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.
Plan Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Plan Number - S07-158
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/11/2008 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES January 11, 2008 Maolin Zheng BSW International, Inc. 10835 North 25th Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85029 Subject: S07-158 Wal-Mart Store #4684-00 Tentative Plat Dear Maolin: Your submittal of October 19, 2007 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 a DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 12 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (Addressing, ADOT, Zoning, TEP, Landscape, Wastewater, Real Estate, ESD, Traffic, Parks and Recreation, Engineering, DSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Landscape, Parks and Recreation, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO Plan (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 3 Copies Traffic Impact Analysis (ADOT, Traffic, DSD) 2 Copies Environmental Resource Report (Landscape, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. Sincerely, Patricia Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: (602) 567-2560 |
| 01/11/2008 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Patricia Gehlen DATE: January 11, 2008 CDRC/Zoning Manager SUBJECT: Wal-mart Store, 3786 E. Valencia Road Tentative Plat S07-158 (First Review) T15S, R14E, Section 16 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Tentative Plat and Drainage Report. The Tentative Plat (TP) and Drainage Report (DR) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Tentative Plat: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the TP. 2. DS Sec.2-13.2.5.B.1: For W.A.S.H. ERR projects, address the following comments: a) Prepare a drainage report explaining hydrology and hydraulics as well as the W.A.S.H./ ERR aspects for the proposed project. b) For W.A.S.H. Ordinance (Tucson Code Chapter 29 Article VIII) compliance, follow the outline of the elements listed under the Tucson Code Section 29-15(b)(1). Per this section, your W.A.S.H. Ordinance report should provide complete discussions regarding any effects on hydrology and hydraulics to the 50-foot Study Area due to the elements that are outlined in section 29-15(b)(1) a through i. In order to easily review the report each of these sections a through i can be addressed separately by section letter. There should be an objectives and/or summary section in the report discussing how the proposed project meets the purpose and intent of the W.A.S.H. Ordinance and ERR standards. See Tucson Code Sec.29-12(a) through (d). c) For more info on W.A.S.H. Ordinance compliance go to the following link, then scroll down to Chapter 29, then go to section 29-15. i) Tucson Code go to this link: http://www.municode.com/resources/gateway.asp?pid=11294&sid=3 and go down to Chapter 29, ARTICLE VIII. WATERCOURSE AMENITIES, SAFETY AND HABITAT. d) The ERR standards should be used as supplemental information to clarify how the W.A.S.H. code provisions are addressed in the report. Here is the link to the ERR requirements: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/agdocs/20061107/nov7-06-610-2b.pdf i) The ERR reflects requirements in Tucson Code Chapter 26 Article I Section 5.2.(4) which states: Development in the floodway fringe shall not unnecessarily alter riparian habitats of watercourse and adjacent bank areas. If there is any proposed disturbance of the regulated 100-yr floodplain riparian watercourse on your site, an ERR report will be required to be submitted for review. ii) Try page 8 for report contents. The report is somewhat similar to WASH Ordinance report (Tucson Code Chapter 29 Article VIII section 15) and asks for similar information to be discussed in the report, however since there is a WASH Ordinance wash that is proposed to be disturbed on this site, follow WASH report format and supplement the report with ERR discussion. Some line items may need more emphasis than others in the report. For example, perhaps a simple statement IF there are no utilities existing at the site to address the utilities item, where as other items may need several paragraphs to fully discuss ... ie floodplain conditions. 3. Please provide property description per D.S. 2-02.2.1.3. 4. List all Cut and Fill quantities in cubic yards. If both are 0 cy, please list. 5. Please provide Drainage patterns and finished grades per D.S. 2-02.2.1.16. 6. All easement of record must be graphically shown on the plan together with recording docket and page per D.S. 2-02.2.1.20. 7. Add the basin(s) maintenance responsibility note per S.M.D.D.F.M. 2.3.1.6 C 1 and 2 to the TP. 8. Correctly depict all cross sections of the basin and existing channel. It appears that the basin slopes in the cross section are disproportionate. Revise as required. 9. Show Tentative Plat number on all sheets per D.S. 2-02.2.1.29. 10. Show refuse container location, size, and access thereto fully dimensioned per D.S. 2-02.2.1.32 and D.S. 6-01.0. Call out that the refuse is compacted and will be serviced by private company. 11. 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. 12. Any pipes proposed in the R/W shall be RCP's. Revise as required. A separate permit for any work in the existing channel will require a separate permit and a floodplain use permit as well. 13. Please show a typical cross section of the P.A.A.L. or call out the percentage of slopes. Call out the GB at the D/W, if applicable. 14. 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 have not yet been decided, a general note indicating sidewalk scuppers will be used when the roof scuppers locations have been designed and located will suffice. 15. Add note: "Depress all landscaped areas 6" maximum for water harvesting". 16. "A grading permit and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP's) will be required for this project. Submit 2 sets of grading and SWPPP's with text, upon completion and submittal of a grading permit application. A grading permit may not be issued prior to site plan approval. Subsequent comments may be necessary, depending upon the nature and extent of revisions that occur to the plans". Drainage Report: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the DR. 2. This review was performed for Tentative Plat purposes only. Final review and acceptance will done at the grading plan stage. 3. Demonstrate how the proposed development will accept stormwater from the future development to the west. Show scuppers, rip-rap, drainage patterns etc. 4. The 50' W.A.S.H. setbacks are measured from the top of bank, not from the 100-year surface elevation. Revise as required. 5. If the future development will graded at the same time the proposed development, then detention/retention volumes will have to be included and so will stabilization of the graded area need to be implemented. 6. DS Sec.2-13.2.5.B.1: For W.A.S.H. ERR projects, address the following comments: a) Prepare a drainage report explaining hydrology and hydraulics as well as the W.A.S.H./ ERR aspects for the proposed project. b) For W.A.S.H. Ordinance (Tucson Code Chapter 29 Article VIII) compliance, follow the outline of the elements listed under the Tucson Code Section 29-15(b)(1). Per this section, your W.A.S.H. Ordinance report should provide complete discussions regarding any effects on hydrology and hydraulics to the 50-foot Study Area due to the elements that are outlined in section 29-15(b)(1) a through i. In order to easily review the report each of these sections a through i can be addressed separately by section letter. There should be an objectives and/or summary section in the report discussing how the proposed project meets the purpose and intent of the W.A.S.H. Ordinance and ERR standards. See Tucson Code Sec.29-12(a) through (d). c) For more info on W.A.S.H. Ordinance compliance go to the following link, then scroll down to Chapter 29, then go to section 29-15. i) Tucson Code go to this link: http://www.municode.com/resources/gateway.asp?pid=11294&sid=3 and go down to Chapter 29, ARTICLE VIII. WATERCOURSE AMENITIES, SAFETY AND HABITAT. d) The ERR standards should be used as supplemental information to clarify how the W.A.S.H. code provisions are addressed in the report. Here is the link to the ERR requirements: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/agdocs/20061107/nov7-06-610-2b.pdf i) The ERR reflects requirements in Tucson Code Chapter 26 Article I Section 5.2.(4) which states: Development in the floodway fringe shall not unnecessarily alter riparian habitats of watercourse and adjacent bank areas. If there is any proposed disturbance of the regulated 100-yr floodplain riparian watercourse on your site, an ERR report will be required to be submitted for review. ii) Try page 8 for report contents. The report is somewhat similar to WASH Ordinance report (Tucson Code Chapter 29 Article VIII section 15) and asks for similar information to be discussed in the report, however since there is a WASH Ordinance wash that is proposed to be disturbed on this site, follow WASH report format and supplement the report with ERR discussion. Some line items may need more emphasis than others in the report. For example, perhaps a simple statement IF there are no utilities existing at the site to address the utilities item, where as other items may need several paragraphs to fully discuss ... ie floodplain conditions. 7. Show the project address or administration address on the cover sheet of the DR. 8. Any pipes proposed in the R/W shall be RCP's. Revise as required. A separate permit for any work in the existing channel will require a separate permit and a floodplain use permit as well. 9. If applicable, add the basin(s) maintenance responsibility note and checklist per S.M.D.D.F.M. 2.3.1.6 C 1 and 2 to the DR. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4932 or Paul.Machado@tucsonaz.govs Paul P. Machado Senior Engineering Associate City of Tucson/Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210 (520) 837-4932 office (520) 879-8010 fax C:/3786 E. Valencia Rd_CDRC |
| 10/18/2007 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 10/22/2007 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 10/26/2007 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Approved | Office of the Pima County Assessor 115 N. Church Ave. Tucson, Arizona 85701 BILL STAPLES ASSESSOR TO: CDRC Office Subdivision Review City of Tucson (FAX# 791-5559) FROM: Gary Ault, Mapping Supervisor Pima County Assessor’s Office Mapping Department DATE: October 25, 2007 RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding DEVELOPMENT PLAN S07-158 WAL-MART * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor’s Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor’s Office requirements. COMMENTS: THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUBMITTAL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL ROSANNA WERNER AT 740-4390 ROSANNA WERNER |
| 10/31/2007 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | CASE: S07-158, WALMART STORE #4684-00: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW COMMENT: NO OBJECTIONS OR ADVERSE COMMENTS Vehicle Trip Generation: Daily: 4,208 PM Peak: 368 Please call if you have questions, Aichong Sun Pima Association of Governments 177 N. Church Ave, #405 Tucson, AZ 85701 Tel: (520) 792-1093, Fax: (520) 620-6981 Web: www.PAGnet.org and www.RTAmobility.com |
| 11/01/2007 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 KAY MARKS ADDRESSING OFFICIAL PH: 740-6480 FAX #: 740-6370 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: KAY MARKS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL SUBJECT: S07-158 WAL-MART STORE #4684-00/TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: October 31, 2007 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: Note 19 indicates this project has 4 lots. Add Lots to Title Block and label on sheets 2, 3 4 and 5. jg |
| 11/02/2007 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Denied | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#189651 November 2, 2007 Dear : Maolin Zheng: SUBJECT: Wal-Mart Store # 4684-00 S07-158 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and disapproved the development plan submitted October 26, 2007. It appears that there are conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. Please identify all TEP facilities for approval, this includes structures and OHE & UGE routes. . Any relocation costs will be billable to the customer. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities, and attached for reference 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: Ms. Mary Boice New Business Project Manager P. O. Box 711 (DB-101) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-917-8732 Please call the area Designer Steve Garica at (520) 918-8739, should you have any questions. Sincerely, Henrietta Noriega Office Specialist Design/Build hn Enclosures Cc S. Garcia, Tucson Electric Power City of Tucson (E-Mail) |
| 11/02/2007 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Denied | ADOT The development lies within 1.2 miles from I-10 and Valencia and 1.5 miles form I-10 and Alvernon Way. ADOT would like a statement in the TIA that the interchanges will continue to operate at an acceptable level of service and that no mitigation will be required at this time. |
| 11/02/2007 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Wal-Mart Store #4684-00 - Tentative Plat 9500 E. Tanque Verde Road S07-158 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 2, 2007 DUE DATE: November 16, 2007 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 4.1.7.1, LUC, permits a maximum of one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a tentative plat. If, at the end of that time, the tentative plat 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 tentative plat is October 18, 2008. 2. Based on the rezoning maps this parcel has a open rezoning case #C9-03-09, I1 to R1 & C1, this said zoning acknowledges that no change in zoning I1 is proposed for the project. Contact Michael Wynekin in regards to withdrawing the existing rezoning case. 3. D.S. 2-03.2.1.D Provide a location map that identifies all the subdivisions within the 1 mile area, reference the subdivision plats by book and page. Show the City of Tucson's jurisdictional limits on the plan. 4. D.S. 2-03.2.1.G.2 Provide the number of lots in the title block. 5. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.1 & D.S. 2-05.2.1.K Place the S07-158 subdivision case number in the lower right corner of the plat next to the title block. 6. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.5 & D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.3 Revise General Note 18 to read "GENERAL MERCHANDISE SALES". 7. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.7 & D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.9 Revise General Note 20 to include "Sec. 2.8.5, GATEWAY CORRIDOR ZONE". 8. D.S. 2-03.2.4.A & D.S. 2-05.2.4.A Provide the distance for the east and west property lines for "SELLERS OUTLOT #2". 9. D.S. 2-03.2.4.A & D.S. 2-05.2.4.A Zoning acknowledges that the acreage has been listed for all proposed lots, provide the square footage for all lots. 10. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Per LUC Figure 3.3.7.2 and LUC Table 3.3.7-I the proposed 60 degree angled vehicle parking does not meet the minimum requirements for the "C Space Depth" for a 9'-0" wide vehicle parking space. The minimum "C Space Depth" is 20'-0", revise the vehicle parking layout to meet this dimension. 11. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Per D.S. 3-05.2.1.3 the proposed vehicle parking spaces next to the proposed "CART CORRAL" are required to be ten (10) foot wide. Provide dimension so that zoning can verify the width of the vehicle parking spaces next to the cart corrals. 12. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 The southern most van accessible vehicle parking space does not meet the requirement of ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 Sec 502.4.1. For angled vehicle paring the required access aisle is to be located on the passenger side of the parking space, revise the plan. 13. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Provide the minimum width for the van accessible vehicle parking space access aisle on the plan and the parking space detail. 14. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Provide a dimension for the width of the western most entrance/exit PAAL off of Valencia Road. Please lighten up the screening in this area to provide better readablity. 15. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Provide a detail for the proposed ADA signage for vehicle parking spaces. If the proposed signage is to be used to prevent vehicles from gaining access to the sidewalk area some type of bollard pole base is required. 16. D.S. 2-03.2.4.J & D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.G For all proposed easements provide their width, purpose and whether they are public or private. 17. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.I The provided zoning setback shown from the building to Valencia Road is shown incorrectly. Per LUC Sec 3.2.6.5.B the setback is measured from the back of future curb, revise the dimension. 18. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.I Provide a zoning setback dimension from the proposed transfer material enclosure to the west property line. 19. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.K Based on truncated domes being shown on the sidewalk along the entire east side of the proposed building zoning will assume that the sidewalk is flush with the asphalt paving. Per D.S. 2-08.4.1 Sidewalks within a project must be physically separated from any vehicular travel lane by means of curbing, grade separation, barriers, railings, or other means, except at crosswalks. This said provide some type of physical separation for this sidewalk from the proposed parking area access lane (PAAL). 20. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.K Provide a detail for the truncated domes shown along the east side of the proposed building so that zoning can verify that they will meet the requirements of ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 Sec 406.13.2. 21. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.K Per D.S. 3-05.2.2.B.1 a five (5) foot pedestrian refuge area must be maintained between any enclosed structure and PAAL. This said, a five (5) foot pedestrian refuge will be provided along the south side of the proposed building and the PAAL. Also Per D.S. 2-08.4.1.B a sidewalk, four (4) foot minimum width will be provided between the proposed building and this PAAL. 22. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.K There is a curb access ramp shown at the northeast corner of the proposed building. It is not clear how this ramp, that appears to be located immediately next to an area where the sidewalk is flush with the asphalt pavement, will function, please clarify. 23. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.K The proposed ADA ramp shown at the east end of the northern most accessible parking area does not appear to be designed as a COT Standard Curb Access Ramp, provide a detail for this ramp. 24. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.K The truncated domes shown at the proposed ramp located at the east end of the northern most accessible parking area are not required at that location. Pedestrians are not transitioning from a pedestrian area to vehicle use area. 25. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.K Per ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 Sec 406.13.2. Truncated domes are required where all accessible vehicle parking space access aisles intercept the flush sidewalk that is located between the northern accessible vehicle parking spaces. Also truncated domes are required at the west end the flush sidewalk where it intersects the thirty (30) foot wide PAAL that runs north south next to the proposed building. 26. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.K The striped pedestrian circulation shown within the two (2) large landscape islands north of the northeast corner of the proposed are required to be concrete sidewalks. These sidewalks may be flush with pavement at each end of the island. Truncated domes are required at both ends where the sidewalk is flush with the pavement. 27. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.K The proposed curb access ramp shown at the southwest corner of the thirty-six (36) foot wide entrance/exit PAAL off of Valencia Road does not appear to have the required three (3) foot landing, see ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 Sec 406.7, the flares do not appear to meet the 1:12 requirement. 28. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.N Provide the height and dimension the footprint on the plan. 29. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.O Under parking data sheet 1 of 5 provide the required and provided loading space size. "LOADING SPACE REQUIRED 4 SPACES 12X35", "LOADING SPACE PROVIDED 4 SPACES 12X135". 30. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.P The parking calculation is not correct. 98,056/200 = 490.28 or 490 vehicle parking spaces required. Provide the required number of accessible vehicle parking spaces, include the number of van accessible vehicle parking spaces in the calculation. It appears that the number 494 spaces shown under Parking data, Total Parking, is the Total required, please clarify. 31. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.Q Clearly identify the main entrance to the proposed structure so that zoning can verify that the requirements of D.S. 2-09.4.1 Proximity to Main Entrances are being met. 32. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.Q It appears that the proposed locations for the Class 2 bicycle parking is directly adjacent to the proposed building wall. Per D.S.2-09.5.1.B show the minimum thirty-six (36) inches measured from the end of the rack to the wall. 33. Remove the reference to Lot Coverage from the plan and provide a Floor Area Ratio (FAR), see LUC Sec. 3.2.11. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\cdrc\tentativeplat\S07-158tpca.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised tentative plat, and additional requested documents. |
| 11/06/2007 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | The Landscape Section does not recommend approval of the plans at this time due to inconsistencies with adopted codes and standards. The plan was reviewed for compliance with the Land Use Code (LUC), Development Standards (DS) and other applicable standards and guidelines referred to in the comments. Revise the plans as necessary to comply. 1) Add the CDRC case number and any related case numbers to the landscape and native plant preservation plans. DS 2-07.2.1.B 2) The area between the right-of-way line and sidewalk and the area between the sidewalk and the curb, if not covered with vegetation, shall be covered with an appropriate inorganic ground cover, such as decomposed granite. Revise the plans to clarify compliance for all street frontages. LUC 3.7.2.4.A.4 3) Revise the landscape plan to identify the location and purpose of utility easements and other easements. DS 2-07.2.2.E.1 4) Revise the landscape plans to show the limits of grading. DS 2-07.2.2.B.5 5) Revise the landscape to show the location (adjacent public right of way areas and the wash study area?), size, and name of existing vegetation to remain in place. DS 2-07.2.2.A.1.e 6) Revise the native plant preservation plans to show the limits of grading. DS 2-15.3.4.A 7) The plans indicate the existence of billboards on the site and also indicate that they are to be removed. Provide information regarding the timing or date of removal. This is necessary due to the applicable Land Use Code requirements (loading areas, landscaping and screening, paved access etc.) that would apply if the billboards remained in place. 8) Revise LS and DP to show the same screen wall height info. DS 2-07.2.2 9) Revise the plans to show any applicable future sight triangles based on the ultimate road sections. 10) Rain water harvesting must be conducted at this site per the requirements in Land Use Code (LUC) Section 3.7.1.1.A, requiring that landscaping should accomplish natural resources conservation; LUC Section 3.7.4.3.B requiring integration of grading, hydrology and landscaping to make the maximum use of stormwater for on-site irrigation; and LUC Section 3.7.4.5.B requiring that stormwater and runoff harvesting be used to supplement drip irrigation for both new and preserved vegetation. Techniques to design and implement water harvesting are described in the City of Tucson's Water Harvesting Guidance Manual. This document can be downloaded as from the following website: http://dot.tucsonaz.gov/stormwater/ To comply with the above-referenced LUC sections, rain water harvested from building roofs, sidewalks, and parking lots shall be employed to assist in supporting landscaped areas including parking lot tree wells, landscape buffers, sidewalk plantings, and other vegetation locations at the site. Details and Specifications for water harvesting shall be clearly indicated on site plans to ensure it is correctly implemented at all necessary stages of construction. The City of Tucson's Office of Conservation and Sustainable Development is available for consultation regarding water harvesting principles, techniques and code requirements. Please contact Ann Audrey or Frank Sousa in OCSD to make an appointment. 11) The plans propose a drainage outlet into the regulated area of the Rodeo Wash. The regulated area includes the channel, the banks, and the land area extending fifty (50) feet from the banks of the wash. Based on the topography, this regulated area or "study area" is located further north than the 50' Wash Setback shown on the plans. If the wash study area is located further north, a number of other potential alterations or encroachments, such as the water easement and parking access lanes, would also be located within the study area. Section B-B on sheet C5 shows a maximum slope of 4:1 between the vertical curb and the Rodeo Wash. The existing grade is required to be maintained in this location. Any grading in the regulatory area is considered encroachment and must be in conformance with DS 9-06 12) Projects subject to the provisions of the Watercourse, Amenities, Safety, and Habitat Ordinance, TCC 29. Require a separate application and review. Contact Patricia Gehlen/Zoning Manager at 837-4904 for submittal requirements. A pre-submittal meeting is required. 13) All tentative plats, development plans, site plans, plot plans or other plans providing for approval of development within property that includes any Regulated Area as defined in Development Standard 9-06.2.2.A shall identify and delineate the Regulated Areas (study area) and the Protected Riparian Area (resource area). Revise the development plans as necessary. 14) Add a note to the development plan stating that the project is designed to meet the WASH Ordinance criteria per DS 2-05.2.2.B.10. 15) Submit an Environmental Resource Report (ERR) per DS 2-13.2.5.B.1 if encroachment is proposed in the regulatory area. The report will document (1) the areas that contain riparian and wildlife habitat that is to be preserved and (2) those areas without such habitat within the regulatory floodplain. 16) All development within the Protected Riparian Area shall be reviewed to insure that there is no unnecessary disturbance of the riparian resources. Refer to DS 2-13.2.5.B.2 for the section on Development Restrictions and the definition of "necessary development" and revise the plans as necessary to comply. 17) Ownership of the Protected Riparian Area shall be provided in one or more of the methods set forth in DS 2-13.2.6 to insure continued preservation of the area. Refer to the standards and revise the plans and provide additional documentation as appropriate. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED |
| 11/13/2007 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | November 9, 2007 To: Maolin Zheng BSW International Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ___________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6579), representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environment Quality Subject: Walmart Store #4684-00 DP/TP - 1st Submittal S07-158 The proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project have been reviewed on behalf of the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) and the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. All Sheets: Show the jurisdiction’s case number, S07-158, in or near the title block of each sheet. This case number should be shown larger and bolder than any associated cross-reference numbers. This project will be tributary to the Roger Road Wastewater Treatment Facility via the Southeast Interceptor. Obtain a letter from the PCWMD's Development Services Section, written within the past 90 days, 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/forms/docs/CapResponseRequest.pdf. The development plan for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. Sheet 1: Chang the first word of General Note # 5 from NO to ANY. Sheet 1: Fill in the blanks for General Note #6. Sheet 4: The section of proposed public sewer from proposed public MH#6 to MH#4625-17 should be 8” not 10”. Sheet 4: Provide the rim elevations for all proposed manholes and cleanouts. 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. If you have any questions regarding the above-mentioned comments, please contact me. |
| 11/15/2007 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S07-158 Wal-Mart Center #4684-00 11/15/07 () Tentative Plat/Development Plan ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment ( ) Other CROSS REFERENCE: N/A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: N/A GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Valencia is Gateway Route COMMENTS DUE BY: November 16, 2007 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: ( ) No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment () Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions ( ) RCP Proposal Complies with Plan Policies ( ) See Additional Comments Attached ( ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: () No Resubmittal Required ( ) Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan ( ) Landscape Plan ( ) Other REVIEWER: J. Hershenhorn 791-4505 DATE: 11/9/07 |
| 11/16/2007 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Denied | S07-158 Wal-Mart Store #4684-00: Tentative Plat Review -Request easement (possible cross-access easement) be established for the offsite portion of the access at the NWC of Subject Parcel. -Request clarification if ownership of Seller's Outlots 1, 2 & 3 will transfer. |
| 11/19/2007 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 11/21/2007 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. No detail of compactor enclosure area provided. Must include all dimensions of concrete pad with CMU screening and identify power supply. Refer to DS 6-01.4.3. 2. Show truck route to trash enclosure area with appropriate turning radii's. 3. No provisions shown or mentioned for recycling. Clarify if cardboard baler will be supplied and used for this development. Please provide corrections on resubmittal. If you have any questions you may contact Andy Vera at (520) 791-5543 ext 1212 or e-mail: Andy.Vera@tucsonaz.gov |
| 11/21/2007 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | November 21, 2007 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D07-158 PROJECT NAME: Wal-Mart Store # 4684-00 PROJECT ADDRESS: 3786 E Valencia 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. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. 2. The proposed traffic signal at Valencia Rd and Hemisphere Loop will not be permitted due to the close proximately of the existing traffic signal at Valencia Rd and Alvernon Way. The City of Tucson's Transportation Access Management Guidelines require a minimum of a half-mile separation between traffic signals along arterial roadways. 3. Existing bike lanes along Valencia Rd need to be adjusted to accommodate the proposed right turn lane for driveway 3. 4. The Traffic Impact Analysis needs to reflect and address the proposed full access configuration for driveway 1. 5. The existing southbound drop lane along Alvernon Way needs to be eliminated to prevent conflicts with the new right turn lane for driveway 4. 6. A private improvement agreement (PIA) will be necessary for the proposed work to be performed within the Right-of-way. An approved tentative plat is required prior to applying for a PIA. Contact the PIA Coordinator for additional PIA information at 791-5550 ext. 1107. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x76730 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 11/27/2007 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | DATE: November 27, 2007 TO: DSD_CDRC@ tucsonaz.gov FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov SUBJECT: S07-158 Wal-Mart Store #4684-00: Tentative Plat Review(10-19-07) Denied. Please indicate a 35 ft wide public non-motorized recreational trail easement is being dedicated along the south property line. |