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 - D07-0049
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/09/2008 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: January 08, 2007 TO: DSD_CDRC@ tucsonaz.gov FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov SUBJECT: D07-0049 DGD Materials: Development Plan(11-26-07) Parks and Recreation has no comments on this project. |
| 01/10/2008 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES January 10, 2008 John Feneck Feneck Group Inc. P.O. 897 Vail, Arizona 85641 Subject: D07-0049 DGD Materials Development Plan Dear John: Your submittal of November 26, 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 (TEP, Wastewater, Landscape, Engineering, Zoning, ESD, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Landscape, Engineering, Zoning, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO Plan (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Statement (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Approved Lot Split Documents (Zoning, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. Sincerely, Patricia Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 886-2992 |
| 11/26/2007 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/27/2007 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 11/29/2007 | 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: November 28, 2007 RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding Development Plan D07-0049 DGD MATERIALS * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor’s Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor’s Office requirements. COMMENTS: THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUBMITTAL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL ROSANNA WERNER AT 740-4390 ROSANNA WERNER |
| 11/30/2007 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | ADOT has NO COMMENT on this project. D07-0049 Feneck Group INC DGD MATERIALS -------------------------------------------------------- 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. |
| 11/30/2007 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 12/04/2007 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Denied | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#190818 December 4, 2007 Dear : John Feneck: SUBJECT: DGD Materials D07-0049 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and disapproved the development plan submitted November 29, 2007. It appears that there are conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. Plans to show all TEP facilities surrounding the site per attached TEP facilites map for approval of development plan. A facilities map is attached for reference. Conflicts can not be determined until facilities are properly indicated on the plan. Any relocation costs will be billable to the customer. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. 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 Steve Garcia at (520) 917-8739, should you have any questions. Sincerely, Henrietta Noriega Office Specialist Design/Build hn Enclosures Cc S. Garcia, Tucson Electric Power P. Gehlen, City of Tucson (E-Mail) |
| 12/05/2007 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | CASE: D07-0049, DGD MATERIALS: DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENT: NO OBJECTIONS OR ADVERSE COMMENTS Vehicle Trip Generation: Daily: 68 PM Peak: 7 Please call if you have questions, Aichong Sun 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 |
| 12/07/2007 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | December 6, 2007 To: Jeff Stanley Stanley Engineering 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: D & D Materials, 7575 S. Old Vail Road Dev. Plan - 1st Submittal D07-049 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 the Southeast 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, D07-049, 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:Add a General Note that states: 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: Revise General Note #8 to read as follows: THE ON-SITE SANITARY SEWERS WILL BE PRIVATE AND WILL BE CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED ON A PRIVATE BASIS, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN APPROVED OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN, IF REQUIRED. THE LOCATION AND METHOD OF CONNECTION TO AN EXISTING PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT. Sheet 2: There is no sewer line accepted by Pima County fronting this lot. Developer will have to extend the public sewer north from MH#4190-10A1(G-84-89). Sheet 2: Need a Legend for the sewer line and elements. Also show the pipe size/slope/material and length of pipe for the private BCS. 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 $100.00 (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. |
| 12/07/2007 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approv-Cond | 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: D07-0049 DGD MATERIALS/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: December 6, 2007 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: CORRECT OLD VAIL RD TO OLD VAIL ROAD ON SHEETS 1 AND 2 OF MYLAR. NOTE: Submit a 24 x 36 Reverse Reading Double Matte Photo Mylar of approved Development Plan to City Planning. Signed and dated Mylar will be forwarded to Pima County Addressing prior to assignment of addresses. All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection. jg |
| 12/11/2007 | FRODRIG2 | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Revise the legal description in the title block of all sheets of the landscape plan and Native Plant Preservation Plan to include the correct Section, Township and Range. Add the address to these sheets. 2. Add the CDRC Development Plan case number (D07-0049) and any other case numbers that affect the site, to all sheets of the d.p., landscape plan and NPP Plan. DS 2-07.2.1 3. Add the street name (Old Vail Road) to the aerial photo on sheet N-1 and to Irrigation Plan on sheet L-2 and correct the street name on the landscape plan sheet L-2. 4. Show the limits of grading clearly on the Native Plant Preservation Plan aerial photo and on the landscape plan. DS 2-15.3.4.A.1, DS2-07.2.2.B.4 5. Revise the landscape plan to show the extent of supplementary irrigation in each planting area provided by water harvesting methods. Show the amount and disposition of flow and indicate drainage points from the building and paved areas. DS 2-07.2.2.C 6. The quantities of plants to be Preserved in Place and to be removed from site as shown in the NPPO Plant legend on sheet N-1 do not match with the total quantities stated on sheet N-2. Revise to be consistent. |
| 12/12/2007 | 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 D07-0049 DGD Materials 12/11/07 () Tentative Plat (XXXX) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-84-84 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Esmond Statin GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 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 (XXXX) 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: () Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: drcorral 791-4505 DATE: 12/10/07 |
| 12/14/2007 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: December 14, 2007 SUBJECT: D&D Material Development Plan- Engineering Review TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: 7575 S Old Vail Road, T155S R15E Sec21 Ward 4 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: D07-0049 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan, Drainage Statement (Stanley Engineering & Drainage, Inc., 18NOV07) and Master Drainage Report for Arizona Madera at Rita Ranch (Stanley Engineering & Drainage, Inc., 16MAY00). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan or Drainage Statement at this time. The Drainage Statement was reviewed for Development Plan purposes only. The following items need to be addressed: DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 1) Revise the Development Plan so that all detail references (Sheet 2) are either numerical or alphabetical, either way they must be in chronological order, revise the keynotes accordingly to reference the associated detail. 2) Revise Sheet 1 and the mapped data to be drawn at a standard engineering scale having no more than 40-feet to the inch. The first page of the Development Plan is drawn at a 1-inch to 60-feet scale, which does not meet the requirements within the section. The scale is the minimum accepted due to clarity after photographic reduction for record keeping purposes. 3) DS Sec.2-05.2.1.D.3: Revise the project location map to label the Township, Range and Section corners. 4) DS Sec.2-05.2.1.G.2: Provide a brief legal description within the title block provided in the lower right corner of the sheets. 5) DS Sec.2-05.2.1.J: Revise the Development plan to include a legend, which shows and describes all symbols used on the drawing. 6) DS Sec.2-05.2.1.K: The correct Development Plan number (D07-0049) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan. 7) DS Sec.2-05.2.2.A.1: Provide the name, addresses and telephone numbers of the primary property owner of the site and the developer of the project. 8) DS Sec.2-05.2.2.B.10: Revise General Note #17 on Sheet 1 of the Development Plan to reference all special overlay zones. Specifically the note should also reference the LUC Code for the overlay as follows; "Sec.2.8.3, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone." 9) DS Sec.2-05.2.2.C.2.b: Provide, if applicable, the following note on the Development Plan to read; "A floodplain use permit is required for any work proposed within the limits of the mapped 100-year floodplain of regulatory wash as shown on the Development Plan." Provide a Floodplain Use Permit application with the resubmittal of the Development Plan for review and approval prior to Development Plan approval. This will be based on the revised Drainage Statement and floodplain limit determination. 10) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C: Revise the Development Plan to provide the recordation information for Old Vail Road right-of-way. Label the right-of-way as existing and/or future. 11) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C: Revise the Development Plan to provide the dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts and sidewalks. 12) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.D: Revise the Development Plan to show the location of all existing streetlights to verify that vehicular access is not in conflict. 13) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.E: Revise General Note #11 to include the datum reference (i.e. NGVD29 or NAVD88) that the spot elevation and topography are based on per the Field Book and Page. 14) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.F: Revise the Development Plan to label and dimension the existing box culvert under Old Vail Road at the existing channel. Verify all storm drain and storm pipe locations within the right-of-way of Old Vail Road. 15) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.H: Provide a detail for the discharge location of the site into the existing drainage channel. Show the slope, slope protection, toe down, etc. for the discharge point to verify any potential for erosion. 16) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.I.1: Provide the water surface elevation (WSEL) and the 100-year floodplain limits of the regulatory wash (168 cfs) that is shown on the Development Plan and within the proposed Drainage Statement. Label the 100-year floodplain limits in plan view on the Development Plan. 17) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.I.2: Provide the water surface elevation for the project at a minimum of 4 locations (may be more to determine floodplain limits) to verify finished floor elevation, roadway crossing elevation and discharge elevation at the existing drainage channel. 18) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.I.2: Revise the Development Plan to include the erosion hazard setback line from the bank of the regulatory wash per the revised Drainage Statement to determine setback location of the proposed building. 19) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.I.3: Provide a symbol within the legend that is identical to that used to represent the water surface contour intervals on the Development Plan. 20) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Depict and label the 25-feet radii at both concrete curb returns per City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Detail 213 (PC/COT SD 213). The curbs should be constructed at the edge of pavement, which must also be depicted on the Development Plan. 21) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Revise the Development Plan to include handicap access ramps at the intersection of the PAAL and Old Vail Road. Handicap Ramps must be constructed per the Public Improvement Details and the ANSI 705.5. design requirements. 22) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Verify that the Development Plan reflects handicap access ramps with truncated domes (see ANSI 705.5. for design criteria) at all existing and proposed handicap ramp location. Revise the parking space detail to label the required truncated domes. Please refer to this standard and the figures provided for additional curb access ramps requirements. 23) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Revise the Development Plan to include 6-inch curbing around the entire proposed vehicular use area. Curbing is required to prevent encroachment onto the adjacent undeveloped property. Provide a label with the associated keynote #7 to verify location. 24) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Revise the back-up spur provided at the end of the PAAL located on the east side of the proposed Development Plan. The spur must label the minimum 3-foot radius at the corner. Refer to DS Sec.3-05.2.2.3.D. 25) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.G: Verify any applicable easements for sewer, electric, water, gas, etc. that is shown on the Development Plan. 26) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.3: Revise the Development Plan to provide a detail of the proposed (2)-48-inch corrugated metal pipes (CMPs). Provide the percent slope, inlet and outlet erosion protection (due to the calculated velocities), and spot elevations at the inlet, outlet and top of PAAL, and depth of water at inlet. 27) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.4: Revise the Development Plan to indicate all proposed ground elevations at different points on the lot to provide reference to future grading and site drainage. 28) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.6: Revise the Development Plan to show the 100-year flood limits with water surface elevations for all flows of 100-hundred cfs or more. Provide a cross section at the upstream end of the proposed building to verify that the elevation of the finished floor is one-foot above the calculated water surface elevation. 29) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.7: Provide a detail for the discharge location of the site into the existing drainage channel. Show the slope, slope protection, toe down, etc. for the discharge point to verify any potential for erosion. 30) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.K: Revise the Development Plan to clearly show the unobstructed 4-foot pedestrian circulation that is located between the building and the parking spaces. The plan view shows a 4-foot sidewalk, however the parking space detail shows a 5-foot sidewalk area, clarify. 31) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.K: Revise the Development Plan to show the minimum distance of 5-feet for the pedestrian refuge that is proposed from the right-of-way of Old Vail Rd and the proposed building. The pedestrian circulation is required to be a minimum 4-foot wide and set back 1-foot from the PAAL and must be physically separated from the PAAL with curbing or 6" raised concrete sidewalk. 32) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.L: Revise the Development Plan to provide handicap access ramps at the intersection of the PAAL and Old Vail Road. Show a detail for the handicap accesses ramps that meet the minimum requirements within the Public Improvement Standards and ANSI 705.5. design requirements. Truncated domes are required for all proposed handicap access ramps. 33) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.L: Revise the development plan and details to show existing or proposed sidewalks along abutting right-of-way. Revise dimensions on development plan to show the existing or proposed 6-foot wide sidewalk along Old Vail Road. Per the adopted Mayor and Counsel policy all sidewalks along MS&R right-of-ways for arterial and collector streets require 6-foot wide sidewalks. All sidewalks must comply with ADA accessibility requirements. If an existing 4- or 5-foot sidewalk is already constructed along the frontage of Old Vail Road provide photo documentation showing that the existing sidewalk is in good condition. If the sidewalk is missing in spots or is cracked and buckled a new 6-foot sidewalk will be required. A DSMR will be required for modifying the development standards to allow the existing sidewalk, if less than the minimum 6-foot required, to remain. The DSMR must be approved prior to Development Plan approval. All exhibits and discussion must reflect any changes made by the approved DSMR. Provide a General Note to list the DSMR number, the Development Standard being modified along with the date of DSMR approval. 34) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.O: Label and dimension the maneuverability for all required loading zones on the subject property, if applicable through the Zoning Section. 35) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.T: Verify that the detail provided for the refuse container area meets the minimum requirements within DS Sec.6-01. The enclosures must have a minimum inside clear dimension of 10 feet by 10 feet between the steel bollards that are required between the container and the enclosure's rear and sidewall. The inside clear dimensions must be shown from the face of the wall protectors. Refer to Figure 3 and DS Sec.6-01.4.2 for specifications and requirements on access, placement of containers, bin enclosure and construction. Provide the minimum 14-ft x 40-ft clear approach to the enclosure area. Refer to Environmental Services for further clarity on refuse requirements. 36) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.T: Label and dimension the minimum maneuverability for the proposed refuse container. Label and dimension the minimum 36-foot inside and 50-foot outside radii to show vehicle maneuverability to verify that landscaping and parking spaces are not an obstruction. 37) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.T: The refuse vehicle must have a maximum back-up distance of 40-feet and can not back-up into or over proposed parking spaces. Per the submitted Development Plan the refuse vehicle has to back up greater than the allowed 40-foot distance and will be required to back into the proposed parking spaces in order to meet the minimum turning radius. 38) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.W: Provide a General Note on the Development Plan stating that "All fencing and walls will require a separate permit for review and approval by all necessary Development Services Departments." 39) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H: Any Development Standard Modification Requires (DSMRs) related to the Development Plan should be submitted together with the Development Plan to DSD so that the request can be reviewed at the same time. DRAINAGE STATEMENT: 40) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.4.C.1: Provide the water surface elevation (WSEL) and the 100-year floodplain limits of the regulatory wash that is shown on the Development Plan and within the proposed Drainage Statement. Label the 100-year floodplain limits in plan view on the Development Plan. 41) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.4.D: Revise the Drainage Statement to provide the water surface elevation for the project at a minimum of 4 locations (may be more to determine floodplain limits) to verify finished floor elevation, roadway crossing elevation and discharge elevation at the existing drainage channel. 42) DS Sec.10-02.7.6.1: Revise the Drainage Statement to provide a discussion with calculation for the erosion hazard setback required from the bank of the regulatory wash (168 cfs) to determine setback location of the proposed building. 43) DS Sec.10-02.11.4.2: Revise the Drainage Statement to provide a detail of the proposed (2)-48-inch corrugated metal pipes (CMPs). Provide the percent slope, inlet and outlet erosion protection (due to the calculated velocities) per DS Sec.10-02.11.4.4.2, and spot elevations at the inlet, outlet and top of PAAL, and depth of water at inlet. The detail must be shown on the Development Plan and match the requirements within the revised Drainage Statement. 44) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.3.A.5: Clarify with a detail the discharge location of the site into the existing drainage channel. Show the slope, slope protection, toe down, etc. for the discharge point to verify any potential for erosion. Detail must be specific to the discharge location. GRADING PLAN: 45) DS Sec.11-01.2.1: A grading permit is required for this project. 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. 46) Please ensure that any future grading plan will be consistent with the Development Plan, Drainage Report, and geotechnical report. Grading standards may be accessed at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf 47) Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) is 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. For further information, visit www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan, a revised Drainage Statement, and a Floodplain Use Permit (if applicable) that address 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 Development Plan and Drainage Statement reviews. For any questions or to schedule a meeting call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 12/18/2007 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: D07-0049 D&D Materials Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: 12/18/07 DUE DATE: 12/24/07 COMMENTS: 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 12/23/08. 2. DS 2-05.2.1.D A small, project-location map shall be drawn on the first sheet of the development plan, preferably in the upper right corner. The map should cover approximately one (1) square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of 3" = 1 mile, and provide the following information. 1. Section, township, and range; SECTION CORNERS; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled. 3. DS 2-05.2.1.K List as reference the annexation case number (C9-84-84) in the lower right corner next to the title block of all plan sheets including landscape and NPPO sheets. 4. DS 2-05.2.2.A List the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the primary property owner of the site and developer of the project. 5. DS 2-05.2.2.B.2 Case number D07-0049 has been assigned to this development plan (DP). Please place this number in the right corner of all sheets of the development plan, landscape plan, NPPO, and any other associated sheets. 6. DS 2-05.2.2.B.3 General note number 2 has the wrong use indicated. Revise. 7. DS 2-05.2.4.A A search of Pima County Assessors records indicate a split has been done on this property in May of 2007. Prior to approval of the development plan a lot split application must be processed and approved. A separate application, fees, review, and approval by DSD is required for the lot split. Please call David Rivera if you have any questions related to the lot split process. If the lot split has been processed and approved by DSD, submit copies of the approved survey drawing along with the recorded legal descriptions (with docket and page stamped) with the next submittal. 8. Per conversation with Jeff Stanley the material storage area has not been defined on this plan. Clearly indicate the location of the storage area. The storage area will be required to meet the requirements of the LUC Sec. 3.3.7.3 for surface material. The storage area must also be considered in the requirements for vehicle parking spaces (see LUC 3.3.4), loading zone requirements (see LUC Sec. 3.4.3.3), required barriers to prevent driving onto unimproved portions of the site (see DS 3-05.2.3.C), bicycle parking, etc. 9. DS 2-05.2.4.D.3 The vehicle use area as indicated on the plan is required to provide barriers to prevent driving onto unimproved portions of the site at the south and east sides of the paved area (see DS 3-05.2.3.C). 10. DS 2-05.2.4.F Clearly note the location of the future curb along Old Vail Rd. 11. DS 2-05.2.4.K The handicap ramp indicated on detail 3 of page 2 is not complete. A ramp will be required for the pedestrian circulation path from the street connecting to the landing at the access aisle. The area this ramp will use does not appear to be large enough for the ramp and landing because of the 90 degree turn in the sidewalk. Revise. Truncated Dome (early warning systems) must be added to all access ramps where transitioning from the pedestrian area to the vehicular use area or at HC access aisles transitioning to the sidewalk area. (minimum 24" in depth) 12. DS 2-05.2.4.M The dimensions of the footprint of the building indicate a total of 1500 sq. ft. The parking calculations and loading zone notes indicate 1499 sq. ft. Clarify. 13. DS 2-05.2.4.N On the drawing indicate the height of the proposed structure. Clarify the difference between note #12 indicating proposed building height at 20' and LUC Review calculation indicating building height of 14'. 14. DS 2-05.2.4.O Show all loading zones, fully dimensioned, and provide, as a note, the number of loading spaces required and the number provided. Because of the change requiring the indication of the storage area and possible change to building size loading zones will be required. 15. DS 2-05.2.4.P The detail (3 of 2) for the standard and handicap parking spaces does not match with the dimensions provided on the plan. Six standard parking spaces at 9' wide equals 54' in width not 51' as indicated. The handicap parking space and access aisle on the detail indicates 17' in width and the plan shows 16' in width. Clarify. Parking calculations will be required to be revised based on adding storage area. 16. DS 2-05.2.4.Q A minimum of 2 class two bicycle parking spaces are required per LUC Sec.3.3.3.5. Revise claculations. The bicycle rack indicated is approved for two class 2 bicycles. The indicated 5' access aisle for the bicycle parking space appears to be in conflict with the required handicap ramp at the west side of the access aisle for the handicap parking space. Revise. The class two bicycle parking is required to be within 50' of the main entrance to the building. Clearly indicate the location of the main entrance for the proposed structure and provide a dimension from the bicycle parking to the entrance. 17. DS 2-05.2.4.W 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. 18. DS 2-05.2.3.B All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Per the subdivision plat there is a utility easement along the south side of the property, indicate on the plan with recording information.. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 837-4961 TLS C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D07-0049dp.doc |
| 12/20/2007 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 12/21/2007 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Sheet 2, site plan - Does not provide adequate maneuverability to the minimum required 14 ft x 40 ft clear approach in front of the enclosure. Recommend moving enclosure south 7 ft to satisfy this. 2. Refuse enclosure detail must identify all dimensions of and within enclsosure. Show dimensions/spacing of side bollards from front of enclosure. Please provide corrections on resubmittal. If you have any questions you may contact Andy Vera at (520) 791-5543 ext 1212 or e-mail: Andy.Vera@tucsonaz.gov |
| 12/24/2007 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | No comment |