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 - D09-0017
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/02/2009 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/02/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | NOT A COT OWNED/OPERATED PROPERTY |
| 07/09/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. At Detail 7/3: a. Below the detail title reference the accessible governing code as 2006 IBC, Chapter 11 and ICC/ANSI 117.2 2003 Edition. PC/COT SD 207 is for Public Right of Way construction only. b. Add reference to detectable warning compliance as per ICC/ANSI 117.1, Sections 406.12 and 406.14. c. Provide a 4' wide landing at the top of the ramp. d. All flared sides to be a minimum of 1:10 slope. e. Please calify the detectable warning note requirenment for a "+/- 2" border". 2. At detail 4/3: Below the detail title delete the compliance minimum requirements stated and reference the accessible governing code as 2006 IBC, Chapter 11 and ICC/ANSI 117.1, 2003 Edition. 3. Reference detail 1/6, the East end of the very long marked crossing is non compliant: a. The section of marked crossing from the face of the curb to the 90 degree turn to the curb ramp is required to be concrete. Reference zoning comments b. The curb ramp and detectable warnings must be parallel with the direction of travel as per section 406.12. Extend the landscape island to the North and encompass this section of the marked crossing. Relocate the curb ramp and detectable warning to the face of the West curb of the extended island. Continue the accessible route (concrete walk way) to the previous ramp location. END OF REVIEW |
| 07/09/2009 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 07/09/2009, TO: Patricia Gehlen FROM: Laith Alshami, P.E. CDRC Engineering SUBJECT: Valero At the Pavilions at Civano D09-0017, T15S, R15E, SECTION 07 RECEIVED: Development Package and Drainage Report on May 07, 2009 The subject project has been reviewed. The Drainage Report is acceptable and it is hereby approved. Additional drainage information may be required for the construction phase of the project. The Development package is acceptable and it is recommended for conditional approval subject to the following conditions: EVERY PAGE OF PACKAGE: 1. Correct the subdivision case number (i.e. D09-0017) (D.S. 2-01.3.3.3.). Grading Plan: 1. Provide the proper dimensions that clarify the exact location of the dowels in all applicable details (i.e. How far the dowel is supposed to be from the bottom or the top of the concrete). The response to this previously made comment appears to be incorrect. SWPPP: 1. Clarify where the City of Tucson was identified as the recipient of the NOI and authorization certificate (Part III.D.4). 2. Call out the receiving waters on the location map (Part III.C.2.f.). RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Plan Package Mylar |
| 07/09/2009 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | 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: D09-0017 VALERO AT THE PAVILIONS AT CIVANO/REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 7/07/09 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. Submit a 24 x 36 Reverse Reading Double Matte Photo Mylar of approved Development Plan to City Planning. Signed and dated Mylar will be forwarded to Pima County Addressing prior to assignment of addresses. 2.) All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection. |
| 07/09/2009 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNING COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D09-0017 Valero at the Pavilions at CIV () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Civano Master PAD (PAD-12) SCENIC ROUTE: YES COMMENTS DUE BY: 7/10/09 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 () See Comments Below (X) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: 4/27/09 (X) No Resubmittal Required: REVIEWER: MSP 791-5505 DATE: July 9, 2009 |
| 07/10/2009 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL FROM: Michael St.Paul, Planning Technician PROJECT: D09-0017 (SCZ T09SA00127 & Grading T09BU00660) 10335 East Drexel Road Valero at the Pavilions (PAD12 Pavilions District) TRANSMITTAL: July 10, 2009 COMMENTS: Please attach a response letter with the next submittal, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1) Responded. 2) Responded 3) Responded 4) In the general notes provide the proposed use of the property (DS 2-05.2.2.B.3). The correct use is "General Merchandise Sales" (LUC Section 2.6.1.2.B.2). 5) Add a not stating that: "The project is designed to meet the overlay zone criteria for the Scenic Corridor Zone (LUC Section 2.8.2)" (DS 2-05.2.2.B.10). 6) Responded. 7) Responded. 8) Responded. 9) Responded. 10) Provide dimensions for the distance from each structure and the property lines (DS 2-05.2.4.I). Please provide these dimensions on the sheet that functions as a dimensioned site plan. 11) Responded. 12) The parking calculations work, but there is no additional parking for gas station employees. That use and parking calculation is for gas stations that gas and oil without the general merchandise. 13) "Show on the drawing, off-street bicycle parking locations, 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. When adjacent to pedestrian paths, indicate the width of clearance available for the pedestrian area. For specifics, refer to Development Standard 2-09.0." (DS.2-05.2.4.Q). Provide a plan view of the bicycle parking. 14) Responded. The following comment is relative the Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ) (LUC Section 2.8.2): The correct depth is two hundred feet from the future ROW. Please clearly depict the future ROW and the SCZ dimension on the plans. Please be aware that additional comments may be required relative to subsequent submittals. |
| 07/14/2009 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/14/2009 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | ES approves with the following conditions to be included: 1. Trash enclosure detail -(from response 3) a single side wall protector (bollard) is acceptable however must call out a 3 ft dimension from the front of enclosure to identify bollard placement. 2. Trash enclosure detail -(from response 4) The detail should specify that four (4) anchors are required for each set of gates to secure in the open and closed positions. 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 |
| 07/14/2009 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Good afternoon John, I just reviewed the mylars with Warren Thompson and everything is acceptable regarding solid waste disposal. Let me know if you need anything else from me. Thanks, Andy |
| 07/16/2009 | JWILLIA4 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES July 16, 2009 Warren D. Thompson Stantec Consulting, Inc. 201 N. Bonita Avenue, Suite 101 Tucson, Arizona 85745 Subject: D09-0017 Valero at the Pavilions at Civano Development Package Dear Warren: The above referenced development plan has been CONDITIONALLY APPROVED by the Community Design Review Committee. Once the necessary corrections are made per Zoning, Engineering, ESD, HC Site please submit the following documents for sign-off. 1 Double Matte right-reading Océ or Photo Mylar of the COMPLETE SET of the Development Package. AND 1 Double Matte right-reading Océ or Photo Mylar of the Development Package. The extra Double Matte right-reading Océ or Photo Mylar that you submit will be delivered to Pima County for permanent recording. Additional black line copies will be made from the complete mylar set and distributed to various review agencies for their files. These copies will be ordered from the City's contracted print company and billed to you unless you already have an account at another printing company. Please let us know which printing company you would prefer to use and list them on your attached transmittal form when submitting your mylars to the CDRC office for sign-off approval. Your printing company will deliver the mylar and two (2) blackline copies to your office. If you are out of town you will need to contact the printing company for pick up or mailing arrangement options. Please note you must send a copy to ESD for approval prior to bringing back to Development Services. We must have their approval in writing, an email is acceptable. Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. Sincerely, John Williams Planning Technician All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: (520) 750-7470 |