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 - D08-0009
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/15/2008 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 02/19/2008 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 02/25/2008 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | ADOT has NO COMMENT on this project -------------------------------------------------------- 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. |
| 02/28/2008 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | February 27, 2008 To: David Shambach David Shambach Architects, Inc. Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ___________________________ From: Tom Porter , representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environment Quality Subject: Rocks and Ropes East Climbing Gym - 8200 E. Bowline Road Dev. Plan - 1st Submittal D08-009 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 Both Ina and Roger Road Wastewater Treatment Facility via the Pantano Interceptor. Per written guidance provided by the PCWMD Development Services Section, sufficient conveyance and treatment capacity exists in the downstream public sewerage system for this small project, and a formal capacity response letter from the PCWMD will not be required for this small project. All Sheets: Show the jurisdiction’s case number, D08-008, 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 #5 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 1: Add a Permitting Note that states: A PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FROM PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. Sheet 1: Include sewer line and elements -existing/proposed and private/public in the Legend. Sheet 2: Show the point and method of connection. Also show the size/slope/length and material of pipe for the proposed private BCS. Sheet 2: Show the pipe size of the sewer line in Bowline and indicate that the line is private. Sheet 2: Remove the circular symbols shown in the private existing sewer line where manholes do not exist. These lots are part of the 22nd St. Business Plaza subdivision and as such they have the right to connect to the private sewer line in Bowline Rd. 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. |
| 02/29/2008 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Passed | To Whom it May Concern: We are unable to develop traffic impact estimates for Project D08-0009 as we have no comparable study data at this time. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions, Sincerely, Sandy Sandra C. Holland Senior Statistical/ Research Analyst Pima Association of Governments 177 N. Church Ave, Suite 405 Tucson AZ 85701 Tel: 520 792 1093 X462 Fax: 520 620 6981 |
| 03/05/2008 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/11/2008 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Rocks & Ropes East D08-0009 Development Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 11, 2008 DUE DATE: March 17, 2008 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1) 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 February 14, 2009. 2) D.S. 2-05.2.1.D.3 On the location map label the section, township and range and section corners. 3) D.S. 2-05.2.2.A.1 List the name, address and telephone number of the developer of the project. If the owner and developer are one in the same state so. 4) D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2 List the D08-0009 development plan number in the lower right corner of the plan. 5) D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2 Remove the reference to D98-64 from the plan. 6) D.S. 2-05.2.4.A It appears that this project is comprised of two (2) different parcels. There are two (2) options in regards to utilizing the two (2) parcels as one site. Prior to approval of the site plan provide; 1) A Pima County Tax Parcel Combo and a recorded covenant regarding development and use of real property, or 2) Provide a site plan for each parcel that shows how the parcels can stand alone, if sold separately, and meet the requirements of the LUC if sold separately along with a recorded covenant regarding development and use of real property. 7) D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 It appears that one-way parking area access lanes (PAALs) are proposed. Clearly delineate on the plan what type of signage or pavement markings will be used. 8) D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Once the Parking Angle has been provided zoning will be able to verify that the proposed PAALs, providing access to the angled parking, meet the minimum width requirements, see comment 17 below. 9) D.S. 2-05.2.4.I It does not appear that the proposed building meets the required building setback to as shown on the plan and final plat. The building may not be built within the drainage easement and/or the building setback as shown on the final plat. Provide documentation that the drainage easement and building setback have been abandoned or redesign the site. 10) D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Demonstrate on the site plan how access from the proposed handicapped access aisle to the sidewalk will be dealt with. Truncated domes are required at all ramps and areas where the pavement is flush with the curb. 11) D.S. 2-05.2.4.K It appears there are stairs proposed along the south side of the proposed building. Per D.S. 2-03.1 this sidewalk is required to be a pedestrian circulation/accessible route. Stairs do not meet the requirements for an accessible route. 12) D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Provide a pedestrian circulation/accessible route to both the proposed loading space and the refuse area, see D.S. 2-08.3.1. 13) D.S. 2-05.2.4.M Under "PROJECT DESCRIPTION" the building square footage is listed as "10,000 SQUARE FOOT", on the plan the building is called out as "BUILDING FOOTPRINT = 9,000 s.f.", please clarify. 14) D.S. 2-05.2.4.N Provide elevations for the buildings so that zoning can verify wall heights. 15) D.S. 2-05.2.4.O Zoning acknowledges the loading space shown on the plan. For your information the loading space is only required to be 12' x 35' not 12' x 36'. 16) D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Provide a typical detail for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. Show the 1:48 maximum slopes for the handicapped vehicle parking space and the access aisle on the handicapped parking space detail, see ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 Sec. 502.5. Also show the location for the wheel stop curbing, see D.S. 3-05.2.3.C.2 17) D.S. 2-05.2.4.P For all angled parking either provide a detail with all dimensions, i.e.; parking angle & curb length or show these dimension on the plan. 18) D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Per D.S. 3-05.2.3.C.1 A vehicular use area must be provided with post barricades or wheel stop curbing designed to prevent parked vehicles from extending beyond the property lines; damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings; or overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas or unpaved areas on or off site and to prevent vehicles from driving onto unimproved portions of the site. This said there are numerous landscape islands, parking areas, PAALs that do not clearly indicate how this requirement is to be met. 19) D.S. 2-05.2.4.P The parking calculation does not appear to be correct. If the primary use of this building is "RECREATION (SKATING RINK)" then the entire building is parked as "RECREATION (SKATING RINK)" with a parking ratio of 1/200 GFA. If the plan is to have two different primary uses, not affiliated, clearly delineate the areas on the plan and park accordly. Separate certificate of occupancies would be required. 20) D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Provide a detail the Class 2 bicycle parking, including materials for lighting and paving, type of security, dimensions, specific type of rack and the number of bicycles it supports, and the location and type of directional signage if required. When adjacent to pedestrian paths, indicate the width of clearance available for the pedestrian area. 21) D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Clearly identify the main entrance for both building as so that zoning can verify that the proposed Class 2 location meets the requirements of D.S. 2-09.4.1. 22) D.S. 2-05.2.4.R Per D.S. 3-01.5.1.A.1 Lines of sight will not be obscured between thirty (30) inches and six (6) feet through a triangular area adjacent to a driveway, a PAAL, an alley, or a street. This said the proposed parking shown within the sight-visibility-triangles (SVTs) along Bowline Road may not be within the SVT's. 23) D.S. 2-05.2.4.W If applicable provide the location, type, size and height of proposed freestanding signs (wall free-standing, pedestal). 24) Ensure that all changes to the development plan are reflected on the landscape plans. 25) 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\D08-0009dp.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents. |
| 03/11/2008 | 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: D08-0009 ROCKS & ROPES EAST/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 3/11/08 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: Add suffix to Sarnoff in Location Map. Add brief legal description that includes Subdivision name, lot numbers and recording Book and Page. Label Bowline Road on sheets 1 and 2. es |
| 03/12/2008 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#1194458 March 12, 2008 Dear Mr. Shambach: SUBJECT: Rocks and Ropes East D08-0009 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted March 3, 2008. 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. 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, Henrietta Noriega Office Specialist Design/Build hn Enclosures cc:City of Tucson (Email) N. DiMaria, Tucson Electric Power |
| 03/13/2008 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 03/13/2008 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: March 13, 2008 SUBJECT: Rocks and Ropes East Development Plan- Engineering Review TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: 8200 E Bowline Road, T14S R15E Sec21 Ward 4 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: D08-0009 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan, Hydrology Report (Oracle Engineering Group, 06FEB08), and Landscape Plan. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan at this time. The Hydrology Report was reviewed for Development Plan purposes only. The following items need to be addressed: HYDROLOGY REPORT: 1) DS Sec.9-06.2.5.A.2: Provide a discussion within the Hydrology Report for the Rolling Hills Wash stating that this wash is a Water Course Amenities, Safety and Habitat (WASH) wash per the watercourses designated in the Water Course Amenities, Safety and Habitat regulations in Article VIII of Chapter 29. The discussion must include verbiage of the 50-foot study area and no encroachment into this study area along with temporary fencing that is required to be placed around the 50-foot study area to prevent encroachment or equipment storage. 2) Revise the Hydrology Report and Development Plan to clearly label the 100-year water surface elevation of the proposed retention basin. Per Page 12 of the report the top of weir is at a depth of 2.65 feet, which would indicate a 2.65 foot depth of water with 2:1 side slopes. If the water depth and side slopes are designed this way security barriers are required around the basin for public safety per DS Sec.10-01.3.6.2, revise. 3) Revise Section 3.1 of the Hydrology Report to include all verbiage of basin maintenance per DS Sec.10-02.14.3. Provide verbiage within the report and a note on the Development Plan stating that, "(a) the owner or owners shall be solely responsible for operation, maintenance, and liability for drainage structures and detention/retention basins; (b) that the owner or owners shall have an Arizona Registered Professional Civil Engineer prepare a certified inspection report for the drainage and detention/retention facilities at lease once each year, and that these regular inspection reports will be on file with the owner for review by City staff, upon written request; (c) that City staff may periodically inspect the drainage and retention/detention facilities to verify that scheduled and unscheduled maintenance activities are being performed adequately; and (d) that the owner or owners agree to reimburse the City for any and all costs associated with the maintaining of the drainage and detention/retention facilities, should the City find the owner or owners deficient in their obligation to adequately operate and maintain their facilities". 4) DS Sec.3-01.4.4.F: Provide a revised Hydrology Report showing calculations that demonstrate that the 10-year flood flow is contained under the sidewalk at all required scupper concentration location. Provide details and dimensions in plan view for any proposed scuppers on the proposed Development Plan. DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 5) DS Sec.2-05.2.1.D.2: Revise the project location map to identify conditions within the square mile area, such as the major water courses (i.e. Rolling Hills Wash and Pantano Wash). 6) DS Sec.2-05.2.1.D.3: Revise the project location map to label the Township, Range and Section corners. 7) DS Sec.2-05.2.1.G.1: Revise the Title Block information to include the proposed name of the project, preferably in the lower right corner of the sheet. 8) 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. 9) DS Sec.2-05.2.1.J: Verify that all symbols used on the drawing are included within the legend, for example the proposed sanitary sewer symbol and the water surface elevation symbol must be included within the legend. 10) DS Sec.2-05.2.1.K: The correct Development Plan number (D08-0009) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets. Remove the reference to D98-064 and the Project Number 07-015. 11) 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. 12) DS Sec.2-05.2.2.B.10: Provide a general note on Sheet 1 to include a note that reads "This project is designed to meet the overlay zones criteria; Sec.29-12 through 29-19 Water Course Amenities, Safety and Habitat (WASH) Ordinance of the Tucson Code." 13) DS Sec.2-05.2.2.C.1.a & b: Provide all notes associated with the Development Plan DS Sec.2-05 on the first sheet of the Development Plan. Specifically provide all drainage notes (Notes 1 and 2 on Sheet 2) to be included on the 1st sheet of the Development Plan. Sheet 2 was reviewed as a supplemental sheet only it was not reviewed for grading plan standards; revise the sheet to read "Preliminary Grading Plan." 14) DS Sec.2-05.2.2.D.1: Provide the following Street and Roads Note on the Development Plan; "All new public roads within and adjacent to this project will be constructed in accordance with approved plans. Construction plans will be submitted to the City Engineer's Office for review and approval." 15) DS Sec.2-05.2.2.D.2: Provide the following Street and Roads 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 the Development Standard 3-01.0." 16) DS Sec.2-05.2.2.E: Revise the Development Plan to provide the utility note (#11) shown on Sheet 2 on the 1st page of the Development Plan. All notes associated with DS Sec.2-05 must be included on the 1st sheet of the Development Plan and not under the grading plan notes. 17) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.B: Review of the Development Plan and last approved Final Plat shows a drainage easement (keynote #7) and building setback easement (keynote #5) that is in conflict with the building location. In order for the building to be placed in the proposed location the easements must be abandoned and the recordation information must be provided on the Development Plan prior to approval. 18) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.B: Revise the Development Plan to include the labeled dimension for the existing drainage way and alley along the south side of the property. Provide the recordation information or subdivision Book and Page for the drainage way and label it as private or public. 19) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C: Revise the Development Plan to provide the following information regarding the public right-of-way adjacent to the site; provide the name, right-of-way width (clearly labeled), recordation information, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalk for Bowline Road. 20) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.D: Provide the pipe diameter and invert and rim elevations for all manholes and clean outs shown on the Development Plan for the storm drains and sewer manholes. 21) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.E: Provide the ground elevation on the site based on City of Tucson Datum, indicating City of Tucson field book number and page. Include the datum reference used in the basis of bearing section (i.e. NGVD29 or NAVD88). 22) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.G: Revise the Development Plan to clearly label the existing wall as retained or removed. 23) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.A: Revise the Development Plan to clearly show the combination of both lots. Per the Assessors website this parcel has two separate tax identification numbers. A lot combination is required in order to have the improvements span the current property line. The lot combination must be approved by the Zoning Division prior to Development Plan approval. 24) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.2: Revise the Development plan to indicate if the existing street is public or private; provide the roadway widths, curbs, sidewalks and utility locations fully dimensioned. 25) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Revise the Development Plan to dimension wheel stop barrier for the parking spaces located along any adjacent landscape areas and/or pedestrian circulation paths. The barriers are to be set at 15.5-feet to accommodate the required 2.5-foot overhang to prevent encroachment or damage to the proposed landscape area and/or the required clear 4-foot pedestrian path. Specifically for the angled parking space along the west and east side of the property. Revise Detail 1 to show wheel stops. 26) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Provide a detail on the Development Plan to accurately dimension all parking spaces proposed including the required handicap spaces. Refer to Table 1 within DS Sec.3-05 for further clarification on angled parking requirements. Once all dimensions are shown for the angled parking a better review of parking stalls and PAAL widths can be made. 27) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Revise keynotes 16 and 16a along with details B and D to call out the Standard Detail number that is associated with vertical curbing and curb and gutter design, respectively. The details shown on Sheet C2 do not meet the minimum design requirements for curbing. 28) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Provide the dimensioned radii for all areas of the parking lot to verify that the PAAL intersections and PAAL curvatures meet the minimum requirements within DS Sec.3-05.2.1. 29) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Depict and label the required 18-feet radii concrete curb returns per City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Detail 213 (PC/COT SD 213 and the Transportation Access Management Guidelines (TAMG) at both proposed driveway entrances on Bowline Road. The curbs should be constructed at the edge of pavement, which must also be depicted on the site plan. Curb returns must be constructed entirely within the subject parcel refer to DS Sec.3-01.3.2.C for street development standards 30) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Revise the Development Plan to show the location of all proposed scuppers under the sidewalk for roof drainage. Provide separate details for the scuppers showing the standard detail number for public improvements required meeting these requirements in order to convey the 10-year flow under the pedestrian circulation. 31) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Revise the Development Plan to clearly show the one-way PAALs that are proposed. Clearly delineate on the plan what type of signage or pavement markings will be used for directional arrows. 32) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.G: Verify that all proposed easements (utilities, drainage, access, etc) are labeled and dimensioned on the proposed Development Plan. 33) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H: Revise the Development Plan to clearly label (keynote #8) the 50-foot WASH setback study area. Per keynote #8 this area is only defined as the erosion hazard set back, however it must also be labeled as the WASH study area to be left undisturbed. 34) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.1: Revise detail #2 on Sheet C2 to label the 100-year ponding limits with water surface elevations for the proposed retention basin. 35) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.2: Revise the Development Plan to clearly label the (5) 4-foot opening at the inlet to the retention basin. The plan and detail #2 must clearly show the 5 locations for openings to assure clarity in the field. 36) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.3: Revise detail #2 and the drainage report to show type and placement of filter fabric under the proposed dumped riprap. Call out the filter fabric by type and placement in the detail. 37) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.4: Revise the finished floor elevation (FFE) for the proposed building to meet the minimum 1 foot elevation requirement shown within the Hydrology Report. Per the Hydrology Report the minimum FFE for the building is 2648.99 feet per NAVD88. All FFE must be elevated 1-foot above the Water Surface Elevation for both the existing drainage way and the proposed retention basin, verify. 38) DS Sec.9-04.3.1.A.2: Revise the Development Plan to include a note that states "Temporary Fencing is required along the WASH delineation in order to prevent encroachment into this area." 39) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.K: Provide a separate detail for the handicap access ramps located adjacent to the handicap parking stalls. Per the keynote these ramps are to be constructed per Standard Detail #207 however this detail does not reflect the proposed design shown in plan view. A modified detail must be provided to assure compliance with ANSI 705.5. 40) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.L: Verify the required 5-foot wide sidewalk along the street frontage of Bowline Road, revise detail 1 and plan view to correctly dimension the 5-foot width. All new development is required to install a minimum 5-foot sidewalk along the street frontage adjacent to the property. If an existing sidewalk is already constructed along the frontage of Bowline 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 5-foot sidewalk will be required. A DSMR will be required for modifying the development standards to allow a sidewalk that does not meet the minimum 5-foot width requirements along Bowline Road. 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. 41) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.R: Label and dimension the sight visibility triangles that are shown in plan view. Verify the dimensions meet the requirements within DS Sec.3-01.5.1. 42) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.T: Revise keynote #23 to reference detail E on Sheet C2. Revise the detail to show that the refuse enclosure meets the minimum design requirements of DS Sec.6-01. Refer to Figure 3 and DS Sec.6-01.4.2 for specifications and requirements on access, placement of containers, bin enclosure and construction; see Environmental Services for further clarity. 43) DS Sec.11-01.2.1: Provide estimated cut and fill quantities on the Development Plan for grading plan purposes. 44) Review and approval from TDOT Permits and Codes for all improvements within the public right-of-way will be required. A right-of-way use permit application will be required prior to construction. Refer to the following links for TDOT Forms and applications: a) http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Forms_Fees___Maps/Applications/applications.html / b) http://www.dot.ci.tucson.az.us/engineering/pia.php c) Or contact Thad Harvison at 837-6592 for all additional questions regarding r-o-w. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: 45) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a, 10-02.14.2.6: Provide a Geotechnical Report evaluation that addresses the following: a) Soils report should provide conformance with DS Section 10-02.14.2.6 regarding 30-foot boring for the basins, and provide a discussion of the potential for hydro-collapsible soils and building setbacks from the proposed retention basin. b) Provide percolation rates for the retention basin for 5-year threshold to show that the drain down time meets the maximum per DS Sec.10-01.3.5.1. A low flow bleed pipe is required in the basin to prevent standing water unless the percolation rates shown in the geotechnical report can show percolation rates with a safety factor that still meets the maximum drain time allowed. c) Provide pavement structure design recommendations. d) Provide slope stability recommendations for the constructed slopes that are proposed within the basin. GRADING PLAN: 46) DS Sec.11-01.2.1: A grading permit may be required for this project depending on the cut and fill quantities provided. A grading plan and a grading permit application may be required after Development Plan approval and prior to any construction activity. A grading permit may not be issued prior to Development Plan approval. 47) 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 48) Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) requirements are applicable to this project. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) and text addressing stormwater controls for all areas affected by construction activities related to this development will be required with a grading plan submittal. For further information, visit www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan, Hydrology Report and a Geotechnical Report 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, Hydrology Report and Geotechnical Report reviews. For any questions or to schedule a meeting call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 03/13/2008 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Per DS 9-06.2.4, All tentative plats, development plans, site plans, plot plans or other plans providing for approval of development within property that includes any Regulated Area as defined in Development Standard 9-06.2.2.A shall identify and delineate the Regulated Areas and the Protected Riparian Area on the property. The boundary of the WASH Study Area/Protected Riparian Area should be clearly depicted on the Development Plan. 2) Applications for WASH watercourses as described in Development Standard 9-06.2.2.B above that propose a project with no encroachment into the Regulated Area, are required to indicate the top of bank or 10-year flood boundary and the fifty foot study area beyond those lines on the plans submitted through the applicable process, accompanied by a floodplain report verifying the floodplain limits. 3) This plans, shall also indicate the proposed location of the temporary fencing which is required to protect the Protected Riparian Areas during construction. DS 9-06.2.5.A 4) The WASH Study Area should include a treatment such as revegetation with an appropriate seed mix as necessary to comply with the dust control provisions of LUC 3.7.2.7 and is allowed per DS 9-06.2.5.A.4. 5) Note 2 on sheet A1 & note 3 on sheet L-1 contain outdated code references and should be removed. Based on the site design the required parking area screening will likely have to be located behind the street landscape border in order to meet the vegetative groundcover requirements of LUC 3.7.2.4.A.5. 6) Revise the landscape plan to include a thirty inch high screen per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. Plants used for screening are not calculated as part of the requirement for 50% coverage. DS 2-06.3.7 A short screen wall may be placed between the parking spaces and the proposed sidewalk. 7) Revise the development plan and the landscape to identify the existing wall at the southern property line. DS 2-05.2.3.G 8) Revise the landscape plan and site plan if necessary to identify the protrusion into the landscape area at the northwest corner of the building. DS 2-07.2.1.A 9) Revise the Development plans to remove vehicle parking spaces from the sight visibility triangles along the street. DS 3-05.2.2.C 10) Revise the plans to indicate that vertical curb per detail B on sheet C2 will be employed per LUC 3.7.2.3.B and DS 3-05.2.3.C.1. 11) Revise the landscape plans to include the area reserved for bicycle parking and adjust the planting plan as necessary. DS 2-09.5.6 12) Revise the development /landscape plan to identify the adjacent street. DS 2-07.2.1.A 13) Any required storm water detention/retention basins shall be landscaped to enhance the natural configuration of the basin. Design criteria are set forth in Development Standard 10-01.0. LUC 3.7.4.3.A Revise the landscape plan to include basin landscaping. Basin slopes are required to have slopes no steeper than 4:1 where depths are three feet or greater. Slopes for basins less than three feet are to be no steeper than 3:1 for unprotected slopes and 2: 1 for protected. DS 10-01.4 14) Revise the landscape plan to include the following calculations: a. Square footage of the site. b. Square footage of the oasis allowance area and calculation. c. Square footage of the vehicular use area; number of parking spaces, including the required and provided parking space calculations; and the calculation of the required number of canopy trees. d. Minimum width and square footage measured from the inside edge of tree planters in vehicular use areas. e. Length and width of landscape borders and number of canopy trees per length. f. Square footage of the street landscape border and calculation of the percentage of vegetative coverage. 15) The native plant exception application is approved. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED. |
| 03/17/2008 | CDRC1 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | >>> Jim Stoyanoff 03/17/2008 1:15 PM >>> No comment |
| 03/19/2008 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approv-Cond | Parks APPROVES the Development Plan and Landscape Plan. However, a resubmittal is required, as I am looking for some information that other reviewers have requested - for informational purposes only. It will not affect the review/approval. Please see the attached comments. Thanks. - Joanne |
| 03/19/2008 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approv-Cond | PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT COMMENTS City of Tucson CDRC – Community Design Review Committee CASE NUMBER: D08-0009 CASE NAME: Rocks & Ropes East: DP Submittal #: 1 COMMENTS DUE: 3/17/08 COMMENTS SENT: 3/18/08 Items being reviewed: Development Plan, Landscape Plan Related: annexation - N/A rezoning - N/A CDRC – N/A Adopted land use plan(s) – Pantano East Area Plan Parks and Recreation Department Staff has reviewed this proposal and offers the following comments: APPROVED – No Resubmittal Required. The Rolling Hills Wash, a WASH Ordinance wash, is south of and adjacent to the site. According to the Eastern Pima County Trail System Master Plan, the Rolling Hills Wash is an identified local trail from Golf Links Road to the Pantano Wash, including the portion adjacent to this site. If opportunities/resources become available in the future, it would be desirable to implement this segment of the regional trail system. According to the plans submitted for this project, D08-0009, there is an approximately 20-foot-wide area between the top-of-bank and the property line. This should be sufficient for a future trail corridor with landscaping. REVIEWED BY: Joanne Hershenhorn, 3/18/08 S:\PARKS_AND_RECREATION_DEPT\REVIEW_COMMENTS\CDRC_Cases\2008_ReviewsD08-0009_Rocks_Ropes_East.doc |
| 03/20/2008 | 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 D08-0009 Rocks and Ropes East () Tentative Plat (XXXX) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-85-95 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Pantano East Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 03/18/08 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: 03/17/08 |
| 03/21/2008 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 03/24/2008 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Sheet 2 C-1, Does not demonstrate adequate turning radii (require 36 ft inside & 50 ft outside) for collection vehicle to maneuver safely within development, DS 6-01.3.1.A. Refer to figure 1 for turning radii's and required 3 ft buffer on either side of vehicle. 2. Enclosure detail works. 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 |
| 03/26/2008 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES March 26, 2008 David E. Shambach David Shambach Architects, Inc. 1202 East Broadway Blvd., #112 Tucson, Arizona 85719 Subject: D08-0009 Rocks & Ropes East Development Plan Dear David: Your submittal of February 15, 2008 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 (Wastewater, Zoning, Addressing, Engineering, Landscape, Parks and Recreation, ESD, DSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Engineering, Landscape, Parks and Recreation, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Hydrology and Geotechnical Reports (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Lot Combo Covenant (Zoning, DSD) 2 Copies Building Elevations (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: 624-9474 |