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 - D07-0012
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/29/2007 | MARILYN KALTHOFF | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 04/02/2007 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | NO COMMENT D07-0012 PSOMAS HAMPTON INN -------------------------------------------------------- Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are intended for use by the person(s)/entity(ies) named above and may contain confidential/privileged information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by email, and delete or destroy all copies plus attachments. |
| 04/04/2007 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#179415 April 4, 2007 PSOMAS Attn: Pattie Davis 800 E Wetmore Rd, Suite 110 Tucson, Arizona 85719 Dear Ms. Davis : SUBJECT: Hampton Inn D07-0012 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted March 30, 2007. It appears that there are conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. There is a PM Transformer located near the south east portion of the project. The easement for TEP primary duct and transformer are shown on sheet 2 & 4. The relocation for the transformer and the 3 phase UG primary will be billable to developer. 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 Nancy DiMaria at (520) 918-8267, 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) N. DiMaria, Tucson Electric Power |
| 04/18/2007 | 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 D07-0012 Hampton Inn 04/18/07 () Tentative Plat (XXXX) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: General Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 04/26/07 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: 04/16/07 |
| 04/18/2007 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) An unpaved planting area, a minimum of thirty-four (34) square feet in area and four feet in width, must be provided for each canopy tree. Revise the plans and provide dimensions for the planting space along the south property line. Obtain approval in writing from the City Engineer if the minimum planting area extends in to the public drainageway. 2) A screen wall is required along the south boundary of the site per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. Revise the plans and the calculations on sheet L-1. Show any proposed walls on the development and landscape plan. 3) Please verify if the NPP Exception request also applies to improvements proposed in the public drainageway to the south (offsite) and that it also includes other types of protected plants in addition to trees. 4) Provide a calculation for oasis areas per LUC 3.7.2.2.C.3. 5) The oasis areas are required to have separate remote control valves and zones. DS 2-06.5.1, DS 2-06.5.4.B 6) Indian Hawthorne and Queen Palm are not listed on the Drought Tolerant Plant List. Include these only in the oasis area. 7) Identify water harvesting areas and show drainage points from buildings and paved areas. Show curb openings on the landscape and development plans. LUC 3.7.4.3 8) Add the CDRC case number and any related case numbers to the landscape plans. DS 2-07.2.1.B 9) Screen the loading area from the R-1 parcel to the south. LUC Table 3.7.2-I 10) The project appears to impact areas within fifty feet of the Alamo Wash, a watercourse subject to the WASH Ordinance. A separate application is required for WASH approvals, see TCC Sec. 29-17. 11) . Submit an Environmental Resource Report (ERR) per DS 2-13.2.5.B.1. 12) Where any allowed development encroaches within Protected Riparian Areas, a mitigation plan will be required. DS 2-13.2.5.B.2 13) Improvements, such as drainage structures, may not interfere with required maintenance access or with facilities or trail routes recommended by City of Tucson Parks and Recreation. Obtain necessary approvals from Transportation and Parks and Recreation. 14) Revise the landscape plans to include limits of grading. DS 2-07.2.2.B RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED. |
| 04/19/2007 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | April 19, 2007 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D07-0012 PROJECT NAME: Hampton Inn PROJECT ADDRESS: 251 S Wilmot 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 development plan. 1. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. 2. Provide dimensions in width of paving, curbs, curb cuts and sidewalks. (DS 2-05.2.2.D) 3. Provide the Traffic Impact Analysis or Traffic Statement as requested by Traffic Engineering during the CDRC Pre-submittal meeting dated 3/14/2007. The report shall discuss the possible warrants for a right turn/decel lane for the proposed Hampton Inn project. This plat will not be approved until Traffic has accepted the recommendations of the report. 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 |
| 04/19/2007 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | 1. "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" signs shall be provided as needed to provide 20' clear unobstructed width along all fire apparatus access roadways in accordance with the fire code. 2. On street parking shall be prohibited on (one/both) side(s) and signs shall be installed so indicating. 3. The interior radius of the road at the Southeast corner does not appear to meet the Development Standard requirements. |
| 04/24/2007 | KAROL ARAGONEZ | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Karol Aragonez Planner PROJECT: D07-0012 Hampton Inn Development Plan TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 24, 2007 DUE DATE: April 26, 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 March 19, 2008. 2. Case number D07-0012 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. DS 2-05.2.2.B.2 3. Please remove the subject to portion of general note 1. This section is not a performance criterion. DS 2-05.2.2.B.3 4. Please add to general notes "This project is subject to Sec. 29-12 through 29-19 Watercourse Amenities, Safety, and Habitat (WASH) Ordinance of the Tucson Code". DS 2-05.2.2.B.10 5. The project appears to impact areas within fifty feet of the Alamo Wash, a watercourse subject to the WASH Ordinance. A separate application is required for WASH approvals, see TCC Sec. 29-17. 6. This site contains two (2) separate parcels therefore you will need to show how the parcels can work as stand alone parcels if sold separately or provide a Pima County Tax Parcel Combo and a record covenant regarding development and use of real property. Forms may be found at http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Forms_Fees___Maps/Applications/applications.html DS 2-05.2.4.A 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 type and dimensioned width of existing pavement, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks within Wilmot Road. DS 2-05.2.3.C 9. Please provide the existing zoning designation west across Wilmot Road (C-1). DS 2-05.2.4.B 10. Please provide a copy of the recorded agreement for cross access/parking and provide revised parking calculations to reflect the cross access and cross parking with all associated development to the north up to Broadway. DS 2-05.2.3.B DS 2-05.2.3.B 11. Please dimension the PAAL north and south of the main entrance island. Minimum two-way traffic aisles is twenty-four (24) feet DS 3-05.2.1.C.1 12. It appears that there is a portico over the main entrance into the hotel. Clearly label the covered area and dimension the required one (1) foot setback that is required between the roof overhang and the adjacent PAAL to the north. DS 3-05.2.2.B.2 13. Please revise detail D/4. The required placement of wheel-stop curbing is two and one-half (2 1.2) feet from the front of the parking space. DS 3-05.2.3.C.2 14. Please verify if the main entrance into the building is flush with the PAAL. 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. 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 15. Please call out required slopes for handicap ramp details C/4 and E/4. Curb ramps shall be a minimum of three (3) feet in width, exclusive of flared sides. The curb ramp flares shall not be steeper than 1:10. Counter slopes of adjoining gutters and road surfaces immediately adjacent to the curb ramp shall not be steeper than 1:20. The adjacent surfaces at transitions at curb ramps to walks, gutters and streets shall be at the same level. All slopes are to be indicated on the plan/plat and associated details. ANSI 406.2, 3, & 4 16. The required number of handicap parking spaces for the total number of spaces between 101-150 is five (5) Per 2003 IBC Table 1106.1. Please revise required HC parking space calculation. Also provide Van accessible parking calculation which requires one (1) van accessible space per every six (6) accessible space provided. 2003 IBC 1106.1 & 1106.5 17. Sidewalks within MS&R arterials are required to be six (6) feet in width. Please provide along property frontage of Wilmot Road. DS 2-05.2.4.F 18. Please connect pedestrian sidewalks from the project site to existing/proposed sidewalk within Wilmot Road. DS 2-08.4.1.D 19. Please indicate on the DP that all sidewalks will have a cross slope not to exceed two (2) percent. DS 2-08.5.1.D 20. Please provide a plan view detail of the proposed class 1 & 2 bicycle parking spaces. Class 2 multiple rack spaces will allow a minimum of seventy -two (72) inch length per bicycle parking space and a minimum of thirty (30) inches between outer spaces of racks. A five (5) foot wide access aisle measured from the front or rear of the seventy-two (72) inch long parking space will be provided beside each row. Lighting will be provided such that all facilities are thoroughly illuminated and visible from adjacent sidewalks, parking lots, or buildings, during working hours. The surface of the facility can be surfaced the same as for motor vehicle parking or with a minimum of one (1) inch thickness of one-fourth (1/4) inch aggregate material. Class 1 long term bicycle parking shall be covered, secured bicycle parking facility that protects against direct sunlight and theft of the entire bicycle and of its components and accessories. They can consist of bicycle lockers, check-in facilities, monitored parking, restricted access parking, or other means, which provide the level of security as, approved by the COT DSD Director. DS 2-09.2.0, DS 2-09.5.1, DS2-09.5.2, DS 2-09.5.4, & DS 2-09.6.2 21. 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. DS 2-09.3.2 22. Please provide the provided FAR percentage for this site. 23. 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 within a building please state so on the plan. DS 2-05.2.4.V 24. Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, freestanding, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Also indicate if there are existing billboards on site. Billboards will be required to meet all LUC requirements as stated in LUC Sec. 3.5.4.26. If none exists please state so. DS 2-05.2.4.W & LUC 3.5.4.26 25. 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. 74960. KAA S:\zoning review\karol\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D07-0012dp.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents. |
| 04/25/2007 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | April 25, 2007 To: Pattie Davis, PSOMAS, Inc. 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 Environmental Quality Subject: Hampton Inn Development Plan – 1st Submittal D07-0012 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. 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. All Sheets: Add the case number, D07-0012, 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. Sheet 1: 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 line types in the legend on Sheet 1. 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. Once the wastewater fixture units have been determined, you may have to obtain from us via e-mail, a .pdf file containing a Sewer Service Agreement for the proposed number of wastewater fixture unit equivalents. Three originals will need to be printed out from this file for notarized signatures by the Owner of Record. The three signed originals of the Agreement must be returned to this office in order to satisfy the necessary requirements needed to approve the Mylars of the development plan. Sheet 1: Revise Note No. 14 to read as follows: 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. Also remove Note No.15. Sheet 2: Show flow arrows on all existing and proposed sewer lines. Sheet 2: The information for the existing manholes along Wilmot Rd. appears to be incorrect. MH#4911-01 does not appear in the referenced plan G-336. The distance of 364.90 LF should refer to the length of pipe from MH# 8516-02 to MH#8516-01. The invert elevations for MH#8516-01 and MH#4911-01 appear to be incorrect. Please show the correct information for the existing manholes and the correct plan # for MH#4911-01. Sheet 2: Show the pipe size/slope/material and length of the existing private sewer line on site. Also show the BCS to the proposed building. Sheet 3: Show the existing sewer plan # for the sewer lines shown on this page. This office will require a revised set of blue lines, 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 2nd submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $100 (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) must accompany the revised set of blue lines 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 . |
| 04/27/2007 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | * No enclosure detail provided. Include in resubmittal. * No provisions mentioned for recycling. Recommend designing a double enclosure or adding an additional single enclosure to accomodate for recycling. * Access and approach to enclosure area okay. Maneuverability within development will work. |
| 04/30/2007 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | DATE: April 30, 2007 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov CC: Patricia Gehlen SUBJECT: D07-0012 Hampton Inn: Development Plan(3-30-07) Denied. Alamo Wash is Trail Route #309 In the Eastern Pima County Trail System Master Plan. A trail will be developed on the north bank of the wash in the future. Please substitute Prosopis velutina for Acacia smallii along the south side of the proposed wall adjacent to Alamo Wash. Acacia smallii suckers profusely and is difficult to train and maintain as a canopy tree that provides overhead clearance for trail users. In keeping with a native plant selection that is preferred along the Alamo Wash Trail corridor, please substitute Prosopis velutina, Cercidium floridum or other native tree for Brachychiton populneus in parking islands along north side of wall adjacent to Alamo Wash. The two proposed drainage channels from the parking area to Alamo Wash will interfere with future trail use. The drainage must be placed below ground or a pedestrian bridge crossing must be provided over the channel. Provide details as to how this will be accomplished. Describe the type of screen wall proposed adjacent to Alamo Wash. For public safety reasons, a view wall of masonry and wrought iron construction is preferred. The view wall shall be constructed of solid masonry up to a height of at least thirty (30) inches and with a combination of masonry and wrought iron above that height. At least 80 percent of the view wall above the solid masonry shall be of wrought iron construction. In place of Agave proposed along the south side of the wall adjacent to Alamo Wash, please substitute a small native plant without spines that can be pruned to prevent encroachment into trail use areas. |
| 05/01/2007 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 05/01/2007 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Passed | |
| 05/01/2007 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 05/07/2007 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | |
| 05/07/2007 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | D 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: D07-0012 HAMPTON INN/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: April 24, 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. 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 |
| 05/08/2007 | STANTEC | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Passed | Engineering comments by Stantec can be located in the CDRC file for this case. Please note that encroachment into the 50 study area of the WASH wash requires a seperate public process with seperate fees. Please contact Patricia Gehlen at 837-4919 for additional information on the public process. |
| 05/08/2007 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES May 8, 2007 Pattie Davis PSOMAS 800 East Wetmore Road, Suite 110 Tucson, Arizona 85719 Subject: D07-0012 Hampton Inn Development Plan Dear Pattie: Your submittal of March 30, 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 (Landscape, Traffic, Fire, Zoning, Wastewater, ESD, Parks and Recreation, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Landscape, Zoning, Parks and Recreation, DSD) 2 Copies Environmental Resource Report (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Traffic Impact Analysis (Traffic, DSD) 2 Copies Lot Combo Covenant (Zoning, DSD) 2 Copies Recorded Cross Access and Parking Agreements (Zoning, DSD) PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ENGINEERING REVIEW IS GOING THIRD THIRD PARTY REVIEW (STANTEC). THE ABOVE RESUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS DO NOT INCLUDE ITEMS NEEDED FOR THE ENGINEERING REVIEW. 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: 292-1290 dp-resubmittal |