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 - D11-0001
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/20/2011 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 01/20/2011 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | Not a COT owned or operated property |
| 01/20/2011 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Passed | |
| 01/24/2011 | DAVID MANN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 01/26/2011 | 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: D11-0001 WALMART SUPERCENTER #5626-00/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: January 26, 2011 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: Correct the Vicinity Map to 3”=1 mile. Delete all street directions. Delete T14S-R15E on the Vicinity Map. Delete NW Quarter or correct on all Title Blocks and under Vicinity Map. Include the legal description on all the Title Blocks. |
| 01/27/2011 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | GENERAL 1. Please provide a large scale 1:40/1:50 (or as large as possible to fit on the sheet) of your project. a. Please identify all accessible routes b. Please show accessible route slopes complying with the 2006 IBC, ICC (ANSI 117.1), Section 403.3. SHEET C3.1 2. At the area where a 4 way crossing is shown for the accessible route, please delete the two "detectable warning" strips at the top and bottom of the 4 way crossing. Detectable warnings are just that, an element to provide a visually impaired person of an emanate hazard. The Accessible route is not a hazardous area. The two detectable warnings on the right and left sides are appropriate. 3. Please show all ramp slopes and a straight line beginning point. 4. Where ever detectable warnings are used, they are to be the same width as the accessible route, ICC (ANSI 117.1), Sections 406.12 and .14. SHEET C3.2: 5. Ditto comments 2, 3, and 4 above. SHEET C3.3 6. Ditto 2, 3, and 4 above. 7. Delete the detectable warning strips shown at the end of the 5' concrete accessible route just prior to the entrance of the 15.4 ' wide accessible route shown between the accessible parking signs. Again, there is no emending danger in the accessible route. 8. Delete the 3.5' wide striped areas shown in front of the accessible parking spaces. Move the front edge of the accessible parking spaces to the edge of the 15.4' wide accessible route between the accessible parking signs. Provide concrete wheel stops for all accessible parking spaces as per Zoning requirements. a. Provide a detectable strip on both sides of the accessible route between the signs from the shown detectable warning to the edge of the first concrete wheel stop. This is a Zoning requirement for accessible route separation from vehicle paved areas. Reference Zoning comments. 9. Provide a marked crossing from the 15.2' wide detectable warning to the store front entry accessible route. Provide a detectable strip at this side of the marked crossing as per ICC (ANSI 117.1), Section 406.12 and 406.14. a. Insure the new marked crossing has different markings from that of the whole painted paved area at the entrance. 10. Insure that the bollards are spaced as per Zoning requirements. Reference Zoning comments. 11. Remove the light pole from the middle of the accessible route. 12. Please delete the accessible route and marked crossings to the future development area. Being built with this phase only provides an accessible route that leads to nowhere. Include the construction of this route in the future phase development. SHEET C 3.4 13. Ditto Comments 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12. SHEET C 3.5 14. Please provide door clearance as per ICC (ANSI 117.1), Section 404 at door SW of accessible parking. 15. Between note 30 and the floor plan drawing, it appears as though the marked pedestrian route from the exist door mentioned above and the access to the auto store entry is asphaltic paving. Zoning will require this pedestrian pathway to be concrete elevated 6" afg. Reference Zoning comments. SHEET C 3.6 16. Provide clearance at the exist door as required by ICC (ANSI 117.1), Section 404. SHEET C 6.3 17. Please coordinate height of accessible sign requirement as stated and shown on the two sign details. 18. At the Typical Parking Stall Detail: a. Delete the 3.5' wide marked accessible route clearance and abut the front of the accessible parking to the edge of the 15.4' wide accessible route between the accessible parking signs. b. Provide a full dimensional string for all of the accessible parking stall and aisle widths for both sides on sheets C 3.3 and C 3.3 c. Please delete the detectable warning strip to the 15.4' wide accessible route behind the accessible parking signs. This area is not a hazardous area. END OF REVIEW |
| 01/31/2011 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#233557 January 31, 2011 Projects International Attn: Jim Portner 10836 E Armada Lane Tucson, Arizona 85749 Dear Mr. Portner : SUBJECT: Tucson Marlet Place D11-0001 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted January 20, 2011. It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. Facilities shown are proposed and have not been installed. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. Any 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, electrical load, paving off-site improvements and irrigation plans, if available 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: Mr. ricahrd Harrington New Business Project Manager P. O. Box 711 (DB-101) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-917-8726 Should you have any technical questions, please call the area Designer Mike Kaiser at (520) 918-8244. Sincerely, Elizabeth Miranda Office Support Specialist Design/Build lm Enclosures cc: DSD_CDRC@tucsonaz.gov, City of Tucson (email) M. Kaiser, Tucson Electric Power |
| 02/01/2011 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Tucson Market Place Phase 2 Development Plan (1st Review) D10-0047 TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 01, 2011 DUE DATE: February 03, 2011 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 January 19, 2012. 2. This development plan was reviewed for full code compliance for the entire site. The following comments are for the Kimley-Horn Walmart Development plan. 3. D.S. 2-05.2.1.F Provide a reduced-scale map of the PAD District on the first sheet, indicating the location of the portion being developed. 4. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2 Provide the development plan number D11-0001 in the lower right corner of the plan. 5. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.8 As this project is part of The Bridges Blocks 1 -15 subdivision remove "DEVELOPMENT PLAN - GENERAL ZONING AND LAND USE NOTES" #3 from the plan. 6. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.10 As both Park Avenue and Kino Parkway are Major Streets and Routes shown on the COT MS&R map and Kino Parkway is designated as a Gateway route provide a note on the plan stating "THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA: SEC. 2.8.3, MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES (MS&R) SETBACK ZONE & SEC. 2.8.4, GATEWAY CORRIDOR ZONE." 7. D.S. 2-05.2.4.B On the "SITE AREA MAP" sheet C1.0, provide 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. 8. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Sheet C3.1 provide a parking area access lane (PAAL) width dimension for the PAAL providing access to the spine road. 9. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Per D.S. 3-05.2.1.C.2.b The minimum drive-through lane width leading to the window is eleven (11) feet and must be striped, marked, or therwise clearly delineated. The minimum drive-through lane width at the window is nine (9) feet. No more than two (2) car lengths may be less than the minimum width of eleven (11) feet. That said on sheet C3.4 the pharmacy drive-thru called out as 10.5' appears to exceed the two (2) car lengths, provide dimensions that clear show the two (2) car lengths are not exceeded. Also the bypass lane must meet eleven (11) foot width. 10. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Clearly show the required vehicle stacking spaces on the plan see D.S. 3-05.2.1.C.2.c 11. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Sheet C3.5 northwest corner of the "3 BAY TLE" provide a PAAL width dimension from the proposed pavement markings to the landscape island located to the northwest. 12. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Sheet C3.5 provide a PAAL width dimension from the proposed pavement markings, located just south of the proposed transformer, to the curb located to the south. 13. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Sheet C3.5 northwest corner of the "3 BAY TLE" provide a PAAL width dimension from the proposed pavement markings to the landscape island located to the northwest. 14. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Clearly indicate on the plan the extents of the "6" CONCRETE TACK-ON CURB" called out under "SITE PLAN NOTES' #32" in regards to the proposed "CURB AND CUTTER" called out under "SITE PLAN NOTES' #1. 15. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Sheet C3.5 at the northwest corner of the "3 BAY TLE" the proposed 5' wide striped area is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the vehicle use area, see D.S. 2-08.4.1.B and D.S. 3-05.2.2.B.1. 16. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Sheet C3.2 there is a sidewalk shown running north/south that ends at the end of the landscape area. As there are accessible ramps shown along this sidewalk it could cause issues for a handicapped person when the reach the north end of the sidewalk. Zoning recommends that this sidewalk be extended to connect to the proposed trail on the north side of the spine road. 17. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Sheet C3.3 the striped area shown between the proposed accessible vehicle parking and the accessible signs is required to a sidewalk, physically separated by means of curbing, grade separation, barriers, railings, or other means, except at crosswalks, see D.S. 2-08.4.1 18. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Sheet C6.3 "TYPICAL PARKING STALL" detail there is a 3.5' width dimension shown on the accessible route. Per D.S. 2-08.5.1 this is required to be four (4) feet. 19. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Sheet C6.3 "TYPICAL PARKING STALL" detail clearly indicated on the plan how a parking vehicle will be prevented from overhanging the striped area. 20. D.S. 2-05.2.4.N Provide a clear height for the proposed "EXIT PORCHES" shown on the plan. 21. D.S. 2-05.2.4.O.Per LUC Section 3.4.5.3 and a building square footage of 155,861 the required number of loading spaces is five (5). Zoning acknowledges that the four (4) proposed 12 x 130 loading docks far exceed the LUC requirements. Revise the "LOADING DATA" to show five (5) required 12 x 35 loading spaces and five (5) provided 12 x 25 loading spaces. 22. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q The provided bicycle parking calculation does not appear to be correct. Based on the Master Development plan provided by Optimus, sheet DP-3 the percent of bicycle parking is based on an overall site building square footage of 914,333 or nineteen (19) bicycle parking spaces provided. Zoning acknowledges that the proposed exceeds the required. 23. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Provide a detail for both Class 1 and Class 2 bicycle parking that provides; including materials for lighting and paving, type of security, dimensions, specific type of rack and the number of bicycles it supports. Clearly show that the requirements of D.S. 2-09.5.0 are met. The following comments are for the Optimus Master Development Plan for the Tucson Market Place. 1. D.S. 2-05.2.1.F Provide a reduced-scale map of the PAD District on the first sheet, indicating the location of the portion being developed. 2. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2 Provide the development plan number D11-0001 in the lower right corner of the plan. 3. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Sheet C3.1 of the Kimley-Horn Walmart Development plan shows a continuous pedestrian circulation/accessible route running from the proposed Walmart north to the proposed paved path provided by others. This continuous pedestrian circulation/accessible route is not shown on the Optimus Master Development Plan sheet DP-5. As the northern most portion of this continuous pedestrian circulation/accessible route does not appear to be in the Walmart scope of work show in on sheet DP-5 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/ D11-0001 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan. |
| 02/01/2011 | 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 D11-0001 Tucson Market Place: Phase 2 2/1/11 () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment (X) Other - Master Development Plan CROSS REFERENCE: D09-0010, C9-06-32 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: PAD-15 GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 02/03/2011 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 RCP - No Comment () Proposal Complies with Rezoning (Special Exception) Conditions () RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies (X) See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: REVIEWER: JBeall 791-5505 DATE: 02/01/2011 Comments 1. Please add under Building Data, Setbacks Required, Sheet C1.0, "From Residential Uses and Residentially Zoned Properties - 200' (feet) 2. Please correct under Building Data, Building Heights, to read " Max. for Sub-Area A" instead of By Code. 3. There appears to be a discrepancy with calculations found in the Total Center SF on sheet C1.0 of the Development Plan (1,000,000) and Total Center SF listed on sheet DP-3 of the Master Development Plan (914,333). Please clarify and correct, as this affects the required number of Bicycle Parking calculations. 4. Please verify the number of Walmart Parking Provided under Bicycle Parking Data - 63? As Master Development Plan indicates that 20 bicycle spaces are being provided. 5. On sheet C3.4, at far northeast corner of Walmart building where concrete sidewalk and proposed crosswalk extends towards adjacent future development, please provide landscaping for that node. 6. Please correct the NOS/FOS requirement percentage under Total Project, on Sheet DP-3 of the Master Development Plan. The PAD requires 5.0%. And the FOS Acres should be 5.4. 7. Please identify if Metal Halide Lighting is to be used in the parking lot areas, if so, then lighting levels are to be reduced between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am. |
| 02/02/2011 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 02/03/2011 | ELIZABETH LEIBOLD | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | ACTIVITY: D11-0001 PROJECT: Tucson Marketplace (Wal-Mart at Bridges) 1st review comments LOCATION: Ward 5 FEMA: 2237K, Zone X-Unshaded WATERSHED: Mission View Wash Watershed adjacent to Greyhound Wash REVIEWER: Elizabeth Leibold, PE SUMMARY: The Development Plan package for the Wal-Mart at the Tucson Market Place was received and reviewed by Planning & Development Services Department Engineering. Submittal package included Wal-Mart Development Plan sheets, Landscape Plan sheets, Title Report schedule A, Drainage Statement/Reports, Master Drainage Report for Mission View Wash, small scale proposed master development plan sheets, NPPO reference documents, Geotechnical Engineering Report, Geotechnical Evaluation, and project scope letter. A separate rough grading plan submittal for the west area (Phase 2) of the Tucson Market Place is expected to be submitted for review, as well as a separate finished grading plan for Wal-Mart. Planning & Development Services Department Engineering does not recommend approval of the Wal-Mart Development Plan at this time. Meetings were held 10DEC10 and 20JAN11 to meet with consultants and discuss preliminary comments. The Drainage Report was reviewed for development plan purposes only. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS: 1) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No.10-02.2.3.1.3.A.2: Address the following Wal-Mart drainage report drainage comments: a) Provide bleed pipes for all basin / water harvesting areas. Positive gradient is required to assure drain down time. See page 54 of Detention Retention Manual. Post-construction infiltration rates for the basin areas, as well as additional re-engineering design, may be required if construction inspections indicate ponding that exceeds 24 hours. b) Provide specific section in the report explaining the following: i) Explain and provide a list of maintenance requirements for the stormwater runoff system and other drainage improvements onsite. ii) Clarify if there are some drainage improvements within the Wal-Mart project that are solely the responsibility of Wal-Mart, or state whether it is the responsibility of Tucson Market Place. There may be a need to provide the drainage maintenance verbiage as a general note(s) on the Development Plan cover sheet per section DS Sec.10-02.14.3. c) DS Sec.2-08.4.1.e, 2-05.2.4.H.3: Provide scuppers at sidewalks adjacent to building for roof drainage. Show roof drainage scheme on an exhibit. d) Add case number and administrative address to cover page of report: D11-0001. DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS: 2) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.E, 2-05.2.1.H: It will be necessary to provide a local benchmark for basis of elevation for the Wal-Mart project. Show and label on a planview. 3) Preliminary comments for Master Development Plan: a) Provide temporary (or permanent) bleed pipe for temporary runoff storage areas. Sufficient positive gradient and drain down time is needed for temporary conditions for this project. b) Clarify whether the northern path is part of this project. c) Clarify phasing lines shown on Key Map on sheet DP-2. There appears to be dashed lines around several areas and these areas are not clearly labeled for phasing. 4) Address the following drainage related comments: a) Sheet C4.6 address the following comments: i) Label type of storm drain pipes on plans for Grading & Drainage Notes callout 1 & 2. ii) Provide and label inlet erosion protection at 48" pipe inlet. iii) Provide cross sections for area near truck well at rear of proposed building that clarifies grades, outlet pipe function, and proposed structures in this area. b) On sheets C4.1, C4.2, C4.3, C4.4, and C4.5, address the following comments: i) Label type of storm drain pipe on plans for Grading & Drainage Notes callout 1. ii) Grading & Drainage Notes keynote 10 indicates basin information shown on Landscape plans for basins. Assure landscape plans show positive gradient in all basin / water harvesting areas. Provide clarification of this keynote if additional details are provided in this plan set. c) Due to the collapsible soils on site and the drain-down requirement, add revised proposed contouring for basin bottoms to indicate a positive gradient through basin / waterharvesting areas toward outlets. With a 1% or greater grade, potential for ponding issues lessen and thereby assisting with project completion, as discussed in meeting. d) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.3: Show roof drainage. Also, provide locations and types of drainage structures including any sidewalk scuppers. e) DS Sec.2-05.2.2.C.2.a, 2-05.2.2.C.2.b: Show floodplain limits on planview. If the parcel is impacted by a jurisdictional floodplain as determined by the revised drainage report add the following two notes to the Development Plan: "A floodplain use permit and/or finished floor elevation certificates may be required for the proposed building." "This project is affected by the City of Tucson Floodplain Regulations." 5) DS Sec.2-5.3.2.D: Address the following conceptual grading comments: a) Clarify and label missing max/minimum slope grades on details C2.0. Clarify depth of flow for any channels. b) Add minimum distance from basins to pavement and bldg structures per geotechnical reports. c) Add general note for accessibility. For privately-owned projects, design is subject to 2006 IBC / ICC A117.1 (ANSI) 2003 compliance. 6) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.B, 2-05.2.4.G: All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. 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 is to occur prior to issuance of permits. All existing easements will be explained in a response letter or drawn on the plat, and recordation information, location, width, and purpose shall be included. All proposed easements (utility, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned for widths and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. In particular, please clarify the following specific easement comments: a) Clearly identify fill & cut proposed for locations of optical fiber (AT&T or other utility) along south perimeter with cross sections. Assure that there is no substantial cut or fill near optic line. 7) Address the following access comments: a) Provide pavement structural design section details on sheet C2.1 to match recommendations of the geotechnical report page 23. b) Add the following as general notes to the Development Plan: i) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.C: Provide general note on Development Plan cover sheet regarding PAD requirement for completion of commercial spine roads to be completed for this phase of Tucson Market Place construction. ii) The south emergency access road shall be maintained throughout the second phase of Tucson Market Place construction. c) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.G: Clarify whether there are any cross access agreements in place for the project. Provide information regarding any cross access agreements. d) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.D.1: Label curb return radii dimensions in PAAL area for entrances at spine road to accommodate future vehicle and truck use. Also, label entrance widths for entrances on Development Plan. 8) DS Sec.3-01.5.1.A.1: Landscape plans do not comply with SVT regulations. Other than trees as noted below, plant materials located within existing and future sight visibility triangles shall be limited to ground cover or low-growing vegetation of a species that will not grow higher than thirty inches. Trees may be located within existing and future sight visibility triangles only if clear of leaves and branches to a height of at least six feet above grade upon installation, and at all times thereafter. The trunk caliper of any species selected may not exceed twelve inches in diameter at maturity. Trees with multiple trunks are not allowed. Trees may not be planted in a line that could result in a solid wall effect as viewed from motorist's perspective. The number and location of trees within existing and future sight visibility triangles may be restricted or modified by City of Tucson in order to preserve visibility. Address the following landscape comments: a) Revise location of trees in SVT locations on sheets P-1, P-2, P-3, where the proposed landscaping is in conflict with SVT along connections to the spine road. b) Revise sheet C-1 planting note 16; remove last sentence, since SVT's will be needed to confirm that the trees are not a safety conflict. 9) DS Sec.2-05.3.2.A: Address the following geotechnical engineering comments: a) The geotechnical evaluation stated that it did not include assessment of environmental concerns or presence of hazardous materials. Submit geotechnical addenda or reports explaining whether further assessment is needed and whether there is indication of existing under ground storage tanks or other environmental concerns within this phase of the Tucson Market Place project. b) Add irrigation setback per LMT geotechnical report page 18. c) Add slope protection recommendations per sheet 14 of LMT geotechnical report. 10) Please acknowledge that separate grading permit application submittals will be required for the rough grading for phase 2 and the Wal-Mart finished grading of the site once the Development Plan is approved. Early submittal of the grading permit applications may be considered if drainage comments are addressed for the 2nd Development plan submittal. A SWPPP will be required with the grading plan submittals. Also, a Right-of-way Use Permit may be needed; contact TDOT Permits and Codes. Resubmittal is required. The next submittal should address all the above items. Submit same items as submitted in this first review submittal package and associated a revised Wal-Mart Development Plan, revised Phase 2 master development plan, response letter, and other supporting documentation. If you have questions or would like to set up a meeting, call me at 837-4934. Elizabeth Leibold, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Department |
| 02/03/2011 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | PIMA COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT 201 NORTH STONE AVENUE TUCSON, ARIZONA 85701-1207 Jackson Jenkins PH: (520) 740-6500 DIRECTOR FAX: (520) 620-0135 February 2, 2011 To: JIM PORTNER PROJECTS INTERNATIONAL INC. Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department __________________________ Reviewed by: Kristin Greene, P.E., Civil Engineer PCRWRD Subject: TUCSON MARKETPLACE PHASE 2 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN & WAL-MART Development Plan – 1st Submittal D11-0001 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: Wal-mart 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/developer.htm#permits The development plan for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. Sheet C4.5, 4.6, 5.5 and 5.6: A 42” existing public sewer line is shown on plan. Call out the construction plan # for the sewer line and IMS #’s for all of the existing public manholes. Also show the rim and invert elevations for the existing public manholes. Sheet C4.5, 4.6, 5.5 and 5.6: Show the public sewer easement width and recordation information for the easement over the existing public sewer line. Sheet C4.5, 4.6, 5.5 and 5.6: Demonstrate the easement will have a minimum 16’ wide all-weather drivable surface per PC/COT STD DTL WWM 111 and WWM A-3 Accessibility. Master Development Plan 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/developer.htm#permits The development plan for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. Sheet DP-1: Revise General Note #10 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 DP-1: Revise General Note #8 to reflect the correct number of FUE for both existing and proposed. The Wal-Mart plan showed 436 FUE. Sheet DP-4, 9, 10, 11 & 12: Show the IMS # with rim and invert elevations for all of the existing manholes on plan. Sheet DP-9: Show that there is accessibility from Park Ave over the 42” public sewer line per PC/COT STD DTL WWM A-3 –Accessibility and WWM-111. Sheet DP-10, 11, 12 & 13: Demonstrate accessibility over the 42” existing public sewer line per PC/COT STD DTL WWM A-3 –Accessibility and WWM-111 including an all weather drivable surface. Sheet DP-12: There appears to be some kind of drainage structure in the 50’ public sewer easement just southwest of proposed building Major M. Please clarify. 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 $200.00(Wal-Mart Project) plus $350.00(Master Plan) for a total of $550.00 (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. If you have any questions about this review letter please call me @ the phone number below. ______________________________ Tom Porter, Sr. CEA, (520)740-6719 PCRWRD cc: Chad Amateau, PE Kristin Greene, PE, DLU Manager DLU Project folder |
| 02/03/2011 | FRODRIG2 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | Date Case Number Project Address February 3, 2011 D11-0001 Tucson Market Place Phase-2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN Comments: The proposed Development Plan Case No.D11-0001 for the Tucson Market Place Phase-2, located at Park Avenue and Interstate I-10.Meets the minimum requirements for the Environmental Services, Solid Waste Disposal Standard 6-01. The proposed plan is approved with the following exception: 1. The Plan must clearly label and show the locations for both Solid Waste and Recycle collection containers, compactors, and enclosures. 2. All containers locations must be shown on the Development Plan and labeled for the intended use, being Solid Waste or Recycle materials 3. All enclosures must show Details with dimensions, and gates installed and mounted to the end of the CMU screen wall as show on Solid Waste Standards. 4. The detail of the container enclosures must clearly show that the minimum inside dimension between the bollards shall be a 10’- 0” for each container enclosures. as shown on the Solid Waste and Recycle materials Standards. 5. The proposed development plan for the WAL-MART STORE, Located at Park Avenue and Interstate I-10 must state the physical address on the Title Block of each sheet of the proposed plans. In order to plan Environmental Services of Solid Waste and Recycle collection. Environmental Services Department Development Plan Review Reviewer: Tony Teran Office Phone (520) 837-3706 E-mail: Tony.Teran @tucsonaz.gov |
| 02/03/2011 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | >>> Tom Martinez <TMartinez@azdot.gov> 02/03/2011 10:29 AM >>> Regional Traffic Engineering has no comments on this submittal and recommends the project proceed with the approval for Phase 2 of the Tucson Market Place. Thank you. ________________________________ 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. . |
| 02/03/2011 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) According to the bridges PAD "All Development Plans/Plat Submittals will include running calculations/percentages of NOS and FOS set aside as they relate to the overall requirements (calculations will be presented in a table)." The Native Plant Preservation Plan claims credit for existing vegetation in sub areas C-I and C-II. Barring additional development in these subareas, the NOS calculation should be added to the plans. 2) Provide architecturally compatible refuse storage gates and walls per Appendix B, Figure 10 of the Bridges PAD, where applicable. 3) Include the full El Paso Greenway section, including landscaping on the Tucson Marketplace landscape plans, regardless of proposed construction phasing. 4) Provide the trail and street landscape border and screening required along Park Avenue. 5) Submit a rain water harvesting plan per DS 10-03. 6) All disturbed, grubbed, graded, or bladed areas not otherwise improved shall be landscaped, reseeded, or treated with an inorganic or organic ground cover to help reduce dust pollution. Revise landscape plans to identify the type and locations proposed for inert ground cover materials or seeded areas. LUC 3.7.2.7. DS 2-06.5.2.C |
| 02/03/2011 | JANE DUARTE | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | see PDSD landscape comments |
| 02/04/2011 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/04/2011 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Passed | |
| 02/04/2011 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 02/04/2011 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Passed | |
| 02/04/2011 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 02/07/2011 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES February 7, 2011 Jim Portner Project International Inc. 10836 East Armada Lane Tucson, Arizona 85749-9460 Subject: D11-0001 Tucson Market Place Phase 2/Walmart Development Plan Dear Jim: Your submittal of January 20, 2001 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 10 DETAILED cover letters explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 10 Copies Revised Development Plan (Addressing, ADA, Zoning, Planning, ESD, PCWWM, Engineering, Landscape, P&R, CDRC) 6 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Planning, Engineering, Landscape, P&R. CDRC) 2 Copies Revised Geotechnical Engineering Report/Geotechnical Evaluation (Engineering, CDRC) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, CDRC) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. Sincerely, Patricia Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: (520) 760-1950 dp-resubmittal |