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 - D10-0022
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/01/2010 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/02/2010 | MARTIN BROWN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | Fire Comments: 1. Show location of gate from SPRR for emergency turn around. 2. A wet standpipe is required for the parking garage phase of the project. A 8 inch service is shown but with no note. |
| 07/02/2010 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Passed | This project is a COT owned property. |
| 07/14/2010 | JWILLIA4 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | Due Date Case Number Project Address June 30, 2010 D10-0022 Plaza Centro Garage Development Plan Comments: Approved Environmental Services Department Development Plan Review Reviewer: Tony Teran Office Phone (520) 837-3706 E-mail: Tony.Teran @tucsonaz.gov |
| 07/20/2010 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Plaza Centro Development Package (1st Review) D10-0022 TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 20, 2009 DUE DATE: July 23, 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 package. If, at the end of that time, the development package 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 June 30, 2011 2. This development package was reviewed for compliance with the City of Tucson Development Standards (D.S.) and Land Use Code (LUC) for full code compliance. 3. Applications for projects within the Rio Nuevo and Downtown (RND) Zone shall be reviewed in accordance with the Administrative Design Review Procedures, 23A-32. The application must include a Design Context and Compatibility Report in conformance with Development Standard 9-10.2.0. Applications shall be subject to the following level of review. Major Project Design Review. Applications which have completed the major review process which shall be reviewed to verify incorporation into the final plans and drawings the preliminary findings and recommendations of the Development Review Board (DRB) rendered in the major review. Once the DRB is completed provide the DRB number date of approval and any conditions of approval on the plan. 4. The proposed project shows "FUTURE RETAIL AREA 1ST FLOOR". Either remove the "FUTURE RETAIL AREA 1ST FLOOR" from the plan or provide phase lines and phase calculations that show how each phase will meet the LUC and D.S. requirements. The following comments are based on the Development Package Submittal Requirements: 5. Provide the following information for the Consultant Team on sheet 1 of the development package: a. Firm, Contact, Phone, Address and email address. 6. The total number of sheets, X of 5, does not appear to be correct. As this is a development package the total number of sheet should include, site, grading, landscape, SWPP. 7. The Sheet Index shown on sheet one should include all sheets of the development package. 8. For your information a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPP) may be required and should be submitted with the development package. The following comments are based on the assumption that all lot split/reconfiguration issues have been addressed. 9. D.S. 2-01.3.2.D Provide an administrative street address on the within the title block on all sheets. 10. D.S. 2-01.3.7.6.b add "2.8.10 RIO NUEVO AND DOWNTOWN (RND)" to General Note 10. 11. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.9.a Provide the floor area for each floor of the parking garage. 12. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.9.b The floor area ratio (FAR) calculation is not correct. As the parking garage is the principle use all floor area of the garage is part of the FAR, see LUC Section 3.2.11. 13. D.S. 2-01.3.8.B If applicable all existing easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. 14. D.S. 2-01.3.9.E There appears to be some type of lot split/reconfiguration planned for this project that includes the addition of right-of-way. Until the lot split/reconfiguration has been approved by the City of Tucson Zoning will be unable to approve the development package. 15. D.S. 2-01.3.9.F 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. That said provide the zoning for the parcels to the east and west of this project. 16. D.S. 2-01.3.9.G If the project is to be phased, provide calculations, setbacks, etc., to indicate that each phase complies with all requirements as a separate entity. Show phase lines on the drawing. Show and label any temporary improvements that may be needed to make the site function for each phase as one entity. See comment 4 above. 17. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.2 Show future and existing sight visibility triangles. On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section. 18. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5 There appears to be two (2) one-way entrance or exit parking area access lanes (PAALs) along the south side of the garage structure. Clarify what they are and show how they will connect to the street. Per LUC Section 3.3.7.2 the minimum width for a one-way PAAL is 12'. 19. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5 The following comments are in regards to the proposed 20' fire lane shown along the north side of the property. a. 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. Show the refuge area along the north side of the parking structure. b. Per D.S. 3-05.2.2.B.2 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. That said based on detail 5 sheet 5 a two (2) foot setback will be required along the north property line. c. Per D.S. 3-05.23.C.1 Some type of barrier is required to prevent vehicles from driving onto unimproved portions of the site. That said some type of barrier is required along the north property line to prevent vehicles from accessing the railroad right-of-way (ROW). 20. D.S. 2-01.3.9.L All proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. 21. 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). 22. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Per D.S. 2-08.3.1 Within all development, a continuous pedestrian circulation path is required. The path must connect all public access areas of the development and the pedestrian circulation path locate in any adjacent streets. That said provided a sidewalk to 4th Avenue. 23. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R There is a 'NEW 5' WIDE ACCESSIBLE PATH" shown on sheet 2. Identify what type of material the path will be constructed of on the development plan. 24. 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/ D10-0022 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan & copy of the last approved development plan or site plan. CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Plaza Centro Development Package (1st Review) T10BU01053 TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 20, 2009 DUE DATE: July 23, 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 |
| 07/20/2010 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Denied | SHEET 1 of 5 1. Please insert ADAAG for all accessibility requirements in the list of Codes and Standards in the General Notes on sheet 1. 2. Generic details are not acceptable. Please provide large scale details of each different layout of accessible parking as per the floor plan design. b. The parking signage is to be located outside of the the 18' deep parking area. c. Please show the signage on all floor plans. SHEET 2 3. Please provide a curb ramp and 2' wide detectable warning strip at the top the accessible parking aisle. SHEET 3 2ND FLOOR PLAN 4. Please provide a 3' wide detectable warning strip paralleling the front of the two accessible parking spaces and three regular spaces just on the edge of the front end of the parking spaces and accessible parking aisle. 5. Please provide a 3' wide detectable warning strip in front of the two standard parking spaces located in the South East corner, turn the corner at the marked aisle and line the West and North ends of the marked aisle to the curb of the ramp. THIRD FLOOR PLAN 6. Ditto 2nd level floor plan but extend the detectable to all areas accessible that are flush with the parking spaces. FORTH FLOOR PLAN 7. Ditto 3rd floor plan. GENERAL COMMENTS 8. All detectable warnings are to be positioned in the accessible route just on the edge of the parking area and are to be compliant with ADAAG, Section 4.29.5. 9. Provide dimensions of all accessible parkings spaces on all floor plans. 10. Locate accessible parking signs on all floor plans. END OF REVIEW |
| 07/23/2010 | ELIZABETH LEIBOLD | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Marty Magelli, PE SUBJECT: Plaza Centro Development Package Engineering Review ADDRESS: 345 E CONGRESS ST FLOODPLAIN STATUS: X-unshaded zone, 040076-2227K REVIEWER: Elizabeth Leibold, PE DATE: July 23, 2010 CASE NUMBER: D10-0022 SUMMARY: A development package was submitted in lieu of an otherwise required development plan for the proposed Plaza Centro improvements. Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the Development Package including plan sheets, Drainage Statement for Plaza Centro Garage, Amended Zoning Ordinance documentation, M&C Meeting minutes 7OCT08, Report (RBF Engineers, 9/08/09), Geotechnical Evaluation (Western Technologies, 8/10/09), and SWPPP. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Package until the following items are addressed. MASTER COVER SHEETS/ GENERAL NOTES: 1) DS Sec.2-01: Address the following Development Package general note comments: a) DS Sec.2-01.2.10: Label document as Development Package and add all sheets for the Development Package on sheet 1. b) Add as a general grading notes: i) Call for DSD Engineering Inspection meetings. For a DSD Engineering Inspection, call IVR (740-6970), or schedule with a Customer Service Representative at the Development Services Department, or contact DSD Engineering at 837-4888, or schedule inspections online at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Online_Services/Online_Permits/online_permits.html . ii) Add as a general grading note: Grading shall conform to Development Standard 11-01.0 (Excavation and Grading). iii) Prior to final grading approval, As-builts for the overall project are required with statement of conformance for the substantial completion letter, and letter stating the drainage facilities were constructed to meet City of Tucson drainage requirements and were constructed per the approved plans and drainage report(s). iv) Any engineering work to be done below grade (i.e. toe-downs, cutoff walls, drainage pipes/structures, etc.) shall not be back filled until Planning and Development Services Inspector inspects work and accepts it. v) Add as General Grading Note: "If grading construction is expected to last longer than the expiration date of the grading permit, contact PDSD to renew/extend the Grading Permit. If Final Grading Inspection has not been completed before the Grading Permit expires, and the permit has not been renewed, additional fees and reviews may be required. vi) The permitee shall notify the PDSD when the grading operation is ready for final grading inspection. Final grading approval shall not be given until all work, including installation of all drainage facilities and their permanent protective devices, and all erosion control measures have been completed in accordance with the approved grading plan and grading permit, and any required field reports or other closure documentation has been submitted. 2) DS Sec.2-01.2.2.D.1: List the following note if applicable: "All new public roads within and adjacent to this project will be constructed in accordance with approved plans. Construction plans will be submitted to the City Engineer's Office for review and approval." 3) DS Sec.2-01.2.2.D.2: List the following note on all development package documents: "No structure or vegetation shall be located or maintained so as to interfere with the sight visibility triangles in accordance with Development Standard 3-01.0." BASE LAYER SHEET COMMENTS: 4) DS Sec.2-01.2.4: Add the D10-0022 subdivision case number to each sheet of the Development Package. 5) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.J: Label Major Street or Routes and differentiate North and South Toole Avenues on plan. 6) DS Sec.2-01.Show parcel delineations for parcels 117-06-562C and 117-06-081D and right-of-way on plan. Explain in response letter and show on plans how these areas are lot-combined or parcel property lines are revised. 7) DS Sec.2-01: Clarify if boundary data is measured, recorded or calculated on the development package on sheet 1 as a note, or label on planview on site plan sheets or base layer. 8) DS Sec.2-01.3.7.A.6.b: Show on plan the MS&R Collector street alignments going through property and adjacent to southwest property line. 9) Show all easements. 10) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.B: Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided. 11) The curbing and curb opening and proposed paved area shall be shown on all plans as a base layer. 12) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.5.c: Show all loading zones, and vehicle maneuverability fully dimensioned, and access route, and provide, as a note, the number of loading spaces required, the number provided, and the design vehicle. SIGNING & STRIPING SHEET COMMENT: 13) On sheet 2, clarify entry and exists for parking garage. It may be necessary to add directional traffic arrows at entrances off of North Toole. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS: 14) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.2: Due to request for waiver for retention and geotechnical report indicating clayey soils, waterharvest areas need to show positive gradients and how waterharvesting areas will not exceed the 24-hour drain down time; at minimum show and label Type 1 scuppers at low points in each waterharvest area, or location of low point outflow. 15) Show the roof drainage arrows to clarify how all proposed building roofs will drain. 16) LUC 3.7.4.3.B: Address the following Water harvesting comments on sheet L-4.1: a) Clarify the sub-watersheds for water harvesting. b) Correct Ratios for sub-watersheds 17) Add developed conditions exhibit with sub-watersheds to drainage statement. LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS: 18) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.O: Regarding landscape sheets address the following comments: a) Add a landscape note to the landscape plans that states that any existing trees or transplanted trees from onsite within the existing/remaining and proposed SVT's shall be checked and trimmed to assure that they are clear of leaves and branches to a height of at least six feet above grade. The location of trees within existing and future sight visibility triangles may be restricted or modified as determined by the City of Tucson Inspectors in order to preserve visibility. b) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.O: On sheets 2 & L-3.1 delineate and label SVT's. Remove any non-conforming tree from SVT at east entrance that falls within SVT. 19) Per Geotechnical Report, planters and landscaping is not advised adjacent to or near building structures. Either provide additional geotechnical addenda, or show compliance to geotechnical recommendations by adding drain-out systems such as Type 1 scuppers directing runoff away from building structure. GRADING, PAVING, UTILITIES PLAN / DETAIL SHEET COMMENTS: 20) DS Sec.2-01.4.2.A: Include grading general note stating reference to Geotechnical Evaluation for Plaza Centro prepared by Western Technologies Inc Randall D Harris P.E., Justin Heinecke P.E., sealed 9-29-09 and any addenda. 21) Show the roof drainage arrows to clarify how all proposed building roof will drain. 22) For parking structure, show any overhang heights and locations. 23) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.4: Label invert for existing stormdrain catch basin adjacent to southwest corner of the project. 24) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.2: A type 1 scupper is necessary to dissipate nuisance ponding water in landscape areas adjacent to sidewalks due to clayey soils indicated from geotechnical report. 25) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.E: Provide local vertical benchmark with elevation and provide datum. 26) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.3: Indicate emergency vehicle circulation, including accessibility and vehicle maneuverability. 27) Clarify north property area - indicate barrier - curb, existing fence (label to remain or to be removed), wall with openings. 28) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.T: An adequate and safe ingress/egress is required for the collection vehicle in each new project per DS Sec.6-01.3.1.A. Provide delineations for maneuverability for solid waste and emergency vehicles. 29) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.L: All proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. 30) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Label size of existing stormdrain pipe crossing south portion of project. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN COMMENTS: 31) Tucson Code Chap.26 Art.2: The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) does not meet the minimum requirements of the AzPDES Construction General Permit (CGP). Revise the SWPPP according to the following comments: a) Address the following general SWPPP comment: i) Tucson Code Sec.26 Article 2: Provide registrant seals for SWPP report and exhibit(s) per COT Stormwater Ordinance. b) Address the following comments for the SWPPP Report: i) The Operator Certification Statement should have a statement with name & signature that they act as Operator and that they have operational control over the construction plans and specifications, including the ability to make modifications to those plans and specifications (e.g., owner or developer of project), or that they have day-to-day operational control of those project activities that are necessary to ensure compliance with a stormwater pollution prevention plan for the site or other grading permit conditions. ii) At minimum, one Operator, contractor or owner, as listed on the bottom of the second page of the NOI shall sign one of the Operator certifications. Please note that the remaining signatures from the Operators must be on the SWPPP on the site copy of the SWPPP (exhibit or report) at or before commencement of construction. (Part IV.C.1) iii) Provide sequential list of grading construction activities for this project. The sequence of major activities should state whether establishment of erosion and stormwater controls are to occur prior to clearing and rough grading of this site. iv) Provide copy of completely filled-out NOI that has been sent to ADEQ. c) Address the following comments for the SWPPP exhibit sheets: i) Show limits, dimensions, and designated locations on the planview for both temporary stockpile area, concrete washout area, and material / construction vehicle storage areas, with appropriate controls. ii) Show, label, and provide leader line for the receiving waters either on location map on cover sheet, on vicinity map on exhibit, or on other planview. iii) Temporary material or vehicle staging / stockpile area, and designated concrete washout locations should not be located in or near basins, washes/river, floodplain, or water harvesting areas. iv) Revise boundary controls according to the following comments: (1) Depict and label disturbance / grading limits on SWPPP exhibit. (2) Interim control measures shall be placed within the grading limits that match grading plan. v) Provide the following general notes on the SWPPP cover sheet: (1) Add note stating a water truck or other temporary water source will be provided for dust control, otherwise explain how wind erosion/dust control will be achieved and provide specific practices. (2) Provide note stating that adjacent street shall be cleaned daily of sediment and other construction debris. Specify that when sediment escapes the construction site, offsite accumulations of sediment must be routinely removed and at a frequency sufficient to ensure no adverse effects on water quality. (Part IV.D.2.a) (Part IV.D.2.c) (3) Add notation regarding restriction of storage or placement of construction material and vehicles within water harvesting areas. 32) For resubmittal package, provide 2 copies of revised SWPPP exhibit, report, copy of NOI, with general permit. SOILS/GEOTECHNICAL/ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT COMMENTS: 33) DS Sec.2-01.4.2.A: If any type of retention is being proposed to be waived and detention requirements are met using surface basins and/or water harvesting areas, provide referenced Exhibit A section 8 of the phase 1 Environmental Assessment to substantiate subsurface constraints at site that would provide reason for waiving retention. The Environmental Assessment report is needed to be provided to CDRC for resubmittal. Please provide a revised Development Package plan sheets, Environmental Assessment report, ALTA survey, revised Drainage Statement, revised SWPPP and a comprehensive response letter that addresses in detail responses to all of the above comments. If you have questions, call me at 837-4934. Elizabeth Leibold, P.E., CPM, CFM Civil Engineer Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Department |
| 07/23/2010 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Within the Downtown Redevelopment District, the requirements for landscape borders are: a. A street landscape border, measured from the development side of the future sidewalk location, shall be maintained along all public right-of-way frontages of vehicular use areas and parking structures. b. A street landscape border is not required if the ground level story of a building containing a parking structure is not used for motor vehicle parking or if the parking structure is completely screened and enclosed by a masonry wall. LUC 3.7.2.4.C.1. Clarify how the site complies with the above section. 2) Any ground level vehicular use areas are to be screened per LUC 3.7.3. Address required screening on the landscape plans. 3) If portions of the site are subject the Rio Nuevo and Downtown Overlay Zone, map the zone on the Development Plan, add the RND Case Number, and provide the plans approved by the DRB and the PDSD Director. Address how the site complies with applicable RND criteria. 4) Change the title of the Water Harvesting Infiltration Area Plan (L-4.1) to Rainwater Harvesting Plan. DS 10-03.4.0 5) Revise the cover sheet of the Development Package to include the Landscape/Water Harvesting plans. 6) Revise the Rainwater Harvesting Plan to indicate the sub-watersheds associated with the water harvesting areas. DS 10-03.4.2.B 7) Indicate spot elevations for the bottoms of water harvesting structures, at spillways, and to define other grades as needed. DS 10-03.4.2.C.3.a)iii 8) Provide the percentage of annual landscape water demand met using harvested water tabulated for the entire site per DS 10-03.4.2.B.3.d. 9) Revise note 3 on sheet L-4.1 as necessary to provide consistency with the water budget table and the grading plans. 10) Identify and provide information for WHA #6 on the grading plans. 11) Indicate the location of all surface or subsurface infiltration structures, pipelines, spillways, french drains, scuppers, curb cuts and other infrastructure elements needed to convey, store or overflow passively supplied water, or to control erosion on the water harvesting plan. |
| 07/23/2010 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | July 23, 2010 To: MARTY MAGELLI, P.E. BAKER & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING, INC Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6719), Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department Subject: PLAZA CENTRO GARAGE Dev. Plan – 1ST Submittal D10-0022 The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD) has reviewed the proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project. The following comments are offered for your use: 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). Sheet 1: Show the public and private sewer lines using different line-types, so that they can readily be distinguished from each other. Also, show and describe examples of these different linetypes in the legend on Sheet 1. Sheet 4: Show the rim and invert elevations for all of the existing public manholes on plan. Sheet 4: Show the construction plan # and pipe size for the existing public sewer on plan. Sheet 4: We recommend that you connect at the existing private cleanout. With the connection as shown the City of Tucson DOT may require the 8” line be public which would necessitate that your proposed manhole on site be public. We would then have issues with accessibility to the manhole as currently shown. Also they may have a pavement cut moratorium currently in place. 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 This comment letter has been reviewed and accepted for substantial conformance to Pima County Code Title 13 by: ___________________________ Chad Amateau, P.E., Civil Engineer PCRWRD, Planning Services Section, Development Liaison Unit cc: Chad Amateau, PE Kristin Borer, PE, DLU Manager DLU Project folder |
| 07/26/2010 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | July 26, 2010 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D10-0022 Plaza Centro PROJECT NAME: Plaza Centro PROJECT ADDRESS: Toole/Congress 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. The access points shall have 18' radius curb returns. (DS 3-01.0 figure 6) 3. TDOT-Traffic is concern with the proposed single entrance into the proposed parking garage along Toole/Congress. Toole/Congress is an arterial roadway and the garage-gated entrance will potentially create queue lengths that will extend into the roadway and the future streetcar alignment. 4. Provide a Traffic Impact Analysis to address potential impacts to Toole/Congress Road due to queuing vehicles at the gated entry. The analysis should also provide recommendations to the location of the gated entry. 5. 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. 6. It appears that Right of Way needs to be dedicated and/or vacated therefore the plans need to be reviewed by COT Real Estate. TDOT-Traffic will not approve the development plans until the dedication and vacation of right of way has been recorded/accepted by COT Real Estate. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-6730 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 07/27/2010 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES July 27, 2010 Marty Magelli, P.E. Baker & Associates Engineering, Inc. 3561 E. Sunrise Dr. # 225 Tucson, Arizona 85718 Subject: D10-0022 Plaza Centro Development Package Dear Marty: Your submittal of July 1, 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 8 sets of the DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 8 Copies Revised Development Package (Fire, Zoning, ADA, Wastewater, Engineering, Landscape, Traffic, PDSD) 2 Copies Last Approved DP or Site Plan (Zoning, PDSD) 2 Copies Environmental Assessment Report (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies ALTA Survey (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Statement (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised SWPPP (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Traffic Impact Analysis (Traffic, 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 |