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: In Review
Review Details: CIP - DEV SITE + COMM STRUCTURE - INITIAL v.1
Plan Number - CIP-1025-00025
Review Name: CIP - DEV SITE + COMM STRUCTURE - INITIAL v.1
Review Status: In Review
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Building Official | NOT REQUIRED | ||||
| Real Estate | NOT REQUIRED | Please contact the Real Estate Division if any property rights or encroachments need to be addressed. | |||
| Zoning Administration | NOT REQUIRED | ||||
| Zoning Compliance Review | NOT REQUIRED | ||||
| CDRC Post Review Express | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | ||||
| Urban Forestry | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | ||||
| Bldg Permits - Post Review Express | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Commercial Building | REVIEW COMPLETED | Provide structural calculations and construction drawings for any vertical structures/buildings associated with this project. Please contact me if you have any questions about these comments. Mark Masek Plans Examiner – Building Safety Planning and Development Services | City of Tucson main 520.837.4994 email mark.masek@tucsonaz.gov |
|||
| Commercial Electrical | REVIEW COMPLETED | Commercial Electrical Review CIP-1025-00025 (2420 S KINO PW TUCSON, AZ 85713) Plan review for the above referenced structure has been completed. This letter reflects comments to be addressed. Provide updated Plans/calculations and a written response Letter to each of the notated items indicating action taken. Resubmitted plans that do not contain a written response Letter addressing each of the notated items indicating action taken, may be delayed until response letter is received. Code reference, 2018 International Building Code (IBC), 2017 National Electrical Code (NEC). 1. Provide an electrical plan showing any/all electrical work. Or note that no electrical work shall be done. Contact Jeremy Hamblin with any questions: Jeremy.hamblin@tucsonaz.gov |
|||
| Commercial Mechanical | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Commercial Plumbing | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Entitlements | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Fire New Construction | REVIEW COMPLETED | No comments | |||
| New Services/JOC | REVIEW COMPLETED | Tucson Water – New Area Development has no objection to the proposed work for CIP-1025-00025, The drinking fountain that its shown on sheet 9 of xx needs to be tied to a potable water main not reclaimed main. For any questions, contact Mario Rivera Alvarez at mario.riveraalvarez3@tucsonaz.gov | |||
| NPPO | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Outdoor Lighting | REVIEW COMPLETED | Outdoor Lighting Review CIP-1025-00025 (2420 S KINO PW TUCSON, AZ 85713) Plan review for the above referenced structure has been completed. This letter reflects comments to be addressed. Provide updated Plans/calculations and a written response Letter to each of the notated items indicating action taken. Resubmitted plans that do not contain a written response Letter addressing each of the notated items indicating action taken, may be delayed until response letter is received. Code reference, 2018 International Building Code (IBC), 2017 National Electrical Code (NEC), 2012 Outdoor Lighting Code (OLC). Outdoor Lighting Review: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/pdsd/documents/building-code/2012_outdoor_lighting_code_.pdf 1. With any modifications, alterations, additions to the outdoor lighting being made, Provide an outdoor site lighting plan that meets the requirements of OLC 104.2. Show/locate the different light sources on your site plan. Number the light fixtures on your lighting fixture table and use the same number on your site plan. 2. Are there new lights going in for the sports courts? 3. Or note that all outdoor lighting to remain. Contact Jeremy Hamblin with any questions: Jeremy.hamblin@tucsonaz.gov |
|||
| ROW Engineering Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | DTM has no Comments | |||
| Signs | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Site Engineering | REVIEW COMPLETED | 1. A SWPPP will be required for this project. Stephen Blood (520) 837-4958 Stephen.blood@tucsonaz.gov |
|||
| Site Landscape | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Site Zoning | REVIEW COMPLETED | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Bobby Parsons Zoning Section Review PROJECT: CIP-1025-00025 (New walking path, new covered basketball court, resurfaced parking lots, ramada, new play area) 2420 S. Kino Pkwy. Tucson, AZ 85713 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11/3/2025 COMMENTS: Resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. 1. Comment: The name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s), or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional, such as a surveyor, architect, landscape architect, or engineer. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines. The Contact information listed on the cover sheet for the Landscape Architect Registrant does not match the name for the stamped Landscape Architect on the landscape plan sheets. Correct the cover sheet to include the contact information for the Landscape Architect whose stamp appears on the landscape plan sheets. 2. Comment: Ensure the provided sheet index is consistent with how many pages are in the submittal. This submittal included 40 sheets however the sheet index only went to 37. 3. Comment: Upon formal submittal, please provide the development package case number adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 4. Comment: If applicable, relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 5. Comment: Per UDC Table 4.8-2, the use should be listed as Parks and Recreation with Use Specific Standards 4.9.13.B & .C applicable. 6. Comment: Please include the floor area of each building. 7. Comment: List the percentage and area in square feet of building and accessory building coverage. 8. Comment: List percentage of building, lot area, or vehicular use area expansion. If the building(s) or lot area have been previously expanded, those calculations shall be included. 9. Comment: All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided. 10. Comment: The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. 11. Comment: All existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) shall be indicated on the drawing with zoning boundaries clearly defined. If the property is being rezoned, use those boundaries and classifications. The basis for this requirement is that some zoning requirements on a project are based on the zoning classification of adjacent property. Also, in some instances, each zone has to be taken into consideration on property that is split by two or more zoning classifications, as each may have different requirements. 12. Comment: All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown. 1. Comment: Provide the square footage and the height of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building(s). 13. Comment: The setbacks listed on Sheet 2 are incorrect. Setbacks for Nonresidential Use to a Residential Zone are the greater of 10’ or ¾(Height) of the proposed exterior wall. 14. Comment: Ensure the minimum required short term bicycle parking spaces are met. 15. Comment: Provide the square footage and the height of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building(s). 16. Comment: Clearly Show existing or proposed pedestrian circulation along abutting rights-of-way. Such sidewalks must comply with accessibility requirements for the physically disabled and the design criteria in Section 10-01.0.0, Street Technical Standards, of the Technical Standards Manual. 17. Comment: Clearly Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual. 18. If applicable, Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Indicate if there are any existing billboards on site. Compliance to the Sign Code, Chapter 3 of the Tucson Code, is required. 19. Comment: If applicable, Show refuse collection areas, including locations of dumpsters, screening location and materials. For specific information on refuse collection, refer to Section 8-01.0.0, Solid Waste and Recycle Disposal, Collection, and Storage, of the Technical Standards Manual. Refuse collection on all projects shall be designed based on that section, even if collection is to be contracted to a private firm. Resubmittal of the following is required: Corrected CIP development package. If you have questions about this transmittal, please contact Robert.Parsons@tucsonaz.gov. |
|||
| Storm to Shade Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | See attachments for comments | |||
| Traffic Engineering Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | No comments | |||
| TSMR/PDMR - Engineering | REVIEW COMPLETED | Not applicable - No TSMR requested | |||
| TW New Development Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | Based on the information provided, Tucson Water has no objections to, or comments on, the proposed development. This project is supplied by a 6-inch PVC reclaimed water line (Work Order WO 8919-103). Everything connected to this line is for irrigation use only. No bathrooms, toilets, or drinking water connections are permitted. | |||
| TW Planning and Engineering Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | see file CONS-2025-09-29-Silverlake 60% DP_v1_Redlines under attachments for comments | |||
| Water - PDSD | REVIEW COMPLETED | See the manufacturer’s note #6 in detail 4/LH-5.3, “This drawing is intended for use by architects, engineers, contractors, consultants and design professionals for planning purposes only. This drawing may not be used for construction.” | |||
| Zoning Modifications - DDO | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Zoning Modifications - IPP | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Zoning Modifications - MS&R | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Zoning Modifications - Variance | REVIEW COMPLETED |