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-0623-00272
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.3
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/28/2023 | Site Engineering | APPROVED | |||
| 09/01/2023 | Site Landscape | APPROVED | |||
| 09/21/2023 | CDRC Post Review Express | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 09/19/2023 | Commercial Plumbing | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | 1. No backwater valve note was found on sheet SSP02. [Initial comment: The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (MH02, 2326.50’) is less than 12” below the first floor elevation of the restroom/concession building (2326.50’). Provide a note on the plans requiring the installation of a backwater valve when future plumbing activities take place. Reference: Section 714.1, IPC 2018, as amended by the City of Tucson.] 2. A keynote tag #11 is shown on sheet SSP02 but there is no keynote 11 description on the drawing. [Initial comment: To what is keynote 11 on sheet SS01 referring?] |
||
| 09/21/2023 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Joaquin Murrieta Park – Phase 1 Site Improvements Development Package (2nd Review) TD-DEV-0623-00272 TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 21, 2023 DUE DATE: September 21, 2023 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 12, 2024. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. This comment was not addressed correctly. The total number of sheets is not correct and should match the number of sheets submitted. COMMENT: 2-06.4.2.D - The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx) provided on the plan shall only include the plans submitted for development package review.. 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 2. This comment was not addressed correctly. “RECREATION” is a use group not a use. The proposed use should be listed as “PARKS AND RECREATION SUBJECT TO USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS 4.9.13.B & C”. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – As a general note identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses. 3. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - As Silverbell Rd. is designated as an Arterial on the COT MS&R Map provide a general note on the cover sheet stating “THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC ARTICLE 5.4 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R). 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 4. The lot coverage does not appear to be correct. Review UDC Article 6.4.3 and provide a correct lot coverage calculation. Lot coverage should only include vehicle use areas and buildings. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.b – Provide a lot coverage calculation that meets the requirements of UDC Article 6.4.3. Maximum lot coverage is 60% see UDC TABLE 6.3-2.B: EXCEPTIONS TO THE R-1, R-2, R-3, MH-1, & MH-2 DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS. 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. 5. This comment was not fully addressed. Zoning was not able to find a dimensioned plan for the proposed vehicle parking show north of the proposed dog park. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Provide a fully dimensioned vehicle use area for all new or modified vehicle use areas. 6. The vehicle parking space calculation is not correct. Review UDC Table 7.4.41 and provide a correct vehicle parking space calculation. There is no vehicle parking requirement for “OPEN SPACE” in the UDC. Also the “ACCESSIBLE” parking calculation does not address the number of van accessible parking spaces. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – As new structures, concession building, new basketball courts and new parking area provided a vehicle parking space calculation that provides the number required and provided, ratio used, number of accessible vehicle parking spaces required and provided to include the number of required and provided van accessible spaces. 7. This comment was not fully addressed. The only sheet that provided sidewalk/path widths is sheet PVP08, but there are numerous proposed sidewalks and paths shown on other sheets not dimensioned. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Provide width dimensions for all proposed sidewalks, & paths. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Nicholas Martell at Nicholas.Martell@tucsonaz.gov. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package & detailed response letter. |
||
| 08/22/2023 | CDRC Application Completeness Express | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 08/25/2023 | Fire New Construction | REVIEW COMPLETED |