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 - D06-0018
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/14/2006 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 04/25/2006 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | Details for gates restricting Fire Department access must be provided, including location of emergency devices (lock boxes, etc.) Refer to IFC 2003 and C.O.T. amendments, Sections 503.6.1, 503.6.2 & 506.1. |
| 04/28/2006 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | SUBJECT: ROOFSAVERS YARD D06-0018 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted April 14, 2006. It appears that there are no 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. 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 Mike Kaiser at (520) 918-8244, should you have any questions. Sincerely, Kathy Clark Scheduling Coordinator Design/Build kc Enclosures cc: P. Gehlen, City of Tucson Kathy Clark Scheduling Coordinator Design/Build 520-918-8271 kclark@tep.com |
| 04/28/2006 | 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: D06-0018 ROOFSAVERS YARD/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: April 27, 2006 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: Revise Location Map per Development Standards (i.e.: Section Corners, S, T, R, north arrow, scale, project location). Darken the boundary (lot) lines of this project. Rotate 34th Street. Provide “blank” Address Block (lower right corner) minimum to 3” x 5”. jg |
| 04/28/2006 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | * No known landfill shown with in 1000 feet of this development. * One double enclosure shown. No service problem with access off 33 and exit onto 34/Winstel Blvd. |
| 05/03/2006 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | May 2, 2006 TO: Joe Locke Landlocked Properties THRU: Patricia Gehlen City of Tucson, Development Services Department FROM: Dickie Fernández, E.I.T. Pima County Development Services Department Development Review Division (Wastewater) SUBJECT: Roofsavers Yard Development Plan – 1st Submittal D06-0018 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. Provide a letter from PCWWM Planning Services, written within the past 90 days, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for this project is available. A capacity request form may be found at http://www.pima.gov/wwm/forms/docs/CapResponseRequest.pdf. ALL SHEETS. Add the project number, D06-0018, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than any cross-reference numbers. Based on the evaluation of the proposed sewer design, this project qualifies for Standard sewer connection fee rates. Delete ALL wastewater related notes and add the following notes, each separated by at least one space so that they are easily distinguishable. SHEET 1. Add the following General Note and fill in the blanks appropriately. THIS PROJECT HAS ____ PROPOSED AND ____ EXISTING WASTEWATER FIXTURE UNIT EQUIVALENTS, PER TABLE 13.20.045(E)(1) IN PIMA COUNTY CODE 13.20.045(E). SHEET 1. Add the following General Note ON-SITE SANITARY SEWERS WILL BE PRIVATE AND WILL BE CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED ON A PRIVATE BASIS. 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 AT THE TIME OF SUBMITTAL OF PLUMBING OR BUILDING PLANS. SHEET 1. Add the following General Note 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 1. Add the following General Note MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF THE PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER TO ITS POINT OF CONNECTION TO THE PUBLIC SEWER IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PROPERTY OWNER. SHEET 1. Add the following Permitting Note A PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FROM PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. All sewer infrastructure shall be shown so it is clearly visible and dark enough so that it does not fade away when viewed in microfilm version. Show the building connection sewer (BCS) from the building all the way to the point of connection with the public sewer network. Additionally, label this BCS as existing or proposed, include the length, size and the slope. Show the length, size and slope of the proposed private sewers. Show the existing public sewer to which this project is connecting, including the size and Pima County plan number. Additionally, show the six-digit Pima County manhole number for any existing public sewer manholes shown on this sheet. If the proposed private sewers are connecting to an existing public manhole, show the manhole’s rim and invert elevations. We will require a revised set of drawings and a response letter addressing each comment. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. The next submittal of this project will be the 2nd submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $50.00 made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter. For any questions regarding the fee schedule, please go to http://www.pimaxpress.com/SubDivision/Documents/Fees.PDF where you may find the appropriate wastewater review fees at the bottom of page 1. 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. Sincerely, Dickie Fernández, E.I.T. Telephone: (520) 740-6947 Copy: Project |
| 05/05/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) A minimum distance of two (2) feet must be maintained between a PAAL and any wall, screen, or other obstruction. DS 3-05.2.2.B.3 Revise the site and landscape plan to provide the required seperation. 2) Revise the landscape and development plans to show all screening elements per LUC Table 3.7.2.I. 3) All outdoor storage areas must be screened from adjacent streets and office and residential with a 6' high screen per LUC 3.7.2-I. 4) A street landscape border per LUC 3.7.2.4 is required along the south property boundary. LUC Table 3.7.2-I 5) The Design Review Board (DRB) will review all variance requests from the Landscaping and Screening Regulations as provided in Sec. 5.1.8.3.G and forward a recommendation in accordance with Sec. 5.1.8.2.F. (Ord. No. 9179, §1, 12/14/98; Ord. No. 9967, §3, 7/1/04) LUC 3.7.7.5 Contact the Zoning Administration division at (520) 791-4541 for information on the procedure for variances. A separate application is required. 6) Revise the site and landscape plan to correct the property information. A lot does not appear to be adjoining the site at the southern boundary at this time. Show all right-of-way dedications on or abutting the site and label. DS 2-05.2.4.E 7) A 35' building setback is required along 34th Street per the Alvernon Business Final Plat, Bk. 32, pg. 52. See Zoning Section comments. 8) Note the scale of the Development Plan. DS 2-05.2.1.B 9) All lettering and dimensions shall be the equivalent of twelve (0.12") point or greater in size. DS 2-05.2.1.A 10) Revise the landscape plan to provide the following required content, plans will include a planting plan, an irrigation plan, a grading plan, and construction details, each with applicable legend, key, symbols, sizes, quantities, and notes: A. The location of individual plants one (1) gallon or larger in size and areas to be seeded, turfed, or planted from flats. B. Both the proper and common name of each type of plant material. C. Location, size, and name of existing vegetation to remain in place. D. Minimum width and square footage measured from the inside edge. of tree planters in vehicular use areas. E. Length and width of landscape borders and landscape transition borders and number of canopy trees per length. F. Square footage of all landscaped borders and calculation of the percentage of vegetative coverage. G. Location of screening elements. H. Height of screening material and reference point for measurement. I. Type of screening material (e.g., masonry wall, wood fence, species of plant material). J. Existing grades on adjacent rights-of-way and adjacent sites. K. Areas of detention/retention, depths of basins, and percentage of side slope. L. Irrigation System specifications, design, and layout (Development Standard 2- 06.5.4.A and 2-06.5.4.B). Clearly show the irrigation mainline and lateral locations. M. A legend that shows and describes all symbols and lines used on the drawing. 11) The plan indicates that the adjoining lot is being purchased. Provide revised site boundary information. DS 2-05.2.3 12) Landscape borders proposed in right-of-way or MS&R areas must be approved by the City Engineer or designee and comply with the City Engineer's requirements on construction, irrigation, location, and plant type. Provide verification, in writing, of any approvals obtained. 13) Shrubs in areas of required landscaping other than for opaque screening will be a minimum one (1) gallon container size, with twenty (20) percent of the required number to be five (5) gallon container size or larger. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED |
| 05/09/2006 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | Estimated daily traffic in 24 hr period - 15 |
| 05/11/2006 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: May 11, 2006 TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Coordinator SUBJECT: Roofsavers Yard Development Plan submittal Engineering Review LOCATION: T14S R14E Section 21 REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach ACTIVITY NUMBER: D06-0018 SUMMARY: The Development Plan, drainage report, landscape plans, and supporting letters and documentation were reviewed by Engineering. Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Development Plan at this time. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Development Plan review only. DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS: 1) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No. 2-05.2.2.D.2: Sight visibility triangles are incorrectly depicted on the plan. Existing SVT's need to be shown along the edge of pavement. Future SVT's if any are located within the project typically based on future setbacks. Revise SVT's per DS Sec.3-01.10.Figure 16. Trees appear to be proposed to be located in the sight visibility triangle. To assure there are no conflicts with SVT's, revise landscape plans so that no vegetation is higher than 30"; trees and tall shrubs should be removed from SVT area. Revise Landscape Plans and Development Plan. 2) DS Sec.2-05.2.1.J: Explain symbol for flow arrow; revise so that it is understood which direction the flow is intended. 3) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.L: Show existing sidewalks along abutting right-of-way. Sidewalks must comply with accessibility requirements for the physically disabled; show any handicap access ramps. 4) DS Sec.2-05.2.1.D: Label the subject property and label section, township, and range on the project-location map. 5) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.U: Indicate graphically, where possible, and by notes, compliance with conditions of rezoning. 6) Add the words "Development Plan to the sheet for the Development Plan. After final approval of the Development Plan this project will need to be walked through for yellow card / site plan approval. Submit revised Development Plan, revised Landscape Plan, and response letter. If you have any questions on the comments, please call me at 791-5550 extension 2204. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Development Services |
| 05/12/2006 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: May 11, 2006 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov CC: Laith Alshami SUBJECT: D06-0018 Roofsavers Yard: Development Plan(4-17-06) Staff has no comments. |
| 05/26/2006 | 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 D06-0018 Roofsavers Yard 06/26/06 () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-75-59 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Arroyo Chico Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Gateway (Palo Verde Blvd.) COMMENTS DUE BY: May 12, 2006 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 () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: msp 791-4505 DATE: May 25, 2006 D06-0018, ROOFSAVERS YARD: Development Plan May 25, 2006 The Department of Urban Planning and Design offers the following comments Site is subject to rezoning case C9-73-59, which requires buildings to be located at least thirty-five feet from any street. The proposed development plan indicates a building footprint at twenty-five feet from 34th Street. The CC&R’s provided by the applicant indicate the setback requirement of thirty five feet from any street, expired at the end of twenty years from date of recordation. However, the City Attorney’s office direction is that as part of a rezoning condition (bldgs. Min. 35 ft from Streets) all rezoning conditions runs with the land as part of Mayor and Council approval and are not tied to the private CC&R twenty year time limit. |
| 05/26/2006 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Traffic Engineering REJECTS this DP: 1. List the name, ROW width, recordation data, type and dimensioned with of paving, curbs, curb cuts and sidewalks. (DS 2-05.2.2.D)There is no recordation data for any depicted ROW. 2. The access points shall have 18' radius curb returns. (DS 3-01.0 figure 6) D. Dale Kelch, PE Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov |
| 06/03/2006 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 06/03/2006 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Passed | |
| 06/05/2006 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Center Plans Coordination Office FROM: Peter McLaughlin Senior Planner FOR: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: D06-018 Roofsavers Yard 3872 E. 34th Street Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: June 5, 2006 DUE DATE: May 12, 2006 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 full CDRC review. The one year expiration date for this development plan is April 16, 2007. 2. Place the development plan number (D06-018) on each sheet of the development plan, landscape plan and NPPO plans in the lower right hand corner near the title block. DS 2-05.2.1.K 3. This plan does not meet the criteria of DS 2-05, DS 2-08, DS 2-09, DS 3-01, DS 3-05, and the Land Use Code and cannot be fully and accurately reviewed as submitted. Provide all calculations for vehicle (standard and handicapped) parking, bicycle parking, loading zones, Floor Area Ration (FAR) and other required elements to continue this review. Further comments will be necessary once a complete development plan with the correct format and content is submitted. Development Standards 2-05.2 4. All lettering and dimensions must be a minimum of equivalent of twelve (0.12") point in size. Revise text within masonry wall detail, location map and any other lettering that does not meet this minimum standard. Also, much of the text and line work is too light to reproduce on microfilm and is difficult to read. Revise. DS 2-05.2.1.C 5. This plan does not meet the criteria for pedestrian circulation. Refer to DS 2-08 for pedestrian circulation requirements. The pedestrian crosswalks may not be within the entrance drives to the site. An accessible pedstian sidewalk must connect the building to adjacent rights-of-way. Revise to show pedestrian connections correctly. Dimension width of all pedestrian sidewalks clearly on the drawing. A minimum 5-foot pedestrian refuge area, including a 4-foot sidewalk is required between any building and PAAL. DS 2-08 DS 3-05 6. Dimension vehicle use area clearly and completely. Provide concrete wheelstops to the parking spaces. Add a fully dimensioned typical parking detail showing angle of parking spaces and showing wheelstops at 2-1/2 feet from the front of parking spaces. Refer to LUC 3.3.7.2 for motor vehicle and PAAL dimensions required. DS 3-05.2.3.C.2 7. Add a vehicle parking (including handicap parking) calculation stating the number of h/c spaces required and provided. Provide h/c access ramps and aisles as required. Add a fully dimensioned h/c parking detail. Show truncated domes where required. ANS/ IBC DS 2-05.2.4.P 8. Add a bicycle parking calculation stating the number of class 1 and class 2 spaces required and provided. Remove note stating that bike parking is not required. Provide a detail showing a fully dimensioned layout of 2 bicycle parking (including width and length of spaces and a 5-foot clear area for bicycle maneuverability per DS 2-09). DS 2-05.2.4.Q 9. Revise the scale in the location map to be correct. Highlight the project site in the location map. DS 2-05.2.1.D 10. Dimension curbs from centerline along all adjacent streets. Dimension building setback distances from the back of existing curbs. Label and dimension the adjacent MS&R street to the east per information note "2.4.F". LUC 3.2.6.5 11. Add the development designator ("34") for the construction service use to the general notes. LUC 2.7.2.2.C.8 12. Indicate the location, height, and dimensions of any proposed freestanding signage. Also, indicate if any freestanding lighting is proposed. DS 2-05.2.4.W 13. Add to general note 10 a statement that the site is within the NCD-65 for Davis Monthan Air Force Base and is subject to the requirements of the AEZ. Also, add a statement that the site is within the Airport Hazard District (AHD). Add to the general note all required information regarding the site elevation above mean sea level, maximum proposed building heights and the elevation of the northwest end the NW/SE runway (2,590 feet above M.S.L.) of DMAFB. LUC 2.8.5 14. Add a general note stating that the proposal meets the criteria of LUC Sec. 2.8.3, Major Streets & Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone and the LUC Sec. 2.8.4, Gateway Corridor Zone. Remove the part of general note 10 stating that "no other overlay zones apply. DS 2-05.2.2.B.10 15. Add a loading zone calculation stating the number of loading spaces required and provided. Show the required loading zone fully dimensioned on the plan DS 2-05.2.4.O 16. SVTs are drawn incorrectly on the drawing. Revise. DS 3-01.5.2.A 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. |
| 06/05/2006 | PGEHLEN1 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | |
| 06/05/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES June 5, 2006 Joe Locke Landlocked Properties 7540 East La Cienega Drive Tucson, Arizona 85715 Subject: D06-0018 Roofsavers Yard Development Plan Dear Steve: Your submittal of April 17, 2006 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 9 Copies Development Plan (Fire, Wastewater, Community Planning, Engineering, Addressing, Landscape, Zoning, Traffic, DSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plans (Zoning, Landscape, Community Planning, 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: 628-3705 |