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 - DP12-0118
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/19/2012 | CAGUILA1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/20/2012 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 07/26/2012 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#252610 July 26, 2012 Star Consulting of Arizona Attn: Erin Harris 5405 E Placita Hayuco Tucson, Arizona 85718 Dear Erin: SUBJECT: Dollar General DP12-0118 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted July 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 |
| 07/26/2012 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | Regional Traffic Engineering has no comments on this submittal and recommends the plan's approval. |
| 08/07/2012 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | SHEET 5 OF 9 1. The curb ramp at the front of the accessible parking aisle does not comply with ICC A117.1, Section 406.3, 3' deep landing at top of ramp. 2. Reposition the accessible parking sign as required by COT DOT, just behind the curb line down the center line of the accessible parking space. END OF REVIEW |
| 08/08/2012 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Dollar General @ Ajo and Pandora Development Package (1st Review) DP12-0118 TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 9, 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. The following comments are based on Development Standard 2-01.0: 1. D.S. 2-01.3.3 Provide the development package number, DP12-0118 adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 2. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.4 As "RETAIL" is a use group in the LUC not a use, remove "RETAIL" from General Note 6 and add "GENERAL MERCHANDISE SALE", See LUC Section 2.5.4.2.B. 3. D.S. 2-01.3.9.E It appears that there has been a recent lot split done on this property. Provide documentation that the lot split was processed through the City of Tucson. 4. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5 Along the east property line the area "EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS", based on the "LEGEND" provide on sheet 1, shown. It is not clear if these existing improvements are to remain are be removed. Please clarify. 5. 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 (2) bicycles. That said the Short-term bicycle parking as shown on the plan provides for four (4) bicycles. Revise the Short-term bicycle parking calculation to show the four (4) spaces are provided. 6. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Provide a clear dimension between the two (2) bicycle racks shown on the plan. This dimension should be 4' clear, see LUC Section 3.3.9.2.B.4 and 3.3.9.5.B. 7. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Show the Long-term bicycle location on the plan and demonstrate how the requirements of LUC Section 3.3.9.4 are met. 8. D.S. 2-01.3.9.O Keynote 6 calls out "PERIMETER YARD DD - 1 1/2H ADJACNET TO RESIDENTIAL AND 0' ADJACENT TO COMMERCIAL". Zoning acknowledges that this is correct for interior perimeter yard setbacks but is not correct for street perimeter yard setbacks. Keynote 6 is used for the perimeter yard setback to Pandora Avenue. The street perimeter yard for Pandora should be based on LUC Section 3.2.6.5.B and Table 3.2.6-I. 9. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R There is a sidewalk and crosswalk shown running from near the southeast corner of the building east toward the refuse enclosure. It appears that the sidewalk extends past the refuse enclosure to no where. Clarify where this sidewalk is going. 10. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Provide a dimension from the top of the proposed accessible ramp to the north side of the building. This dimension needs to be 4'-0" clear. 11. D.S. 2-01.3.9.X Per re-zoning C9-81-63 condition 1 A a five foot wall is required along the south property line. Per a zoning administrator determination required screening must be provided on the developing property or a joint use agreement must be provided indicating that the adjacent wall may be used to meet the screening requirement. Either show the required wall on the plan or provide a copy of the recorded agreement with each property owner that borders the proposed development. 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/ DP12-0118 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package. |
| 08/13/2012 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 08/13/2012 | PGEHLEN1 | COT NON-DSD | TUCSON POLICE DEPARTMENT | Approved | I have no issues with this request. CSO Becky Noel #37968 Tucson Police Dept 837-7428 |
| 08/13/2012 | KEN BROUILLETTE | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/14/2012 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Star Consulting DATE: August 22, 2012 5405 E. Placita Hayuco Tucson, Arizona 85718 Subject: Dollar General at 1335 W. Ajo Way Development Package, DP12-0118 (First Review) T14S, R13E, Section 35 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Package and Drainage Statement 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. 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. 7. If the property is subject to annexation requirements, provide the applicable C9-__-__ or C15-__-__ annexation file number, in the lower right corner of each sheet. List the conditions of approval as a note. F. Trails Notes. List the following notes as appropriate. 3. The Eastern Pima County Trails System Master Plan does not show any trails on or adjacent to the development site. 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. 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. E. Indicate the ground elevation on the site based on City of Tucson Datum (indicate City of Tucson field book number and page). F. Existing storm drainage facilities on and adjacent to the site will be shown. G. Other significant conditions on the site, such as major rock outcrops, structures, fences, walls, etc., shall be shown. These elements should be indicated in a different line weight than the proposed improvements and labeled "to be removed" or "to be retained." 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. 3. Indicate fire circulation, including accessibility and vehicle maneuverability. 4. Indicate if existing streets are public or private; provide street names, widths, curbs, sidewalks, and utility locations, all fully dimensioned. 5. If utilizing parking area access lanes (PAALs), they shall be designed in accordance with Sec. 3.3.0 of the LUC and Development Standard 3-05.0. d. Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Development Standard 2-09.0. Provide, as a note, calculations for Class I and Class II bicycle spaces required and provided. 7. If streets are proposed, indicate if they are designed for on-street parking to accommodate visitor parking or if parking is provided in common parking areas. Visitor parking is to be evenly distributed and usable by all residents of the project. Extra parking on individual lots, such as tandem parking in driveways, does not count toward visitor parking, as it is not available to other property owners within the project. Design criteria for streets are located in Development Standard 3- 01.0. Streets designed at the minimum width, without on-street parking, need clearance for access to all homes by life safety vehicles and, where no alleys are provided, by refuse collection vehicles. If motor vehicles are parked along streets that are not designed to allow for parking, life safety services will be inhibited and, in many situations, blocked. 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. 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.) L. All proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. 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. 5. Verification will be provided that any drainage solutions which occur outside the boundaries of the development document area are constructed with adjacent owners' permission. (Additional notarized documentation of that approval will be submitted with the drainage report.) 21. For additional comments, see the "red-lined set of plans. Be sure to double check all information prior to the re-submittal. 22. 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 at 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 request for a waiver of the ret./det. requirement has been granted. 3. A maintenance easement for the proposed storm drain inlet is required. 4. If the ret./det. is waived in lieu of enhanced water harvesting, than the project should be graded so the water harvesting areas accept more of the stormwater? 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:/1335 W. Ajo Way_DEVPKG |
| 08/15/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (2409.00') is less than 12" below the first floor elevation (2409.74). Indicate the requirement for a backwater valve per Section 710.1, UPC 2006, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 08/16/2012 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the plans to include reference to any recorded agreement or easement to allow the project to use the off-site wall to meet the screening requirements along the southern boundary. LUC Table 3.7.2-I 2) Revise sheet 2 and L-6 to agree. L-6 shows an existing wall, while the site plan indicates removal of this wall segment. DS 2-01.3.X 3) Revise the plans to identify existing vegetation on the site, including the adjacent Ajo Way plantings. Ajo is designated as a gateway route and landscaping is required between the street curb and the property line. Work with Gary Wittwer at TDOT on issues relative to removal and replacement of landscaping. http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/sites/default/files/imported/plans/all/msr.pdf 4) Revise the plans to comply with LUC 3.7.3.2.C.3. Screen walls in the street landscape borders can encroach no more than three feet. Sheet 2 appears to show a 3' measurement from the back of the border to the back of the wall, but should be a maximum of three feet to the face of the wall. |
| 08/20/2012 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | This review has been completed. Resubmittal is required. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/19/2012 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |