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 - D04-0018
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/10/2004 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/11/2004 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | The Development Plan is approved May 11, 2004. |
| 05/13/2004 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | Just a parking lot, no change in refuse service. |
| 05/19/2004 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | NO COMMENT D04-0018 ROBERT PAGE ARCHITECT MARTIN AVE. PARKING |
| 05/19/2004 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | 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: D04-0018 MARTIN AVE PARKING/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: MAY 13, 2004 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and the following matters must be resolved prior to our approval: Correct location of section corners on Location Map. Correct Park Blvd to Park Av on Location Map. Add recorded Book and Page to Rincon Heights in Legal Description. Delete 422 and 428 N. Martin Ave from Title block (one address will be used for this project.) jg |
| 05/19/2004 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D04-0018 Martin Ave. Parking 05/18/04 () Tentative Plat (x) Development Plan (x) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-03-04 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: University Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: N/A COMMENTS DUE BY: June 7, 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 (x) See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: (x) Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat (x) Development Plan (x) Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: E. Anderson 791-4505 DATE: 05/18/04 Department of Urban Planning and Design Comments Martin Avenue Parking, D04-0018 1. Condition two states that canopy trees should be located every 25 feet along the southern side of the parking lot. Please locate a canopy tree and the appropriate ground vegetation in the planter in the southeast corner of the property. 2. Condition eight states that any required or proposed masonry wall shall be constructed of, or painted with, graffiti-resistant materials. Please state on the appropriate Development Plan Keynotes that the masonry walls shall be constructed of, or painted with, graffiti-resistant materials. |
| 05/25/2004 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | |
| 06/03/2004 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Provide barriers per DS 3-05.2.3.C.1 at the perimeter of the paved portions of the site where necessary to protect landscape areas and to prevent vehicles from parking on or driving onto unpaved areas. 2) Per LUC Table 3.7.2-I, a 5' high masonry wall is required to screen the proposed use from the R-2 zoned property to the north, regardless of ownership. Refer to LUC 5.3.1 for alternative reviews. Reference any related cases on the landscape and development plans. |
| 06/07/2004 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approved | June 7, 2004 TO: Robert Page, Robert Page Architect THRU: FROM: ____________________________________ representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environmental Quality SUBJECT: Martin Avenue Parking - Submittal D04-0018 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 Department (PCWMD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. This project will be tributary to the Roger Road WWTF via the Aviation Corridor to Santa Cruz Interceptor. Based on our evaluation, this project would qualify for Participating sewer connection fee rates. ALL SHEETS. Add the project number, D04-0018, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than any cross-reference numbers. Revise Wastewater Management Note 1 to read NO PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SEWERS ARE PROPOSED FOR THIS PROJECT Delete Wastewater Management Note 2. Subject to the above, the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality and Wastewater Management Department hereby approve the above referenced submittal of the development plan. The required revision(s) may be shown on the Mylars. Please note the following: Approval of the above referenced submittal does not authorize the construction of public or private sewer collection lines, or water distribution lines. Prior to the construction of such features, a Construction Authorization (Approval To Construct) may need to be obtained from the Pima County Environmental Quality. Also, air quality activity permits must be secured by the developer or prime contractor from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality before constructing, operating or engaging in an activity which may cause or contribute to air pollution. If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact me at the phone number provided above, under my signature. |
| 06/07/2004 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Craig Gross; CDRC Coordinator DATE: May 20, 2004 SUBJECT: Engineering review of the Martin Avenue Parking Development Plan. The activity number is D04-0018. SUMMARY: The Development Plan and Drainage Report were received by Engineering on May 14th,2004. Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Development Plan or the Drainage Report. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: DP, DR GENERAL COMMENTS 1. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Development Plan purposes only. 2. A separate review is required for the Grading Permit. A Grading Plan and Permit will be required. Submit a grading plan and grading permit application to Development Services prior to approval of the development plan. IBC Chapter 36. 3. Proposed fills in excess of two feet above existing grade at any location in the outer one hundred feet of the developing site adjacent to residentially zoned property require the procedure outlined in IBC Chapter 36 Section13.1. This process must be complete prior to Grading Plan approval. The next submittal must address the following items: DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1. For plan clarity please label sheet C1 Grading Plan, Development Plan 0.2. Note that the development plan is only being reviewed for Development Plan approval, not for approval of the Grading Plan. 2. Identify any watercourses on the location map within the square mile area. DS 2-05.2.1.D.2 3. Include a brief legal description in the title block located in the lower right corner of the sheet. DS 2-05.2.1.G.2. 4. On the legend the symbol and the description for the existing spot elevations are uneven. For plan clarity please correct. DS 2-05.2.1.J. 5. The legend also depicts a bold line print depicting the property line. However this line print is not used for the property line surrounding the site. For plan clarity use this bold line print around the property. DS 2-05.2.1.J. 6. The property line indicated on the legend is only depicted through the center of the parking lot. Because there are two addresses for this site is this line indicating the two separate parcels? The site is being reviewed as one parcel. A lot reconfiguration/lot combo must be approved prior to development plan approval. DS 2-05. 7. There are several different line prints that are not indicated in the legend. Revise the legend to show all the line prints used on the development plan. DS 2-05.2.1.J. 8. The following information regarding existing public right-of-way (including alleys) adjacent to the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. DS 2-05.2.3.C 9. Significant conditions on the site, such as, structures, fences, walls, etc., shall be shown on the development plan. These elements should be indicated in a different line weight than the proposed improvements and labeled to be removed or retained. Development plan keynote number 1, 2 and 3 indicates an existing CMU block wall/retaining wall. The weight of the line indicating the existing wall is very light. For plan clarity use a symbol or line weight that clearly indicates where the existing walls are located. DS 2-05.2.3.G 10. Indicate if existing streets are public or private; provide street names, widths, curbs, sidewalks, and utility locations, all fully dimensioned. DS 2-05.2.4.D.2. 11. Parking area access lanes (PAALs), shall be designed in accordance with Sec. 3.3.0 of the LUC and Development Standard 3-05.0. Per 3-05.2.2.B.3. a minimum distance of two feet must be maintained between a PAAL and any wall. The current location for the wall has areas where it does not meet the minimum distance of two feet. Revise the location of the wall. DS 2-05.2.4.D.4. 12. Acceptable Types of Access to a development, including parking lots are as follow;. A. Public street access, which is ingress-egress to a parcel provided by an abutting public street. B. Private street access, which is ingress-egress to a parcel provided by an abutting private street in which the owner of the parcel has a legal interest to assure perpetual use for access. C. Access easement, which is ingress-egress to a parcel provided over some other parcel through an area dedicated for such perpetual use. Access from an alley to a parking lot will not be approved. Access must come from the street. Revise the plan to show that access to the parking lot is from Martin Avenue. LUC 3.2.8.2. 13. New development will provide on-site refuse storage, collection, and pickup areas with service access from within the tract or from an alley adjacent to the tract. Show refuse collection areas, including locations of dumpsters, screening location and materials, and vehicle maneuverability, fully dimensioned. Refer to DS 6-01 for Solid Waste requirements with commercial development. DS 2-05.2.4.T. 14. It is not clear why there is a pedestrian access through the alley. Pedestrian access should be located to minimize any conflict with vehicular traffic. This proposal does not meet this requirement. Revise plan to minimize pedestrian access with vehicular traffic. DS 2-08. 15. In addition to the above comment, any work within a public Right of Way (ROW) requires approval from the Department of Transportation. For assistance please contact Steve Tineo 791-3115 extension 447. 16. The location of the SVT's are incorrect. On the south side of the parcel the SVT stem side is shown from a starting point within the sidewalk area, this is incorrect. On the northern side of the parcel the SVT stem is shown between the back of curb and front of sidewalk, this is also incorrect. Refer to DS 3-01. Fiqure 17, for the correct location of the stem for an SVT. DS 2-05.2.4.R. 17. General Note 24 is not complete. Please complete for plan clarity. 18. All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement is to occur prior to issuance of permits. From a review of photos of the property it appears there is an Electrical Easement located adjacent to the house on the north side. Is this correct? Revise plan to show any easements. DS 2-05.23.B. 19. Is the alley paved? If the alley is paved please state so on the plan. 20. The plan shows a drain pipe for the water harvesting area. Water harvesting areas do not normally have outlet structures. What is the purpose of this pipe? Furthermore the proposed grades indicate that this pipe can not be installed as shown. 21. Sidewalks must be flood free for up to the ten year event. Put a note on the plan that scuppers will be provided at all locations where drainage is being directed toward a sidewalk. DS 2-08.4.1.E |
| 06/07/2004 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Traffic Engineering REJECTS this DP: 1. The symbol used for new signs is incorrect. Use symbol for new signage IAW SDPI SD100. This applies to signage identified in keynotes 9, 24. 2. Label the SVT's as to their size (ie, 20x110) 3. Show and label SVT's from access point to the parking lot onto the alley. D. Dale Kelch, EIT Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov |
| 06/07/2004 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Denied | SUBJECT: MARTIN AVE. PARKING D04-0018 Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has reviewed the plans dated May 7, 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 is a possible conflict with the telecommunication poles and the entrance of the parking development. 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 Cell Phone/Pager: (520) 904-2668 Fax: (520) 917-8400 |
| 06/07/2004 | 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: D04-018 Parking Lot Development 422 & 428 N. Martin Avenue Development Plan (1st review) TRANSMITTAL: June 7, 2004 DUE DATE: June 7, 2004 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 May 9, 2005. 2. Place the development plan number (D04-018) on each sheet of the d.p., landscape plan, NPPO plan and grading plan in the lower right hand corner near the title block. Also, add the applicable rezoning case number (C9-03-04) to all sheets next to the title block. DS 2-05.2.2.B.2 DS 2-05.2.1.D.K 3. Provide approval, including documentation from traffic engineering to demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition 4 and vehicle access through the alleys has been approved. DS 2-05.2.4.U 4. According to Assessor records this site is made up of two parcels. A lot combination is required prior to the approval of this development plan. Please provide documentation of lot combination including approved assessor's tax combo forms and notarized and recorded covenant. 5. The PAALS must be signed and painted with arrows on the pavement to indicate the one-way flow of traffic. Indicate the location of one-way signage and arrows on the plan. DS 3-05.2.2.D 6. Compact parking is only allowed in the downtown development district. Revise the southern row of parking and the southern two spaces of the eastern row of parking to meet the minimum required dimensions for standard parking spaces. LUC 3.3.7.2.C.1 7. Add the maximum slope of the handicapped parking access aisle and ramp on the drawing. ANS 8. Label the angle of the parking in the middle two rows and the westernmost row of spaces. Also, dimension the depth of the center rows of parking individually to demonstrate that they each meet code. LUC 3.3.7.2 9. Demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition 7 by detailing any existing or proposed freestanding lighting and signage on the plan. DS 2-05.2.4.U DS 2-05.2.4.W 10. Revise section corners in location map to be correct. Section 7 extends only as far south as Broadway Blvd. DS 2-05.2.1.D.3 11. Demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition 2 by showing the location of required canopy trees, shrubs, groundcover and other landscaping/vegetation. DS 2-05.2.4.U 12. Dimension from street monument lines the distance to existing curbs and sidewalks. Show future MS&R sidewalk location along Country Club Road. DS 2-05.2.4.D.2 13. 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. |
| 06/08/2004 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: June 8, 2004 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: CDRC Transmittal, D04-0017 Rita Ranch LDS Church: DP CC: Craig Gross, Development Services Staff has reviewed and has no comments. Please feel free to call me at 791-4873 x 215 if you have any questions. |
| 06/09/2004 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | No comment |