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

Permit Number: DP20-0126
Parcel: 14101001N

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: GRADING

Permit Number - DP20-0126
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
07/10/2020 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Reqs Change ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL

The development package will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet:

Any relevant case numbers for reviews or modifications that affect the site.

Provide Case # DP20-0126 on each sheet.

Development package will include the following types of review: landscape, native plant preservation (npp).

7.7. NATIVE PLANT PRESERVATION

7.7.3. APPLICABILITY
The provisions of this section apply to all development as listed below.
A. New Development
All new development proposed in the City of Tucson shall comply with the standards of this section.
If disturbing any protected native plant with development of the site, submit a NPPO plan with appropriate mitigation per AM 2-11.0 or:
Exceptions
The provisions of this section do not apply to the following:
1. Single-family residential development on lots recorded before March 24, 1997, or single-family residential development on a lot within a subdivision that is subject to an approved Native Plant Preservation Plan after the sale and development of a principal structure on that lot;
2. Single-family residential subdivisions for which a tentative plat has been submitted or approved prior to July 1, 1997, per Article 8, Subdivision Standards, provided the plat is recorded within one year from the approval date of the final plat , infrastructure is in place, and 50% of the lots are developed within five years after July 1, 1997;
3. Projects on a site that does not contain any plant on the Protected Native Plant List as demonstrated by the applicant and subject to approval through procedures established at the Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD). This application can be submitted prior to an applicable review process and approved for an exception on the site. The approved exception is valid for up to one year from the date of the approval; or,
4. Projects on a site or parcel that contains Protected Native Plants that will not be substantially impacted by development on the site as demonstrated by the applicant per this section and subject to approval through procedures established at the PDSD, provided that construction occurs per the approved plan.

Ensure that Zoning, and Engineering comments are addressed prior to landscape section approval.


Additional comments may apply.
07/13/2020 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Site Section Manager

PROJECT: DeBACA Hauling, Inc.
Development Package (1st Review)
DP20-0126

TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 3, 2020

DUE DATE: July 14, 2020

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and any redlined plans along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments 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 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

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 June 14, 2021.

SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS)
Section

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD) - ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.1.1 PURPOSE
This standard has been prepared for the purpose of informing applicants of the submittal and review requirements for development package documents to assure proper and adequate information is presented in a consistent manner, thereby providing the basis for an efficient and timely review. The development package documents are prepared in support of applications for building permits and related reviews.

The information that is requested establishes the basis upon which the project will be approved and could affect what is required of the property in the future, should there be a proposal for expansion or for a different use of the property.

This standard does not waive any applicable city regulations or codes.

2-06.1.2 APPICABILITY
This standard shall be used for all site plans and tentative plats submitted to PDSD for review.

2-06.2.1 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Development Package applications are available from PDSD. Completed applications and accompanying materials shall be submitted to PDSD. Incomplete or inaccurate applications will not be accepted, nor will any application in which the pre-application conference or neighborhood meeting requirements have not been met. The types of documents and the specific number of copies required of each of the documents are on the PDSD website or may be obtained from PDSD. Resubmittals of development packages require a comment response letter that details how all previous comments have been addressed. Provide the same number of copies of the comment response letter as plans provided.
The following documents and information shall be submitted upon application:

2-06.2.1 Application Form
A completed application signed by the property owner or authorized designee;

2-06.2.2 Development Package
A development package must be prepared to the format and content requirements described herein;

2-06.2.3 Related Reviews
In addition to the plan process, a project may require review for other types of plans and documents. The applications for those processes are submitted to the appropriate department for review and approval. These related reviews can be applied for so that review can occur concurrently with the development package application. However, it must be understood that, should the related application be approved subject to conditions or denied, this may affect the;

2-06.2.4 Concurrent Reviews
The development package is designed to allow for concurrent review of any site related reviews. Concurrent review means that all plans and documents needed for the review are submitted as one package. Examples of site related reviews include but are not limited to: site plans, landscape plans, NPPO plans, water harvesting plans, grading plans, SWPPP plans, floodplain use permits, and overlay reviews. Separate applications are often required for the different site related reviews even if the plans are submitted concurrently; and,

2-06.2.5 Fees
Fees in accordance with Section 4-01.0.0, Development Review Fee Schedule.

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

1. 2-06.3.2 - All mapped data shall be drawn at an engineering scale having no more than 50 feet to the inch.

2. 2-06.3.5 - Remove the "DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE PDSD APPROVAL" stamp from the plans as one will be applied electronically once the plans are approved.

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

3. 2-06.4.1 - The email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site.

4. 2-06.4.3 - Provide the Development Package case number, DP20-0126, adjacent to the title block on all sheets.

2-06.4.7 - General Notes
The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable.

2-06.4.7.A - Zoning and Land Use Notes

5. 2-06.4.7.A.4 - The proposed use, "MATERIAL STROAGE AND STOCKPILING" is not a use listed in the UDC. As it appears that this grading plan is strictly to correct a violation for illegal dumping and storage of materials remove General Note 3 from the plan and provide a note stating that this plan is strictly for correction of a violation. Based on the SR zoning this site cannot be used for storage of material, Commercial Storage, without going through a rezoning process.

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
07/17/2020 JOHN VAN WINKLE ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DP20-0126

1) Supply on next submittal a copy of the projects Hydrology Report. The primary goal of the report is to confirm that with the removal of the un-permitted fill that the floodway/floodzone will be returned to its previous condition/capacity. Reference Tucson City Code chapter 26, section 26-5.1 and 26-5.1 and City of Tucson Standards Manual for drainage design section 2.1.2
2) Supply on the next submittal the landscaping mitigation plan/Environmental Resource Report which shows the vegetation that was removed by the placement of the fill and how it will be re-established. Reference Landscaping Review Comment. Report to conform to City of Tucson Technical Standards Manual section 4-02.2.0
3) Supply on next submittal a copy of the SWPPP plan sheet showing where the controls will be placed
4) SWPPP Page 1 1.1 Project description. Please update to indicate that the removal of the material from the site is the result of unpermitted fill placement. Also indicate that all fill will be removed from the site. See zoning comment 5.
5) SWPPP. General. Provide all referenced appendices
6) Per zoning comment 5. "The proposed use, "MATERIAL STROAGE AND STOCKPILING" is not a use listed in the UDC. As it appears that this grading plan is strictly to correct a violation for illegal dumping and storage of materials remove General Note 3 from the plan and provide a note stating that this plan is strictly for correction of a violation. Based on the SR zoning this site cannot be used for storage of material, Commercial Storage, without going through a rezoning process." Update the cut/fill quantities to indicate that all material will be removed from the site. This includes removal from that plans of the proposed 10000 sqft new fill area
7) For clarity, please update sheet 2 to be Existing Conditions 2015 5' Topography with Fill Area to be removed. This would include removing the 2015 topography within the boundaries of the fill area. Show contours for the fill to be removed.
8) Sheet 3, Proposed Conditions, uses the same line weight for the proposed finished contours and the existing boundary for the fill to be removed. Please update to use different line styles or weights. The underlying contours from 2015 for the proposed conditions appear to be being replaced by 2 contours at 2790' and 2785'. Please remove the underlying 2015 contours in the final proposed condition
9) Sheet 3. Indicate on plans, in addition to the two proposed 2790 and 2785 grades where the 2015 grades will be matched. Show the grade transitions to match.
10) Sheet 1. Please indicate the total area of disturbance in Acres
11) Sheet one please add the note 2-06.4.7.B.2.b. "A floodplain use permit and/or finished floor elevation certificates are required for the following lots: __________." (List the lots affected by lot number, or in the case of a one lot development, place a period after the word "required" and delete the remainder of note
12) A floodplain use permit will be issued once the above comments have been addressed
13) This project will require a pre-construction meeting prior to issuance of the development package permit. Project will require EOR certification prior to final inspection

John Van Winkle, P.E.
John.VanWinkle@tucsonaz.gov
07/20/2020 SBEASLE1 ZONING-DECISION LETTER WRITE DECISION LETTER Reqs Change

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
07/20/2020 SBEASLE1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed