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 - D06-0050
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/27/2006 | MARILYN KALTHOFF | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/02/2006 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | * No known landfill within 1000 feet of this development. * Detail doesnot show sidewall protection. * Standarda call for 10' clear area between the wall protection or the front gate. * At the 45 degree angle (in the parking off Rosemont) the service trucks operation is tight and there maybe conflict with the operation. When entering the 14' x 40' required clear area in front of the enclosure or disconnecting and backing away the parking garage structure comes into conflict. This really comes into play in backing away to make the turning movement forward. Recommend that these enclosures be at a 30 degree angle. |
| 11/06/2006 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#172657 November 3, 2006 Castro Engineering Corp. Attn: John Lupo 3580 W. Ina Road, Suite 200 Tucson, Arizona 85741 Dear Mr. Lupo : SUBJECT: The Pavilions D06-0050 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted October 30, 2006. It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. TEP will need a full set of approved site, electrical load, paving off-site improvements and irrigation plans. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. Any relocation costs will be billable to the customer. 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, Elizabeth Miranda Office Support Specialist Design/Build lm Enclosures cc: P. Gehlen and F. Rodriguez, City of Tucson (email) M. Kaiser, Tucson Electric Power |
| 11/13/2006 | KAROL ARAGONEZ | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Karol Aragonez Planner PROJECT: D06-0050 The Pavilions Development Plan TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 9, 2006 DUE DATE: November 28, 2006 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 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 27, 2007. 2. Please add the township and range for the location map in the upper right corner of sheet 1 of 4. DS 2-05.2.1.D.3 3. Please add the contour interval with the north arrow and scale on sheets 3 of 4 and 4 of 4. DS 2-05.2.1.H 4. Please list the name, address, and telephone number of the firm that prepared the development plan on sheet 1 of 4. DS 2-05.2.2.A.2 5. Case number D06-0050 has been assigned to this development plan (DP). Please place this number in the right corner of all sheets of the development plan, landscape plan, NPPO, and any other associated sheets. Remove all excess case numbers that do not pertain to this project/site. DS 2-05.2.2.B.2 6. Please add the following note that states "The project is designed to meet the overlay zone criteria Sec. 2.8.3, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback zone and Sec. 2.8.4, Gateway Corridor Zone". 7. Please draw all existing easements on the plan along with recordation information, location, width, and purpose. If an easement is no longer in use and scheduled to be vacated or has been abandoned, so indicate. If none exist provide response to reviewer's comments. Also if easements are purposed please draw, dimension and label as to their purpose and whether they will be public or private. If none exist provide response to reviewer's comments. DS 2-05.2.3.B & DS 2-05.2.4.G 8. Please provide the recordation data, width of pavement, dimensions of existing sidewalks within both Broadway Boulevard and Rosemont Boulevard. DS 2-05.2.3.C 9. Sidewalks within Broadway Boulevard, a designated arterial and gateway route on the MS&R Map are required to be a minimum of six (6) feet in width. 10. Please provide the zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project, including across Broadway and Rosemont Boulevard. North R-2, west O-3, and south C-1. DS 2-05.2.4.B 11. Detectable warnings (truncated domes) are required at marked crossings (crosswalks). The area covered by the truncated domes shall be twenty-four (24) inch deep and extend the full width of the crosswalk, preceding the crosswalk, including access aisles of handicapped motor vehicle parking spaces. All accessible curb ramps including the flush entrances of buildings shall have truncated domes installed that shall be twenty-four (24) inches minimum in the direction of travel and extend the full width of the curb ramp or flush surface. Stairways emptying out onto the PAAL shall also provide truncated domes measured back from the PAAL. The domes shall be located so the edge nearest the curb line is six (6) inches to eight (8) inches from the curb line. ANSI 406.12, ANSI 705 12. Please provide a detail of the required handicap parking signage. Signage verbiage will meet minimum requirements as required by ANSI and TDOT and will be posted at a height of no less than seven (7) feet. ANSI & TDOT 13. Wheel-stop curbing provided shall be a distance of two and one-half (2 1/2) feet from the front of the motor vehicle parking spaces. Please revise parking typicals D/2 and E/2 provide wheel-stop curbing for standard parking spaces that do not utilize vertical curbing separation or those that overhang sidewalks areas, reducing that sidewalk to less than four (4) feet in width, and to prevent vehicles from damaging walls or buildings. DS 3-05.2.3.C 14. Please dimension the PAAL widths at the entrance from Rosemont and the west entrance from Broadway Boulevard, from vertical curb to vertical curb. A dimension must also be provided from the edge of the off-street loading space to the edge of motor vehicle parking to assure that the PAALs minimum width is maintained. Minimum two-way PAAL width is twenty-four (24) feet. DS 3-05.2.1.C.1 15. Please provide building setbacks of new construction from Rosemont and Broadway Boulevard. Required setback from Rosemont as a side street setback is ten feet from property line to the structure. Broadway requires a setback of the greater of twenty-one (21) feet or the height of the building wall measured from the back of future curb. It is suggested that dimensioned elevations be provided to assist in setback determination. DS 2-05.2.4.I, LUC 3.2.6.5.A & MS&R Plan 16. Please dimension all new sidewalk areas within the site to assure that a minimum width of four (4) feet is provided. DS 2-08.5.1.A 17. Please provide the use more explicitly besides "commercial". There are many uses listed within the Commercial Use Group. Please list the use as "Administrative and Professional Office and Food Service, subject to 3.5.4.6.C". LUC 2.6.2.2.A.1 & 7 18. Please list the development designator for both uses (36) as a note providing both maximum allowed site area (0 sq. ft.) and proposed, maximum allowed FAR (10.5) and proposed, and maximum building height (300 ft) and proposed. LUC 3.2.3.2.B Development Designator 36 19. Please revise the parking calculations for new office uses. The first floor for offices is calculated at one (1) space per two hundred (200) sq. ft. of gross floor area (GFA). All other floors are then calculated at one (1) space per two hundred and fifty (250) sq. ft. of GFA. LUC 3.3.4 Commercial Services Use Group 20. Please revise the parking calculations for handicap parking to include the required number of van accessible parking spaces. Of the 23 provided handicap spaces, four (4) are required to be van accessible. ANSI 2003 1106.5 21. It appears that the expansion calculations are incorrect. a) Current calculation reads 360,154 SF - 22896 SF. Shouldn't this be 260, 154 SF? b) If you take the total existing SF (260,154) minus SF removed (22,896) that equals 237,258 SF. Dividing the new SF (34,957) by the modified existing SF (237,258) equals 14.73% expansion. 22. Please label the heights and dimension the drawing footprints. DS 2-05.2.4.N 23. Please provide as a note the number of off-street loading spaces required and the number being provided along with required size of the spaces. Square footage allocated to the new food service would use Table 3. The total GFA indicated in the parking calculations show total GFA for food service as 36,657 sq. ft. which would require three (3) off-street loading spaces for that use. Office would require one (1) off-street loading space, for a total of four (4) spaces required (LUC Sec. 3.4.5.3 & 3.4.5.5). 24. Bicycle parking provided on the DP does not meet the requirements of revised DS (Development Standard) 2-09. Per DS 2-09.4.1 Class 2 bicycle parking facilities will be located no more than fifty (50) feet from the main building entrance(s) and will be along the front side of the building as well as along other sides of the building that has an entrance. Bicycle access through the development will be separate from the pedestrian ways. Vehicular access may be used as bicycle access. Bicycle access to a parking facility may cross a pedestrian way at a right angle (DS2-09.3.2). Multiple rack bicycle parking require a minimum thirty (30) inches between outer spaces of posts or racks and to abutting walls (DS 2-09.5.1.A). The type of rack proposed does not provide two-point support for bicycles. Please review DS 2-09.8.0 Figure 2 - 7 for acceptable and unacceptable rack designs, Figure 8 for rack location, and Figure 9 for dimensional requirements. Please review the revised DS 2-09 and provide the necessary corrections to the bicycle parking as required. Once changes are provided and reviewed further comments may result. The revised DS may be found on the web at: http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Codes___Ordinances/DevStd209.pdf 25. Please correct the bicycle parking calculations to accurately reflect the correct percentages and number of spaces required. Food service requires bicycle parking at a ratio of eight (8) percent with fifty (50) percent Class 1 (13 spaces) and fifty (50) percent Class 2 (13 spaces) of the provided motor vehicle parking spaces. Administrative and Professional Office use (111 motor vehicle parking spaces) requires eight (8) percent bicycle parking (9 spaces) with seventy-five (75) percent Class 1 (7 spaces) and twenty-five (25) percent Class 2 (2 spaces). 26. Please indicate the location and type of postal service to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements. If mail is to be delivered to an area with a building please state so on the plan. DS 2-05.2.4.V 27. Locations of outdoor dining areas are not clearly depicted on the DP and appear to conflict with landscaped areas as shown on the landscape plans. Locations of outdoor seating are to be accurately shown and match on both plans. 28. All changes, modifications, and/or corrections must be made on all applicable plans including the development plan, landscape plan, and NPPO. Once changes, modifications, and/or corrections are made and reviewed further comments may result. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Karol Aragonez, (520) 791-5550, ext. 1197. KAA S:\zoning review\karol\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D06-0050dp.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents. |
| 11/16/2006 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 11/27/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) 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. Contact Gary Wittwer, DOT Landscape Architect for specific requirements. 2) Street landscape borders are required for the new refuse storage locations. Revise the plans as necessary. LUC Table 3.7.2-I 3) Identify and describe (height, materials, finish) on the landscape plans any screen walls required for refuse storage. DS 2-07.2.0 RESUBMITTAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE LANDSCAPE PLAN IS REQUIRED. |
| 11/27/2006 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING 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: D06-0050 PAVILIONS/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: November 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: 1.) Delete direction from all street names (Location Map and Development Plan). 2.) Add Township 14S and Range 14E to Location Map. 3.) Spell out Boulevard for Broadway and Rosemont on all sheets. jg |
| 11/28/2006 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | November 28, 2006 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D06-0050 PROJECT NAME: Pavilions PROJECT ADDRESS: 5151 E Broadway Blvd. PROJECT REVIEWER: Jose E. Ortiz PE, Traffic Engineer Resubmittal Required: Traffic Engineering does not recommend approval of the Development Plan; therefore a revised Development Plan is required for re-submittal. The following items must be revised or added to the plat. 1. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. 2. The access points shall have 25' radius curb returns. (DS 3-01.0 figure 6) Call out for 25' at all new driveway returns. 3. For clarification call out all existing driveways to distinguish from proposed driveways. 4. The SVT's are incorrectly illustrated. Refer to D.S. 3-01.5.3 (LINE OF SIGHT MATRIX) and Figure 16 for proper dimensions. 5. If applicable, dimension the width of all ingress/egress points (Tucson City Code, Chapter 25, section 39 & 40) 6. A private improvement agreement (PIA) will be necessary for the proposed work to be performed within the Right-of-way. An approved tentative plat is required prior to applying for a PIA. Contact the PIA Coordinator for additional PIA information at 791-5550 ext. 1107. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x305 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 12/04/2006 | 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 D06-0050 Pavilions 12/01/06 ( ) Tentative Plat ( X ) Development Plan (X ) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C09-68-70 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Broadway-Craycroft Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Gateway COMMENTS DUE BY: November 28, 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 ( X ) Architectural Elevations and Renderings REVIEWER: JBeall 791-4505 DATE: 11/29/06 Comments Applicant to provide architectural elevations and renderings that demonstrate a unified development by showing how the proposed project is compatible and integrates with the existing overall development design theme. |
| 12/08/2006 | MARILYN KALTHOFF | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING December 8, 2006 To: John Lupo, Castro Engineering Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Project Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________ From: Michael J. Harrington (520-740-6579), representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environmental Quality Subject: Pavilions (The), at 5151 E. Broadway Blvd. Development Plan - 1st Submittal D06-050 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. 1. This project will be tributary to both the Ina Road Water Pollution Control Facility and the Roger Road Wastewater Treatment Facility via the Pantano Interceptor. This project appears to be a tenant improvement project with existing commercial/financial space being converted to retail/restaurant space. No wastewater fixture unit count are provided with the 1st review and consequently we are unable to determine if increased wastewater volume is an issue. 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. 2. All Sheets: Add the development plan case number, D06-0050, 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. 3. Sheet 1: Revise the Location Map to state the Township and Range. 4. Sheet 1: Delete General Note #8. 5. Sheet 1: Delete General Note #11. 6. Sheet 1: One of the next two notes should be right for this project. ü 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. ü THE ON-SITE SEWERS ARE EXISTING AND PRIVATE. NO NEW SEWERS ARE PROPOSED. Add the appropriate General Note. 7. Sheet 1: Add a General Note that 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. 8. Sheet 3: Revise the site plan so that it shows: The public sewer manhole IMS numbers, added to the labels that identify the manholes west the project site, in the N. Rosemont Boulevard right of way. The IMS numbers are the sewer element identification numbers that can be found at PCWMD Maps and Records (5th floor on basemaps) or on PCWMD and PCDOT MapGuide internet websites. 9. Sheets 3 & 4: Revise the site plans so that they show: The private sewer elements (manholes, cleanouts, sewer mains and cleanouts), that service the existing buildings, connected from the buildings to the point of connections to the existing public sewer. Describe examples of these different elements in the legend on Sheet 1. 10. Sheets 3 & 4: In the Keynotes block, #21 and #29, wastewater elements, are not found on this site plan. Please explain. 11. This office 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 |
| 12/08/2006 | SUZANNE BOHNET | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: December 8, 2006 To: Patricia Gehlen CDRC/Zoning Manager FROM: Suzanne Bohnet, CFM Engineering Division SUBJECT: 5151 E. Broadway Blvd. The Pavilions Development Plan D06-0050 (First Review) T14S, R14E, Section 11 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Plan The Engineering Division has reviewed the Development Plan and Drainage Report, and we do not recommend approval at this time. The following review comments must be addressed. Development Plan Comments: 1. Please label both Broadway Blvd. and Rosemont Blvd. as a Major Street & Route (MS&R). 2. Please provide the public right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, existing curbs, existing curb cuts and existing sidewalks (D.S. 2-03.2.3.D). 3. Please label existing curbs and sidewalks as "Existing/Future". 4. The required width of sidewalks for arterial and collector roadways is 6'. Please change Keynote No. 6 to ensure the width of the new sidewalks along Broadway and Rosemont are 6' wide. 5. Please show or note truncated domes will be used in place of grooves for the sidewalk access ramps located at the driveways. 6. Please dimension the sight visibility triangles (SVT) as detailed below: 6.1. PAAL (or drive) to collector street (Rosemont) - 20' x 265' (near side) and 20' x 110' (far side). 6.2. PAAL (or drive) to arterial street (Broadway) - 20' x 345' (near side) and 20' x 30' (pedestrian far side). 6.3. Collector to arterial (stem on Rosemont) - 20' x 335' (near side). 6.4. Arterial to collector (stem on Broadway) - 20' x 110' (far side). 7. Please provide bollards on either side of the refuse enclosure with a 10' space minimum between the bollards. 8. Please demonstrate the maneuverability of the collection vehicle for the proposed refuse enclosures. 9. Please correct the detail call out for detail M. Should be M/2 rather than M/3. 10. Please add a note stating that all landscaped areas will be depressed a minimum 6" for water harvesting. Drainage Report Comments: 1. Please provide an addendum discussing how the removal of two catch basins and a drainage outlet will affect existing and future drainage. Further comments may be forthcoming following review of the addendum. Submit a revised Tentative Plat and Drainage Report with a detailed response letter detailing how each comment has been addressed. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1188 or suzanne.bohnet@tucsonaz.gov. Suzanne Bohnet, CFM Engineering Associate |
| 12/11/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES December 11, 2006 John Lupo Castro Engineering Corp. 3580 West Ina Road, Suite 200 Tucson, Arizona 85741 Subject: D06-0050 The Pavilions Development Plan Dear John: Your submittal of October 30, 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 explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 9 Copies Revised Development Plan (ESD, Zoning, Addressing, Landscape, Traffic, DUPD, Wastewater, Engineering, DSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Landscape, DUPD, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Architectural Elevations and Renderings (DUPD, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608 extension 1179. Sincerely, Patricia Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 293-2115 dp-resubmittal |