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: DEV PKG
Permit Number - DP20-0135
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/02/2020 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/29/2020 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | 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 # DP19-0135 and any other plans associated with project. on each sheet. Provide previously approved NPP plan with next submittal. Ensure that Zoning and Engineering comments are addressed prior to landscape section approval. Additional comments may apply. |
| 07/30/2020 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Zoning cannot approved until approved by both Engineering and Landscape. |
| 08/03/2020 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: August 3, 2020 RETURNED FOR CORRECTIONS NOTICE Your Next Steps: Resubmittal of documents DESCRIPTION: Grading/SWPPP/Floodplain - Prince 10, Superpad mass grading. PERMIT/ACTIVITY: DP20-0135 FEE BALANCE: $0 (zero) Thank you for the payment. SEE REVIEW COMMENTS and your submitted documents on PRO: www.tucsonaz.gov/pro (If information is not available, check back later after data transfers to PRO.) - Home page, Activity Search, enter the Activity/Permit Number - Permits - click on blue tab - Reviews - click on Review Details - Documents - click on View to the right of each document YOUR NEXT STEP: Submit documents to the Filedrop https://www.tucsonaz.gov/file-upload-pdsd 1) Comment Response Letter (your response to the reviewer's Requires Change comments) 2) Plan Set (all pages, full set, even if no changes were made) 3) Any other documents requested by review staff - Name the 2nd submittal documents starting with the submittal number, for example: 2_Plan_Set FOR FASTER PROCESSING: When on the Filedrop page, select the box "Development Package or Land Division". This applies to all DP submittals, DP resubmittals, and DP revisions - and all Land Splits. (For Building Permits, continue to select "Resubmittals/Revisions...".) Thank you. Sharon Beasley, Permit Specialist City of Tucson Planning and Development Services email: COTDSDPermits@TucsonAz.gov |
| 08/03/2020 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DP20-0135 1. Revise the erosion hazard setback discussions to be consistent with City Code sections 26-7. 1 and 2. Since the channels bank protection is not to the level of the 100-year discharge with adequate freeboard, additional analysis is required. 2. Provide all of the referenced material in the appendices. Ensure the appendices are complete. 3. Revise the Note on page 16 of the SWPPP to be consistent with UDC 7.6.4.E. All disturbed areas must be stabilized. 4. Use the correct parcel APN identifiers for the parcels shown on the Developmtent Package. 5. The Major Streets and Roads Map Shows a future alignment for an arterial route from Silverbell Road and Goret Road through this project site to Prince Road and La Cholla Boulevard. Resolve this condition with the Director of the Department of Transportation and Mobility. 6. Revise note 23 on sheet 2 to reference the correct Technical Standard. Development Standards were superseded by the Technical Standards in January 2013. 7. Show the approval of a block plat for recombining the parcels of La Cholla Landing. 8. Show improvements including curb and sidewalk for Fort Lowell Road and La Cholla Boulevard. 9. Work in Flowing Wells Wash will require consent from Pima County RFCD. Coordinate with the District on these improvements. From Eric Shepp at RFCD: In addition to any comments Ann may have: 1) Pursuant to Section 26-8(f)(1), dedicate the a fifty-foot-wide area measured outward from the front face of the top of the bank protection, for the city or for county flood control district uses. 2) The Pima County Regional Flood Control District completed new floodplain mapping, in September 2019, as part of the Santa Cruz River Management Plan. The Water Surface Elevations from this study may be more restrictive that the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Where they are more restrictive these values shall be used. 3) Depending on the timing of this project and the transfer of Real Property to the District, the District may this portion of the Flowing Wells Wash. If so, a Facility Impact Permit shall be required prior to modification of the channel. 4) The stormdrains installed in Flowing Wells wash are only 2 feet above the channel bottom and are much deeper than the detention basin bottom. Please elevate the culverts as high as possible. 5) Detention basin should have first flush retention and landscaping provided I appreciate you including these requirements. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Additional comments from RFCD may be forthcoming. |
| 08/03/2020 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Additional Comments from RFCD: Hello, Loren, I haven’t been able to find plans for the concrete channel north of the site. I’m guessing they are ADOT plans. Perhaps C o T has a record. I don’t think the consultant was successful in finding them either, and I’m not sure how thick that concrete is. It looks much more stout than the shotcrete detail. I added to Eric’s: 1) Pursuant to Section 26-8(f)(1), dedicate the fifty-foot-wide area measured outward from the front face of the top of the bank protection, for the city or for county flood control district uses. The fill at the NW corner of the project apparently will encroach into the 50-foot setback and will not be compatible with needed clearance for District uses. 2) The Pima County Regional Flood Control District completed new floodplain mapping, in September 2019, as part of the Santa Cruz River Management Plan. The Water Surface Elevations from this study may be more restrictive that the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Where they are more restrictive these values shall be used. The District requests a review of the floodplain encroachment with the updated mapping. The submitted drainage report states that one of the cross-sections exceeds zero rise and that up to .1 foot of increase is allowable. Zero increase is the criterion. 3) A Facility Impact Permit shall be required prior to modification of the channel or impacts to the adjacent linear path. 4) The stormdrains installed in Flowing Wells wash are only 2 feet above the channel bottom and are much deeper than the detention basin bottom. Please elevate the culverts as high as possible, with the invert at or above the 10-year water surface. The District prefers the minimum number of pipes possible without flap gates. The 100-year water surface elevation of the Santa Cruz River will exceed the top of the west basin bank by about 2 feet whether the pipes are open or not. 5) Fill within the Santa Cruz River floodplain should be protected from erosion. 6) Provide specifications for the existing Flowing Wells Wash concrete and include type, thickness and reinforcement for the matching repair wedge. The wedge should be connected to the existing material with dowels. 7) Detention basin should have first flush retention and landscaping provided That’s all I have for now. Thank you, Ann |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/03/2020 | SBEASLE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |