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.2
Permit Number - TD-DEV-1224-00336
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.2
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/30/2025 | Commercial Plumbing | APPROVED | |||
| 02/18/2025 | CDRC Post Review Express | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 02/03/2025 | Historic | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Project is not in an HPZ or National Register District. This project is located in an Archaeological Sensitivity Zone. An Archaeological Consultant/Monitor hired by the permit applicant is required to be on-site during any digging, unless a waiver is issued. Monitoring reports are to be submitted to the Historic Preservation Office, City of Tucson, P.O. Box 27210, Tucson, AZ 85726. For historic, contact Michael.Taku@tucsonaz.gov with any questions. |
||
| 02/08/2025 | NPPO | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | See Site Landscape Review Comments for NPPO revision requirements. Thank you. Chad Keller, RLA chad.keller@tucsonaz.gov 520.837.4923 |
||
| 01/30/2025 | ROW Engineering Review | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | TD-DEV-1224-00336 • 5462 E GLENN ST 1. Per Sec 10-01.3.3.D. of the Technical Standards Manual, lateral transitions in the sidewalk shall be no sharper than three longitudinal to one lateral. See redlined drawing. 2. Sheet 7 of 28, Reference Keynote 8, The Landscaping plans call for an asphalt path, please clarify. If you have any questions, please contact Richard Leigh at Richard Leigh at richard.leigh@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 02/04/2025 | Site Engineering | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | 1. Add TD-DEV-1224-00336 to all sheets of the plan set. 2. The waste enclosure shows 1% slope for the slab and apron, but TSM 8 requires a minimum 2% slope for the apron. Please revise. 3. Detail 8 on sheet C6.1 shows a single enclosure for the waste enclosure, but the site plan shows a double enclosure. Please use the appropriate detail. The following comments apply to the Drainage Report: 4.Please add watershed maps for the existing and proposed conditions. 5. Only Qs for Area A were entered into the PC-LID spreadsheet for the existing condition. Please provide hydrograph summation for the 3 areas in the existing condition and add the resulting values instead. 6. The value for A 100 post-developed was entered into the PC-LID spreadsheet as 15.5cfs but should be 16.5cfs. Please revise. 7. Provide hydraulic calculations for the storm drain pipes to justify sizing. Mike Ortiz michael.ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 02/08/2025 | Site Landscape | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | CDRC TRANSMITTAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT REVIEWER: CHAD KELLER, RLA SITE LANDSCAPE/NATIVE PLANT PRESERVATION SECTION PROJECT: NEW MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING ON EXISTING LOT ACTIVITY NO: TD-DEV-1224-00336 ADDRESS: 5462 E GLENN ST ZONING: PAD-16 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 of the Site Landscape/NPPO Section review comments have been addressed. SITE LANDSCAPE/NPPO SECTION COMMENTS: 1. Identify the site monitor and list their contact information on the NPPO Plan. 2. Include the Native Plant Mitigation Summary on all planting sheets in the landscape set for simple review and for quick reference during site landscape/NPPO inspections. 3. The Department of Transportation has provided a redline review of the plans. Please reach out to David Marhefka (david.marhefka@tucsonaz.gov) and coordinate the approval letter for the use of the ROW for planting and irrigation. Include that documentation with your next submittal. 4. Add an additional No. 2 keynote callout for SVT to the entry off of E Glenn Street on sheet L3.1. 5. The meter is called out as -irrigation meter- please label the irrigation meter as “irrigation only”. See TSM 4-01.6.0 6. Add Saguaro/Cacti and Ocotillo planting details to the details sheet. 7. Add a bold general note to the CRWHP that refers to the civil grading plan for all drainage and basin construction including slopes, spot elevations, contouring, curb cut inlets and outlets, downspouts, splash pads, etc. As a standard practice, a few spot elevations on the CRWHP at bottom of basin and basin curb cut inlets and outlets that match the civil grading plan. Just a few spot elevations, (BOLD NUMBERS), in key locations as a quick reference for the contractor and inspectors. 8. All proposed landscape planting areas should be depressed for water harvesting. Add contouring or some kind of hatch indicating that all landscape areas shall be depressed, even if only receiving rainfall and coordinate this information with the civil engineer and the grading plan. Example: parking area tree planting islands. Is there a reason for all of the planter islands in the parking area to not be depressed and fed by the surrounding impervious area? 9. If the parking area planter islands do become part of the drainage scheme for the rainwater harvesting plan, can a call out be added to those specific planters where people are getting out of their cars to be 4-inch depth maximum and coordinate this information with the civil engineer? We have seen some instances where the narrow tree planting areas adjacent to parking stalls have become very deep and a potential hazard for health and safety. 10. Some landscape contractors have been overlooking the intent of the tree locations within the WHIA’s. I have been recommending the addition of a rainwater harvesting basin schematic detail to the CRWHP for redundant clarity. Not required. There have been several cases on projects where the trees are not located within the basin. 11. Add a detail for a multi-trunk tree planting with no stakes and add a note to remove all nursery stakes on all trees prior to final site landscape inspection. If you feel that the next statement is appropriate, then please add some form of this wording to your plan set for clarity: “Tree stakes may be omitted if the tree is able to support itself upright without leaning or bending.” 12. Include the root barrier detail on the 36” box or larger tree planting detail. 13. Can a bold line type be added to the planting plan to represent root barrier wherever trees are within 5’ of any hardscape and add a leader callout for contractor reference? Within the callout, reference the root barrier shown on the tree planting detail for coordination. 14. Can the screened rock also be labeled as “washed screened rock”? This will help with any miscommunication between what is approved on the plans and what is implemented on site. 15. Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-1224-00336, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 2-06.4.3 16. Prior to Site Landscape Development Package approval, please make sure Site Zoning, Site Engineering, and DTM Landscape review comments are addressed. Thank you. Chad Keller, RLA chad.keller@tucsonaz.gov 520.837.4923 |
||
| 01/31/2025 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Center for Neurosciences – Medical Outpatient Development Package (1st Review) TD-DEV-1224-00336 TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 31, 2025 DUE DATE: February 3, 2025 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 January 2, 2026. 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.1 – Provide the email address, and phone number for the Owner listed on sheet 1. 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.2.B – Provide a brief legal description within the title block on all sheets. 3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-1222-00, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.a – The building square footage listed on Building Use, Square Footage, and Building Height Table for the Center for Neuroscience, 20,003 SF does not match the square footage listed in the vehicle parking space calculation, 29,535 SF. Also, complete the table to include the building height. 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. 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Clearly demonstrate that the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.6.F.2.a.(1) are met from the shade canopies called out under Reference Note 10 to the PAAL. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Zoning and Land Use Note 13 references ICC A117.1-2003 which is not correct and should be ICC A117.1-2009. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Under Required Parking sheet 3 you reference “ACCESSIBLE PARKING, PER 2010 ADA TABLE 208.2 & SECTION 208.2.4” which is not correct and should be 2018 IBC Chapter 11. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The EV parking space calculation shall provide the number of provided spaces. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The required Parking Calculations Table shall be modified to include the EV requirements. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – Provide the square footage, height and specific use within the footprint of the building. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.B a sidewalk is required adjacent and parallel to any access lane or PAAL on the side where buildings are located. Show the required sidewalk along the entire north side of the proposed building. Additional comments: 12. COMMENT: - Per PAD-16 Section 3.4.1 Provide a copy of the required Architectural Review Board letter with your next submittal. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Zone1.desk@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. |
||
| 01/06/2025 | CDRC Review Coordinator Express | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC added TEP PAG, USPS, SWG to the workflow. Review request email sent to TEP. FYI email sent to PAG, USPS, SWG. | ||
| 01/06/2025 | External Reviewers - Pima Association of Governments | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC sent FYI email sent to PAG, USPS, SWG. No further action is required. | ||
| 01/06/2025 | External Reviewers - Southwest Gas | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC sent FYI email sent to PAG, USPS, SWG. No further action is required. | ||
| 02/18/2025 | External Reviewers - Tucson Electric Power (TEP) | REVIEW COMPLETED | February 17, 2025 WO#T139184 City of Tucson Planning and Development Services Attn: CDRC Admin Team Dear CDRC Admin Team Subject: New Medical Office and Surgery Center TD-DEV-1224-00336 Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted 1/10/2025. There are no existing facilities within the development and thus are no 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, Chuck Leon (520) 400-6133 cleon@tep.com Sincerely, Design Admins Design Admins Tucson Electric Power |
||
| 01/06/2025 | External Reviewers - United States Postal Service (USPS) | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC sent FYI email sent to PAG, USPS, SWG. No further action is required. | ||
| 01/15/2025 | Fire New Construction | REVIEW COMPLETED | The project will required an Emergency Responders Radio Coverage test per the 2024 IFC Section 510 | ||
| 01/03/2025 | OK to Submit - Zoning Fast | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 01/28/2025 | Traffic Engineering Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | No comments on the TIA. Trip generation, trip distribution assumptions are all reasonable. No concerns regarding the amount of traffic to be generated by the medical office building. Thank you for the recommendations of future DTM evaluation at Craycroft/Glenn and Craycroft/Towner. | ||
| 01/24/2025 | Transportation Landscape Review Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED |