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: In Review
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.2
Permit Number - TD-DEV-0824-00238
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.2
Review Status: In Review
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | CDRC Post Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| N/A | ROW Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| N/A | Site Landscape | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/05/2024 | Site Engineering | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | TD-DEV-0824-00238 4888 N STONE AV Site engineering comments are as follows: 1. The waste enclosure grades are out of spec as shown on Sheet C4.1. The enclosure slab should slope toward the front at 1% and the apron should slope away from the enclosure at 2% per TSM 8. 2. The clear space for the waste enclosure as depicted on Sheet C3.1 is not enough to accommodate the trash service vehicles when the loading zone is occupied. 3. Pedestrian circulation is required to connect all buildings, dumpster areas, common use areas, and the sidewalk on the street frontage per TSM 7-01.3.3. Show pedestrian access to waste enclosure. Ryan Insalaco Email: ryan.insalaco@tucsonaz.gov Phone: (520) 837-5351 |
||
| 11/18/2024 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: El Rio Health Rillito Clinic Development Package (2nd Review) TD-DEV-0824-00238 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 18, 2024 DUE DATE: November 22, 2024 COMMENTS: 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 , 2025. 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 1. This comment was not fully addressed. Review UDC Table 4.8-4 and provide all applicable Use Specific Standards that apply to the proposed use. 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. 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. 2. This comment was not fully addressed. Provide PAAL width dimensions for the PAALs providing access to the new parking along the north and east side of sheet C3.0. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Provide PAAL width dimensions for all PAAL associated with new vehicle parking. 3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – As the drive-through that is proposed on the south elevation of permit TC-COM-1024-02030, was not clearly shown on the DP, the following comment applies. Clearly demonstrate that the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.6.F.2.a.(2). 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – As the drive-through that is proposed on the south elevation of permit TC-COM-1024-02030, was not clearly shown on the DP, the following comment applies. Review UDC Article 7.4.7 and show the required stacking spaces on the plan. 5. The PDMR must be approved by all review agencies prior to approval of this DP.COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Compact vehicle parking spaces are not allowed, and a Parking Design Modification Request (PDMR), UDC Article 7.4.10, will need to be submitted and approve for the reduced width of the proposed vehicle parking spaces. Also, per UDC Article 7.4.10.D.9 The number of parking spaces with decreased dimensions may not exceed 10% of the total number of parking spaces provided. Based on 563 provided vehicle parking spaces you are only allowed 56 compact spaces on this site. A Board of Adjustment for Variance will need to be submitted and approved to all 58 compact spaces. 6. This comment was not fully addressed. Detail 1 sheet C7.0 still shows the incorrect dimension. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The wheel stop location dimensions shown on detail 1 sheet C7.0 and details 3 & 4 sheet C7.1 are not correct. Review UDC Article 7.4.6.H.3 and Figure 7.4.6-C and provide the correct dimension. 7. This comment was not addressed correctly. Medical Services Outpatient is not a civic land use, see UDC Article 11.3.4 and falls under the Commercial Services use group. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.c – Provide a loading space calculation the provides the number required and provided. 8. This comment was not addressed correctly. Per UDC Article 7.4.3.G when a fraction is less than one-half the number of required spaces is adjusted to the next lower whole number. The short-term required number should be 22 and the long-term should be 9. Per COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - The bicycle required numbers are not correct. Review UDC Article 7.4.3.G and provide the correct number of required spaces. 9. This comment was not addressed. If you are proposing that the existing site lighting will illuminate the bicycle parking state so on the plan/detail. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Detail 15, sheet C7.0 Clearly demonstrate how the requirement of UDC Articles 7.4.9.D.5 is met. 10. This comment was not addressed. If you are proposing that the existing site lighting will illuminate the bicycle parking state so on the plan/detail. Detail 12, sheet C7.0 Clearly demonstrate how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1.e & 7.4.9.B.2.a are met. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – As the drive-through that is proposed on the south elevation of permit TC-COM-1024-02030, was not clearly shown on the DP, the following comment applies. Per TCM Section 7-01.4.1.G Sidewalks or crosswalks cannot cross any type of stacking areas for drive-through lanes. That said the crosswalk shown about midway in the proposed drive-through will need to be relocated. 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. |
||
| 10/24/2024 | CDRC Application Completeness | REVIEW COMPLETED |