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 - D11-0026
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/29/2011 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 08/29/2011 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 08/30/2011 | DAVID MANN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | Please provide some method of isolating underground fire services, so that any repairs to underground will not impact both building simultaneously. Please indicate location of No Parking - Fire Lanes signs. Detail of what sign(s) should look are in the C.O.T. amendments to the 2006 IFC. |
| 08/30/2011 | 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 August 26, 2011 To: Zach Hilgart HILGART WILSON 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: BELLA VISTA APARTMENTS Dev. Plan - 1st submittal D11-0026 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. (Ref A,C,G) 2. Sheet 1: Insert the following wastewater general notes(Ref A): ANY WASTEWATER DISCHARGED INTO THE PUBLIC SANITARY SEWERAGE SYSTEM SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE INDUSTRIAL WASTE ORDINANCE (PIMA COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 1991-140, AS AMENDED). A PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FROM PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. 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). THE LANDSCAPING WITHIN ALL PUBLIC SEWER EASEMENTS SHOWN HEREON SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANTING GUIDELINES OF PC/COT STANDARD DETAIL WWM A-4. NO PERMITS FOR PERMANENT STRUCTURES (I.E., MASONRY WALLS, FENCES, ETC.) ON OR THROUGH THE PUBLIC SEWER EASEMENT WILL BE ISSUED WITHOUT SEPARATE WRITTEN CONSENT OF PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT. 3. Sheet 1: Eliminate Wastewater Management Notes (1) and (2). 4. Sheet C2.1: In order to abandon the section of 6" public sewer line, shown on plan please Contact Mr. Steve Reuter with PCRWRD @ (520)740-6608 to initiate the abandonment process. 5. Sheet C2.1: Call out IMS #'s for all of the public manholes and cleanouts shown on plan. Also call out the rim and invert elevations. (Ref A) 6. Sheet C2.1: Show in the Legend symbols for proposed and existing sewer lines/manholes/cleanouts and distinguish between public and private. (Ref A) 7. Sheet C2.1: Call out the construction plan # for all existing sewer lines shown on plan and show the existing public sewer in Speedway Blvd. (Ref A) 8. Sheet C2.1: Call out the public sewer easement over the existing public sewer line on site. Call out the recordation information and width of the easement. (Ref A) 9. Sheet C2.1: Demonstrate access to MH #9522-01 in compliance with WWM Std Details A-3 and 111. Also an accessibility easement may be required over the PAAL on site to grant PCRWRD access to the public manhole on site. 10. Sheet C2.1: In order to avoid the private lift station, consider abandoning the entire public sewer on site and connecting to the public sewer line fronting the property in Speedway Blvd. Also the as-built plans show an invert of 2366.47 for #9522-02A (which would allow for gravity flow)as opposed to the 2368.32 shown on your plans. Is this a datum discrepancy? 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 Ref. A. Development Plan Checklist Requirements - Chapter 18.71 of the Pima County Code - Section J http://www.pimaxpress.com/SubDivision/Documents/2006/DP_Requirements2Aug04.pdf Ref. C - Arizona Administrative Code, Title 18, Chapters 5 & 9 (R18-5-205) http://www.azsos.gov/public_services/Title_18/18-05.htm and (R-18-9-E301) http://www.azsos.gov/public_services/Title_18/18-09.htm Ref. D - PCRWRD Procedures, Preliminary Sewer Layout Requirements, 1984 (revised April 1988) http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/stddet/pdf/procedures.pdf Ref. E - PCRWRD Design Standards for Public Sewerage Facilities, 1983 (revised April 1988) http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/stddet/pdf/design_standards.pdf Ref. F - City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Details http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/stddet/pdf/all_det.pdf Ref. G - Pima County Code of Ordinances, Title 13 - Public Services, Division II - Sewers http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientID=16119&stateID=3&statename=Arizona Ref. H - City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Specifications for Public Improvements, 2003 Edition http://dot.pima.gov/transeng/stdspecsdet/standardspecs2003.pdf Ref. I - PCRWRD Engineering Directives http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/directives/ |
| 09/13/2011 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Rejected - Off site improvements must be shown on plans 1. West bound deceleration lane 2. Sight visibility triangles for the entrance to the driveway at Speedway must be shown 3. Note to include Offsite improvements in the right of way to be coordinated with City of Tucson Permits and Codes. Review conducted by Zelin Canchola |
| 09/22/2011 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | 1. As per the 2006 IBC, Section 1104.1, there must be a pedestrian accessible route to the nearest public right of waywhich in this case is Speedway Blvd. a. Accessible routes slopes must meet the requirements of ICC/ANSI 117.1, Section 403.3. If slopes are more than 5%, Section 405 requirements are governs the slopes. Maximum slopes can be no more than 1:12 or 8.33%. 2. Change the reference at note 10 to read 3/C1.2. This are no A sheets in this submittal package. 3. Identify the accessible parking space and show location of accessible parking signage on details 1/CO.1 and 1/C1.0. END OF REVIEW |
| 09/26/2011 | 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: D11-0026 BELLA VISTA APARTMENTS/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: September 23, 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: Add the section, township and range to all title blocks. Delete West and spell out Boulevard of West Speedway Blvd on all applicable pages. Number the buildings, no letters. |
| 09/26/2011 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Bella Vista Apartments Development Package (1st Review) D11-0026 TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 26, 2011 DUE DATE: September 28, 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 June 30, 2012. The following comments are based on Development Package Submittal Requirements Dated 12-20-07: 1. Development Standards for General Notes, Standard Notation for calcs, Calculation should be provided on the Master Cover Sheet or General Notes sheet not scattered through out the plan set. Also there are several General Notes, Consultant Team list and calculation duplicated on different sheets. This information should be provided once on the correct sheet as shown in Development Package Submittal Requirements Dated 12-20-07: 2. The Storm Water Management Plan should follow the NPPO plans. The following comments are based on Development Standard 2-01.0 1. D.S. 2-01.2.3 All lettering and text (upper or lower case), and numbering, shall be a minimum of 3/32 inches in height to assure the plan will be legible during review and when digitized and/or reduced for archiving. That said it does not appear that the text on sheet T1.1, C0.1 & C0.1 meet this requirement. 2. D.S. 2-01.3.2.B Provide a brief legal description with in the title block. 3. D.S. 2-01.3.2.D Zoning acknowledges that D.S. 2-01.3.2.D calls for the administrative address to be in the title block. Due to Pima County Addressing requirements remove the address from the title block and provide the address near the title block in the lower right hand corner. 4. D.S. 2-01.3.2.E Provide the page number and number of pages (Sheet X of 17) within the title block on all sheets. 5. D.S. 2-01.3.3 Provide the following relevant case numbers adjacent to the title block on each sheet: D11-0026, T11SA00336 & S11-018. 6. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.6.b Add "SEC. 2.8.3, MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES (MS&R) SETBACK ZONE". To the "APPLICABLE OVERLAY ZONES:". 7. D.S. 2-01.3.9.E The proposed lot split, S11-018, will need to be complete prior to approval of the development package. 8. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H Provide dimensions for all existing and proposed parking area access lanes (PAALs) and access lanes on the plan. This includes the PAAL located on the parcel to the south that provides access to this project. 9. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H Provide dimension for the proposed backup spur shown at the west end of the parking area. These dimension should show how LUC Section 3.3.6.6.D.2 and 3 are met. 10. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Remove all references of "CLASS I" bicycle parking form the plan as this type of bicycle parking is no longer relevant. 11. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d The "CLASS I" bicycle parking called out in Keynote 12 should be called Short-Term. For your information per LUC Section 3.3.9.2.B.4 a single inverted "U" type rack can support two (2) bicycles. 12. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Detail 1 sheet A9.0 does not show how the requirements of LUC Section 3.3.9.2.B.6, 7 & 8 are met, provide this information on the detail. 13. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d The bicycle parking calculation is not correct. Per LUC Section 3.3.8.2.B, RESIDENTIAL USE GROUP, Multifamily Dwellings and Group Dwelling, two (2) Long-Term bicycle parking spaces are required. Per LUC Section 3.3.9.4.B.1 these spaces can be provided within a residential unit. 14. D.S. 2-01.3.9.L An easement is required for the proposed dumpster to be built on the adjacent property. 15. D.S. 2-01.3.9.O until the proposed building heights are provided the required perimeter yard setbacks cannot be verified. 16. D.S. 2-01.3.9.Q Provide the proposed building heights within the footprints on the plan. 17. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Clearly show all required pedestrian circulation paths/accessible routes on the plan.D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Per D.S. 2-08.3.1 Provide a pedestrian circulation/access route from the proposed buildings to the right-of-way along Speedway Blvd. 18. Show the 400' Scenic Corridor Zone line on the plan. 19. Provide the following notes on the plan in regards to the Hillside & Scenic review.: i) Per LUC Section 2.8.2.6.A Siting of structures will be such that existing natural topography and vegetation is minimally disturbed.No grading beyond that necessary for siting of buildings, parking, private yards, and structural improvements will be allowed. All existing vegetation with a caliper of four (4) inches or greater and all saguaro cacti must be preserved or relocated on the site. ii) Per LUC Section 2.8.2.6.C Drainageways are to be maintained in their natural states where possible, and the discretionary authority shall be exercised nly under unusual circumstances. In situations where the discretionary authority is exercised by the City Engineer or designee, modifications will be in accordance with the "Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Area Regulations." iii) Per LUC Section 2.8.2.9.A All new utilities for development on private property and on public right-of-way along Scenic Routes will be underground. Where possible, existing poles will be used to provide the required transition to underground service to new developments adjacent to scenic corridors. However, a new pole set in line with the existing overhead system, when necessary to serve approved new developments, shall not be deemed to be a new utility. Upgrades and reinforcements of existing overhead facilities are allowed to the extent that the total number of electrical circuits or communication cables is not increased. Relocation of overhead utility facilities required by public improvement districts along scenic corridors will conform with existing franchise requirements. iv) Per LUC Section 2.8.2.10.A Building or structure surfaces, which are visible from the Scenic Route, will have colors which are predominant within the surrounding landscape, such as desert and earth tones. Satellite dishes may be black. White is not permitted. v) Per LUC Section 2.8.2.10.B. Fencing and freestanding walls facing the Scenic Route will meet the material restrictions in Sec. 3.7.3, Screening Requirements. 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/ D11-0026 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: Bella Vista Apartments Development Package (1st Review) T11BU01121 TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 26, 2011 DUE DATE: September 28, 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 CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Bella Vista Apartments Overlay Zone (1st Review) T11SA00336 TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 26, 2011 DUE DATE: September 28, 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. Provide the following notes on the plan in regards to the Hillside & Scenic review.: 1. Show the 400' Scenic Corridor Zone line on the plan. 2. Per LUC Section 2.8.2.6.A Siting of structures will be such that existing natural topography and vegetation is minimally disturbed.No grading beyond that necessary for siting of buildings, parking, private yards, and structural improvements will be allowed. All existing vegetation with a caliper of four (4) inches or greater and all saguaro cacti must be preserved or relocated on the site. 3. Per LUC Section 2.8.2.6.C Drainageways are to be maintained in their natural states where possible, and the discretionary authority shall be exercised nly under unusual circumstances. In situations where the discretionary authority is exercised by the City Engineer or designee, modifications will be in accordance with the "Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Area Regulations." 4. Per LUC Section 2.8.2.9.A All new utilities for development on private property and on public right-of-way along Scenic Routes will be underground. Where possible, existing poles will be used to provide the required transition to underground service to new developments adjacent to scenic corridors. However, a new pole set in line with the existing overhead system, when necessary to serve approved new developments, shall not be deemed to be a new utility. Upgrades and reinforcements of existing overhead facilities are allowed to the extent that the total number of electrical circuits or communication cables is not increased. Relocation of overhead utility facilities required by public improvement districts along scenic corridors will conform with existing franchise requirements. 5. Per LUC Section 2.8.2.10.A Building or structure surfaces, which are visible from the Scenic Route, will have colors which are predominant within the surrounding landscape, such as desert and earth tones. Satellite dishes may be black. White is not permitted. 6. Per LUC Section 2.8.2.10.B. Fencing and freestanding walls facing the Scenic Route will meet the material restrictions in Sec. 3.7.3, Screening Requirements. 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 |
| 09/28/2011 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: September 28, 2011 SUBJECT: Bella Vista Apartment Development Plan Package- Engineering Review TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: 1900 W Speedway Blvd, T15S R13E Sec3/10 Ward 1 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: D11-0026 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package and Drainage Statement (HILGARTWILSON, 02MAY11). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the Development Plan Core Review, Development Standard 2-01. All comments reflect Development Plan, Grading Plan and HDZ review. The following items need to be addressed: DRAINAGE REPORT: 1) Provide a discussion within the Drainage Statement to include conformance with the new Commercial Rainwater Harvesting Ordinance (DS Sec.10-03) and the proposed design of the project to meet all requirements within the Ordinance and Detention/Retention Manual. 2) DS Sec.10-02: Revise Section 1.2 of the Drainage Statement to accurately reflect the new FEMA FIRM Panel that that covers the subject property. The K-Panels or no longer effective as of June 16, 2011. The effective FIRM Panel that covers this property is FIRM Panel #04019C2260L effective date June 16, 2011. Provide a revised Figure 3. 3) DS Sec.10-01.2.1: Balanced Basin requirements shall be incorporated into all new development to ensure that at a minimum the post development 2-, 10-, and 100-year peak discharges from the site will not exceed the pre-development conditions. Revise the Drainage Statement Section 3.0 to include a discussion stating that the property is within a balanced basin per the City's classification map with calculation to verify that both Detention and Retention requirements have been met along with satisfying DS Sec.10-03 for Commercial Rainwater Harvesting. 4) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.4.C.1: Revise the Drainage Statement to delineate the limits of the 100-year floodplain of the mapped regulatory wash on both the pre and post development exhibits since a portion of it crosses the subject parcel. Provide the WSEL cross section on the exhibits and verify that the development plan documents clearly labels these in plan view to match. It is recommended that a HEC-RAS run be provided however if the civil engineer can justify using multiple manning sections to establish the 100-year floodplain limits a statement must be provided within the report. 5) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.4.C.5: Revise the Drainage Report to delineate the limits of the erosion hazard setback from the mapped regulatory wash on both the pre and post development exhibits. Refer to DS Sec.10-02.7 for erosion hazard setback calculations and requirements. 6) DS Sec.10-02.14.3.4: Revise the development plan documents and report to label and dimension the required basin access ramps. Verify that the ramps meet the minimum width and slope requirement of 15-feet and 15%, respectively. Alternate means of access will be reviewed by the City Engineer on a case-by-case basis and must be specifically described in the Drainage Statement and as a Note in the General Note Section of the development plan documents. DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 7) DS Sec.2-01: Revise the development plan documents to verify that all dimensions, details, sections, Notes, keynotes, proposed improvements and all other aspects of this project meet the minimum requirements within DS Sec.2-01, 2-08, 3-01, 3-05, 6-01, 9-01, 10-01, 10-02, 10-03 and LUC Section 2.8.1 and are reflected on the development plan sheets. 8) DS Sec.2-01: Revise the development plan document to remove the references on all Sheets that states "For Review Only Not For Construction Purposes." 9) DS Sec.2-01.2.3: Revise the development plan document to ensure that all lettering and text meet the minimum 3/32 inch in height requirement. 10) DS Sec.2-01.2.5: Revise the development plan documents to include a 3-inch by 5-inch space in the lower right quadrant on all sheets that shall be reserved for the CDRC approval stamp. 11) DS Sec.2-01.3.1: Revise the development plan document to remove all additional references to the property owner, contractor and professional registrants on all sheets. This information is already provided on Sheet 1 below the Index Drawing Reference of the development plan package and does not need to be replicated throughout the document sheets. Remove this information from the Title Block area. 12) DS Sec.2-01.3.2.B: Revise the Title Block to include a brief legal description of the property. 13) DS Sec.2-01.3.2.D: Remove the administrative address from the title block and add it to the sheets adjacent to in the lower right hand corner. This conflict with the Standard; however per Pima County Addressing they will not approve the project if the address is within the Title Block. 14) DS Sec.2-01.3.2.E: Revise the Title Block to provide the page number and number of pages (i.e. Sheet X of 17) within the title block on all sheets. 15) DS Sec.2-01.3.3: Revise the development plan documents to include all relevant case numbers (D11-0026, T11SA00336 and S11-018) in the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets. 16) DS Sec.2-01.3.4.a: Revise the project location map to show the subject property approximately centered within the 1-square mile area shown. 17) DS Sec.2-01.3.4.b: Revise the location map on Sheet 1 to label all regulatory watercourse within the 1-square mile area shown, specifically Mosaic Wash, "A" Wash and Silvercroft Wash. 18) DS Sec.2-01.3.7: Revise the development plan document to include all Notes (General, Grading, Paving, Special Overlay, COT Water, COT Sewer, etc) either on Sheet 1 or if necessary on Sheet 2 to be in conformance with the development plan package submittal requirements (this comment does not apply to SWPPP Notes since that document is a "living" document and stands alone even though it is required within the Development Plan Package). The notes should not be scattered throughout the documents, but organized together for easy reference. 19) DS Sec.2-01.3.7: Provide the following note on the development plan document; "Call for a Pre-construction meeting prior to start of earthwork. To schedule a PDSD Pre-construction meeting, SWPPP inspection or general Engineering Inspections, call IVR (740-6970), or schedule with a Customer Service Representative at the Planning Development Services Department, or contact PDSD Engineering at 791-5550 extension 2101, or schedule inspections online at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Online_Services/Online_Permits/online_permits.html" 20) DS Sec.2-01.3.7: Provide the following note on the development plan document to including a grading/drainage note specifying "conformance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (excavation and grading requirements)." 21) DS Sec.2-01.3.7: Provide the following note on the development plan document stating; "All retaining walls, proposed fencing and other walls will require a separate permit for review and approval by all necessary Planning Development Services Departments." 22) DS Sec.2-01.3.7.A.4: Provide the following notes on the development plan document for existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the Land Use Code. List all Land Use Code sections each proposed use is subject to, i.e. Scenic Corridor overlay, Hillside Development Zone Overlay, etc.: a) "Per LUC Section 2.8.2.6.A: Siting of structures will be such that existing natural topography and vegetation is minimally disturbed. No grading beyond what is necessary for siting of buildings, parking, private yards, and structural improvements will be allowed. All existing vegetation with a caliper of four (4) inches or greater and all saguaro cacti must be preserved or relocated on the site." b) "Per LUC Section 2.8.2.6.C: Drainageways are to be maintained in their natural states where possible, and the discretionary authority shall be exercised only under unusual circumstances. In situations where the discretionary authority is exercised by the City Engineer or designee, modifications will be in accordance with the "Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Area Regulations." c) "Per LUC Section 2.8.2.9.A: All new utilities for development on private property and on public right-of-way along Scenic Routes will be underground. Where possible, existing poles will be used to provide the required transition to underground service to new developments adjacent to scenic corridors. However, a new pole set in line with the existing overhead system, when necessary to serve approved new developments, shall not be deemed to be a new utility. Upgrades and reinforcements of existing overhead facilities are allowed to the extent that the total number of electrical circuits or communication cables is not increased. Relocation of overhead utility facilities required by public improvement districts along scenic corridors will conform to the existing franchise requirements." d) "Per LUC Section 2.8.2.10.A: Building or structure surfaces, which are visible from the Scenic Route, will have colors which are predominant within the surrounding landscape, such as desert and earth tones. Satellite dishes may be black. White is not permitted." e) "Per LUC Section 2.8.2.10.B: Fencing and freestanding walls facing the Scenic Route will meet the material restrictions in Sec. 3.7.3, Screening Requirements." 23) DS Sec.2-01.3.7.A.6.b: Provide a General Note on the Development Plan Package that references all special overlay zones that are applicable to this site, specifically state that "the project is designed to meet the overlay zone criteria for Sec. 2.8.1, Hillside Development Zone (HDZ); Sec. 2.8.2, Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ); Sec.2.8.3 Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone." 24) DS Sec.2-01.3.7.B.1.a: Revise the Drainage Note to include all of the note per the referenced standard specifically; "The developer, any successors and assigns, will hold the City of Tucson, its officers, employees, and agents harmless from any and all claims for damages related to the use of this development as shown hereon, now and in the future, by reason of flooding, flowage, erosion, or damage caused by water, whether surface flood or rainfall." 25) DS Sec.2-01.3.7.B.2.a: Provide a Drainage Note to include the following per the referenced Section; "This project is affected by the City of Tucson Floodplain Regulations." 26) DS Sec.2-01.3.7.C.3.a/b: Provide the following Street and Road note on the development plan document to state; "Total miles of public streets are_ "and "Total miles of private streets are_". If there are no streets proposed the blank must be filed in with a zero (0). 27) DS Sec.2-01.3.8: 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 (this will included the limits of the regulatory floodplain with erosion hazard setback delineation). 28) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.B: Verify that all easements are drawn with recordation information, location, width, and purpose of on the development plan document. A Title Report was not submitted for this project, but is required to verify if additional easements affect this property, specifically the use of the access road off of Speedway Blvd. Clarify all easements shown as "Private or Public." 29) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.C: Revise the development plan document to label Speedway as a "Public, Arterial MS&R and Scenic Route Corridor." 30) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.C: Revise the development plan document to label the shown ½-right of way for Speedway as "Existing and Future ½ R.O.W." 31) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.E: Revise the development plan document and Bench Mark Section on Sheet C1.1 to indicate a ground elevation based COT Datum, reference the COT field book number and page. 32) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.I: Revise the development plan document to include 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. This is to include the area within 50-feet of the site a) 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. b) 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. c) A symbol identical to that used to represent the water surface contour intervals on the development package documents should be included in the legend. 33) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.1: Revise the development plan documents to provide concrete headers at the existing driveway entrance to prevent damage to the existing roadway. Label the required 25-foot radii for the concrete headers for the proposed driveway location per City of Tucson Transportation Access Management Guidelines (TAMG), Section 5.5. Refer to DS Sec.3-01.3.2.C for street development standards. 34) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.2: Revise the development plan documents to show the access road at Speedway Blvd with sight visibility triangles. Since Speedway is a designated MS&R street the SVTs are based on the MS&R cross section. 35) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan document to clearly label and dimension all areas of the proposed vehicular use area per DS Sec.3-05. Label all PAAL widths, radii, parking space dimensions (or label Keynote to reference detail), back-up spur, etc. Provide the dimensions for the PAAL offsite and for the access road off of Speedway Blvd. All dimensions must meet the criteria within DS Sec.3-05. 36) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan document to show conformance with onsite handicap and ANSI Standard requirements. Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all onsite handicap and ANSI Standard requirements that may apply to this project. 37) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.L: Revise the development plan document to delineate and label all new/proposed easements with recordation information. Specifically verify 1) ingress/egress across not only the parcel to the south but for the existing access road off of Speedway, 2) an easement is required for the proposed dumpster to be built on the adjacent property and 3) the recordation information is required for the 15 sq ft TEP easement as shown in Keynote #6. 38) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.M: Revise the development plan document to include both the cut and fill quantities and the total area of the site plus total area of proposed disturbance. 39) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.1: Revise the development plan documents to label and dimension the required basin access ramps. Verify that the ramp meets the minimum width and slope requirement of 15-feet and 15%, respectively. Alternate means of access will be reviewed by the City Engineer on a case-by-case basis and must be specifically described in the Drainage Report and as a Note in the General Note Section of the development plan documents 40) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.2: Revise the development plan documents and any associated details to label the required minimum filter fabric specifications. The Development Plan Package is to be used as the construction document for site and grading and must accurately label and detail all improvements for construction purposes. 41) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Revise the development plan document and any associated details or keynotes to clearly label all lengths, dimensions, etc for all drainage infrastructures for construction purposes. Label the length of all headwalls along with the depth for the proposed cut off wall, provide a specific detail for the rock rip rap at both the inlet and outlet for the bleed pipe, The Detail referenced is for the Swale and the PAAL runoff. Specific construction details are required at this time for development plan package approval. 42) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.6: Revise the development plan document to delineate the 100-year flood limits with water surface elevations for the regulatory wash within the northwest corner of the property. Per DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.4.C.4 provide the 100-year peak discharge value in plan view. 43) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.O: Revise the development plan document to delineate the erosion hazard setback from the regulatory wash per DS Sec.10-02.7.6. 44) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.O: Revise the development plan document to delineate the 400' Scenic Corridor Zone line on the plan. 45) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.Q: Revise the development plan document to include the height of each building for HDZ review. Per the HDZ requirements the building must meet specific height requirements and a detail or elevation sheet must be provided to verify conformance with said standard. 46) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.R: Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all handicap accessibility comments that may be associated with this project. 47) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.T: Revise the development plan document to clearly label all required pedestrian circulation paths/accessible routes on the plan. Per DS Sec.2-08.3.1 Provide a pedestrian circulation/access route from the proposed buildings to the right-of-way along Speedway Blvd, sidewalk must comply with accessibility requirements. 48) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.T: Revise the development plan document and associated detail for the refuse enclosure to provide all aspect for construction purposes. The detail must match DS Sec.6-01 and Figure 3a for minimum compressive strength for the approach apron and refuse location, dimensions for 10'x10' clear area and for refuse vehicle maneuverability. Refer to Environmental Services comments for further clarification. An easement is required for the proposed dumpster to be built on the adjacent property. 49) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.X: Revise the development plan document to show conformance with DS Sec.10-03 for Commercial Rainwater Harvesting Ordinance. Or provide approval through the Landscape Section that this standard does not apply. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: 50) DS Sec.10-01.3.5.1.3.a and 10-02.14.2.6: Provide a copy of the Geotechnical Report referenced in Engineering Note #3 from Pattison Evanoff Engineering LLC, 02MAY11, verify that the report meets the minimum recommendations for development: a) Soils report should provide conformance with DS Section 10-02.14.2.6 regarding 30-foot boring for the retention basins, and provide a discussion of the potential for hydro-collapsible soils and building setbacks from the required basin. b) Provide percolation rates for the retention basin for 5-year threshold to show that the drain down time meets the maximum per DS Sec.10-01.3.5.1. c) Provide pavement structure design recommendations. d) Provide slope stability recommendations for the proposed constructed slopes that are proposed. Since the project falls under HDZ review the geotechnical report must discuss all retaining walls with backfill along with all areas that are proposed to be stabilized to meet the requirements within DS Sec.9-01. SWPPP: The SWPPP does not meet the minimum requirements of the AzPDES Construction General Permit (CGP). Revise the SWPPP according to these comments: 51) Per City of Tucson Code Ordinance 10209, Chapter 26 Section 26-42.2: "For land disturbing activities that fall under the jurisdiction of this Article, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan must be prepared and certified by an engineer, or a landscape architect and submitted along with the application for a grading permit to the City of Tucson Planning & Development Services Department." The SWPPP must contain both a report and exhibits signed and sealed by the engineer of record that meet the following requirements of the CGP. It is acknowledged that the Exhibits do contain some of the following information however a detailed report must be provided that includes the rest of the information so the following comments reflect all necessary information for SWPPP approval. a) Part III.A.2.a: Identify all potential sources of pollutants/pollution from construction activities that could possibly contact Stormwater. b) Part III.B.2.b: Provide name(s) of the person(s) having control over project specifications, including the ability to make changes in specifications. c) Part III.C.2: Describe the construction activity (what is being built, what is being disturbed, how long it is expect to take, etc.). d) Part III.C.2.a: Describe the project and what it will be used for when completed (after NOT is filed). e) Part III.C.2.b: Describe the planned phasing or sequencing of land disturbance activities. The amount of open/disturbed dirt left open at one time should be minimized where possible. f) Part III.C.2.c: Indicate the total acres of the site and the number of acres that will be disturbed (include off-site borrow and fill areas, staging and equipment storage areas). g) Part III.C.2.d: Indicate the percentage of the site that is impervious before and after construction. h) Part III.C.2.e: Describe the soil (e.g., sand, clay, etc.) at the site and its potential for erosion (suggestion; reference the Soil Survey covering the project site prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service for soil information http://soils.usda.gov/survey/). i) Part III.C.2.f: Include a map showing the project location (e.g. U.S.G.S. quadrangle, portion of a city or count map). The map must also show any washes or other water bodies within 1 mile of the site. j) Part III.C.4: Identify the nearest receiving water(s). A receiving water is a natural watercourse into which stormwater would flow in a storm event and includes dry washes, streams, tributaries, and other waters of the U.S. (such as designated canals). Man-made structures such as retention basins, storm sewer systems, or city storm drains are not receiving waters. k) Part III.C.4: Identify the areal extent where soils may be disturbed and show any wetlands near the site that could receive dirt or run-off from the construction activity. l) Part III.C.6: Describe any pollutant sources from areas other than dirt moving (e.g., dedicated concrete and asphalt plants, fueling operations, material or waste storage etc., that are associated with the construction project). Identify where these sources are or will occur on site. m) Part III.C.3: Include a site map completed to scale. n) Part III.C.3.a: Use arrows to show the directions(s) where stormwater will flow for all areas within the project limits (This is for the period during construction, not final contours. Flow direction may change as project grading progresses; when this occurs, maps are to be updated.). o) Part III.C.3.b: Show areas of soil disturbance and areas that will not be disturbed. p) Part III.C.3.c: Show all structural BMPs identified in the SWPPP. q) Part III.C.3.d: Show locations where stabilization BMPs is expected to occur. r) Part III.C.3.e: Show locations of on-site material storage, waste storage or receptacles, borrow areas, equipment storage or other supporting activities. s) Part III.C.3.f: Identify any water bodies (including dry washes and wetlands) on the site. If there are no water bodies, indicate this on the map. t) Part III.C.3.g: Show locations where stormwater discharges to surface water (including wetlands, ephemeral waters and dry washes) and to municipal storm sewer systems (MS4s) (use an "X" to indicate discharge location(s)). Where surface waters and/or MS4s receiving Stormwater do not fit on the map, use arrows to show the direction and indicate the approximate distance to the surface water and/or MS4. u) Part III.C.3.h: Show the location and registration number of all onsite dry-wells and dry-wells located on adjacent properties that could receive Stormwater from the site (if none exist, indicate that). v) Part III.C.3.i: Identify any areas of the site where final stabilization has been achieved. w) Part III.C.3.j: Specify existing vegetated areas (trees, brush, etc.) and boundaries of environmentally sensitive areas and buffer zones that are to be preserved. x) Part III.C.5.a: Identify BMPs selected for the site and describe how each will reduce pollutants in Stormwater. y) Part III.C.5.b: Describe how BMPs will be added, modified, or replaced for each phase or sequence of construction activities. Also, identify which operator is responsible for the implementation of BMPs. z) Part III.C.5.c: Provide drawings and/or specifications of structural BMPs that include design or installation details. aa) Part III.D.3: Include a copy of the completed NOI form that was submitted to ADEQ. bb) Part III.D.5: Include copies of other agreements with any state, local or federal agencies that would affect the provisions or implementation of the SWPPP, if applicable (404 permits, local grading permits, etc.) cc) Part IV.B.1.a: Describe where natural/existing vegetation will be preserved. Locations of trees and boundaries of environmentally sensitive area and buffer zones to be preserved are also to be on the SWPPP site map. dd) Part IV.B.1: If using seed to re-vegetate, provide the mixture and application specifications. (These may be obtained from product provider.). ee) Part IV.B.1: If culverts are present on-site, describe measures that will be used to minimize erosion at and around the culvert(s). ff) Part IV.B.1: Describe how off site Stormwater that may run onto the project site will be diverted or otherwise managed with onsite engineering controls, containment, or BMPs. gg) Part IV.B.3: Identify how records of dates when major grading activities occur will be kept. hh) Part IV.B.3: Identify how records of when construction activities temporarily or permanently cease on all portions of the site will be kept. ii) Part IV.B.3: Identify how records of when stabilization measures are initiated and completed and reason(s) for delay will be kept. jj) Part IV.C.3: Provide sizing criteria and show calculations for sediment basin(s) and indicate whether basin(s) will be temporary or permanent (i.e., post-construction). kk) Part IV.C.3: Provide reason(s) or rational why a sediment basin was determined to not be possible at the project site (if applicable). ll) Part IV.D.3: Describe the location(s) and how materials will be stored or staged both on-site and offsite; including overburden, soil stockpiles, and borrow areas. mm) Part IV.E.2: Identify and provide the location(s) of all non-stormwater discharges allowed by this permit expected to be associated with the project and describe BMPs used to minimize discharge of pollutants. nn) Part IV.B.1: Describe measures for preventing and responding to spill, including spill notification requirements. oo) Part IV.F.1: Identify post-construction stormwater BMPs (e.g., porous pavement, open space preservation, etc.,) that will be installed as part of this project. Note; temporary BMPs (e.g., straw waddles, etc.) must be removed prior to submitting your NOT. HDZ & Scenic OVERLAY COMMENTS: 52) For all HDZ and Scenic Overlay comments refer to Activity # T11SA00336. Verify that all HDZ &Scenic Corridor comments are incorporated into the overall design of the site and included on the proposed development plan documents. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan Package, Drainage Statement, Geotechnical Report, Title Report and SWPPP Report that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Further comments may be generated upon re-submittal of the Development Plan Package. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Department |
| 09/28/2011 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | Development Plan Review J. Linville 09/28/2001 1) Revise all the plans (grading, HDZ, LS, NPP) to portray an accurate limits of grading that encompass the construction limits and areas that will be disturbed for construction, drainage, and other improvements. The landscape/NPP plans also need to show the proposed basin area. 2) Provide landscaping for the basin in accordance with DS 10-03. 3) Revise note 4 on sheet N-1 to reflect the Tucson standard location for native, which is 1.5 times the drip-line radius. 4) Revise note 5 to reflect the Tucson practice of allowing permits to be issued conditionally, subject to approval of a pre-grading/construction inspection by the City of Tucson Engineering Inspector. No grading may occur until the inspection is approved. 5) Revise note 15 to state that change to …limits … or… layout will require a revised Native Plant Preservation Plan. Revised grading AND NPP plans are submitted to the COT Planning and Development Services Department. |
| 09/28/2011 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES September 28, 2011 Philip Carhuff Kreb’s Carhuff Architects 3145 E. Prince Rd. #151 Tucson, Arizona 85716 Subject: D11-0026 BELLA VISTA APARTMENTS Development Package Dear Philip: Your submittal of August 23, 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 9 sets of the DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 9 Copies Revised Development Package (Wastewater, Fire, Traffic, HC Site, Zoning, Addressing, Landscape, Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Statement (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised Geotechnical Report (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Title Report (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised SWPPP Report (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: 792-0654 |