Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL
Permit Number - DP13-0113
Review Name: RESUB - SITE/GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/13/2014 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/13/2014 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/15/2014 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/19/2014 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Roger Road Duplex Project Development Package (3rd Review) DP13-0113 TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 19, 2014 DUE DATE: September 10, 2014 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. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC) and the UDC Technical Standards Manual (TSM). The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC & TSM requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above 1. Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, An applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One year Expiration date is September 14, 2014 . 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Section 7.4.9, Bicycle Parking Design Criteria, of the UDC. Provide, as a note, calculations for short and long term bicycle spaces required and provided. 1. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.9.B.2.d A single rack is designed and located to accommodate two bicycles. That said review UDC Sections 7.4.9.B.2.f & .g and figure 7.4.9-C and revise the detail to show that each rack accommodates two bicycles and provide the applicable 2'-6" distance to any wall or obstruction. 2. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.9.B.2.d A single rack is designed and located to accommodate two bicycles. That said based on four (4) racks shown on detail 3 sheet 5 the provided number of short term bicycle parking spaces should show 8. Once the above comments are addressed Zoning is willing to provide an over-the-counter review. Call or email to schedule an appointment for this review. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package . |
| 08/19/2014 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: August 19, 2014 DUE DATE: September 10, 2014 SUBJECT: Roger Road Duplex Development Plan Package- 3rd Engineering Review TO: Coronado Engineering & Development, Inc.; Attn: Paul Nzomo, PE LOCATION: 26 W Roger Rd; T13S R13E Sec24 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: DP13-0113 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package, Drainage Statement (Coronado Engineering & Development, Inc.; 19MAY14 revised 12JUN14), Geotechnical Exploration (Coronado Engineering & Development, Inc.; 20APR13 revised 12JUN14), and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Coronado Engineering & Development, Inc.; 02AUG13 revised 07AUG14). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administration Manual (AM) and Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Refer to the links for further clarification: http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az Due to the 3rd review of the project this comment letter has been revised to reflect only the few outstanding comments with some being restated and some being new. The numbered order of comments does not reflect the last 2 submittal reviews. The following items need to be addressed: SITE PLAN: 1) AM Sec.2-06.3.5: Revise the development plan document to include the approval stamp in the lower right quadrant of each sheet, specifically Sheets 8 and 9. The link to the stamp can be found at the new CDRC link here: http://pdsd.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/development-permits. 2) AM Sec.2-06.4.2.D: Revise the development plan package to include the Landscaping Sheets within the development plan package. The sheet index and page count is correct however the 3 landscaping sheets must be part of the overall package and cannot be submitted under a separate plan set, revise. 3) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5: Revise the development plan package to revise the Keynote #1 callout on Sheets 4 and 5 that is located at the driveway entrance. The Keynote needs to either be moved to a location of vertical curb or the Keynote should reference KN #3. 4) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.3: Revise the development plan package and Detail 4 on Sheet 5 to clearly show how the proposed 6-inch pipe that runs underneath both refuse enclosures work. The detail must correspond with the refuse detail for the location of the concrete encasement for the trash bollards to ensure that the pipe is constructed outside of the 3-foot deep concrete encasement and located to ensure the 10'x10' clear approach. Provide the dimension in plan view from the bollard encasement to the pipe. 5) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.3: Revise the development plan package and Detail 4 on Sheet 5 to clearly dimension and label the underground StormTech system underneath the refuse enclosures. Verify that the refuse improvements do not compromise the system and verify the depth of cover over the system and the enclosure pad, wall footers and bollard encasements. 6) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.3: Revise the development plan package and all associated Keynotes on the civil sheets to reference the details on Sheets 8 and 9 for the StormTech inlet and outlet manholes and the structural design provided. 7) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.3: Revise the development plan package and the StormTech system detail to provide the minimum specifications per the Drainage Report for the discharge pump located in the outlet manhole. Detail 8 on Sheet 7 does not provided the minimum specification as per the Drainage Report, revise. 8) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.S: Revise the development plan package, Sheets 4 and 5, along with Keynote #5 for the proposed handicap access ramps located within the public right-of-way. The ramps within the R-O-W must be labeled as per Sheet 1, Keynote #8 referencing the PC/COT Standard Detail #207 for public improvements. 9) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Revise the development plan package and Detail 1 on Sheet 7 for the construction of the refuse containers. Verify that the details match TSM Sec.8-01.9 Figure 3B for the proposed single enclosures. Specifically the space from wall to the inside of the bollards, clear 10'x10' space for each container to be dimensioned within the bollards, and the space between the bollards located in the back of the enclosure and the proposed 6-inch drain pipe to ensure that the concrete encasement for the bollards does not conflict with the drain pipe or the clear 10'x10' clear space. SWPPP: 10) CGP Sec.6.3(5)c: Revise the SWPPP Exhibit and/or Report to provide the percentage of the site that is impervious before and after construction. Specifically SWPPP Note #12 on Sheet 10 that states 9% post imperviousness. 11) CGP Sec.6.3(6)j(i&ii): Revise the site map and SWPPP Note #8 to remove the reference to the Town of Marana. 12) CGP Sec.6.3(8)d: Revise the SWPPP Exhibit and the stabilized construction entrance to be located at the entrance to the site for tracking purposes. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan Package and SWPPP that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Department |
| 08/27/2014 | CPIERCE1 | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Needs Review |