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: CORE REVIEW
Permit Number - D09-0018
Review Name: CORE REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/07/2009 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/11/2009 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 05/12/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. For all new accessible routes, provide clarification for slope compliance as per ICC/ANSI 117.1 Section 403.3. 2. Show location of all accessible parking signage. 3. Provide large scale signage detail including "Van Accessible" signage. Identify location of all "Van Accessible" parking spaces. 4. Provide a large scale detail of tthe marked crossing between buildings 5 and 6. Provide detectable warnings at both ends of the crossing as per ICC/ANSI 117.1, Sections 406.12 and .14. a. The North side ramp of the marked crossing does not appear to have a 5'x5' landing. Please verify and correct as needed. 5. Provide a latrge scale detail of the accessible parking spaces showing space, aisle, ramp, slopes and signage as required by ICC/ANSI 117.1, Section 502. END OF REVIEW |
| 05/14/2009 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 05/18/2009 | CDRC1 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | May 15, 2009 To: PHILIP A CARHUFF KREBS CARHUFF Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6719), representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environment Quality Subject: DESERT CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL (7525 E SPEEDWAY BLVD) Dev. Plan - 1st Submittal D09-018 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 (PCRWRD).This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. 1. Sheet 1 and Sheet 2: The line weight is not distinctive enough for the existing sewer lines verses proposed. 2. Sheet 1 and Sheet 2: Show the rim and invert elevations for all of the cleanouts shown on plan. Also show the slope for the proposed 4" BCS. 3. Sheet 2: 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. 4. Sheet 2: Many of the FUE values shown in the table on this sheet do not correspond to the values shown in the above mentioned table in Pima County Code 13.20.045(E). 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. |
| 05/26/2009 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Place the CDRC Development Plan case number (D09-0018) along with any other related case numbers in the lower right hand corner of all sheets. 2. Revise the botanical and common name of the mesquite tree to be correct and consistent. The native Prosopis velutina is the velvet mesquite. The Latin name for the Chilean mesquite is Prosopis chilensis. 3. The previously "approved" landscape plans submitted do not appear to be the most recent plans approved based on a note stating "see approved landscape plan". Include the last approved landscape plan with the next submittal. |
| 05/26/2009 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN | Approved | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D09-0018 Desert Christian High School () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-99-06 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: SCENIC ROUTE: YES COMMENTS DUE BY: 6/04/09 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 (X) Proposal Complies with Rezoning Case # C9-99-06, Conditions () RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies () See Comments Below () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: (X) No Resubmittal Required: REVIEWER: msp 791-4505 DATE: May 20, 2009 |
| 05/27/2009 | 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: D09-0018 DESERT CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 5/22/09 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: 1.) Add Drive to Finance Center and Street to Rosewood on Location Plan. 2.) Correct tax code to 133-13-005F. 3.) Add Section, Township and Range to all Title Blocks. 4.) Buildings must be numbered numerically (no letters). Also "Existing Teacher's Lounge" will need a number also. 5.) Include a north arrow on page 2. 6.) Building (s) 10A & 10B on page 1 do not match building 10 on page 2. Please correct. 7.) Add Road to Tanque Verde and avenue to Grady on page 5 Location Map. 8.) Spell out Road of Prudence. |
| 05/28/2009 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Exisitng conditions currently include provisions for refuse and recycle collection services however there is only one single enclosure, which stores the refuse container. Will require an additional single solid waste enclsoure to store the recycle container or modify the exisiting single enclosure to accommodate for both containers. 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 |
| 05/28/2009 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Desert Christian High School Development Plan (1st Review) D09-0018 TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 28, 2009 DUE DATE: June 05, 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 May 07, 2010. 2. General Note 3 states "THE CLOUDED CHANGES #1 ON THIS PLAN SUPERSEDED THE DESIGN SHOWN ON THE LAST APPROVED PLAN DATED 3/30/01. ALL OTHER AREAS ARE UNCHANGED FROM THE LAST APPROVED PLAN. Provide a copy of the approved plan dated 3/30/01. There are no clouded areas shown on the plan. 3. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2 Provide the D09-0018 development plan number in the lower right hand corner adjacent to the title block of all plans. 4. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.3 Add the subject to section to General Note 1, "Sec. 3.5.3.7 and Sec. 3.5.13.5". 5. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.10 Provide a general note stating that the project is designed to meet the overlay zone(s) criteria: Sec. 2.8.3, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone. 6. D.S. 2-05.2.3.B All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. 7. D.S. 2-05.2.3.C Label Speedway Blvd. as an MS&R. 8. D.S. 2-05.2.4.B All existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) shall be indicated on the drawing with zoning boundaries clearly defined. Provide the zoning for the parcel to the north and the parcels located across Speedway and Prudence. 9. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 There is a rectangle shown east of the "FUTURE LOCKER ROOM ADDITION" and on the most recent aerial photos the area is shown striped (loading space ??), that appears to encroach into the 24' wide parking area access lane (PAAL). Provide a dimension from the rectangle to the parking area located to the east. 10. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Per D.S. 3-05.2.2.B.3 A minimum distance of two (2) feet must be maintained between a PAAL and any wall, screen, or other obstruction, provided pedestrian activity is directed to another location. This said; The PAAL located directly adjacent to the north property is required to meet the 2'-0" setback to the property line. There is a shed shown along the east side of the PAAL along the east property line, a 2'-0" setback from the shed to the PAAL is required. 11. D.S. 2-05.2.4.I There is a setback dimension shown at the northwest corner of the property from the face of curb to Bldg. #6. Per LUC Table 3.2.6.I this setback should be shown from the back of curb. It appears that once shown correctly this building will not meet the required setback. 12. D.S. 2-05.2.4.I Once all structures are shown on the plan, see comment #19, and all required setback dimension have been added Zoning can verify if the minimum setbacks are provided to all structures on site. 13. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Per D.S. 3-05.2.2.B.1 A minimum setback distance of five (5) feet for a pedestrian refuge area must be maintained between any enclosed structure and a PAAL and per D.S. 2-08.4.1.B A sidewalk will be provided adjacent and parallel to any PAAL on the side where buildings are located. This said; A five (5) pedestrian refuge and sidewalk are required between building #5 and the PAAL located to the north. A five (5) pedestrian refuge and sidewalk are required between the northeast corner of building #8 and the PAAL located to the north. A five (5) pedestrian refuge and sidewalk are required between the east side of "FUTURE LOCKER ROOM ADDITION" and the PAAL. 14. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K There is a sidewalk shown along the north side of buildings #7 & 8. Is this proposed? Based on recent aerial photos this sidewalk does not exist. 15. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Based on the last approved plan there is a sidewalk shown along the north side of the eastern most drop off spaces. Base on recent aerial photos this is area is striped asphalt. This area is required to be a sidewalk. 16. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Based on the last approved plan there is a pedestrian circulation shown running north from Speedway Blvd to the existing buildings. Base on recent aerial photos this pedestrian circulation was not constructed per the approved plan or as shown on this development plan. 17. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Per D.S. 2-08.5.1.A The minimum width of a sidewalk is four (4) feet. Where parking vehicles overhang a sidewalk the minimum width of the side walk is six (6) foot six (6) inches. There are three (3) areas where some type of barrier is required to prevent parking vehicles from overhanging the sidewalk. The areas are; parking area adjacent to the sidewalk along the eastern drop off spaces, parking area adjacent to the sidewalk along the west side of building #7, area adjacent to the sidewalk along the north side of building #10A. 18. D.S. 2-05.2.4.M Provide, as a note, the square footage of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed. 19. D.S. 2-05.2.4.N On the drawing, show the locations and footprints of all structures. Label the heights and dimensions. This said there are numerous structures, sheds, roll off, etc., not shown on the plan. All structures will be shown on the plan. Also provided copies of the plans that approved the location of these structures as it appears that some may not meet the required perimeter yard setbacks. 20. D.S. 2-05.2.4.N Show all existing and proposed canopies, covered walkways on the plan. 21. D.S. 2-05.2.4.O Until comment #19 has been addressed Zoning cannot verify the requirements for loading spaces. 22. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Based on the last approved plan it appears that new vehicle parking is proposed. Provide a fully dimensioned parking area and/or provide a detail for an accessible and standard vehicle parking space. 23. D.S. 2-05.2.4.O Based on recent aerial photos and a site inspection the area shown as "16 BIKE POSTS, 40 BIKES ON CONC. SLAB" has a structure located in the same area. As this is proposed bicycle parking it is required to meet the requirements of the revised Development Standards 2-09.0 Review the revised standards and provided a bicycle parking detail that meets the requirements of D.S. 2-09.0. 24. Additional comments may be forth coming depending on how each comment has been addressed. 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/ D09-0016 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents. |
| 06/02/2009 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Patricia Gehlen DATE: June 2, 2009 CDRC/Zoning Manager SUBJECT: Desert Christian High Sch, 7525 E.Speedway Blvd Development Plan D09-0018 (First Review) T14S, R15E, Section 05 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Plan and Drainage Report. The Development Plan (DP) and Drainage Statement (DS) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Development Plan: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the DP. 2. As per the Federal ADA requirements, all wheel chair ramps shall have the truncated domes instead of the standard grooves that are shown on COT SD 207. Aside from the Truncated Domes, all wheel chair ramps shall be constructed in accordance with COT SD 207. The driveway on Prudence Road requires a wheel chair ramp per COT development standards. 3. Label existing and future sight visibility triangles per D.S. 2-02.2.1.10. 4. All stormwater must be directed into landscaping areas and/or retention basins prior to discharging from the site. 5. Show all points of egress and ingress including locations and width of driveways and parking area access lanes (P.A.A.L.) per D.S. 2-02.2.1.11. 6. Please label all vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian, and handicapped circulation clearly identified per D.S. 2-02.2.1.12. 7. Fully-dimensioned loading space(s) and maneuvering area(s) per D.S. 2-02.2.1.14. 8. Show the limits of the 100-year floodplain and water surface elevation per D.S. 2-02.2.1.15. This parcel is partially affected by the City of Tucson flood hazard area and should be noted on the plans. 9. Please provide Drainage patterns and finished grades per D.S. 2-02.2.1.16. 10. Please show dimensioned right-of-way, including any applicable Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan right-of-way per D.S. 2-02.2.1.19. 11. All easement of record must be graphically shown on the plan together with recording docket and page per D.S. 2-02.2.1.20. 12. Add the basin(s) maintenance responsibility note per S.M.D.D.F.M. 2.3.1.6 C 1 and 2 to the DP. 13. Dimension from street monument lines to existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, driveways, and utility lines per D.S. 2-02.2.1.21. 14. Location and orientation of existing major physical features, such as railroad tracks and drainageways per D.S. 2-02.2.1.22. 15. Please provide existing topographic contours at intervals not exceeding two (2) feet and/or spot elevations as pertinent and Bench Mark based on City of Tucson Datum, including City Field Book and page number per D.S. 2-02.2.1.23. 16. Show all fences, walls, or vegetation for screening and sight visibility by type, material, height, location and spacing per D.S. 2-02.2.1.27. 17. Show Development plan number (D09-0018) on all sheets per D.S. 2-02.2.1.29. 18. Show refuse container location, size, and access thereto fully dimensioned and detailed per D.S. 2-02.2.1.32 and D.S. 6-01.0. 19. A permit or a private improvement agreement will be necessary for any work performed within the Right-of-way. Contact Permits and Codes at (520) 791-5100 for permit information. 20. Please show a typical cross section of the P.A.A.L. or call out the percentage of slopes. Dimension all streets and access lanes. Call out the GB at the D/W, if applicable. 21. Please show the proposed roof drainage patterns, 100% of the 10-year flow must be conveyed under the sidewalks including any other site drainage as well. Please provide supporting calculations to demonstrate compliance with D.S. 3-01.4.4. If the location(s) of the roof scuppers have not yet been decided, a general note indicating sidewalk scuppers will be used when the roof scuppers locations have been designed and located will suffice. 22. List the consulting engineer and the owner/developer on the plans with the pertinent information. 23. Add note: "Depress all landscaped areas 6" maximum for water harvesting". 24. A Stormwater pollution prevention plan is required. Contact Paul P. Machado at 837-4932 for additional information. 25. "A grading permit and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP's) will be required for this project. Submit 2 sets of grading and SWPPP's with text, upon completion and submittal of a grading permit application. A grading permit may not be issued prior to DP plan approval. Subsequent comments may be necessary, depending upon the nature and extent of revisions that occur to the plans". Drainage Report: 1. Because of improvements, the length of time and changing conditions of the site since the DR was submitted by McCarty Engineering Inc., dated June, 1999, a new DR will be required. 2. A new Drainage Report is required for any site greater than one acre in size or for any site subject to detention requirements…..per S.M.D.D.F.M., chap. II, 2.1.2. 3. The content and format of the Drainage Report should follow S.M.D.D.F.M., chap. II, 2.2. 4. Addendums to any Drainage Reports and Hydrology Reports etc. are not accepted. 5. This site is subject to 5-yesr threshold retention requirements. 6. All stormwater must be directed into landscaping areas and/or retention basins prior to discharging from the site. 7. Show the project address or administration address and the DP number on the cover sheet of the DR. 8. If applicable, add the basin(s) maintenance responsibility note and checklist per S.M.D.D.F.M. 2.3.1.6 C 1 and 2 to the DR. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4932 or Paul.Machado@tucsonaz.gov Paul P. Machado Senior Engineering Associate City of Tucson/Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210 (520) 837-4932 office (520) 879-8010 fax C:/7525 E. Speedway Blvd._CDRC |
| 06/02/2009 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Patricia Gehlen DATE: June 3, 2009 CDRC/Zoning Manager SUBJECT: Desert Christ. High Sch, 7525 E. Speedway Blvd. Development Plan D09-0018 (First Review) T14S, R15E, Section 05 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Plan. The Development Plan (DP) Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Development Plan: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the DP. 2. The preceding comments are still valid and shall be addressed. 3. The DP labels all the buildings as existing. Buildings/structures that have been permitted by DSD can be shown as existing on the DP provided proper documentation (completed bldg permits) is submitted. Buildings/structures that have not been permitted and no documentation exists, shall be shown as new. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4932 or Paul.Machado@tucsonaz.gov Paul P. Machado Senior Engineering Associate City of Tucson/Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210 (520) 837-4932 office (520) 879-8010 fax C:/7525 E. Speedway Blvd._CDRC_addendum |
| 06/05/2009 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR# 211761 June 3, 2009 Krebs Carhuff Architects Attn: Philip Carhuff 3149 E. Prince Rd. #151 Tucson, AZ 85716 To Philip Carhuff : SUBJECT: Desert Christian High School D09-0018 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted May 28, 2009. 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. The customer is responsible for the new trenching to relocate them as well as the relocation cost. 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: Rich Harrington New Business Project Manager P. O. Box 711 (DB-101) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-918-8726 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 only) N. DiMaria Tucson Electric Power |
| 06/10/2009 | JWILLIA5 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES June 10, 2009 Philip Carhuff Krebs Carhuff Architects 3149 E. Prince Road Suite #151 Tucson, Arizona 85716 Subject: D09-0018 Desert Christian High School Development Plan Re-submittal Dear Philip: Your submittal of May 8, 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 a set of 8 DETAILED cover letters explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 8 Copies Revised Development Plan (H/C, WWM, Landscape, Addressing, ENV SVCS, Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Last Approved Landscape Plan (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 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) 577-4599 |