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: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Permit Number - DP12-0113
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/23/2012 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 08/27/2012 | PGEHLEN1 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | This project is approved for solid waste and recycle storage and disposal. Jeff Drumm, P.E. Environmental Manager City of Tucson Environmental Services 520-837-3713 |
| 08/27/2012 | 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: 8/24/12 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. " 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. " THE TENTATIVE PLAT SHOWS OWNERSHIP TO BE FULLERTON PROPERTIES INC. OUR RECORDS SHOW OWNERSHIP TO BE A PORTION OF 132-13-0710 (NO LONGER 132-13-034A AS SHOWN ON THE TENTATIVE PLAT)IN THE NAME OF TUCSON RETAIL LLC PER DOCKET 12949, PAGE 3773. 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. |
| 08/29/2012 | GBONILL1 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approved | August 29, 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 - 2nd 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 |
| 08/29/2012 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | This review has been completed. Resubmittal is required. |
| 08/30/2012 | 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 (2nd Review) DP12-0113 TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 29, 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. This comment was not addressed correctly. Sheet 4 Keynotes 17,18 &24, Sheet 5 & 6 Keynotes 15 & 16 and Details 4 & 5 reference DEVELOPMENT STD. NO. 2-09.0. Development Standard 2-09 is not longer applicable as the bicycle design requirements are now located in the LUC Section 3.3.9. 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. 2. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d The Long-term Bicycle parking called out under Keynote 24 does not clarify how the requirements of LUC Sections 3.3.9.4.C and D are met. 3. Zoning acknowledges that this comment should have been made on the last review. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Detail 5, Sheet 7 does not meet the requirement of LUC Sections 3.3.9.2.6 & .8 Each required short-term bicycle parking space must be at least two (2) feet by six (6) feet, see LUC 3.3.9.5.B. For your information per LUC Section 3.3.9.2.4 A single rack is designed and located to accommodate two bicycles 4. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d The Short-term Bicycle parking called out under Keynote 18 does not appear to provide the five (5) foot access aisle required by LUC Section 3.3.9.2.8. The sidewalk only appears to be about five (5) foot wide and it appears that vehicle overhang is proposed. 5. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Provide width dimensions for all sidewalks shown on the McDonald's site. 6. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R It appears that vehicle overhang is proposed along the sidewalk show east of the proposed McDonald's. If this is the case the sidewalk must be six (6) foot six (6) inches wide. Sshield1 on DS1/planning/New Development Package/ DP12-0113 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package. |
| 08/31/2012 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | SHEET DP-4 1. In the upper North West corner of the site, a curb ramp and detectable warning strip that leads to the middle of the PAAL is proposed. a. Either provide a marked crossing and a another curb ramp and detectable warning on the North side the PAAL; b. Or delete the curb ramp and detectable warning strip and maintain a 6" high curb. 2. Zoning may require a pedestrian access way to the Park Av. right of way. If required, the path way could be located on the North side of the access road, would have to be accessible and comment 1a would be in effect. 3. The slopes for all accessible routes are tio comply with ICC A117.1, section 403.3: 5% max running slope, 2% max cross slope. SHEET DP-5 4. Ditto comment 3 SHEET DP-6 5. Ditto comment 3 6. For all marked crossings that connect to future accessible routes, please insure that all curb ramps, detectable warnings, and landings for both sides of the marked crossings are included in this contract. 7. At the South East entrance drive, a flush landing with a detectable warning strip continuing from one marked crossing to another is proposed and is referenced to detail 14/DP-7. This detail is not reflective of the layout. Please provide a separate detail large scale for this situation. 8. In several locations, a side walk ramp with a detectable warning strip has a 90 degree turn bottom landing also with a detectable warning strip. The only required detectable warning strip (section 406.12, 13, and 14) is the one at the bottom landing just prior to entering the PAAL. Please delete the detectable warning strip at the bottom of the ramp. 9. Delete the ramp and detectable warning at the end of the pensula adjacent to the accessible parking space and maintain a 6" high curb. This ramp leads to no where but the middle of a hazardous vehicle area. 10. Provide a curb ramp for the accessible aisle next to the accessible parking space that is next to the pensula with a curb ramp. SHEET DP-7 11. At detail 6, the detectable warning strip need be only 24" deep as per ICC A117.1, Section 406.12. 12. At detail 11, please indicate maximum grade slopes of 2% as per ICC A117.1, Section 502.5 END OF REVIEW |
| 08/31/2012 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approv-Cond | 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 8/31/12 (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: September 7, 2012 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: ((X) No Resubmittal Required: Approved Conditionally - applicant to submit DRC letter for McDonalds project. REVIEWER:JB 837-6966 DATE: 08/31/12 |
| 08/31/2012 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 09/05/2012 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | |
| 09/05/2012 | KBROUIL1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 09/05/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/07/2012 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/10/2012 | 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: DP12-0113 TUCSON MARKETPLACE PHASE 3/REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: September 10, 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. Pads and Shops may change as long as there is some sort of order. Please clarify why Shops A2 is on the plan but not on the title block. The title block lists Shop A3. Also, why is Pad 11 way out of sequence? Please provide the new "conceptual" site plan that shows the new numbering. |
| 09/10/2012 | PGEHLEN1 | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#253886 September 10, 2012 Optimus Civil Design Group Attn: Jeff Bahrana 4650 E Cotton Center Blvd Suite 200 Phoenix, Arizona 85040 Dear Mr. Bahrana: SUBJECT: Tucson Marketplace Phase 3 PD12-0113 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted August 23, 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 |
| 09/10/2012 | ELIZABETH LEIBOLD | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: September 10, 2012 TO: Jeff Behrana, P.E., OPTIMUS ACTIVITY: D12-0113 PROJECT: Tucson Marketplace Phase 3 - 2nd 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 revised 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 some of the revised sheets of the Development Plan / Tentative Plat sheets, Landscape Plan sheets, a Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation, and a revised Drainage Statement. PDSD Engineering recommends conditional approval; address the remaining comments. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS: 1) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No.10-02.2.3.1.3.A.2: In response letter, it was stated that the drainage report was revised to add discussion for maintenance of drainage improvements, however it was not found. Clarify how the REA provides individual or shared maintenance responsibility for the drainage improvements within the proposed pad developments of the lots in Tucson Market Place. GRADING, PAVING, DRAINAGE PLAN / UTILITIES PLAN / DETAIL SHEET COMMENTS: 2) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.M: Tackifiers are to be used where the temporary condition applies; any pads that will be applying for permits for building and finished grading, such as McDonald's, will require permanent erosion control in form of vegetation or decorative rock. Clarify in notes "for which no building permits have been applied" or other language. LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS: 3) DS Sec.3-01.5.1.A.1: Sheet numbers requested for revision were not re-submitted. Regarding landscape sheets address the following comments that do not appear to be addressed: a) Assure revised SVT's are shown on sheets Landscape planviews where proposed trees are shown, so that SVT review can be accomplished. Specifically at entrances along spine road and along Park Avenue. SVT's should match DP-4, DP-5, and DP-6. b) In response letter state which sheet has the following landscape note added: 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. Resubmittal is required. The next submittal should address all the above items. Submit same items as submitted in this review submittal package, plus soils report, and associated revised Phase 3 Development Plan/Tentative Plat, response letter, and other supporting documentation. Provide geotechnical report on CD. 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 |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/16/2012 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |