Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: D10-0018
Parcel: 133200150

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Permit Number - D10-0018
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
06/01/2010 FERNE RODRIGUEZ START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
06/01/2010 RONALD BROWN ADA REVIEW Passed Not a COT owned or operated property
06/01/2010 FERNE RODRIGUEZ COT NON-DSD REAL ESTATE Passed
06/02/2010 DAVID MANN COT NON-DSD FIRE Approved
06/09/2010 TOM MARTINEZ OTHER AGENCIES AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION Approved >>> Douglas Kratina <DKratina@azdot.gov> 06/07/2010 11:03 AM >>>
Regional Traffic:
Traffic Engineering has no Objections or Comments on this submittal.
The Development will not affect any ADOT facilities.

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.
.
06/14/2010 FERNE RODRIGUEZ OTHER AGENCIES PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS Approved >>> Malini Banerjee <mbanerjee@pagnet.org> 06/10/2010 4:29 PM >>>
Hi,

We have no objection to the proposed offices regarding trip generation
numbers. Please feel free to contact me if you have more questions.

Thanks,

Malini
--
06/16/2010 TIM ROWE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Denied PIMA COUNTY
REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT
201 NORTH STONE AVENUE
TUCSON, ARIZONA 85701-1207
MICHAEL GRITZUK, P.E. PH: (520) 740-6500
DIRECTOR FAX: (520) 620-0135


April 21, 2010

To: GEORGE E HOLGUIN, AIA
ADC WEST, LLC

Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager
City of Tucson Development Services Department

____________________________________________
From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6719), Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department

Subject: MANX INVESTMENTS LLC
Site Plan – 1st Submittal
D10-0018

The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD) has reviewed the proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project. The following comments are offered for your use:
Are you proposing new sewer? If so then obtain a letter from the PCRWRD’s Development Liaison Unit, written within the past year, 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/developer.htm#permits

The development plan for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office.

The development plan submitted is significantly deficient. Refer to Pima County Development Services “Development Plan Review, Checklist Requirements” section J. WASTEWATER, for submittal requirements. The checklist is available at;

http://www.pimaxpress.com/SubDivision/Documents/DevPlanReq.pdf

Sheet 1: If no new sewer is proposed then include a General Note as follows:


THE ON-SITE SEWERS ARE EXISTING AND PRIVATE. NO NEW SEWERS ARE PROPOSED.
This office will require a revised set of bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents.

Pima County Code Title 13.20.030.A.2 requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the development plan. The fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet.

The next submittal of this project will be the second(2nd) submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $100.00 (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter.

If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly.

This comment letter has been reviewed and accepted for substantial conformance to Pima
County Code Title 13 by:

___________________________
Chad Amateau, P.E., Civil Engineer
PCRWRD, Planning Services Section, Development Liaison Unit





cc: Chad Amateau, PE
Kristin Borer, PE, DLU Manager
DLU Project folder
06/16/2010 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Denied CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Manx Investments LLC.
Development Plan (1st Review)
D10-0018

TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 16, 2010

DUE DATE: June 29, 2010

DEVELOPMENT PLAN 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 May 31, 2011.

2. This site plan was reviewed for compliance with the City of Tucson Development Standards (D.S.) and Land Use Code (LUC) for full code compliance.

3. Sheet 1 of 2 the title block states " ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS TO CUPPS INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY, INC". This appears to be incorrect, please clarify.

4. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.1 & 2 List as a general note "EXISTING ZONING IS R-1, PROPOSED ZONING IS O-1.

5. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2 Provide the development plan number D10-00118 and the rezoning case number C9-07-16 in the lower right corner of the plan, next to the title block on all sheets.

6. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.2 List the rezoning conditions of approval on the plan.

7. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.3 Add "SUBJECT TO: SEC. 3.5.4.11" to the proposed use.

8. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.10 Add a note stating that "THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE CRITERIA SEC. 2.8.3, MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES (MS&R) SETBACK ZONE.

9. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.11 List the gross area of the site by square footage and acreage.

10. D.S. 2-05.2.3.C The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks.

11. D.S. 2-05.2.4.A Remove the "ORIGINAL LINE BETWEEN LOTS 10 & 11" from the plan.

12. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Provide a fully dimensioned vehicle use area, i.e. parking area access lane (PAAL) widths, backup spurs etc.

13. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 As this is a commercial site all; vehicle use areas must meet the requirements of LUC Section 3.3.0 & D.S. 3-05.0. That said the following comments apply to the proposed access to the garage;

a. Per LUC Section 3.3.7.2 & D.S. 3-05.2.1.C.1 the minimum width for a two-way PAAL is twenty-four (24) feet.
b. Per D.S. 3-05.2.2.B.1 A minimum setback distance of five (5) feet for a pedestrian refuge area must be maintained between any enclosed structure and a PAAL.
c. Per D.S. 2-08.4.1.B A sidewalk will be provided adjacent and parallel to any PAAL on the side where buildings are located.
d. Per D.S. 3-05. A vehicular use area must be provided with post barricades or wheel stop curbing designed to prevent vehicles from driving onto unimproved portions of the site.

14. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Provide a width dimension for all sidewalks on site.

15. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Per D.S. 2-08.3.1 a pedestrian circulation path/accessible route will be provided between all buildings on site. That said provide a sidewalk from the office to the garage.

16. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Keynote 14 calls out a new accessible ramp. There is a sidewalk that runs from the office building north to the accessible parking area. This sidewalk appears to run into the ramp, clarify how this works.

17. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Once the required refuse collections area is shown on the plan, see comment 25, show the required pedestrian circulation path/accessible route to this area on the plan.

18. D.S. 2-05.2.4.N Label the heights and dimensions for all existing structures on site.

19. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Zoning acknowledges that the provided bicycle parking space detail shown on sheet CVR. Demonstrate how rezoning condition 3 will be met if lighting for the bicycle parking is provided from a light mounted on the building.

20. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Per LUC Section 3.3.3.5 Bicycle Parking Requirements. The number of required bicycle parking spaces is calculated as a percentage of the total number of motor vehicle parking spaces provided. If the calculated number of required bicycle parking spaces is less than two (2), the minimum number of required spaces is two (2). That said revise the bicycle parking calculation to reflect that two (2) Class 2 bicycle parking spaces area required and two (2) are provided. For your information a single inverted "U" rack can support two (2) bicycles.

21. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Sheet SD-1 keynote 28 calls out "BICYCLE PARKING SPACES (3-CLASS1, 3 CLASS 2) …". Ones comment 20 above is clarified revise this note as needed.

22. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Sheet SD-1 keynote 10 calls out "NEW BICKE PARKING …" if bicycle parking is to be provided in this location provide a detail that shows how this bicycle parking meets the requirements of D.S. 2-09.0

23. D.S. 2-05.2.4.T Show the refuse collection area on the plan.

24. D.S. 2-05.2.4.U Demonstrate on the plan how rezoning condition 5 has been met.

25. D.S. 2-05.2.4.V I applicable show the location and type of postal service proposed.

26. D.S. 2-05.2.4.V I applicable show the location and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) on the plan.

27. If applicable ensure all changes are made to the landscape plans.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.com

Sshield1 on DS1/planning/New Development Package/ D10-0018

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan.
06/17/2010 LIZA CASTILLO UTILITIES TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER Approved 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714
Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702


WR#225676 June 17, 2010



Dear George Holguin :

SUBJECT: Manx Investments
D10-0018


Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted June 14, 2010. It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. The development plan did not show the existing underground service crossing the property from the SE corner of the property. It does not appear that scope of the workwill take place in that area, but if the scope of the work changes and the underground service needs to be relocated it would be billable to the customer.

Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. All relocation costs will be billable to the customer if there is a conflict.

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: Richard Harrington
New Business Project Manager
P. O. Box 711 (DB-101)
Tucson, AZ 85702
520-917-8726

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
Pima County (Email only)
cc:J. Wojnar
06/18/2010 FRODRIG2 ENV SVCS REVIEW Denied Due Date Case Number Project Address
June 29, 2010 D10-0018 Cupps Industrial Supply Company
DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Denied,
Comments: Case No. D10-0018, Cupps Industrial Supply Company Development Plan; The proposed development plan must clarify on the general notes and demonstrate on the site plan the proposed method for solid waste collection services, all containers will need to labeled on the plan to clarify the location and use of the solid waste refuse container and the recycle container to be located on the new proposed development, as per the Solid Waste Disposal Standard 6-01.0.


Environmental Services Department
Development Plan Review
Reviewer: Tony Teran
Office Phone (520) 837-3706
E-mail: Tony.Teran @tucsonaz.gov
06/22/2010 JOSE ORTIZ COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Denied - 18' radius curb returns are required.

- Call out the dimension/width of the driveway.
06/25/2010 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied June 25, 2010
D10-0018
Engineering Review

Resubmittal Required: Development Plan, Drainage Statement

Drainage Statement:
1. Provide a complete peak discharge analysis for the site. Include pre-development calculations as well as the post-development calculations.
2. Revise the drainage patterns to direct the drainage from the building roofs and vehicle use areas through the landscape/water harvesting areas.
3. Demonstrate that the off-site discharges will be accepted in the historical patterns and quantities. Provide wall opening calculations if necessary.

Development Plan
4. Provide the required notes as described in Development Standard 2-05. Include the hold harmless clause of DS 2-05.2.2.C.1.
5. Show the dimensions of the existing sidewalk in the right-of-way. If the existing sidewalk is less than 4 feet wide, it must be replaced with 5-foot sidewalks.
6. Show the proposed spot elevations and drainage patterns for the site. Stormwater should be directed to landscape/water harvesting areas to the maximum extent possible.
7. Provide specifications and descriptions for wall openings to allow the off-site discharges to enter the site.
8. Provide dimensions and recordation information for adjacent right-of-way.
9. Provide dimensions for all vehicle use areas, PAALs, and sidewalks.
10. Show solid waste storage and collection locations.
11. Provide estimated cut and fill quantities and list the area of disturbance for this proposed development.
12. Note that in order to ensure the water harvesting requirements are being met, a grading permit is required for this project.
06/28/2010 JENNIFER STEPHENS PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING Denied 201 N. STONE AV., 2ND FL
TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207

AUDREY FARENGA
ADDRESSING REVIEW
PH #: 740-6800
FAX #: 623-5411


TO: CITY PLANNING
FROM: AUDREY FARENGA, ADDRESSING REVIEW
SUBJECT: D10-0018 MANX INVESTMENTS LLC/DEVELOPMENT PLAN
DATE: June 28, 2010



The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and the following matters must be resolved prior to our approval:

Delete all street directions on the Location Map.

Include title blocks on the lower right hand corner of sheets 1 & 2 per Development Plan requirements.

Spell out Boulevard of Speedway Blvd. on sheet 2.

Label sheets 1 and 2.
06/28/2010 JOHN BEALL COT NON-DSD COMMUNITY PLANNING Denied PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
COMMENTS

Regarding

SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application

CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT

D10-0018 MANX Investments LLC 6/28/10

() Tentative Plat
(X) Development Plan
(X) Landscape Plan
() Revised Plan/Plat
() Board of Adjustment
() Other - Elevations

CROSS REFERENCE: C9-07-16

NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Sewell-Hudlow Neighborhood Plan

GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE:

COMMENTS DUE BY: June 29, 2010

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 FLD, No Comment
() Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions
() RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies
(X) Resubmittal Required - See Additional Comments Attached
() No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on:






REVIEWER: JBeall 791-5505 DATE: 6/25/10



Comments


1. List the Rezoning Conditions (C9-07-16) on the Cover Sheet of the Development Plan.

2. Change the label on the Site Development Plan to read Development Plan (Sheet SD-1)

3. Label the distance from the nearest existing fire hydrant to the structure. (Rezoning Condition 4)

4. The Preliminary Development Plan dated June 21, 2007 indicated that the existing building to be 16 feet. The Development Plan needs to identify the building height. (Rezoning Condition 1)

5. The Preliminary Development Plan dated June 21, 2007 indicated that 4-foot colored sidewalk would connect structure to the public sidewalk along Speedway Boulevard. Keynote 2 calls this out, but it is not identified on the Development Plan. Please identify. (Rezoning Condition 1)

6. Provide a detail for walls showing that they meet Rezoning Conditions 5 and 6.

7. Identify stepped down heights on wall at northerly 40 L.F. from 6' to 3' in 3 segments, per Note 1 on Cover Sheet.

8. Landscape Plan on sheet LS-1 shows west CMU wall to be 5-foot high. Please correctly identify height (s) as PDP shows 6-feet. (Rezoning Condition 1)

9. Add the following wording to the Exterior Lighting Analysis on Cover Sheet: "All security lighting will be either low bollard or wall mounted to reduce spillover onto adjacent properties." (Rezoning Condition 3)

10. The Preliminary Development Plan dated June 21, 2007 indicated that there was to be a border landscape yard along the eastern side of property. Please identify this on the Development Plan and Landscape Plan. (Rezoning Condition 1)
06/28/2010 RONALD BROWN ZONING HC REVIEW Denied 1. The accessible parking layout is not the same design as per the typical accessible parking details shwon on sheet CVR. Please change the detail to match the actual parking design layout shown on the site plan. Generic details are not acceptable.
2. At sheet SD-1, note 14:
a. Delete the reference to Section 406, this is for curb rampds only
b. Delete the detectable warning reference, they are not required.
3. Show the slopes of all accessible routes for compliance with section 403.3.
END OF REVIEW
06/30/2010 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1) Add the CDRC case number and any related case numbers to the landscape and native plant preservation plans.
DS 2-07.2.1.B

2) All disturbed, grubbed, graded, or bladed areas not otherwise improved shall be landscaped, reseeded, or treated with an inorganic or organic ground cover to help reduce dust pollution. Revise landscape plan to identify the type and locations proposed for inert ground cover materials.
LUC 3.7.2.7. DS 2-06.5.2.C

3) Revise the title block on the cover sheet to refer to the case under consideration for this application.

4) The vehicular use area (VUA) must be provided with post barricades or wheel stop curbing designed to prevent parked vehicles from extending beyond the property lines; damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings and to prevent vehicles from driving onto unimproved portions of the site per DS 3-05.2.3.C. Revise the plans as necessary to provide a barrier for the southern portion of the VUA.

5) Enclosure and gated openings of refuse enclosures are required to meet the screening standards of LUC Table 3.7.2-I. Include details or other information regarding the locations and provisions for refuse storage and screening.

6) Revise LS-1 clarify tree planting locations along the west side of the site. Trees are shown centered on the proposed sidewalk and too close to the existing fence.

7) Revise the landscape plans to provide trees for the street landscape border. Include calculations for the street border and interior landscape borders.

8) Revise the REQUIRED LANDSCAPE BORDER note on sheet LS-2 to refer to the border conditions for the subject site.

9) Landscape plans shall include a summary of plants required for mitigation and show their site location
on the landscape plans. Show the NPP TOS locations.
06/30/2010 PGEHLEN1 TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Approved
06/30/2010 FERNE RODRIGUEZ LANDFILL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Approved
06/30/2010 JANE DUARTE COT NON-DSD PARKS & RECREATION Denied
06/30/2010 ED ABRIGO PIMA COUNTY ASSESSOR Passed
07/01/2010 JOHN WILLIAMS ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Denied COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

July 1, 2010

George Holguin, AIA
ADC West, LLC
11100 E. Sundance Dr.
Tucson, Arizona 85749

Subject: D10-0018 MANX Investments LLC Development Plan

Dear George:

Your submittal of June 1, 2010 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 set of 11 DETAILED cover letters explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed:

ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED

11 Copies Revised Development Plan (Wastewater, Zoning, Env Svcs, Traffic, Engineering, HC Site, Planning, Addressing, Landscape, Parks & Rec, PDSD)

6 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Engineering, Planning, Landscape, Parks & Rec, PDSD)

2 Copies Revised Drainage Statement (Engineering, PDSD)

1 Check Made out to "Pima County Treasurer" for $100.00 (Wastewater)


Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4917.

Sincerely,




John Williams
Planning Technician

All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/

Via fax: (480) 772-4761