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 - D10-0001
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/27/2010 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 04/28/2010 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approv-Cond | Please add note to plan indicating fire sprinklers will be installed. |
| 05/04/2010 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | The site plan and landscape plan must show identical site layout to avoid conflict between the two plans. Landscape must check Mylar's prior to approval stamp. |
| 05/11/2010 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: GEO-WRAP Solutions Development Plan (3rd Review) D10-0001 TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 11, 2010 DUE DATE: May 25, 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 plan 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 plan to verify that those changes do not affect any zoning requirements. 2. The proposed backup spurs located at the east and west end of the parking area need to meet the requirements of D.S. 3-05.2.2.D A minimum distance of three (3) feet will be provided between the back of spur and the property line. 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/ D10-0001 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan & copy of the last approved development plan or site plan. |
| 05/17/2010 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approved | May 14, 2010 To: STEVE CORRALES ENGINEERING CORP. CHARLES CORRALES 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 Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department and Environment Quality Subject: GEO-WRAP SOLUTIONS (2820 E FORT LOWELL) Development Plan– 3rd Submittal D10-0001 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. |
| 05/19/2010 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 05/19/2010, TO: Patricia Gehlen FROM: Laith Alshami, P.E. CDRC Engineering SUBJECT: Carbon-Wrap (formerly Geo-Wrap) Solutions D10-0001, T13S, R14E, SECTION 32 Ref. S07-082 RECEIVED: Development Plan and Landscape Plan on April 27, 2010 The subject submittal has been reviewed and it can not be approved at this time. Address the following comments before review can continue. Prepare a detailed response that explains the revisions that were made and references the exact location in the drainage report and on the Development Plan where the revisions were made: Drainage Report: The proposed work appears to be at least 25% expansion, which requires the entire site to be brought up to code. Consequently, the following is required: 1. Provide a drainage exhibit that shows all drainage patterns, solutions, structures, existing and proposed grades, roof drainage, waterharvesting areas, etc. Additionally, Development Plan: 1. (D.S. 2-05.2.2.C.2.b) Since this project is affected by Christmas Wash regulatory floodplain, a floodplain use permit and finished floor elevation certificates are required. Submit a floodplain use permit application with the next submittal. 2. Provide a detail that clearly shows the separation between the proposed building and the existing building. 3. (D.S. 2-05.2.3.B) It is not clear where the electric easement is located. Provide additional information to help locate the easement on the plan. 4. It is not clear where Footnotes D and E are shown on the plan. Revise as necessary. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Development Plan, and Drainage Report |
| 05/24/2010 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | 1. SUBMITTAL COMMENTS: OK 2. At the accessible parking aisle, the ramp shown is not compliable. Please provide a curb ramp in the sidewalk area as per ANSI, Section 406 and figure 406.3. The detectable warning strip is to be at the bottop of this ramp. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS: 2A. NON RESPONSIVE. SITE PLAN SHEET D1, AND ALL DETAILS SHOWING THE RAMP IN THE PARKING AISLE ARE NONCOMPLIANT. REVISE THE RAMP TO BE I9N THE SIDEWALK AND COMPLIANT WITH ICC (ANSI 117.1) SECTION 406.3. NON-RESPONSIVE: DETAIL 207 IS FOR COT DOT ACCESSIBLE CONSTRUCTION IN THE RIGHT OF WAY AND IS NOT COMPLIANT WITH ANSI 117.1. 3. Please show diagonial 4" painted stripes at the parking aisle and the marked crossing all the way to the Northerly curb line. The slope for the marked crossing is to comply with ICC (ANSI) 117.1, Section 403.3. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS 3A. NON RESPONSIVE PARTIAL RESPONSIVE: PLEASE PROVIDE THE DIAGONIAL STRIPS IN THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING ROUTE LAYOUT DETAIL SHOWN ON SHEET 2. 4. Provide an opening in the screen wall. Start a curb ramp, maximum slope 1:12, without flared sides and a detectable warning at the bottom of the ramp at this opening. Extend side walk to the existing public right of way pedestrian walkway. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS: 4A. THE SECTION THROUGH THE RAMP IS NOT COMPLIANT. PLEASE PROVIDE A CURB THAT IS COMPLIANT WITH ICC (ANSI 117.1), SECTION 406.3 AND FIGURE 406.3 IF THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY SIDEWAY IS FLUSH WITH THE PARKING LOT PLEASE INDICATE SUCH. 5. Provide a detail of the accessible parking sign including a "Van Accessible" attachment. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS 5A THE BOTTOM OF THE LARGE SIGN IS TO BE 7' ABOVE FINISHED GRADE AS PER DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS. NON-RESPONSIVE 6. That are a couple detail notes that refer to std detail 207. This is a COT DOT detail used strictly for right of way accessible construction and is not in compliance with the 2006 IBC Chapter 11 and ICC (ANSI) 117.1 Please delete all references to detail 207. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS 6A. REFERENCE THE TITLE REFERENCE OF THE "HC RAMP DETAIL, TYP". NON-RESPONSIVE: THIS DETAIL IS NOT COMPLIANT WITH 2006 IBC ICC (ANSI 117.1 2003) STANDARDS. PLEASE DELETE AND REDESIGN THE RAMP TO COMPLY. 7. That are a couple detail notes that refer to ADA. This project is governed by the 2006 IBC which ultlizes ICC (ANSI) 117.1, 2003 Edition. Please delete all references to ADA. RESUBMITTAL COMMENTS 7A. REFERENCE THE MARKED CROSSING NOTE AT THE DETAIL TITLED "ROUTE ACCESSIBLE PARKING LAYOUT". NON-RESPONSIVE RESUBMITTRAL COMMENTS ADDITIONAL NOTES: 8. SHEET D1, NOTE "E": REMOVE ALL REFERENCE TO COT STANDARD DETAILS AND REFERENCE THE APPROPRIATE ICC (ANSI 117.1) SECTION. NON-RESPONSIVE END OF SECOND RESUBMITTAL REVIEW |
| 05/25/2010 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES May 25, 2010 Charles Corrales Steve Corrales Engineering Corporation 1008 W. St. Mary's Road Tucson, Arizona 85745 Subject: D10-0001 Geo-Wrap Solutions Development Plan Dear Charles: Your submittal of January 11, 2010 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 4 DETAILED cover letters explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 4 Copies Revised Development Plan (Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Last Approved DP or Site Plan (Zoning, PDSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4917. 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) 622-2554 |