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: RESUBMITTAL - DEV STDS REVIEW (DSMR)
Permit Number - DS14-30
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - DEV STDS REVIEW (DSMR)
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/05/2014 | PGEHLEN1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/05/2014 | PGEHLEN1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | WRITE DECISION LETTER | Approv-Cond | This TSMR was approved on 11/5/2014. Please add the following information to the DevPack: 1) General note that lists the case number, modifications requested and conditions imposed, if any 2) TSMR Activity number to each sheet of the DevPack in the lower right corner. |
| 11/05/2014 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING | REVIEW | Approved | Per first review. |
| 11/05/2014 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | We updated the southwest entrance to the site with 25’ radii curb returns. Please verify that this is the only objection you had to the TSMR. With this change would you be able to fully support the TSMR? Affirmative - this is the only objection TDOT had to the TSMR. With this change we would support the TSMR. Also, we updated the median curbing per the phone conversation that you and I had this morning, see Sheets 2 and 3 for detail on those changes. I have also added a General Note that a Private Improvement Agreement will be required for the median work in the right-of-way. I wanted to make it clear that we would be providing further detail, including stationing and curb details, on the PIA following approval of the Development Plan. Yes, as discussed we would need to see the changes to the turn lane on the Site plan with dimensions, but fully designed on the PIA. Minor changes may apply. Zelin >>> Steve Shields 11/4/2014 7:53 AM >>> My only comments have to do with the easements and TSMR. I found the covenant in the submitted documentation even though your response letter stated that it would be provided at a later time. As far as assuming that the TSMR for sidewalk location takes care of Ron and Zelin’s comments that’s up to them. Steve Shields City of Tucson Development Services Lead Planner 520-791-5550 Ext. 1180 Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov >>> Jeff Hunt <jphunt@cypresscivil.com> 11/4/2014 1:54 AM >>> Review Team –  As you may be aware, our Development Plan was put on the Mayor and Council Agenda for November however, there were a few outstanding items that needed to be resolved. As a result, we took the comments that were received today for the previous submittal and compiled the attached revisions. There were a couple of items that need to be discussed and I have highlighted your name below in an effort to try and resolve those things as quickly as possible. I will be trying to call or meet with all of you tomorrow in an attempt to gain resolution of these items and maintain our scheduled date at Mayor and Council. There are major implications with missing this date and your help is appreciated.  Ron – Zoning approved the TSMR and I believe that satisfies our request to have on-site connectivity using portions of the sidewalk within the right-of-way. The right-of-way sidewalk is ADA compliant. Can you please confirm that Zoning’s approval of our TSMR for right-of-way sidewalk connectivity satisfies your lone comment on the TSMR? Also, we have added more blown up detailing of ramps and areas of specific ADA concern, as you had requested.  Zelin – We updated the southwest entrance to the site with 25’ radii curb returns. Please verify that this is the only objection you had to the TSMR. With this change would you be able to fully support the TSMR? Also, we updated the median curbing per the phone conversation that you and I had this morning, see Sheets 2 and 3 for detail on those changes. I have also added a General Note that a Private Improvement Agreement will be required for the median work in the right-of-way. I wanted to make it clear that we would be providing further detail, including stationing and curb details, on the PIA following approval of the Development Plan.  Ken – The northwest egress from the site will be an exiting movement only. We have added signs to make this more clear and based on that information I believe the concern regarding the trash trucks exiting the site not having the necessary maneuverability has hopefully been taken care of, please confirm. Also, we adjusted the trash enclosure placement and added dimensions to be sure that the appropriate clearances have been provided.  Jason – We have pre-emptively added a TSMR note assuming approval on 11/4 with resolution of Zelin and Ron’s comments. That note and the reference case number are now on the plan and that was the bulk of your comments. Thank you for providing approval of the Drainage Statement. The only other item is the driveway separations and we have noted those on the attached version of the plan. Please note that we ensured the maximum amount of driveway separation possible considering the existing nature of the alley and entrances. We could not accommodate the 80’ referenced in your comment but we did get all radii to work without conflicting with one another based on either reductions approved by TDOT (northwest) or maximizing the distance between the existing and new drives so 25’ radii would work (southeast). I have included a detailed response in my attached comment response letter, please let me know if you have any questions.  Steve – It seems as though David approved our request for off-site connection of the on-site buildings with our original TSMR submittal. Assuming the outstanding comments with Ron and Zelin are resolved based on my clarifications then this should satisfy the bulk of your remaining comments. As for the easements, I will follow up with the building permit number that we can associate the easements with however, we are working to resolve those things ASAP. I will get you copies of the easement resolutions the moment we have them. ALSO – the recorded covenant that we submitted with the last submittal, I was under the impression this took care of our combo needs. Was I under the wrong impression? I noticed you still had a request for an Approved Pima County Combo at the end of your comments but it was no longer a comment. I am hoping to get this clarified for myself and Jason Green. Thanks Steve.  Thank you all for your time reading through this lengthy email. I look forward to touching base tomorrow. Landscape will be forthcoming following receipt of any comments. If approved, I will update the title block with the TSMR case number and add to this set, unchanged.  Regards,  Jeff Hunt, P.E. 2102 N. Country Club Road #9 Tucson, Arizona 85716 520.261.7440    phone 520.798.3341    fax  |
| 11/05/2014 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Approved | Good Morning Jeff, I concur that approval of the TSMR routing around the right of way perimeter is an acceptable accessible route connection for the building complex and will approve the TSMR as long as you have provided all the additional large scale details explaining the several sidewalk and curb ramps as referenced in my last review comments. If you have any other questions please feel free to contact me. Many Thanks, Ron Brown Architect Structural Plans Examiner City of Tucson Planning and Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Tucson, Arizona 85701 Office: (520) 837-4908 Fax: (520) 879-8010 E-mail: ronald.brown@tucsonaz.go |