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 - D06-0060
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/02/2007 | MARILYN KALTHOFF | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 01/08/2007 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#175530 January 8, 2007 SBBL Attn: Wm C Schuiteman, AIA 1001 N Alvernon Way, Suite 105 Tucson, Arizona 85711 Dear Mr. Schuiteman: SUBJECT: Midvale Commercial Center D06-0060 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted January 02, 2007. 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. **Possible conflict with existing uG primary cable and the NW corner of building #3. 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 |
| 01/09/2007 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | January 9, 2007 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D06-0060 PROJECT NAME: Midvale Commercial Center PROJECT ADDRESS: 1740 W Valencia Rd 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. Sheet DP3: For clarification call out all existing driveways. 3. Sheet DP3: Adjust keynotes 10-15. They do not line up with the text description. 4. A permit or a private improvement agreement will be necessary for any work performed within the Right-of-way. Contact Permits and Codes at (520) 791-5100 for permit information. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x76730 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 01/19/2007 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | * No known landfill within 1000 feet of this development. * Dumpster detail enclosure requires 10' clear for each dumpster. Double set of doors do not provide this clearance. * Detail 2&3 on sheet 4 reflect dumpster enclosure enclosures. These enclosures are not shown on sheet 5. Please clarify. * Concerned with the number of refuse enclosures. If the refuse is controled by the owner of the complex then there maybe sufficient enclosures. If the owner requires the tenets to control there own refuse then there are insufficient enclosures. (Example: The two resturants and the four other spaces in buildings 1 & 2 donot have adequate refuse space. Resturants usually require there own service. Please clarify.) * There are collection conflicts with the enclosures located by building 1 and building 7. The required service area of 14' by 40' that is required per the Development Standards is in conflict with the curbed islands. Access to the dumpster would be difficult without damaging the curb. * Resturants usually have grease containers. These containers are not allowed within the 10' clear of the enclosures. * Please clarify if recycling is proposed and the enclosures that are for recycling. |
| 01/23/2007 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | January 23, 2007 To: Wm. C. Schuiteman., AIA SBBL Architecture & Planning Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department From: Chandubhai C. Patel, P.E., Civil Engineering Manager Pima County Development Services Department Development Review Division (Wastewater) Subject: Midvale Commercial Center, Lot 2 Development Plan – 1st Submittal, D06-0060 The drawings for the proposed Development Plan 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. ALL SHEETS. Add the project number, D06-0060 to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger and bolder than any cross-reference numbers. ALL SHEETS. Show the name of the project in larger bold letters. Provide a letter from PCWMD Development Services Section, written within the past 90 days, stating that the 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 4. SHEET 1. Add a Permitting Note that reads: A PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FROM THE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. 5. SHEET 2. In the Legend, show symbols for proposed and existing private and public sewers. Also, show a symbol for the existing public sewers. Use distinctively different line types for these sewers. These line types and the symbols should clearly match those used on Sheets DP3 and DP 4. for depicting sewer lines. 6. SHEET DP 3. Where you are showing SEWER M.H. in the Oak Tree Drive, change the call out to EXISTING PUBLIC MANHOLE NO. 6177-3 and 6177-04. 7. SHEET DP 3 & DP 4. Call out the sewer line shown in the Oak Tree Drive as EXISTING 12-inch PUBLIC SEWER. 8. SHEET DP 3 & DP 4. Show the existing and proposed private/public sewer lines that will be used to provide sewer service for this project. Once you have shown the sewer lines, we will be able to provide our review comments for them. 10. SHEET DP 3. The sewer line coming from SW corner into the Oak Tree Drive: Label this as EXISTING 8-INCH PRIVATE SEWER LINE. 11. 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 $100.00 made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER must accompany the revised set of bluelines and the 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 comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Chandubhai C. Patel, P.E. Telephone: (520) 740-6563 Copy: Project File |
| 01/23/2007 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | The 60 foot no-build easement cannot be abandoned. It is required to allow Wal-Mart to have an unlimited area building. |
| 01/26/2007 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approv-Cond | 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: D06-0060 MIDVALE COMMERCIAL CENTER/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: January 26, 2007 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: DELETE DIRECTION FROM STREET NAMES (LOCATION MAP) ON MYLAR. NOTE: 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. jg |
| 01/26/2007 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D06-0060 Midvale Commercial Center () Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-83-34 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Santa Cruz Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: No COMMENTS DUE BY: 01/25/07 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 (XXXX) 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: drcorral 791-4505 DATE: 01/25/07 |
| 01/30/2007 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the landscape plan to provide the trees shown on the previous landscape plan. All planting islands in the vehicular use area are required to be planted per the approved plans. LUC 3.7.1.2 2) Revise the landscape plan to provide all trees shown on the approved landscape plan. The number of trees indicated for the street landscape borders on the previous plan are required for this plan. LUC 3.7.1.2 3) Revise the landscape plan to provide all trees shown on the approved landscape plan. Tree planters and landscape borders outside of Lot 2 are required to include the landscaping shown on the approved plans. LUC 3.7.1.2 4) Show the loading area for the existing billboard on the development and landscape plans. Show the required screening for the billboard and the loading area on the landscape plan. LUC Table 3.7.2-I |
| 02/02/2007 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Midvale Commercial Center D06-0060 Development plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 2, 2007 DUE DATE: January 31, 2007 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 January 01, 2008. 2. List the D06-060 case number in the lower left hand corner of the sheet next to the title block. 3. D.S. 2-05.2.1.D On the location map identify conditions within the square mile area, such as watercourses. The West Branch Diversion Channel runs along the west side of the section shown. 4. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.3 Under the "SITE DATA: ZONING PERMITTED LAND USE: add the "Subject To", to the uses as listed under LUC Sec. 2.5.4.2. 5. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.10 Add a note stating that the project is designed to meet the overlay zones criteria: LUC Sec. 2.8.3, Major Streets & Routes & LUC Sec. 2.8.4, Gateway corridor Zone 6. D.S. 2-05.2.3.B There are electrical & water easements shown on the plan which run under structures, i.e. buildings, trash enclosures, These easements need to be relocated or abandoned. Provide documentation showing that these easements have been relocated or abandoned. 7. D.S. 2-05.2.3.B Provide documentation showing that the "NO BUILD EASEMENTS DKT 11158 PG 1141" has been abandoned. 8. D.S. 2-05.2.4.A Provide a Pima County Tax Parcel Combo and a recorded Covenant Regarding Development and Use of Real Property for the property line that is proposed to be abandoned. On the plan remove the southern part of the property line, shown on the plan, that is proposed to be abandoned. 9. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D. Per D.S. 3-05.2.1.C.2.c Six stacking spaces are required for any drive-through facility with one (1) drive through lane, show the eighteen (18) foot long stacking spaces on the plan 10. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D. Per D.S. 3-05.2.1.C.2. on site pedestrian access must not cross the stacking area for drive through lanes. It appears that there is pedestrian access across both proposed drive-through PAALs at the stacking area. Once the stacking area is clearly shown, see comment 9, additional comments maybe forth coming. 11. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D. Per D.S. 3-05.2.2.B.4 A minimum distance of one (1) foot must be maintained between a structure and any PAAL serving as a drive-through aisle. Provide a dimension for this setback at both drive-through PAALS shown on the plan. 12. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.Provide a dimension for the PAAL behind building #12. 13. D.S. 2-05.2.4.I Zoning acknowledges that the proposed buildings will meet the minimum setbacks. Provide dimensions showing the setback from the back of future/existing curb to all buildings located along the street frontages. 14. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K The pedestrian access/access route shown at the northwest corner of building #7 provides an unsafe condition and also appears to encroach on the 24' PAAL, relocate. 15. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Provide a stripped crosswalk at the entrance PAAL off of Oak Tree Drive near the northwest corner of building #7. 16. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Per D.S. 2-08.4.1.B provide a sidewalk along the south side of building #10. 17. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Provide a pedestrian access/access route from the proposed sidewalk shown at the southwest corner of building #6 across the entrance PAAL to the existing sidewalk to the south. 18. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Provide a stripped crosswalk from the sidewalk shown to the north of buildings #4 & 5 southwest to the area near the electrical transformer shown near the northwest corner of building #6. Provide a pedestrian access (sidewalk) around the electrical transformer to the sidewalk shown between the parking just south of the transformer. 19. D.S. 2-05.2.4.N On the drawing label the height and provide dimensions for each building. 20. D.S. 2-05.2.4.O Base on LUC Sec. 3.4.3.3 & 3.4.4.1 any building over 1,500 sq. ft. requires a loading space. This said buildings # 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 would require at a minimum 5 loading spaces, one for each building. The same applies to buildings # 7, 8, 9 & 10 which require 4 loading spaces. Based on the uses within each building, addition loading spaces may be required. 21. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Provide the required and provide number of physically disabled vehicle parking spaces within the parking calculation. 22. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Provide a typical parking space detail for a standard vehicle parking space. 23. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P As required show the wheel stops on the plan. 24. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Detail 1/DP5, The note stating "SIDEWALK - MIMIMUM 4' CLEAR" appears to show just the sidewalk width. The proposed handicapped signage cannot encroach into the minimum 4' width. The callout for the handicapped signage references detail 5/DP5, revise to read 2/DP5. Show the detectable warnings (truncated domes) on the detail. 25. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P The detectable warnings (truncated domes) shown at the handicapped vehicle parking spaces located just south of proposed buildings #4 & #5 are located incorrectly. Per ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 406.13.2 the detectable warnings shall be located so the edge nearest the curb line is six to eight inches from the curb line at the north end of the parking spaces. These detectable warnings shall run the full width of the flush surface, clarify where the pavement and curb/sidewalk are flush. 26. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Define which handicapped spaces are van accessible. 27. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Show the detectable warnings at all curb access ramps or where the pavement and curb/sidewalk are flush. 28. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Per ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 406.14 at island or cur-through medians that are less than forty-eight (48) inches the entire depth of the pedestrian route or cut-through shall have detectable warnings. It appears a the cut-throughs located south of proposed buildings #4 & #5 and to the north of building #12 may be required to meet this standard. Provide dimensions for the cut-thoughs. 29. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Detail 2/DP5 Accessible Sign detail, the height of the sign from finished grade, pavement or sidewalk should be 7'-0". Also the lettering as called out on the sign is incorrect, see attached detail. 30. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q The bicycle parking shown for buildings # 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 and for buildings # 7, 8, 9 & 10 needs to be distributed show that requirements of D.S. 2-09.4.1 31. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q The proposed bicycle parking located at the northeast corner of proposed building #12 is mislabeled. Keynote 8 which is for Class 1 points to the Class 2 and Keynote 9 which is Class 2 points to the Class 1, revise. 32. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q The proposed bicycle parking shown at the southwest corner of proposed building #11 needs to be rotated 90 degrees to allow adequate access. 33. D.S. 2-05.2.4.W If applicable indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, freestanding, pedestal & billboard) on the plan. 34. Provide recorded documentation for the cross-vehicular and pedestrian access and cross parking for the center. 35. Provide recorded documentation that provides for the cross access across the property lines at the southwest corner of this site. The parcels in questions are 137-33-5730, where the existing billboard is located, and 137-34-0020. Per Keynote 12 sheet DP3 show the location of the loading area on the plan. This loading area cannot encroach on any required PAAL. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 791-5608 ext. 1180. C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D06-0060dp.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan, tentative plat, final plat, CC&R's and additional requested documents. |
| 02/08/2007 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Manager SUBJECT: Midvale Commercial Center Lot 2 Revised Development Plan Engineering Review REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach ACTIVITY NUMBER: D06-0060 SUMMARY: The Development Plan Revision, drainage statement, original Development Plan, Landscape Plan, NPPO plan, and the Title Report were received by Development Services Department Engineering on January 2, 2007. Development Services Department Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Development Plan at this time. The drainage statement was reviewed for development plan purposes only. DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS: 1) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No.2-05.2.4.O: Loading vehicle maneuverability is in conflict with building 10. Provide access for truck loading and clarify revise planview on sheet DP3. 2) DS Sec.2-05.2.2.B.10: Add general note stating that the project is designed to meet the special overlay zones criteria: LUC Sec. 2.8.3, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone, and the LUC Sec. 2.8.4, Gateway Corridor Zone. 3) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.B: All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, abandonment of the easement is to occur prior to issuance of permits. Specifically, as discussed in prior meeting for this project, change layout for north building 6 or indicate water easement relocation. 4) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.T: Revise detail 5 on sheet DP5 to show minimum 20-ft between bollards, with-wise, and 10-ft between rear bollards and enclosure gate. 5) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.H&E.1: Regarding the existing ground elevations, it is unclear where existing onsite flows are conveyed on the site. Provide existing / as-built contours, proposed spot elevations, and proposed drainage flow arrows. Clarify grades at tactile warning strip south of building 4. 6) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.F&2.4.H.7: Describe and label existing storm drainage facilities at southwest corner of project. 7) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.G: Clarify whether there are any cross access agreements in place for the existing commercial parcel. Provide information regarding cross access agreements. 8) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.1: Show any detention/retention basins including 100-year ponding limits and water surface elevations per the Midvale Commercial Center Master Drainage Plan report. 9) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.T: Clarify solid waste collection vehicle maneuverability for building 7. 10) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.X: In response letter, discuss how water harvesting is provided in landscaped areas. 11) Please acknowledge that a separate grading permit may be needed for development of the site once the Development Plan is approved. Also, a Right-of-way Use Permit may be needed; contact Permits and Codes at 791-5100. Resubmittal is required. Submit response letter, Midvale Commercial Center Master drainage report, and revised Development Plan. The next submittal should address all the above items. If you have questions, call me at 791-5550, extension 2204. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Section Development Services |
| 02/12/2007 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES February 12, 2007 C. Schuiteman, AIA SBBL 1001 North Alvernon Way, Suite 105 Tucson, Arizona 85711-1019 Subject: D06-0060 Midvale Commercial Center Revised Development Plan Dear Mr. Schuiteman: Your submittal of January 2, 2007 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 8 Copies Revised Development Plan (Traffic, ESD, Fire, Wastewater, Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Recorded Lot Combination Covenant (Zoning, DSD) 2 Copies Master Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Recorded Cross Access and Parking Agreement(s) (Zoning, 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: 620-0535 |