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: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D09-0034
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/02/2009 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/03/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Passed | Project is a COT owned/operated project |
| 11/03/2009 | MARTIN BROWN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | Commercial development turn-arounds should be 53'-6" outside radius (Smoot Drive) |
| 11/16/2009 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | November 10, 2009 To: JOHN C MCGANN, P.E. GLHN ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS, INC. Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________________ From: Tom Porter, representing the Pima County Departments of Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department and Environment Quality Subject: SUN TRAN BSMF - PHASE 3 Development Plan– 1st Submittal D09-034 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. Obtain a letter from the PCWMD's Development Services Section, written within the past 90 days, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for the project is available in the downstream public sewerage system and provide a copy of that letter to this office. The required form to request such a letter may be found at: http://www.pima.gov/wwm/forms/docs/CapResponseRequest.pdf. The development plan for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. Sheet 1: Revise General Note #15 to read as follows: THE ON-SITE SANITARY SEWERS, EXCEPT PUBLIC SEWERS WITHIN PUBLIC SEWER EASEMENTS OR RIGHTS-OF-WAY, WILL BE PRIVATE AND WILL BE CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED ON A PRIVATE BASIS, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN APPROVED OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN, IF REQUIRED. THE LOCATION AND METHOD OF CONNECTION TO AN EXISTING PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT. Sheet 1: Revise General Note #16 to read as follows: 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. Sheet 17 and 19: Show the IMS#’s with rim and invert elevations for all of the existing public manholes shown on plan. Also show the construction plan # for all of the existing public sewer shown on plan. Sheet 19: Show the public sewer easement with recordation information and width containing the existing public sewer south of Sun Tran Blvd. 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 $150.00 (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. |
| 11/23/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Denied | SHEET CS101 1. Where the accessible route connects to the existing parking lot from the new Maintenance Building addition, on the South side, insure a compliant marked crossing with all required markings, ramps, slopes and detectable warnings at both end of the crossing. SHEET CS102 2. The intersection of the new angled marked crossing connection from the new parking layout to the existing marked crossing leading North does not work. The connection creates a landing in the PAAL. Please angle the North end of the crossing to to the South to terminate in the island and then transition to the existing ramp and crossing to the North. SHEET CS 104 3. As per 1994 Edition ADAAG, Section 4.1.2 (5), (a), accessible parking spaces shall be provided for all employee self parking lots as per table shown in this section. Please provide additional accessible parking spaces as per the increase in parking spaces as per Additive Alternate 1 or provide explanation as to why accessible spaces were not provided. 4. Please reference clearly the large scale details provided on CD102. 5. At the revised motorcycle island and on detail 5/CD102, please provide a marked crossing at the entrance to the parking area. AT SHEET CS105 6. Please identify all accessible ramps (Curb and/or sidewalk) and show direction of slope arrow. 7. All detectable warnings are shown to be 2' wide. As per ADAAG, Section 4.29.5, all detecable warnings must be 3' wide. 8. There are several palces on the accessible route where detectable warnings have been placed that are not required by code. Please delete the detectable warnings from these areas: a. At the sidewalk extension to the existing Southerly pedestrian sidewalk paralleling the access PAAL. b. At the sidewalk extension to the existing Northerly pedestrian sidewalk next to Sun Tran Blvd. c. At the Easterly end of the zig zag walk way located North of the new admin building where it connects to the existing accessible route. d. At the North and South ends of the accessible route just in front of the three new accessible parkings spaces. 9. At the island between the loading zone and the accessible parkings spaces, there is shown a detectable warning at the rounded end. There is no indication of a ramp. Please provide a large scale detail of the area clarifing function. 10. Where the loading zone connects to the accessibe route, there are two detectable warnings shown at the North and South ends of the accessible route walkway which serve no purpose. If the walkway here is flush with the loading zone, a detectable warning strip must be added between the accessible route and the top East end of the laoding zone. 11. Note 7 refers to the installation of detectable warnings as per PC COT STD DET 207. Detail 207 is a COT DOT detail strictly for accessible construction requirements for the public right of way and may not be used for ADAAG construction code compliance inside property lines. Please delete all reference to DET 207 and provide reference to ADAAG Sections 4.1.3 (15), 4.7.7, 4.29.2 and 4.29.5 as required. SHEET CD102 12. At detail 5, the revised motorcycle island, please provide a marked crossing at the entrance to the parking area and show the marked crossing from the new parking lot accessible route. 13. At detail 4, delete all references to PC/COT DET. 207 and refrence ADAAG, Section 4.7 RAMPS. Redesign ramp for compliance including detectable warning strip. 14. At detail 2, generic details are not acceptable. Please provide a large scale detail of the exact accessible parking layout showing all dimensions, slopes, ramps, detectable warning strips, aisles, aisle access to accessible route, signage and identify "Van Accessible" spaces. Show code compliance. 15. Please provide accessible parking signage detail including "Van Accessible" signage. END OF REVIEW |
| 12/02/2009 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Sun Tran Storage Phase 3 Development Package (1st Review) D09-0034 TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 02, 2009 DUE DATE: December 03, 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 November 01, 2010. 2. D.S. 2-01.3.2.D The title block shall include the administrative street address. 3. D.S. 2-01.3.2.E Provide page number and number of pages within the title block 4. D.S. 2-01.3.3 Provide the development package number, D09-0034, adjacent to the tile block on each sheet. 5. D.S. 2-01.3.3 Provide the following relevant case numbers, D00-0056, S01-010, C12-94-16, adjacent to the tile block on each sheet. 6. D.S. 2-01.3.9.O Sheet CI001 "SETBACKS & PERIMETER YARDS) table, the required setback shown for Price St. and Sun Tran Blvd is not correct. Per LUC section 3.2.6.5.A Within established areas, the front street perimeter yard is twenty (20) feet or one and one-half (1 1/2) the height of the proposed wall (H), measured from the street property line, whichever is greater. This said based on a wall height of 31.33 the require setback should be 46.99'. 7. D.S. 2-01.3.9.O Provide a setback dimension from the proposed addition to building #5 to Price street right-of-way and from the northwest corner of proposed Building 1 to Sun Tran Blvd. right-of-way 8. D.S. 2-01.3.9.Q Provide the square footage and the height of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building(s). 9. D.S. 2-01.3.9.W If applicable show the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. 10. 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/ D09-0034 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package. CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Sun Tran Storage Phase 3 Grading Plan (1st Review) T09BU01625 TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 02, 2009 DUE DATE: December 03, 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 package has been approved. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.com RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 12/03/2009 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | December 3, 2009 D09-034 Site/Grading 1. Revise section B/CG102 to show the existing drainage way and its relation to the property line and the screen wall. Show any surface treatment such as shot crete within the drainage way. 2. Revise the FFE for the New Administration Building. The site is in a FEMA X flood hazard zone that is shaded on the FIRM. These areas are regulated under the City of Tucson floodplain ordinance. The FFE must be one foot above the highest adjacent natural grade. The contours on the plan indicate that the natural grade is approximately 2282 ft. 3. The same issue must be addressed for the New Maintenance Building. Sheet CG101 indicates a natural grade of 2288 in one area of the building and an FFE of 2287.5. 4. As noted on the plan, a Floodplain Use Permit is required for this project. The FUP must be approved before any permits are issued for this site. The plans have been reviewed for the floodplain issues. SWPPP 1. Revise and update the SWPPP to reflect this project and the current CGP. 2. The SWPPP indicates that the total area to be disturbed is nearly 21 acres which is nearly the whole site.. 3. The SWPPP indicates that it is prepared in accordance with EPA standards. The State of Arizona has been working under a primacy agreement with EPA and should be referenced in the introduction. 4. The current general permit requires a listing of the percent of impervious area before and after construction rather than run-off coefficients. 5. The SWPPP indicates that the Santa Cruz River is the immediate receiving water for the runoff from this project. Revise this to reflect the various drainage channels accepting runoff from this project. |
| 12/03/2009 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Provide the development package number, D09-0034, and relevant case numbers, D00-056, S01-010, C12-94-16, adjacent to the tile block on each sheet adjacent to the tile block on each sheet of the development plan, Including the cover sheet of landscape plan D.S. 2-01.3.3. 2. Ensure that all the changes to development plan relevant to Zoning & Engineering comments are reflected on Landscape plans as well. |
| 12/04/2009 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES December 4, 2009 Manuel Ellsworth City of Tucson 2939 E. Broadway Blvd. Tucson, Arizona 85716 Subject: D09-0034 Sun Tran Bus Storage Facility Development Package Dear Manuel: Your submittal of October 30, 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 (Fire, Wastewater, ADA, Zoning, Landscape, Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised SWPPP (Engineering, PDSD) 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) |