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: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D02-0035
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/09/2003 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/11/2003 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | Cul-de sac turnaround shall be designed and dimensioned in accordance with COT Dev. Std. 3-01 Figure 21. |
| 07/16/2003 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Craig Gross Planning Administrator SUBJECT: 2715 N. Wyatt Dr. Development Plan D02-0035 (Second Review) T13S, R14E, Section 35 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Plan and Drainage Report. The Development Plan (DP) and Drainage Report (DR) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Development Plan: 1. Please include all details from the civil plans on the development plan. 2. A separate grading submittal and permit are required. 3. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies with re-submittal. On comment no. 3, the response is "by Stickley Design Group", yet the response by Stickley Design Group reads "See attached letter from McCarty Engineering Inc." These and previous comments were made towards the Development plans, not the Civil plans or the Grading plans. Please address. 4. Add note: "Depress all landscaped areas 6" maximum for water harvesting". 5. A Stormwater pollution prevention plan is required. Contact Paul P. Machado at 791-5550 x1193 for additional information. Drainage Statement: 1. A Drainage report is required for this project. Per previous comment and rezoning condition no. 2. 2. A $150.00 review fee for the Drainage Report is required. Per previous comment. 3. The floodplain use permit that was applied for in June of 2002 has expired. A new floodplain use permit will need to be applied for with an addition $50.00. 4. Please include an elevation conversion to NVGD 29 from NAVD 88 for the finished floor elevation. 5. An elevation certificate will need to be completed when the building constructed and returned to the engineering division for our records dept. prior to the issuance of a C of O. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1193 or pmachad2@ci.tucson.az.us Paul Machado Senior Engineering Associate |
| 07/17/2003 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Peter McLaughlin Senior Planner FOR: Patricia Gehlen Principal Planner PROJECT: D02-035 Hospice Facility For TMC Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: May 14, 2004 (Revised Comments) 1. This site is made up of a portion of Lot 13 of Tucson Medical Center. Provide documentation of lot split approval by the zoning review section. The Development Plan cannot be approved until the lot split history can be verified. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608. |
| 07/18/2003 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING TASK FORCE COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D02-0035 New Hospice Facility – TMC 07/17/03 () Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan ( ) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-01-01 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Arcadia-Alamo GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: July 22, 2003 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: () No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment () Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions () RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies ( ) See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: ( ) Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: JBeall 791-4505 DATE: 7-15-02 Comprehensive Planning Task Force Comments New Hospice Facility – TMC, D02-0035 This is a Rezoning (C9-01-01), as approved by Mayor and Council on May 21, 2001, and it is subject to meeting certain rezoning conditions. 4. Although the applicant has provided and listed out the Rezoning Conditions on the Development Plan, the applicant needs to demonstrate compliance with said rezoning conditions. Please provide a note to the General Notes section (which demonstrates compliance with rezoning conditions) to read “Buildings to be of other than metal construction and all mechanical equipment to be screened.” Provide elevations of all buildings, showing type of construction and screening of mechanical equipment. [Rezoning Condition, 1.f] 6. Although the Development Plan provides details of the west wall, it does not clearly show that the west wall of the project reflects the design characteristics of the Glenn Heights Neighborhood walls. Please provide elevations, which address and show on the Development Plan that the west wall for the project reflects the design characteristics of the Glenn Heights Neighborhood walls. [Rezoning Condition, 4] In order to demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition 6, please provide a note to the Development Plan General Notes section, on Sheet DP1, to read “All outdoor lighting shall be directed down and away from residential parcels and public roadways as be as low in elevation as possible.” [Rezoning Condition, 6] |
| 07/18/2003 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING TASK FORCE COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D02-0035 New Hospice Facility – TMC 08/08/03 () Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan ( ) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-01-01 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Arcadia-Alamo GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: July 22, 2003 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: () No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment () Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions () RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies ( ) See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: ( ) Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: J Beall 791-4505 DATE: 8-1-03 Comprehensive Planning Task Force Comments New Hospice Facility – TMC, D02-0035 This is a Rezoning (C9-01-01), as approved by Mayor and Council on May 21, 2001, and it is subject to meeting certain rezoning conditions. 4. Although the applicant has provided and listed out the Rezoning Conditions on the Development Plan, the applicant needs to demonstrate compliance with said rezoning conditions. Please provide a note to the General Notes section (which demonstrates compliance with rezoning conditions) to read “Buildings to be of other than metal construction and all mechanical equipment to be screened.” Provide elevations of all buildings, showing type of construction and screening of mechanical equipment. [Rezoning Condition, 1.f] 6. Although the Development Plan provides details of the west wall, it does not clearly show that the west wall of the project reflects the design characteristics of the Glenn Heights Neighborhood walls. Please provide elevations, which address and show on the Development Plan that the west wall for the project reflects the design characteristics of the Glenn Heights Neighborhood walls. [Rezoning Condition, 4] In order to demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition 6, please provide a note to the Development Plan General Notes section, on Sheet DP1, to read “All outdoor lighting shall be directed down and away from residential parcels and public roadways as be as low in elevation as possible.” [Rezoning Condition, 6] Although the development plan lists the required rezoning conditions as approved by Mayor and Council on May 21, 2001, rezoning conditions 1.A, B, C, and D, are incorrectly worded and stated. Please correct these rezoning conditions so they read as originally put forth by Mayor and Council on May 21, 2001. 15. It should be noted that the development plan shows the proposed height of the Future Record Storage building to be 24 feet with parapet. Please review and correct it to read 23 feet as set forth by rezoning condition 1.d. |
| 07/21/2003 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/22/2003 | CRAIG GROSS | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approv-Cond | PIMA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION 201 N. Stone Avenue, 2nd Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701-1207 CARMINE DEBONIS, JR. Phone: (520) 740-6586 Director FAX: (520) 740-6380 August 8, 2003 TO: Martin Stickley, Stickley Design Group Architects THRU: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Development Services FROM: Subhash Raval, P.E., Manager Pima County Development Review & Technical Services Divisions (Wastewater) SUBJECT: New Hospice Facility - TMC Development Plan - 2nd Submittal D02-035 We have reviewed the above-referenced project on behalf of the Pima County Wastewater Management Department. The following comments are offered for your use: 1. Label the length (350 l.f.) And grade of private sewer from existing manhole to the new manhole. Provide new manhole #1 rim and invert elevation. It is the design engineers responsibility to field verify the existing sewer manholes invert and rim elevations. 2. Correct 6' and 4' sewers to 6" and 4" for the proposed private sewer. 3. Please submit a blueline with the above revisions to the Subdivision Coordinator for our files. There will not be a fee for the corrected bluelines. 4. We have sent to your office under separate cover a Private Sewer Service Agreement for the proposed number of fixture units. The Sewer Service Agreements must be signed by the owner of record, notarized, and all three originals returned to this office before we can approve the Development Plan. 5. We have no objection to this Development Plan , however, until we receive the signed Sewer Service Agreements, we cannot approve the Development Plan. If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact me at 740-6586. Subhash Raval, P.E., Division Manager Pima County Development Review & Technical Services Divisions (Wastewater) SR/DK/dk Copy: Project |