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: DEV PKG
Permit Number - DP12-0005
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/11/2012 | CPIERCE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 01/11/2012 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Passed | |
| 01/12/2012 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 01/12/2012 | MARTIN BROWN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | Please provide details for entrance gate. Refer to 2006 IFC, section 503.6 (with C.O.T. modifications) for requi8rements. Please provide location of existing and/or proposed fire hydrants. Refer to section 508.5 for location and spacing requirements. Verify turning radii for fire trucks and indicate on plan. |
| 01/18/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 01/20/2012 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approved | PIMA COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT 201 NORTH STONE AVENUE TUCSON, ARIZONA 85701-1207 JACKSON JENKINS PH: (520) 740-6500 DIRECTOR FAX: (520) 620-0135 January 19, 2012 To: JEFF STANLEY, PE JAS ENGINEERING, INC 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: A FAMILY DISCOUNT -- DREXEL/CAMPBELL Dev. Plan – 1st submittal DP12-0005 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: The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department hereby approves the above referenced submittal of the development plan. cc: Chad Amateau, PE Checked by:_________ Kristin Greene, PE, DLU Manager DLU Project folder |
| 01/23/2012 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | Here are my comments - DATE: 1/20/2012 CASE: DP12-0005 A - FAMILY DISCOUNT STORAGE: DEV PKG COMMENT: No objections or adverse comments Daily PM Peak Vehicle Trip Generation: 162 17 Thanks, -Eric Additional notes: |
| 01/24/2012 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#245316 January 24, 2012 Jeffrey A Stanley 2061 W Furreys Tucson, Arizona 85705 Dear Mr. Stanley: : SUBJECT: A-Family Discount Storage DP12-0005 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted January 11, 2012. 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. 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, electrical load, paving off-site improvements and irrigation plans, if available 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: Mr. Richard Harrington New Business Project Manager P. O. Box 711 (DB-101) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-917-8726 Should you have any technical questions, please call the area Designer Mike Kaiser at (520) 918-8244. Sincerely, Elizabeth Miranda Office Support Specialist Design/Build lm Enclosures cc: DSD_CDRC@tucsonaz.gov, City of Tucson (email) M. Kaiser, Tucson Electric Power |
| 01/24/2012 | JWILLIA4 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | Date Case Number Project Address January 24, 2012 DP12-0005 FAMILY DISCOUNT STORAGE Development Plan Comments: Denied, The proposed development plan for Case No. DP12-0005, FAMILY DISCOUNT- DREXEL/CAMPBELL dose not the meet the minimum requirements for Environmental Services, Solid Waste and Recycle materials Disposal Standard 6-01. 1. The proposed development plan for the FAMILY DISCOUNT to be located at DREXEL/CAMPBELL must state the physical street address on the title block of each sheet of the proposed plans. 2. The Development Plan must include recycle containers and must be shown and labeled on the site plan. 3. All containers will require masonry enclosures with gates, and a detailed of the enclosures must be shown and dimensioned for both solid waste and recycle disposal, The minimum inside dimension must not be less than 10’- 0”. As shown on the must current Development Standard No. 6-01.0. 4. Containers location shown on the Development Plans must be labeled for their intended us being Solid Waste or Recycle materials. 5 All enclosures must show the gates installed and mounted on the end of the CMU walls or mounted on separate post as show on Solid Waste Standards. The minimum inside dimension between the gates must not be less then 12’-0”. Environmental Services Department Development Plan Review Reviewer: Tony Teran Office Phone (520) 837-3706 E-mail: Tony.Teran @tucsonaz.gov |
| 01/27/2012 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | SHEETS 2 AND 3 1. Keyed note 8 referes to a detail 4/4 which has nothing to do with ramps and detectable warnings. Please provide a detail of this ramp showing all accessible requirements including dimensions, elevations, ramps, slopes, detectable warning strips and etc. as required by ICC/ANSI 117.1, Section 405, 406 and 705. END OF REVIEW |
| 02/07/2012 | 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: DP12-0005 A-FAMILY DISCOUNT STORAGE/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: February 7, 2012 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: 1. Spell out all street suffixes. 2. Assign a building number to the office. |
| 02/07/2012 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | Approved by TDOT Traffic Engineering Review conducted by Zelin Canchola |
| 02/09/2012 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Record a 50' wide trail access easement along the Rodeo Wash per rezoning condition. 2) Revise the Native Plant Inventory to provide preservation per DS 2-15.6.A. Grading should not be proposed near PIP plants. 3) The project is subject to the provisions of the Watercourse, Amenities, Safety, and Habitat Ordinance, Approval of the overlay application and review is required. TCC 29-16. 4) The plans appear to show a drainage structure within the asphalt path at the southwest corner of the site. Structures cannot interfere with the use of the path. 5) Reference appropriate standard detail for the metal pipe fence or provide one. 6) Provide grading limits on the grading, landscape and NPP plans. DS 2-15.6 7) Provide dimensions for an appropriate shoulder along the asphalt trail. Refer to the Pima Regional Trail System Master Plan. Pp. 61-63. |
| 02/09/2012 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: DP12-0005 A-Family Discount Storage Development Package TRANSMITTAL: 02/09/2012 DUE DATE: 02/09/2012 COMMENTS: 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 01/10/2013. 2. DS 2-01.3.3 This project has been assigned case number DP12-0005, place this number near the lower right corner of all sheets. 3. DS 2-01.3.9.H.5.d The indicated short term bicycle parking on detail 4 page 4 of 14 does not meet the minimum distance from the building to the bicycle rack. See LUC Sec. 3.3.9.2.B.7 A bicycle rack must be a minimum of two and one-half (2½) feet from a wall or other obstruction. In the bicycle parking calculations, Class II is no long the correct term, revise to short term bicycle parking. 4. DS 2-01.3.9.I Clearly indicate the area of right of way dedication required by the conditions of rezoning. Clearly indicate the property lines with distances and bearings as they will be after the dedication. Provide recording sequence number for the dedication of right of way. 5. DS 22-01.3.9.L Clearly indicate the location, width and purpose of the required easement per rezoning condition #5. Provide recording sequence number for the required easement. 6. DS 2-01.3.9.Q Provide on the plan the dimensions of each building and the height of each building. 7. DS 2-01.3.9.R Keynote #8 on sheet 2 of 14 indicates handicap ramps shown on detail 4 of sheet 4 of 14. Detail is for bicycle parking. Clearly indicate location of handicap ramps. 8. DS 2-01.3.9.U Provide a separate letter clearly indicating how each of the conditions of rezoning have been met. Condition of rezoning #17 requires an 8' wall along the south and east borders of the property. The elevations provided indicate a 6'-8" wall. Clarify. The elevations provided do not appear to indicate the structures which are being used as part of the walls. Clarify. Clearly indicate the location and height of all walls and fences on the development plan. 9. DS 2-01.3.9.W If applicable, provide the location and types of signs. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 837-4961 TLS C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\DP12-0005dp.doc |
| 02/10/2012 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Patricia Gehlen DATE: February 10, 2011 CDRC/Zoning Manager SUBJECT: A-Family Discount, 2000 E. Drexel Rd Development Package D12-0005 (First Review) T15S, R14E, Section 08 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Package. The Development Package (DP) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Development Package: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the DP. 2. A meeting is suggested to review my comments and can be scheduled at your connivance. Contact Paul P. Machado at 837-4932. 3. Show x-sections at the property line at the North and West sides of the project and for a typical P.A.A.L. section. 4. Provide greater detail for all basins. 5. Remove general note no. 20. The grading plan in included in the DP and does not have its own actv. No. 6. The name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s), or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional, such as a surveyor, architect, landscape architect, or engineer. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines. D.S. 2-01.3.1. 7. General Notes. The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable. D.S. 2-01.3.7. B. Drainage Notes. List the following notes as appropriate. 1. List the following notes on all plans/plats. b. "A floodplain use permit and/or finished floor elevation certificates are required for the following lots: __________." (List the lots affected by lot number, or in the case of a one (1) lot development, place a period after the word "required" and delete the remainder of note. C. Streets and Roads Notes. 3. Provided the following notes as applicable: a. "Total miles of new public streets is ____________. b. Total miles of new private streets is ____________. F. Trails Notes. List the following notes as appropriate. 1. If a trail or path is proposed, provide a note, as appropriate, indicating that a trail or path will be constructed for public or private use, the general location of the trail or path, and whom it will be constructed and maintained by. If it is intended to connect to an offsite feature, such as an exiting trail, wash, sidewalk, road, commercial or residential development, etc., so indicate. If the trail or path is to be dedicated, indicate the method of dedication. Show the 50' dedicated trail esmt. on the plans. 2. If a new trail or path will be constructed, add the following note, as appropriate: "All new onsite and offsite trails or paths constructed in conjunction with this project will be constructed in accordance with approved plans. Construction plans will be subject to the review and approval of the City's Parks and Recreation Department, and, if requested, Pima County Natural Resources, Parks and Recreation." 8. Existing Site Conditions. The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within fifty (50) feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of fifty (50) feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided. D.S. 2-01.3.8. 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, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided. C. The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. H. Conditions on adjacent land significantly affecting the design of the project will be shown, such as the approximate direction and gradients of ground slope; character and location of adjacent development; and drainageways, arroyos, ditches, and channels, including their existing conditions. I. Floodplain information, including the location of the 100-year flood limits for all flows of one hundred (100) cfs or more with 100-year flood water surface elevations, shall be indicated. 1. Where natural floodprone areas, such as washes, channels, drainageways, etc., exist within the development document boundaries of the drawing, water surface contours for the 100-year flood with water surface elevations indicated must be shown and clearly labeled. 2. The linear distance between water surface contour intervals should not exceed two hundred (200) feet unless prior agreement has been made with the City Floodplain Engineer or designee. 3. A symbol identical to that used to represent the water surface contour intervals on the development package documents should be included in the legend. 9. Information on Proposed Development. The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes. D.S. 2-01.3.9. H. Proposed traffic circulation: 2. Show future and existing sight visibility triangles. On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section. It appears that the SVT for both streets are drawn incorrectly. I. Show all right-of-way dedications on or abutting the site and label. If the development package documents have been prepared in conjunction with a subdivision plat or is required as a condition of approval of a review process, such as a rezoning, street dedications in accordance with the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan may be required by these processes. Projects bounded by streets having only a portion of the right-of-way width dedicated will be required to dedicate right-of-way, up to one-half (½), to complete the street width. Should there be any proposed street or alley vacation, provide this information. If vacation has occurred, include the recording information. L. All proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their N. In conjunction with a drainage report or statement, as applicable, prepared in accordance with the City Engineer's instructions and procedures, the following information will be indicated on the development package documents. For additional information regarding drainage standards, see the City of Tucson Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management. 1. Show areas of detention/retention including 100-year ponding limits with water surface elevations. 2. Indicate proposed drainage solutions, such as origin, direction, and destination of flow and method of collecting and containing flow. 6. The 100-year flood limits with water surface elevations for all flows of one hundred (100) cfs or more will be drawn on the development package documents. 7. Draw locations and indicate types of off-site runoff acceptance points and/or onsite run off discharge points. O. All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown. T. Show existing or proposed pedestrian circulation along abutting rights-of-way. Such sidewalks must comply with accessibility requirements for the physically disabled and the design criteria in Development Standard 3-01.0. Show the refuse collection areas, including locations of dumpsters, screening location and materials, and vehicle maneuverability, fully dimensioned, and access route. If dumpster service is not proposed, indicate type of service. For specific information on refuse collection, refer to Development Standard 6-01.0. Refuse collection on all projects shall be designed based on that Standard, even if collection is to be contracted to a private firm. Show the double refuse enclosure per 6-.01.0. Drainage Report: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the DR. 2. Provide an x-section at wash location. 3. Provide greater detail for all basins, including dimensions. 4. Call out size and dimension all rip-rap. 5. It appears the drainage flow into the Rodeo Wash from the west may break out and into the project to the North. Please address. 6. A flood plain use permit may be required. 7. Show the 50' trail esmt. in the drainage report. Because the required 50' trail esmt., the ret./det. basins are allowed in that area. 8. The Parks and Recreation dept is also reviewing the plan. Additional comments may be forth coming depending on the extent of the Parks and Recreation dept. comments. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4932 or Paul.Machado@tucsonaz.gov Paul P. Machado Senior Engineering Associate City of Tucson - Planning and Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210 (520) 837-4932 office (520) 879-8010 fax C:/2000 E. Drexel Rd cdrc_Dev_Pkg |
| 02/10/2012 | JWILLIA4 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Passed | |
| 02/10/2012 | JWILLIA4 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/10/2012 | JANE DUARTE | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | |
| 02/10/2012 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 02/10/2012 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Passed | |
| 02/10/2012 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 02/10/2012 | JWILLIA4 | COT NON-DSD | TUCSON POLICE DEPARTMENT | Approved | I have no issues with this proposal. CSO Becky Noel #37968 Tucson Police Dept 837-7428 |
| 02/15/2012 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES February 15, 2012 Jeff Stanley JAS Engineering 2061 W. Furry? Tucson, Arizona 85705 Subject: DS12-0005 A FAMILY DISCOUNT STORAGE Development Package Dear Jeff: Your submittal of January 11, 2012 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 8 sets of the DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 8 Copies Revised Development Package (Fire, Env Svcs, Zoning HC, Addressing, Zoning, Landscape, Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, PDSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4893. Sincerely, John Williams Planning Technician All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/ Via fax: stanley19263@msn.com |
| 02/15/2012 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Completed | No comments from Community Planning Staff. |