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 - D07-0032
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/25/2007 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/27/2007 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | July 27, 2007 To: Victor Bolduc Paragon Architects 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: ANEWCO Dev. Plan - 1st Submittal D07-032 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: Show the jurisdiction’s case number, D07-0032, in or near the title block of each sheet. This case number should be shown larger and bolder than any associated cross-reference numbers. Sheet 1: Revise General Note #28 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. Sheet 2: The pipe size(8”) of the existing public sewer should be shown on plan. Sheet 2: The HCS shown on plan should be called BCS. Sheet 2: A manhole would be required at the point of connection to the public sewer because you are proposing a 6” BCS. Also the minimum slope for the BCS is 2%. Sheet 2: Show the existing public sewer continuing eastward from MH # 2820-13. 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 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. |
| 07/30/2007 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | September 11, 2007 To: Patricia Gehlen CDRC/Zoning Manager FROM: Loren Makus, EIT Engineering Division SUBJECT: ANEWCO Development Plan D07-0032 (First Review) T14S, R15E, Section 21 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Development Plan, Revised Drainage Report The development plan has been reviewed by the Engineering Division and we do not recommend approval at this time. The following comments must be addressed: Drainage Report Comments: Revise section 5.0 of the Drainage report to demonstrate that the basins will receive a sufficient discharge to provide threshold retention in a 5-year event. Revise the basin sizing as necessary. Provide details of drainage structures showing dimensions of the basins, maintenance access ramps, and limits of ponding. Revise the drainage report to provide for clogging of the scuppers. (DS 10-02.10.6.9) Development Plan Comments: 1. Provide pedestrian refuge areas between the PAAL and the building on all sides. 2. Keynote 6 does not seem to be used. Indicate where 6 inch curb will be used. 3. Keynote 2 represents a gate. Revise the callout for the area near the parking at the rear of the building to refer to the correct keynote. 4. Revise detail 8 on sheet 1 to indicate that the truncated domes eill be located at the interface between the vehicle use area and the vehicle use area. 5. Indicate that the truncated domes indicated by keynote 25 are typical or provide some other means to indicate that truncated domes will be used at each curb ramp. 6. Consistency is helpful for plan review. Keynote 1 indicates "Trash Enclosure." We recommend using this note for all three enclosures. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 520.837.4927 or loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov. Loren Makus, EIT Senior Engineering Associate |
| 07/30/2007 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 08/02/2007 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | ADOT has NO COMMENT D07-0032 Paragon Architects, LLC ANEWCO -------------------------------------------------------- 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. |
| 08/09/2007 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#186001 August 9, 2007 Paragon Architects, LLC 2210 E. Fort Lowell Rd. Ste 100 Tucson, AZ 85719 To Whom It May Concern: : SUBJECT: Anewco D07-0032 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted August 8, 2007 It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. There is a J2 at the SW corner of the lot (not shown). No apparent conflicts with the location of it and the new entrance. Thre are some dusk to dawn lights that are owned and maintained by TEP along the perimeter of the property that may be in conflict with new driveways. The customer is responsible for the new trenching to relocate them as well as the relocation cost. 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, Henrietta Noriega Office Specialist Design/Build hn Enclosures cc: City of Tucson, (Email only) N. DiMaria, Tucson Electric Power |
| 08/09/2007 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | CASE: D07-0032, ANEWCO, DEVEL PLAN COMMENT: NO OBJECTIONS OR ADVERSE COMMENTS Vehicle Trip Generation: Daily: 652 PM Peak: 92 Please call if you have questions Tom Cooney, Travel Forecasting Manager Pima Association of Governments 177 N. Church Ave, #405 Tucson, AZ 85701 Tel: (520) 792-1093, Fax: (520) 620-6981 Web: www.PAGnet.org and www.RTAmobility.com |
| 08/14/2007 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. The parking calculations and layout are not the same on the Development Plan as they are on the Landscape Plan. Three parking spaces are shown to the west of the proposed building on the Development Plan that are not shown on the Landcape Plan yet the discrepancy is only 2 spaces (187 stated in the Development Plan calcs and 185 stated in the Landscape Plan calcs). If these three additional spaces are to be constructed, one canopy tree must be provided in this location. Within vehicular use areas, one (1) canopy tree is required for each 10 motor vehicle parking spaces and every parking space shall be located within forty (40) feet of the trunk of a canopy tree (as measured from the center of the tree trunk) per LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.a. Revise plan(s) as necessary in all areas where parking places are not within 40 feet of the center of a canopy tree trunk (including those spaces located to the south and to the east of the proposed building). 2. One of the loading zones (keynote 5) to the west of the building and the electrical transformer (keynote 11) are not shown in the same location/orientation on the Landscape Plan as shown on the Development Plan. Revise to be consistent. 3. The class 1 (keynote 21) and class 2 (keynote 22) bicycle parking areas are not shown on the Landscape Plan. Revise. Make sure that the Landscape Plan is consistent and accurate based on all proposed elements of the Development Plan. Additional comments may be necessary once the components of the project are shown correctly on both sets of plans. 4. The 10-foot street landscape border is shown (labeled and dimensioned) in the incorrect location. The street landscape border shall be located on the development side of the sidewalk along Research Loop, in between the sidewalk and the vehicle overhang area. A 5-foot sidewalk may not run down the center of a required 10-foot street landcape border. DS 2-06.3.4.C 5. The Landscape Plan indicates that canopy trees will be placed in the concrete drainage channel along the west property line. Provide a detail of tree wells within this concrete channel to indicate how this will be accomplished. The Landscape Plan also indicates decomposed granite to be placed in this concrete drainageway. Please clarify. 6. The minimum required type size is 12 point (0.12") for microfilming purposes. Revise the text and dimensions in the Typical Water Harvesting Detail 1 on sheet L-1 to meet this minimum requirement. 7. Add the CDRC Development Plan case number (D07-0032) to all sheets of the Development Plan, Landscape Plan and Native Plant Preservation Plan. |
| 08/14/2007 | KAROL ARAGONEZ | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Karol Aragonez Planner PROJECT: D07-0032 ANEWCO Development Plan TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 14, 2007 DUE DATE: August 17, 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 July 24, 2008. 2. Please add to the location map Pantano Road and Pantano Parkway. Ds 2-05.2.1.D.2 3. Please add the contour interval with the north arrow on sheet 2. DS 2-05.2.1.H 4. Please provide a separate response letter detailing compliance with annexation conditions. DS 2-05.2.4.U 5. Please list as generals note the gross area of the site by square footage and acreage. DS 2-05.2.2.B.11 6. 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 7. Please provide the right-of-way width, and type and dimensioned width of paving and curb within Research Loop. DS 2-05.2.3.C 8. Please dimension the second entrance from the north. Minimum two-way PAAL width is twenty-four (24) feet. DS 3-01.2.1.C.1 9. Please dimension the area between the PAAL and building on the northeast. A minimum setback distance of five (5) feet for a pedestrian refuge is to be provided. DS 3-01.2.2.B.1 10. A minimum distance of one (1) foot must be maintained between any open structure, such as a carport, and a PAAL. The distance is measured to the closet part of the roof overhang of the carport. DS 3-01.2.2.B.1 11. Please revise the fine amount on the disabled signage from five hundred (500) dollars to five hundred and eighteen (518) dollars. 12. Please provide dimensions from the northwest property line to the building and from the corners of the building to the face of curb within Research Loop. DS 2-05.2.4.I 13. Please provide a detail of curb ramps used at cross walks within the project site. 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 14. Please dimension the structure on the development plan. DS 2-05.2.4.N 15. Bicycle parking provided on the DP does not meet the requirements of DS 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. Please revise accordingly. 16. Please provide a plan view detail of the proposed class 2 bicycle parking spaces. Single rack spaces placed in a row will allow a minimum of seventy-two (72) inch length per bicycle parking space and a minimum of thirty (30) inches between 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. DS 2-09.5.1, DS2-09.5.2, DS 2-09.5.4, & DS 2-09.6.2 17. Please provide a detail of the proposed six (6) foot high slated wrought iron fence. The fence must be opaque to meet the design criteria of LUC 3.5.5.1.E. 18. 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 19. Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, freestanding, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirement 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 20. 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) 837-4960. KAA S:\zoning review\karol\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D07-0032dp.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents. |
| 08/15/2007 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | >>> Jim Stoyanoff 08/15/2007 9:38 AM >>> No comment |
| 08/16/2007 | 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 D07-0032 Anewco 08/15/07 (X) Tentative Plat () Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: Annexation C9-8595 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: General Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: NO COMMENTS DUE BY: 8/17/07 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 () 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 () Development Plan () Landscape Plan (X) Other – Memorandum dated July 6, 1987 REVIEWER: drcorral 791-4505 DATE: 8/15/07 Department of Urban Planning and Design Annexation #C9-85-95, Ordinance established annexation conditions for this case, specifically as follows: Ordinance No. 6330 Section 5, zoning classification I-1® conditions: Construction of a wall along the south and west corner of the property extended to Palm Street to be painted earth tones. Item #3, under City of Tucson Annexation Conditions, General Notes section of the development plan, states “Additional memorandums were generated by Mayor and Council that specifically address condition 2 of Section 5 under Ordinance No. 6503. Memorandum dated July 6, 1987; After field surveying the subject site (eastside Research/Commerce Center), City staff considers the wall unnecessary along the south property line to the distance between the existing mobile home park (Tucson Meadows) and the building of the Cienega property (Eastside Research/Commerce Center.” Please provide a copy of the memorandum dated July 6, 1987 for review. |
| 08/17/2007 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 08/20/2007 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. DP1, Trash enclosure - Plan Does not provide the require 10 ft x 10 ft inside clear area between the rear and side wall protectors and the front gates. DS 6-01.4.1.B. Show all deminsions within detail. 2. Gates must be equipped with the ability to be secured in the open and closed positions. DS 6-01.4.2.C.4. Include in deatil and annotate "positive locking with (bayonet) anchors, Qty - 4, 1 inch dia. x 6 inch long galvanized pipe flush with concrete. Recommend designing gates to open 180 degrees so gate opening does not encroach within the required 14 ft x 40 ft clear approach. DS 6-01.4.1.C 3. DP2, Both enclosure areas do not provide adequate access and approach to the enclosure area. A. North enclosure does not allow adequate maneuverability for service vehicle to position itself in front of enclosure area . Recommend designing this to a double enclosure to acommodate for a garbage and recycle dumpster. B. South enclosure, need clarification on whether the refuse enclosure approach area is boundaried by a wall, fence or other structure or is it open area? If a structure boundaried by a structure, will require a straight approach for the service vehicle or increase the cut out 10 ft more to allow for adequate maneuverability. Please correct on resubmittal. |
| 08/21/2007 | 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: D07-0032 ANEWCO/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 8/20/07 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. 1.) 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 |
| 08/27/2007 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: August 23, 2007 TO: DSD_CDRC@ tucsonaz.gov FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov SUBJECT: D07-0032 ANEWCO: Development Plan Review(7/25/2007) Staff has no comments. |
| 08/27/2007 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 08/27/2007 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 09/13/2007 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES September 13, 2007 Paragon Architects, LLC 2210 East Fort Lowell Road, Suite 100 Tucson, Arizona 85719-2461 Subject: D07-0032 ANEWCO Development Plan Dear Consultant: Your submittal of July 25, 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 7 Copies Revised Development Plan (Wastewater, Engineering, Zoning, Landscape, DUPD, ESD, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Engineering, Zoning, Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies City Memorandum dated July 6, 1987 (DUPD, 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: 382-0075 dp-resubmittal |