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.1
Permit Number - TD-DEV-1023-00437
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.1
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12/05/2023 | Commercial Plumbing | APPROVED | |||
| 12/13/2023 | External Reviewers - Pima County Addressing | APPROVED | Pima County Addressing approves TD-DEV-1023-00437. Thank you Nicholas Jordan Site Review Project Manager – Addressing Official Pima County Development Services Department 201 N Stone AV – 1st Floor Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 724-9623 Pima County Development Services’ enhanced online permitting website is now live. Create an account to submit most applications online, and get your comments and documents directly from our portal. No more waiting for staff to email you! Start here at (https://permits.pima.gov). The Pima County Development Services Team – Your gateway to Building Safety |
||
| 01/02/2024 | Site Engineering | APPROVED | |||
| 12/08/2023 | Site Landscape | APPROVED | |||
| 12/29/2023 | TSMR/PDMR - Engineering | APPROVED | |||
| 12/06/2023 | TSMR/PDMR - Zoning | APPROVED | Approved in coordination with TFD | ||
| 12/08/2023 | NPPO | NOT REQUIRED | |||
| 01/02/2024 | CDRC Post Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/17/2023 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | FROM: Development Services Department Zoning Review PROJECT: 2611-2625 E. Grant Rd Development Package (1st Review) TD-DEV-1023-00437 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 17, 2023 DUE DATE: December 10, 2021 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. 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 November 6, 2024. FORMAT REQUIREMENTS 1. This comment was not addressed correctly, north is to the right not the left. COMMENT: 2-06.3.9 - The plan drawing shall be oriented with north toward the top of the sheet. If it is not practical to orient north to the top of the sheet, the plan drawing shall be oriented with north to the left side of the sheet. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-1023-00437, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. Remove the references to DP21-0009 & T20 CM 05688 from the plan as they are no longer applicable. 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. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a – Until the PDMR/TSMR is approved Zoning cannot approve. If there are any conditions of approval provide a General Note stating the conditions. 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. 4. Until the PDMR is approved this comment stands. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Per UDC Article 7.4.6.D and Table 7.4.6-2 the minimum two-way access lane width is 20’-0”, proposed is 19’-0”. A Parking Design Modification Request (PDMR) must be submitted and approved prior to approval of this DP. The PDMR and required TSMR can be processed under the same application and fees. 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – The provided short-term detail does not address UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1.e. The 2’ x 6” required by UDC Article 7.4.9.B.2, shall be from the edge of rack, see UDC Figure 7.4.9-C. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Your comment response states that Long-term parking (7.4.9.D) will be met within the fenced back yard area associated with the subject building. As you propose outdoor long-term bicycle parking provide a detail that demonstrates compliance with 7.4.9.D.2, .3 & .5. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – Provide the height of each structure within the footprint of the building(s). 8. Until the TSMR is approved this comment stands. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Per TSM Section 7-01.4.3.A All sidewalks must be a minimum of four feet wide and installed to avoid any obstruction which decreases the minimum width to less than four feet, proposed is 3’-0”. A Technical Standards Modification Request (TSMR) must be submitted and approved prior to approval of the DP. The TSMR and required PDMR can be processed under the same application and fees. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Elisa Hamblin, (520) 837-4966 or Elisa.Hamblin @tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
||
| 11/01/2023 | CDRC Application Completeness | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 11/09/2023 | CDRC Review Coordinator | REVIEW COMPLETED | Addressing review required. Review request email sent to TEP and ES. FYI email sent to PAG, USPS, SWG | ||
| 12/06/2023 | External Reviewers - COT Environmental Services | REVIEW COMPLETED | ES comments are as follows: 1. Must include details for a single container enclosure, refer to TSM 8-01.5.0, 8-01.5.2, 8-01.5.3, 8-01.9.0 figure 3B & 4. 2. APC recycle would be approved for storage within individual units. Contact me if any questions regarding this review. Andy Vera (520) 837-3798 Andy. Vera@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 11/09/2023 | External Reviewers - Pima Association of Governments | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC sent FYI email to PAG, USPS and SWG. No further action is required from customer at this time. | ||
| 11/09/2023 | External Reviewers - Southwest Gas | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC sent FYI email to PAG, USPS and SWG. No further action is required from customer at this time. | ||
| 12/06/2023 | External Reviewers - Tucson Electric Power (TEP) | REVIEW COMPLETED | ES comments are as follows: 1. Regarding the TSMR requesting relief from TSM 8-01.5.3.B , a vertical clearance of 25 ft is required NOT 10 ft. 2. The single container enclosure detail must be included within the DP for review and approval. Referencing the section within the TSM is not acceptable for approval. Please contact me if any questions regarding this review. Andy Vera (520) 837-3798 Andy.Vera@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 11/09/2023 | External Reviewers - United States Postal Service (USPS) | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC sent FYI email to PAG, USPS and SWG. No further action is required from customer at this time. | ||
| 12/06/2023 | Fire New Construction | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 11/06/2023 | OK to Submit - Engineering | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 11/07/2023 | OK to Submit - Landscape | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 11/02/2023 | OK to Submit - Zoning | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 11/20/2023 | ROW Engineering Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | No Comments David Stiffey David.Stiffey@tucsonaz.gov |