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 - DP14-0141
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/25/2014 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | TO: Matt Cawley, P.E. DATE: August 26, 2014 PARCEL: 110-12-094D ADDRESS: 5301 E Grant Rd WATERSHED: Alamo W.A.S.H. FLOODPLAIN STATUS: FEMA X-unshaded zone 1649L SUBJECT: TMC Replacement Power Plant Development Package Engineering Review REVIEWER: Elizabeth Leibold, P.E. CASE NUMBER: D14-0141 SUMMARY: The development package was submitted for the proposed TMC Power Plant replacement structures and improvements. Meeting was held 13AUG14. Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the Development Package including Drainage Memo (as the drainage statement). Engineering Division does not recommend approval until the remaining comments are addressed on resubmittal of the package. MASTER COVER SHEETS/ GENERAL NOTES: No comments at this time. BASE LAYER SHEET COMMENTS: 1) Admin Man Sec.2-06.3: Add DP14-0141 case number to Development Package sheets. SITE PLAN COMMENTS: 2) Sheet C1.0 there are numerous structures shown along the northwest boundary that encroach into the adjacent parcel owned by the City of Tucson. Provide documentation from COT Real Estate Department that allows this encroachment. 3) 2-06.4.8.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. 4) There is a "90' DRAINAGE & UTILITIY EASEMENT" called out on the plan. The proposed fuel tanks, new cooing towers, and the electrical equipment awning all encroach into this easement. Provide documentation from all utilities, that have rights to this easement, allowing encroachment into this easement. Contact the engineering reviewer about the encroachment into the drainage easement. 5) There are two (2) "15' ELECTRICAL EASEMENTS" called out on the plan. One of the proposed fuel tanks, the new cooing tower walls, electrical equipment awning, and a rolling gate, encroach into these easements. Provide documentation from TEP allowing encroachment into these easements. 6) Provide the development package case number, DP14-0141, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. DRAINAGE STATEMENT COMMENTS: 7) Tucson Code Sec.26-11.2.f(4): Explain / clarify proposed stormdrain improvement on sheet C2.1. Explain whether there is a need to add contaminant filter or control to stormdrain system due to the potential danger that fuel or materials may be swept onto other lands or downstream to cause injury to others during storm events. LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS: No comments at this time. GRADING, PAVING, UTILITIES PLAN / DETAIL SHEET COMMENTS: 8) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.8.B: 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 structure or building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided. Assure complete information is provided for the easements within this project site. Explain what depths and types of existing utility infrastructure is located underground in these easements. Provide temporary construction easement, or copy of existing cross access easement, or explain use of offsite parcels. Also, explain whether there are any conflicts with proposed footprints of the replacement structures and existing easements. Provide any previous documentation from prior TMC phases, regarding the use of these existing utility/drainage easements for improvements. 9) Admin Man Sec.4.9.M.1: Address the following grading related comments: a) Show local vertical benchmark with elevation and datum on grading sheet or Key Map. If benchmark is not in vicinity of Key Map area, a more local benchmark must be provided. b) Provide elevations of base pads for replacement fuel tanks. c) Explain C2.2 keynote 11. Provide design. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN COMMENTS: 10) Tucson Code Chap.26 Art.2: The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) sheets do not meet the minimum requirements of the AzPDES Construction General Permit (CGP). Revise the SWPPP sheets according to the following comments: a) Verify if special SWPP permit is needed for this type of project (fuel tanks). b) Acknowledge for inspection purposes, please post the NOI at construction entrance of the site, at beginning of construction activities, and maintain this posted document throughout project construction. c) No SWPPP Report was provided; consider providing one or add the following to SWPP sheets: i) All Operators shall be identified and have separate certification statements. For the Owner/Operator Certification Statements, provide name and signature for the Operators with each certification statement. ii) The Operator Certification Statement should have a statement with name & signature that they act as Operator and that they have operational control over the construction plans and specifications, including the ability to make modifications to those plans and specifications (e.g., owner, EOR, or developer of project), or that they have day-to-day operational control of those project activities that are necessary to ensure compliance with a stormwater pollution prevention plan for the site or other grading permit conditions. iii) At minimum, one Operator, either the engineer of record or the project manager or owner as listed on the bottom of the second page of the NOI shall sign one of the Operator certifications. Please note that the remaining signatures from the Operators must be on the SWPPP on the site copy of the SWPPP (exhibit or report) at or before commencement of construction. (Part IV.C.1) iv) Provide list of contractors and subcontractors to be filled out at commencement of grading construction activity and to be updated on site and kept with the SWPP. Indicate in the SWPPP the name(s) of the party(ies) with day-to-day operational control of those activities necessary to ensure compliance with the SWPPP or other permit conditions. Provide a table for recording the names and responsibilities for each party responsible for activities necessary to ensure compliance with the SWPPP or other permit conditions. (Part IV.B.1.d) v) Identify and provide a list of potential other non-construction pollutant sources from this project that includes everyday operations of the hospital other than those listed in section C.10 on page 14 of the SWPP Report; fill out section C.6 on page 8. vi) Provide copies of compliance evaluation report forms for use by onsite Operators. vii) At pre-con meeting, provide copy of AzPDES general permit (#AZG2013-001) as part of the SWPPP. See weblink: http://www.azdeq.gov/environ/water/permits/download/2013_cgp.pdf viii) At pre-con meeting, provide copy of completely filled-out NOI that has been sent to ADEQ. See weblink: http://www.azdeq.gov/environ/water/permits/download/cgp_noi_form2013.pdf ix) Provide a copy of the form for the NOT. See the weblink: http://www.azdeq.gov/environ/water/permits/download/constnot.pdf d) Address the following comments for the SWPPP exhibit sheets: i) Add "SWPP" to Title Block description on sheet C4.1. ii) On sheet C4.1, label, and provide leader line for the receiving waters on Key Map on SWPPP. iii) Show, label, and explain any specific temporary erosion/stormwater control installation information for fuel tank area and if necessary any additional notes. iv) Explain / clarify hatching in last item for Legend. SOILS/GEOTECHNICAL REPORT COMMENTS: No comments at this time. If you have questions, call me at 837-4934. Elizabeth Leibold, P.E., CPM, CFM Civil Engineer Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Department |
| 08/26/2014 | PGEHLEN1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 08/26/2014 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: TMC Power Plant Development Package (1st Review) DP14-0141 TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 25, 2014 DUE DATE: September 05, 2014 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC) and the UDC Technical Standards Manual (TSM). 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 & TSM requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above 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 August 20, 2015. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS) Section 2-06.1.0 GENERAL 2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD) - ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS 2-06.1.0 GENERAL 2-06.1.1 PURPOSE This standard has been prepared for the purpose of informing applicants of the submittal and review requirements for development package documents to assure proper and adequate information is presented in a consistent manner, thereby providing the basis for an efficient and timely review. The development package documents are prepared in support of applications for building permits and related reviews. The information that is requested establishes the basis upon which the project will be approved and could affect what is required of the property in the future, should there be a proposal for expansion or for a different use of the property. This standard does not waive any applicable city regulations or codes. 2-06.1.2 APPICABILITY This standard shall be used for all site plans and tentative plats submitted to PDSD for review. 2-06.2.1 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS Development Package applications are available from PDSD. Completed applications and accompanying materials shall be submitted to PDSD. Incomplete or inaccurate applications will not be accepted, nor will any application in which the pre-application conference or neighborhood meeting requirements have not been met. The types of documents and the specific number of copies required of each of the documents are on the PDSD website or may be obtained from PDSD. Resubmittals of development packages require a comment response letter that details how all previous comments have been addressed. Provide the same number of copies of the comment response letter as plans provided. The following documents and information shall be submitted upon application: 2-06.2.1 Application Form A completed application signed by the property owner or authorized designee; 2-06.2.2 Development Package A development package must be prepared to the format and content requirements described herein; 2-06.2.3 Related Reviews In addition to the plan process, a project may require review for other types of plans and documents. The applications for those processes are submitted to the appropriate department for review and approval. These related reviews can be applied for so that review can occur concurrently with the development package application. However, it must be understood that, should the related application be approved subject to conditions or denied, this may affect the; 2-06.2.4 Concurrent Reviews The development package is designed to allow for concurrent review of any site related reviews. Concurrent review means that all plans and documents needed for the review are submitted as one package. Examples of site related reviews include but are not limited to: site plans, landscape plans, NPPO plans, water harvesting plans, grading plans, SWPPP plans, floodplain use permits, and overlay reviews. Separate applications are often required for the different site related reviews even if the plans are submitted concurrently; and, 2-06.2.5 Fees Fees in accordance with Section 4-01.0.0, Development Review Fee Schedule. 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.4.3 - 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. 1. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP14-0141, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided. 2-06.4.8.A - Provide site boundary/subdivision perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system. 2. COMMENT: Sheet C1.0 there are numerous structures shown along the northwest boundary that encroach into the adjacent parcel owned by the City of Tucson. Provide documentation from COT Real Estate Department that allows this encroachment. 2-06.4.8.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. 3. COMMENT: There is a "90' DRAINAGE & UTILITIY EASEMENT" called out on the plan. The proposed fuel tanks, new cooing towers, and the electrical equipment awning all encroach into this easement. Provide documentation from all utilities, that have rights to this easement, allowing encroachment into this easement. Contact the engineering reviewer about the encroachment into the drainage easement. 4. COMMENT: There are two (2) "15' ELECTRICAL EASEMENTS" called out on the plan. One of the proposed fuel tanks, the new cooing tower walls, electrical equipment awning, and a rolling gate, encroach into these easements. Provide documentation from TEP allowing encroachment into these easements. Additional Comments 5. COMMENT: Per Minor Amendment letter dated August 1, 2014, provide a copy of the TMC Architectural Review Board approval with you next submittal. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 08/26/2014 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | Regional Traffic Engineering has no comments on this submittal and supports the rezoning. Thank you. |
| 08/26/2014 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 08/26/2014 | PGEHLEN1 | UTILITIES | SOUTHWEST GAS | Approved | See information letter in PRO |
| 08/26/2014 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | No objections/adverse comments -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: This report and/or data was funded in part through grant[s] from the Federal Highway Administration and/or Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. The contents of this report and/or data reflect the views and opinions of the author(s) who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily state or reflect the official views or policies of the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Arizona Department of Transportation, or any other State or Federal Agency. This report and/or data does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation. The information in this publication is provided on an “as is” basis, and there are no warranties, express or implied, including, but not limited to, any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. In no event shall PAG be liable for any damages resulting from the use of the information. PAG provides the information in good faith and has endeavored to create and maintain accurate data. The users of this report and/or data are advised to use the information with caution and to independently verify accuracy. ____________________________ Eric W. Kramer, Ph.D., AICP Senior Land-Use Modeler 1 E. Broadway Blvd, Ste. 401 Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 792-1093 x4455 (tel) (520) 620-6981 (fax) www.pagregion.com ekramer@pagregion.com |
| 08/26/2014 | PGEHLEN1 | COT NON-DSD | TUCSON POLICE DEPARTMENT | Approved | I have no issues with this proposal. |
| 08/27/2014 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/28/2014 | MARTIN BROWN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 09/02/2014 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 09/03/2014 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed prior NPP / Landscape signature. |
| 09/03/2014 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 09/04/2014 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Reqs Change | The requirements of the Alamo Wash Greenway as described in the current Pima Regional Trails System Master Plan have been reasonably accommodated in this design, given the tight constraints of this site. However, to mitigate heat-island concerns, Parks and Recreation would like to see a note requiring that the adjacent asphalt path be re-surface-coated to match the tan color of the existing paths on either end of this site. Howard B. Dutt, ASLA Landscape Architect Tucson Parks & Recreation (520) 837-8040 Fax: (520) 791-4008 Howard.Dutt@tucsonaz.gov |
| 09/04/2014 | PGEHLEN1 | COT NON-DSD | ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES | Reqs Change | The DP has been reviewed on behalf of Environmental Services. Please address the following comment on the resubmittal: 1. Provide a general note on the cover sheet that describes the anticipated method of collection and disposal of any refuse and recycling generated by the power plant facilities. If the refuse and recycling is to be placed in existing containers somewhere else on the site, please state this in the note. |
| 09/08/2014 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Passed | Already provided letter for previous development at TMC. |
| 09/08/2014 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Passed | |
| 09/08/2014 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 09/08/2014 | PGEHLEN1 | UTILITIES | CENTURYLINK | Passed | |
| 09/08/2014 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 09/08/2014 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | U. S. POST OFFICE | Passed | |
| 09/08/2014 | PGEHLEN1 | UTILITIES | EL PASO NATURAL GAS | Passed | |
| 09/09/2014 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items: 1) Two rolled sets of the plans 2) A disk containing all items submitted 3) All items requrested by review staff 4) All items needed to approve this plan |
| 09/09/2014 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 PO Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#281665 September 9, 2014 DLR Group Attn: K. Wolfarth 177 North Church Ave. Suite 755 Tucson, AZ 85701 Dear Ms. Wolfarth : SUBJECT: Tucson Medical Center/Power Plant DP14-0141 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and has approved the development plan submitted August 25, 2014. It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. " New development should not impact any existing TEP facilities or required clearances in front or around facilities. Development must also not impact any existing easements. 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 (OH204) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-917-8726 Should you have any technical questions, please call the area Designer Jennifer Crawford at (520) 917-8708. Sincerely, Jeffery Shea Admin Support Specialist Design/Build cc: DSD_CDRC@tucsonaz.gov, City of Tucson (email) J. Crawford, Tucson Electric Power |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/15/2015 | PGEHLEN1 | APPROVAL SHELF | Completed |
| 07/15/2015 | PGEHLEN1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 07/15/2015 | CPIERCE1 | REJECT SHELF | Completed |