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 - D09-0034
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/29/2010 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 02/02/2010 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 02/10/2010 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approved | February 3, 2010 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– 2nd 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. The Pima County Department of Environmental Quality and Wastewater Management Department hereby approve the above referenced submittal of the development plan as submitted. 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. |
| 02/17/2010 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Sun Tran Storage Phase 3 Development Package (2nd Review) D09-0034 TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 17, 2010 DUE DATE: March 01, 2010 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. The Zoning Review Section conditionally approves the development package for this project, subject to the following changes on the sign-off copies. However, should there be any changes requested by other CDRC members, the Zoning Review Section approval is void, and we request copies of the revised development package to verify that those changes do not affect any zoning requirements. 2. This comment was not addressed correctly. Based on the Sheet Index there should be 45 sheets total. This said each sheet should show X of 45 not X of 22 and X of 15. D.S. 2-01.3.2.E Provide page number and number of pages within the title block 3. D.S. 2-01.3.9.O Per Glenn Moyer, Planning Administrator, the use of both developing area and developed area street perimeter yard setbacks is not allowed. For the purposes of this project developing area perimeter yard setbacks will be used. Revised the "SETBACKS & PERIMETER YARDS" table to reflect developed area street perimeter yard setbacks and provide a dimension from the proposed maintenance building addition to the back of curb along Price Street. Zoning acknowledges that the building will meet setbacks. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.com |
| 02/22/2010 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Denied | RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS: COMMENT 1: A. As per ADAAG Sections 3.4 and 4.29.5, a detectable warning must be placed as indicated in previous comments. Please add a detectable warning at the new accessible route connection to the existing marked crossing. COMMENT 2: NON-RESPONSIVE A. Please relocate the angled marked crossing to the south sisde of the island, provide a new curb ramp and then connect to the marked crossing heading North. CONMMENT 3. A. It is not apparent that a new accessible parking space was added. Please identify the added space on the drawings and provide all required access asiles, curb ramps and detectable warnings as required. COMMENT 8: A. Pleasde refer to Section 3.5 for the defination of a Detectable Warning and Section 4.29.5 for the required placement of a detectable warning. Detectable warnings are elements that are used to warn visually impared persons of impending hazardous vehicle areas for any path way (including curb ramps, sidewalk ramps or flush acessible routes to vehicle way paving) that lead to hazardous areas. Sidewalk ramps that are a continuation of of the accessible route and do not lead to a vehicle area are not required to have detectable warnings. B. All the areas identified in comments 8a, 8b, 8c and 8d are sidewalk ramps not leading to hazardous areas. Placement of detectable warnings where show would confuse a visually impared person into thinking they are headed into a hazardous area when in fact they are not. COMMENT 10: A. The dectectable warning shown at the bottom of the sidewalk ramp just North of the loading zone has the same problem of not leading to a hazarous area. Please remove this detectable warning and place one at the flush curb edge of the loading zone access to the accessible route. B. As per ADAAG, Section 4.29.5, if a walk adjoins a vehicular way and no separation is indicated between the two, the boundary must be defined by a continous detectable warning. COMMENT 12: A. Please insure that the existing curb ramp that the new marked crossing is attached has a detectable warning. COMMENT 13: B. Please clarify the functional use of the curb ramp located at the end of the rounded island. COMMENT 15: A. The mounting height to the bottom of the main sige is to be 7'-0" a.f.f. as per COT DOT standards. B. The main sign is missing the "FINE" assesment. END OF REVIEW |
| 02/22/2010 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 02/22/2010 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/26/2010 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | February 26, 2010 D09-0034 The Engineering Division recommends approval of this development package. Loren Makus, EIT Senior Engineering Associate |
| 03/01/2010 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES March 1, 2010 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 3 sets of the DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 3 Copies Revised Development Package (ADA, Zoning, 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: NA; emailed to Mellswor@glhn.com |