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 - REVISION
Permit Number - DP15-0036
Review Name: DEV PKG - REVISION
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/30/2015 | AROMERO4 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/05/2015 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 11/05/2015 | PGEHLEN1 | COT NON-DSD | ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES | Approved | Hello Patricia, With the revision as shown, the Development Plan is approved on behalf of the Environmental Services Dept. Thanks, Ken From: Jeff Hunt [jphunt@cypresscivil.com] Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 12:18 PM To: Ken Perry Cc: Matt Stuart; Bowers, Lisa; Patricia Gehlen Subject: RE: DS15-25 Thank you Ken. Please see attached. We have added the pad and note now shown, as requested in the TSMR. We appreciate you looking at this right away for us this morning. Have a great afternoon and weekend. Regards, Jeff Hunt, PE logo 01.12 - small Principal 2102 N Country Club Road #9 Tucson, Arizona 85716 (520) 261-7440 From: Ken Perry [mailto:kperry@perryengineering.net] Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 7:50 AM To: 'Jeff Hunt' <jphunt@cypresscivil.com> Cc: 'Matt Stuart' <mstuart@cypresscivil.com>; 'Bowers, Lisa' <lisa@metroted.com>; 'Patricia Gehlen' <Patricia.Gehlen@tucsonaz.gov> Subject: RE: DS15-25 I have conditionally approved the TSMR DS15-25 pending removal of the 5 ft. apron and replacing it with the standard 10 ft. apron with #4 rebar at 12” on center in 6”, 3,000 psi concrete. I made a site visit this week and notice the 5 ft. apron has been broken. Add this to the revision and I can approve. Ken From: Jeff Hunt [mailto:jphunt@cypresscivil.com] Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 9:29 PM To: kperry@perryengineering.net Cc: Matt Stuart; Bowers, Lisa; Patricia Gehlen Subject: RE: DS15-25 Ken, I hope you are doing well. We are looking at finally updating our Development Plan for the Manning House to keep the existing trash enclosure. As discussed in May we are going to be adding the new bollard to the back side of the existing enclosure and we already have the parking area reconfigured to accommodate the required 3’ clear space. Let me know if you have any questions. You are listed as the single reviewer required for approval on the DP revision. We also have a TSMR for this revision that you either have already seen or will be seeing soon. We are hopeful that this revision meets your approval and is in line with the original discussions we had in May. I have included your email from May as a refresher of those conversations, if necessary. Regards, Jeff Hunt, PE logo 01.12 - small Principal 2102 N Country Club Road #9 Tucson, Arizona 85716 (520) 261-7440 From: Patricia Gehlen [mailto:Patricia.Gehlen@tucsonaz.gov] Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 9:26 AM To: Hunt', 'Jeff <jphunt@cypresscivil.com>; Bowers, Lisa <lisa@metroted.com> Cc: Stuart Matt <mstuart@cypresscivil.com> Subject: RE: DS15-25 Jeff- Attached are the submittal requirements and fees. This one is so easy I recommend getting Ken's approval electronically and once we have it, I can get two copies of revised sheet 3 from Lisa for final signature. Trish Patricia Gehlen Project Manager Planning and Development Services Department City of Tucson (520) 837-4919 >>> Jeff Hunt <jphunt@cypresscivil.com> 10/21/2015 1:26 PM >>> Trish – Manning House DP is DP15-0036, which I am sure you know, I am just restating to be thorough. You are correct, that plan was approved and just prior to approval the client was discussing the ability to keep their existing trash enclosure. We had talked with Ken Perry and gotten his ok to do so as long as we processed a TSMR and added a bollard. At the time he was the last and final approval and the client was anxious to get into the field so we left the new trash enclosure called out and processed for approval, noting with Ken our intent to come back later with a revision and TSMR. I had hoped to process the TSMR for approval prior to the revision so we could already have the approval in place when the revision package comes in. If that is backwards thinking on my part that is 100% ok, I am happy to get you the revision package now to open a workflow that the TSMR can be tied to. I will know better for next time as well. I already have a revision letter (attached) and revised Sheet 3 (attached) to submit for the requested revision. What would be the best way to proceed for all parties? I am not under the gun right now. We have 3-4 weeks to get this resolved before anyone starts getting nervous about delivery. With the short review timeframes of the TSMRs and this revision being only to 1 reviewer I had anticipated that being plenty of time. Regards, Jeff Hunt, PE logo 01.12 - small Principal 2102 N Country Club Road #9 Tucson, Arizona 85716 (520) 261-7440 From: Patricia Gehlen [mailto:Patricia.Gehlen@tucsonaz.gov] Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 8:19 AM To: 'Jeff Hunt' <jphunt@cypresscivil.com>; Lisa Bowers <lisa@metroted.com> Subject: DS15-25 Morning- The above listed TSMR was submitted yesterday. We do not generally process TSMR without an active development package. The application does not list any related activity numbers nor is there an development package under review (we have an approved development package which should not need a TSMR). What is the related case number? Thanks Patricia Gehlen Project Manager Planning and Development Services Department City of Tucson (520) 837-4919 |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/05/2015 | KROBLES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |