Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D11-0012
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/02/2011 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/02/2011 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Passed | |
| 05/03/2011 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 05/03/2011 | DAVID MANN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | Fire Comments: Add note all units to have automatic fire sprinklers. Current layout of fire lines would require domestic demand to be added to calculations. |
| 05/04/2011 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | However, the location/description of the development will not have any impact on ADOT facilities at Tanque Verde Rd. at Wrightstown rd. please proceed with the approval process; ADOT has no comments on this development. Thank you. TM. |
| 05/09/2011 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department Jackson Jenkins Director 201 N. Stone Ave., 8th Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701-1207 PH: (520) 740-6500 FAX: (520) 620-0135 May 6, 2011 To: NICK WESTPHAL DOWL HKM 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: TANQUE VERDE AT WRIGHTSTOWN CASITAS (7777 E. TANQUE VERDE ROAD, TUCSON, AZ 85715) Development Plan – 1st Submittal D11-0012 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: 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. SheetC9.2: Call out the private construction plan #(PV-2004-23) for the existing manhole #3815-PV09. Sheet C1.1: Include the following Wastewater Notes: 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). A PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FROM PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. 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. cc: Chad Amateau, PE Checked by:______ Kristin Greene, PE, DLU Manager DLU Project folder |
| 05/10/2011 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Please provide total number of parking space calculations and required accessible parking spaces required as per Table 1106.1. 2. Please identify the "Van Accessible" parking spaces on the site plan,. 3. At sheet C4.1, please realign the marked crossing between units 90 and 66 to be as close as possible to 90 degrees of both curb lines. Parked cars have no choice now but to back into the marked crossing. 4. Please insure that the slopes for all accessible routes are compliant with 2006 IBC, ICC (ANSI 117.1), Section 403.3 END OF REVIEW |
| 05/11/2011 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Tanque Verde At Wrightstown Development Package D11-0012 TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 11, 2011 DUE DATE: May 13, 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 May 01, 2012. 2. D.S. 2-01.3.4.B Identify Tanque Verde Creek on the project location map. 3. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.6.b Remove all references to "SCENIC" as Tanque Verde Road is not a scenic route in this area. 4. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.9.b Per LUC Section 3.2.9 the following areas are not counted in the lot coverage, "POOL RAMADA, POOL DECK & PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION". Revise the lot coverage calculation. 5. D.S. 2-01.3.8.B All existing easements that are "TO BE ABANDONED" need to be abandoned prior to approval of this development package. 6. D.S. 2-01.3.8.C The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. 7. D.S. 2-01.3.9.E As this project encompasses 6 parcels a lot combination is required. Provide a copy of the approved Pima County Combo Request form and a copy of the recorded Covenant Regarding Development and Use of Real Property with your next submittal. 8. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.a Per Ordinance #10886 LUC Section 3.3.6.4.B.2 A motor vehicle off-street parking space shall have a minimum width of ten (10) feet when the side(s) of the parking space abuts any vertical barrier over six (6) inches in height, other than a vertical support for a carport. That said demonstrate on the plan how the proposed vehicle parking spaces adjacent to the proposed garages meet this section of the code. 9. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.a Per Ordinance #10886 LUC Section 3.3.6.4.B.2 A motor vehicle off-street parking space shall have a minimum width of ten (10) feet when the side(s) of the parking space abuts any vertical barrier over six (6) inches in height, other than a vertical support for a carport. That said demonstrate on the plan how the vehicle parking space adjacent to the proposed gated entry, called out under keynote 39, Sheet C4.1, meets this section of the code. 10. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.a There are two (2) back-up spurs that don't meet the requirements of Ordinance #10886 LUC Section 3.3.6.6.D. Show all required radii and the required distance to the wall on the south back-up spur. 11. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.a Per Ordinance #10886 LUC Section 3.3.6.6.B.1.a Access lanes and PAALs shall be setback at least one (1) foot from an open structure, such as a carport or covered pedestrian access path as measured from the closed part of the structure or roof overhang. That said demonstrate on the plan how proposed carport structures meet this section of the LUC. 12. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.a Per Ordinance #10886 LUC Section 3.3.6.6.B.2 Access lanes and PAALs shall be setback at least two (2) feet from a wall, screen, or other obstruction. That said show how the proposed garages meet this section of the LUC. 13. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.a Provide a vehicle parking space calculation that includes the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. This calculation should be based on Ordinance #10886 LUC Section 3.3.4.2. 14. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Show both the required Short-Term and Long-Term bicycle parking facilities on the development package. Provide a fully dimensioned detail for the Short-Term bicycle parking. See Ordinance #10886 LUC Section 3.3.9 for design criteria. 15. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Provide a bicycle parking space calculation for both Short-Term and Long-Term that includes the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided on the development package. This calculation should be based on Ordinance #10886 LUC Section 3.3.8.2.B. 16. D.S. 2-01.3.9.O Once comment #18 has been addressed the required perimeter yard setbacks can be verified. 17. D.S. 2-01.3.9.O Keynote 35 calls out a "29' BUILDING SETBACK", this appears to be incorrect. Based on the scale shown on the plan of 1" = 20' this setback line shown is approximately 15', please clarify. 18. D.S. 2-01.3.9.Q Provide the height of each structure within the footprint of the building(s). 19. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R The proposed "STABILIZED DG PATH" called out under keynote 9 does not meet the requirements of D.S. 2-08.5.1.C. 20. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.0 the striped area located between the two (2) vehicle parking spaces, located just east of buildings #34 & 35 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the vehicle parking spaces. 21. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.0 the striped area located just east of building #44 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the vehicle parking space. 22. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.0 the striped area located southeast of building #56 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the parking spaces. 23. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.0 the striped area located northwest of building #83 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the parking spaces. 24. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.0 the striped area located between the two (2) vehicle parking spaces, located just east of buildings #55 & 56 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the vehicle parking spaces. 25. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.0 the striped area located between the two (2) vehicle parking spaces, located just west of buildings #57 & 58 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the vehicle parking spaces. 26. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.1 the striped area located between the two (2) vehicle parking spaces, located just north of buildings #75 & 77 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the vehicle parking spaces. 27. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.1 the striped area located between the two (2) vehicle parking spaces, located just north of buildings #71 & 73 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the vehicle parking spaces. 28. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.1 the striped area located north of building #90 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the parking spaces. 29. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.1 the striped area located east of building #86 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the parking spaces. 30. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.1 the striped area located between the two (2) vehicle parking spaces, located just west of buildings #11 & 13 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the vehicle parking spaces. 31. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.1 the striped area located between the two (2) vehicle parking spaces, located just west of buildings #01 & 04 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the vehicle parking spaces. 32. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.2 the striped area located north of building #22 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the parking spaces. 33. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.2 the striped area located between the two (2) vehicle parking spaces, located just north of buildings #28 & 30 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the vehicle parking spaces. 34. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Sheet C4.1 the striped area located between the two (2) vehicle parking spaces, located just south of buildings #78 & 79 is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the vehicle parking spaces. 35. Depending on how the above comments are addressed additional comments may be forth coming. 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/ D11-0012 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: Tanque Verde At Wrightstown Development Package T11BU00568 TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 11, 2011 DUE DATE: May 13, 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 |
| 05/12/2011 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the landscape plans to include the following standard notes for landscaping in the public right-of-way if applicable: All planting and irrigation that is proposed within the ROW must receive a permit prior to construction. Plans should be submitted to the City of Tucson Permits and Code section at 201 N. Stone, 4th floor. Once the permit has been approved, the applicant must call for a "Blue Stake " prior to the required pre-construction meeting with the City Landscape Architect, and prior to starting any work. It is the property owner's responsibility to keep the Sight Visibility Triangles (SVT), and the pedestrian access area clear of vegetation at all times, per Land Use Code (LUC) section 3.7.2.9. Final plant locations must be in compliance with all utility setback requirements. The owner understands that if the City of Tucson Transportation Department or any utility company needs to work within the ROW in the landscaped area, plants and irrigation may be destroyed without replacement or repair. The property owner assumes full liability for this landscape and irrigation, and any damage to roadway, sidewalk and utilities within the public right-of-way. The only private irrigation equipment that is allowed within the ROW is polyethylene type tubing and emitters that are not under constant pressure. All other equipment except for the water meter must be on site. 2) Revise the references to screening on sheet L-1 to note the required screening for parking lots and drives located within 100 feet of adjacent streets or residentially zoned property. LUC Table 3.7.2-I 3) If a new development is using an existing screen on an adjacent property to meet screening requirements, a copy of the recorded covenant locating the existing screen(s) on adjacent property is required. DS 2-03.2.1.A.15 Basically this means that an easement for joint use and maintenance would be required where the code requires a screen wall and the proposal is to use an existing off-site wall. 4) Verify that the water harvesting note on sheet L-1 should apply universally or if it is limited to identified basins on the site. If water harvesting is limited to identified basins, more should be provided for proposed tree plantings and the basins need to be shown on the grading plans. Grading, hydrology, and landscape structural plans are to be integrated to make maximum use of site storm water runoff for supplemental on-site irrigation purposes. The landscape plan shall indicate use of all runoff, from individual catch basins around single trees to basins accepting flow from an entire vehicular use area or roof area. LUC 3.7.4.3.B 5) Dimension the street landscape border at Tanque Verde at the wall projections, noting any use of the public right-of-way to meet the minimum width requirements. 6) Revise the landscape plan to include the required number of canopy trees. Provide totals for borders and parking areas for the number required and provided. |
| 05/12/2011 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | >>> Malini Banerjee <mbanerjee@pagnet.org> 05/12/2011 2:42 PM >>> No Objection regarding trip generation numbers. |
| 05/12/2011 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR# 236599 May 11, 2011 DOWL HKM Attn: Nick Westphal 166 W Alameda St Tucson, AZ 85701 To Mr Westphal : SUBJECT: Tanque Verde @ Wrightstown D11-001 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted May 6, 2011. It appears that there are some conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. The J2 (TPW-37) & the single phase transformer (TPW-38) are in conflict with the development and will need to be relocated at the expense on the Developer. If the conduit is in conflict, this too will have to be relocated at the expense of the Developer. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. The customer is responsible for the new trenching to relocate them as well as the relocation cost. In order to apply for electric service, call the New Construction Department at (520) 918-8300. Submit a final set of plans including approved site, offsite and electrical load plans. Include a CD with the AutoCAD version of the plans. If easements are required, they will be secured by separate instrument. Your final plans should be sent to: Tucson Electric Power Company Attn: Rich Harrington New Business Project Manager P. O. Box 711 (DB-101) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-918-8726 Please call the area Designer Steve Doniere at (520) 918-8275, should you have any questions. Sincerely, Henrietta Noriega Office Specialist Design/Build hn Enclosures cc: City of Tucson (Email only) S. Doniere, Tucson Electric Power |
| 05/12/2011 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | AUDREY FARENGA ADDRESSING REVIEW PH #: 740-6800 FAX #: 623-5411 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: AUDREY FARENGA, ADDRESSING REVIEW SUBJECT: D11-0012 TANQUE VERDE AT WRIGHTSTOWN CASITAS/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: May 11, 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: On the Location Map, delete all the directions in front of the street names. Delete Super Chicken Drive, this is not an official street name. Number all the casitas on sheet 1. Include the legal description and tax codes of all the parcels associated with the plan. Include the number of casitas in all title blocks. Do not include the garages, parking lots, etc. in the same numbering system as the casitas. Is there access off of Tanque Verde Road? If not, the address may need to be changed. What is the building labeled 90? This number may need to be changed to be labeled consecutively with the other buildings. |
| 05/12/2011 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | May 12, 2011 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D11-0012 PROJECT NAME: Tanque Verde/Wrightstown PROJECT ADDRESS: 7777 E Tanque Verde Rd 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. It is not like me to encourage more driveways, but it may benefit the site to have an additional access drive onto Desert Links Drive in the event that the primary driveway needs to be closed periodically. 2. 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. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-6730 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 05/13/2011 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Patricia Gehlen DATE: May 13, 2011 CDRC/Zoning Manager SUBJECT: Tanque Verde at Wrightstown, 7777 E. Tanque Verde Rd. Development Package D11-0012 (First Review) T13S, R15E, Section 32 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Package. The Development Package (DP) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Development Package: 1. Please include a detailed response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the DP. 2. The Dev. Pkg. does not contain or is missing a substantial amount of information, such as but not limited to, contours or spot elevations for the adjacent properties, sidewalks being used to convey drainage (common through-out many areas of the project), details of all proposed drainage structures, a substandard SWPPP etc. I have included many comments in this letter; however, it is difficult to address every issue because of the lack of information needed to perform a proper review. Perhaps and I suggest, a meeting with the reviewers to explain your project to us and what we need in turn from you. 3. Edit any reference Site and grading general notes to be in conformance with D.S. 11-01.0. 4. The title block shall include the following information. D.S. 2-01.3.2. A. The proposed name of the project or subdivision, or if there is no name, the proposed tenant's name. B. A brief legal description and a statement as to whether the project is a resubdivision are to be provided. On re-subdivisions, provide the recording information of the existing subdivision plat. D. The administrative street address. E. Page number and number of pages. 5. Relevant case numbers (development package document, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet. D.S. 2-01.3.3. 6. General Notes. The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable. D.S. 2-01.3.7. 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." 7. Existing Site Conditions. The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within fifty (50) feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of fifty (50) feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided. D.S. 2-01.3.8. B. 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 shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided. C. The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. E. Indicate the ground elevation on the site based on City of Tucson Datum (indicate City of Tucson field book number and page). 1. For land that slopes less than approximately one (1) percent, contour lines shall be drawn at intervals of not more than one (1) foot. Spot elevations shall be provided at all breaks in grade and along all drainage channels or swales and at selected points not more than one hundred (100) feet apart in all directions. 2. For land that slopes between approximately one (1) percent and five (5) percent, contour lines shall be drawn at intervals of not more than two (2) feet. 3. For land that slopes more than five (5) percent, contour line intervals shall be drawn at five (5) foot intervals. If the property is under the applicability of the Hillside Development Zone (HDZ), the contour lines are to be drawn at intervals which satisfy the specific requirements of the HDZ and Development Standard 9-01.0. 4. If applicable, protected peaks and ridges shall be delineated on the plan/plat. F. Existing storm drainage facilities on and adjacent to the site will be shown. H. Conditions on adjacent land significantly affecting the design of the project will be shown, such as the approximate direction and gradients of ground slope; character and location of adjacent development; and drainageways, arroyos, ditches, and channels, including their existing conditions. I. Floodplain information, including the location of the 100-year flood limits for all flows of one hundred (100) cfs or more with 100-year flood water surface elevations, shall be indicated. 1. Where natural floodprone areas, such as washes, channels, drainageways, etc., exist within the development document boundaries of the drawing, water surface contours for the 100-year flood with water surface elevations indicated must be shown and clearly labeled. 2. The linear distance between water surface contour intervals should not exceed two hundred (200) feet unless prior agreement has been made with the City Floodplain Engineer or designee. 3. A symbol identical to that used to represent the water surface contour intervals on the development package documents should be included in the legend. 8. Information on Proposed Development. The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes. D.S. 2-01.3.9. J. If street dedication is not required or proposed and the project site is adjacent to a Major Street or Route, draw the Major Street right-of-way lines for those streets. (Add the MS&R future sidewalk, right-of -way lines, sight visibility triangles, etc.) 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. N. In conjunction with a drainage report or statement, as applicable, prepared inaccordance with the City Engineer's instructions and procedures, the following information will be indicated on the development package documents. For additional information regarding drainage standards, see the City of Tucson Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management. 1. Show areas of detention/retention including 100-year ponding limits with water surface elevations. 3. Provide locations and types of drainage structures, such as, but not limited to, drainage crossings an pipe culverts. 4. Indicate all proposed ground elevations at different points on each lot to provide reference to future grading and site drainage. 5. Verification will be provided that any drainage solutions which occur outside the boundaries of the development document area are constructed with adjacent owners' permission. (Additional notarized documentation of that approval will be submitted with the drainage report.) 6. The 100-year flood limits with water surface elevations for all flows of one hundred (100) cfs or more will be drawn on the development package documents. 7. Draw locations and indicate types of off-site runoff acceptance points and/or onsite runoff discharge points. O. All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown. R. Show on-site pedestrian circulation as required by the LUC utilizing location and the design criteria in Development Standard 2-08.0. S. Show on-site pedestrian refuge areas per Development Standard 3-05. T. Show existing or proposed pedestrian circulation along abutting rights-of-way. Such sidewalks must comply with accessibility requirements for the physically disabled and the design criteria in Development Standard 3-01.0. Show refuse collection areas, including locations of dumpsters, screening location and materials, and vehicle maneuverability, fully dimensioned, and access route. If dumpster service is not proposed, indicate type of service. For specific information on refuse collection, refer to Development Standard 6-01.0. Refuse collection on all projects shall be designed based on that Standard, even if collection is to be contracted to a private firm. U. Indicate graphically, where possible, compliance with conditions of rezoning. V. For gang mailboxes indicate location to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements, such as pedestrian accessibility, utilities, and landscaping. Drainage Report: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the DR. 2. See comment no. 2 of the DP. 3. Include WSEL and the EHS adjacent to the development. 4. Details of all drainage structures on site. 5. Profile of the proposed 36" storm drain pipe for HGL. 6. Detail all rip-raped areas and curb depression lengths. 7. Number of wall openings and spacing. 8. Side walks cannot be used for drainage purposes, scuppers must be used to convey the 10-year event under pedestrian walkways. 9. Include the Administration address and DP on the DR. 10. Addendums to any Drainage Reports are not accecpted. The new layout or revisions must be incorporated into the approved Drainage Report. Grading Plan: 1. Please include a detailed response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the DP/GP. 2. Add note: "Depress all landscaped areas a maximum of 6" for water harvesting" 3. List Development Package (D11-003) and Grading plan number (T11BU00568) on each sheet of the DP/GP. 4. Show cross section with transverse and longitudinal slopes. Because of the fill additional x-sections will be needed to review the project. 5. Please show the proposed roof drainage patterns, 100% of the 10-year flow must be conveyed under the sidewalks including any other site drainage as well. Please provide supporting calculations to demonstrate compliance with D.S. 3-01.4.4. If the location(s) of the roof scuppers and/or sidewalk scuppers have not yet been decided, a general note indicating sidewalk scuppers will be used when the roof drain/sidewalk scupper locations have been designed and located will suffice. 6. Call out surface paving material. 7. Curb and Gutter elevation include drainage flow with percent slope. 8. Show details of all surface materials. 9. A permit or a private improvement agreement might be necessary for any work performed within the Right-of-way. Contact Permits and Codes at (520) 791-5100 for permit information. 10. Delineate 100-year W.S.E.L., Floodplain and erosion hazard setback. 11. Call out the names of all washes. 12. Show the 100-year flood peak discharge. 13. Call out all slopes and stabilization material (concrete, riprap, gabbions or vegetation). With the amount of fill are there any slopes? 14. Cut or fill slopes require a 2' minimum setback from property line. 15. Placement of fill in excess of 2' above existing grade at any location in the outer 100' of the developing site is not allowed and/or shall meet the requirements per D.S. 11-01. Please address. 16. Drainage patterns with percent slopes (Show patterns within the first 100 feet from the property line). 17. Flow arrows, grades and flow rates within and adjacent to site to show drainage scheme. 18. Call out peak discharges entering and exiting the site. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the DR. 2. See note no. 2 of the DP comments. 3. The SWPPP plan must meet and include all the requirements of the ADEQ SWPPP check list available on line. Here are a couple of web sites to aid you in preparation of the SWPPP: " http://lists.asdeq.gov/environ/water/permits/sownload/cswppp.pdf " http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/sample_swppp.pdf If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4932 or Paul.Machado@tucsonaz.gov Paul P. Machado Senior Engineering Associate City of Tucson - Planning and Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210 (520) 837-4932 office (520) 879-8010 fax C:/7777 E. Tanque Verde Rd._DEV_PKG |
| 05/13/2011 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 05/13/2011 | FRODRIG2 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | Date Case Number Project Address May 13, 2011 D11-0012 TANQUE VERDE AT WRIGHTSTOWN DEVELOPMENT PLAN Comments: Denied, The proposed development plan for the Case No. D11-0012, TANQUE VERDE AT WRIGHTSTOWN, DEVELOPMENT PLAN dose not the meet the minimum requirements for Environmental Services, Solid Waste Disposal Standard 6-01. Containers enclosures must be clearly shown on the Development Plan and labeled for their intended us being Solid Waste or Recycle materials. If a compact system is to be used for Solid Waste an enclosures must be shown on the Plan. A detail plan for the container enclosures must be shown on the plans with 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”. Environmental Services Department Development Plan Review Reviewer: Tony Teran Office Phone (520) 837-3706 E-mail: Tony.Teran @tucsonaz.gov |
| 05/13/2011 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Passed | |
| 05/13/2011 | JANE DUARTE | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | |
| 05/13/2011 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | CDRC Review Planning and Development Services Dept. - Community Planning D11-0012, Tanque Verde at Wrightstown, 1st submittal Comments Due: 5/13/11 Items reviewed: Development Plan Package - Associated rezoning case is C9-91-19B, Lewis-Tanque Verde Road, C-2. Ordinance 10876 (adopted 2/8/2011) amended Ordinance 9892, including the rezoning conditions established on 9/22/2003, for the commercial (southern) portion of the site. - Not an FLD (Flexible Lot Development option) project - Not on a Gateway or Scenic Route - Satisfies annexation conditions as per zoning Ordinance 7428, adopted on 6/11/1990 Comments: The plans are denied. Please resubmit, and address the following. 1) Regarding rezoning condition #3, thank you for providing colored renderings of the walls and building elevations. To ensure they are kept in the project file, please submit two copies to the CDRC office (for review by the Landscaping and Community Planning sections), with the next submittal. They don't need to be stamped or full-size. 2) Regarding rezoning condition #4, please show sections and associated elevation details for all new screen walls (south, east and west sides; where are the sections associated with detail 6 on sheet L.4?). 3) Also regarding rezoning condition #4, please indicate (sheet L4.0, screen wall details) that all new screen walls, including the split face portions, will receive graffiti-resistant treatment. 4) Please indicate how rezoning condition #10 is being addressed. Feel free to contact me to discuss any of the above. Reviewed by: J. Hershenhorn, 5/13/11 837-6976, joanne.hershenhorn@tucsonaz.gov |
| 05/16/2011 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES May 16, 2011 Nick Westphal DOWL HKM 166 W. Alameda St. Tucson, Arizona 85701 Subject: D11-0012 TANQUE VERDE AT WRIGHTSTOWN Development Package Dear Nick: Your submittal of May 2, 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 11 sets of the DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 11 Copies Revised Development Package (Fire, Wastewater, Zoning HC, Zoning, Addressing, Landscape, Traffic, Planning, Env Svcs, Engineering, PDSD) 3 Copies Colored Wall and Building Elevations (Landscape, Planning, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised SWPPP Documents (Engineering, 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) 624-0384 |
| 05/16/2011 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 05/16/2011 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed |