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 - D04-0024
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/26/2004 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 08/27/2004 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/27/2004 | 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: D04-0024 MIGUEL HIGH SCHOOL / DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: AUGUST 27, 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. 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. |
| 08/27/2004 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | The Development Plan is approved August 27, 2004. |
| 08/31/2004 | GLYNDA ROTHWELL | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | SUBJECT: SAN MIGUEL HIGH SCHOOL D04-0024 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan dated August 25, 2004. As you are aware there are existing facilities within the boundaries of this development. All costs associated with the relocation of existing facilities will be billable to the developer. Please submit a final set of plans including electrical load plans, to determine how TEP will serve this commercial development. If easements are required, they will be secured by separate instrument. Submit your plans a minimum of eight (8) weeks prior to requiring service. Liza Castillo Land Management Tucson Electric Power Company lcastillo@tep.com Office: (520) 917-8745 Cell Phone: (520) 904-2668 Fax: (520) 917-8700 |
| 09/07/2004 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | * Realignment of enclosure for service and description is approved and can be serviced. * Detail 9 shown on sheet 9/9 is in error. Detail has an out to out dimensions of 2'-10" by 5'-4". |
| 09/09/2004 | DOUG WILLIAMS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | SUBJECT: San Miguel High School REVIEWER: Doug Williams DATE: 9 September 2004 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D04-0024 Resubmittals Required: Revised Development Plan, Landscape Plan SUMMARY: Engineering Division has reviewed the revised Development Plan, Landscape Plan and Drainage Report. Approval of the Development Plan and Landscape Plan are not recommended at this time. Please provide a response letter to the comments provided below and address all comments on revised plans. DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 1. Previous comment, "Clearly identify all sidewalk scuppers, with opening heights and dimensions noted" has not been fully addressed. Provide scupper callout notes for three of the five scuppers on Lerdo Road (sheets C203 & C204). The response to previous comment # 12 does not fully address this issue. Provide scupper dimensions (individual opening heights and widths if other than standard, and # of cells) for all scuppers, on the plan. Please note that roof drainage must be routed under pedestrian/sidewalk areas throughout the site. Concentrated discharges directly onto sidewalk areas may not be permitted. 2. Review of the revised drawings has revealed a necessity for creation/recordation of a Pedestrian/Utility Easement for the proposed sidewalk on private property, adjacent to the Lerdo Road. Provide two copies of a legal description, with recording information depicted on the plan for creation of said easement. See previous comment, "Please ensure all easements are clearly depicted, dimensioned and labeled, with recording information provided on the plan - see additional requirements outlined for these Development Standards (DS 2-05.2.3 B & D, 2-05.2.4 G)". 3. Please clarify on the plan that the majority of improvements depicted on Sheet C207 (all of the area north and east of the match lines depicted) are intended to be a part of Phase II improvements. 4. Correct the dumpster enclosure dimensions in section 9/9 to meet enclosure requirements outlined in Development Standard 6-01.0 (DS 2-05.2.4 T). 5. The response to previous comment #17, "Identify and label the proposed wall along the northern property boundary" is inconsistent with the Landscape plan submitted, which identifies a min. 30" high wall screen (sic). Revise the plans accordingly. 6. Revise the overlapping notes north of the cul-de-sac on Sheet C202. 7. Correct references to sheet C207 to read Sheet C209 under keynotes 40-43 on all applicable sheets. 8. Provide a cross section for the curved drainage area/swale between concrete pavilion areas, east of Building 1, fully labeled and dimensioned. 9. Provide a detail or additional notes for the riprap and landscape area/basin inlet at the southwest corner of the site (Sheet C205). 10. Provide additional detail/notes for the wall opening (width, height, lintel opening?), in the north concrete spillway Detail 5 on Sheet C209. LANDSCAPE PLAN: 1. Submit a revised landscape plan reflecting all Landscape Review Section comments and comments # 4 provide above. The landscape and Development Plans must be consistent with one another. 2. Correct the conflicting right of way information for Lerdo Road - 60' is dimensioned, and 56' is written under the Lerdo Rd. labeling. GENERAL COMMENTS: *Additional comments may be necessary upon resubmittal, depending upon the nature and extent of revisions that occur to the plans. *A right of way permit and/or a Private Improvement Agreement (PIA) will be required for the work in the public right of way. Contact Tucson Department of Transportation - Permits and Codes Section at 791-5100 for questions/inquiries. *A grading permit will be required for this development. A grading permit application submittal with a copy of the stamped/approved Development Plan and three sets of Grading and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans will be required prior to any building permit issuance. Resubmittal shall require revised Development and Landscape Plans If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 1189 or Dwillia1@ci.tucson.az.us. Doug Williams Sr. Engineering Associate Engineering Division Development Services Department |
| 09/10/2004 | DAN CASTRO | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | COMMENTS 1. Section 5.3.8.2, LUC, 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 a full CDRC review. The one-year expiration date for this development plan is June 15, 2005. 2. A copy of the Variance letter was not found in the Zoning submittal package. Please provide a copy of the variance decision letter with the next submittal. Previous comment: Provide a copy of the Board of Adjustment Variance decision letter along with a copy of the site plan submitted to the board. (D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.6) 3. A copy of the recorded lot combination covenant was not found in the Zoning submittal package. Please provide a copy of the recorded covenant with next submittal. Previous comment: Per Pima County Assessors Records and general note six (6), the site is comprised of four (4) lots, which must be combined by providing a copy of the recorded City of Tucson Lot Combination Covenant and a copy of the approved Pima County Assessors Tax Combination form. You may obtain a copy of the covenant online at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Lot_Combo_Declaration.pdf or you may contact me at the number below. The Pima County Assessors Tax Combination Form may be obtained at the Assessors office. (D.S. 2-05.2.4.A) Revise general note six (6) as required. 4. A minimum four (4) foot wide sidewalk is required from the pedestrian circulation path located in front of the existing sanctuary, which connects to the pedestrian circulation path along Medina Road. (D.S. 2-05.2.4.K) (D.S. 2-08.4.1.A) 5. Please dimension the height of the free standing light pole on detail 10 of sheet 209. Per S.E. condition number eight (8), pole mounted lighting shall be no higher than 15 feet to the light source. 6. A copy of the S.E. conditions response letter was not found in the Zoning submittal package. Previous comment: Provide a response letter, which details how each special exception condition has been addressed. If applicable, provide necessary documentation, details, or drawings to demonstrate compliance. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro, (520) 791-5608. |
| 09/13/2004 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D04-0024 San Miguel High School 09/10/04 () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: SE-03-28 & C10-04-18 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: 12th Avenue-Valencia Rd Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: NO COMMENTS DUE BY: September 8, 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 () See Additional Comments Attached (X) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: July 9, 2004 REVIEWER: msp 791-4505 DATE: September 8, 2004 |
| 09/21/2004 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approv-Cond | September 21, 2004 TO: Mark McCarty, McCarty Engineering THRU: FROM: ____________________________________ representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environmental Quality SUBJECT: San Miguel High School - Submittal D04-024 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. 1. The number of wastewater fixture unit equivalents requires a sewer service agreement. While there are no objections to the development plan as submitted, it may not be approved until the sewer service agreement has been returned. Once the sewer service agreement is returned, the development plan will be approved without the requirement of any fees or a new submittal. If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact me at the phone number provided above, under my signature. Copy: Project |
| 09/21/2004 | CRAIG GROSS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Completed |