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

Permit Number: DP14-0192
Parcel: 11918029L

Address:
1340 W AJO WY

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: DEV PKG

Permit Number - DP14-0192
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
10/16/2014 CPIERCE1 START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
10/16/2014 RONALD BROWN ADA REVIEW Passed
10/17/2014 PGEHLEN1 TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Approved This parcel (11918029L) is in the Tucson limits (obligated) and is already served by Tucson Water and has a meter.

Thank you,

Kellie Anderson
Tucson Water
New Area Development
520-837-2165 (direct line)
520-791-4718 (division line)
520-791-2501 (fax)
Kellie.Anderson@tucsonaz.gov


>>> DSD_CDRC 10/17/2014 12:04 PM >>>

Dear Reviewers:



This is an electronic distribution for a Rezoning review and CDRC Development Plan review. If you are receiving this e-mail, you should review for both reviews listed above. If you normally receive paper copies of the review documents, you will receive them soon.



The applicable case numbers are:



REZONING: C9-14-11

CDRC Development Plan: DP14-0192

Existing and Proposed Zoning: R-3 to C-1 (portion of site)

Proposed Use: RETAIL

Due Date: November 12, 2014

Electronic Documents may be found at the following link: http://www.tucsonaz.gov/PRO/Command?mode=permit&firstTime=true&number_key=DP14-0192&command=InitialProcess&SearchButton=Search



1. If the PRO disclaimer appears, click on the “I have read the disclaimer” button at the bottom of the page.

2. On the Permit and Parcel Detail page click on the Associated Documents and Plans button for activity number DP14-0192 to display the document list

3. Click on the View File button next to the desired document to view that document.
10/29/2014 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Family Dollar - 1340 W. Ajo way
Development Package. Concurrent Review with Rezoning (1st Review)
DP14-0192 & C9-14-11

TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 30, 2014

DUE DATE: September 19, 2014

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a detailed 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 15, 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, DP14-0192, adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

2. COMMENT: Provide the rezoning case number, C9-14-11, adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

2-06.4.7 - General Notes
The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable.

2-06.4.7.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.

3. COMMENT: Once finalized provide the rezoning conditions on the plan.

2-06.4.7.A.6.a - List additional applications and overlays, by case number (if applicable), in lower right corner of each sheet. As a general note provide the type of application processed or overlays applicable, a statement that the project meets the criteria/conditions of the additional application or overlay, the case number, date of approval, what was approved, and the conditions of approval, if any.

4. COMMENT: Provide a general note on the cover sheet stating "THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC ARTICLE 5.4 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R) AND ARTICLE 5.5 GATEWAY CORRIDOR ZONE (GCZ)."

2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide:

2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development
The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes.

2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show future and existing sight visibility triangles (SVTs). On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section.

5. COMMENT: Show the future SVT's on the plan.

2-06.4.9.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.

6. COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.9.B.1.e Outdoor bicycle parking areas must be lighted so that they are thoroughly illuminated and visible from adjacent sidewalks, parking lots, or buildings during hours of use. That said demonstrate how this requirement is met.

7. COMMENT: Provide a detail for the long term bicycle parking that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Section 7.4.9.D.2 are met.

2-06.4.9.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.)

8. COMMENT: Show future curb and sidewalk on the plan.

2-06.4.9.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. The easements may have to be recorded and the recordation information added to the development package prior to approval.

9. COMMENT: As vehicular access is proposed to the parcel to the west either a recorded cross access agreement or easement is required. Provide the recordation information on the plan.

2-06.4.9.O - All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown.

10. COMMENT: The street perimeter yard setback shown for Ajo Way is not correct. This setback should be measured from the back of future curb. Until the future curb is shown the setback cannot be verified, see comment 8.

2-06.4.9.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.

11. COMMENT: Clarify what the sidewalk is for that runs from the southwest corner of the building to the west and goes no where.

12. COMMENT: Per TSM 7-01.4.A At least one sidewalk is required to a project from each street on which the project has frontage, unless there is no vehicular access from a street because of a physical barrier, such as a drainageway or an unbroken security barrier (e.g., a wall or fence). The sidewalk should be located to minimize any conflict with vehicular access to the project. That said as there is a man gate, not shown on this plan, at the northern end of the existing wall shown on the plan along Holiday Isle Blvd, provide a sidewalk from the proposed building to Holiday Isle Blvd.

2-06.4.9.U - Indicate graphically, where possible, compliance with conditions of rezoning.

13. COMMENT: Until the rezoning conditions are provided the requirements of this section cannot be verified.


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
.
10/29/2014 TOM MARTINEZ OTHER AGENCIES AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION Reqs Change Regional Traffic Engineering has these comments on the submittal:

o A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) will be needed, and approved by ADOT, prior to the issuance of an access/encroachment permit.

o The TIA will follow the current ADOT requirements.

o Will there be any change of ownership of the current driveway?

o The driveway width needs to be reevaluated for a commercial development accessing ADOT facilities.

o The development should move the existing and new water meters closer to the R/W.

o The new landscaping in ADOT R/W will be impacted by TEP OH power relocations and CenturyLink buried conduits which will be moved close to the ADOT R/W line. Some of the trees will be planted below the relocated power lines. Utility relocations are planned to take place between January 2015 to May 2015. TEP may have requirements regarding allowable plant materials below overhead power lines.

o Remote control landscape irrigation valves for site landscaping are being placed within ADOT R/W in an area that will be disrupted during ADOT’s project. ADOT project will disrupt the irrigation of landscaping. These valves should be moved onto private property.

o Irrigation backflow preventer should be moved out of ADOT R/W.

o Irrigation line routing should be reviewed to reduce impact on system within ADOT R/W from planned construction.

Thank you.
10/29/2014 LIZA CASTILLO UTILITIES TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER Approved 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714
PO Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702


WR#284116 October 29, 2014


Cypress Civil Development
Attn: K. Hall
2102 N. Country Club Rd. Suite 9
Tucson, AZ 85716

Dear Mr. Hall:

SUBJECT: Ajo Retail
DP14-0192

Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and has approved the development plan submitted October 21, 2014. It appears that there are possible conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development.

" The plans did not show the existing underground service that currently serves the car wash. If it is in conflict, it will be billable to remove/relocate.

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 Necas at (520) 918-8295.

Sincerely,

Jeffery Shea
Admin Support Specialist
Design/Build


cc: DSD_CDRC@tucsonaz.gov, City of Tucson (email)
J. Necas, Tucson Electric Power
10/29/2014 PGEHLEN1 UTILITIES SOUTHWEST GAS Approved See documents in PRO
10/29/2014 MARTIN BROWN COT NON-DSD FIRE Denied Distance from existing fire hydrant appears to exceed the 400' (as the hose lays) to all parts of the building allowed by the 2012 International Fire Code. Refer to section 507. Installation of an additional fire hydrant, or installation of fire sprinklers, or successful appeal to the fire code administrator
will be required prior to approval of the Development Plan.
11/10/2014 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change 1. An approved development plan is not to be used for construction of on-site utilities (e.g. water service to the building, building sewer, site lighting, or electrical service to the building). The construction of the on-site utilities may be included with the permit for constructing the building or as a separate permit.
2. The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (2408.93') is higher than the first floor elevation (2407.25'). Provide a note on the plans requiring the installation of a backwater valve. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.
11/10/2014 ZELIN CANCHOLA COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Approved November 10, 2014
ACTIVITY NUMBER: DP14-0192
PROJECT NAME: Ajo Retail
PROJECT ADDRESS: 1340 East Ajo Way
PROJECT REVIEWER: Zelin Canchola TDOT

Approved

ADOT Approval recommended.

ADOT acceptance/permitting maybe required prior to the issuance of permits from TDOT-Permits and Codes.

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-6659 or Zelin.canchola@tucsonaz.gov
11/12/2014 PGEHLEN1 OTHER AGENCIES PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS Approved See documents in PRO
11/12/2014 PGEHLEN1 COT NON-DSD ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Approved The Development Package has been reviewed on behalf of Environmental Services and is approved. If there are any questions, I can be reached at kperry@perryengineering.net.



From: DSD_CDRC DSD_CDRC [mailto:DSD_CDRC.DSPO2.CHDOM2@tucsonaz.gov]
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 12:05 PM
To: Scott Beck; Tom Martinez; tcoyle@flytucson.com; Ken Perry; Addressing; Pima County Assessor; Mary; Howard Dutt; Joseph Linville; Kellie Anderson; Kenneth Brouillette; Martin Brown; Rebecca Noel; Steve Shields; Zelin Canchola
Cc: John Beall
Subject: DP14-0192/C9-14-11- Ajo Retail
11/12/2014 PGEHLEN1 COT NON-DSD TUCSON POLICE DEPARTMENT Approved I have no issues with this request.



>>> DSD_CDRC 10/17/2014 12:04 PM >>>

Dear Reviewers:



This is an electronic distribution for a Rezoning review and CDRC Development Plan review. If you are receiving this e-mail, you should review for both reviews listed above. If you normally receive paper copies of the review documents, you will receive them soon.



The applicable case numbers are:



REZONING: C9-14-11

CDRC Development Plan: DP14-0192

Existing and Proposed Zoning: R-3 to C-1 (portion of site)

Proposed Use: RETAIL

Due Date: November 12, 2014

Electronic Documents may be found at the following link: http://www.tucsonaz.gov/PRO/Command?mode=permit&firstTime=true&number_key=DP14-0192&command=InitialProcess&SearchButton=Search
11/13/2014 RONALD BROWN ZONING HC REVIEW Reqs Change 1. Detectable warning strips are required by code at transportation platforms only. Use on this project is strictly an owner option but if so installed they must meet the requirements of ICC A117.1, Sections 406.12, 13, 14 and 705 as applicable.
2. At the typical accessible parking detail, show a maximum grade slope of 2% in all directions.
END OF REVEIW
11/14/2014 ELIZABETH LEIBOLD ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change TO: Kevin Hall P.E.
DATE: November 14, 2014
SUBJECT: Ajo Retail Engineering Review Development Package (SP/GP/SWPP) 1st submittal Engineering Review
ADDRESS: 1340 W Ajo Wy T14S R13E Sec26
PROJECT: Ajo Retail Rezoning: (C9-14-11)
FLOODPLAIN: FEMA zone X-unshaded, 2286L
REVIEWER: Elizabeth Leibold, P.E.

SUMMARY: Engineering has reviewed Development Package for site plan and grading review including Drainage Report review, and does not recommend approval of the Development Package at this time until the following comments are addressed.

MASTER COVER SHEETS/ GENERAL NOTES:
1) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.7.6.a,B.2.b: Address the following Development Package general note comments:
a) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.7: Submit Rezoning conditions and show compliance. List the applicable rezoning file number and conditions of approval.
b) List additional applications and overlays, by case number (if applicable), in lower right corner of each sheet. As a general note provide the type of application processed or overlays applicable, a statement that the project meets the criteria/conditions of the additional application or overlay, the case number, date of approval, what was approved, and the conditions of approval, if any. Provide sequence number for any easements on site, utility, and/or grading sheets (base layer preferred).

BASE LAYER SHEET COMMENTS:
2) Admin Man Sec.2-06.3: Add DP14-0192 case number to Development Package sheets.

SITE PLAN SHEET COMMENTS:
3) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.8.C: Assure all existing and future right-of-way dimensions are correct. Assure Title report Schedule B Section II Exception 5 and 9 are labeled with docket/pages on site plan sheet.
4) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.7: Submit Rezoning conditions and show compliance. List the applicable rezoning file number and conditions of approval.

DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS:
5) Tech Man Sec.4-03.3.5.5.3, 4-03.3.5.1.3.a: Please be aware that ponding stormwater issues during final grading permit inspections can hold up CofO and final approvals. Infiltration rates shall meet Water Harvesting and Detention / Retention criteria per Tech Man Sec.4-03.III.3.5.1.3.a. For this project, it is imperative that stormwater runoff disposal drain down time is achieved within 12 hours. Provide statement in drainage report regarding infiltration, and explain how bleed pipes are proposed to be utilized and that positive gradients are provided on all basin / waterharvesting areas. Otherwise, acknowledge that any ponding stormwater in basin or water harvest areas during inspections will require resubmittal of re-engineered designs for basin and/or water harvesting areas; also, sufficient infiltration tests must be provided within the vicinity of the proposed retention/waterharvesting basin to establish acceptable percolation rates, with factor of safety; and acknowledge that post construction percolation testing may be required if bleed pipes are not proposed at outlets to drain lower elevation of basins.
6) Tech Man Sec.4-03.2.2: If soils report is submitted and indicates soil conditions at site that shows a constraint to retention requirement, retention volume may be waived with in-lieu detention (5yr threshold), if requested.
7) Tech Man Sec.4-03.3.5: Basin should have slope gradient called out to focus stormwater to outlet area and bleed pipes shall be provided.
8) Tech Man Sec.4-03.3.5.1.10, 4-04.13.4: Assure lowest finished floor of building meets RFE (1-ft above WSEL of basin). Show and label on plans.

GRADING, PAVING, DETAIL SHEET COMMENTS:
9) Tech Man Secs.2-01.4.1.C, 8-01.5.2.G: Address the following grading comments:
a) Label local Basis of Elevation location on grading plan.
b) Label minimum 2% slope away within trash enclosure pad on planview. Assure solid waste pick-up areas are clearly elevated so as not to become a flowline for general local flows in area.
c) Clarify/revise, delineate, and label disturbance / grading limits on grading plan sheet 4 that matches SWPPP sheet 8.
d) Assure all roof drainage information is provided including roof flow direction arrows, scuppers for all sidewalk locations, and associated details.
e) Label dimensions of basin area for inspection purposes.
10) Tech Man Sec.8-01.5.2.D: For Refuse Enclosure detail G on sheet 6, address following comments:
a) Add note that gates shall be opaque (no see-through gates allowed).
b) Further clarify dimensions with dimension lines for clearance between bollards/gates.

UTILITIES / EASEMENTS COMMENTS:
11) Admin Man Sec.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. Assure complete information is provided for easements on the site.

STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN COMMENTS:
12) Tucson Code Chap.26 Art.2: The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) does not meet the minimum requirements of AzPDES Construction General Permit (CGP). Revise SWPPP according to the following comments:
a) Depict and label disturbance / grading limits on SWPPP exhibit.
b) Clarify locations of interim erosion control measures on planview to match grading plan limits of disturbance.
c) Provide location map on SWPP, and show, label, and provide leader line for the receiving waters either on location map on cover sheet, on vicinity map on exhibit, or on other planview.
d) Provide a note to the SWPP plan cover sheet and/or front of SWPP report stating that the Operator shall report to ADEQ any noncompliance (including spills) which may endanger human health or the environment. The Operator shall orally notify the office listed below within 24 hours: Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 1110 W. Washington, 5th floor (5515B-1), Phoenix, AZ 85007, Office: 602-771-4466; Fax 602-771-4505
e) Add notation regarding restriction of storage or placement of construction material and vehicles within waterharvesting and basin areas.
f) Submit a SWPP report with operator information, sequential list of grading construction activities, list of potential pollutant sources, compliance evaluation report forms, etc.
13) For resubmittal package, provide 2 copies of revised SWPPP exhibit, report. Copy of NOI, and general permit will be required at Pre-con but may be submitted with resubmittal.

SOILS/GEOTECHNICAL REPORT COMMENTS:
14) Tech Man Sec.4-03.III.3.5.1.3.a: Provide infiltration testing results unless detention is provided. Also provide recommendations for pavement structural design, and building setback from basin if basin is within 20-ft of proposed building.

Please provide a revised Development Package plan sheets, revised Drainage Report, Soils Report, and comprehensive response letter that address the comments provided above. If you have questions, call me at 837-4934.

Elizabeth Leibold, P.E., CPM, CFM
Civil Engineer
Engineering Division
Planning & Development Services Department
11/14/2014 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL SECTION 2-10.0.0: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS

Identification and Descriptive Data

All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the landscape plan will be identical in size and location to those shown on the base plan (site plan or tentative plat). Should amendments be required to the base plan through the review process, the same amendments will be made to the landscape plan which will then be resubmitted along with the base plan.

The landscape plan will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet:

Rezoning case;

Subdivision case;

Board of Adjustment case;

Design Development Option case;

Development Review Board (DRB) case; and/or,
Any other relevant case number for reviews or modifications that affect the site.

Use of the Public Right-of-Way

Non-required landscaping may be placed in the public right-of-way, if the following standards are met:

1. The landscaping is approved by the City Engineer or designee and complies with the City Engineer's standards on construction, irrigation, location, and plant type;

2. All vegetation complies with the standards of Section 7.6.4, Landscaping Standards; and,

3. The landscaping does not interfere with the use of the sidewalk.

Until the rezoning review and conditions are provided the requirements of these sections(s) cannot be verified.


Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed.

Additional comments may apply.
11/17/2014 ED ABRIGO PIMA COUNTY ASSESSOR Passed
11/17/2014 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 requested by review staff
4) All items needed to approve this plan
11/17/2014 PGEHLEN1 OTHER AGENCIES TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY Passed
11/17/2014 ROBERT YOUNG PIMA COUNTY PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW Passed
11/17/2014 GLENN HICKS COT NON-DSD PARKS & RECREATION Approved No existing or planned Tucson Parks and Recreation facilities are affected by this development.

Howard B. Dutt, ASLA
Landscape Architect
Tucson Parks & Recreation
(520) 837-8040
Fax: (520) 791-4008
Howard.Dutt@tucsonaz.gov
11/17/2014 PGEHLEN1 OTHER AGENCIES U. S. POST OFFICE Passed
11/17/2014 PGEHLEN1 UTILITIES CENTURYLINK Passed
11/17/2014 PGEHLEN1 UTILITIES EL PASO NATURAL GAS Passed

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
12/15/2014 AROMERO4 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed