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: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D07-0025
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/30/2008 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/01/2008 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 05/06/2008 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | May 6, 2008 To: Cardell Andrews II Olsson Associates Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ___________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6579), representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environment Quality Subject: Catalina View Center, Lots 1-3 Dev. Plan -2nd Submittal D07-025 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. This project will be tributary to the Roger Road Wastewater Treatment Facility via the South Rillito West-North Line. 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 letter needs to be updated because it has expired. Sheet 12: Check Map Guide to find the size and construction plan# for the existing public sewer line off of MH#9811-103B. Also correct the spelling of the word sewer there and in other places. Sheet 13: Why is the existing public cleanout #9233*01 shown outside the public sewer easement? Sheet 13: The section of private sewer north of existing MH#9811-105B should be shown as existing private sewer. 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 third(3rd) submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $78.00 (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. |
| 05/07/2008 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 KAY MARKS ADDRESSING OFFICIAL PH: 740-6480 FAX #: 740-6370 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: KAY MARKS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL SUBJECT: D07-0025 CATALINA VIEW CENTER/REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 5/06/08 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. Submit a 24 x 36 Reverse Reading Double Matte Photo Mylar of approved Development Plan to City Planning. Signed and dated Mylar will be forwarded to Pima County Addressing prior to assignment of addresses. 2.) All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection. ES |
| 05/13/2008 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | Provide a fully dimensioned typical for the diamond shaped planter islands with the tree grates and the tree planters of various sizes located in front (just to the west) of the Target building. There are no dimensions on the landscape plan for these planter areas. Dimension the minimum width and label the square footage measured from the inside of tree planters. An unpaved area, which is a minimum of thirty-four (34) square feet in area and four (4) feet in width, must be provided for each canopy tree. LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.c, DS 2-07.2.2.A.2.e, DS 2-06.3.3.C |
| 05/19/2008 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D07-0025 Catalina View Center 07/16/07 () Tentative Plat (XXXX) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: SE-07-01 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: North Stone GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 5/29/08 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: () No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment () Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions () RCP Proposal Complies with Plan Policies () See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: (XXXX) Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat () Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: drcorral 791-4505 DATE: 5/09/08 COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION COMMENTS D07-0025 Catalina View Center This site is subject to the restrictions of Special Exception SE-07-01. Please add/revise the following items to the landscape plan: Special Exception Condition 10 which reads “the owner/developer shall provide a plaza and/or courtyard and a pedestrian seating area as public amenities for the large retail establishment on the property.” Please provide details of plaza amenities, such the seating areas, on the landscape plan. |
| 05/28/2008 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 05/30/2008 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Denied | Intermodal Transportation Division 206 South Seventeenth Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85007-3213 Janet Napolitano Governor Victor M. Mendez Director May 30, 2008 Sam Elters State Engineer Ms. Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager Development Services Department City of Tucson 201 N. Stone Ave. Tucson, AZ 85701 Re: SR 77 (Oracle Road) and Roger Road (northeast quadrant) Catalina View Center: Resubmittal - CDRC - Development Plan And March 19, 2008 Updated Traffic Impact Analysis D07-0025 Dear Ms. Gehlen: Your submittal for the proposed development on the east side of SR 77 (Oracle Road) north of Roger Road has been reviewed and the following comments are offered: 1. The existing southbound left-turn lane at the Oracle Road/Roger Road intersection will need to be lengthened in order to accommodate the anticipated left-turn traffic volume. Extension of the left-turn lane will help to maintain the safety and efficiency of traffic operations on Oracle Road. The March 19, 2008, Updated Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the Catalina View Center prepared by Curtis Lueck and Associates does not show the correct existing storage length for the southbound left-turn lane at this intersection. Exhibit 19 on page 25 of the TIA report shows an existing storage length of 165 feet. However, the existing storage length is 110 feet with a 140-foot reverse curve. The Development Plans should show the lengthened southbound left-turn lane. The TIA needs to be revised as well. The TIA should re-evaluate the need to lengthen the southbound left-turn lane based on the existing storage length. 2. Sheet 5 of 16 Section U/5 for Oracle Road needs to be revised. The 5-foot separation between the northbound through lane and the right-turn lane shall be labeled BUFFER and not BIKE. In addition, the TIA needs to be revised to remove all references to a bike lane on Oracle Road. ADOT does not stripe or sign bike lanes on State highways. Revise note to remove existing vertical curb to read "Existing vertical curb and gutter to be removed." There is curb and gutter on Oracle Road along the site. Ms. Patricia Gehlen May 28, 2008 Page 2 Sheet 5 of 16, Section U/5 cont'd Revise note 6" Type 2 vertical curb per SD 209 (Typ.) to read "New 7" vertical curb and gutter per ADOT Std. Dwg. C-05.10, Type D". 3. Sheet 6 of 16 Line Data Table, Line L2 shows a distance of 14.65'. Should this be 15 feet since the existing ½ right-of-way is 75' and the future ½ right-of-way is 90'? Sheet 8 of 16 Line Data Table, Line L2 shows a distance of 13.65'. Should this be 15 feet since the existing ½ right-of-way is 75' and the future ½ right-of-way is 90'? 4. There are currently five existing driveways on Oracle Road serving the site. Three of the existing driveways on Oracle Road will be eliminated, and two driveways will continue to serve the development as shown in the March 19, 2008, Traffic Impact Analysis for the Catalina View Center and as shown on the Development Plan for the site. The proposed southern-most driveway on Oracle Road will allow right-in/right-out movements only. The driveway will be 30 feet wide with 35-foot radii. The existing driveway on Oracle Road opposite a median opening with a traffic island will continue to provide right-in/right-out/left-in access to the site. The driveway will be 35 feet wide with 35-foot radii 5. We have received five copies of the stand-alone Left-turn Phasing Analysis - Roger Road at Oracle Road prepared by Curtis Lueck and Associates. We concur with the recommendation to install protected left-turn signal phasing for east- and westbound traffic at the Oracle Road/Roger Road intersection. The report shows that the traffic volume for future conditions will meet the left-turn phasing criteria as set forth in the ADOT Traffic Engineering Policies, Guidelines and Procedures Manual, Section 612, "Left Turn Signal Phasing". 6. In order to accommodate the widening of Oracle Road along the site, additional right-of-way will be required. The additional right-of-way along Oracle Road will be dedicated to ADOT by separate instrument. Please verify that the submitted legal description for the right-of-way dedication is correct. See Item No. 3 above. 7. The existing speed limit on Oracle Road between Roger Road and Limberlost Drive is 40 miles per hour. Page 7 of the March 19, 2008, Traffic Impact Analysis shows a speed limit of 45 miles per hour for this section of Oracle Road. Revise the TIA accordingly. Ms. Patricia Gehlen May 28, 2008 Page 3 8. Construction plans for work in ADOT right-of-way, traffic signal plans for the modification of the traffic signal at the Oracle Road/Roger Road intersection and a signing and striping plan need to be submitted for our review. The developers/owners will be responsible for all costs associated with the roadway and intersection improvements within State right-of-way. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed Catalina View Center Development Plans and the Traffic Impact Analysis for the development. Sincerely, Maria Deal Arizona Department of Transportation Southern Regional Traffic Engineering 1221 South 2nd Ave. Tucson, AZ 85713-1602 c: Reza Karimvand, P.E., Southern Regional Traffic Engineer, ADOT Daniel J. Williams, P.E., Assistant District Engineer, ADOT Donna Jones, Senior Permit Technician, ADOT Frank Smith, Transportation Engineering Specialist, ADOT Curtis Lueck, Ph.D., P.E., Curtis Lueck & Associates Cardell Andrews II, Olsson Associates |
| 05/30/2008 | CDRC1 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Denied | Please have the legal description divided into two separate dedications. One for Oracle Road which is a state route, that dedication will go to ADOT. The second legal description is for Roger Road and that will be dedicated to the City of Tucson. Sincerely, Jim Stoyanoff Property Agent Real Estate Program City of Tucson 201 N. Stone Ave. 6th Fl. Tucson, Arizona 85701 (O) 520.837.6719 (F) 520.791.5641 Jim.Stoyanoff@tucsonaz.gov |
| 06/02/2008 | HEATHER THRALL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Heather Thrall Senior Planner PROJECT: D07-0025 Catalina View Center - Target, Michaels 4040 N. Oracle, C-2 TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 2, 2008 DUE DATE: May 29, 2008 COMMENTS: 1. Per LUC 5.3.8.2, one-year expiration date for this development plan is June 10, 2008. As plan is in review during expiration, contact Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager for advisement. 2. Remove reference to former S-83-2, the development plan replaces that site plan. 3. Per DS 2-02.2.3.B, provide recorded dockets & pages of abandoned easements & cell tower lease area. If utility easement abandonments not able to record before plan approval, provide letters from each utility of intention to abandon described easement. 4. Please provide cross -access and cross parking agreements/easements between Target and Baskin Robbin's lot at Roger/Oracle - please show docket___/page_____ . 5. Per DS 2-05.2.4.D.3, regarding PAALs A) dimension PAAL on east side of Target, EXCLUDE 5' wide pedestrian refuge area 6. Per DS 2-05.5.4.I, regarding building setbacks: A) NOTE building setback required for Target at the south, off Roger, is LUC 3.2.6.5.B, - THE GREATER OF 21 or HEIGHT of exterior building wall from the back of the future curb of Roger. Please NOTE setback of the 26' tall wall from that future curb. 7. Per DS 2-05.2.4.K, regarding on site pedestrian circulation: A) Per SE-07-01, a minimum 8' wide pedestrian system must connect from Oracle to the building entrances on the site. The pathway must be 8' clear in width - along all main public entrances - under steel trellis and along Michael's building. Call out. B) Per DS 3-05, north side of Target, note 4' sidewalk width setback 1' from PAAL - also check area by back up generator. 8.. Per DS 2-05.2.4.M & N: with regards to structures: A) sheet 2, in building setback notes, please clarify setbacks from Oracle and Roger are "the greater of 21' or the height of the exterior building wall" B) I acknowledge Target building meets setbacks based upon my review of elevations and the plan. Please clarify on sheet 7 rather than "building overhang" declare this 18'8" measurement as WALL height - given elevation view it's a porch type area. 9. Per DS 2-05.2.4.O - regarding loading zones: A) Per LUC 3.4.5.4, in the last submittal, the beauty academy (instructional school) was removed. At this submittal it's remaining, please provide one 12x35 loading zone. B) In the calculation, please provide a break down that indicates 5 are for Target, 2 are for Michael's, 1 is for the Beauty Academy and 1 is for Baskin Robbins/Radio Shack. C) In the calculation, please revise the calculation to show 9 loading zones provided. 10.. Per DS 2-05.2.4.P -parking meets DS and LUC layout and dimension requirements, and the Special Exception TIA study of 603 minimum spaces provided, thank you. 11. Per DS 2-05.2.4.Q, with regards to bicycle parking: A) NOTE IN CALCULATION "required bicycle parking overall - is 8% of first 500 vehicle parking spaces + 5% over 500 spaces" B) Bike parking details in T/5 meet code, thank you C) On sheets 6 & 7, each building-call outs point to wrong types of bike parking-reverse to call out class 1 is locker type parking, class 2 is rack parking D) Per DS 2-09, at Michael's/Beauty Academy please provide class 2 rack type lockers within 50' of entrance. E) The class 2 bike parking for Target needs to be within 50' of MAIN building entry per DS 2-09.4.1, please provide some class 2 bike parking in this area. I see the class 1 and class 2 provided near the south entry as well, thank you. 12. Per DS 2-05.2.4.W, with regards to signs: A) please relocate sign at Roger entrance out of Sight Visibility Triangle, DS 3-01 13. Condition 23 of Special Exception mandates all lights within 200' of east and north property lines cannot be taller than 17' feet from grade to light source. The detail provided on sheet 4, drawing Z, shows the light is 38' tall. Provide a light detail for lights to meet the special exception standard within 200' of the north and east property lines. 14. Provide wall detail please showing how condition 27 of SE-07-01 is met. 15. Please screen Target back up generator, per condition 28 of SE-07-01. 16. On demolition sheets, please remove parking calcs and instead call out "area of parking available during construction" for each phase. Ensure handicapped parking available for each open tenant during construction. 17. I acknowledge proposed cell tower lease area legal description in packet, please dimension area on plan, and dimension distance from north and ease property lines to match legal. I acknowledge the note that a separate special exception is forthcoming. 18. On the elevations provided, it appears a loading zone is missing from left elevation. 19. Please note, depending upon the responses provided, further review comments may be forthcoming. Should you have any questions about this review, please contact me at Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov or at 837-4951. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call (520) 791-5608. C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D07-0025 Catalina View Center Target 2.doc RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised plan, additional requested documents. ACCESSIBLE REVIEW JUNE 2 2008 RON BROWN, STRUCTURAL REVIEWER, CITY OF TUCSON 1) PER IBC 2006 1106.6, PROVIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING BY BOTH MICHAEL'S AND ACADEMY OF BEAUTY, PROVIDE CLOSEST ROUTE POSSIBLE TO ENTRANCES 2) SHEETS 6 & 7, KEYNOTE 5 CALLS OUT RAMPS WITH TDOT 207 ON SITE. THIS REFERENCE- SHOULD BE USED ONLY IN RIGHT OF WAY RAMP NOTATIONS. PROVIDE A NEW KEYNOTE AND NOTE FOR SIDEWALK RAMPS AND CURB RAMPS ON SITE THAT ANSI 405 & 406 APPLY. 3) ON DETAIL B, SHEET 3, FOR ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN - DECLARE POST HEIGHT FOR SIGN 7' TALL FROM GRADE TO BOTTOM OF SIGN (EXCLUDES VAN ACCESSIBLE SIGNAGE). 4) ON DETAIL B, SHEET 3, FOR ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN - PROVIDE DETAIL FOR VAN ACCESSIBLE SIGN. 5) PROVIDE LARGE SCALE DETAIL(S) FOR ALL ACCESSIBLE RAMPS ON SITE TO SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH ANSI 405 AND 406. 6) ON DETAIL B, SHEET 3, IN ACCESSIBLE PARKING DRAWING - NOTE 2% SLOPE ON BOTH SIDES OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING AISLES AND PROVIDE NOTE ALL ACCESSIBLE PARKING TO BE AT NO GREATER THAN 2% SLOPE. 7) PER IBC 06 SECTION 1104, MARK ENTIRE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE THROUGHOUT SITE WITH A SYMBOL - INCLUDE FROM NEAREST PUBLIC TRANSIT POINT TO ALL BUILDING ENTRANCES AND ACCESSIBLE PARKING. PROVIDE SPOT GRADES ON ACCESSIBLE ROUTE TO SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH ANSI 403.3 RESUBMITTAL OF REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN REQUIRED. IF ANY QUESTIONS, CONTACT ME AT RONALD.BROWN@TUCSONAZ.GOV OR 837-4908 |
| 06/02/2008 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Sheet 3 - F, double trash enclosure will require a gate for the 3 ft opening, shown at the rear, with the ability to secure. 2. Provide a dimension for the center rear bollard at 6 ft to center or 2 ft to center between the side wall and the side rear bollards of each container service area. 3. Enclosure dimensions for outside wall and inside wall are not accurate/consistent with each other. 4. Buildings 2 & 3 will require two additonal single enclosures or one double enclosure to accomodate for recycling. Same for buildings 4 & 5 and Target. Clarify if Michaels or Target will have a cardboard baler to support recyling. 5. If building 4 & 5 will have a single property owner, or management, or association that will be responsible for the maintenance and management of the collection services and storage areas then one double enclosure will work. Provide a general note stating such. 6. Circulation within development works as shown. Please provide corrections on resubmittal. If you have any questions you may contact Andy Vera at (520) 791-5543 ext 1212 or e-mail: Andy.Vera@tucsonaz.gov |
| 06/12/2008 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | June 12, 2008 Catalina View Center Development Plan - D07-0025 Resubmittal Required: NONE The engineering division has reviewed the proposed development plan and hydrology report. The engineering division recommends approval at this time. Loren Makus Senior Engineering Associate |
| 06/17/2008 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES June 17, 2008 Cardell Andrews II Olsson Associates 3025 West Ina Road Tucson, Arizona 85741 Subject: D07-0025 Catalina View Center Development Plan Dear Cardell: Your submittal of April 30, 2008 for the above project has been reviewed by the Community Design Review Committee and the comments reflect the outstanding requirements which need to be addressed before approval 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 (Wastewater, ADOT, Landscape, ESD, DUPD, Real Estate, Zoning, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Landscape, DUPD, Zoning, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. 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: 777-3872 |