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: CORE REVIEW
Permit Number - D06-0013
Review Name: CORE REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/07/2008 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 02/11/2008 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 02/15/2008 | CDRC1 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approved | February 15, 2008 To: Thomas Sayler-Brown Sayler-Brown Bolduc Lara Architects Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ___________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6579), representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environment Quality Subject: Houghton Town Center DP REVISION - 2nd Submittal D06-013 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. The Pima County Department of Environmental Quality and Wastewater Management Department hereby approve the above referenced submittal of the development plan as submitted. 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 have any questions regarding the above-mentioned comments, please contact me. |
| 02/28/2008 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Document the recording information (Dkt. & Pg.) for the Shopping Center Restriction and Easement Agreement on the Development Plan. |
| 02/29/2008 | 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: D06-0013 HOUGHTON TOWN CENTER/REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 2/29/08 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. 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. ES |
| 03/07/2008 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 03/10/2008 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN | Approved | REVISED DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D06-0013 Houghton Town Center 03/06/08 () Tentative Plat (XXXX) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment (XXXX) Other - NPPO CROSS REFERENCE: Annexation C9-84-84, Ordinance 6143 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Esmond Station GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Scenic Route - Houghton COMMENTS DUE BY: 03/07/08 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 (XXXX) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: 12/15/07 () Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other – REVIEWER: D. R. Corral 791-4505 DATE: 02/29/08 |
| 03/11/2008 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#191367 March 10, 2008 Houghton Commerce, LLC Attn: Alan Tanner 3915 E Broadway Blvd. Tucson, AZ 85711 To Mr. Tanner : SUBJECT: HOUGHTON TOWN CENTER D06-0013 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted February 28, 2008 It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. The customer is responsible for any relocation costs. 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: Tucson Electric Power Company Attn: Ms. Mary Boice New Business Project Manager P. O. Box 711 (DB-101) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-917-8732 Please call the area Designer Steve Garcia at (520) 917-8739, should you have any questions. Sincerely, Henrietta Noriega Office Specialist Design/Build hn Enclosures cc: City of Tucson, (Email only) S.Garcia, Tucson Electric Power |
| 03/12/2008 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approv-Cond | PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT COMMENTS City of Tucson CDRC – Community Design Review Committee CASE NUMBER: D06-0013 CASE NAME: Houghton Town Center Submittal #: 7 COMMENTS DUE: 3/7/08 COMMENTS SENT: 3/12/08 Items being reviewed: ( ) Tentative or Final Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan ( ) Other - Related: annexation - N/A rezoning - C9-84-84 CDRC – N/A Adopted land use plan(s) – Esmond Station Parks and Recreation Department Staff has reviewed this proposal and offers the following comments: () CONDITIONALLY APPROVED – Subject to adding one note to DP () See attached comment () Proposal complies with annexation or rezoning conditions () RCP Proposal; complies with land use plan () Proposal satisfies trails, recreational amenities, and/or parks and open space requirements () No additional comments - complies with comments submitted on: ( ) NOT APPROVED – Resubmit the following. See attached comments. ( ) Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan ( ) Landscape Plan ( ) Other REVIEWER: Joanne Hershenhorn DATE: 3/12/08 S:\PARKS_AND_RECREATION_DEPT\REVIEW_COMMENTS\CDRC_Cases\2008_ReviewsD06-0016_Houghton_Town_Ctr.doc Houghton Town Center, DP D06-0013 Please place the following note on the Development Plan: “No certificate of occupancy will be issued until either 1) the 10-foot –wide paved path along Houghton Road, and associated landscaping and irrigation, have been constructed; and the City has inspected and accepted these improvements; or b) in lieu fees have been paid to the City for construction of the Houghton Road paved path, and associated improvements. |
| 03/12/2008 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | 1. DP4 - Compactor area for buildings 21 thru 24 does not provide the required turning radii (36 ft inside and 50 ft outside) to allow the collection vehicle to position itself within the required minimum 14 ft x 40 ft clear approach. 2. DP 6 - Building #18 does not provide the required turning radii (36 ft inside and 50 ft outside) to allow the collection vehicle to position itself within the required minimum 14 ft x 40 ft clear approach. Will work if move enclosure back 15 ft to allow required maneuverability and approach for collection vehicle. 3. DP 5 & DP 7 - Although the following has been aprroved by my predessor I am providing comments for your consideration. Because the existing conditons as shown will limit the ability to provide a collection service that will meet the volume and/or capacity needs of the individual businesses because the containers will be required to be placed on casters and rolled in and out of the enclosure. This will require a smaller refuse/recycle container in order to be safely handled... Buildings 29, 9, 7, & 6 do not provide the required turning radii (36 ft inside and 50 ft outside) to allow the collection vehicle to position itself within the required minimum 14 ft x 40 ft clear approach. Also, please clarify exit path from bldg #34. Or provide turnaround. Please provide corrections and/or clarification. If you have any questions you may contact Andy Vera at (520) 791-5543 ext 1212 or e-mail: Andy.Vera@tucsonaz.gov |
| 03/14/2008 | HEATHER THRALL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Heather Thrall Senior Planner PROJECT: D06-0013, Houghton Town Center Revision to approved Development Plan 1st Review of Revision TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 13, 2008 DUE DATE: March 7, 2008 COMMENTS: 1. This submittal consists of several changes to the last approved development plan for the Houghton Town Center, D06-0013. This project was reviewed for compliance with the Land Use Code (LUC), Development Standards (DS), American National Standards Institute (ANSI), Tucson City Code 20-222, and International Building Code 2006. The changes were also reviewed for compliance with the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone. Specifically, this project was reviewed for content specified under DS 2-05 for development plan standards. 2. Per DS 2-05.2.4.D - regarding traffic circulation: A) Sheet 3, Bldg 11 - provide a 1' setback from the drive thru PAAL B) Sheet 3, Bldg. 11 - provide a dimension on the drive thru lane widths C) Sheet 3, Bldg. 11- dimension (typical) for each stacking space in the drive thru D) Sheet 5, Bldg. 30,31,32,33,34 - dimension drive thru at egress E) Sheet 5, Bldg. 30,31,32,33,34 - provide a 1' setback from the drive thru PAAL F) Sheet 5, Bldg. 30,31,32,33,34 - dimension typical stacking space in drive thru lane G) Sheet 7, Bldg 6 provide 1' setback note from PAAL to building 3. Per DS 2-05.2.4.I - regarding setbacks: A) Sheet 3, Bldg 11 - if the lined area over the drive thru is a canopy, it may not meet Scenic Corridor Overlay setbacks. Provide height. Call out as canopy if so. 4. Per DS 2-05.2.4.K - regarding pedestrian/handicapped circulation: A) All Sheets, please dimension widths of all sidewalks around buildings B) All Sheets and on detail for handicapped parking, limit strip of truncated domes to be in area on concrete where abutting access aisle only. C) Sheet 5, Bldg 30 - a ramp with truncated domes is missing from one side of the drive thru lane D) Sheet 5, bldg 29 shows a man-gate - please provide a note that all man-gates are to be 4' wide to meet DS 2-08. 5. Per DS 2-05.2.4.M & N - regarding buildings: A) Sheet 3, bldg 11 - declare what lined area is over drive thru - dimension, height B) Sheet 5, bldg 20,29,30,31,32,33,34 - show entry to building to verify bike pkg within 50' C) Sheet 5, bldgs 20,29,30,31,32,33,34 - dimension building footprints for permitting and records D) Sheet 5, building 20 has lines next to the foot print on east/west that are not called out - are these a roof or canopy? E) Sheet 6, show building entries for all buildings to show they have trash access for employees and to ensure class 2 bike parking is within 50' of entry F) Sheet 6, provide building footprints of all buildings for permitting and records G) Sheet 7, provide building footprints of all buildings for permitting and records H) Sheet 7, show building entries for all buildings 6. Per DS 2-05.2.4.O - regarding loading zones: A) Sheet 3, bldg. 34 - the loading zone is positioned directly adjacent to the immediate exit of a drive thru lane in such a way that it can be a safety issue for people exiting the drive thru. Please at least provide a separation between the drive thru lane and the loading zone -curbing, etc. B) Sheet 6, bldgs 15 and 16 each require an additional loading zone per LUC 3.4.5.3 due to the square footage increase C) Sheet 7, bldg 8 now requires an additional loading zone per LUC 3.4.5.3 due to the square footage increase D) Sheet 8, bldgs 4 & 5 each require an additional loading zone at 12x35 per LUC 3.4..5.3 (they each had one more loading zone provided on the last review) 7. Per DS 2-05.2.4.P - regarding parking: A) Sheet 5, bldg 30 - the parking space directly adjacent to loading zone appears to be shortened and in path of loading zone B) Sheet 20, detail 2 - please add a note that the fine for illegal parking is $518.00 8. Per DS 2-05.2.4.Q - regarding bicycle parking: A) verification all class 2 bike parking spaces shall occur once the positions of all building entries are provided for each building on each sheet B) sheet 8, building 5 -access to the class 1 bike parking appears to be blocked by a wall - and there is no door shown immediately adjacent like the other adjacent buildings. 10. Scenic Corridor Review Comments: A) Sheet 3, bldg. 11 - the lined area over the drive thru - if called out as a canopy, will be checked in next review to ensure compliance with SCZ setbacks B) Sheet 21, please revise the building setback shown on SCZ setbacks to match the actual building setbacks on DP3 - for buildings 11, 12, and 13 B) Sheet 21, the view shed analysis and SCZ setback sheets do not match - and the view shed analysis drawing is not updated to reflect the new building positions in the plan C) Sheet 21 depicts two view corridors that are not actually clear of buildings fully within the 400' SCZ area from the future right of way line. I acknowledge that the view shed corridors are clearly over the 20% required per LUC 2.8.2.6.B - and likely will be even after the view shed is updated to show new building positions. For accurate records, the drawing should be adjusted to show the 116.1 and 137.3 view corridors removed, as buildings 22 and 8 are within those corridors and within the 400' line. In addition, the view shed corridor calculation should be adjusted to show the accurate linear feet and percentage of view corridors. 11. Please note that further review responses may be forthcoming, depending upon the responses provided. I may be reached at Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov or at 837-4951. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call (520) 791-5608. C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D06-0013 houghton town center 7 - revision.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan. |
| 03/17/2008 | PGEHLEN1 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | |
| 03/28/2008 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Patricia Gehlen DATE: March 28, 2008 CDRC/Zoning Manager FROM: Paul Machado Engineering Division SUBJECT: Houghton Town Center, 8880 S. Old Vail Rd. Revised Development Plan D06-0013 (First Review) T15S, R15E, Section 26 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Plan. The Development Plan (DP) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Development Plan: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the DP. 2. As per the Federal ADA requirements, all wheel chair ramps shall have the truncated domes instead of the standard grooves that are shown on COT SD 207. Aside from the Truncated Domes, all wheel chair ramps shall be constructed in accordance with COT SD 207. Re-check all ramps for compliance. 3. Label existing and future sight visibility triangles per D.S. 2-02.2.1.10. A future right of way width of 120' has a future sidewalk area is 5' from the right of way line. 4. Fully-dimensioned loading space(s) and maneuvering area(s) per D.S. 2-02.2.1.14. 5. Show refuse container location, size, and access thereto fully dimensioned per D.S. 2-02.2.1.32 and D.S. 6-01.0. Re-check all locations for DS specifications. A DSMR will be required for any access to the refuse if it does meet DS. 6. Please provide Drainage patterns and finished grades per D.S. 2-02.2.1.16. 7. Please show dimensioned right-of-way, including any applicable Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan right-of-way per D.S. 2-02.2.1.19. Intersection widening is required for Old Vail Road and Houghton Road. 8. Please show the proposed roof drainage patterns, 100% of the 10-year flow must be conveyed under the sidewalks including any other site drainage as well. Please provide supporting calculations to demonstrate compliance with D.S. 3-01.4.4. If the location(s) of the roof scuppers have not yet been decided, a general note indicating sidewalk scuppers will be used when the roof scuppers locations have been designed and located will suffice. 9. List the consulting engineer and the owner/developer on the plans with the pertinent information. 10. "A grading permit and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP's) will be required for this project. Submit 4 sets of grading and 3 sets of the SWPPP with text, upon completion and submittal of a grading permit application. A grading permit may not be issued prior to development plan approval. Subsequent comments may be necessary, depending upon the nature and extent of revisions that occur to the plans". Drainage Report: 1. The DR has been accepted for DP purposes only. 2. This review was performed for DP purposes only. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4932 or Paul.Machado@ci.tucsonaz.govs Paul P. Machado Senior Engineering Associate City of Tucson/Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210 (520) 837-4932 office (520) 879-8010 fax C:/8880 S. Old Vail Rd. Rev. DP |
| 04/01/2008 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES April 1, 2008 Thomas Saylor Brown, AIA Sayler-Brown Bolduc, Lara Architects, LLC 1001 North Alvernon Way, Suite 105 Tucson, Arizona 85711-1019 Subject: D06-0013 Houghton Town Center Revised Development Plan Dear Thomas: Your submittal of February 7, 2008 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 of the Development Plan 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 3 Copies Revised Development Plan (Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 3 Copies Revised Landscape Plans (Zoning, Engineering, DSD), AN OVER-THE-COUNTER REVIEW IS DIFFICULT TO DO, SO PLEASE RESUBMIT AND THE NEXT REVIEW WILL BE DONE RAPIDLY. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE MYLARS WILL STILL HAVE TO BE REVIEWED BY ANDY VERA WITH ESD. Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. 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 |