Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D08-0036
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/22/2009 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 01/30/2009 | 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 D08-0036 Double Tree Hotel 09/03/08 (XXXX) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Alvernon-Broadway COMMENTS DUE BY: 02/20/09 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: (XXXX) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: 08/27/08 REVIEWER: drcorral 791-4505 DATE: 01/23/09 |
| 02/05/2009 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approv-Cond | February 04, 2009 To: DAVID WHITNEY THE WLB GROUP 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: DOUBLE TREE HOTEL Dev. Plan – 2nd Submittal, D08-036 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. Sheet 4: Add a cleanout at the junction of two proposed HCS located northwest of the existing private MH. Subject to the above, the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality and the Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department hereby CONDITIONALLY approve the above referenced submittal of the development plan as received by us on January 21, 2009. The changes may be shown on the mylars. A review fee of $39.00 will be charged by Pima County DSD to certify that the correction has been made. 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 comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. |
| 02/05/2009 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: February 4, 2009 SUBJECT: Double Tree Hotel Development Plan Core Review- 2nd Engineering Review TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: 431 S Alvernon Way, T145S R14E Sec15 Ward 6 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: D08-0036 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the revised Development Plan, Drainage Report (The WLB Group, 18JUL08, revised 14JAN09), Stormwater Pollution prevention Plan (The WLB Group, 22JULY08, revised 15JAN09), Title Report and Infiltration Test Report (ATL, Inc., 29OCT08). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan package at this time. This review falls under the draft policy for Development Plan Core Review, Development Standard 2-01; all comments reflect Development Plan and Grading Plan review. The following items need to be addressed: DRAINAGE REPORT: 1) Complied. 2) Complied. 3) Acknowledged: DS Sec.2-01.3.9.M.3: It is acknowledged that the proposed bilge pumps are being used as a safety and that the submitted Geotechnical Report shows that the proposed retention basin drains within the required 12 hours, however it is still recommended to provide the minimum capacity requirements for the 2 proposed bilge pumps to ensure that they have the capacity to drain the basin within the 12 hour time limit in the case that the infiltration of the retention basin slows or stops over time due to sedimentation or poor maintenance of the infrastructure. 4) Complied. DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 5) Restated: DS Sec.2-01.2.2: Revise the Development Plan to include all mapped data at an engineering scale having no more than 50-feet to the inch. Sheet 1, 7 and 13 are mapped at a 1 inch equals 80 feet scale, which does not meet the minimum requirements. The response comment that this standard does not apply for cover sheets is incorrect. Per the CDRC Manager all sheets must be provided at a 1-inch equals 50 feet scale to satisfy this standard. In order to deviate from the Standard prior approval from the CDRC Manager is required, per the referenced section. Provide, in writing, from the CDRC Manager approval to use the 1-inch equals 80 feet scale as shown. This comment was not addressed. 6) Complied. 7) Complied. 8) Complied. 9) Complied. 10) Complied. 11) Complied. 12) Restated: DS Sec.2-01.3.8.I: Revise the Development Plan and/or Drainage Note #6 to clearly state that the property is within a 100-year floodplain SFHA Zone AH per the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel # 2233K and 2234K with LOMR dated 04JUN07. A Floodplain Use Permit will be required for all work within the mapped floodplain. Provide a Floodplain Use Permit with the next submittal of the Development Plan Core review. Per the comment letter this was submitted, however there is not an activity number or application open for a Floodplain Use Permit for this property or project. This comment was not fully addressed. 13) Restated: DS Sec.2-01.3.9.G.1: Revise the Development Plan package to include all required information for the revised traffic circulation. Verify standard driveway entrance for the revised PAAL intersection with Timrod Street and Haynes Street. Per the Tucson Access Management Guidelines 18-foot radii are required at all new PAAL entrance/exits to local streets. Revise the plan set to show the minimum 18-foot radii at all new PAAL locations (with the exception of the Alvernon Way location which is the 25-foot radii as labeled) or provide a letter of approval from TDOT stating that they have no objections to a standard driveway apron. Comment not fully addressed. 14) Restated: DS Sec.2-01.3.9.G.2: Revise the Development Plan sheets and Detail 8 (was Detail 5 under review 1) to correctly dimension the Site Visibility Triangle (Near side) for the intersection of the PAAL with Alvernon Way. Alvernon Way is an Arterial roadway per the MS&R maps therefore the dimension shown for the Near Side in Detail #8 does not meet the minimum requirements. Refer to DS Sec.3-01.5.3 for the correct near side dimension for a PAAL intersecting an Arterial Street. This comment was not fully addresses. 15) Complied. 16) Complied. 17) Complied. 18) Complied. 19) Restated: DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H: Revise the Development Plan and/or the Grading Plan to clearly label that the right-of-way for Alvernon is in accordance with the MS&R Plan. Provide the label "Existing and Future Right-of-Way" to the dimensions shown to verify that the full future right-of-way is complete for this section. Comment not fully addressed. 20) Restated: DS Sec.2-01.3.9.K: Revise the Development Plan to provide for an easement for the proposed Basin A and sump pumps. All detention/retention basins and drainage infrastructure must have a separate restriction that specifies responsibility and maintenance of the drainage infrastructure. Verify that the easement submitted provides for maintenance responsibility for the basins, sump pumps and all other drainage infrastructure. If an easement is not provided then Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&Rs) will be required that address common areas (proposed basin and infrastructure) and the maintenance responsibilities associated. Comment not addressed. 21) Restated: DS Sec.2-01.3.9.M.1: Revise the Development Plan to clearly label the 100-year limits within the vehicular use area as "FEMA AH Special Flood Hazard Area per FIRM Panel 04019C2233K and 2234K with LOMR dated 04JUN07. Either revise the symbol description in the legend or provide this label in plan view adjacent to the floodplain labeling. Comment not fully addressed. 22) Acknowledged: DS Sec.2-01.3.9.M.3: It is acknowledged that the proposed bilge pumps are being used as a safety and that the submitted Geotechnical Report shows that the proposed retention basin drains within the required 12 hours, however it is still recommended to provide the minimum capacity requirements for the 2 proposed bilge pumps to ensure that they have the capacity to drain the basin within the 12 hour time limit in the case that the infiltration of the retention basin slows or stops over time due to sedimentation or poor maintenance of the infrastructure. 23) Complied. 24) Complied. 25) Acknowledged. Since this is a Core Review package Environmental Services is reviewing the refuse location and details for compliance with DS Sec.6-01. Any changes required by Environmental Services must be reflected on the plan set. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: 26) Complied. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN: The SWPPP meets the minimum requirements of the AzPDES Construction General Permit (CGP). Return 3 copies of both the SWPPP Report and Exhibits at resubmittal for stamped approval once all comments related to the Development Plan Package have been addressed: 27) Complied. 28) Complied. 29) Complied. 30) Complied. 31) Complied. NEW COMMENTS (2ND SUBMITTAL): 32) Revise General Note #2 to label the datum reference used for the COT Field Book and Page, i.e. NGVD29 or NAVD88 datum. 33) Revise General Note #6 to include all of the required statement for Detention/Retention Basin maintenance per DS Sec.10-02.14.3.2. Specifically the following statement must be included in Note #6; "(d) that the owner or owners agree to reimburse the City for any and all costs associated with the maintaining of the drainage structures and Detention/Retention system, should the City find the owner or owners deficient in their obligation to adequately operate and maintain their facilities." 34) Clarify that the redesign of the circular driveway to a PAAL access point at Timrod Street still provides for the minimum 24-foot (12-foot for one-way, 20-foot if used for Fire Access) PAAL width for the shown driveway for the existing adjacent apartment/casitas on the south side of Timrod Street. Clearly label the PAAL width at this location to verify that it meets the minimum requirements within DS Sec.3-05. 35) Revise General Paving Note #29 on Sheet 7 to remove the reference to Pima County Zoning Code. Revise the note to specify conformance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (excavation and grading requirements). 36) Provide a General Paving Note on the Sheet 7 to state the following: "Call for a Pre-construction meeting prior to start of earthwork. To schedule a DSD Pre-construction meeting, SWPPP inspection or general Engineering Inspections, call IVR (740-6970), or schedule with a Customer Service Representative at the Development Services Department, or contact DSD Engineering at 791-5550 extension 2101, or schedule inspections online at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Online_Services/Online_Permits/online_permits.html 37) Revise all notes, references or labels to Standard Detail #209 (construction keynote #2) to call out the type of vertical curbing proposed, i.e. Type I, Type I (G) or Type II per the referenced detail. Verify that all call outs to Standard Details provide the minimum information or all additional information that must be called out in plan view per the detail reference is shown. 38) Revise Detail #1 on Sheet 12 to include all required dimensions and specifications for construction purposes. The detail must provide the length and width dimension for the drainage sump along with the 10-foot depth (height) dimension. All filter fabric proposed must provide the minimum specifications and/or type of fabric proposed. Provide the style, composition, thickness, strength, etc for the filter fabric to ensure minimum requirements have been meet. The detail can also call out the brand name and type or equivalent (i.e. Mirafi 140N). 39) Revise Detail #2 on Sheet 12 to include all specifications for the proposed filter fabric. Provide the style, composition, thickness, strength, etc for the filter fabric to ensure minimum requirements have been meet. The detail can also call out the brand name and type or equivalent (i.e. Mirafi 140N). GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan package, Floodplain Use Permit, and 3 copies of the SWPPP (with Exhibits) that addresses 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 package and Floodplain Use Permit. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 02/10/2009 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | 1. The proposed narrow, elongated planter box in the parking area (located just to the left of the center of the sheet and containing a blue palo verde) on landscape plan sheet L-5, does not meet the minimum requirements for required unpaved planting area width. Revise and dimension the minimum width and label the square footage measured from the inside of each type of tree planters (including the elongated planters) proposed in the vehicle use area. An unpaved area, which is a minimum of thirty-four (34) square feet in area and four (4) feet in width, must be provided for each canopy tree. LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.c, DS 2-07.2.2.A.2.e 2. The minimum required text size is 12 point (0.12"). Some of the text for labels in the details on landscape plan sheet L-2 do not meet this standard. Revise where necesary. Revise text where necessary. DS 2-05.2.1.C 3. Revise the address in the title block on all sheets of the development plan to read "South" (S.) Alvenon Way. |
| 02/11/2009 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Double Tree Hotel Development Package (2nd Review) D08-0036 TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 11, 2009 DUE DATE: February 20, 2009 DEVELOPMENT PLAN 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 July 29, 2009. The following comments are based on the Draft Development Standards 2-01.0.0 DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE DOCUMENTS, dated 2-26-08. This review is a full code review for the areas of expansion only. 1. This comment was not addressed correctly. The vehicle use area expansion calculation is not just parking spaces it is all paved areas. Provide a vehicle use area expansion calculation that includes all parking area access lanes (PAALs) and parking areas. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.9.c Provide a vehicle use area expansion calculation on the plan. This calculation is cumulatively for all expansions back to the last full code review. 2. D.S. 2-01.3.8.A Zoning acknowledges the Office of the Pima County Assessor Combination Request Form but was unable to find a copy of the City of Tucson Covenant Regarding Development and Use of Real Property. Provide a copy of the recorded City of Tucson Covenant Regarding Development and Use of Real Property. 3. This comment was not addressed. The PAAL accessing the proposed parking spaces is required to be 24'-0" wide. D.S. 2-01.3.9.G.5 As the parking spaces north of the existing buildings called out along Irving Avenue the PAAL providing access to these parking spaces will need to be twenty-four (24) foot wide. See D.S. 3-05.2.1.C.1 and D.S.3-05.0 Table 1. 4. This comment has not been addressed. Contact City of Tucson Real Estate Department and provide documentation that allows the use of the right-of-way for private parking. D.S. 2-01.3.9.G.5.a Sheet 5 there is parking shown along the west property line that appears to be partially within the ROW. Provide a copy of the temporary revocable easement and the plan that approved this parking within the ROW. 5. This comment was not addressed. D.S. 2-01.3.9.G.5.a Within the parking calculation provide the required and provided number of van accessible vehicle parking spaces. 6. If applicable ensure all changes are made to the grading and landscape plans. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.com Sshield1 on DS1/planning/New Development Package/ D08-0036 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package and additional requested documents. CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Double Tree Hotel Grading Plan (2nd Review) Revised T08BU01371 TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 11, 2009 DUE DATE: February 20, 2009 GRADING PLAN 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. The grading plan has been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until it has been approved by the Engineering, and Landscape Review Sections and until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 2. Zoning cannot approve the grading plan until the development plan has been approved. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.com Sshield1 on DS1/planning/New Development Package/ T08BU01371 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package and additional requested documents. |
| 02/18/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 17 FEBRUARY 2009 D08-0036/DOUBLE TREE HOTEL-RESUBMITTAL REVIEWED BY RON BROWN RESUBMITTAL ACCESSIBILITY REVIEW 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1 DENIED: SEE COMMENTS BELOW SHEET 1 of 35 A. "VAN ACCESSIBLE" SPACES ARE NOTED AS NONE. AS PER 2006 IBC, SECTION 1106.5, ONE OF EVERY SIX ACCESSIBLE SPACES PROVIDED SHALL BE VAN ACCESSIBLE. PLEASE SHOW LOCATION ON PLAN FOR TWO "VAN ACCESSIBLE" SPACES. II. SHEET 3 of 35: A. AT BOTH "BUMP" AREAS: THESE ARE IN FACT ACCESSIBLE ROUTE CROSSINGS THROUGH HAZARDOUS AREAS AND ARE REQUIRED TO BE RAISED MARKED CROSSINGS. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS: a. PROVIDE DETECTABLE WARNINGS AT EITHER END OF THE ISLAND AS PER SECTION 406.14 REFERENCE COMMENTS SHEET 11. III. SHEET 4 of 35: A. PROVIDE LARGE SCALE DETAILS OF ALL MULTIPLE ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES LAYOUTS (4 AND 2) SHOWING ALL REQUIRED RAMPS, SIZE, SLOPES, SIGNAGE, DIMENSIONS, ACCESSIBLE ROUTES, ETC., AND COMPLYING WITH 2006 IBC, SECTION 1106 AND ICC 117.1, SECTIONS 502, 405 AND 406. GENERIC DETAILS ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS: a. SHOW LOCATION OF ALL "VAN ACCESSIBLE" SPACES. CORRECT DETAILS ON SHEET 11 ACCORDINGLY. IV. SHEET 5 of 35: A. OK RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS: a. THE NEW MARKED CROSSING FROM THE NEWLY RELOCATED ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES NEEDS A DETECTABLE WARNING AT THE EAST END OF THE MARKED CROSSING AS PER ANSI SECTION 406.12 AND IF PAVING IS NOT FLUSH WITH THE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE NEXT TO THE BUILDING, A RAMP WILL BE REQUIRED. B. THE WIDE CROSSING FROM THE WATER FOUNTAIN TO THE FRONT DOOR IS AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE CROSSING THROUGH A HAZARDOUS AREA AND IS REQUIRED TO BE A MARKED CROSSING. 1. PROVIDE LARGE SCALE DETAILS OF ALL DIFFERENT TYPES OF CURB RAMPS AND SIDEWALK RAMPS SHOWING SIZE, SLOPE, FLARED SIDES, DIMENSIONS, DETECTABLE WARNINGS, ETC., AND COMPLYING WITH 2006 IBC, SECTION 1010 AND ICC 117.1, SECTIONS 405 AND 406. 2. THE CROSSING MUST BE DIFFERENTIATED WITH PAINTED STRIPES OR CONTRASTING MATERIALS, BOTH TEXTURE AND COLOR RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS: 1. ALL OF THE ABOVE STILL APPLIES. ACCESSIBILITY IS ALLOWED AT THE NORTH AND WEST ENDS OF THE WATER FEATURE WHILE NO ACCESSIBILITY IS ALLOWED AT THE EAST SIDE OF THE WATER FEATURE AND THERE IS NO ACCESSIBILITY FROM THE WATER FEATURE TO THE MAIN ENTRANCE. REFERENCE 2006 IBC, SECTION 1104 AND ICC ANSI 117.1 402, ACCESSIBLE ROUTES. C. AT THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY ACCESSIBLE ROUTE CONNECTION, THREE MARKED CROSSINGS AND DETECTABLE WARNINGS ARE NOT SHOWN AND DETAILED. 1. OK RESUBMITTAL COMMENT: a. THE NEW ISLAND CUT REQUIRES DETECTABLE WARNINGS AT BOTH ENDS AS PER ICC ANSI 117.1, SECTION 406.14 D. REFERENCE LARGE SCALE DETAILS OF THE OTHER CURB AND SIDEWALK RAMPS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE MARKED CROSSINGS. 1. AT THE ACCESSIBLE CROSSING IN FRONT OF THE SERVICE YARD ENTRANCE, PROVIDE A RAISED MARKED CROSSING AND LARGE SCALE DETAILS OF ALL DIFFERENT TYPES OF CURB RAMPS AND SIDEWALK RAMPS SHOWING SIZE, SLOPE, FLARED SIDES, DIMENSIONS, DETECTABLE WARNINGS, ETC., AND COMPLYING WITH 2006 IBC, SECTION 1010 AND ICC 117.1, SECTIONS 405 AND 406. RESUBMITTAL COMMENT: a. RAMPS ARE PROVIDED AT EITHER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE ENTRANCE TO THE SERVICE YARD, TWO ACCESSIBLE SPACES ARE LOCATED AT THE SOUTH END OF THE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE, THERE IS AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE FROM THE FRONT ENTRANCE TO THE VEHICLE CROSSING AREA. A MARKED CROSSING IN FRONT OF SERVICE YARD ENTRANCE IS REQUIRED. ALSO, REFERENCE YOUR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PLAN SHEET 24. V. SHEET 11 of 35: A. DETAIL 3: 1. PROVIDE AN 8' WIDE AISLE FOR "VAN ACCESSIBLE" SPACES. LOCATE ALL "VAN ACCESSIBLE" SPACES ON FLOOR PLANS. RESUBMITTAL COMMENT: a. WHERE ARE THE VAN ACCESSIBLE SPACES? SPACING TO BE AS PER SECTION 502.2; 8' WIDE SPACE NEED 8' WIDE AISLE, 11' WIDE SPACE NEED 5' AISLE. REFERENCE ICC ANSI 117.1 SECTION 502.2. SHOW LOCATIONS ON DETAILS 3, 6 AND 9 ON ALL SITE PLANS. 2. RELOCATE SIGNAGE TO BACK SIDE OF CURB RESUBMITTAL COMMENT: NON RESPONSIVE 3. OK 4. CHANGE ALL ADA REFERENCES TO 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1. RESUBMITTAL COMMENT: NON RESPONSIVE REFERENCE DETAILS 3, 6, 7 AND 9. 5. OK RESUBMITTAL COMMENT: a. ALL ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES ARE NOT VAN ACCESSIBLE AS NOTED, SPACING FOR VAN ACCESSIBLE AS PER SECTION 502.2 IS NOT PROVIDED. b. AT DETAIL 11: PROVIDE DETECTABLE WARNINGS AT EITHER ENDS OF THE ISLAND CUT AS PER SECTION 406.14. c. AT DETAIL 5, THE 7' MOUNTING HEIGHT IS TO THE FINISHED GRADE NOT TO THE TOP OF CONCRETE FOUNDATION AS SHOWN. VI. SHEET 24 of 35: A. OK B. OK C. OK D. OK E. OK RESUBMITTAL COMMENT: a. PROVIDE A MARKED CROSSING AT THE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING OF THE EXISTING SERVICE YARD ENTRANCE WITH ALL REQUIRED DETECTABLE WARNINGS. END OF REVIEW |
| 02/24/2009 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/03/2009 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES March 3, 2009 Andie Haslem The WLB Group, Inc. 4444 East Broadway Blvd. Tucson, Arizona 85711 Subject: D08-0036 Double Tree Hotel Development Plan Dear Andie: Your submittal of January 22, 2009 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 7 sets of the DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 7 Copies Revised Development Package (Wastewater, ADA, Landscape, Engineering, Zoning, Addressing, DSD) 2 Copies Lot Combo Covenant (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: 881-7492 dp-resubmittal |
| 03/03/2009 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 JENNIFER STEPHENS ADDRESSING OFFICIAL PH: 740-6480 FAX #: 740-6370 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: JENNIFER STEPHENS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL SUBJECT: D08-0036 DOUBLE TREE HOTEL/REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 2/26/09 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: Delete address, city, state and zip code from Title Block on all sheets. Correct lot lines (resubmittal is indicating property lines) and delete fractions for surrounding subdivisions on all corresponding sheets. Correct block number for eastern most reference of San Gabriel Bk 6 Pg 98 surrounding subdivision, on all corresponding sheets. Address block, sheet 1, should be blank. Delete address block from all sheets except sheet 1. List complete subdivision name for Bk 8 Pg 57, sheet 1. Delete taxcode information on sheets 6 and 24. Label building 11 on sheet 6. Correct suffix for Longfellow on sheets 6, 7, 20 and 21. Correct matchline sheet # on sheet 18. List surrounding subdivision information on sheet 24. Label building numbers on sheets 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. Per comment letter dated 8/27/08: add “See Sheet L-4” to west line on sheet 33. Correct matchline on sheet 35. Label Hayne Street on sheet 34. Label Timrod Street on sheet 35. |