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: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D08-0009
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/06/2008 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/07/2008 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approved | May 6, 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 – 2nd 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. The Pima County Department of Environmental Quality and Wastewater Management Department hereby approve the above referenced submittal of the development plan as submitted. Please note the following: Approval of the above referenced submittal does not authorize the construction of public or private sewer collection lines, or water distribution lines. Prior to the construction of such features, a Construction Authorization (Approval To Construct) may need to be obtained from the Pima County Environmental Quality. Also, air quality activity permits must be secured by the developer or prime contractor from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality before constructing, operating or engaging in an activity which may cause or contribute to air pollution. If you have any questions regarding the above-mentioned comments, please contact me. |
| 05/09/2008 | 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 AND ROPES EAST/REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 5/08/08 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 the following legal description to Title Block: A development pf Lots 5 and 6 of 22nd St. Business Plaza, Book 41, Page 46. es |
| 05/15/2008 | 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 (2nd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 15, 2008 DUE DATE: June 4, 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.C Revise the section corners and street names size to meet the minimum twelve (0.12) point size requirement. 3) D.S. 2-05.2.3.B Provide the recordation information for the easements that are to be abandoned on the plan. 4) D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Per LUC Table 3.3.7.I, 60 degree parking the minimum width for the one-way PAAL is 16'-0", the proposed 14'-0" does not meet this requirement. 5) D.S. 2-05.2.4.P The proposed crosswalk shown at the northeast corner heading to the refuse location appears to encroach into the two-way PAAL's minimum 24' width. Provide a dimension and if necessary relocate the crosswalk. 6) D.S. 2-05.2.4.P The dimensions shown on detail 2 Angled Parking space, the space depth and curb length dimensions are incorrect. Per LUC Table 3.3.7.I, 60 degree parking, the space depth is 19.8 feet and the curb length is 9.8 feet. Revise the detail. 7) This comment has not been addressed 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. 8) Zoning acknowledges the provided bicycle parking detail. The proposed center post does not appear to meet the requirements of revised D.S. 2-09. Review the revised standard and provide an elevation of the proposed rack. Indicate how the lighting for the bicycle parking area will be handled, i.e. building light, site light. After discussions with Ron Brown, Structural Review, City of Tucson, Development Services Department in regards to the ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 and the requirements for detectable warnings (truncated domes), it has been determined that some locations previously requiring truncated domes may no longer require them. The following comments are a direct result of these discussions. If you have any questions in regards to the requirements for truncated domes contact Ron Brown @837-4908. 9) Truncated domes are not required at the handicapped vehicle parking space access aisle but are required at all curb access ramps that lead into the PAAL's. 10) Ensure that all changes to the development plan are reflected on the landscape plans. 11) 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-2nd.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents. |
| 05/20/2008 | 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 is required to be clearly depicted on the Development Plan. Provide the fifty foot dimension from the top of bank and define the regulatory limit along the entire length of the parcel. 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. 3) 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. Additional curbing is required in several locations to protect plantings from vehicular damage. 4) 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. (Stormwater Detention Manual), LUC 3.7.4.3.A Revise the landscape plan to include basin landscaping. Landscaping is not optional. (See pages 85-97 for examples) The following technical requirements and guidelines apply: A) A minimum of twenty trees per acre B) Continuous uniform slopes shall not exceed 20 percent of the basin perimeter C) Slope grading should achieve a balance between engineering function, multi-use factors, and visual attractiveness D) Use plants suitable for flood zones. E) A minimum of two shrubs for each tree is recommended. F) Inert groundcovers alone should not comprise over 35% of the total basin area. 5) Revise the landscape plan to include the following calculations: Revise the number of parking spaces to match the Development Plan and revise the calculation for the required number of canopy trees. (1 tree per 10 or fraction thereof) 6) Revise the section designator for the basin on Sheet C1. 7) Revise keynote 22 on Sheet A1. 8) Keynote 25 indicates an eight foot high equipment screen. The landscape plan indicates 6' wall. Revise as necessary. DS 2-07.2.2.A.3 RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED. |
| 05/21/2008 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT COMMENTS City of Tucson CDRC – Community Design Review Committee CASE NAME & NUMBER: D08-0009, Rocks & Ropes East: DP Submittal #: 2 COMMENTS DUE: 6/4/08 COMMENTS SENT: 5/21/08 Items reviewed: Development Plan and Landscape Plan Parks and Recreation Department Staff has reviewed this proposal and offers the following comments: APPROVED – No resubmittal required. REVIEWED BY: Joanne Hershenhorn DATE: 5/21/08 S:\PARKS_AND_RECREATION_DEPT\REVIEW_COMMENTS\CDRC_Cases\2008_ReviewsD08-009a_Rocks_Ropes_East.doc |
| 06/06/2008 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Sheet 1 keynote 22 does not accurately identify trash/recyle enclosure as shown within DP. Sheet 3 GP has two references. Reposition and remove accordingly. 2. Sheet 4, provides detail for a single trash enclosure which meets minimum requirements as shown. However, DP sheet 1 identifies a double wide enclosure which does not represent the detail drawing as shown nor will two single enclosures, side by side, fit within the current foot print. DP shows four enclosure gates but no detail refrencing a center post/column for mounting gates to. Provide detail of a double enclosure fully dimensioned and ensure works within DP. 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 |
| 06/18/2008 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: June 18, 2008 SUBJECT: Rocks and Ropes East Development Plan- 2nd 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 revised Development Plan, Hydrology Report (Oracle Engineering Group, 06FEB08 revised 16APR08), and preliminary grading 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: DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 1) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Revise the Development Plan and Detail 2/A2 to correctly label all required dimensions (A-E) that apply to the proposed 60 degree angle parking. Refer to Table 1 within Sec 3.3.0 LUC and Supplemental Document #3 in 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. For angled parking a minimum of 16-feet is required for the access aisle and the parking stall must be a minimum 19.8 feet long, verify all other dimensions. 2) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Revise the Development Plan to label all (4) proposed scuppers (keynote #21) under the sidewalk along the south side of the building. 3) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.2: The development plan will be approved for drainage and basin design; however at the grading plan application submittal a more detail view of how stormwater drains in to the basin from the proposed curb line along the south side of the south PAAL will be required. The grading plan must show that the water drains into the basin and does not by-pass it along the south side and causing erosion into the Rodeo Wash Channel. 4) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.K: Revise the Development Plan to clearly show the required 5-foot landing at the top of the handicap access ramp adjacent to the "Do Not Enter" sign. For all other handicap comments or questions please refer to Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner. 5) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.P: Revise or verify on the Development Plan the minimum PAAL width at the proposed crosswalk location shown at the northeast corner of the building to the refuse container location. Provide the minimum 24-foot width requirement for 2-way traffic. 6) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.P: Revise the Development Plan to clearly show that all areas of the vehicular use area (landscape islands, parking areas, PAALs) are designed to meet the requirements of DS Sec.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. 7) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.T: Revise the Development Plan and Sheet A1 to label the refuse container location (keynote #22). Provide a detail on the Development Plan (Sheets A1 or A2) for the refuse container showing dimensions for a double container enclosure. 8) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.T: Revise the preliminary grading plan and keynote #60 to reference Detail E on Sheet C2. Revise Detail E for the refuse container showing dimensions for a double container enclosure. 9) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.T: Verify that the required dimensions for the double enclosure meets the overall dimensions of the site design on both the Development Plan and preliminary grading plan. 10) 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. GRADING PLAN: 11) DS Sec.11-01.2.1: A grading permit is required for this project due to the cut and fill quantities provided on the preliminary grading plan. 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. 12) 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 13) 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 that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. For this submittal I want to express my thanks for the comment letter that was submitted with the corrections, very detailed and it told me exactly where to look. High praises to who ever wrote it. Please keep them coming just like that. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the Development Plan reviews. For any questions or to schedule a meeting call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 06/20/2008 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES June 20, 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 May 6, 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 6 Copies Revised Development Plan (Zoning, Addressing, Engineering, Landscape, ESD, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Engineering, Landscape, 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 |