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: Requires Resubmit
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.3
Permit Number - TD-DEV-0524-00143
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.3
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/12/2024 | Commercial Plumbing | APPROVED | |||
| 07/17/2024 | Site Engineering | APPROVED | |||
| 08/13/2024 | Site Landscape | APPROVED | CDRC TRANSMITTAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT REVIEWER: CHAD KELLER, RLA PDSD SITE LANDSCAPE/NATIVE PLANT PRESERVATION SECTION PROJECT: NEW FUEL STATION WITH 10 FUELING POSITIONS AND A 1,440 S.F. CONVENIENCE STORE WITHIN THE EXISTING PARKING LOT OF A WALMART SUPERCENTER ACTIVITY NO: TD-DEV-0524-00143 ADDRESS/PARCEL: 7150 E SPEEDWAY BL/13323164A ZONING: PAD-3 GATEWAY CENTER PAD This plan has been reviewed for compliance with applicable development criteria in the City of Tucson Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-11 and Technical Manual (TM) Section for landscape, native plants, and water harvesting. Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Landscape/NPPO Review Section comments are addressed. SITE LANDSCAPE/NPPO SECTION COMMENTS: Pre-construction meeting prior to construction is required to ensure that CRWHP refers to civil grading plan and details. If you have any questions about these comments, I can be reached at chad.keller@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 08/13/2024 | CDRC Post Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 08/05/2024 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Walmart Store #1291 – Fuel Station Development Package (1st Review) TD-DEV-0524-00143 TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 21, 2024 DUE DATE: June 30, 2024 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with 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). 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 June 3, 2025. 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. This comment was not fully addressed. Sheets 2 & 3 have an incorrect page number. COMMENT: 2-06.4.2.D – The total number of sheets 21 listed on all sheets is not correct, see comment 1. Page 25 does not have the total number of sheets. Also, provide the page number on sheets 22 – 28. 2. This comment was not addressed correctly. The PAD map shall clearly show the PAD boundary. COMMENT: 2-06.4.6 – As the proposed site is located within PAD-3 include a reduced-scale map of the PAD on the first sheet, indicating the location of the portion being developed. 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 - Zoning and Land Use Notes 3. This comment was not addressed correctly. Zoning only asked for the reference to “AIRPORT ENIVIRONS (DAVIS MONTAN AIR FORCE BASE VINCINTY) PER UDC 5.6” be removed from the note. The MS&R note is still required as both Speedway & Kolb are designated on the COT MS&R Map. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a – Remove the reference to “AIRPORT ENIVIRONS (DAVIS MONTAN AIR FORCE BASE VINCINTY) PER UDC 5.6” as the “VICINITY “ is not part of the AEZ requirements. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 4. This comment was not addressed correctly. Review UDC Article 6.4.6.C.2 and figure 6.4.6-B and provide the correct calculation. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.b – Per PAD-3 Development Standard Section D.1.c.(2), pg. IX-37, provide a Floor Area Ration that meets the requirements of UDC Article 6.4.6. 5. This comment was not addressed correctly. Review the definition of Building Coverage found on page IX-7 of PAD-3 and provide a correct calculation. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.b – Per PAD-3 Development Standard Section D.1.c.(3), pg. IX-37, provide a Building Coverage calculation. 6. This comment was not addressed correctly. The building expansion calculation is cumulative and based on DP21-0112 there was a building expansion of 2,169 sq. ft. plus the proposed 1,440 sq. ft. for a total of 3,609 sq.ft. of cumulative expansion. Based on DP14-0018 the total building square footage on site prior to DP21-0112 was 179,724 sq. ft. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.c – Provide a building area expansion calculation on the plan. This calculation is cumulative and shall include the building addition shown on DP21-0112. 2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided. 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. 7. Zoning acknowledges your response to this comment but those lines shown dividing the overall parcel no longer exist, remove them from the plan. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.A – Sheet C4.1 shows lines with distance and bearing that appear to divide the parcel into 4 pieces. Clarify what these lines are and what this sheet is for. 8. This comment was not addressed correctly. By definition the use of this site is not a shopping center, UDC Article 11.3.9.C.3 and should be listed as General Merchandise Sales, Retail Establishment, Large. The vehicle parking space calculation shall only reference the required number based on 1 space per 300 sq. ft. of gross floor area, which is the standard formula, UDC Article 7.4.3.A.2. The calculation shall provide the number required based on the 1 to 300 requirement and the number provided. The calculation shall also include the number of required and provide accessible parking spaces to include the number of van accessible required and provided. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The vehicle parking space calculation is not correct. Per PAD-3 Development Standard Section D.1.c.(4), pg. IC-37 the parking is per LUC section 3.3.0. As the LUC is not longer applicable it would be per UDC Table 7.4.4-1. 9. This comment was not addressed correctly. Per UDC Article 7.4.6.D.2.b the minimum width is 10’. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Provide a parking space width dimension for the space directly east of the proposed long-term bicycle parking. 10. Per DP14-0018 there should be 26 short-term and 16 long-term bicycle parking spaces on site. You plan only shows that there are 20 short-term and 2 long-term on site. Clarify what happened to the require bicycle parking and if it has been removed it will need to be replaced. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – The short- & long-term bicycle parking calculation is not correct. The calculation shall include the entire site and show the number of required and provided. 11. This comment was not addressed correctly. Provide a detail for the long-term bicycle parking and the short-term detail does not address UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1.d, .e, 7.4.9.B.2.a, .f, & g. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Provide a detail for both the short- and long-term bicycle parking that clearly demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9 are met. 12. This comment was not fully addressed. Provide the required sidewalk out to Finance Center Dr. or submit a Technical Standards Modification request to allow the use of the sidewalk within the ROW along Speedway to provide the connection to Finance Dr. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Clearly demonstrate that the requirements of TSM Section 7-01.4.1.A is met. 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. Zoning may consider using the sidewalk connection show out to the Speedway sidewalk and using the sidewalks in the ROWs to meet this requirement. A Technical Standard Modification Request (TSMR) would be required Prior to submittal of the TSMR contact Nicholas Ross at (520) 837-4029 or email Nicholas.Ross@tucsonaz.gov. to determine if he can support this request. 13. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Clearly demonstrate that the requirements of TSM Section 7-01.4.1.A is met. The sidewalk must connect the proposed building to the existing building. Zoning may consider using the sidewalk connection show out to the Speedway sidewalk and using the sidewalks in the ROWs to meet this requirement. A Technical Standard Modification Request (TSMR) would be required Prior to submittal of the TSMR contact Nicholas Ross at (520) 837-4029 or email Nicholas.Ross@tucsonaz.gov. to determine if he can support this request. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Nicholas Martell at Nicholas.Martell@tucsonaz.gov. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: A revised development package as well as a comment response letter. To resubmit, visit the Tucson Development Center Online at https://tdc-online.tucsonaz.gov/#/home. The instructions for resubmittal can be found at https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/pdsd/documents/tdc-faq/new-pdfs/revisions-and-resubmittals.pdf. |
||
| 07/09/2024 | CDRC Application Completeness | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 07/17/2024 | Traffic Engineering Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | Traffic Engineering Division agrees with the trip generation, ITE published pass-by rates, and assumptions used in the TIA. No comments on the TIA document. Based on the fact that the development will have little to no impact on the level-of-service at the Speedway/Kolb intersection, we do not object to the development project proceeding. Any deficient movements at the intersection identified are that way in the existing and/or future background condition. |