Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D11-0003
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/25/2011 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 01/25/2011 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 01/25/2011 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Passed | |
| 01/27/2011 | DAVID MANN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 01/31/2011 | FRODRIG2 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | Date Case Number Project Address January 31, 2011 DS11-0003 CAR WASH-12TH & DREXEL ROAD DEVELOPMENT PLAN Comments: Denied, The proposed development Plan for the CAR WASH-to be located at 12TH Avenue & Drexel road, Case No. DS11-0003, dose not the meet the minimum requirements for the Environmental Services, Solid Waste Disposal Standard 6-01. All containers enclosures shown on the Development Plan must be labeled for their intended us being Solid Waste or Recycle materials. The Plan must show enclosures for both Solid Waste and Recycle materials. The detail plan for the container enclosures must shown on the plans the inside dimension between the bollards. The minimum inside dimension must not be less than 10’- 0”. As shown on the Solid Waste Standards. All enclosures must show the gates installed and mounted on the end of the CMU screen wall or mounted on separate post as show on Solid Waste Standards. The minimum inside dimension between the gates must not be less then 12’-0”. The proposed development plan for the CAR WASH to be located at 12th and Drexel road must state the physical street address on the title block of each sheet of the proposed plans. Environmental Services Department Development Plan Review Reviewer: Tony Teran Office Phone (520) 837-3706 E-mail: Tony.Teran @tucsonaz.gov |
| 01/31/2011 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 01/31/2011 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | CDRC Review Planning and Development Services Dept., Community Planning Review D11-0003, Car Wash, 12th & Drexel, 1st submittal Comments Due: 2/24/11 Items reviewed: Development Plan Package SE-10-119 4-D Properties - 12th Avenue Comments: 1. The plans are APPROVED. 2. A resubmittal is not required. Reviewed by: J. Hershenhorn, 1/27/10 F:\Shardir\UPDfiles\Development Review\CASE_REVIEW\CDRC\2011 Cases\D11-0003.doc |
| 02/02/2011 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | >>> Douglas Kratina <DKratina@azdot.gov> 02/02/2011 7:37 AM >>> Regional Traffic Engineering has no comment on this submittal and recommends approval of this development. It will have no impact on any existing ADOT facilities. 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. . |
| 02/09/2011 | 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: D11-003 CAR WASH 12TH AV AND DREXEL ROAD/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: February 9, 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 Location Map scale to 3”=1 Mile. Change Interstate 10 to Interstate 19 on the Location Map. Spell out Avenue of 12th Av. |
| 02/22/2011 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Being that this facility is exclusively accessed by the automobile, no pedestrian ways nor accessible routes are required. That being said, please delete the marked crossing, the ramp and detectable warning leading into the site and maintain a 6" high curb. END OF REVIEW |
| 02/22/2011 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | February 18, 2011 To: DAVID LITTLE THE WLB GROUP Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department __________________________ Reviewed by: Tom Porter, Sr CEA, PCRWRD Checked______ Subject: CAR WASH (12TH AVENUE & DREXEL ROAD) Development Plan - 1st Submittal D11-0003 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: 1. 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. 2. Sheet 1: Fill in the blank for the existing wastewater FUE in Wastewater Management Note #4. If the existing FUE will be demolished then note this. 3. Sheet 2: Call out the rim and invert elevations for the existing and proposed cleanouts on site. 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. 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 |
| 02/23/2011 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: 12th and Drexel Road - Car Wash Development Package D11-0003 TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 23, 2011 DUE DATE: February 24, 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 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 January 26, 2012 2. D.S. 2-01.3.2.D Provide the administrative street address adjacent to the title block. 3. D.S. 2-01.3.3 Provide the Development Package number D11-0003, Grading Plan number T11BU000117 and Special Exception number SE-10-119 adjacent to the title block. 4. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.4 Revise General Note 3 to read "THE EXISTING USE IS AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE AND REPAIR MAJOR". 5. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.4 Revise General Note 4 to read "AUTOMOTIVE - MINOR SERVICE AND REPAIR "28", SUBJECT TO: SEC. 3.5.4.2.B, .C, .D, AND .E AND APPROVAL THROUGH A ZONING EXAMINER FULL NOTICE PROCEDURE, SEC. 23A-50 AND 23A-53." 6. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.6.b Provide a General Note on the plan stating "THE PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE CRITERIA, SEC. 2.8.3, MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES (MS&R) SETBACK ZONE." 7. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.9.b The Floor area ratio calculation is not correct. The "ACTUAL FAR of 0.35 should be 0.12. 8. D.S. 2-01.3.9.E As this site is made up of two (2) parcels, 138-13-001B & 138-13-001C, a lot combination is required. Provide a copy of the approved Pima County Combination Request from and a recorded COT Covenant Regarding Development and Use of Real Property with the next submittal. 9. 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 the zoning for the parcels directly south is not shown on the plan and the zoning shown for the northeast corner of 12th and Drexel is incorrect and should be shown as R-2. 10. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5 Clearly indicate on the plan how vehicles entering the site from Drexel Road be prevented from going the wrong direction down the one-way parking area access lane (PAAL), i.e. signage, pavement markings etc. 11. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5 Provide a PAAL width dimension from the south end of the parking spaces shown along the south side of the wash bays to the curd. 12. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.b the parking spaces called out under keynote 22 should be called out as stacking spaces. 13. D.S. 2-01.3.9.L If applicable shall 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 on the plan. 14. 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). 15. D.S. 2-01.3.9.L If applicable Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. 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/ D11-0003 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package. CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: 12th and Drexel Road - Car Wash Development Package T11BU00117 TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 23, 2011 DUE DATE: February 24, 2011 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 |
| 02/24/2011 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 02/24/2011, TO: Patricia Gehlen FROM: Laith Alshami, P.E. CDRC Engineering SUBJECT: Car Wash - 12th and Drexel Road D11-0003, T15S, R13E, SECTION 12 RECEIVED: Development Plan Package and Drainage Report on January 25, 2011 The subject project has been reviewed. The project can not be approved at this time. Address the following comments before review can continue. Prepare a detailed response that explains the revisions that where made and references the exact location in the Final plat and in the Title Report where the revisions were made: Drainage Report: 1. Correct the "Figure" numbers in the first lines of pages 11 and 12. 2. Drexel Road has a significant amount of water that might impact the subject parcel. Determine the impact of Drexel Road runoff on the site and revise the site design accordingly. 3. Include a discussion concerning any existing offsite drainage facilities and how they affect the subject development. 4. It is not clear if the proposed improvements include an office. If the offsite runoff impacts the site, the office and the mechanical/electrical equipment may have to be raised at least one foot above the regulatory flood elevation. Determine the proposed buildings floor elevation based on the offsite and onsite drainage. Additionally, any proposed work in the regulatory floodplain will require a floodplain use permit and might require an elevation certificate. 5. It is not clear why Basin B channel was rated for 1.2 cfs. It seems that the runoff entering Basin B is more than 1.2 cfs. 6. The text in the report and Figure 4 state that Basin A bleeder pipe will be 8" with a 6" orifice. Bleeder pipe rating in Appendix B is for a 12" pipe. Clarify the discrepancy and revise as required. 7. The discharge from Basin "B" through the weir will be concentrated flow. Address any required erosion control measures needed at the outlet. 8. Provide the design calculations for all proposed riprap splash pads. 9. Include a more detail discussion concerning proposed drainage facilities maintenance requirements and provide a maintenance checklist. 10. Provide an offsite watershed map that has the elevation contour lines. 11. The proposed bleeder pipe is too long which will make its maintenance difficult. Provide the pipe with a clean out station at appropriate distances. 12. The drainage report shall address erosion control requirements for this project. 13. Address water harvesting requirements in more details and demonstrate how roof and site drainage will be directed to maximize water harvesting. 14. According to Section 14.3 of the "Standard Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management In Tucson, Arizona", the proposed detention basins require maintenance access ramp that shall be wide enough to accommodate vehicular access. The minimum width should be 15' and the ramp slope should not exceed 15 percent. Please be advised that maintenance ramps should be designed in such a way that does not allow inadvertent access to vehicles. Verify that the maintenance ramps will not reduce the required size of the basins. Smaller access ramps or the elimination of the ramp might be considered based on the size of the basin. 15. According to Section 3.3.5 "Low-Flow Channels" of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual the proposed basins floors shall be sloped to provide positive drainage. The section recommends a minimum of 0.5% floor slope and 0.2% low flow concrete channel slope. Please be advised that based on the City's experience with similar projects, 0.5% slope was difficult to construct and maintain which resulted in nuisance ponding in the basins. Show the provided positive drainage on the drainage exhibit. 16. Address drainage facilities maintenance responsibility and what needs to be done. Provide drainage facilities maintenance checklist. Every Sheet: 1. Include the administrative address in the Title Block as required by D.S. 2-01.3.2.D. 2. Provide the complete Development Package case number (i.e. D11-0003) and the assigned Grading Plan number (i.e. T11BU00117) adjacent to the title block on each sheet (D.S. 2-01.3.3). General/Grading Notes: 3. Drainage Notes #2 and #3, on Sheet 1/22, may need to be revised based on the findings of the revised Drainage Report. 4. Revise General Note #32, on Sheet 4/22, to read as follows: "CALL FOR SWPPP INSPECTION AND PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETINGS. FOR A PDSD ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS, CALL IVR (740-6970), OR SCHEDULE WITH A CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE AT THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, OR CONTACT DSD ENGINEERING AT 791-5550 EXTENSION 2101, OR SCHEDULE INSPECTIONS ONLINE AT: http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/inspections". 5. Revise all references to "Development Services Department" and "DSD" to "Planning and Development Services Department" and "PDSD". 6. Add the following general notes: a. The approved Development Package Plan is the only acceptable construction plan onsite. The Contractor may not use any other plans, for construction purposes. b. The contractor shall remove the fine materials from the bottom of the detention basins and scarify the basin bottom once the construction activities are completed in order to remove any fine material build up caused by construction and to restore soil percolation. install BMP's at the basin inlet(s) to prevent the fines from entering the basin c. Any proposed engineering work to be done below grade (i.e. toe-downs, cutoff walls, drainage pipes/structures, etc.) shall not be back filled until Development Services Inspector inspects the work and approves it. d. The contractor is not permitted to make an autonomous decision to carry out construction field changes without prior written approval from the Engineer of Record and the City of Tucson Planning and Development Services Department. e. A copy of the approved Development Package Plan, Grading Permit, and any Geotechnical Reports shall be kept at the site at all times, until final grading approval. f. Any proposed field revision to the Development Package Plan MAY require a re-submittal of a revised development package plan for review. Contact PDSD Engineering at 791-5550 to discuss changes in grading design. g. 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. h. See the associated Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan as a part of this grading permit. i. Contact Permits and Codes at 791-5100 for any questions regarding any right-of-way permit requirements. j. As-builts and letters of completion for basin and overall project are required. k. The Engineer of Record shall submit a statement of conformance to as-built plan and the specifications. l. 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 reports have been submitted. m. Depress all landscaped areas a maximum of 6" for waterharvesting" 7. Provide the drainage structures maintenance responsibility note. Base Layer: 8. Provide the described basis of bearing and the tie between the basis bearing and one of the parcel corners (D.S. 2-01.3.8.A). 9. Provide, if applicable, all existing easements, and ensure that the proposed improvements are not in conflict with the existing easements (D.S. 2-01.3.8.B). 10. The solid waste collection location appears to be inaccessible. Relocate the enclosure to a more accessible location (D.S. 2-01.3.9.T). Site Plan: 11. Either show the location of Keynote #9 on Sheet 2/22 of the plan, or remove the description if it is not applicable. 12. It appears that the location of Keynote #17, on Sheet 2/22, is incorrect. Revise. 13. Show the basis of bearing and the tie as required by D.S. 2-01.3.8.A. 14. Provide all existing storm drainage facilities on and adjacent to the site (D.S. 2-01.3.8.F). 15. Show the floodplain limits for Drexel Road 100-year runoff with 100-year water surface elevations (D.S. 2-01.3.8.I) and (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.6). 16. Provide the detention basins 100-year ponding limits with water surface elevations (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.1). 17. Indicate proposed drainage solutions, such as origin, direction and destination of flow and method of collecting and containing flow (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.2). 18. Provide locations and types of drainage structures, such as, but not limited to, drainage pipes, erosion control pads, detention basins, etc. (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.3). 19. Show building setbacks from the proposed detention basins as recommended by the Geotechnical Report. Landscape Plan: 20. Ensure that the proposed landscaping does not obstruct visibility within the sight visibility triangles. 21. If detention basin maintenance access ramps are needed, ensure that the proposed landscaping does not obstruct the ramps. Geotechnical Report: 22. The report shall make recommendation concerning building setbacks from the proposed detention basins especially for the wash bay and its proximity to Basin "A". Grading Plan: 23. Provide cut and fill quantities. 24. Show on Detail 7/6 that the P.A.A.L. width is measured from the bottom of the vertical curbs where the curb meets the pavement. 25. Provide construction details for the proposed detention basin outlets. Include elevations, material, dimensions, etc. 26. Provide the construction details for the erosion control pads including elevations, materials, dimensions, etc. 27. Darken the existing contour lines and provide their elevations (D.S. 2-01.3.8.E). 28. Details 8/6 may have to be revised if the geotechnical report recommends a building setback from Basin "A". 29. All existing curb cuts that are not proposed to be used shall be closed. 30. Provide the length of the curb openings on Sheet 5/22. 31. The required width of public sidewalks on MS&R streets is 6'. Show the sidewalk widths on Sheets 2/22 and 5/22 to verify compliance with this requirement. If the sidewalks are less than 6' in width, revise the plans accordingly. 32. Show the locations of Keynotes #5, #6, #8, #10, #13 and #14 on Sheet 5/22. 33. Label the grading limits on Sheet 5/22. Include the grading limits symbol in the legend. 34. All proposed work in the public right of way will require a right of way excavation permit or a Private Improvement Agreement. Contact Thad Harvison of Transportation Department Permit and Codes at 791-5100 for additional information. 35. Revise the Development Plan Package according to the Drainage Report revisions. SWPPP: The project appears to be less than one acre in size including all proposed work in the public right of way. Consequently, a SWPPP submittal is not required. The submitted SWPPP was given a courtesy review and was found acceptable. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4933 or Laith.Alshami@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Development Plan Package |
| 02/25/2011 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Passed | |
| 02/25/2011 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Add the CDRC case number and any related case numbers to the landscape and native plant preservation plans. DS 2-07.2.1.B 2) Landscape borders proposed in right-of-way or MS&R areas must be approved by the City Engineer or designee and comply with the City Engineer's requirements on construction, irrigation, location, and plant type. Provide verification, in writing, of any approvals obtained. Contact Gary Wittwer, DOT Landscape Architect for specific requirements. 3) Hedges and other vegetative screens shall not extend more than three (3) feet into the street landscape border per LUC 3.7.3.2.C.2. Revise the plans to locate the required screen at the development side of the street landscape borders where applicable. 4) Fifty (50) percent or more of the area of the street landscape border must be covered with shrubs or vegetative ground cover. The required ground coverage must be achieved within two (2) years from the date of planting. LUC 3.7.2.4.A.5 5) The use of vegetation to satisfy the screen requirement is allowed only to provide for alternative treatment and is not in any way meant to imply that the vegetative screen can also be used to meet the landscape requirement. Screening plants are not calculated as part of the 50% vegetative groundcover requirement. Revise as necessary. DS 2-06.3.7 6) Revise the water harvesting plant to revise the water demand category for WHIA 2. The categories should correspond with the ADWR plant List which lists Prosopis velutina and Acacia stenophylla in the "low" category. It would be more accurate to state that the category is Very Low-Low. WHIAS can contain one or several categories if the values are averaged. |
| 02/25/2011 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 02/25/2011 | JANE DUARTE | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | |
| 02/25/2011 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/28/2011 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#233613 February 28, 2011 The WLB Group Attn: Gary Grizzle 4444 E Broadway Tucson, Arizona 85711 Dear Mr. Grizzle : SUBJECT: Car Wash – 12th and Drexel Rd D11-0003 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted August 16, 2007. It appears that there may be conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. TEP Down guy and anchor may conflict with driveway. Relocation is billable. 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. Richard 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 |
| 02/28/2011 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Approved | Hi Patricia, thank you for the follow up. TAA does not oppose the proposed development (Car Wash/ 12th&Drexel) |
| 02/28/2011 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES February 28, 2011 Gary Grizzle The WLB Group 4444 E. Broadway Blvd. Tucson, Arizona 85711 Subject: D11-0003 CAR WASH 12th & DREXEL ROAD Development Package Dear Gary: Your submittal of January 25, 2011 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 (Env Svcs, Addressing, Zoning HC, Wastewater, Zoning, Engineering, Landscape, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Geotechnical Report (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Pima County Combo Request Documentation (Zoning, PDSD) 1 Check Made out to "Pima County Treasurer" for $100.00 (Wastewater) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4893. Sincerely, John Williams Planning Technician All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/ Via fax: (520) 318-6170 |