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-0924-00245
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.1
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/11/2024 | NPPO | APPROVED | |||
| 10/14/2024 | CDRC Post Review Express | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 10/07/2024 | Commercial Plumbing | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | 1. Clarify sewer keynote #4. Where is the existing 6” stub? Any fitting or connection in a drainage system that results in a reduction of the pipe area is prohibited. Reference: Section 706.2, IPC 2018. 2. Note that the use of saddle-type fittings to connect to a private sewer is prohibited. Use directional wye fittings to connect the building sewers to the private sewer main. Reference: Section 707.1 (6), IPC 2018 and Detail RWRD 401. |
||
| 10/14/2024 | External Reviewers - Pima County Addressing | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Good morning, Pima County Addressing is returning TD-DEV-0924-00245 for corrections. Please see the attached report for comments. Nicholas Jordan Site Review Project Manager II – Addressing Official Pima County Development Services Department 201 N Stone AV – 1st Floor Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 724-9623 |
||
| 10/08/2024 | Site Engineering | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | 1. Address the following comments about the drainage report: a) There is a discrepancy with the size of the site, particularly with P2. The site is stated as 3.1ac on page 2 and page 5. P2A is stated as 0.74ac and P2B is stated as 0.06ac throughout the report including the Hydrologic Data Sheets. Only 3.05ac have been accounted for in the calculations. P2 is stated as 0.85ac on page 5. Clear this discrepancy. b) Fig 5 says "Firts Flush" - please correct the typo throughout. c) Fig 5 and Page 5 states that the impervious acreage for P2A is 30%. Please use acres as the unit. d) The Hydrologic Data Sheet for P1B says P1A. Please correct. e) P2A is stated to have an impervious percentage of 70% on the Hydrologic Data Sheet. This is an underestimate. Please use 90% impervious. f) Page 7 states that the Qout for P3 is 3.0cfs, but the routing calculations state that it is 3.7cfs. Please correct. 2. Show details for both basins side slope stabilization compliant with DSSDR 4.7.1. 3. Show basin inlets on the site plans, if applicable. Details H and I say "Basin Inlet" but this is the outlet weir for each basin. Change the detail description to say "Basin Outlet Weir" rather than "Weir Basin Inlet" to avoid confusion. 4. Basin BAS P2A has a 100-year water depth of 2.9 feet and 1:1 side slopes. Per DSSDR 4.11.1 Security Barrier Standards, basins designed for 100-year water depths of more than 2 feet and with side slopes steeper than 4:1 shall have a security barrier at all locations where side slopes are steeper than 4:1. 4. Show slopes for waste enclosure slabs and aprons and ensure they are a minimum of 1% and 2%, respectively, compliant with TSM Section 8. 5. Provide additional spot elevation or show cross-slopes on all ADA accessible paths. 6. Show locations of roof downspouts and any scuppers, if applicable. Mike Ortiz michael.ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 10/11/2024 | Site Landscape | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | CDRC TRANSMITTAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT REVIEWER: CHAD KELLER, RLA PDSD SITE LANDSCAPE/NATIVE PLANT PRESERVATION SECTION PROJECT: NEW BUILDINGS WITH PARKING AND LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVITY NO: TD-DEV-0924-00245 ADDRESS: 8300 E VALENCIA RD ZONING: I-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL 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. Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Landscape/NPPO Review Section comments are addressed. SITE LANDSCAPE/NPPO SECTION COMMENTS: 1. The shade tree planter islands on the west side of the vehicular use area are extremely narrow. They appear to meet the UDC code for minimum tree planter square footage, but there is room to increase the width/overall size of the tree planter islands for tree health and longevity. If possible, increase the size of the tree planter islands. 2. What direction does the water drain from the roof top of the buildings? Add flow direction arrows from the roof, downspout and splash pad locations and scuppers if the roof drains to the east across the sidewalk. 3. Your water demand is met on the CRWHP. If the building roof drainage square footage is added to the subwatershed it will help increase the overall percent of plant water demand met. 4. A rainwater harvesting basin schematic detail is not a requirement but adding it to CRWHP would be a clarifying addition for the contractor during construction. If you would like to add the detail and need an example, please reach out and I will send a copy of the schematic that can be added to the CRWHP. 5. Increase the line type width of the property line, or clearly label the property line on all plan sheets in the plan set. 6. There are (five) ¾” water meters feeding the five buildings. A sixth meter is needed for irrigation purposes. Add the meter and backflow to the irrigation plan. If the irrigation meter and backflow are to be found on the civil utilities and easements plan, sheet 4 of 12, then make sure the irrigation meter and backflow are present on that sheet for review. Also, label the irrigation meter as “irrigation only”. See TSM 4-01.6.0 7. Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-0924-00245, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 2-06.4.3 If you have any questions about these comments, I can be reached at chad.keller@tucsonaz.gov, or at 520.837.4923 |
||
| 10/04/2024 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: 8300 E. Valencia Rd. Development Package (1st Review) TD-DEV-0924-00245 TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 4, 2024 DUE DATE: May 11, 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 September 17, 2025. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-0924-00245, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 - Provide the annexation case number, C9-64-84, 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.2 – Clarify the difference in acreage shown D07-0013, 27.8, and the acreage shown, 24.79, shown on this plan. 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – The existing uses listed under General Note 3 are Use Groups not uses. List all existing uses and the applicable Use Specific Standards in the note. 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – The Use Specific Standards listed under General Note 3 for the proposed Craftwork use in the I-2 zone are not correct. Review UDC Table 4.8-5 and provide the correct standards. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - As Old Vail Rd. is designated as an Arterial on the COT MS&R Map add the following to General Note 19, “THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC ARTICLE 5.4 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R) 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.b – The FAR Calculation shall include the entire site. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.d - When the proposed site is part of a larger site, the calculations encompass the entire site, whether existing or proposed. If the project is being phased, calculations must show that, at each phase, requirements are being met. 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. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – It appears that there is some type of access lane proposed between the buildings shown on the plan. Demonstrate how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.6.F.2.b are met. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – East of proposed buildings 23 & 24 it appears you are proposing to provided vehicle access to the existing development, clearly show how the connection will be constructed. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The vehicle parking space calculation shall include the entire site, see comment 8. 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.c – Provide a loading space calculation the provides the number required and provided for the entire site, see comment 8. 13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Provide a short- & long-term bicycle parking calculation the provides the number required and provided for the entire site, see comment 8. 14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – The setbacks listed under “BUILDING SETBACKS” for the north and east are not correct. The north is a right-of-way not designated on the COT MS&R map and the east is an Arterial on the COT MS&R map. Review UDC Article 6.4.5.C.2.a & .b and provide the correct setbacks. 15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Clear demonstrate how the requirements of TSM Section 7-01.4.1.B are met for the access lanes shown between the buildings. 16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – The proposed pedestrian circulation shown running from proposed building 20 east to the existing development appears run into the side of an access ramp. Provide a detail of this connection the clearly shows that there is accessible access to the ramp that does not require someone to go out into the existing PAAL. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Nicholas Martell at Nicholas.Martell@tucsonaz.gov. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: A revised development package as well as a comment response letter. To resubmit, visit the Tucson Development Center Online at https://tdc-online.tucsonaz.gov/#/home. The instructions for resubmittal can be found at https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/pdsd/documents/tdc-faq/new-pdfs/revisions-and-resubmittals.pdf. |
||
| 09/09/2024 | CDRC Application Completeness Express | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 09/19/2024 | CDRC Review Coordinator Express | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC added Addressing and TEP PAG, USPS, SWG to the workflow. Review request email sent to Addressing and TEP. FYI email sent to PAG, USPS, SWG. | ||
| 09/19/2024 | External Reviewers - Pima Association of Governments | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC sent FYI email sent to PAG, USPS, SWG. No further action is required. | ||
| 09/19/2024 | External Reviewers - Southwest Gas | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC sent FYI email sent to PAG, USPS, SWG. No further action is required. | ||
| 10/03/2024 | External Reviewers - Tucson Electric Power (TEP) | REVIEW COMPLETED | October 3, 2024 WO#T128755 City of Tucson Planning And Development Services Attn: CDRC Admin Team Dear CDRC Admin Team Subject: Development Package for 8300 E Valencia Rd TD-DEV-0924-00245 Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted 9/19/2024. There are existing facilities within the development which are not depicted upon the plan; however, there do not appear to be any apparent conflicts at this time. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. Any relocation costs will be billable to the customer. To apply for electric service, please call the New Construction department at (520) 918- 8300. Please submit a final set of plans including approved site, electric load, paving off-site improvements and irrigation plans. If available, include a PDF version of the plans. If easements are required, they will be secured by separate instrument. Should you have any easement questions, please contact our Land Resources Department, LandReviews@tep.com. Should you have any technical questions, please contact the area designer, Jesus 'Chuy' Figueroa (520) 262-9400 jfigueroa@tep.com Sincerely, Design Admins Design Admins Tucson Electric Power |
||
| 09/19/2024 | External Reviewers - United States Postal Service (USPS) | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC sent FYI email sent to PAG, USPS, SWG. No further action is required. | ||
| 10/04/2024 | Fire New Construction | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 09/17/2024 | OK to Submit - Engineering Fast | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 09/18/2024 | OK to Submit - Zoning Fast | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 09/24/2024 | ROW Engineering Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | DTM has no comments. |