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 - D08-0014
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/13/2008 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/25/2008 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department, Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera - Principal Planner PROJECT: D08-0014, Desert Toyota Parking Expansion - full code entire site. 7550 E. 22nd Street, C-2 rezoning case, Development Plan, 3rd Review TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 25, 2008 DUE DATE: December 12, 2008 COMMENTS: 1. The remaining three issues must be addressed based on any determination by the Re-zoning staff. It is my understanding that the garage doors, proposed light poles, and the fencing along the east side do not meet the intent of the conditions 11, 22, and 26 respectively. Until these items are addressed by either a change or determination of the respective conditions the development plan cannot be approved by zoning. Condition 11 - (Previous Comment: Assessor's photos show garage doors along south side of existing auto garage. Per Glenn Moyer, condition 11-prohibiting garage doors on south face of buildings - applies to entire site. Provide notes & building elevations showing how condition 11 to be met. Your response to above states new building complies, however, response does not address existing building complies and the plan shows openings on south wall. For staff to accept plan, provide written advisement from Rezoning or Glenn Moyer indicating this condition does not apply to the existing building.) Condition 22 - (Previous Comment: Show the location(s) of free-standing lighting on the site - meeting condition 22 - provide elevation drawing noting pole height. Also, appears poles will be on south lot line. Condition 22 indicates pole lighting only allowed within 15' of north lot line and other light sources on the site can only be 5' tall. See condition 22 please.) Condition 26 - (Previous Comment: sheet 4, detail A, wrought iron fencing elevation is missing a block under it per-condition 26. In addition, the wrought iron is not allowed to bow out of the property line. Please provide a note stating that wrought iron tips shall be directed inward to the property, or will be erected straight.) If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call (520) 791-5608. C:\drivera\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D080014c.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents. |
| 11/26/2008 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approved | August, 2008 To: David Laredo Laredo Engineering Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department From: Chandubhai C. Patel, P.E., Civil Eng. Manager Development Review Division ( Wastewater) Subject: Desert Toyota Parking Expansion Development Plan – 2nd Submittal (REVISED) D08-014 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 Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (RWRD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. We have now received the sewer Capacity letter that was not available at the time of the last review. Therefore. the PDEQ and the PCRWRD hereby approve the above referenced submittal of the Development Plan as received by us on June 18,.2008 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. 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 . |
| 12/11/2008 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 12/11/2008, TO: Patricia Gehlen FROM: Laith Alshami, P.E. CDRC Engineering SUBJECT: Desert Toyota Parking Expansion D08-0014, T14S, R15E, SECTION 20 RECEIVED: Development Plan and Drainage Report on November 14, 2008 The subject submittal has been reviewed. The Drainage Report is acceptable for Development Plan purposes and it is hereby approved. Additional drainage related information may be required with the grading plan. The Development Plan is recommended for approval pertaining to Engineering and Floodplain review. The Landscape Plan is acceptable pertaining to Engineering and Floodplain Review. |
| 12/12/2008 | 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 D08-0014 Desert Toyota Parking Exp. () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-07-05 (Desert Toyota) NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: General Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: No COMMENTS DUE BY: 12/12/08 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 () Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions () RCP Proposal Complies with Plan Policies (X) See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: (X) Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: msp 791-4505 DATE: 12/11/08 The Department of Urban Planning and Design D08-0014 - Desert Toyota Parking Exp. Development Plan December 11, 2008 Staff offers the following comments: Community Planning staff provided applicant with five comments which required corrections/revisions to comply with rezoning case C9-07-05. Of the previous five comments the resubmittal only fully complied with one. The four comments are revisited from staff's previous comments dated June 30, 2008, they are the following: 1. Rezoning condition # 11 requires service bay doors (existing and proposed buildings) to be north oriented only. An existing building has bay doors oriented to the east and as per the applicant's resubmittal comments; this rezoning condition is pending action by Mayor & Council, meeting to accept the condition. I assume by the applicant's comment that a request for a public hearing before Mayor & Council has been requested to delete or modify rezoning condition #11 and rezoning condition #26. However until such time as Mayor & Council take action on the applicant's request, rezoning condition #11 and #26 are requirements of this development plan. Therefore, Community Planning staff may only approve this development plan when it is in full compliance with all approved rezoning conditions. Until such time as rezoning condition #11 and #16 are adhered to, deleted, or revised by Mayor & Council staff is unable to approve this development plan as submitted. 2. Development plan, sheet 1 of 4 identifies two locations for the proposed business sign. Keynote (22) identifies the proposed freestanding business sign. There are two keynote(22) symbols along the 22nd Street frontage. One is west of the new entrance and one is shown to the east of the new entrance. It seems like the one shown just west of the new entrance may be an error. Please revise sheet 1 of 4 to show only one keynote (22) symbol along 22nd Street frontage. 3. Rezoning condition #22 permits two types of lighting to illuminate the dealership. The first is a pole type lighting that is points the lighting down and away from residential properties. This type of lighting is only permitted along the northern 15 feet of the site for the full length of the development site. The remainder of the site may include bollards lighting with a maximum height of 5 feet. Now these are very specific rezoning requirements and the development plan submittal does not clearly establish these boundaries and lighting conditions. As submitted this condition was addressed by adding a second keynote #1, when there already is another issue identified as keynote #1. Staff recommends the keynote created for this condition be revised as keynote # 27. Also, the keynote used to address the lighting rezoning condition provides symbols to identify the location of site lighting which are then shown on the site layout of the development plan. Now, the symbol shown on the development site layout for pole lights (four sides pole), which are restricted to the northern edge of the site are positioned beyond the restricted area and cover most of the site. Staff supports specific symbols instead of repeatedly showing a keynote number every where a light pole or light bollard is to be located. Staff supports two vary distinct symbols should be used for each of the two type of light permitted. In addition staff requests that a distinct line be drawn through the development site layout to identify and separate the two areas. North of the drawn line is where light poles are permitted, and south of the drawn line is where light bollards are permitted. This line will lessen any confusion and the development plan will clearly define the boundary between the two areas. This line would identify and simplify how to determine where each type of light is permitted. Also revise the development plan to identify the location of each type of light fixture so as to pin point each light pole and/or light bollard locations within their approved areas, respectfully. |
| 12/17/2008 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES December 15, 2008 George Lance L2 Architects 6418 East Tanque Verde #102 Tucson, Arizona 85715 Subject: D08-0014 Desert Toyota Parking Expansion Development Plan Dear George: Your submittal of November 14, 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 3 Copies Revised Development Plan (DUPD, Zoning, DSD) 3 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (DUPD, Zoning, DUPD) 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: 546-4777 |
| 12/17/2008 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | March 9, 2010 George Lance L2 Architects 6418 East Tanque Verde #102 Tucson, AZ 85715 SUBJECT: CLOSURE OF CDRC FILE Development Plan Per Section 5.3.8.2.A, Expiration Dates, of the Land Use Code, "an applicant has one (1) year from the date of application to obtain approval of a development plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A development plan application that has been in review for a period of one (1) year which has not been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a development plan for the property, a new development plan which complies with regulations in effect at that time must be submitted. The new submittal initiates a new one (1) year review period." Case # Case Name DSD Transmittal Date D08-0014 Desert Toyota Distribution February 28, 2008 Please note that this case has been closed and that, in order to continue review of the project, new development plan/tentative plat application is required which comply with regulations in effect at the time of the new submittals. CDRC members should be advised of their ability to review the new applications per the current regulations. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Patricia Y. Gehlen CDRC Manager xc: CDRC file D08-0014 |