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 REVIEW v.1
Permit Number - TD-DEV-1022-00007
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE REVIEW v.1
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/07/2022 | OK to Submit - External Reviewer PC Addressing | NOT REQUIRED | Addressing to review on full review. | ||
| 11/14/2022 | CDRC Post Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/14/2022 | Commercial Plumbing | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/14/2022 | Design Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/14/2022 | External Reviewers - Pima County Addressing | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/14/2022 | Fire New Construction | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/14/2022 | Historic | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/14/2022 | NPPO | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/14/2022 | Site Engineering | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/14/2022 | Site Landscape | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/14/2022 | Site Zoning | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/14/2022 | Traffic Engineering Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/14/2022 | CDRC Review Coordinator | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PROJECT: MILAGRO ON ORACLE ACTIVITY NO. TD-DEV-1022-00007 ADDRESS/PARCEL:2445 N ORACLE RD/107-09-049B; 107-09-050A; 107-09-051A ZONING: C-2; UOD-GRID-ORACLE CENTER (SUB-CENTER B) TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 14, 2022 DUE DATE: November 14, 2022 Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter which states how all Landscape Review Sections comments have been addressed. 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. 1. General Note: UDC 2-10.4.1 Identification and Descriptive Data - 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. 2. General Note: Please ensure all Zoning and Engineering Comments have been addressed prior to Landscape Approval Section comments. 3. General Note: AM 4.1.B.f Please reference Case No TD-DEV-1022-00007 across all Landscape/Irrigation/NPPO plans 4. Please add Construction Detail to Landscape Plan set showing root barrier for trees and/or shrubs against hardscape. 5.Please show roof top drainage patterns and show how they are incorporated into the rainwater harvestings areas and into the rainwater harvesting calculations. 6. Adherence to the Low Impact Development Standards outlined in Section 5 of the PCRFCD Design Standards for Stormwater Detention and Retention is required and shall work in conjunction with the Commercial Rainwater Harvesting design. Using Low Impact Development design and water harvesting provides critical basin detention and first flush retention for all new development and impervious area. The newly adopted Detention/Retention Manual can be found: https://webcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government/Flood%20Control/Rules%20and%20Procedures/Stormwater%20Detention-Retention/dssdr-final-201406-manual.pdf With CoT edits to the manual are found at: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/pdsd/codes/Detention_Retention_Manual_Tech_Standards_Amemdments.pdf If you have any questions about these comments, I can be reached at Matthew.Carlton@tucsonaz.gov or 520-837-4988 |
||
| 11/01/2022 | CDRC Application Completeness | REVIEW COMPLETED | Review completed RS | ||
| 11/01/2022 | OK to Submit - Engineering | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 11/03/2022 | OK to Submit - Zoning | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Loran Shamis PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: Milagro on Oracle – 2445 N Oracle Rd Development Package (1st Review) TD-DEV-1022-0007 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 7, 2022 DUE DATE: December 1, 2022 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 November 1, 2023. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS) 1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 - Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-1022-00007, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - The project intends use the Grant Road Improvement District GRID) urban overlay district per General Note #25, update the note by providing the application case number and the date of approval, and any conditions of approval. Zoning cannot approve the development package until Special Districts has approved your overlay application for the requested modifications. 3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.8.C - Label and provide the dimension of the alley to the west. 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.A - A lot combination processed through the Pima County Assessor’s is required to develop the three parcels (107-09-049B, 107-09-050A and 107-09-051A) as one site. Provide documentation from the Assessor’s that the lot combination has been approved. 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.2 – Correct the sight visibility triangle, from drive/PAAL to Oracle (arterial) the required width is 325’ for the near side and 125’ for the far side. See TSM 10-01.5 and Figure 16 and 17 for more information. Ensure the sight visibility triangle is demonstrated for both existing and future right of way, if applicable. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Per UDC 7.4.4 the parking ratio for multifamily residential, projects for elderly or physically disable, is 0.75 spaces per dwelling unit and the proposed number of units is 63; therefore, the required number of parking spaces is 47 parking spaces with two (2) required ADA accessible. Per UDC 7.4.5.E.2, Other Permitted Parking Reductions, for proposed development, the number of required parking spaces may be reduced by one parking spaces for every non-required accessible parking space and the proposed project provides four (4) accessible parking spaces; reducing the required number of parking spaces to 45. The project proposes 36 parking spaces and, per General Note #18, appears to be applying for an individual parking plan (IPP). Per UDC 7.4.5 – Zoning cannot approve the development package until the modification request has been reviewed and approved. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – There are four (4) areas on the site plan labeled as keynote 36 for short term bicycle parking but only three (3) are proposed per General Note 18 on the cover page – it appears there is an extra label, please remove. Demonstrate the short-term bicycle parking is with 50’ of each public entrance, per UDC 7.4.9.C.2.a. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.J – Verify with the Department of Transportation (DTM) that the right of way width for Oracle is correct. If applicable, the site plan should show both the existing and proposed width and it appears the proposed width of Oracle is 150’ and the existing width is 130’ - the plans show the right of way for Oracle at 150’ (future) but not the existing right of way – verify this is accurate and clarify. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.L - Provide the recordation information for the new public 15’ water easement. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – The minimum required building setback along Oracle is the greater of 21’ or the height of the proposed adjacent building measured from the back of the existing or future curb location. Proposed Community Amenities Buildings is not meeting the required setback of 45’ from the back of the existing/future curb location. The proposed building setback is 1.8’ from the eastern property line adjacent to Oracle Road. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – Provide the square footage for the Community Amenities Building within the footprint of the building and in the Building Table on page one. Additionally, there are two building labeled as building #9 – please assign separate building numbers. 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – As the proposed expansion is more than 25%, the provisions of TSM 7-01 apply to the existing use or structure as well as the expansion. The existing sidewalk on the north side of the site and on the south side of building #2 is 3.2’ wide and the minimum required width is 4’ – either increase the proposed width or clarify if a technical standards modification request (TSMR) is proposed 13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R - Dimension the curb opening from the sidewalk to the access aisle for the eastern-most ADA parking spaces, the minimum width is 5’. Clarify how the access aisle is ADA accessible per slope requirements. ***For additional information on the any standard presented in this memo, please refer to the City of Tucson “Unified Development Code” – Administrative Manual Section 2-06 or Technical Standards noted in the comments. https://www.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/all-codes-plans-determinations If you have any questions about this transmittal, Contact Loran Shamis by email Loran.Shamis@tucsonaz.gov. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |