Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D10-0008
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/10/2010 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 02/10/2010 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | Not a COT owned/operated property |
| 02/10/2010 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Passed | |
| 02/11/2010 | DAVID MANN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 02/17/2010 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | >>> Douglas Kratina <DKratina@azdot.gov> 02/16/2010 12:24 PM >>> Regional Traffic No objections or adverse comments from Traffic Engineering on this submittal. The development will not affect any ADOT facilities. Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are intended for use by the person(s)/entity(ies) named above and may contain confidential/privileged information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by email, and delete or destroy all copies plus attachments. . |
| 02/18/2010 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | 201 N. STONE AV., 2ND FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 AUDREY FARENGA ADDRESSING REVIEW PH #: 740-6800 FAX #: 623-5411 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: AUDREY FARENGA, ADDRESSING REVIEW SUBJECT: D10-0008 TUCSON MERCEDES BENZ/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 02/18/10 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. Correct sections on the Location Plan. 2. Delete E. from Tanque Verde Road on the Location Plan. 3. Change Pima Street to Paseo Dorado on the Location Plan. 4. Change 36/45 to 30/45 on the Location Plan. 5. Number the buildings, no letters. |
| 02/23/2010 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: February 23, 2010 SUBJECT: Tucson Mercedes Benz Development Plan- Engineering Review TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: 6350 E Grant Road, T14S R15E Sec06, Ward 2 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: D10-0008 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning Development Services Department has received the proposed development plan, Drainage Statement (Baker & Associates Engineering, Inc., 29JAN10) and Geotechnical Investigation Report (Forsee & Vann, Inc., 13MAR09). Engineering Division has reviewed the submitted development plan and does not recommend approval at this time. The following items need to be addressed: DRAINAGE STATEMENT: 1) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.6.A.1: Revise the discussion of the Drainage Statement to correctly state that the project watershed has been designated as a non-designated Basin per the Rose Hill Wash Basin Management Plan and describe how this designation affects the site design (i.e. non-designated basin, commercial, greater than 1 acre therefore 5 year retention is required). Post discharge values can not increase from existing for commercial development larger than 1 acre. 2) The subject property is within a non-designated basin per the Balanced and Critical Basin Management Plan Study. Per the Detention Retention Basin Manual Section 10-01.1.4 threshold retention is required for all commercial development larger than 1 acre in size. It is acknowledged by the City of Tucson Floodplain Manager that the existing parcel is 100 % impervious and with the addition of the required landscape areas the proposed improvements should not increase or decrease the existing flows. Revise the statement and hydrology calculations to show the correct percent imperviousness for proposed construction and verify that the post discharge values do not increase. Or provide a retention basin with retention calculations that meet the requirements of 10-01. DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 3) Revise the Development Plan and Detail Sheets (along with any references in the Keynotes) so that all details are provided with a separate reference number/letter or other corresponding reference system for clarity purposes. Example is DP-4 Detail 4 is for a rolling gate and DP-5 Detail 4 is for a typical entry section. 4) DS Sec.2-05.2.1.K: The correct Development Plan number (D10-0008) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan sheets where indicated by "D0____." 5) DS Sec.2-05.2.2.D.1: Revise General Note #4 on the Development Plan to correct the typographical error. The wording should read "Parking Area Access Lane" not "Private." 6) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.A: Provide the site boundary information, including bearing in degrees, minutes and seconds with basis of bearing noted, together with distance in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system. 7) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.B: Revise the Development Plan to label and delineate the existing 15-foot wide TEP easement. Per the civil sheet a portion of this easement is to be abandoned. Provide the delineation of the easement that is to remain and provide the recordation information (docket and page) for the abandonment. All easements that are to be abandoned or created must provide the recordation information prior to approval. 8) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C: Revise the Development Plan to clarify the existing right-of-way for Wilmot Road. Label the 38-foot right-of-way as existing to clarify the future 50-foot right-of-way line. 9) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C: Revise the Development Plan to label Wilmot and Grant Roads as Public/ MS&R streets. 10) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.E: It is recommended that the Benchmark Section be revised to indicate the datum reference used, i.e. NGVD29 or NAVD88. 11) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.F: Revise the Development Plan to clearly label the improvement plan number for all existing storm drainage facilities that are shown adjacent to the site. 12) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.1: Refer to Tucson Department of Transportation comments for right-of-way improvements. Specifically the required 25-foot curb return for the eastern most PAAL entrance from Grant Road. Verify that the minimum space between adjacent driveways per the Transportation Access Management Guidelines has been addressed. For further information contact the Tucson Department of Transportation, Jose Ortiz, P.E. at 837-6730. 13) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.1: Refer to Tucson Department of Transportation comments regarding the existing bus bay along Grant Road. Verify if TDOT is requiring a bus pull out to be constructed under the PIA. For further information contact the Tucson Department of Transportation, Jose Ortiz, P.E. at 837-6730. 14) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.1: Revise the Development Plan to clearly label the minimum distances required from all proposed driveway entrances to existing street lights, catch basins and any applicable fire hydrants. 15) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.1: Revise the Development Plan and Sheet DP-2 to label Keynote #25 at the existing driveway entrance along Grant Road that is required to be closed off. All driveways that are to be abandoned must be closed off to prevent access. 16) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Revise the Development Plan to clearly label the minimum 24-foot PAAL width at all PAAL intersections and gate locations. If the PAAL is less than 24-foot in width and used as a 1-way access aisle clearly delineate in plan view. 17) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.3: Revise the Development Plan to clarify the minimum height requirement for the PAAL adjacent to the Customer Service Drop Off area. The roof overhang is within the 24-foot PAAL width and must provide a minimum 15-foot clear height for access. 18) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.G: Verify the location of all proposed utilities and provide any applicable easements for sewer, electric, water, gas, if applicable. 19) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.K: Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for any handicap accessibility comments that may be associated with this project. 20) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.L: Revise the Development Plan and details to label and dimension the required 6-foot wide sidewalk along Wilmot and Grant Road. Per the adopted Mayor and Counsel policy all sidewalks along MS&R right-of-ways for arterial and collector streets require 6-foot wide sidewalks. All sidewalks must comply with ADA accessibility requirements. If an existing 4-5 foot sidewalk is already constructed along the frontages provide photo documentation showing that the existing sidewalk is in good condition. If the sidewalk is missing in spots or is cracked and buckled a new 6-foot sidewalk will be required. A DSMR will be required for modifying the development standards to allow the existing sidewalk, if less than the minimum 6-foot required, to remain. The DSMR must be approved prior to Development Plan approval. All exhibits and discussion must reflect any changes made by the approved DSMR. Provide a General Note to list the DSMR number, the Development Standard being modified along with the date of DSMR approval. 21) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.O: Label the required bollards around the proposed electrical transformer adjacent to the loading zone. Bollards are required to prevent damage to the transformer. 22) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.T: Verify on the Development Plan the required minimum vertical height restriction at the proposed refuse enclosure. Verify the minimum vertical height for the 14-foot x40-foot clear approach since it falls underneath the proposed roof top parking structure. GRADING PLAN: 23) DS Sec.11-01.2.1: A grading permit will be required for this project due to the size of the development. A grading plan and a grading permit application will be required after Development Plan approval and prior to any construction activity. A grading permit may not be issued prior to Development Plan approval. 24) Please ensure that any future grading plan will be consistent with the Development Plan and Drainage Statement. Grading standards may be accessed at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf 25) Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) requirements are applicable to this project due to the proposed acreage of disturbed area. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) and text addressing stormwater controls for all areas affected by construction activities related to this development will be required with a grading plan submittal. For further information, visit www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan and Drainage Statement that address the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the Development Plan and Drainage Statement reviews. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Planning & Development Services |
| 02/25/2010 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | February 24, 2010 To: BRB ARCHTIECT, INC. BARRY BARCUS 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: TUCSON MERCEDES BENZ (6350 E GRANT ROAD) Development Plan– 1st Submittal D10-0008 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 PCRWRD’s Development Liaison Unit, written within the past year, 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: 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. Sheet 1: Revise General Note #12 to read as follows: THE ON-SITE SANITARY SEWERS 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 3: Is there a reason why you are not connecting into the existing MH # 6172-01 instead of the proposed manhole as shown? Also are you planning to abandon the existing connection? Can the existing connection be used instead of the proposed 6” line? Sheet 3: Show on plan the proposed BCS connection for the proposed building. Sheet 3: Show the size of the existing private sewer line and clarify where the existing line ends in the NE corner of the parcel. Sheet 3: The proposed connection to the 18” line will need to be approved by PCRWRD Engineering and Planning Department. Please contact Mr. Chad Amateau with PCRWRD @(520)740-6547 to get approval of the proposed connection before your next submittal. 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. |
| 02/25/2010 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#221500 February 24, 2010 Dear Marty Bae : SUBJECT: Tucson Mercedes Benz D10-0008 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted February 17, 2010. 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. All relocation costs will be billable to the customer. 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: Richard Harrington New Business Project Manager P. O. Box 711 (DB-101) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-917-8726 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 City of Tucson (Email only) cc:N. DiMaria |
| 03/02/2010 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | March 2, 2010 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D10-0008 PROJECT NAME: Tucson Mercedes Benz PROJECT ADDRESS: 6350 E Grant Road PROJECT REVIEWER: Jose E. Ortiz PE, Traffic Engineer Resubmittal Required: Traffic Engineering does not recommend approval of the Development Plan; therefore a revised Development Plan is required for re-submittal. The following items must be revised or added to the development plan. 1. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. 2. A RTA Intersection Improvement project for the Wilmot Road/Pima Street intersection has been approved and is currently in design. The improvements will include an additional left turn lane for northbound Wilmot Road at Pima Street. The final configuration of the intersection will include a dual left from Wilmot Road to westbound Pima Street increasing left turn volumes capacity at this intersection. An informal in-house study was conducted to forecast trip distributions at this intersection and surrounding intersections (including Grant/Wilmot). The study demonstrated an increase in northbound left turn movements at Wilmot and Pima resulting in an increase of left turn movements at Wilmot and Grant as well. In an effort to maximize left turn queuing for the projected increase of left turn movements at the Grant/Wilmot intersection the proposed northern driveway along Wilmot Road (Tucson Mercedes Benz project) will need to be located further south to align with the existing driveway on the westside of Wilmot Road. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-6730 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 03/04/2010 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | SHEET DP-1 of 5 1. Accessible Route Notes: a. ANSI 406 does call for a minimum 3' wide however, Zoning requires a minimum of 4' wide. Please reference Zoning comments and correct sheet note as required. b. Delete in it's entirety, the note referencing ADAAG. All private construction work is governed by the 2006 IBC and all accessibility requirements are to be as per Chapter 11 and ICC (ANSI) 117.1. SHEET DP-2 OF 5 2. At the main entrance accessible route entrance curb ramp and detail 7/DP-4: a. Delete all references to ADA, ADAAG and refer all accessibility code requirements to the 2006 IBC, Chapter 11 and ICC (ANS) 117.1 and respective sections that apply to the same situations referenced. b. As per ANSI 117.1, Section 406.12, the detectable warnings need be only 2' deep, not the full depth of the ramp. 3. At the North end of the accesible route leading to the main entrance and detail 6 DP-4: a. Delete all references to ADA, ADAAG and refer all accessibility code requirements to the 2006 IBC, Chapter 11 and ICC (ANS) 117.1 and respective sections that apply to the same situations referenced. b. As per ANSI 117.1, Section 406.12, the detectable warnings need be only 2' deep, not 3' as required by ADAAG. c. Change the 1:20 slope max to 1:12 maximum. 4. At the front entrance accessible parking and detail 8/DP-5, please provide concrete wheel stops and reference comment number 2 above. 5. Please provide one accessible parking space in the Customer Service Pickup Parking Area. 6. At the marked crossing leading to the Wilmot Road public right of way: Same as Comment 3 above. 7. At the four employee parking spaces and details 7 and 8 DP-5: a. The striped accessible route will probably be required by zoning to be concrete. Reference Zoning comments. b. Extend the accessible route to connect the two accessible parking groups. c. Insure door clearance at both entrance doors off this accessible route comply with ICC (ANSI), Section 404. SHEET DP-4 OF 5 8. At detail 9, the mounting height of the main sign is to be 7' from finished grade to the bottom of the sign as per COT DOT standards. END OF REVIEW |
| 03/10/2010 | FRODRIG2 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | Due Date Case Number Project Address February 10, 2010 D10-008 Tucson Mercedes Benz Comments: Approved Development Plan |
| 03/11/2010 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: D10-0008 Tucson Mercedes Benz Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: 03/11/2010 DUE DATE: 03/11/10 COMMENTS: 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 02/09/11. 2. DS 2-05.2.2.A.1 List the name, address, and telephone number of the developer of this project. If the owner is the developer state such. 3. DS 2-05.2.2.B.1 List as a general note: "Existing zoning is C-2." 4. DS 2-05.2.2.B.2 The case number D10-0008 has been assigned to this project. Place the case number in the lower right corner or in that vicinity of all sheets. 5. DS 2-05.2.2.B.3 List the proposed use as follows: "Vehicle Rental and Sales "31", subject to: Sec. 3.5.9.5.A and .B" 6. DS 2-05.2.2.B.10 In general note #17, remove the portion "Section 2.8.2", this applies to SCZ which is not applicable to this project. 7. DS 2-05.2.3.B If applicable, provide recording information, location, width and purpose of all existing and proposed easements. 8. DS 2-05.2.4.A Provide distance and bearings of all property lines on the development plan. Clearly indicate the proposed new property line along Wilmot. It appears that a right of way dedication is proposed. Clearly indicate the area to be dedicated and provide recording docket and page information on the plan. 9. DS 2-05.2.4.D.3 Provide the widths of all PAALs. Missing at entrances from Wilmot and east entrance from Grant Rd The proposed gates per keynote #6 at the entrances from Wilmot may be required to provide a turn around. Contact Jose Ortiz with traffic engineering for clarification. Provide documentation from traffic engineering if the turn arounds are not required. The key note #6 references the wrong detail. Revise. Per DS 3-05.2.2.B A minimum distance of one (1) foot must be maintained between any open structure, such as a carport, and a PAAL. The one (1) foot setback is conditioned upon the pedestrian way(s) being designed at a location other than between the open structure and the PAAL. The distance is measured to the closest part of the structure, i.e., a roof overhang. This setback will apply to the canopy cover over the service customer pickup parking spaces. Per DS 3-05.2.1.4.a The minimum height clearance for access along PAALs is fifteen (15) feet. The height is needed for high-profile vehicles, such as sanitation, fire, or delivery vehicles. Clearly indicate the vertical clearance a bove the PAAL in the customer service drop-off canopy and the area under Building "B" for the employee parking area. 10. DS 2-05.2.4.F Clearly indicate the location of the future right of way for Wilmot Rd (show as a property line because of dedication) and future curb location for both Wilmot and Grant Rd. 11. DS 2-05.2.4.K Clearly indicate the width of all pedestrian circulation paths (sidewalks). Minimum clearance width of 4' is required. Per DS 2-08.4.1.B A sidewalk will be provided adjacent to any parking space accessed by a PAAL where the space is located on the same side of the PAAL as any building. Required at the employee parking spaces along the east side of the main building, the two parking spaces near the tires and battery portion of the main building, at the northern handicap parking spaces within the employee parking Per DS 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. This area must be clearly delineated by striping. Required on both the east and west sides of the proposed carwash and detailing building and along the south side of the proposed main building. 12. DS 2-05.2.4.N On the drawing, label the heights and dimension the footprints of all structures. 13. DS 2-05.2.4.O Per LUC Sec. 3.4.5 and 3.4.5.3 the number of required 12x35 loading zones required for a Retail Use with a GFA of between 60,001 and 100,000 is four (4). Provide the corrected number of required and provided loading zones in the calculations and revise the plans to indicate the correct number of loading zones. Clearly demonstrate maneuverability in and out of the north portion of the trash enclosure. It appears the column for building B interferes with maneuverability. 14. DS 2-05.2.4.P Provide a dimensioned detail of both a standard and handicap parking space. Per DS 3-05.2.1.C.1 & .2 1. A vehicular use area must be provided with post barricades or wheel stop curbing designed to prevent parked vehicles from extending beyond the property lines; damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings; or overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas or unpaved areas on or off site and to prevent vehicles from driving onto unimproved portions of the site. The parking spaces locate within the service customer pickup will be required to have wheel stops. 2. When wheel stop curbing is used, it is to be located two and one-half (2½) feet from the front of the parking space. (See Figure 5.) Clearly indicate location on the details for the parking spaces. 15. DS 2-05.2.4.Q The number of required bicycle parking spaces is based on the number of provided vehicle parking spaces not on the number of required parking spaces. The number of required class one bicycle parking spaces based on 139 parking spaces provided is six (6). Revise calculations and provide on the plan. 16. DS 2-05.2.4.R Provide the location of the future sight visibility triangles. Any object or structure greater than 30" in height will not be allowed within the future sight visibility triangle. It appears the indicated monument sign and the 6' screen wall along Wilmot Rd. may be inside of the triangle and would not be allowed. 17. DS 2-05.2.4.T Clearly demonstrate maneuverability in and out of the north portion of the trash enclosure. It appears the column for building B interferes with maneuverability. 18. DS 2-05.2.4.V Please indicate the location and type of postal service to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements. If mail is to be delivered to an area within a building please state so on the plan. 19. DS 2-05.2.4.W Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, freestanding, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Also indicate if there are existing billboards on site. Billboards will be required to meet all LUC requirements as stated in LUC Sec. 3.5.4.26. If none exists please state so. 20. Provide on the first sheet the allowed FAR as well as the provided FAR. Remove the lot coverage verbiage as it is not required. 21. If a DDO is applied for and approved, provide on the plan the DDO case number in the lower right corner and provide as a general note the DDO case number, date of approval, what the DDO is for, and any conditions of approval. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 837-4961 TLS C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D10-0008dp.doc |
| 03/11/2010 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Include the Native Plant Inventory on the same sheet as the Native Plant Preservation Plan Aerial Photo. 2) Include the following summary table on the Native Plant Preservation Plan , assuming Cereus giganteus is the only protected plant per LUC 3.8.5. on the site. Viable plants 1 PIP 0 TOS 1 Mit. 1 3) Coordinate the parking calculations on LS-1 with DP-1. 4) Per LUC 3.7.2.4 provide canopy trees every 33 feet for the street landscape borders. Palm trees are not counted toward this requirement per LUC 6.2.3. 5) Provide a 30" high screen along the street frontage where parking or display areas are adjacent per LUC 3.7.3. 6) Per LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1, every parking space (not display area) shall be located within forty (40) feet of the trunk of a canopy tree. Revise as necessary. 7) An opportunity exists in the planting area adjacent to the customer service drop off area to take advantage of the oasis provisions of LUC 3.7.2.2.C.3, due to the shade conditions and favorable location per DS 2-06.3.2.B. 8) Revise the street landscape border calculations on LS-1. It appears that the specific titles are misplaced (the west and east buffer yard information). |
| 03/11/2010 | JANE DUARTE | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | |
| 03/11/2010 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D10-0008 Tucson Mercedes Benz 3/11/10 () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other - Elevations CROSS REFERENCE: C9-93-27 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 3/11/10 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 FLD, No Comment () Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions () RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies (X) Resubmittal Required - See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: REVIEWER: JBeall 791-5505 DATE: 3/11/10 Comments 1. Please reference and list Rezoning Conditions from C9-93-27 on Sheet DP-1 of 5. |
| 03/15/2010 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES March 15, 2010 Anthony Villarreal Baker & Assoc Engineering 3561 E. Sunrise Dr. # 225 Tucson, Arizona 85718 Subject: D10-0008 Tucson Mercedes Benz Development Plan Dear Anthony: Your submittal of February 10, 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 9 DETAILED cover letters explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 9 Copies Revised Development Plan (Addressing, Engineering, Wastewater, Traffic, Zoning HC, Planning, Landscape, Zoning, PDSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Engineering, Planning, Landscape, Zoning, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Statement (Engineering, PDSD) 1 Check Made out to "Pima County Treasurer" for $ 100.00 (Wastewater) 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) 318-1930 |
| 03/15/2010 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 03/15/2010 | JWILLIA4 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Passed | |
| 03/15/2010 | JWILLIA4 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved |