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: LUCAPPS - OVERLAY ZONE REVIEW
Permit Number - T06SA00004
Review Name: LUCAPPS - OVERLAY ZONE REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/20/2006 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 01/20/2006 SUBJECT: Voyager R.V. Resort T06SA00004, T15S, R15E, SECTION 32 RECEIVED: Overlay Zone Review (ERZ) on January 06, 2006 The subject submittal has been reviewed. We offer the following comments: 1. The proposed Golf Course facilities require a Floodplain Use Permit (FUP). Submit an FUP application with the Grading Plan. 2. Label the washes on the Concept Grading Plans. 3. Provide the existing conditions HEC RAS for the Norhtfork Airport Tributary. 4. Show the Golf Course facilities on the HEC RAS Map and ensure that HEC RAS cross sections are taken through the facilities to analyze their impact. 5. Delineate and label the 100-year floodplain on Figure 5. 6. Provide a sediment transport analysis to verify if there are any sediment transport issues that might cause the undermining of the Golf Course facilities. 7. Calculate the scour depth to determine the depth design of the golf cart path. 8. Determine the location of the proposed golf cart path, based on the runoff velocities, in order to determine the proper depth design. 9. Provide the hydrological information required in this review comments in the Voyager RV Resort Drainage Report. 10. Address the HEC RAS comments that were offered in the Voyager RV Resort Drainage Report comments. Prepare a detailed response that explains the revisions that were made and references the exact location in the submittal where the revisions were made. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Mitigation Report including the Hydrology submittal |
| 02/07/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | The Landscape Section has reviewed the application and recommends to the Director that it be denied. The Rincon Southeast Subregional Plan requires that "Areas identified on the Critical and Sensitive Wildlife Habitats of Eastern Pima County Map or in the Environmental Resource Report as Class I or Class II habitat shall be left in their predevelopment state, subject to the following exceptions: Encroachment shall not reduce the width of the critical and sensitive wash area by more than 20 percent at any cross-section of the critical and sensitive area". The plan also states "In cases where open space benefits conflict with the protection of wildlife habitat and corridors, wildlife protection shall be the primary concern and shall have precedence except when public safety is a concern". The recommendation is also based upon the amount, quality, and the existing condition of the critical riparian habitat areas, the impacts of the development on the critical riparian habitat areas, and the characteristics of the critical habitat areas south of the project. LUC 2.8.6.5.D.3 The mitigation plan does not recreate the critical riparian habitat through the native planting of trees, shrubs, and seed mix to equal to the predisturbance plant density, diversity, and volume on the net site. LUC 2.8.6.5.D.4 The application does not include a written statement from the regional office of the Arizona Game and Fish Department regarding any endangered plant or animal species on or near the project site. DS 2-13.2.2.B.1.i The project includes development within critical habitat areas and proposes cart paths that run parallel through critical habitat. LUC 2.8.6.6.A.1 states that "where allowed, roadway, bike path, and walkway improvements and utility encroachments will cross critical riparian habitat areas, not run parallel to the critical riparian habitat". The nature and extent of development coupled with the disruption within the critical habitat areas due to human activity and the potential degradation of habitat areas due to golf cart noise and traffic does not serve to protect the valuable habitat resources to the greatest extent possible. LUC 2.8.6.1 |
| 02/22/2006 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 03/13/2006 | FRODRIG2 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | WRITE DECISION LETTER | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES March 8, 2006 Michael Marks, AICP MJM Consulting, Inc. 7002 East 4th Street Tucson, Arizona 85710 Subject: T06SA00004 Environmental Resource Overlay Zone for Voyager R.V. Resort (S05-123) Dear Mike: Your submittal of January 6, 2006 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 for each agency explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLUELINES MUST BE FOLDED 3 Copies Revised Environmental Resource Zone Overlay submittal package as detailed in the on line comments (Engineering, Landscape, DSD). Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608, ext. 1179. Sincerely, Patricia Y. Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 885-5021 |