this easement the plans will need to changed leaving this access easement open and free of encroachments. 2.) The most easterly corner of Block 1 should be included in the Legal Description preamble. The legal description exception starts off at the most east common corner to Block 1 and Block 2 then south 92.43' to the point of beginning, this is leaving a triangle portion of Block 1 as a part of this development. With that said it appears to me that PAD 4 is a part of this development plan, but it is not according to the legal description. You have blurred the lines of what is a part of this development and what is not a part. Please clarify on the next submittal. Maybe a subdivision plat would be better for this development as it appears that a reconfiguration of the original Blocks has taken place. (portions of Blocks 1 & 2 for pad 4 Brake Masters has been sold) Most pads as shown do not fall into the Block plat (ie: pad 3 and Block 4) do not have the same boundary lines. If pad 3 is sold, as in the case of pad 4, then it will incorporate portions of Blocks 3 and 5 and will create new boundaries which according to Arizona State Statue requires a Record of Survey to be recorded and the new corners to be pinned. |
| 09/25/2007 | 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 D07-0038 Wal-Mart Super Center #4307-00 () Tentative Plat (XXXX) Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-98-01, C9-83-34 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Santa Cruz Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Mission Road (Scenic Route) COMMENTS DUE BY: 9/26/07 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 (XXXX) See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: () Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: drcorral 791-4505 DATE: 09/18/07 The site falls under rezoning case number C9-98-01, in which the applicant proposes rezoning from MH to C-1 and C-2 to allow for the development of a shopping center at the northeast corner of Irvington and Mission Roads. On December 9, 2002, a Change of Development Plan and a Time Extension were requested and granted, with amended conditions. Rezoning condition #1 states the applicant shall submit a development plan in substantial compliance with the preliminary development plan, dated October 17, 2002. Upon review of development plan dated October 23, 2007, it is evident a reconfiguration of the pads and a substantial increase in gross floor area has occurred. As such staff cannot continue with a review of the development plan at this time. Furthermore, staff reserves the right to respond to any added conditions of rezoning. |
| 09/26/2007 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the landscape border note for Mission Road on the landscape cover sheet to comply with the requirements of the Scenic Corridor Zone. A thirty-foot wide natural buffer is required. LUC 2.8.2 2) An additional overlay zone application and approval is required prior to Development plan approval. Applications for projects within the Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ) shall be reviewed in accordance with the DSD Full Notice Procedure, Sec. 23A-50 and 23A-51. Contact Patricia Gehlen-Zoning Manager for application information. The decision to approve or deny the project will be based on the purpose, intent, and specific regulations of LUC 2.8.2. 3) Revise the Development Plan to reference any of the following special overlay zones (SCZ, WASH) that are applicable, and add a note stating that the plat is designed to meet the overlay zone(s) criteria and note the case file number, date of approval, and any conditions of approval. DS 2-03.2.2.B.7 4) All disturbed, grubbed, graded, or bladed areas not otherwise improved shall be landscaped, reseeded, or treated with an inorganic or organic ground cover to help reduce dust pollution. Revise landscape plan to identify the type and locations proposed for inert ground cover materials or seeded areas. Decomposed granite is not generally allowed in the scenic route buffer area or in the bottom of drainage basins. LUC 3.7.2.7. DS 2-06.5.2.C 5) Within the 30' scenic route buffer area, indigenous plant material is to remain. If any disturbance occurs during construction or prior to permit application, the buffer area is to be revegetated with native plants indigenous to the site and the area reconstructed to look as natural as possible. DS 2-06.7.1.B The buffer is required to be maintained in natural state, except as permitted in LUC 3.7.5.2.C. Provide photos of the existing scenic route buffer area and a list of plants indigenous to the site with future submittals of the plan. Only disturbed areas are to be revegtated and the plants are to be from the indigenous plant list. DS 9-06.0 6) Add the following standard scenic corridor Zone notes to the landscape plans and revise the plans as necessary to comply with the requirements: Within the Scenic Route buffer area and the MS&R right-of-way, all areas between the MS&R right-of-way line and the existing street right-of-way that are disturbed by development shall be revegetated with native vegetation. Within the SCZ, excluding the Scenic Routes buffer area, all disturbed areas on the site that are visible from the Scenic Route and are not covered by permanent improvements shall be revegetated with native plants, plants from the Drought Tolerant Plant List, or a combination of both. 7) Screening requirements along the scenic route can be met with existing vegetation or with the introduction of screening elements behind or within previously disturbed portions of the thirty foot buffer area. Revise the landscape plans to describe and document how the screening requirements are to be met. LUC 3.7.3 8) Revise the landscape and development plans to agree regarding the height and location of any proposed screen wall. Discrepancies were noted. DS 2-07.2.2. 9) The screen wall along the eastern boundary of the site is required to be extended north where the adjacent property is residentially zoned. LUC Table 3.7.2-I 10) Grading, hydrology, and landscape structural plans are to be integrated to make maximum use of site storm water runoff for supplemental on-site irrigation purposes. The landscape plan shall indicate use of all runoff, from individual catch basins around single trees to basins accepting flow from an entire vehicular use area or roof area. Revise the landscape plan to show provisions for supplementary irrigation water harvesting methods. Show the drainage points from buildings and paved areas. LUC 3.7.4.3.B, DS 2-07.2.2.C 11) Revise the landscape plans to show the limits of grading. DS 2-07.2.2.B.5 Revise the native plant preservation plans to show the limits of grading. DS 2-15.3.4.A Both plans are to indicate preservation of the scenic route buffer areas and should indicate existing topography for natural areas. Currently the plans show two different sets of proposed countours. 12) Revise the landscape plans to include the plants required to comply the Native Plant Preservation regulations. Acacia greggii and constricta, saguaro, and barrel cactus could not be located on the plans. DS 2-15.3.4.B 13) An additional Native Plant Preservation Plan or approval is required for any construction or disturbance of public right-of-way areas adjacent the site. Contact Gary Wittwer, the Department of Transportation Landscape Architect, at 791-5100 for additional information. LUC 3.8.4.2 Alternatively, right-of-way areas may be incorporated into the submitted plans. The approved Native Plant Preservation Plan can then be used to obtain any required permits from the Department of Transportation where an NPPO clearance is required. 14) Where natural floodprone areas, such as washes, channels, drainageways, etc., exist within the development plan boundaries of the drawing, water surface contours for the 100-year flood with water surface elevations indicated must be shown and clearly labeled. Revise the development plan to include floodplain information, including the location of the 100-year flood limits for all flows of one hundred (100) cfs or more with 100-year flood water surface elevations, if applicable. DS 2-05.2.3.I 15) All plant material used for landscaping shall be selected from the Drought Tolerant Plant List in Development Standard 9-06.0, except as otherwise provided in LUC 3.7.2.2. The Fraxinus velutina is not on the list. In addition, plants that are not on the approved list must be located in oasis areas and are to be located such that they are not visible from the scenic route. LUC 3.7.2.2.C, DS 2-06.7.1.C 16) Design the placement of trees in coordination with the parking lot lighting, such that the trees, at maturity, do not diminish the purpose of the lights. Conflicts such as this could result in poor lighting or the elimination or the extensive trimming of trees. 17) 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). Revise the landscape plan as necessary. LUC 3.7.2.3.A We noticed that in a few instance the requirement did not appear to be met in the southern half of the site. 18) The refuse container service area is required to have a minimum vertical clearance of twenty-five (25) feet. The container service area must be kept free from vegetation and other obstructions. Revise the landscape plans such that trees canopies will not interfere with the container service area. DS 6-01.4.1 19) The project is subject to the provisions of the Watercourse, Amenities, Safety, and Habitat Ordinance, TCC 29. A separate application and review is required. Contact Patricia Gehlen/Zoning Manager at 791-5640 Ext. 1179 for submittal requirements. A pre-submittal meeting is required. 20) Submit an Environmental Resource Report (ERR) per DS 2-13.2.5.B.1 if encroachment is proposed in the regulatory area (study area per the WASH regulations). The report will document (1) the areas that contain riparian and wildlife habitat that is to be preserved and (2) those areas without such habitat within the regulatory floodplain. For projects where there will be no encroachment within the Regulated Areas, development is not restricted by this section except as provided herein and except that the Regulated Areas shall be identified on the site plan, plat or development plan in a surveyable manner. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED |
| 09/26/2007 | FRODRIG2 | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Wal-Mart Super Center #4307-00 D07-0038 Development Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 26, 2007 DUE DATE: September 26, 2007 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with 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 August 27, 2008. 2. Per a letter from Glenn Moyer, dated July 13, 2005, this project will require consideration by the Mayor and Council at a public hearing. Contact the City of Tucson's Re-zoning section for the requirements. 3. A separate Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ) Overlay review is required for this project. The SCZ Overlay must be approved prior to the approval of this development plan. 4. For your information the proposed Brake Master, Automotive Service and Repair Major, is not allowed in a C1 zone as proposed, a rezoning is required. 5. D.S. 2-05.2.1.D.3 Label the section corners on the location map. 6. D.S. 2-05.2.1.K List subdivision case number S03-026 in the lower right-hand corner, next to the title block. 7. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.1 General Note 3 lists the existing zoning as C1 & C2. The existing zoning for this parcel is MH2. Revise General Note 3. 8. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2 Add a note next to General Note 3 which states "PROPOSED ZONING IS C1 AND C2". 9. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2 List the rezoning conditions of approval on the development plan. 10. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2 Place the Development Plan number D07-0038 near the lower right-hand corner of the plan. 11. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.3 General Note 18 should read "PROPOSED USE: GENERAL MERCHIDISE SALES: SHOPPING CENTER, SUBJECT TO 3.5.9.2.A AND .C. 12. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.10 Add "SEC. 2.8.2, SCENIC CORRIDOR ZONE (SCZ)" to General Note 19. 13. D.S. 2-05.2.3.B There is a "WAPA ESMT ADJUSTMENT DKT 8112, PG 1972" shown near the north east corner of sheet 4 of subdivision plat book 58, page 48, show on this plan. 14. D.S. 2-05.2.3.C Label the existing and/or future curbs along all streets. 15. D.S. 2-05.2.4.A It appears that there are lot lines around each PAD. If separate lots are proposed for this project a tentative plat/development plan and final plat will be required. Contact Patricia Gehlen @ 520-837-4919 for information in regards to the platting procedure. If separate lots are not proposed remove the lot lines from the plan. Additional comments may be forth coming. 16. D.S. 2-05.2.4.B The zoning listed for the parcels located on the west side of Mission Road is incorrect, this zoning should be County Zoning SH. The zoning listed for the parcels located to the south of Irvington Road is incorrect, this zoning should be C1. The zoning listed for the parcels, subdivision, located to the northeast is incorrect, this zoning should be MH2. Provide the zoning for the parcels located to the southeast, this zoning should be MH2. 17. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Provide a dimension for the parking area access lane (PAAL) located to the east of PAD 5. 18. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Provide a dimension for the parking area access lane (PAAL) located to the east of PAD 6. 19. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Show the required stacking for the drive through at both Pad 2 & 3, see D.S. 3-05.2.1.C.2.c. 20. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Provide dimensions for the drive through at Pad 3. 21. D.S. 2-05.2.4.F Clarify the right-of-way (R.O.W) dimensions shown on the plan as either existing or future. 22. D.S. 2-05.2.4.G Label all proposed easements as public or private. 23. D.S. 2-05.2.4.G There appears to be an existing sidewalk from the existing subdivision that runs onto this parcel at the northeast corner. A pedestrian access easement is required for this sidewalk. 24. D.S. 2-05.2.4.G A pedestrian access easement is required for the curb access ramps shown at the northern most entrance off of Mission Road for the portion of the ramps located on private property. 25. D.S. 2-05.2.4.I Provide building setback dimensions on the plan. Additional comments may be forth coming. 26. D.S. 2-05.2.4.I Provide a setback dimension to the proposed transfer material enclosure. 27. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Provide dimensions for all proposed sidewalks. 28. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Per ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 section 406.14 truncated domes are required at the landscape cut-throughs shown south of the southwest corner of Pad 5. 29. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K At the curb access ramp shown near the southwest corner of Pad 5 and the curb access ramp shown on the east side of the PAAL near Pad 1, the truncated domes are shown incorrectly, see ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 section 406.13.1. 30. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Provide a dimension for the landing at all curb access ramps or provide a minimum dimension on the details for the landing, see ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 section 406.7. 31. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K The curb access ramp and sidewalk shown on the north side of the PAAL near the northwest corner of Pad 3 will not work as shown. The sidewalk cannot connect into the flare as shown. 32. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Clarify what is happening at the striped area located between the two (2) landscape islands located to the west of the main handicapped parking area for Wal-Mart Pad 6. 33. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K For your information the proposed site lighting shown along the seven (7) foot sidewalk that runs east and west from the main entrance of Pad 6 cannot reduce the overall width of the sidewalk to less than four (4) feet at any point along this sidewalk. 34. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Per D.S. 2-08.3.1 a continuous pedestrian circulation path/accessible route is required to connect all buildings on site. That said there is no connection between Pads 1 & 2 south to the remaining Pads. 35. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Per D.S. 2-08.3.1 Provide a continuous pedestrian circulation path/accessible route to all proposed refuse collection areas on site. 36. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K There appears to be a pole light located in the middle of the proposed sidewalk located adjacent to the entrance PAAL off of Irvington Road as it turns east towards Pad 4. 37. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K There is a proposed curb access ramp located at the east end of the northern most entrance PAAL off of Mission road. The proposed curb access ramp and sidewalk will not work as shown. The sidewalk cannot connect into the flare as shown. 38. D.S. 2-05.2.4.N Show the footprint of all structures and provide overall dimensions and label the height of the building. Based on the provided rezoning conditions the maximum height of any structure within four hundred feet of Mission Road's R.O.W. is restricted to a maximum height of eighteen (18) feet. 39. D.S. 2-05.2.4.O Show all loading zones fully dimensioned on the plan. The provided loading zone required/provided calculation in incorrect. Per LUC Sec. 3.4.4.1.B a loading zone is required for each building. Based on LUC Sec. 3.4.5 Pads 1-5 require one (1) each 12 by 35 loading spaces, Pad 6 requires four (4) 12 by 35 loading spaces, for a total of nine (9) required. The plan shows five (5) required, eight (8) provided. Pad 3 requires a loading zone, none shown on plan. 40. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Add to the vehicle parking space calculation the required/provided spaces for the physically disabled, include the van accessible parking spaces/ 41. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Per ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 section 502.5 show the maximum allowed slope for the handicapped parking space and access aisle on the provided details. 42. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Until all sidewalk widths have been provided zoning cannot verify which vehicle parking spaces may require wheel stops. For your information for any sidewalk with parking on one (1) side the minimum width of the sidewalk is six foot six inches (6'-6"). For any sidewalk with parking on two (2) side the minimum width of the sidewalk is nine feet (9'-0"). Additional comments may be forth coming. 43. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Per D.S. 3-05.2.3.C.1 post barricades or wheel stop curbing is required to prevent parked vehicles from damaging adjacent landscaping. This said, the parking area located north of the northern most entrance off of Mission Road requires post barricades or wheel stop curbing to prevent parked vehicles from overhanging the required thirty (30) foot buffer along Mission Road. 44. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P The proposed site lighting appears to encroach into the minimum vehicle parking space depth at numerous locations through out the site. The pole lights may be located at the intersection of the vehicle parking space striping. 45. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P The proposed vehicle parking located east of the Brake Masters requires wheel stops to prevent the vehicles from overhanging the sidewalk, see comment 39. 46. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Demonstrate on the plan how vehicles will access the Brake Masters building. 47. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q The bicycle parking calculation is incorrect. Per LUC Sec 3.3.5.6.A.2 eight (8) percent of the first five hundred (500) required motor vehicle parking spaces and five (5) percent of the required motor vehicle parking over the five hundred (500) motor vehicle parking spaces. This said, eight (8) percent times five hundred (500) equals forty (40) bicycle parking spaces and five (5) percent times one hundred sixty six (166) equals eight (8) bicycle parking spaces for a total of forty eight (48) bicycle parking spaces required, twenty four (24) Class 1 and twenty four (24) Class 2. 48. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Show the location of the main entrances of each building so that zoning can verify compliance with D.S. 2-09.4.1. 49. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Per D.S. 2-09.5.2 show the required five (5) foot access aisle on the detail for the Class 2 bicycle parking. 50. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Indicate on the plan or details the materials for lighting and specific type of bicycle rack and the number of bicycles it supports. 51. D.S. 2-05.2.4.R It appears the sight visibility triangles (SVT) are shown incorrectly, see Engineering comments. 52. D.S. 2-05.2.4.T Fully dimension all refuse collection areas. 53. D.S. 2-05.2.4.T Provide a refuse collection area for Pad 1. 54. D.S. 2-05.2.4.U Provide a separate letter stating how all rezoning conditions have been met. 55. D.S. 2-05.2.4.V Indicate location and type of postal service to be provided. 56. D.S. 2-05.2.4.W Zoning acknowledges the locations of proposed signs on site. Provide the types of signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal, billboards (existing). 57. Clarify what is meant by Transfer Material Enclosure, see keynote 29, sheet 2 of 8. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. I:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D07-0038dp.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents. |
| 09/26/2007 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | CASE: D07-0038, WALMART SUPERCENTER #4307-00, DEVEL PLAN COMMENT: NO OBJECTIONS OR ADVERSE COMMENTS Vehicle Trip Generation: Daily: 10,866 PM Peak: 1,023 Please call if you have questions Tom Cooney, Travel Forecasting Manager Pima Association of Governments 177 N. Church Ave, #405 Tucson, AZ 85701 Tel: (520) 792-1093, Fax: (520) 620-6981 Web: www.PAGnet.org and www.RTAmobility.com |
| 09/27/2007 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 09/27/2007 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Denied | PIMA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION 201 N. Stone Ave., 1st Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701-1207 CARMINE DEBONIS, Jr. Phone: (520) 740-6832 Director FAX: (520) 740-6380 October 1, 2007 TO: Maolin Zheng, P.E. BSW International THRU: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department FROM: Brandon Matheson, P.E. Civil Engineering Manager (Transportation) SUBJECT: D07-0038 Wal-Mart Supercenter, Store #4307-00 Development Plan We have reviewed the above-referenced submittal and have found it unacceptable. We offer the following comments: Please provide a Traffic Impact Study for review by Pima County Department of Transportation Traffic Engineering. If you wish to discuss any of the above comments, please contact me at 740-6389. Brandon Matheson, P.E. Civil Engineering Manager (Transportation) Copy: Project File |
| 09/28/2007 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Refuse/recycle enclosures by PAD's 2,3,4, & 5 do not provide adequate access to the refuse enclosure or the required 14 ft x 40 ft approach. DS 6-01.3.1.A & 6-01.4.1.C. 2. PAD 2 & 5 will require additional single enclosures or two double enclosures in order to accomodate for recycling. Restaurants and retail stores will require provisions for recycling. 3. All refuse and recycle enclosures must be positioned to permit the collection vehicle to perform refuse and recycle collection without impeding the continuous flow of traffic within the development. Recommend positioning enclosures to a 45 or 30 degree angle. 4. No enclosure detail provided. A. Ensure to include a 10 ft x 10 ft inside clear service area between the rear and side wall protectors and the front gates. DS 6-01.4.1.B. B. Gate are to be equipped with the ability to be secured in the open and closed positions. DS 6-01.4.2.C.4. Show and annotate within detail drawing. Recommend, "positive locking with (Bayonet) anchors, Qty - 4, 1 in. dia. x 6 in. long galvanized pipe flush with concrete." C. Design gates to open a minimum of 180 degrees as area allows. 5. Show truck route within DP with the required turning radii's, 36 ft inner rear wheel 50 ft outside front bumper. Please correct on resubmittal. |
| 09/28/2007 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | September 28, 2007 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D07-0038 PROJECT NAME: Wal-Mart Super Center PROJECT ADDRESS: Irvington Rd/Mission Rd 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. Show and label as to size (ie 20x110) both existing and future SVTs (DS 2-05.2.4.R) If the existing and future SVTs are coincident, label it as both existing and future. 3. To prevent confusion between jurisdictions provide the contact information of the county traffic mitigation reviewer for this project so that city and county staff can coordinate off-site improvement requirements. 4. A private improvement agreement (PIA) will be necessary for the proposed work to be performed within the Right-of-way. An approved tentative plat 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 |
| 10/05/2007 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | DATE: October 04, 2007 TO: DSD_CDRC@ tucsonaz.gov FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov CC: Jim Stoyanoff SUBJECT: D07-0038 Wal-Mart Super Center #4307-00: Development Plan 8-28-07 Denied. Please contact Parks and Recreation to arrange a meeting to discuss rezoning requirements pertaining to the West Branch Santa Cruz River Linear Park. |
| 11/14/2007 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | November 14, 2007 To: Patricia Gehlen CDRC/Zoning Manager FROM: Loren Makus, EIT Engineering Division SUBJECT: Walmart Supercenter #4307-00 Development Plan D07-0038 (First Review) T15S, R13E, Section 03 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Development Plan, Revised Drainage Report The development plan has been reviewed by the Engineering Division and we do not recommend approval at this time. The following comments must be addressed: Development Plan Comments 1. Provide complete sight visibility triangles at the intersections of the PAALs/Driveways and the adjacent streets. Note that far side SVTs can be the smaller 20 x 30 where there is a median in the through street and there is no median openning. 2. Provide a note that landscape areas will be depressed 6 inches for water harvesting. 3. Include in the title block a brief legal description for the property for which this development plan is proposed. 4. Include water surface contours for each of the watercourses within or adjacent to the project. Also include 100-year water surface elevations for all basins. Ensure that the finished floor elevation for each building is at least on foot higher that any adjacent water surface elevation. 5. Include the Subdivision case numbers near the title block. The case number for Casitas del Sol Estates is S03-026. The plat lists other case numbers. Include all applicable case numbers on this development plan. 6. Identify the city limits that are adjacent to the property. Note that Mission Road is a Pima County road and Pima County Department of Transportation must approve and permit all row-of-way improvemetns in Mission Road. 7. Clearly indicate the existing contours for the site and label them frequently enough to determine the relationship between existing and proposed conditions. Drainage Report comments: 8. Number each page in the report, including the appendices so that reference can be made to specific pages in the report. 9. On page 5 the first paragraph in section 3 is incomplete. Please provide the additional information. 10. Provide complete hydraulic calculations for the wash crossing over the Wyoming Wash. Provide a backwater analysis to demonstrate that no adverse impact to private or public property will result from the culvert design. Include a complete discussion of the results in the main body of the report. 11. Provide a discussion along with relevant excerpts from the drainage report from Casitas del Sol Estates to demonstrate that the proposed drainage scheme is consistent with the design of the subdivision. Until the previously approved drainage report is complared with the proposed drainage report for this project a complete review is not possible. Additional comments will be forthcoming when a complete submittal is received. (Please use a binder or other binding mechanism that is appropriately sized for the report. ) If you have any questions, I can be reached at 520.837.4927 or loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov. Loren Makus, EIT Senior Engineering Associate |
| 11/15/2007 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES November 15, 2007 Maolin Zheng BSW International, Inc. 10835 North 25th Avenue, Suite 250 Phoenix, Arizona 85029 Subject: D07-0038 Wal-Mart Super CenterDevelopment Plan Dear Maolin: 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 12 Copies Revised Development Plan (Wastewater, DUPD, Real Estate, Addressing, Landscape, Zoning, Pima County Development Review, ESD, Parks and Recreation, Engineering, Traffic, DSD) 6 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (DUPD, Landscape, Zoning, Parks and Recreation, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO Plan (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 3 Copies Traffic Impact Analysis (Traffic, Pima Country Development Review, 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) 567-2560 |