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: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Permit Number - T10CM02700
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/04/2011 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Clements Senior Center T10CM02700 Site Plan (2nd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 1, 2011 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. This site plan was reviewed for compliance with the City of Tucson Development Standards (D.S.) and Land Use Code (LUC) for full code compliance for the area of expansion only. 2. As the propose building is going to be built across a lot line, parcels 136-29-0010 & 136-29-003A. A lot combination is required. Provide a copy of the approve Pima County Combination Request Form and a recorded Covenant Regarding Development and Use of Real Property prior to approval of the site plan. 3. This comment was not addressed. As building area and vehicle use area have been added to the site the lot coverage should change. The lot coverage shown on sheet C1.00 is the same as on the last approved plan. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.3 Per Development Designator "6" provide the allowed and proposed lot coverage on the site plan. 4. As these plans have yet to be fully approved by the COT only corrections have been made to the plans not revisions. That said remove all revision clouds and deltas from the plans. 5. Once the above comments have been addressed I am willing to provide an over-the-counter review for the site plan and building plan. Please call or email to schedule an appointment for this review. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\site\t10cm02700 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan. |
| 04/04/2011 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Steven R. Davenport, Architect DATE: April 4, 2011 410 N. 44th St., Ste. 800 Phoenix, Arizona, 85008 Subject: Clements Senior Center, 8155 E. Poinciana Dr. Site plan T10CM02700 (Second Review) T14S, R15E, Section 33 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Site Plan and Drainage Report. The Site Plan (SP) and Drainage Report (DR) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Site Plan: 1. Please include a detailed response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the SP. 2. Considering the information and drainage requirements for constructing adjacent to the regulated floodplain and a W.A.S.H. wash, a meeting is suggested to discuss the requirements for a solution to the site plan. Contact Paul Machado via phone or e-mail to schedule an appointment. 3. Provide a smaller scale of the entire parcel showing the property lines, all improvements, the limits of the 100-yr. flood plain, EHS etc. Perhaps the building and its improvements can be shown on the over all parcel map, sht. C1.00A. 4. "A Floodplain Use Permit (FUP) will be required for this project. A grading permit may not be issued prior to the approval of the Site Plan. Subsequent comments may be necessary, depending upon the nature, extent of revisions and comments that occur to the plans". Per previous comments. 5. The unnamed wash NE of the project is labeled as a proposed W.A.S.H. wash on the Tucson Department of Transportation maps. The W.A.S.H. ordinance regulations will apply for this wash. Contact Patricia Gehlen for information on submittal requirements and procedures at (520) 837-4919. Per pervious comment. 6. Show the 50-foot study area (resources area) for parcels subject to the W.A.S.H. Ordinance. A mitigation plan is required for any disturbance in the resource area. Include the mitigation plan with the grading plan submittal. Per previous comment. 7. Show the limits of the 100-year floodplain and water surface elevation per D.S. 2-02.2.1.15. See DR comments. 8. 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. Provide either individual or blankets easements for all future and existing utilities. The easements shall be labeled with the recording information prior to the approval of the site plan. Per previous comment. 9. Location and orientation of existing major physical features, such as railroad tracks and drainageways per D.S. 2-02.2.1.22. Label or show the top of the banks in order to determine the 50' setback and the EHS. 10. Show Site plan number on all sheets per D.S. 2-02.2.1.29. Shall be shown on each sheet. 11. Show refuse container location, size, and access thereto fully dimensioned per D.S. 2-02.2.1.32 and D.S. 6-01.0. Detail of enclosure not found on sheet C1.00. 12. 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 and/or sidewalk scuppers have not yet been decided, a general note indicating sidewalk scuppers will be used when the roof drain/sidewalk scupper locations have been designed and located and that the 10-year flow must be conveyed under any other sidewalks and/or pedestrian paths will suffice. As indicated above, the sidewalk scuppers are required for any other site drainage as well. 13. Add note: "Depress all landscaped areas 6" maximum for water harvesting". Note not found on plans. Include a detailed response indicating where the note i.e.: sheet no., area of plans etc. can be found. 14. "A grading permit and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP's) will be required for this project. Submit 2 sets of the grading plan 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". The SWPPP must be submitted in conjunction with the grading plan and grading permit application. Additional SWPPP requirements are available at: http://www.azdeq.gov/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html. Drainage Report: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the DR. 2. The DR included information from previous drainage reports that addressed upstream conditions that are important to the project but the report does not address drainage conditions or any drainage solutions adjacent to the property nor does it address a number of my comments. A meeting is suggested to discuss the requirements for a drainage solution. Contact Paul Machado via phone or e-mail to schedule an appointment. 3. If information/data is being extracted and used from a different DR, than a statement indicating that you have reviewed and agree to the data will need to be included in your DR. 4. For all commercial or industrial developments larger than one acre in size shall provide 5-year threshold retention per the Stormwater Det./Ret. Manual, Chapter II, 2.2. Per the DR, no additional retention is required due to enlargement of the existing basins. Include details with dimensions of all existing basins and the improvements as well as more information on the cisterns or water harvesting containment systems. 5. Comments 6 through 10 are from the previous review and must be addressed. 6. The unnamed wash NE of the project is labeled as a proposed W.A.S.H. wash on the Tucson Department of Transportation maps. The W.A.S.H. ordinance regulations will apply for this wash. Contact Patricia Gehlen for information on submittal requirements and procedures at (520) 837-4919. 7. Show the 50-foot study area (resources area) for parcels subject to the W.A.S.H. Ordinance. A mitigation plan is required for any disturbance in the resource area. Include the mitigation plan with the grading plan submittal. 8. Per the City of Tucson Code of Ordinances, Chapter 26, Floodplain, Stormwater and Erosion Hazard Management, Section 26-5.1 - Floodway development. Development in the floodway shall: " (13) Not contribute to debris accumulation upstream and/or downstream. " (14) Not create a water pollution problem in the floodway due to soluble, insoluble, or solid materials, at the time of flooding. 9. Per the City of Tucson Code of Ordinances, Chapter 26, Floodplain, Stormwater and Erosion Hazard Management, Section 26-5.2 - Floodway fringe development: No development, storage of materials or equipment, or other uses shall be permitted which, acting alone or in combination with existing or future uses, create a danger or hazard to life or property. Development in the floodway fringe shall: " (13) Prohibit storage and/or processing of materials that are buoyant, flammable, explosives or that could be injurious to human, animal or plant life at the time of flooding. " (15) Locate water supply, water treatment and sewage collection and disposal systems to eliminate or minimize infiltration of floodwaters into these systems and discharge of materials from these systems into floodwaters. 10. Show the limits of the 100-year floodplain, erosion hazard setback line and water surface elevation per D.S. 2-02.2.1.15. The E.H.S. is measured from the top of bank or the 100-yr WSEL per S.M.D.D.F.M., Chap VII, 7.4. How were the WSEL obtained? 11. Additional comments may be necessary depending on the content and information contained in the DR. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4932 or Paul.Machado@tucsonaz.gov Paul P. Machado Senior Engineering Associate City of Tucson - Planning and Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210 (520) 837-4932 office (520) 879-8010 fax C:/8155 E. Poinciana Dr. Site 2 |
| 04/04/2011 | RONALD BROWN | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | It has been our experience that due to the lack of training on the part of Sun Tran that if there is no physical barrier at the passenger loading zone, they will pull head in to drop of the passengers as opposed to a parallel approach. This in turn allows the van and the wheel chair lift and ramp to damage the truncated domes. It is our suggestion that a row of steel bollards be placed just inside the curb line prior to the edge of the truncated domes and positioned the entire length of the flush curb line. Space them approximately 6' on center. |
| 04/06/2011 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Engineering comments verified that the following comments apply to Landscape and NPPO reviews. 2. All development within Regulated Areas must comply with all other applicable code provisions, including obtaining floodplain use permits where necessary. Washes zoned or named in the WASH regulations must also be reviewed in conformance with the DSD Full Notice Procedure, Sections 23A- 50 and 51 DS 9-06.2.7 3. If encroachment is proposed into the Regulated Area(s), submittal of an Environmental Resource Report in conformance as defined in LUC 6.2.5 & DS 9-06.2.5.B.1 is required. 4. Include with re-submittal overlay case approval documentation. Indicate on the lower right hand corner of the site plan, the case number, date of approval, and any conditions imposed. Site plan review will continue once DSD Full Notice Procedure is complete. 5. Ensure that all Zoning & Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. 6. Additional comments may apply |
| 04/06/2011 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Engineering comments verified that the following comments apply to the Landscape and NPPO reviews. 2. All development within Regulated Areas must comply with all other applicable code provisions, including obtaining floodplain use permits where necessary. Washes zoned or named in the WASH regulations must also be reviewed in conformance with the DSD Full Notice Procedure, Sections 23A- 50 and 51 DS 9-06.2.7 3. If encroachment is proposed into the Regulated Area(s), submittal of an Environmental Resource Report in conformance as defined in LUC 6.2.5 & DS 9-06.2.5.B.1 is required. 4. Include with re-submittal overlay case approval documentation. Indicate on the lower right hand corner of the site plan, the case number, date of approval, and any conditions imposed. Site plan review will continue once DSD Full Notice Procedure is complete. 5. Ensure that all Zoning & Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. 6. Additional comments may apply |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/21/2011 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 09/21/2011 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |