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: DP17-0142
Parcel: 11620134A

Address:
875 W CUSHING ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL

Permit Number - DP17-0142
Review Name: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
07/27/2017 ALEXANDRA HINES START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
07/31/2017 ZELIN CANCHOLA COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Approved
08/02/2017 PAUL BAUGHMAN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change 1) Per UDC 7.4.6E1a and a change in configuration the curb radii at the northwest corner adjacent to the solid waste receptacle on sheet 4 should be changed from 8' to 18'.
2) Per TSM 2-01.4.1C6 recommendations contained in section 6.9 (page 13) of the geotechnical report should be incorporated into the plan. The geotechnical report requires a 4,000 psi compressive strength for the 6" thick concrete pad and a 4" ABC base underneath the concrete. The trash enclosure detail on sheet 9 of the Development Package shows an 8" thick concrete slab with a 3,000 psi compressive strength. Please verify that this is equivalent to what is being recommended in the geotechnical report or update accordingly. Please note that the geotechnical report was submitted for the first time with this 2nd submittal.
3) Per TSM 2-01.4.1C6 recommendations contained in section 7.7 (page 16) of the geotechnical report should be incorporated into the plan grading notes as follows; "The subgrade should be scarified, moistened as required, and recompacted for a minimum depth of 12 inches prior to placement of fill and pavement materials."
4) Per TSM 2-01.4.1C6 recommendations contained in section 7.9 (page 18) of the geotechnical report should be incorporated into the plan grading notes as follows; "Uncompacted lift thickness shall not exceed 12 inches."
5) The vehicle turning radii detail shown on sheet 9 does not seem to take into account the new proposed location of the solid waste structure. Engineer to verify intent is met.
6) The bank protection details on sheet 8 show stabilization of banks extending horizontally one foot beyond the 100-year bank protection instead of vertically. Please add a note to the details and/or provide an additional/modified dimension to clarify that the bank protection is to be constructed at least one foot vertically above the adjacent 100 year water surface elevation.
08/02/2017 GLENN HICKS COT NON-DSD PARKS & RECREATION Approved Tucson Parks and Recreation's previous comments have been adequately addressed.

Howard B. Dutt, RLA
Landscape Architect
Tucson Parks & Recreation
(520) 837-8040
Howard.Dutt@tucsonaz.gov
08/03/2017 ALEXANDRA HINES DESIGN PROFESSIONAL REVIEW Needs Review IID Package has not been submitted. IID Director Decision Letter needed to approve modifications in Development Package.
08/03/2017 ALEXANDRA HINES COT NON-DSD ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Passed No further review since no modification to trash and recycle requested.
08/03/2017 TOM MARTINEZ OTHER AGENCIES AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION Reqs Change Regional Traffic Engineering has a comment on this submittal; it looks as there are no traffic documents for the second submittal of the development in the package.

Regional Traffic Engineering is requesting that an analysis, from ADOT TGP 240, be presented in the next submittal to Regional Traffic. The proposed development is close enough to affect the I-10 eastbound and westbound off ramps operation at Congress St. and at the Westside Frontage Road Cushing St., which need to be identified and mitigated.

The page 240-14 of the policy needs to be filled out and returned to ADOT Regional Traffic Engineering for our records.

Thank you.

Tom Martinez <TMartinez@azdot.gov>
08/07/2017 ALEXANDRA HINES PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Approv-Cond Pima County Development Services has no objections to the approval of the Development Package with the following condition: an Observation Permit is required for any work within or adjacent to the existing Public Sewer easement DKT 5098 PG 658.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Joseph

Joseph Godoy
Site Review Project Manager
Pima County Development Services
201 N. Stone Ave
Tucson, AZ 85701
joseph.godoy@pima.gov
(520) 724-6756
08/08/2017 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved
08/09/2017 AHINES2 LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL
FROM: Alexandra Hines - Lead Planner
PDSD Landscape Review

PROJECT: Caterpillar Surface Mining & Technology HQ - Administrative and Professional Office
Development Package (1st Review)
DP17-0142 - C-2 & I-1 - 875 W Cushing St

TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 8, 2017

DUE DATE: August 8, 2017

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and any redlined plans along with a detailed response letter, which states how all landscape review comments were addressed.

This plan has been reviewed for compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Unified Development Code (UDC), the UDC Technical Standards Manual (TSM), and the UDC Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06.

2-10.4.1.A - ...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.

2. Comment not addressed. Provide information if an overlay is approved. Provide information from decision letter on Development Package if IID overlay is approved.
22. Comment not fully addressed. Comply with sight visibility triangle where no planted area creates a hazard by obstructing a driver's view of oncoming pedestrians, bicyclists, or vehicles per TSM 5-01.8.5. Clarify how trees in sight visibility triangle are in compliance.
23. Comment not addressed. Identify compliance with street landscape borders must be a minimum of ten feet wide as measured from the street property line per UDC 7.6.4.C.2.a. Identify compliance from property line by visitor parking.
24. Comment not fully addressed. Provide City Engineer approval that the use of the Public Right-of-Way is approval and complies with standards per 7.6.4.F. Provide written approval from TDOT Gary Wittwer in next submittal.

Additional review comments may be forthcoming due to response to landscape review comments or other review agency comments including owner driven changes to the plan.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Alexandra Hines, (520) 837-6975 or Alexandra.Hines@tucsonaz.gov.

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package.
08/09/2017 ALEXANDRA HINES 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) All approved documents submitted previously
3) A disk containing all items submitted
4) All items requested by review staff
5) All items needed to approve these plans
08/09/2017 ALEXANDRA HINES ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Alexandra Hines - Lead Planner for Steve Shields - Principal Planner
PDSD Zoning Review

PROJECT: Caterpillar Surface Mining & Technology HQ - Administrative and Professional Office
Development Package (1st Review)
DP17-0142 - C-2 & I-1 - 875 W Cushing St

TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 8, 2017

DUE DATE: August 8, 2017

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and the highlighted plans along with a detailed response letter, which states how all zoning review comments were addressed.

This plan has been reviewed for compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Unified Development Code (UDC), the UDC Technical Standards Manual (TSM), and the UDC Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06.

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... One year Expiration date is June 19, 2018.

1. Comment 14 not fully addressed. Acknowledged that IID will be submitted, if approved, provide information and conditions on development package. Provide information from decision letter on Development Package if IID overlay is approved.
2. Comment 19 not fully addressed. Provide documentation of monitoring well and probing well removed/abandoned. Provide written confirmation from Environmental Services.
3. Comment 20 not addressed. Applicant chose to make condition prior to C of O. Provide documentation of sewer easement and construction easement removed/abandoned in next submittal or prior to issuance of building C of O.
4. Comment 21 not addressed. Applicant chose to make condition prior to C of O. Provide documentation for PIA in next submittal or prior to issuance of building C of O as stated by 'design by separate plan' for Avenida Del Convento on sheet 4.
5. Comment 24 not fully addressed. Provide dimension of all radius shown on the plan per 7.4.6.E.1.a. Proposed radii does not meet standard in surface parking area and visitor parking area.
6. Comment 25 not fully addressed. Provide and dimension the required 2' setback per 7.4.6.F.2.b at the southwest corner of the site from the access lane to the property line & the northeast corner of the parking area from the wall to the PAAL & where the walls but up to the north access lane on sheet 5, see blue highlight. Identify 2' compliance from property line in southwest corner of property.
7. Comment 32 not fully addressed. Clarify parking structure design per keynote 10 on Site Plan, sheet 4. Provide fully dimensioned layout plan to see parking meets code requirements.
8. Comment 35 not fully addressed. Clearly show the short term bicycle layout on sheet 4. Resolve conflict between short term bicycle parking and landscape area in same area in sheet 4 and 14. Dimension short-term bicycle parking. Short term detail and dimension does not meet UDC Section 7.4.9.E.2.
9. Comment 37 not fully addressed. Provide a short term bicycle detail that clearly demonstrates how the requirements of 7.4.9.B.1 & .2, and 7.4.9.C are met. Also provide a long term bicycle detail that clearly demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1 & .2, and 7.4.9.D are met. Bicycle parking calculation does not appear correct. Demonstrate compliance to UDC Section 7.4.9.B.1.d. hard surface and -e. lighting. Seek exception from UDC Section 7.4.9.C.2.a location of short-term bicycle parking from PDSD Director.
10. Comment 38 not fully addressed. Clearly show the public entrance to the building on the plan and clearly demonstrate how the requirements of 7.4.9.C.2.a are met. Show all building doors to demonstrate all doors have a sidewalk.
11. Comment 40 not fully addressed. Provide dimension of structures from property lines. Show setback correctly on Cushing (MS&R) and Avenida Del Convento using the proposed height. View code section and please note the MS&R setback is back of curb and Avenida Del Convento is edge of nearest travel lane.
12. Comment 42 not fully addressed. Specify the sf of parking structure within footprint of structure on the site plan. On the site plan, sheet 4 (within footprint of structure under SF).
13. Comment 43 not fully addressed. Provide the height within footprint of building and parking structure. On the site plan, sheet 4 (within footprint of structure under SF) and on cover sheet (under Dimensional Standards state required and proposed). Provide comment response from letter on plan set.
14. Comment 44 not fully addressed. The maximum height permitted in C-2 zone is 40 feet. Include IID Decision Letter approval in next submittal. Provide information from decision letter on Development Package if IID overlay is approved.
15. Comment 47 not fully addressed. Identify correct location of double steel pedestrian gate on site plan and hardscape plan, sheet 4 and 10, see pink highlight. Clarify keynote or plans as there seems to not be further information on the Landscape Plans for the pedestrian turnstile as stated in keynote 15 on site plan, sheet 4.
16. Comment 52 not addressed. Applicant chose to make condition prior to C of O. Submit PIA for Avenida Del Convento and reflect plans in development package.
17. Comment 53 not fully addressed. Identify each detail on sheet 8, 9, 12 & 13 in each corresponding keynote. Example: Keynote 15... See xx Steel Screen Wall. Clarify keynote or plans as there does not appear to be further information on the Landscape Plans for the entrance gate as stated in keynote 16 on site plan, sheet 4. Clarify every keynote and plan on every sheet that references further information on the Landscape Plans or Hardscape Plans (i.e keynote 4). There does not appear to be further information or the keynote is mislabeled.
18. New comment since new to plans. Identify or keynote the items to the right/east of the trash enclosure?

Additional review comments may be forthcoming due to response to zoning review comments or other review agency comments including owner driven changes to the plan.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Alexandra Hines at (520) 837-6975 or Alexandra.Hines@tucsonaz.gov.

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: revised development package
08/09/2017 AHINES2 ZONING HC REVIEW Approved

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
08/16/2017 KROBLES1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed