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 - DP12-0067
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/10/2012 | CPIERCE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/10/2012 | JWILLIA4 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | Date Case Number Project Address May 10, 2012 C9-12-07, DP12-0067 Circle K Comments: Environmental Services approves the Circle K at Valencia and Nogales for solid waste service based on the drawings presented. |
| 05/10/2012 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 05/15/2012 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | Regional Traffic Engineering has no comments on this submittal and recommends its approval. |
| 05/22/2012 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Circle K @ Valencia and Nogales Development Package/Rezoning (1st Review) DP12-0067 & C9-12-07 TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 22, 2012 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. This development package was reviewed for full code compliance with the City of Tucson Development Standards (D.S.) and Land Use Code (LUC) for the entire site. 2. 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 04, 2013 3. The following comments are based on the "LAYOUT TO BE USED WITH A DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE SUBMITTAL (DS 2-01) dated 12-2009. 4. The sheet order is not correct. The grading plan should follow the site plan and the utility plan should follow the site/grading details. The A.L.T.A. sheets are not required for this submittal. If you wish for them to remain in the drawing package place them after the landscape details and revise the sheet numbering. 5. The following comments are based on Development Standard 2-01.0: 6. D.S. 2-01.3.2.D Zoning acknowledges that D.S. 2-01.3.2.D states that an administrative street address is to be provided in the title block. After discussion with Pima County Addressing the administrative street address is to be provided adjacent to the title block. That said remove the administrative address from the title block and provide it adjacent to the title block. 7. D.S. 2-01.3.2.E Depending on how comment 3 above is addressed the sheet number and page numbers will need to be revised. 8. D.S. 2-01.3.3 Provide the following relevant case numbers on the plan adjacent to the title block on all sheets, DP12-0067 & C9-12-07. 9. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.3 Once available list the rezoning conditions on the plan. 10. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.6.b Following discussions with staff it has been determined that the Airport Environs Zone (AEZ) layers shown on the COT GIS map are not correct. This project is located within the CUZ-1 with a very small corner within the CUZ-2. That said provide the following notes on the plan a. Per LUC Section 2.8.5.5.A.2 No more than one (1) employee for every two hundred fifty (250) square feet of gross floor area of all buildings on a project site at any time may be accommodated by intention, design, or in fact. b. Per LUC Section 2.8.5.5.A.3 Structures or uses with fifty (50) or more employees must develop an emergency evacuation plan and training program and implement it as approved by the Fire Department. c. Per LUC Section 2.8.5.5.A.4 the maximum height limit is seventy-five (75) feet, except where Sec. 2.8.5.7 reduces that limit. 11. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.6.b Remove all references to CUZ -3 and CUZ-4 from the plan. 12. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.6.b Remove ZONING AND LAND USE NOTE #11 as it does not apply. 13. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.6.b Provide a building height based on the requirements of LUC Section 2.8.5.11 and the Median Sea Level elevation at the end of the applicable runway. 14. D.S. 2-01.3.8.B The existing easements shown to be "ABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT" will need to be abandoned prior to approval of the development package. 15. D.S. 2-01.3.9.F All existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) shall be indicated on the drawing with zoning boundaries clearly defined. That said provide the zoning for the parcels located north of Valencia Road and east of Nogales Highway. 16. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Per the Long-Term bicycle parking space calculation provide the detail on sheet 8. 17. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Per LUC Section 3.3.9.2.B.4 A single rack is designed and located to accommodate two bicycles. That said based on two racks provided the provided Short-Term should be 4. 18. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Per LUC Section 3.3.9.2.B.6 show the two (2) feet by six (6) feet required for each bicycle. 19. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Per LUC Section 3.3.9.2.B.8 show the five (5) access aisle between the two racks. 20. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Show the 2'-6" vehicle overhang and minimum 4' sidewalk dimension along all areas where vehicles will be allowed to overhang the proposed sidewalks. At the Short-Term bicycle parking area show the 2' bicycle parking area, 4' sidewalk and 2'-6" vehicle overhang on the plan. 21. D.S. 2-01.3.9.U Once the rezoning conditions are available indicate graphically, where possible, compliance with conditions of rezoning. 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/ DP12-0067 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package. |
| 05/23/2012 | PGEHLEN1 | COT NON-DSD | TUCSON POLICE DEPARTMENT | Approved | I have no issues with this request/proposal. CSO Becky Noel #37968 Tucson Police Dept 837-7428 |
| 05/23/2012 | JWILLIA4 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Denied | >>> "Eric Kramer" <ekramer@pagnet.org> 05/22/2012 11:22 AM >>> Potential traffic impact warrants additional analysis. See attached. ____________________________ Eric W. Kramer, Ph.D., AICP Senior Land-Use Modeler PAG_logotype 177 N. Church Ave, Suite 405 Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 792-1093 x506 (tel) |
| 06/04/2012 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | 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: DP12-0067 CIRCLE K @ VALENCIA/NOGALES/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: June 4, 2012 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 or bond paper of approved Development Plan to City Planning. Signed and dated Mylar will be forwarded to Pima County Addressing prior to assignment of addresses. |
| 06/05/2012 | KBROUIL1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 06/06/2012 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Provide a large scale detail of the curb ramp compliant with ICC A117.1, Section 406. Provide detetcable warnings as required by Section 406.12, 13 and 14. 2. On Sheet 8 at the Parking Space detail: a. Show painted stripes for the accessible parking aisle. b. Show slope compliance with ICC A117.1, Section 502.5, 2% max in all directions. 3. Verify the concrete wheel stop requirements with zoning. 4. Remove all ADA references and substitute reference the 2006 IBC, Chapter 11 and ICC A117.1, 2003 Edition. END OF REVIEW |
| 06/06/2012 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | 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 June 1, 2012 To: ERIN HARRIS, PE STAR CONSULTING OF ARIZONA, 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: CIRCLE K AT VALENCIA RD. AND NOGALES HY Development Plan – 1st submittal DP12-0067 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: 1. 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. Ref. A 2. Sheet 1: Revise General Note #27 to read as follows (Ref. A): 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 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 $50.00 (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. cc: Chad Amateau, PE Checked by:_________ Kristin Greene, PE, DLU Manager DLU Project folder Ref. A. Development Plan Checklist Requirements – Chapter 18.71 of the Pima County Code - Section J http://www.pimaxpress.com/SubDivision/Documents/2006/DP_Requirements2Aug04.pdf Ref. C - Arizona Administrative Code, Title 18, Chapters 5 & 9 (R18-5-205) http://www.azsos.gov/public_services/Title_18/18-05.htm and (R-18-9-E301) http://www.azsos.gov/public_services/Title_18/18-09.htm Ref. D - PCRWRD Procedures, Preliminary Sewer Layout Requirements, 1984 (revised April 1988) http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/stddet/pdf/procedures.pdf Ref. E - PCRWRD Design Standards for Public Sewerage Facilities, 1983 (revised April 1988) http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/stddet/pdf/design_standards.pdf Ref. F - City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Details http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/stddet/pdf/all_det.pdf Ref. G - Pima County Code of Ordinances, Title 13 - Public Services, Division II - Sewers http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientID=16119&stateID=3&statename=Arizona Ref. H - City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Specifications for Public Improvements, 2003 Edition http://dot.pima.gov/transeng/stdspecsdet/standardspecs2003.pdf Ref. I - PCRWRD Engineering Directives http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/directives/ |
| 06/08/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (2541.58') is higher than the first floor elevation (2540.1'). Provide a backwater valve per Section 710.1, UPC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 06/08/2012 | 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 DP12-0067 Circle K _ Valencia & Nogales Hwy () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other - Elevations CROSS REFERENCE: NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: 12th Avenue/Valencia Rd Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: YES COMMENTS DUE BY: June 8, 2012 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 (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER:msp 791-5505 DATE: 07/08/12 Planning and Development Services Department Community Planning Section DP12 0067 - Circle K, Valencia - Nogales Hwy June 8, 2012 Based on the applicant's request, Development Plan 12-0067, for a Circle K convenience store and gas island is under a concurrent review with rezoning case C9-12-07. Prior to the approval of proposed development plan, rezoning C9-12-07 approval is required from Mayor and Council. Development plan DP12-0067 shall be required to be in full compliance with all of C9-12-07 rezoning conditions. Staff's development plan comments are subject to final rezoning requirements by Mayor and Council. The applicant shall address all rezoning requirements prior to resubmittal of the development Plan. Staff offers the following comments: 1. Prior to development plan resubmittal, the proposed development plan shall be in full compliance with rezoning case C9-12-07, as approved by Mayor and Council. 2. Prior to development plan approval, add to the general notes all rezoning conditions, verbatim, as approved by Mayor and Council. 3. Applicant to provide a copy of the letter, committing to specific requirements on the subject site, as requested by the neighborhood. Applicant's letter is dated April 26. 2011, and was handed out at the March 15, 2012 neighborhood meeting. If applicable, some of the specific requirements requested by the neighborhood as outlined in this letter may become part of the rezoning conditions at the time of rezoning case C9-12-07 approval by Mayor and Council. 4. As a reference, development plan dumpster location may need to be revised, if recommended rezoning condition is approved by Mayor and Council. Condition states that dumpsters are to be a minimum of fifty (50) feet from the south and west property line. |
| 06/08/2012 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Star Consulting DATE: June 13, 2012 5405 E. Placita Hayuco Tucson, Arizona 85718 Subject: Circle 'K', 503 E. Valencia Rd. Development plan DP12-0067 (First Review) T13S, R13E, Section 15 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Package and Drainage Report 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. Relevant case numbers (development package document, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet. D.S. 2-01.3.3. Complete all relevant numbers on the cover sheet. 3. General Notes. The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable. D.S. 2-01.3.7. A. Zoning and Land Use Notes. 3. If the plan/plat has been prepared in conjunction with a rezoning application, add the following note next to the existing zoning note: "Proposed zoning is ____." List the applicable rezoning file number and conditions of approval. Also place theC9-__-__ (if applicable) and the plan/plat file numbers in the lower right corner of each sheet. 4. Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the Land Use Code. List all Land Use Code sections each proposed use is subject to. 5. On residential projects, list the total number of units/lots proposed. 6. List special exceptions, zoning variances, zoning and development standard modifications, overlay zones, and other reviews that are applicable to the project. b. List overlay zones that are applicable to the property, such as Sec. 2.8.1, Hillside Development Zone (HDZ); Sec. 2.8.2, Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ); Sec. 2.8.3, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone; Sec. 2.8.4, Gateway Corridor Zone; Sec. 2.8.5, Airport Environs Zone (AEZ); Sec. 2.8.6, Environmental Resource Zone (ERZ); Sec. 2.8.7, Downtown Heritage Incentive Zone; Sec. 2.8.8, Historic Preservation Zone (HPZ), 2.8.9 Drachman School Overlay (DSO), or 2.8.10 Rio Nuevo And Downtown (RND) of the LUC; or Sec. 29-12 through 29-19 Watercourse Amenities, Safety, and Habitat (WASH) Ordinance of the Tucson Code, by case number, in lower right corner of each sheet. As a general note state that the project is designed to meet the overlay zone(s) criteria, and provide the case number, date of approval, what was approved, and conditions of approval. If there is more than one (1) lot within the site, the note should specify which lots are affected by the overlay zones. Projects involving Historic Preservation Zones, Downtown Heritage Incentive Zones (involving demolition), or overlay zones, require separate review and approval. 4. 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. 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. Verify and provide documentation of R/W widths for both Valencia Rd. and Nogales Hwy. The dimension line on Valencia Rd calls out a future ½ R/W width of 90'. There is not a 180' R/W in the MS and R plan. Revise as required. E. Indicate the ground elevation on the site based on City of Tucson Datum (indicate City of Tucson field book number and page). 5. 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. 4. Indicate if existing streets are public or private; provide street names, widths, curbs, sidewalks, and utility locations, all fully dimensioned. c. Show all loading zones, and vehicle maneuverability fully dimensioned, and access route, and provide, as a note, the number of loading spaces required, the number provided, and the design vehicle. Show the service vehicle for the refuse enclosure backing up straight instead of backing up on a curve. If the Serv. Veh. is backing up on the same curve for the north dumpster (south of the path shown on the plans) then the Serv. Veh. will hit the wall after it services the south dumpster. The Serv. Vehicles max. back-up dist. is 40'. 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. See comment 4.C. J. If street dedication is not required or proposed and the project site is adjacent to a Major Street or Route, draw the Major Street right-of-way lines for those streets. (Add the MS&R future sidewalk, right-of -way lines, sight visibility triangles, etc.) 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. Adhere to the re-zoning conditions including all the requirements listed for the retention/detention basins, ie.: runoff from the fueling and gas tank watershed areas shall be designed to include a disposal systems that will pre-treat and remove the contaminants from the first flush before the runoff is detained and discharged, etc. 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. The pedestrian SVT at the Valencia Rd. ingress/egress shall be located at the curb line where the stop bar for the exiting vehicles will be, not at the north side of the turning lane where there shouldn't be any pedestrians. Show 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. See comment no. 5.H.2.4.c. U. Indicate graphically, where possible, compliance with conditions of rezoning. W. Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Indicate if there are any existing billboards on site. Compliance to LUC Sec. 3.5.4.26 may be required. 6. Where is keynote no. 7 used on sht. 5? 7. It is suggested that after my comments have been addressed, that you make an appointment with me to discuss any of my comments that you may have questions on. If I missed any information or made a mistake, we can go over those items during the meeting. Do not hesitate to call if there are any questions or disagreements on my comments as you address them. Drainage Report: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the DR. 2. The required percolation rate for a basin with upstream watershed which is up to 10 acres in size is 12 hours. Per the geotechnical report the percolation rate exceeds 18 hours. Revise as required. 3. Per the rezoning conditions, C-12-07, adhere to all the requirements listed for the retention/detention basins, ie.: runoff from the fueling and gas tank watershed areas shall be designed to include a disposal systems that will pre-treat and remove the contaminants from the first flush before the runoff is detained and discharged, etc. 4. All stormwater-infiltration systems shall have a minimum horizontal separation of 300 feet from a cased water well, and 500 feet from an uncased water well. DS Sec.10-02.14.5.5: 5. Percolation is expected to be poor and therefore bleed pipes or Type 1 scuppers, as well as positive gradients will be needed on all retention areas including water harvesting areas. Keep in mind that if any type of retention is being proposed to be waived and detention requirements are met using surface basins and/or water harvesting areas, provide statement in the drainage report requesting waiver and discuss subsurface constraints (such as poor percolation, sandy clay soils at site, proximity to existing structure such as a well or existing channel bank protection, or other subsurface constraint) that would provide reason for waiving retention, as this will be accepted by the City if requested. DS Sec.10-01.2.2: 6. Identify and describe both the existing natural and/or man-made impacts and the proposed major developments to be located within the contributing watershed which may impact the subject development. Existing monitoring wells and water wells pose concerns for groundwater protection when there is a basin proposed in the same location. Basin may need to be relocated; provide justification. DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.3.A.4: 7. Add the basin(s) maintenance responsibility note and checklist per S.M.D.D.F.M. 2.3.1.6 C 1 and 2 to the DR. 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:/530 E. Valencia Rd_DEV-SITE_2-01.0 |
| 06/08/2012 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) An unpaved planting 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 Note the minimum width for the two small tree planting areas on the west side of the site. 2) Revise the plans to include a screen wall along the southern boundary of the site. LUC Table 3.7.2-I 3) Revise the plans as necessary to incorporate any conditions of rezoning. C9-12-07. 4) Revise the Water harvesting plan to include the site water budget and calculations. DS 10-03 |
| 06/11/2012 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/11/2012 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 06/11/2012 | JANE DUARTE | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | |
| 06/11/2012 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 06/12/2012 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#249932 June 12, 2012 Star Consulting 5405 E Placita Hayuco Tucson, AZ 85718 To Whom it May Concern: SUBJECT: Circle K DP12-0067 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted May 15, 2012. It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. 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 Jennifer Wojnar at (520) 917-8717. Sincerely, Henrietta Noriega Office Support Specialist Design/Build hn Enclosures cc: City of Tucson (email) J. Wojnar, Tucson Electric Power |
| 06/12/2012 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Approved | Dear Mr.Wyneken and Ms. Gehlen, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the subject rezoning and development plan application. The Tucson Airport Authority requests the following conditions of development: 1. The owner/developer shall record the Airport Disclosure Statement form prior to the City's approval of the development plan or building permit. The Airport Disclosure Statement discloses the existence, and operational characteristics of the Tucson International Airport, to future owners or tenants of the property and further conveys the right to the public to lawfully use the airspace above the property. 2. That owner/developer shall send one executed form set of FAA Form 7460-1, Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration, to the Manager, Air Traffic Division, FAA Regional Office. Copies of the form and electronic submittal are available at: https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/portal.jsp/ Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Jordan D. Feld, CM, AICP Director of Planning Tucson Airport Authority 7005 S. Plumer Ave. Tucson, AZ 85756 jfeld@tucsonairport.org <mailto:jfeld@tucsonairport.org> www.flytucsonairport.com <http://www.flytucsonairport.com> 520-573-5115 office 520-573-8006 fax |
| 06/12/2012 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Approved | Approved per forms and e-mail (from Jordan Feld) in SIRE. |
| 06/18/2012 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | June 18, 2012 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D12-0067 & C9-12-07 PROJECT NAME: Circle K PROJECT ADDRESS: Nogales HWY/Valencia PROJECT REVIEWER: Jose E. Ortiz PE, Traffic Engineer Resubmittal Required: Traffic Engineering does not recommend approval of either the Development Plan or Re-zoning Case so a re-submittal is required. 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. Re-zoning conditions 2, 3, 5, 12 - 17 and 23 from Case C9-06-10 apply to this project and need to be added to the current re-zoning case. 3. Re-zoning condition 12 can be revised to call for a TIA Category I in-lieu of a TIA Category II. 4. Re-zoning Case # 5 (from C9-06-10) needs to include vehicular cross access between parcels. A new condition addressing vehicular cross access is appropriate. 5. Remove all reference to a bus stop/pullout from the plans. SunTran does not have plans for a stop along Nogales HWY so the installation of a stop will not be required by the developer. 6. Maintain 12' through lanes along Valencia Road, an 11' right turn lane is acceptable. 7. A private improvement agreement (PIA) will be necessary for the proposed work to be performed within the right-of-way. An approved development plan is required prior to applying for a PIA. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-6730 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 06/19/2012 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES June 19, 2012 Erin Harris STAR Consulting 5405 E. Placita Hayuco Tucson, Arizona 85718 Subject: DP12-0067 CIRCLE K Development Package Dear Erin: Your submittal of 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 3 DETAILED cover letters explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE ROLLED 3 Rolls Revised Development Package (Wastewater, PDSD2) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (PDSD2) 2 Copies of Neighborhood Letter (PDSD2) 1 CD of All Plans and Documents Listed Above (PDSD) 1 Check made out to "Pima County Treasurer" for $50.00 (Wastewater) Please Speak to Patricia Gehlen regarding Rezoning Conditions before Re-Submitting. 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.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via Email: STAR.CONSULTING@COMCAST.NET |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/03/2013 | CPIERCE1 | REJECT SHELF | Completed |