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: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Permit Number - DP12-0113
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/17/2012 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/18/2012 | RONALD BROWN | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Denied | SHOP H 1. Detail 11/DP7 is not a typical detail of the one Accessible Parking Space shown for Shops H. It is hard to tell what's going on with this one acc. parking space and the adjacent island and how access is achieved to the accessible route. Please provide a specific large scale detail of this accessible parking space showing all associated elements and accessible requirememts. a. Delete the curb ramp at the end of the pensula and provide an accessible loading zone as per the 2006 IBC, Section 1106.7 and ICC A117.1, Section 503.3. 2. Please provide a separate large scale detail of the 90 degree turn ramp, landing, marked crossing and detectable warning strip. Detectable warning strips are only required prior to entering a hazardous area such as a PAAL. Delete the detectable warning strip shown at the bottom of the ramp just prior to the landing, two places. 3. At the SE auto entrance drive, north curb pensula, delete the detectable warning strip where not directly connected to a marked crossing. SHOPS B3, B4, PAD, A2 AND PAD 11 4. Detectable Warning strips are not required at the top of an accessible parking aisle. The aisles are safe zones not hazardous areas. SHOP A2 5. For the curb ramp located in the far NE corner, either delete it or add a marked crossing and another curb ramp and detectable warning strip on the N side of the PAAL. SHEET 7 OF 8 6. Detectable warnings need be only 2' deep. END OF REVIEW |
| 07/18/2012 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 07/19/2012 | JWILLIA4 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | This project is approved for Solid Waste and Recycle. Jeff |
| 07/19/2012 | JWILLIA4 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | No objections/ adverse comments. 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) (520) 620-6981 (fax) |
| 07/23/2012 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Denied | Office of the Pima County Assessor 115 N. Church Ave. Tucson, Arizona 85701 BILL STAPLES ASSESSOR TO: CDRC Office Subdivision Review City of Tucson (FAX# 791-5559) FROM: Sherry Hyde Senior Property Technician Pima County Assessor's Office DATE: 7/23/12 RE: Assessor's Review and Comments Regarding DP12-0113 TUCSON MARKETPLACE PHASE 3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * COMMENTS: THIS APPEARS TO BE MORE OF A DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAN A SUBDIVISION PLAT. FOR THE PLAT, THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE WILL NEED: " THE TITLE BLOCK MUST BE IN THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER & IT MUST HAVE THE SECTION, TOWNSHIP AND RANGE. " THERE MUST BE A SECTION TIE, WITH A BEARING AND DIMENSION FROM THE SECTION CORNER OR QUARTER CORNER TO THE POINT OF TIE ON THE SUBDIVISION. " THE PERIMETER LINE MUST BE SOLID AND THE HEAVIEST LINEWEIGHT ON THE PLAT. THE LOT LINES AND COMMON AREA LINES MUST BE SOLID AND THE NEXT HEAVIEST. LINES FOR EROSION SETBACKS, FLOODPLAIN LINES ETC. SHOULD BE THE LIGHTEST LINEWEIGHT AND BE DASHED OR DOT-DASHED. " THERE MUST BE BEARINGS AND DIMENSIONS FOR THE PERIMETER AND ALL LOT LINES AND ALL COMMON AREAS. " ALL HATCHING, STIPPLING, STRIPING ETC. MUST BE REMOVED IN THE FINAL PLAT, UNLESS ANOTHER AGENCY REQUIRES IT. IF SO ALL LETTERING MUST HAVE THE HATCHING, ETC. CUT AWAY SO THEY ARE LEGIBLE. NOTE: THE ASSESSOR'S CURRENT INVOLVEMENT IN PROCESSING ITS MANUAL MAPS TO DIGITAL FORMAT IS EXPEDITED GREATLY BY EXCHANGE OF DIGITAL DATA. IN THE COURSE OF RECORDING THIS SUBDIVISION YOUR ASSISTANCE IN PROVIDING THIS OFFICE WITH AN AUTOCAD COPY WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED. THANK YOU FOR ANY DIGITAL DATA PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED. |
| 07/23/2012 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Tucson Market Place - Phase 3 Development Package (1st Review) DP12-0113 TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 25, 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.), Land Use Code (LUC) and The Bridges Planned Area Development. 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 July 17, 2013 The following comments are based on Development Standard 2-01.0: 1. 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 provide an administrative address adjacent to the title block. 2. D.S. 2-01.3.2.E Revise the Page X of X to include the landscape sheets. 3. D.S. 2-01.3.3 Provide the following relevant case numbers on the plan adjacent to the title block on all sheets, DP12-0113 4. D.S. 2-01.3.5 The "SHEET INDEX" located on sheet DP-1 should include the landscape sheets. 5. D.S. 2-01.3.6 The PAD district map should be on the first sheet. 6. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.8 If the final plat is submitted prior to approval of this development package provide the subdivision case number in the lower right hand corner, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 7. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5 Per LUC Section 3.3.6.6.D.1 A back-up spur shall be provided at the end of a row of parking if no ingress or egress is provided at that end. That said on sheet DP-6 provide a back-up spur at the end of the four (4) parking area access lanes (PAALs) shown along the south end of the parking area. 8. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Remove all reference to "CLASS I, CLASS II & DEVELOPMENT STD. NO. 2-09.0" from all sheets. 9. D.S. 2-01.3.9.Q Provide the height of all proposed buildings within the building footprint. 10. Remove the old "CITY OF TUCSON DSD/CDRC APPROVAL" stamp from all sheets. Sshield1 on DS1/planning/New Development Package/ DP12-0113 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package. |
| 07/25/2012 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#252454 July 25, 2012 Optimus Civil Design Group 4650 E Cotton Center Blvd, Suite 240 Phoenix, Arizona 85040 Dear Optimus Civil Design Group: SUBJECT: Tucson Marketplace Phase 3 DP12-0113 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted July 18, 2012. It appears that there 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 |
| 07/25/2012 | JWILLIA4 | COT NON-DSD | TUCSON POLICE DEPARTMENT | Approved | I have no issues with this request. CSO Becky Noel #37968 Tucson Police Dept 837-7428 |
| 07/27/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole for Shops A2 on sheet DP-4 (2468.57') is less than 12" lower than the first floor elevation (6468.75'). Provide a note on the drawing requiring the installation of a backwater valve per Section 710.1, UPC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 07/27/2012 | JWILLIA4 | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | AUDREY FARENGA ADDRESSING REVIEW PH #: 740-6800 FAX #: 623-5411 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: AUDREY FARENGA, ADDRESSING REVIEW SUBJECT: DP12-0113 TUCSON MARKETPLACE PHASE 3/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: July 26, 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. Delete 132-13-034A and replace with the most current tax code on General Notes #5. 2. Include the section, township and range on all title blocks. 3. Label Shops and Pads as they are labeled on the Master Development Plan Book 35, Page 47. 4. Label Lot 1 on sheet 3. 5. Change Noble Way to Nobel Way on all applicable sheets. 6. On sheet 2 delete The Bridges Block 12 University of Arizona and change The Bridges Block 13 to Block 12. |
| 07/30/2012 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | Revise DP4, DP5, and the landscape plans to include tree planters that meet the minimum size requirements of LUC 3.2.7.3 and that do not occupy the parking spaces in a manner that requires vehicles to extend into the parking access lane. The diamond planters shown appear to be undersized and potentially limits vehicles from parking in the space. |
| 07/30/2012 | 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 DP12-0113 Tucson Marketplace - Phase 3 7/30/12 (X) Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other - Elevations CROSS REFERENCE: D09-0010 and D11-0001 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: The Bridges PAD -15 GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: No COMMENTS DUE BY: July 31, 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: (X) Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER:JB 837-6966 DATE: 07/30/12 Planning and Development Services Department Community Planning Section DP12-0113 - Tucson Marketplace - Phase 3 July 30, 2012 Staff offers the following comments: 1. Per the Bridges PAD the architectural theme is to be implemented, monitored and enforced pursuant to the Bridges Design Review Committee and Guidelines. Prior to submittal of any Development Plan or Plat to the City of Tucson, the developer must procure a letter of recommendation from the Design Review Committee. Please provide a letter from the Bridges Design Review Committee that recommends the proposed development - Phase 3, proposed conceptual building elevations and architectural renderings meets the Bridges design guidelines. [Bridges PAD: Section C.6) 2. Please provide building height for the proposed buildings / commercial pads. 3. DP-2, please remove the wording under Open Space requirements: "FOS has already been provided per PAD by virtue of El Paso & SW Trail and the partial trails constructed behind Costco and Walmart". It is fine to indicate that Phase 3 will not provide FOS. However, FOS is required for each Subarea. Subarea A is required that at the end of final build-out, there will be 5.0% FOS. So any future phases for Sub-area A will need to provide FOS and add to the provided amount as indicated on the running table sheet. |
| 07/31/2012 | ELIZABETH LEIBOLD | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: July 31, 2012 TO: Jeff Behrana, P.E., OPTIMUS ACTIVITY: D12-0113 PROJECT: Tucson Marketplace Phase 3 - 1st review comments LOCATION: Ward 5 FEMA: 2237K, Zone X-Unshaded WATERSHED: Mission View Wash Watershed adjacent to Greyhound Wash Detention Area REVIEWER: Elizabeth Leibold, P.E. SUMMARY: The Development Plan package for the Phase 3 of the Tucson Market Place was received and reviewed by Planning & Development Services Department Engineering. Submittal package included Development Plan / Tentative Plat sheets, Landscape Plan sheets, and Drainage Statement. Address the following comments. BASE LAYER SHEET COMMENTS: 1) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.A: Clarify if boundary data is measured, recorded or calculated on planview development package sheet 1. MASTER COVER / TENTATIVE PLAT SHEET COMMENTS: 2) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.a: Show lot lines to be proposed on planviews. 3) DS Sec.11-01: Add note regarding that a grading permit will be required for the grading for Phase 3. Individual grading permit applications may be submitted if desired, or a revision to the Development Package may be submitted including grading plan sheets. 4) Tucson Code 26.II: Add note stating that a SWPPP will be required with the grading plan submittal(s). Also, a Right-of-way Use Permit may be needed; contact TDOT Permits and Codes. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS: 5) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No.10-02.2.3.1.3.A.2: Address the following Phase 3 drainage report drainage comments: a) Clarify if there are some drainage improvements within the proposed pad developments that are solely the responsibility of the individual lots, or state whether it is the responsibility of Tucson Market Place. There may be a need to provide the drainage maintenance verbiage as a general note(s) on the Development Plan cover sheet per section DS Sec.10-02.14.3. b) Add case number and administrative address to cover page of report: DP12-0113. DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS: 6) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.B, 2-05.2.4.G: 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 is to occur prior to issuance of permits. All existing easements will be explained in a response letter or drawn on the plat, and recordation information, location, width, and purpose shall be included. All proposed easements (utility, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned for widths and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. 7) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.G: Address the following access comments: a) Clarify responsible party for maintenance of private spine road as a note to the plans. b) TDOT shall confirm allowance for new entrance from Park Av. c) Add note to plan regarding cross access agreements in place for this phase. 8) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.5.c: On planview sheets DP-4, DP-5, and DP-6, show all loading zones, and vehicle maneuverability fully dimensioned, and access route, and provide, as a note the design vehicle. 9) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.2: On streets with median islands, only 1 sight triangle is required on the side of approaching traffic; however, a 20-ft stem by 30-ft curb pedestrian visibility triangle will be maintained on the opposite side of approaching traffic, per DS Sec.3-01.5.1.B.1. Clarify future and existing sight visibility triangles. 10) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.5.a: Dimension width of sidewalks on planview sheets DP-4, DP-5, and DP-6. GRADING, PAVING, DRAINAGE PLAN / UTILITIES PLAN / DETAIL SHEET COMMENTS: 11) DS Sec.2-05.2.3.E, 2-05.2.1.H, 2-01.3.8.E: Indicate local benchmark elevation for Phase 3. Include planview location and provide datum. 12) Address the following drainage related comments: a) Check call-out location for keynote 4 on sheet DP-6. b) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.3: Regarding roof drainage, provide locations and types of roof drainage structures on planview sheets DP-4, DP-5, and DP-6 including any sidewalk scuppers. c) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.F: Existing storm drainage facilities on and adjacent to the site will be shown on sheet DP-4 including existing stormdrain system along Park Avenue. d) Provide bleed pipes for all basin / water harvesting areas. Positive gradient is required to assure drain down time. 13) DS Sec.2-5.3.2.D: Address the following conceptual grading comments: a) Provide interceptor swale along edge of stockpile encroachment on DP-4. b) Add minimum setback distances on planview sheets DP-4, DP-5, and DP-6 from basins, waterharvesting retention areas, to public pavement areas, and bldg structures per geotechnical reports. 14) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.M: Provide total square footage and clarify extents of disturbance limits for project for all proposed improvements on sheets DP-4, DP-5, and DP-6. Clarify permanent erosion control for proposed and existing exposed dirt areas -see memo of understanding from the City for previous phased grading soil stabilization. LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS: 15) DS Sec.3-01.5.1.A.1: Regarding landscape sheets address the following comments: a) Assure revised SVT's are shown on sheets L2, L3, & L4. b) Add a landscape note to the landscape plans that states that any existing trees or transplanted trees from onsite within the SVT's shall be checked and trimmed to assure that they are clear of leaves and branches to a height of at least six feet above grade. The location of trees within existing and future sight visibility triangles may be restricted or modified as determined by the City of Tucson Inspectors in order to preserve visibility. SOILS/GEOTECHNICAL REPORT COMMENTS: 16) DS Sec.2-05.3.1.H, 2-01.4.2.A, 3.9.N, Tucson Code Sec. 26.11.2(a)(2): Submit a soils investigation study (previous reports may be sufficient) prepared by a state-registered professional civil engineer outlining soil types, infiltration rates, project feasibility, existence of and recommendations for hydro-collapsing soils, recommendations for pavement design, and other pertinent information. The report should discuss existing geotechnical conditions and proposed recommendations for foundations and pavement design and provide typical geotechnical recommendations for the site including setback recommendations to substantiate setbacks from water harvesting retention areas. Also, assure pavement structural design section details match recommendations of the geotechnical report. Resubmittal is required. The next submittal should address all the above items. Submit same items as submitted in this first review submittal package, plus soils report, and associated revised Phase 3 Development Plan/Tentative Plat, response letter, and other supporting documentation. If you have questions or would like to set up a meeting, call me at 837-4934. Elizabeth Leibold, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Department |
| 07/31/2012 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | Regional Traffic Engineering has no comments on this submittal and recommends its approval. |
| 07/31/2012 | KBROUIL1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 08/01/2012 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 08/01/2012 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/01/2012 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Passed | |
| 08/01/2012 | JANE DUARTE | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | |
| 08/01/2012 | PGEHLEN1 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approved | July 20, 2012 To: Jeff Behrana, P.E. Optimus Civil Design Group 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: Tucson Market Place Phase 3 Development Plan - 1st submittal DP12-0113 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 |
| 08/02/2012 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 08/03/2012 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | Due to the proposed changes to the plan (addition of McDonalds) the resubmittal of these plans will require 6 sets of rolled plans, a disk and all other required documents. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/23/2012 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |