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

Permit Number: TD-DEV-1122-00012
Parcel: 13106031B

Review Status: Requires Resubmit

Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE REVIEW v.4

Permit Number - TD-DEV-1122-00012
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE REVIEW v.4
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
03/21/2023 Commercial Plumbing APPROVED
04/13/2023 CDRC Post Review Express PENDING ASSIGNMENT
04/13/2023 ROW Engineering Review REQUIRES RESUBMIT TD-DEV-1122-00012 2nd Comments
5501 E. Golf Links Rd.

Comments:
1. Change “Construction Note” No. 37 on sheet C2, to read, “Construct 6’ sidewalk…” 6’ wide sidewalk is required on arterial streets.
2. On the DP, annotate Construction Note No. 23 at the sidewalk connection where the onsite circulation path ties into sidewalk along Craycroft Rd.
3. Regarding the new P.A.G. standard 206 driveway apron at the entrance on Golf Links Rd. Maintain the 6’ sidewalk width through the back of the apron.
4. Where adjoining sidewalk from the properties on site circulation path, ties to sidewalk along the ROW frontage, a 60” X 60” ADA landing is required. Landings shall be 60” X 60” and not to exceed a 2% cross slope in all directions. (This is Construction Note No. 23, sheet C2 on the DP.)
5. Show Sight Visibility Triangles on the DP.


David Stiffey
DTM Project Coordinator
David.Stiffey@tucsonaz.gov
04/05/2023 Site Engineering REQUIRES RESUBMIT 1. Previous comment 5 was not fully addressed. The trash enclosure still doesn’t match the figure in the technical standards manual 8-01 or demonstrate the minimum requirements for clear area for width inside the enclosure or call out the reinforcement in the block wall. A TSMR will be required with approval from Environmental Services.
2. Previous comment 9 was not addressed. Show how this site is meeting the first flush requirements and provide the calculations for the required volume and achieved volume along with the delineated watersheds on the site.
3. Please provide on the site plan the recordation number of any and all easement abandonments or relocations.
4. As this plan is proposing the use of a dry well, please provide a letter in the next submittal from the engineer justifying the use of a dry well along with addressing all 20 standards found in the Detention/Retention manual section 4.19.1 and the 4 prohibitions found in section 4.19.2.
5. Show and dimension the driveway throat length on the site plan for the southern driveway out to E Golf Links Rd to show compliance with Transportation Access Management Guidelines section 5.11.

Stephen Blood
(520) 837-4958
Stephen.blood@tucsonaz.gov
03/30/2023 Site Zoning REQUIRES RESUBMIT PDSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: PDSD Zoning Review

PROJECT: Circle K – Golf Links & Craycroft
Development Package (2nd Review)
TD-DEV-1122-00012

TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 30, 2023

DUE DATE: April 07, 2023

COMMENTS: As the full development package was not resubmitted Zoning cannot verify that this comment was fully addressed.

Provide a detail response letter with your next submittal. This letter shall be submitted as a separate PDF file. Also all sheets of the DP shall be submitted. 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 October 31, 2023.

2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

1. COMMENT: 2-06.2.2 – Except for the aerial photo shown on sheet 3, clarify what the difference between sheets 2 & 3 are and why do we need this information twice.

2. 2-06.2.4 – The development package is designed to allow for concurrent review of any site related reviews. That said sheets 15 & 16 will not be reviewed during the development package review and will require a separate permit, typically done under the building plan review.

3. COMMENT: 2-06.2.4 – Remove all demolition information from the plans as demolition requires separate permits.

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

4. COMMENT: 2-06.3.1 – Each sheet shall measure 24 inches by 36 inches.

5. COMMENT: 2-06.3.5 - A three-inch by five-inch space shall be reserved in the lower right quadrant of each sheet for an approval electronically applied stamp.

2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide:

6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.b – Sheet 2 & 3 remove the reference to site coverage as it is not applicable.

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-1122-00012, adjacent to the title block on all sheets.

8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4 – It does not appear that the location map is at the three inch equals one-mile scale.

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

9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.3 – Revise Zoning & Land Use Note 1 to state “EXISTING ZONING IS C-2 & P, PROPOSED ZONING IS C-2.

10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.3 – List rezoning case number, C9-22-05, adjacent to the title block on sheets and provide the rezoning conditions on the plan.

11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – Restaurant is not a use classified in the UDC. Revise Zoning & Land Use Note 3 to show the existing use as “FOOD SERVICE & GENERAL MERCHANDISE SALES”.

12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a – As Golf Links Rd is designated a Gateway Route on the COT MS&R map revise Zoning & Land Use Note 7 to include UDC Article 5.5 GATEWAY CORRIFOR ZONE (GCZ).

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.

13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.A – As this site is made up of three (3) parcels, 131-06-031B, 131-11-378A & 131-06-034A, a lot combination is require. Provide a copy of the approved Pima County Combo request form with your next submittal.

14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The vehicle parking space calculation shall include the number of Van accessible spaces required & provided, review 2018 IBC Section 1106.

15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – As the proposed accessible signs will be located in a pedestrian way the mounted height shall be 84” to the bottom of the lowest sign.

16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Sheet 7 Construction Note 8 states “INSTALL BIKE RACK PER ARCHITECT’S DETAILS” and should reference the details provided in the DP.

17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Zoning was not able to find the long-term bicycle parking on the site plan.

18. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.L – As you are proposing access across this site to the parcel to the north a recorded easement or agreement is required. Zoning acknowledges that an Unsigned agreement was provide but until this document has been fully executed and recorded Zoning cannot approve this plan. If the DP review gets to the point where this is the only comment Zoning may put the requirement off to the Building C of O so that the DP can be approved.

19. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – The street perimeter yard setbacks shown under “ZONING INFORMATION” are not correct. Based on the definition of Established Area Setbacks any project that boarders on a street designated as a major street on the COT MS&R map is considered developing area for the purpose of street perimeter yard setbacks, see UDC Article 11.4.6. Review UDC Article 6.4.5.C.2 and Table 6.4.5C-1 and provide the correct setbacks. Also, provide a setback dimension from the proposed building to the back of existing or future curb, whichever is applicable, for both Craycroft & Golf Links.

20. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – Provide the proposed height of the building within the footprint.

21. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q - The allowed building height shown under “ZONING INFORMATION” is not correct. Review UDC Table 6.3-4.A DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE C-1, C-2, C-3, OCR-1, & OCR-2 ZONES, and provide the correct allowed height in the C-2 Zone.

22. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Per TSM Section 7-01.3.3.A & 7-01.4.A a sidewalk meeting the requirements of TSM Sections 7-01.4.2 & 7-01.4.3, is required to connect the building to the sidewalks along both streets. Show the required sidewalk out to the sidewalk along Craycroft.

23. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.U - Indicate graphically, where possible, compliance with conditions of rezoning.

24. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.W - Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. And provide a general note stating all signage requires separate permits.

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
03/09/2023 CDRC Application Completeness Express REVIEW COMPLETED
03/21/2023 OK to Submit - Engineering Fast REVIEW COMPLETED
03/16/2023 OK to Submit - Zoning Fast REVIEW COMPLETED