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 - DP13-0131
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/19/2013 | CPIERCE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/19/2013 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | No objections/adverse comments ____________________________ Eric W. Kramer, Ph.D., AICP Senior Land-Use Modeler PAG40MPOhoriz3.png 177 N. Church Ave, Suite 405 Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 792-1093 x506 (tel) (520) 620-6981 (fax) www.pagnet.org <mailto:ekramer@pagnet.org> ekramer@pagnet.org |
| 07/19/2013 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Passed | |
| 07/19/2013 | MARTIN BROWN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | There does not seem to be an appoved turn around for fire vehicles on road from Mountain Ave. Proposed fire hydrant location may need to be moved to a different location. Verify Tucson Water is OK with a dead end run for fire sprinklers. |
| 07/19/2013 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Passed | per form |
| 07/19/2013 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 07/22/2013 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Revise the site utility drawing to include the rim elevation of the manhole upstream of the connection of the building sewer to the public sewer. Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual No. 2-06.0.0, Section 4.8 and Section 107.2.13, IBC 2012. 2. If the finished floor elevation of the proposed student center is below or less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole in the public sewer, include a note on the drawing requiring the installation of a backwater valve in the building drain or branch of the building drain serving the first floor. Floors discharging from above that reference point shall not discharge through the backwater valve. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. |
| 07/23/2013 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Passed | |
| 07/23/2013 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | Regional Traffic Engineering has no comments on this submittal and recommends its approval. ________________________________ Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are intended for use by the person(s)/entity(ies) named above and may contain confidential/privileged information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by email, and delete or destroy all copies plus attachments. . |
| 07/26/2013 | MWYNEKE1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | See letter in SIRE. |
| 07/26/2013 | MWYNEKE1 | UTILITIES | SOUTHWEST GAS | Approved | See letter in SIRE. |
| 07/29/2013 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: DP13-0131 1545 E Copper Street Salpointe High School - New Student Center Buildings TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 29, 2013 DUE DATE: August 15,2013 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. 01. Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, An applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One year Expiration date is July 13, 2014. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Package Standards listed in section 2-06 of the City of Tucson Administrative Manual. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC). The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above. 02. 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS: 3.1 - Each sheet shall measure 24 inches by 36 inches and include a minimum one inch margin on left side and one-half inch margin on all other sides to facilitate efficient record keeping. A larger sheet format may be used with the approval of the Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD). COMMENT: All sheets including the landscape sheets should be 24"x36" in size. 03. 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS: 3.5 - A three-inch by five-inch space shall be reserved in the lower right quadrant of each sheet for an approval stamp. COMMENT: The information in title block of the landscape plan sheets must match the information from the development package sheets. Revise the landscape sheets as required. 04. 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS: 3.6 - Provide a blank three-inch by five-inch block in the lower right corner of the plan adjacent to the title block on the first sheet of the development package for use by Pima County Addressing. COMMENT: Add the required block Pima County Addressing as required to the first sheet only. 05. 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS: 3.8 - The north arrow, contour interval, and scale as applicable to each sheet should be placed together in the upper right corner of each sheet. COMMENT: Add the contour intervals to all applicable sheets. 06. 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS: 4.1 - 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. COMMENT: List the email addresses as required by this standard. 07. 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS: 4.2.D - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet: D. The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx). COMMENT: The title block of all the landscape plan sheets must include the page number and number of pages. The title block information must match on all development and landscape plan sheets. Revise the title blocks as required. Also, the landscape plan sheets must include the Development Approval Stamp. 08. 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS: 4.3 - The administrative street address and relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet. COMMENT: All reference case numbers must be listed on all on sheets including landscape plan sheets. Include the following case number as reference DP12-0088. If applicable list any special approval application case number on all plan sheets. 09. 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS: 4.4 - The project-location map to be located on the first sheet of the development package in the upper right corner, shall cover approximately one square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of three inch equals one mile, and provide the following information. A. Show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area; B. Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and all streets that abut the subject property; and, C. Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled COMMENT: Remove from the location map all the labels for subdivision plats. Label the following street names, Glenn Street, Copper Street, Mountain Avenue, and Cherry Avenue. 10. 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS: 4.5 - When the development package documents consists of more than one sheet, a sheet index (a legible drawing of the site showing the area represented on each sheet) is to be placed on the cover sheet or the second sheet. COMMENT: Include the information per this standard. 11. 2-06.4.0 GENERAL NOTES: 4.7.A - The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable. 4.7.A.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 the C9-__-__ (if applicable) and the plan/plat file numbers in the lower right corner of each sheet. COMMENT: This project has been assigned the DP case number DP13-0131. List the case number in the right corner of all plan sheets including the landscape plan sheets. 12. 2-06.4.0 GENERAL NOTES: 4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 4.7.A.8.- Floor area for each building; COMMENT: 4.7.A.8.a - Revise the Onsite Facilities Table on sheet 1 of 16 (C-1) to correctly list the existing square footages based on the last approved DP, (DP12-0088). The Onsite Facilities Table must include the softball amenities as approved on the previous DP. Also the Onsite Facilities Table must be revised to list existing and proposed information as it relates to the floor area of the buildings. The Onsite Facilities Table in this plan is listing the student center as an existing building and is listed under the current square footage. Revise the Onsite Facilities Table as required for accuracy and consistency for future phasing. (Verify the correct square footage numbers). See the Onsite Facilities Table DP12-0088 DP for reference. Clarify if the actual Cafeteria square footage is 6,815 or is it 8,815 as noted in the DP. This needs to be clarified. 4.7.A.8.b - Percentage and area in square feet of building and accessory building coverage; COMMENT: The Onsite Facilities Table should include a running calculation of the floor area ratio. The DP case number associated with the specific expansion should be included (listed). The maximum ratio per the PAD is .75. Include the ratio calculation in the table. 13. 2-06.4.0 GENERAL NOTES: 4.9.H.5 - If utilizing parking area access lanes (PAALs), they shall be designed in accordance with Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC. 4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC. COMMENT: After reviewing parking calculations and trying to verify whether or not 1131 vehicle parking spaces have been demonstrated on the plan, a more detailed site plan drawing that clearly demonstrates the number of parking proposed must be included in the package. It is clear that existing parking spaces will be lost due to the location of the Student Center buildings but it is not clear where all the parking listed is provided. If necessary revise the parking calculations to clarify where and how many existing parking spaces are located and how many are proposed for the future. This may or will require an additional sheet demonstrating the parking areas and spaces. 14. 2-06.4.0 GENERAL NOTES: 4.9.H.5.c - Show all loading zones, vehicle maneuverability fully dimensioned, and access route. Provide as a note the number of loading spaces required, the number provided, whether the loading space is a Type A or B as provided in UDC Section 7.5.4. COMMENT: It is not clear from this plan if existing loading zones that may be within the project area are being removed, clarify. If so demonstrate on the plan where and how many of the loading have been relocated. Demonstrate on the plan the maneuverability into and out of the loading zones areas. Depict the radius' used. 15. 2-06.4.0 GENERAL NOTES: 4. 9.H.5.d - Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Section 7.4.9, Bicycle Parking Design Criteria, of the UDC. Provide, as a note, calculations for short and long term bicycle spaces required and provided. COMMENT: As with the loading zone issue, it is not clear if any existing bicycle facilities that may be within the project area are being removed or relocated. Clarify. 16. 2-06.4.0 GENERAL NOTES: 4.9.H.5.L - If applicable, 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. The easements may have to be recorded and the recordation information added to the development package prior to approval. COMMENT: Provide the required information if this standard is applicable. 17. 2-06.4.0 GENERAL NOTES: 4.9.H.5.M. - Grading Plan 4.9.H.5.M.1 - A conceptual grading plan is required on projects with significant topographic conditions. The PDSD Engineering Administrator or designee will determine the need for such a plan. COMMENT: The grading plan has been reviewed along with the site plan. Once the site plan has been approved the grading plan is approved assuming that all changes made to the site plan are made to the grading plan for consistency. 18. 2-06.4.0 GENERAL NOTES: 4.9.R - Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual. COMMENT: Clarify how the three doors along the west side of the large Student Center building connect to the on site pedestrian and accessible circulation. The doors open up to a landing with stairs but do not connect to sidewalk and does not appear that the construction will be accessible compliant. 19. 2-06.4.0 GENERAL NOTES: 4.9.T - 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 Section 8-01.0.0, Solid Waste and Recycle Disposal, Collection, and Storage, of the Technical Standards Manual. Refuse collection on all projects shall be designed based on that section, even if collection is to be contracted to a private firm. COMMENT: Demonstrate the maneuverability into and out of the Trash Enclosure area. Depict the maneuvering radiuses, see additional comments by Engineering. 20. 2-06.4.0 GENERAL NOTES: 4.9.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 the Sign Code, Chapter 3 of the Tucson Code, is required. COMMENT: If applicable to this expansion/phase, provide information and location for any proposed freestanding monument signs. Label the dimension of the sign that include the height, length and width. 21 2-06.4.0 GENERAL NOTES: 4.9.X - Show compliance with landscaping and screening requirements by locations, material descriptions, and dimensions. Specific plant or hardscape material shall be detailed on a landscape plan. A detailed landscape plan is required. In accordance with Section 2-11.0.0, Landscape Plan Requirements. COMMENT: Review the Landscape Reviewer comments related to landscaping requirements. 22. It is clear that the locations and possibly size of the building are not consistent with the PAD document preliminary plan. Also it is not clear if the Chapel building is to be constructed in a different location or will it not be constructed as part of this PAD change? Provide a memo or letter from John Beall that this proposed PAD change has been approved by PDSD Staff If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package and additional requested documents. |
| 08/06/2013 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#266527 August 6, 2013 Grenier Engineering Inc Attn: John Grenier 5524 E 4th Street Tucson, Arizona 85713 Dear Mr. Grenier: SUBJECT: Salpointe New Student Center DP13-0131 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted July 24, 2013. 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 Jennifer Crawford at (520) 917-8708. Sincerely, Elizabeth Miranda Office Support Specialist Design/Build Enclosures cc: DSD_CDRC@tucsonaz.gov, City of Tucson (email) J. Crawford, Tucson Electric Power |
| 08/07/2013 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: August 7, 2013 SUBJECT: Salpointe Catholic High School Development Plan Package- Engineering Review TO: Grenier Engineering; Attn: Jason Morse LOCATION: 1545 E Copper St, T13S R14E S31 Ward 3 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: DP13-0131 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package, Drainage Statement (Grenier Engineering, Inc., 17JUL13) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Grenier Engineering Inc., 05JUL13). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administration Manual (AM) and Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Refer to the following link for further clarification: http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az The following items need to be addressed: SITE PLAN: 1) AM Sec.2-06.3.1: Revise the development plan document so that each sheet measures 24 inches by 36 inches and includes a minimum one inch margin on left side and one-half inch margin on all other sides to facilitate efficient record keeping. A larger sheet format may be used with the approval of the Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD), specifically the Landscape Sheets must meet this requirement or get prior approval. 2) AM Sec.2-06.4.2.D: Revise the development plan document to provide the page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e Sheet xx of xx). The total number of sheets needs to include the landscape plans. 3) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP13-0131) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets where indicated by DP13-XXXX. Also include any subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc. that is applicable to the property. 4) AM Sec.2-06.4.4: Revise the project location map to meet the minimum requirements within the referenced section; remove from the location map all labels for subdivision plats and label the following street names, Glenn Street, Copper Street, Mountain Avenue, and Cherry Avenue. 5) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.C: Revise the development plan document to label the existing right-of-way for all adjacent streets that are shown on the overall site plan, Sheet C3.0. 6) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.c: Verify on the development plan any existing or revised loading zone locations. If the loading zone is relocated demonstrate on the plan the maneuverability into and out of the loading zones areas by depicting the radii in plan view. 7) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Provide the original Geotechnical Report or an addendum to the report to verify the proposed building setback as labeled in Cross Section 3. The Cross Section shows a varying dimension for the building setback to the concentration of flow off of the proposed rock riprap. After discussing this with the Structural Plans Examiner (Eric Newcomb, PE) it was stated that the Geotechnical Engineer needs to verify a safe building setback to assure that the foundation is not compromised. 8) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.3: Revise the development plan documents to provide clean outs at all junctions of the proposed roof drains that exceed angles great than 10 degrees per TSM Sec.4-04.10.9.1.8. After discussion with the Plumbing Plans Reviewer (Robert Sherry, PE) the design of the roof drains once underground has to meet these requirements per the IPC also, clarify. 9) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all handicap accessibility comments that may be associated with this project. 10) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan document and/or associated Keynote (KN #28) to reference a PC/COT Standard Detail for the proposed hand rail or provide a separate detail for construction purposes. Since the development plan document is the acting construction document for all site improvements a detail must be provided, a reference to the Building Plans does not suffice. 11) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Revise the development plan document to provide a construction detail for the refuse enclosures. The detail must match TSM Sec.8-01 and Figure 3a for the required enclosure walls with gates, concrete thickness and compressive strength, concrete approach apron dimensions, 14'x40' clear approach for each container, etc. Since the development plan document is the acting construction document for all site improvements a detail must be provided, a reference to the Building Plans does not suffice. SWPPP: 12) Part III.D.1: A copy of AZPDES permit (AZG2008-001) was included with the SWPPP; however refer to the following website from AZDEQ for the new AZPDES 2013 CGP and expiration dates of the existing 2008 CGP; http://www.azdeq.gov/environ/water/permits/cgp.html. Since the effective date of June 3, 2013 is past please revise the SWPPP to include the new updated CGP and NOI forms. Revise all portions of the SWPPP that are applicable to reference the new AZPDES 2013 CGP. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan Package and SWPPP that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Department |
| 08/07/2013 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Retain the existing 4 accessible parking spaces just north of the new Student Center complying with 2012 IBC, Section 1106.6. 2. After reanalization of the total number of parking spaces provided as requested by the Zoning reviewer, David Rivera, recalculate the required number of accessible parking spaces required by the 2012 IBC, Table 1106.1 and show on an overall site plan the this total number and location. With 1131 total parking spaces, Table 1106.1 requires 22 accessible parking spaces not 16. END OF REVIEW |
| 08/13/2013 | PGEHLEN1 | COT NON-DSD | ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES | Approved | This project is approved for commercial solid waste and recycle services. Jeff Drumm, P.E. Environmental Manager City of Tucson Environmental Services 520-837-3713 |
| 08/14/2013 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 08/15/2013 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Add the Development Package approval block to the landscape plans. http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/sites/default/files/dsd/CDRC/dvpkg_stamp_10-11.jpeg |
| 08/15/2013 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Passed | |
| 08/19/2013 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items: 1) Two sets of the rolled plans, 2) All items requested by review staff. 3) All items needed to approve the plans. |
| 08/19/2013 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 08/19/2013 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Passed | |
| 08/19/2013 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 08/19/2013 | PGEHLEN1 | COT NON-DSD | TUCSON POLICE DEPARTMENT | Approved | I have no issues with this proposal at this time. CSO Becky Noel #37968 Tucson Police Dept 837-7428 |
| 08/19/2013 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | U. S. POST OFFICE | Passed | |
| 08/19/2013 | PGEHLEN1 | UTILITIES | CENTURYLINK | Passed | |
| 08/19/2013 | PGEHLEN1 | UTILITIES | EL PASO NATURAL GAS | Passed |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/27/2013 | AROMERO4 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 08/27/2013 | CPIERCE1 | REJECT SHELF | Completed |