Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.3
Permit Number - TD-DEV-1224-00324
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.3
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/17/2026 | External Reviewers - Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | March 17, 2026 Mr. Mick Mathieu, PE CivTech, Inc. 10605 North Hayden Road, Suite 140 Scottsdale, AZ 85260 Re: Northwest Corner (NWC) of Kino Pkwy. and Benson Hwy. (South of the I-10 TI) Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for The Place at Kino Benson – February 2026 Dear Mr. Mathieu: This letter is being sent to provide comments on the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) dated May 2024 and received February 2026, for the proposed development known as The Place at Kino Benson located in the northwest corner (NWC) of Kino Pkwy. and Benson Hwy. (south of the I-10 TI) in Tucson, AZ. The proposed development is requesting three (3) driveway access points: one (1) full access onto Kino Pkwy. and two (2) right-in/right-out accesses onto Benson Hwy. The proposed development would consist of 300 multi-family units. According to the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11 th Edition, the proposed development is estimated to generate 1,998 weekday daily trips, with 116 trips occurring during the AM peak hour and 150 trips occurring during the PM peak hour. Below you will find comments on the traffic study that need to be addressed prior to acceptance. ● General: “Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT)” should be added to the “Submittal to” line of the cover pages. ● General: If known, the estimated trip generation for the proposed Kino Sports Complex expansion should be included in this study. ● General: The existing Overhead Sign Structure just south of the proposed full access onto Kino Pkwy. may be impacted by the proposed improvements and will need to be considered. ● Page 1 - Executive Summary: The opening year of the project should be updated. ● Page 1 - Executive Summary: ADOT TGP 240 should be discussed. o This TIA is also a Category I TIA per TGP 240 guidelines. o However, ADOT guidelines require a horizon year to be analyzed 3 years after the opening year. o Additionally, at a minimum, all signalized intersections within a ½ Mile of the site access driveways should be analyzed. o Therefore, the Study Area will need to include the I-10 and Kino Pkwy. TI, which is currently being redesigned as a Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI) as part of a Design Build project. o The signal at the connector road to Ajo Way should also be included in the Study Area. ● Page 5 - Surrounding Land Use: Please include that the proposed development would surround the existing Anytime Storage. azdot.gov 1 ● Page 6 - Intersection Configuration: Typo - The WB approach consists of two through lanes. ● Page 13 - Trip Generation: Typo - There are 150 anticipated trips during the PM Peak Hour. ● Pages 21 & 22 - Projected Capacity Analysis: The LOS E during the PM Peak Hour at Access A may need to be mitigated. Further stakeholder discussion is needed. ● Page 24 - Table 9 - 2025 Queue Storage Lengths - Footnote 4: The raised median could be modified to extend the SB Dual Left Turn Lanes further to the north. It appears that approximately 700’ of total storage length could be achieved. Please revise the recommendation accordingly. ● Page 25 - Figure 8 - Proposed Lane Configurations and Traffic Controls: The existing SB U-Turn lane should be shown at Access A. ● Pages 27 & 28 - Conclusions: Please update this section after addressing the above comments. The ultimate success of the Development will require coordinated efforts with ADOT and the City of Tucson. The developer/owner would need to complete an ADOT Encroachment Permit Application and have a signed Permit before commencing any work within State Right-of-Way. The On-Site Plans and Off-Site Improvement Plans, including the civil plans, traffic plans, and other requirements of the Encroachment Permit would need to be submitted to the Southcentral District Permits Office in Tucson for review and approval by the appropriate disciplines. Additional information can be found on ADOT’s website at https://azdot.gov/business/permits/encroachment-permits. Questions regarding the permit requirements, application, or process should be directed to the ADOT Southcentral District Permits email address: southcentralpermit@azdot.gov. If you have any questions, comments, or concerns regarding the mitigation measures or requirements necessary for approval of the TIA, please call me at (520) 388-4203, or email me at rfreije@azdot.gov. Sincerely, Richard S. Freije, P.E. Assistant Southern Regional Traffic Engineer, ADOT 1221 S. 2nd Ave. Tucson, AZ 85713 Office: 520-388-4203 rfreije@azdot.gov CC: Jeremy Moore, PE, Southcentral District Administrator, ADOT Priscilla Thompson, PE, Assistant Southcentral District Engineer, ADOT Michelle Garza, Southcentral District Permits Supervisor, ADOT Allen Wallace, Southern Region TE Specialist, ADOT Blake Olofson, PE, PTOE, Traffic Engineering Administrator, City of Tucson Greg Orsini, PE, PTOE, Department of Transportation and Mobility, City of Tucson |
||
| 03/03/2026 | Floodplain Administration Review | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | TD-DEV-1224-00324, Per Phone conversation with CEC 3MAR26: 1. Please provide soil engineering setback for retention component of the underground system. 2. Please provide copy of approval from PCRFCD for project. 3. Consider adding additional clarification showing spillway information on cross sections for construction and inspection purposes. 4. Provide clarification of delineation and labeling for the “public maintenance access” easement to / along north property line / next to TDC on planview(s). Elizabeth Eberbach P.E., CPM. CFM |
||
| 03/05/2026 | ROW Engineering Review Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Shared access/driveway on Kino Parkway design is currently in conflict with new traffic signal plans for Mosaic Quarter project. Contact PIA coordinator Jesus.Villezcas@tucsonaz.gov Radiuses for curb returns need to follow Complete Streets guidelines on Benson highway and Kino Parkway Traffic Impact Analysis needs to be updated to include new traffic signal design and reference Mosaic Quarter traffic impact analysis. DTM comment file from PIA plans has been added to attachments. |
||
| 03/06/2026 | Site Engineering | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Permit Activity Number: TD-DEV-1224-00324 (3rd Review) Project: Development package for multi-family residential Location: 1767 E BENSON HY Review Date: 3/4/2026 Reviewer: Marco Contreras – Engineering Associate - Site Engineering Related Cases: TP-PRE-0724-00159 *This plan has been reviewed for compliance with applicable development criteria in the City of Tucson Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-6 and Technical Standards Manual (TSM) Section for waste management, Pedestrian Access, Hydrology -Retention/Detention Requirements, and all site standard code. * City of Tucson Code: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Codes Drainage Manual Link: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/pdsd/documents/engineering-code/cot-drainage-manual-searchable.pdf Design standards for Stormwater Detention and Retention Link: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/pdsd/documents/engineering-code/updated-retention-detention-manual.pdf Site Engineering Review Comments: 1. Revise the sight visibility triangles shown on the site plan to be compliant with TSM 10-01.5.0. The near and far side triangles shown at the entrances off Benson HWY and Campbell AV on sheet 5 are Collector Street measurements. It should also be noted that Benson HWY and Kino/Cambell AV are designated as Arterial Roads, which requires a 345’ near side SVT and a 125’ far side SVT. 2. Regarding keynote 13 – Covered parking - To review for compliance with UDC 7.4.6.F.2 & UDC 7.4.6.E.2. It is required that the required the canopy either follow the required height clearance of 15 – feet along the PAAL or be setback one foot or greater from the PAAL. Provide a height call-out showing the clearance OR show on the site plan that the 1-foot setback is addressed. 3. As the retaining wall proposed for the northwest corner is shown as keynote 22, it will be required that a separate wall permit be submitted for structural review. For the wall permit, please submit the structural calculations and drawings for the construction of the wall. Revise the Development Package Site keynote: “Wall to be built under separate permit.” 4. Provide a descriptor box adjacent to the proposed basins (Includes water harvesting basins) and the stormwater chambers on the grading plan. Include a leader arrow to the basin or provide a label for the basin and reference the label on the top of the descriptor box. This can be done through an additional detail sheet or included on current basin detail sheet if the grading plans appear too narrow for such details. Include the following applicable information in the descriptor box: a. Total volume, cubic feet or acre feet; b. detention volume, cubic feet or acre feet; c. retention volume, cubic feet; d. d. first-flush retention volume, cubic feet; (It is understood these values do not account towards drainage requirements for the underground chambers, this is for documentation) e. Q100 in, cubic feet per second; f. Q100 out, cubic feet per second; g. Basin top elevation, feet; h. 100-year water surface elevation, feet; i. 100-year ponding depth, (measured from the lowest elevation of the basin), feet. DSSDR 11.1.3. 5. Provide a keynote/call-out for all structures downspouts locations on the grading sheets. This is to ensure compliance with building permit plan reviews. 6. Revise trash enclosure details and grading plan sheets to show all the trash enclosures ramps slopes being 2% away from enclosure as well as the enclosure slabs sloping 1% to the gate. TSM 8-1.0.0 7. Show that erosion protection is used for all inlet and outlet structures on the Grading sheet and details. The erosion protection shall extend below the finished grade of the basin floor and/or side slope to the appropriate design depth. DSSDR 4.8.1.4 Show this for all inlet & outlet structures as it appears erosion protection is not clearly shown to extend below finished grade across multiple proposed WHB’s. 8. The ADA parking spaces on the site plan, grading plans, and details do not show the ADA sign placement. Revise so that the ADA signs are correctly shown to be proposed at referenced parking spaces. 9. In compliance with TSM 4-02.2.5.B.2.h, provide a keynote/call-out to show the required temporary fencing required to protect the PRA. 10. Pedestrian circulation is required to connect all buildings, dumpster areas, common areas, and the sidewalk on all the street frontages per TSM 7-01.3.3. Demonstrate how this requirement is addressed for connecting the site to Building # 9. Drainage Report comments: 11. The Swales section of the report will need to be revised as well as the design for the swale on the plan set – When 100-year flow velocities are greater than 3 FPS, the swale shall be rock lined and not be left with an earthen swale DSSDR 5.10.1.3 12. Provide An inspection and maintenance protocol including frequency of inspection, a checklist of items to be inspected and recommended maintenance when an inspection identifies a maintenance requirement shall be prepared by an Arizona registrant should be included at the end of the provided drainage report. DSSDR 4.1.1. The ADS inspec guide will not suffice to cover the entire scope of the site drainage components such as the basins and channels/swales. 13. Previous comment #2 not addressed correctly. The drainage report still points to the required CCR that would need to be prepared for the underground storage. It is still mentioned on sheet 270. Please provide the required CCR in resubmission as required by DSSDR 4.13.1.7 14. Provide a Environmental Services Vehicle / Emergency Vehicle (Fire apparatus) maneuverability detail for the roundabout entrance proposed on the southeast entrance along Campbell Avenue. This roundabout may require a truck apron. 15. See to it that Floodplain Administration Comments are addressed. FOR PERMIT RESUBMISSION, IT IS REQUIRED THAT: Corrected/Revised Plan set and a detailed response letter document that clearly shows how you addressed all of Site Engineering’s and other reviewers’ comments for the completed review cycle. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Marco Contreras at Marco.contreras@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 03/06/2026 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Kino & Benson - Multifamily Development Package (3rd Review) TD-DEV-1224-00324 TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 6, 2026 DUE DATE: March 2, 2026 COMMENTS: 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 December 11, 2025. 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 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. 1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.E – As this site is made up of 8 parcels a lot combination is required. Provide approved documentation that the combination is complete. It does not appear this comment was not addressed. Zoning acknowledges the survey drawing with the lots combined, however an application to combine the parcels must be processed through Pima County Assessors. The application can be found at this website – https://www.asr.pima.gov/Downloads/Forms/ComboRequest.pdf 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a This comment was not addressed. The parking ratio for accessible parking is 1 vehicular parking space per every 25 vehicular parking space provided must be ADA accessible. The required number of ADA accessible spaces is 8 out of the 393 parking spaces provided. Please correct. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Loran.Shamis@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. |
||
| 03/05/2026 | Fire New Construction | REVIEW COMPLETED |