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: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D04-0003
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/26/2004 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 01/27/2004 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | The Development Plan is approved 01/27/04. |
| 01/30/2004 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | 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 February 20, 2004 TO: Thomas Sayler-Brown, Sayler-Brown Boulduc Architects, LLC THRU: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Development Services FROM: Brandon Matheson, E.I.T. Pima County Development Review (Wastewater) SUBJECT: Lowe’s Home Improvement Warehouse - East Tucson Development Plan - 1st Submittal D04-003 The proposed sewer collection lines to serve the above-referenced project have been reviewed on behalf of the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) and the Pima County Wastewater Management (PCWWM) Department. This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. Separate review letters from PDEQ and PCWWM representatives will not be prepared for this project. The following comments are offered for your use: 1. This project will be tributary to the Pantano Interceptor and the Ina Road Wastewater Pollution Control Facility. There is currently capacity in the existing downstream sewerage system for this development. This response in not to be construed as a commitment for conveyance capacity allocation, but rather an analysis of the existing sewerage system as of this date. 2. Based on our evaluation, this project would qualify for Participating sewer connection fee rates. 3. 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. 4. All Sheets: Add the Plan case number, D04-003, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than the cross reference numbers. 5. Label C9-03-023 as a cross reference number. 6. Sheet DP3: Provide recorded information for existing sewer easements on site. 7. Sheet DP3: Provide design for proposed sewer (slope, size, diameter) and provide design for proposed sewer manholes. 8. Sheet DP3: Clarify the manhole at the northeast corner which has no lines into or out of it. 9. Show connection to public sewer. 10. Reference the existing private sewer as PV-78-150. 11. Reference the existing public sewer in Speedway Boulevard as G-75-04. 12. Due to the lack of design information, additional comments will be provided on the second submittal. 13. We will require a revised Development Plan 14. The next submittal of this project will be the second submittal. Please include a $50.00 check for the wastewater review fees (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) with the revised set of bluelines and response letter. If other sheets are added to the set of plans, or revised in such a manner that the sewer design is impacted, please adjust the review fee accordingly. If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact Brandon Matheson at 740-6315. Brandon Matheson, E.I.T. Pima County Development BM/ST/dk Copy: Project |
| 01/30/2004 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 KAY MARKS ADDRESSING OFFICIAL PH: 740-6480 FAX #: 740-6370 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: KAY MARKS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL SUBJECT: D04-0003 LOWE’S HOME IMPROVEMENT WAREHOUSE/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: January 29, 2004 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED ON CONDITION THAT SPEEDWAY BLVD. IS CORRECTED TO SPEEDWAY BOULEVARD (SHEETS 2 & 3) ON MYLAR. NOTE: 1. Submit a 24 x 36 Reverse Reading Double Matte Photo Mylar of approved Development Plan to City Planning. Signed and dated Mylar will be forwarded to Pima County Addressing prior to assignment of addresses. 2. All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection. jg |
| 02/02/2004 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | NO COMMENT D04-0003 SAYLER-BROWN BOLDUC I.I.C. LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT |
| 02/09/2004 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Denied | SUBJECT: LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT D04-0003 Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has reviewed the plans dated January 23, 2004. TEP is unable to approve the plans at this time. There are existing electrical facilities within the boundaries of this project. In order for TEP to approve the plans, the facilities and easement recording information must be depicted on the plans. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facility map and the development plan showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. There are conflicts with the existing facilities and the proposed new buildings, driveway, street and sidewalk. All cost associated with the relocation of the facilities in conflict will be billable to the developer. Please resubmit two revised bluelines to the City of Tucson for TEP's review. You may contact me at (520) 917-8479 if you have any questions. Liza Castillo Land Management Tucson Electric Power Company lcastillo@tep.com Office: (520) 917-8479 Pager: (520) 218-6565 Fax: (520) 917-8400 |
| 02/13/2004 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | SUBJECT: Lowe's Home Improvement D04-0003, T14S, R15E, SECTION 05 RECEIVED: Development Plan, Landscape Plan, SWPPP and Drainage Report on January 26, 2004 The subject submittal has been reviewed. We offer the following comments. Prepare a detailed response that explains the revisions that were made and references the exact location in the drainage report and on the Development Plan where the revisions were made: Drainage Report: 1. The proposed contour lines do not show elevations on the Proposed Drainage Area Map. Revise. 2. The water harvesting areas should be depressed 6". Revise the water harvesting information on page 4. 3. The Existing Drainage Area Map does not show the existing drainage facilities. Additionally, the drainage report does not rate the existing drainage facilities to demonstrate their capacity and adequacy. Provide the missing information. 4. The hydraulic structures information (i.e. stormsewer and area inlets) depicted on the Proposed Drainage Area Map is very small and hardly readable. Revise the data font size. 5. It is not clear if sidewalk scuppers will be incorporated in the drainage plan. According to D.S. 3-01.4.4.F. 10-year flow has to be completely conveyed under sidewalks when the runoff crosses any sidewalk or walkway (including the walkways around the proposed buildings). Demonstrate compliance with this requirement and include any design calculations in the drainage report. Development Plan: 1. Provide the correct D(yr)-______ subdivision case number as required by D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2. 2. The location map should cover approximately one (1) square mile with major streets shown as required by D.S. 2-05.2.1.D. Revise accordingly. 3. The title block should include a brief legal description (D.S. 2-05.2.1.G). 4. Applicable Rezoning Case Number should be listed in the lower right corner, next to the title block (D.S. 2-05.2.1.K). 5. List the address and telephone number of the primary property owner of the site (D.S. 2-05.2.2.A.1). 6. Since this project will not provide detention/retention, remove all references to detention/retention in the General Notes. 7. Verify compliance with Rezoning Condition number 2. 8. Provide the boundary information for the curve at the southwest corner of the parcel (D.S. 2-05.2.3.A). 9. It appears that the trash dumpster north of the Lowe's building, is not accessible. Revise the location (D.S. 2-05.2.4.T). 10. The existing easements recordation information, width and purpose should be stated (D.S. 2-05.2.3.B). 11. Indicate the ground elevations on the site based on City of Tucson Datum (D.S. 2-05.2.3.E) and (D.S. 2-05.2.4.H.4). 12. Indicate proposed drainage solutions, such as origin, direction, and destination of flow and method of collecting and containing flow (D.S. 2-05.2.4.H.2). 13. Provide locations and types of drainage structures as required by D.S. 2-05.2.4.H.3. 14. Provide a 6' sidewalk north of the north most Kolb Road entrance. 15. If the existing sidewalk on Speedway is less than 6' wide, it should be widened to 6'. Check with Permits and Codes (Steve Tineo @ 791-5100) concerning the acceptable method of widening the sidewalk. 16. According to D.S. 2-05.2.4.H.3. and D.S. 3-01.4.4.F. 10-year flow has to be completely conveyed under sidewalks when the runoff crosses any sidewalk/walkway. This also applies to roof drainage. Demonstrate compliance with this requirement. 17. Revise the Development Plan according to the Drainage Report revisions. Landscape Plan: The Landscape Plan is acceptable for Engineering and Drainage purposes. SWPPP: 1. Identify or leave spaces to identify all operators.(Part IV.C.1) The CGP defines operator in Part IX, on page 31. Indicate which operator has operational control over plans and specifications and which operator has day-to-day operational control of activities at the project. A signed operator certification and a signed NOI is required for each operator. (Part III.A and Part IV.J.1) 2. Show, on the site map, directions of stormwater flow (e.g., use arrows to show which ways stormwater will flow) and approximate slopes anticipated after major grading activities. (Part IV.C.3.a) 3. Specify that when sediment escapes the construction site, offsite accumulations of sediment must be routinely removed and at a frequency sufficient to ensure no adverse effects on water quality. (Part IV.D.2.c) RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Development Plan, SWPPP, and Drainage Report |
| 02/17/2004 | 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 D04-0003 Lowe's Home Improvement 02/17/04 ( ) Tentative Plat (ü) Development Plan (ü) Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment (ü) Other (NPPO) CROSS REFERENCE: C9-03-23 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Kolb Road (gateway) COMMENTS DUE BY: February 23, 2004 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 (ü) See Additional Comments Attached ( ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: (ü) Resubmittal Required: ( ) Tentative Plat (ü) Development Plan (ü) Landscape Plan ( ) Other REVIEWER: K. Aragonez 791-4505 DATE: February 17, 2004 This section reviews plans and plats for compliance with rezoning conditions. Since the rezoning (C9-03-23) has not been completed yet, no conditions are available. Staff is reviewing for compliance with the rezoning conditions recommended by the Zoning Examiner dated January 29, 2004. Future reviews may result in different and/or additional comments. 1. Per recommended condition 2 documentation of the required neighborhood meeting prior to plan submittal must include copies of the invitation, sign-in sheets and minutes. Please provide these items. 2. The Zoning Examiners recommended condition 3 includes the requirement for unconventional construction practices, such as helicopter use for placement of roof-mounted mechanical equipment. Until the conditions are approved by Mayor and Council this condition should be included on the development plan. 3. Per recommended condition 7, please dimension all sidewalks along all building that adjoins a parking lot. Dimensions not shown include those on the north, east, and west of Pad 2 and Pad 3 on the west. 1. Please identify the location of the required five (5) pedestrian seating areas that are required throughout the building site per recommended condition 9. These required areas are excluding those seating areas along the river park. 2. Per recommended condition 11 the owner/developer shall provide a corridor for the entire length of the property that is a minimum of forty-five (45) feet in width, for the proposed River Park. Please provide this dimension on the development plan. 3. Please show the correct configuration of parking spaces on the detail 1 on page dp6. Parking spaces are shown drawn within the river park. 4. Recommended notes 14 and 15 are shown twice. Please remove the duplicate notes. 5. Please provide a detail of the two monument signs as required per recommended condition 24. 6. Please include a detail of the ten (10) foot high screen walls. These walls should be graffiti resistant with a minimum of two (2) design elements incorporated into them if visible from rights-of-ways or the River Park as per required by recommended condition 27. 7. Please revised recommended condition 28 and 29(condition 27 and 28 as shown on sheet DP1) to read verbatim per the Zoning Examiner's recommended conditions. 8. Dates shown in recommended condition 1 and 35 (condition 1 and 34 as shown on sheet DP1) do not match to the dates provided in the Zoning Examiner's recommended conditions. Please revise. 9. Please revise times indicated for trash removal to correspond to those times indicated on the recommended conditions of the Zoning Examiner's. Times should be from 6:00 pm to 6:00 am. |
| 02/23/2004 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Center Plans Coordination Office FROM: Peter McLaughlin Senior Planner FOR: Patricia Gehlen Principal Planner PROJECT: D04-003 Lowe's Home Improvement Warehouse Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: 2-23-04 DUE DATE: 2-23-04 1. LUC Section 5.3.8.2 permits a maximum of one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a development plan. If, at the end of that time, the development plan has not been approved, it must be revised to be in compliance with all regulations in effect at that time, and must be resubmitted for full CDRC review. The one year expiration date for this development plan is January 25, 2005. 2. Place the development plan number (D04-003) on each sheet of the d.p., landscape plan and NPPO plan in the lower right hand corner near the title block. DS 2-05.2.2.B.2 3. Label the Pantano Wash within the location map on sheet DP-1. DS 2-05.2.1.D.2 4. Provide a copy of documentation for special exception approval and rezoning conditions as approved by Mayor and Council for case C9-03-023. Provide a copy of documentation for special exception approval and rezoning conditions as approved by Mayor and Council for case C9-03-023. If the stated reduction of required parking has been approved as part of the rezoning case, please provide documentation of this. Approval of a Board of Adjustment variance may be required to allow the parking deficit. 5. The bicycle parking calcs state that 17 class 1 and 17 class 2 spaces are provided for the Lowes. The drawing depicts only 16 of each. Revise for consistency. Bicycle parking calcs indicate that 2 class 1 spaces are provided for pad 1, but none are shown on the drawing. Please revise to show location of class 1 spaces provided. DS 2-05.2.4.Q 6. According to Assessor records this site area is made up of seven parcels. A lot combination is required prior to the approval of this development plan. Please provide the following documentation to the Zoning Review Section for review: a signed, notarized and recorded covenant and approved Pima County Tax Combination Form. 7. Rezoning/special exception conditions 14 and 15 are duplicated in the list. Please remove one set of these two conditions. 8. Trucks will not be able to maneuver into the loading zone located adjacent to and southeast of the Lowe's building due to proposed vehicle parking spaces located at both ends of the loading area. Revise plan. LUC 3.4.4.2.C 9. Per LUC 3.5.9.7.A.7 loading spaces must be setback at least 200 feet from residentially zoned property adjacent to the site. The proposed loading docks behind the Lowe's HIW do not appear to meet this requirement. Demonstrate compliance by dimensioning loading spaces from the adjacent SR zoned property (Pantano River Park). If the special exception (SE-01-33) has been approved and these LUC design criteria have been waived, please provide copy of approval letter per comment 4. List date of approval along with case number in the general notes on d.p. LUC 3.5.9.7.A.7 10. Per LUC 3.5.9.7.A.7, loading areas shall be screened so that they are not visible from public sidewalks and adjacent properties. The northernmost loading dock behind the Lowe's is not screened from the adjacent Pantano River Park trail. Please revise. LUC 3.5.9.7.A.7 11. Per LUC 3.5.9.7.A.4 trash collection areas must be located at least 200 feet from residentially zoned property adjacent to the site. The proposed refuse collection area and trash compactor behind the Lowe's HIW do not appear to meet this requirement. LUC 3.5.9.7.A.4 12. LUC 3.5.9.7.A.2 states that the project shall provide visual and noise buffers where the site is adjacent to a residential use or residentially zoned property, to be accomplished by providing a minimum 200-foot building setback to residential uses and residential zones adjacent to the property. If the special exception (SE-01-33) has been approved and these LUC design criteria have been waived, please provide copy of approval letter per comment 4. List date of approval along with case number in the general notes on d.p. LUC 3.5.9.7.A.2 13. The minimum vehicle stacking capacity of any drive-through facility with two (2) drive-through lanes is four (4) spaces, including the spaces at the pick-up window. The length of a stacking space is 18 feet. Dimension the stacking spaces required for the proposed covered customer service drive-through. DS 3-05.2.1.C.2.c 14. Provide the proposed height and dimensions of the buildings on pads 1, 2 and 3. MS&R building setbacks may not be verified until height is provided. DS 2-05.2.4.N 15. Because there is an existing center median island (right turn only, with no median opening) in Speedway Blvd., far side SVT's at the westernmost exit drive to Speedway may be revised to be only 30' in length (pedestrian SVT's). DS 3-01.5.1.B.1 16. Dimension the depth of the backup spurs located at the ends of the parking rows to the east and west of PAD 2. The minimum depth of backup spur must be three (3) feet. DS 3-05.2.2.D 17. All requested changes must be made to the Development Plan and Landscape Plan. DS 2-07.2.1.A If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS IS REQUIRED: revised development plan, special exception approval letter, landscape plan, lot combo documents. |
| 02/23/2004 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Denied | For any easement abandonments or easement dedications please submit a legal description and title report to the Real Estate Division for processing. |
| 02/26/2004 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Hidden Hills Wash 2) Identify the source of water for irrigation. 3) Revise the plans to eliminate conflicts between planters, outdoor sales areas, and the required pedestrian areas in front of the Lowe's buidling. The sidewalk southwest of the entrance does not provide the required 8' wide clear area due to the location of the trees and the display area. 4) Identify any plant materials proposed in the planters in front of the Lowe's building on the landscape plan. Sheet DP appears to indicate trees in these areas. 5) Provide documentation for any related cases. Additional comments may apply. 6) Revise the plans to comply with conditions 8, 10, 11, 24, 26, 34, 36, 42 Resubmittal of all plans is required. |
| 02/26/2004 | CRAIG GROSS | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | |
| 02/26/2004 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | Traffic Engineering recommends APPROVAL of this DP. D. Dale Kelch, EIT Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dkelch1@ci.tucson.az.us |
| 02/26/2004 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | DATE: March 01, 2004 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: CDRC Transmittal, Project D04-0003 Lowes Home Improvement: DP CC: Craig Gross, Development Services Staff has reviewed the development plan and has the following comments regarding the Pantano Riverpark: The north and south ends of the paved path and trail should be configured to allow for continuation of the riverpark off-site by others in the future. Indicate paved path is 12 ft wide. Indicate trail is 8 ft wide All plants used in the riverpark must be native plants. If moderate and high water use native trees such as Fraxinus velutina and Platanus wrightii are used, they must be valved separately from low water use trees and shrubs. Please feel free to call me at 791-4873 x 215 if you have any questions. |