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: Requires Resubmit
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.1
Permit Number - TD-DEV-0623-00283
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.1
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/26/2023 | Commercial Plumbing | APPROVED | |||
| 08/08/2023 | CDRC Post Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 07/28/2023 | Entitlements | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Rezoning Case TP-ENT-0523-00020 is scheduled to be heard by the Mayor & Council on 19 September 2023. -GS | ||
| 07/06/2023 | NPPO | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | See landscape comments | ||
| 07/11/2023 | Site Engineering | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Tucson codes and ordinances can be found online at https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/tucson/latest/overview The Stormwater Retention-Detention Manual can be found online at https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/pdsd/documents/engineering-code/updated-retention-detention-manual.pdf TD-DEV-0623-00283 1. Provide a figure similar to Table 2.3 in Section 2 of the Retention-Detention Manual in the drainage report to show that first flush volumes are being provided. 2. Table 1 in the Drainage Report shows that Q100 for Watershed 1 is 15.4 cfs and Table 3 shows Q100 for Watershed 1 is 13.1 cfs. Ensure these numbers are consistent. 3. Table 1 in the Drainage Report shows that Q100 for Watershed 2 is 2.1 cfs and Table 3 shows Q100 for Watershed 2 is 1.8 cfs. Ensure these numbers are consistent. 4. Maximize water harvesting to all landscaped areas through use of flush curbs or curb cuts. 5. Show locations of roof downspouts on the drainage plan. 6. The catch basin bubble box/storm drain catch basin appears to be set directly into the bottom of Basin 1. If water in the basin is being drained directly into the storm drain, the basin does not provide retention. Elevate the storm drain inlet above the bottom of the basin to provide retention or revise retention calculations to remove Basin 1’s retention contributions. 7. Provide a waste stream calculation compliant with TSM 8-01. 8. Provide the trash enclosure detail in the Development Package. Lianne Evans lianne.evans@tucsonaz.gov This project is within a regulated floodplain and requires a Floodplain Use Permit (FUP.) Please start a new FUP at our permit application web page: https://tdc-online.tucsonaz.gov/#/home NOTE: Documentation of a cost estimate from your contractor will be required if this project involves any reconstruction, repair, rehabilitation, structurally connected addition, or other improvement of an existing structure (including TI’s and solar). Construction of separate builds/new structures does not require a cost estimate to be provided. Instructions: 1. Navigate into the current project in the “My Work” tab. Within the permit, navigate to the “Sub-Records” tab and click “Apply” on the Floodplain Use Permit Sub-Record 2. Locations -> Confirm the location is accurate to the project. Click “Next” 3. Type -> Fill in the “Square Feet” and “Valuation” boxes with the project area and a contractor-provided cost estimate (See note above: for new structures, input 0). Click “Next” 4. Contacts -> Confirm contacts and add any additional contacts if applicable. Click “Next” 5. More Info -> This will be filled in by the engineer assigned to your case, Click “Next” 6. Attachments -> Please attach the project plan, supporting documentation for the cost estimate (if applicable), and a drainage/hydrology report (if applicable). Click “Next” 7. Signature -> Read the statement and type your name. Sign your name below (You may Enable Type Signature to have the software sign for you.) Click “Next” 8. Review and Submit -> Review all information to ensure accuracy. Click “Submit” Contact Lianne Evans at lianne.evans@tucsonaz.gov or Stephen Blood at Stephen.Blood@tucsonaz.gov if you have any questions about the FUP. |
||
| 07/06/2023 | Site Landscape | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Review Coordinator FROM: Anne Warner, RLA PDSD Landscape/Native Plant Preservation Section PROJECT: Select Medical Development ACTIVITY NO: TD-DEV-0623-00283 Address: 355 N Wilmot Rd TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 6, 2023 DUE DATE: 22 days from the above date COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Landscape Review Section comments were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with applicable development criteria in the City of Tucson Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-11 and Technical Manual (TM) Section for landscape, native plants and water harvesting. General Note - UDC 2-10.4.1 Identification and Descriptive Data - All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the landscape plan will be identical in size and location to those shown on the base plan (site plan or tentative plat). Should amendments be required to the base plan through the review process, the same amendments will be made to the landscape plan which will then be resubmitted along with the base plan. 1. Commercial Rainwater Harvesting is not reflected on the grading plan, or if it is, it’s not readable. UDC Technical Standards Manual – Section 4-01.0.0. and Section 5-01.0.0 Landscaping and Screening. Demonstrate how water harvesting is being maximized. 2. Correct spelling on sheet 22, calculations are not clear as to whether the project is meeting the 50% water harvesting requirement. 3. Plans in general are difficult to read, remove or screen back significantly information that is not relevant to the plan. Make sure to include a key on each plan that shows the meaning of each line and hatch. 4. Engineer & LA – Show on grading plans; top and bottom elevations of all basins, including water harvesting infiltration areas, side slopes, and basin depth. 5. If using d.g. at 2” depth, make sure that the water harvesting basins are 8” deep to allow for d.g. depth. Make sure that grading, water harvesting and landscape plans match, as well as details. Please add a detail to show depressed landscape areas or indicate with notes. 6. Engineer & LA comment - Adherence to the Low Impact Development Standards outlined in Section 5 of the PCRFCD Design Standards for Stormwater Detention and Retention shall work in conjunction with the Commercial Rainwater Harvesting design. First flush volumes should be directed to landscape areas. See pages 9-16 and Tables 2.2 and 2.3. https://webcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government/Flood%20Control/Rules%20and%20Procedures/Stormwater%20Detention-Retention/dssdr-manual-board-version-201511.pdf COT edits - https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/pdsd/codes/Detention_Retention_Manual_Tech_Standards_Amemdments.pdf 7. Engineer & LA comment - The tables 2.2 and 2.3, pages 12-13 in the PCRFCD Manuel can be used in lieu of the Water Budget Table, the only thing that is missing is water demand for plants, which can be added. Make sure units match. Show how First Flush Volumes relate to plant water demands. 8. Engineer & LA comment The grading plan and water harvesting plan do not meet the requirements of the water harvesting ordinance and technical standard. The plan doesn't show the effective use of run-off to supplement irrigation. a. The catchment areas must provide water to the infiltration areas. Revise the grading to direct runoff to the landscape infiltration areas to the maximum extent possible. b. Catchment areas in the water harvesting table can only count the areas that are directed to the landscape infiltration areas. c. Clearly show the areas in each catchment area and the areas of effective infiltration and water harvesting. All landscape areas should be included within infiltration areas. d. UDC section 7.6.6.C requires the use of all runoff to supplement irrigation. Show how this is attained. e. Show rooftop drainage patterns and show how they are incorporated into the water harvesting calculations. f. Water harvesting areas should be depressed between 6 and 9 inches. These areas can be counted toward first flush retention requirements. g. Consider using Water Harvesting Infiltration Areas to offset the size of a retention/detention basin. 9. The following information will be provided on the Water Harvesting Plan. UDC Tech. Manual 4-01.3.2. a. How monthly rainfall and irrigation data will be obtained and recorded; b. Soil pretreatment techniques, locations; c. Maintenance notes; and, d. Monitoring and Annual Reporting Requirements. 10. The following maintenance requirements should be addressed on the Water Harvesting Plan and within the required Annual Monitoring Report (UDC Tech Manual 4-01-5.1); a. Periodically inspect and clean gutters, leaf screens, and filters. Inspect systems following heavy rains to check for leaks and/or overflow problems. Periodically inspect and maintain Water Harvesting Infiltration Areas to ensure proper infiltration, overflow, and erosion control. Repair and correct problems. b. Ensure proper functioning of Water Harvesting Systems, by periodically inspecting and maintaining sub-watershed surfaces and infrastructure associated with the system such as French drains, spillways, scuppers, and other elements. Repair and correct problems as needed. 11. Monitoring - UDC Tech Manual – 4-01-61, please add these notes to the Water Harvesting Plan; a. Monitoring of water use and related information at the site shall be the responsibility of the property owner. Monitoring is required to verify compliance with the approved Water Harvesting Plan. Monitoring data shall be compiled, along with other necessary information, into an annual report to be submitted to the city by January 30 of each year. b. Monthly rainfall shall be monitored using an on-site rain gauge, or a monthly rainfall estimate shall be developed using data from the closest available rain gauge recorded at www.rainlog.org. c. Annual reporting requirements as stated in UDC 4.01-6.2 12. Engineer & LA comment - The landscape, water harvesting, and grading plans must match. 13. Engineer & LA comment - Identify curb inlets/splash pads to landscape areas on grading and water harvesting plans. 14. Engineer & LA comment - Retention/detention basins should be designed naturally and organically, whenever practicable. Square and rectangles are not organic shapes. 15. The basin floor requires something other than bare dirt, hydroseed or rock larger than 1/2” is acceptable. 16. Please provide all landscape calculations on the landscape plan, including required trees for the parking areas, Admin. Manual 2-10-4.2.A.2.c and landscape borders, UDC Technical Standards 2-10.4.2.f & g. 17. The plans only have one right of way dimension on them. Is this r/w future? Existing? Please label the existing and future rights of way for all public streets, UDC 7.6.4.C.2.a. 18. The existing Nerium oleanders along the north property line are part of an entry statement to this complex. A new concrete drainage swale that replaces the oleanders does not fit in with the entry concept. 19. Table 7.6.4-1- Requires 30” screen adjacent to parking areas along MS&R streets, 5’ screen along non-MS&R streets, adjacent to residential or office uses, a 5’ wall is required. 20. Consider using an organic groundcover such as mulch instead of d.g. 21. All landscape calculations should be on the landscape plan, not on a separate sheet. 22. Please usie a lighter hatch for the d.g. symbol. 23. A separate irrigation meter is required and should be labeled “irrigation only”. UDC Technical Standards 4-01.6.1.A.1. 24. Identify the type of irrigation controller with soil moisture gauge, tensiometer, weather station and/or evaportranspiration data. UDC Tech Standards 4-01.4.A. 25. Provide a maintenance schedule for the landscape and irrigation for this project. UDC 7.6.8, Admin Manual 2-10-4.2.A.4. and Technical Standards 5-01.9., please be specific. 26. Please move the summary of quantities of all inventoried, mitigation and TOS plants to the NPPO plan. 27. Please identify the project monitor on the plans, monitor should verify plants on site prior to any grading activities, UDC 7.7.5. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package YOUR NEXT STEPS: Submit documents to the Tucson Development Center https://tdc-online.tucsonaz.gov/#/home 1) Comment Response Letter (your response to the reviewer's “Requires Changes” comments) 2) Plan Set (or individual sheets) 3) Naming Conventions 2nd resubmittal & subsequent reviews (3,4, etc.) should be labeled as: 2_Plan Set 2_Comment Response Narrative 2_Structural Calcs 3) Any other items requested by review staff If you have any questions, please contact me at anne.warner@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 06/30/2023 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Select Medical – 355 N. Wilmot Rd. Development Package (1st Review) TD-DEV-0623-00283 TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 30, 2023 DUE DATE: Nuly 27, 2023 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06. Also, compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC) and the UDC Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, an applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One-year Expiration date is June 20, 2024. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.1 – Provide the email address, 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 document. 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-0623-00283, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 2-06.4.7 - General Notes The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable. 2-06.4.7.A - Zoning and Land Use Notes 3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.3 – Provide the rezoning conditions of approval on the plan. Also place the rezoning case number, TP-ENT-0523-00020,in the lower right corner of each sheet. 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – The use listed under Zoning and Land Use Note 4 is not a use as classified per the UDC. Review UDC Table 4.8-4 and provide a use as classified per the UDC. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.b – Remove the reference to “LOT COVERAGE” from the plan as it is not applicable. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.c – Remove the “EXPANSION CALCUALTION” from the plan as it is not applicable. 2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.8.C – Provide dimensioned width of existing paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks along Wilmot. 2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.E - 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. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Clearly demonstrate how vehicles will be prevented from accessing the sidewalk area at what appears to be a drop-off area shown approximately centered along the south side of the proposed building. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Clarify why there are two (2) separate vehicle parking space calculations provided, one on sheet 1 and one on sheet 3. The calculation on sheet 3 does not match the calculation on sheet 1 and includes “STAFF SPACE” which is not a requirement in the UDC. Also accessible parking space are typically based on the number of parking spaces in a parking facility. Both calcs reference “20% PER BED (0.2 SPACE / BED = 13 SPACES”, there is nothing in the IBC that based the required number of accessible spaces on a bed count. The 20% should be based on the total number of provide vehicle parking spaces. If the total number of provided vehicle parking spaces is 73 than the required number of accessible parking space is 15, 3 of which are required to be van accessible. The accessible spaces are not over and above the total number of parking spaces provided on site but are included in that number. If you are going to provide two parking calculations, ensure that they match. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – The bicycle parking details shown on sheet 9 are labeled incorrectly. The long-term is labeled as “BICYCLE RACK PARKING” and shows lockers and the “BICYCLE LOCKER PARKING” shows racks. 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – The location shown for the ‘SHORT TERM BIKE RACK” on sheet 3 shows 3 racks. Per UDC Article 7.4.9.B.2.d a single rack is designed and located to accommodate two bicycles. That said the number of provided short-term should be 6 not 3 as shown on the calculations on sheets 1 & 3. 13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – The “BICYCLE LOCKER PARKING” does not match what is shown on the plan. Clearly demonstrate that the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.B.1.e, 7.4.9.B.2.a, .g are met. 14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – On the long-term bicycle parking detail clearly demonstrate that the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.D.5 are met. 15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.L – As access is proposed across the parcel to the south provide a copy of the recorded access agreement or easement with your next submittal. 16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – The street setback show on sheet one should only reference “FUTURE CURB” as the existing curb is not at full width at this time. 17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – The maximum permitted building height, 40’ is not correct and should be 75’. Also, the maximum proposed, 75’, does not match what is shown within the foot print of the building and under Site Calculations, 62.8’. 18. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Clearly demonstrate that the requirements of TSM Section 7-01.4.1.B are met along the north side of the building. 19. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.U - Indicate graphically, where possible, compliance with conditions of rezoning. 20. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.W – There is a proposed monument sign shown on the parcel to the south, some type of recorded agreement or easement is required to plan this sign on the adjacent parcel. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Nicholas Martell at Nicholas.Martell@tucsonaz.gov. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package & detailed response letter. |
||
| 06/20/2023 | CDRC Application Completeness | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 06/28/2023 | CDRC Review Coordinator | REVIEW COMPLETED | Added external reviewers, sent emails and sent FYI emails per SOP. | ||
| 08/08/2023 | External Reviewers - COT Parks & Recreation | REVIEW COMPLETED | TD-DEV-0623-00283/ Select Medical Rehab Facility Tom Fisher CDRC On behalf of the City of Tucson Parks and Recreation Department, I have no comments on the above development plan. Tom Fisher Project Manager City of Tucson Parks and Recreation Department 900 S. Randolph Way Tucson, Arizona 85716 (520) 837-8037 |
||
| 06/28/2023 | External Reviewers - Pima Association of Governments | REVIEW COMPLETED | Sent FYI emails per SOP. | ||
| 06/28/2023 | External Reviewers - Southwest Gas | REVIEW COMPLETED | Sent FYI emails per SOP. | ||
| 06/28/2023 | External Reviewers - Tucson Electric Power (TEP) | REVIEW COMPLETED | Sent FYI emails per SOP. | ||
| 06/28/2023 | External Reviewers - United States Postal Service (USPS) | REVIEW COMPLETED | Sent FYI emails per SOP. | ||
| 07/13/2023 | Fire New Construction | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 06/20/2023 | OK to Submit - Engineering | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 06/21/2023 | OK to Submit - Landscape | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 06/21/2023 | OK to Submit - Zoning | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 07/17/2023 | Traffic Engineering Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | No Comments David Stiffey David.Stiffey@tucsonaz.gov |