Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D05-0041
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/06/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES February 6, 2006 Chuck Schuiteman, AIA Sayler-Brown Bolduc Lara Arichtects, L.L.C. 1001 North Alvernon Way, Suite 105 Tucson, Arizona 85711-1019 Subject: D05-0041 AGM Container Controls Development Plan Dear Chuck: Your submittal of November 15, 2005 for the above project has been reviewed by the Community Design Review Committee and the comments reflect the outstanding requirements which need to be addressed before approval is granted. Please review the comments carefully. Once you have addressed all of the comments, please submit the following revised documents and a DETAILED cover letter for each agency explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLUELINES MUST BE FOLDED 5 Copies Revised Development Plan (Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, Wastewater, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape and NPPO Plans (Zoning, Landscape, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Reports (Engineering, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608, ext. 1179. Sincerely, Patricia Y. Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 620-0535 |
| 02/06/2006 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Passed | |
| 11/10/2005 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/17/2005 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | The Development Plan is approved November 17, 2005. |
| 11/22/2005 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | * No known landfill with in 1000 feet of this development. * Enclosure can be serviced as shown. ( If the enclosure is perpendicular to the building and moved fourty feet to the north of the building there would not be any blocking of the enclosure by delivery trucks.) * No recycling enclosure shown or mentioned for this development. * Question if this enclosure is also for the existing bussiness? |
| 11/23/2005 | 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: D05-0041 AGM CONTAINER CONTROLS / DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: November 23, 2005 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. |
| 11/29/2005 | 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 D05-0041 AGM Container Controls 11/29/05 ( ) Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment () Other (NPPO) CROSS REFERENCE: C9-05-01 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Grant/Alvernon Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: N/A COMMENTS DUE BY: December 12, 2005 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: K. Aragonez 791-4505 DATE: 11/30/05 |
| 12/05/2005 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the landscape plan to include the entire site. Include all required content per DS 2-07.0. 2) The existing screen wall located in the Presidio Road landscape border is not in compliance with LUC 3.7.3.2.C. Walls may only encroach into the street landscape border a maximum of three feet. Revise the plans as necessary. Options may include use of the adjacent right-of-way, Design Development Option per LUC 5.3.5. or plan revision. 3) Revise the development plan and the landscape plan to identify the MS&R right-of-way line for Fort Lowell Road and to only include permitted uses within the overlay zone per LUC 2.8.3.2, LUC 2.8.3.5. 4) Revise the landscape plan to include slope ratios for retention/detention basins. Basin slopes in most instances are required to have slopes no steeper than 4:1 where depths exceed three feet, 3:1 for unprotected slopes and 2: 1 for protected slopes for depths less than three feet. DS 10-01.4 Retaining walls are acceptable for up to 35% of the basin perimeter. 5) The retention basin is to include a minimum of 20 trees per acre and should include two shrubs for every tree. The minimum groundcover requirement for the basin is 35%. Revise as necessary. 6) Screening per LUC Table 3.7.2-I is required along Fort Lowell Road. Revise the landscape and development plans to identify screening elements. 7) The screen required along the west property boundary is required to be located on the property line, unless the screen is provided between the property line and the use and a landscaped area of a minimum width of twenty (20) feet is provided between the screen and the property line. LUC 3.7.3.2.A 8) Revise the landscape plan to include calculations for the entire site. Also, include calculations for vehicular use area trees. 9) Revise the development plan to note the height and location of any existing or proposed screen walls on the site. 10) Revise the development plan to note the correct zoning designation of the property to the east. (P-I) 11) Revise the plans to demonstrate compliance with the conditions of C9-05-01. Walls are to be graffiti resistant and must incorporate visually appealing design treatments per condition 4. 12) Note the CDRC case number (D05-0041) on the landscape and native plant preservation plans. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED. |
| 12/07/2005 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | SUBJECT: AGM CONTAINER CONTROLS D05-0041 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted November 15, 2005. It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. In order to apply for electric service, call the New Construction Department at (520) 918-8300. Submit a final set of plans including approved site, offsite and electrical load plans. Include a CD with the AutoCAD version of the plans. If easements are required, they will be secured by separate instrument. Your final plans should be sent to: Warren McElyea Design/Build - DB 102 Tucson Electric Power Company P. O. Box 711 Tucson, AZ 85702 Please call me at (520) 917-8745, should you have any questions. Liza Castillo Right of Way Agent Land Management Tucson Electric Power Co. (520) 917-8745 lcastillo@tep.com |
| 12/09/2005 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: December 09, 2005 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov SUBJECT: D05-0041 AGM Container Controls: Development Plan Staff has no comments. |
| 12/13/2005 | JOSE ORTIZ | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | December 13, 2005 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D05-041 PROJECT NAME: AGM Container PROJECT ADDRESS: 3526 E Fort Lowell Rd. PROJECT REVIEWER: Jose E. Ortiz, Civil Engineer Resubmittal Required: Development Plan, and Drainage Report The following items must be revised or added to the plan. 1. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. 2. Please verify that the following information regarding existing utilities has been provided: the location and size of water wells, water pumping plants, water reservoirs, water lines, fire hydrants, sanitary and storm sewers, including the pipe diameter and the invert and rim elevations of all manholes and cleanouts; the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD) reference number; locations of gas lines, electric and telephone lines, poles, and communications cables, on-ground junction boxes, and street lights. If water mains and sewers are not located on or adjacent to the tract, indicate the direction, distance to, and sizes of those nearest the property. 3. If applicable, all proposed easements (utility, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. DS 2-05.2.4.G 4. If applicable, provide locations and types of drainage structure, such as, but not limited to, drainage crossings and pipe culverts. DS 2-05.2.4.H.3 5. Indicate all proposed ground elevations at different points on each lot to provide reference to future grading and site drainage. DS 2-05.2.4.H.4 6. Draw locations and indicate types of off-site runoff acceptance points and/or on-site runoff discharge points. DS 2-05.2.4.H.7 7. Is a loading zone required for the new 21,700 S.F. structure? Show all loading zones, fully dimensioned, and provide, as a note, the number of loading spaces required and the number provided. DS 2-05.2.4.O 8. Due to the reduction of the existing detention/retention basis a drainage report/statement will be required to demonstrate how proposed drainage will be handled, and to ensure that there are no adverse effects to the adjacent lots due to the modifications to the existing drainage patterns. 9. Show areas of detention/retention including 100-year ponding limits with water surface elevations. DS 2-05.2.4.H.1 10. Indicate proposed drainage solutions, such as origin, direction, and destination of flow and method of collecting and containing flow. DS 2-05.2.4.H.2 11. Small, local detention basins constructed in compliance with Section 23-469 of the Tucson Zoning Code will not be accepted by the City of Tucson for maintenance or liability. All local detention/retention basins shall be constructed according to current design standards, and they must include appropriate access and maintenance easements, including an unobstructed access route into the basin. SMDDFM 1.5.2 12. As part of the drainage report submitted in conjunction with the Development Plan a detailed inspection list and basin-performance criteria shall be included for subsequent reference by the Engineer responsible for annual and as-needed maintenance inspections of the basins and drainageways. SMDDFM 1.5.2 13. Include Maintenance checklist in drainage report. SMDDFM 14.03 14. A Grading Plan and Grading Permit may be required. If the earthwork quantities exceed 50CY then a Grading permit and Grading Plan will be required. 15. Please provide the area of disturbance for this project. Please be advised that if the proposed development exceeds 1 acre of disturbance the development will be subject to NPDES requirements. Contact Patricia Gilbert @ 791-5550 for submittal requirements. The NPDES submittal must accompany the Grading Plan submittal. 16. Please provide openings in curb to relieve nuisance ponding in low points on paving. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5640 x1191 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 12/14/2005 | 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 November 9, 2005. 2. Revise general note two (2) to state the following: "Proposed zoning is R-2 to P-I". (D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2) 3. This project has been assigned development plan case number D05-0041. Place the case number in the lower right corner of each sheet on all plans. (D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2) 4. Under general note three (3) on sheet DP1, revise the proposed use to be more specific as to what type of manufacturing will occur. Refer to LUC Sec. 2.7.1.2.A for listing of land use classifications and applicable "subject to" sections. The land use classification and "subject to" section/s shall be provided. (D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.3) 5. Label and dimension existing and future right-of-way and curb location for both Fort Lowell Road and Presidio Road. (D.S. 2-05.2.3.C) 6. The site is comprised of two (2) separate parcels, which must be combined by providing a copy of the recorded City of Tucson Lot Combination Covenant. A copy of the City of Tucson Lot Combination Covenant may be obtained at the Zoning Review counter or online at www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Lot_Combo_Declaration.pdf. 7. a) Other than the 7,000 S.F. building addition proposed for phase 2, will there be any other site improvements proposed for the second phase? If so, delineate phase boundaries and call out site improvements to occur in second phase. Additional comments may be forthcoming as a result of phasing boundaries. (D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.4) b) Provide calculations for each phase (FAR, vehicle, and bicycle parking, and loading zone). 8. Dimension the building setback for the new 21,700 square foot building from the edge of nearest travel lane along Presidio Road to the face of the south facing exterior building wall. Minimum building setback required is based on the greater of, 21 feet or the building height. (D.S. 2-05.2.4.I) 9. If public access is proposed to the new manufacturing buildings, an accessible pedestrian path is required from the accessible building entrances, which connects to the existing on-site pedestrian circulation system. (D.S. 2-08.3.1) 10. A minimum five (5) foot wide pedestrian refuge area is required along the south side of the new building proposed for the second phase and the PAAL. (D.S. 3-05.2.2.B.1) 11. For all vehicle parking spaces abutting a sidewalk of less than six and one-half (6 ½) feet in width, wheel stop curbing shall be provided. Per D.S. 3-05.2.3.C.2, wheelstop curbing shall be located two and one-half (2 ½) feet from the front of the parking space. 12. Dimension the back-up spurs located in the southern most parking lot. The spur will be a minimum of three (3) feet in depth, will have a three (3) foot radii. A minimum distance of three (3) feet will be provided between the back of spur and any wall, screen, or other obstruction over six (6) inches in height. (D.S. 3-05.2.2.D) 13. If applicable, provide a detail of existing and or proposed free standing signage, billboard, and outdoor lighting on the site plan. (D.S. 2-05.2.4.W) 14. List the height of the proposed building for phase II. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro, (520) 791-5608 ext. 1180. |
| 12/14/2005 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | No comment |
| 12/15/2005 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | Traffic Engineering recommends APPROVAL of this DP. D. Dale Kelch, PE Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov |
| 12/19/2005 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | Transportation Information for Rezoning, Subdivision, and Development Requests Delivered to: Date Delivered: Development Services - City of Tucson 12/9/2005 Case Number Project Name Estimated Daily Traffic (in average 24-hour vehicle trips) D05-0041 AGM Container Controls, Inc. 287 Pima Association of Governments Transportation Planning Division 177 N. Church Ave., Suite 405, Tucson, Arizona 85701-1127 (520) 792-1093 FAX (520) 620-6981 |
| 12/23/2005 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | December23, 2005 To: Chuck Shuiteman, Sayler-Brown Bolduc Lara Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Project Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________ From: Michael Harrington (520-740-6579), representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environmental Quality Subject: AGM Manufacturing Facility Development Plan - 1st Submittal D05-0041 The proposed sewer collection lines for 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 both the Ina Road Water Pollution Control Facility and the Roger Road Wastewater Treatment Facility via the South Rillito Central Interceptor. Obtain a letter from the PCWMD's Development Services Section, written within the past 90 days, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for the project is available in the downstream public sewerage system and provide a copy of that letter to this office. The required form to request such a letter may be found at: http://www.pima.gov/wwm/forms/docs/CapResponseRequest.pdf. The development plan for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. Based on previous developments, D03-0032 and D98-035 , this project will qualify for the Non-Participating sewer connection fee rate. All Sheets: Add the development plan case number, D05-0041, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than any cross-reference numbers. No wastewater review fees will be charged for sheets where this is the only required revision. All Sheets: Add the development plan cross-reference numbers, D03-0032, D98-035, C9-85-79 and CD9-85-79. These numbers should be near the title block of each sheet. These numbers should be shown smaller or less bold than the case number D05-0041. No wastewater review fees will be charged for sheets where this is the only required revision. Sheet DP1: Revise General Note #11, so that it states: THE ON-SITE SANITARY SEWERS WILL BE PRIVATE AND WILL BE CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED ON A PRIVATE BASIS, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN APPROVED OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN, IF REQUIRED. THE LOCATION AND METHOD OF CONNECTION TO AN EXISTING PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT. Sheet DP1: Revise General Note #20, so that it states: THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE ______ EXISTING AND______ PROPOSED WASTEWATER FIXTURE UNIT EQUIVALENTS PER TABLE 13.20.045(E)(1) IN PIMA COUNTY CODE 13.20.045(E). And fill in the blanks with the appropriate values. Sheet DP1: Add a General Note that states: ANY WASTEWATER DISCHARGED INTO THE PUBLIC SANITARY SEWERAGE SYSTEM SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE INDUSTRIAL WASTE ORDINANCE (PIMA COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 1991-140, AS AMENDED). Sheet DP1: Add a General Note or Permitting Note that states: A PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FROM PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. Sheet DP2: Revise the LEGEND TO SYMBOLS block so that: The symbol used for SEWER MANHOLE is the accepted, manhole, sanitary sewer symbol found in PC/COT, STANDARD DETAIL, PLAN SYMBOLS, 100 (sheet 8 of 11), of “STANDARD DETAILS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, 2003 EDITION.” Sheet DP2: Revise the site plan to show: The existing private sewer, shared with the property to the east, connecting to the public sewer and to including all BCS lines. Show the public and private sewer lines using different line-types, so that they can readily be distinguished from each other. Also, show and describe examples of these different linetypes in the legend on this sheet. If an operation and maintenance agreement has been executed between these two property owners, a label, next to the private sewer should be added, that includes the recording information, Sheet DP2: Revise the site plan to show: The private sewers existing or proposed private manholes or cleanouts with rim and invert elevations Sheet DP2: Revise the site plan to show: The existing public sewer lines, labeled with the pipe size and construction plan numbers, that are within 100’ of this project. Sheet DP2: Revise the site plan to show: The existing manholes that are within 100’ of this project shown ion this page with the correct symbol mentioned above. The manhole used as the point of connection, or the upstream and downstream manholes from the point of connection need to be labeled with their IMS numbers. The IMS numbers are the numbers found at PCWMD Maps and Records Section basemaps or PCWMD and PCDOT websites using MapGuide. We will require a revised set of bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. Pima County Code Title 13.20.030.A.2 requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the development plan. The fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet. The next submittal of this project will be the second (2nd) submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $100.00 (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER ) must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter. If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly. If you have any questions regarding the above mentioned comments, please contact me at the telephone number shown under my signature on the first page of this letter CC: Project File |