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 - RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - DP18-0298
Review Name: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/26/2019 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 03/04/2019 | SBEASLE1 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Reqs Change | February 28, 2019 Sharon Beasley Permit Technician City of Tucson Public Works Buildings - 201 North Stone Avenue Tucson, AZ. 85701 RE: DP18-0298 Hilton Home2, 2nd Submittal, Received February 26, 2019 Dear Ms. Beasley, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on DP18-0298, Hilton Home2; 2nd Submittal, a development package application for an approximately 2.53 acre site, located southeast of the intersection of South Bay Colony Drive and East Valencia Road. The property is zoned Park Industrial (P-I) and Industrial 1 (I-1), with the proposed development being a new hotel. This site is within the Tucson International Airport avigation easement requirements and public disclosure area, FAA traffic pattern airspace, FAA Part 77 airspace, and the City of Tucson Airport Environs Zone. The Tucson Airport Authority recognizes that the Avigation Easement has been recorded for this project site. The Tucson Airport Authority conditionally approves the subject request contingent upon the following condition of approval, as noted below. This condition shall be identified in the general notes of the revised development plan. 1. "According to the FAA Notice Criteria Tool, this proposed structure exceeds the following Notice Criteria: a. Your proposed structure exceeds an instrument approach area by 77 feet and aeronautical study is needed to determine if it will exceed a standard of subpart C of 14CFR Part 77. The FAA, in accordance with 77.9, requests that you file. b. Your proposed structure is in proximity to a navigation facility and may impact the assurance of navigation signal reception. The FAA, in accordance with 77.9, requests that you file. c. 77.9(b) by 35 ft. The nearest airport is TUS, and the nearest runway is 03/21. d. The FAA requests that you file The applicant shall file Form 7460 with the FAA at least 45 days before construction activities begin for the project. It is highly recommended that the applicant file earlier than 45 days to provide the applicant with sufficient time to respond to any concerns which are identified by the FAA. Any cranes used which are used must also be identified with Form 7460. Please file Form 7460 at https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/portal.jsp" Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or concerns regarding this comment letter. I can be reached by email at srobidoux@flytucson.com or by telephone at 520-573-4811. Respectfully, Scott Robidoux, Senior Airport Planner |
| 03/26/2019 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/26/2019 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL SECTION 2-10.0.0: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS 4.1 Identification and Descriptive Data A. 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. 7.6. LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING Street Landscape Borders Minimum Width Street landscape borders must be a minimum of ten feet wide as measured from the street property line. 4.3 Streetscape Landscape Border - Maximum Width In situations where the street landscape border is wider than the minimum ten foot standard, the landscape border width needs to be determined for the purposes of calculating the 50% vegetative coverage standard. The width is that area between the required screen and the property line, unless there is permitted encroachment into the right-of-way as per this section. Vegetative Ground Cover Fifty percent or more of the area of the street landscape border must be covered with shrubs or vegetative ground cover. The required ground coverage must be achieved within two years from the date of planting. Vegetation used to meet the screening standards is not included in the ground cover calculation as provided in Section 5-01.5.3 Dimension Landscape borders, provide coverage calculations and identify screeinig elements . Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. Additional comments may apply |
| 03/26/2019 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: Hilton Home 2 Tucson - Travelers Accommodation Lodging (Commercial Use) Development Package (2nd Review) DP18-0298 - 6555 S. Bay Colony Drive P-I / I-1 Zoning TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 26, 2019 DUE DATE: March 26, 2019 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and any redlined plans along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. 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 December 11, 2019. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS) *** Please address only the remaining 10 zoning review comments noted as "Follow up to comment". The comments from the previous review were left for the reviewer's and applicant's reference. 1. Follow up to previous comment 1: It does not appear that the title block on the sheets is consistent. Add a title block that includes the information requested Previous comment 1: The title block provided in the lower right corner appears to be the title used for the TDOT and Tucson Water Department drawings. The following is a typical title block used on DP plans. While it is acknowledged that all firms have or use their own individual title block, the one below includes the common information in the standards. If the title block used on the DP package can be modified to include the information required by the standards in AM 2-06 feel free to do so or modify it to the typical title block below. 2. Follow up to Previous comment 2: Sheet 19 does not appear to have an area designated for the PDSD stamp. Revise a minimum 5' x 3' area next to the title block 2-06.3.5 - A three-inch by five-inch space shall be reserved in the lower right quadrant of each sheet for an approval stamp. Previous comment 2: All sheets shall include a 3 inch by 5 inch area next to the title block reserved for a PDSD Digital Stamp to be applied by PDSD staff once the DP is approved. 3. Follow up to previous comment 11: The development package case number assigned by PDSD to this project was not listed as requested per the previous comment. List the land split case number S07-152 as reference next to the title block. 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. Previous comment 11: Provide the development package case number, DP18-0298, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. List the administrative address next to the title block of all plan sheets. 4. Follow up to previous comment 15: The correct section corner numbers were labeled on the location map; however the reverse section numbers should read 17 and 16 from left to right. 2-06.4.4.C - Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled. Previous comment 15: Label the section corners based on the location map drawn on the cover sheet. Valencia Road and Country Club Road is the Section corner intersection. The section corners 8, 9, 16, 17 shall be listed on the location map. 5. Follow up to previous comment 24: The curve data (distance and Bearings) for C1 and C2 must be labeled on the site plan sheets. 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. Previous comment 24: The site boundary cannot be verified until a copy of the PDSD approved and Pima County recorded lot split / survey drawing is provided. 6. Follow up to previous comment 25: The recordation information for Bay Colony or Valencia could not be verified on the site plan sheet. Also the both street should also be labeled as Private and public on the site plan sheet. (It is acknowledged that sheets 11 and 12 indicate Private and Public.) 2-06.4.8.C - The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. Previous comment 25: Provide the information as noted by the standard above for Valencia Road and Bay Colony Drive as noted by the standard above. 7. Follow up to previous comment 29: The sight visibility triangles at the entrance along Bay Colony must be drawn and labeled. A far and nearside triangle is required at this location. The pedestrian SVT is not applicable because there is no median in the roadway. Consult with the Engineering reviewer for the correct SVT requirements. 2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show future and existing sight visibility triangles. On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section. Previous comment 29: If applicable draw and label the SVTs as Noted by the standard above; see the PDSD Engineering Reviewer comments related to SVTs. 8. Follow up to previous comment 34: The fully dimensioned detail drawings for the short and long term bicycle parking facilities could not be verified on the plans. Please include the information for the short and long term facilities by standard 2-06.4.9.H.5.d. 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. Previous comment 34: Bicycle parking requirements, detail drawings, facility locations, calculations etc. as noted by the standard above will be verified on the next submittal of the DP. 9. Follow up to previous comment 38: Label the square footages and proposed building height within the building footprint on sheet 2. 2-06.4.9.Q - Provide the square footage and the height of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building(s). Previous comment 38: Label the square footage and building height within the building footprint. 10. Follow up to previous comment 42: Until the correct SVT is drawn on the site plan sheet it is not clear that the sign will be out of the SVT area. 2-06.4.9.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. Previous comment 42: If applicable draw and label the location, type and size of any proposed free-standing monument sign(s). If you have any questions about this transmittal, Contact David Rivera on Tuesday or Wednesday at (520) 837-4957 or by email David.Rivera@tucsonaz.gov or contact Steve Shields any time during the week at (520) 837-4956 or email Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 03/27/2019 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 04/04/2019 | JOHN VAN WINKLE | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DP18-0298 1) Previous comment 2. The engineering seal on the drainage report cover sheet is illegible. Correct as needed 2) Follow up Show on 100 year flood plain limits, proposed vs developed. Any flow over 100 cfs is regulatory and as such an environmental resource report with a corresponding mitigation plan is needed. Reference City of Tucson Technical Standards Manual section 4-02.2.C 3) Portion of Previous Comment 15. Supply the SWPPP manual on next submittal 4) Portion of previous comment 17. Show the required service area in front of the trash enclosure; note the maneuvering area in front is a minimum of 40' deep. Reference TSM section John Van Winkle, P.E. John.VanWinkle@tucsonaz.gov 520-837-5007 |
| 04/05/2019 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PLAN RETURNED FOR CORRECTIONS NOTICE The reviews have been completed and a resubmittal is required. Activity Number: DP18-0298 Project Description: E SITE/GRADING/SWPPP - Hilton Home 2 Tucson. To view review comments, visit PRO at www.tucsonaz.gov/PRO, then search by Activity Number. (If new comments aren't shown yet, check back later as data flows to PRO periodically throughout the day.) After the necessary corrections have been made, name your documents accordingly - a 2nd submittal document would be titled: 2_Plan_Set. Submit the following items to the PDSD Filedrop at https://www.tucsonaz.gov/file-upload-pdsd. In the Project Description field, enter the Activity Number. 1) Comment Response Letter (lists changes to the Plan and which reviewer comments are being addressed) 2) Corrected Plan Set (all pages, full set) 3) Items requested by review staff After resubmittal, the plans will re-enter the standard 20-working-day review cycle. The fee balance is $0 (zero). The Project Manager can be reached via email: Loren.Makus@TucsonAz.gov or phone: (520) 837-4927. Thank you. Sharon Beasley City of Tucson Planning and Development Services Attn: Permit Counter 201 N. Stone Avenue, First Floor Tucson, AZ 85701 |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/05/2019 | SBEASLE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |