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-1122-00049
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE REVIEW v.1
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/09/2023 | Commercial Plumbing | APPROVED | |||
| 01/05/2023 | NPPO | NOT REQUIRED | See landscape comments | ||
| 01/04/2023 | OK to Submit - External Reviewer PC Addressing | NOT REQUIRED | TD-DEV-1122-00049 Nicholas Jordan CDRC Good afternoon, Please remove Pima County Addressing from the review for TD-DEV-1122-00049. 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 |
||
| 01/09/2023 | CDRC Post Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 01/04/2023 | Site Engineering | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | 1. Include the total area of disturbance along with cut/fill quantities on the plans. 2. Include the waste stream calculations on the plans. 3. In general notes 9 on the cover sheet include Lot 2 along with Lot 3 for requiring a floodplain use permit. 4. The floodplain use permits will need to be applied for and processed before issuance of this Tentative Plat. 5. Comparing the utilities and easements on the site plan with the submitted title report there were a few issues that need addressing: Access easement SEQ#20200661021, 10’ sign easement DKT 9247, PG 565, and electric and communication easement DKT 2292 PG 283 are shown on the plans but aren’t in the title report; And signage easement DKT 12465, PG 3802, gas easement SEQ# 20152450705, electric transmission easement DKT 2647, PG 56 are on the title report and aren’t shown on the plans; And the electric easement DKT 12285 PG 908 looks to be the public utilities easement in the title report listed with page number 1908 instead of 908. Please clarify and revise as needed. 6. The trash enclosures need to have details for them or called out to be built according to Technical Standards Manual section 8-01. 7. Show how the two sites are maximizing water harvesting and provide more detail on the grading sheet that shows how this is achieved. Provide spot grades, flow arrows, and curb cuts with enough detail to follow what is happening with the onsite drainage. Stephen Blood (520) 837-4958 Stephen.blood@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 01/05/2023 | Site Landscape | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | FROM: Anne Warner, RLA PDSD Landscape/Native Plant Preservation Section ACTIVITY NO: TD-DEV-1122-00049 Address: 6228 E BROADWAY BL Zoning: I-1 Existing Use: Retail center Proposed Use: Retail Center TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 5, 2023 DUE DATE: January 4, 2023 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Landscape Review Section comments were addressed. 1. A Commercial Rainwater Harvesting plan is required. UDC Technical Standards Manual – Section 4-01.0.0. and Section 5-01.0.0 Landscaping and Screening. Demonstrate how water harvesting is being maximized. 2. If using d.g. at 2” depth, make sure that the water harvesting basins are 8” deep to allow for d.g. depth. Make sure that grading, water harvesting and landscape plans match, as well as details. Please add a detail to show depressed landscape areas or indicate with notes. 3. Engineer & LA comment - Adherence to the Low Impact Development Standards outlined in Section 5 of the PCRFCD Design Standards for Stormwater Detention and Retention shall work in conjunction with the Commercial Rainwater Harvesting design. First flush volumes should be directed to landscape areas. See pages 9-16 and Tables 2.2 and 2.3. https://webcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government/Flood%20Control/Rules%20and%20Procedures/Stormwater%20Detention-Retention/dssdr-manual-board-version-201511.pdf COT edits - https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/pdsd/codes/Detention_Retention_Manual_Tech_Standards_Amemdments.pdf 4. Engineer & LA comment - The tables 2.2 and 2.3, pages 12-13 in the PCRFCD Manuel can be used in lieu of the Water Budget Table, the only thing that is missing is water demand for plants, which can be added. Make sure units match. Show how First Flush Volumes relate to plant water demands. 5. Engineer & LA comment The grading plan and water harvesting plan do not meet the requirements of the water harvesting ordinance and technical standard. The plan doesn't show the effective use of run-off to supplement irrigation. a. The catchment areas must provide water to the infiltration areas. Revise the grading to direct runoff to the landscape infiltration areas to the maximum extent possible. b. Catchment areas in the water harvesting table can only count the areas that are directed to the landscape infiltration areas. c. Clearly show the areas in each catchment area and the areas of effective infiltration and water harvesting. All landscape areas should be included within infiltration areas. d. Show rooftop drainage patterns and show how they are incorporated into the water harvesting calculations. 6. Engineer & LA comment - The landscape, water harvesting, and grading plans must match. 7. Engineer & LA comment - Identify curb inlets/splash pads to landscape areas on grading and water harvesting plans. 8. Please provide all landscape calculations on the landscape plan, including required trees for the parking areas, Admin. Manual 2-10-4.2.A.2.c and landscape borders, UDC Technical Standards 2-10.4.2.f & g. 9. A 10’ landscape border is required along Wilmot Rd. The parking area along Wilmot requires screening/wall and trees. 10. Please label the existing and future rights of way for all public streets, UDC 7.6.4.C.2.a. 11. Table 7.6.4-1- Requires 30” screen adjacent to parking areas along MS&R streets, 5’ screen along non-MS&R streets, adjacent to residential or office uses, a 5’ wall is required. 12. Consider using an organic groundcover such as mulch instead of d.g. 13. Only 1 tree was incorporated into the parking lot for maximizing shade on asphalt, please add trees or reconfigure parking lots to meet the intent of the code. 14. Placing trees along the edge of a parking area or at the ends of parking row does not meet the intent of the UDC. All spaces within 40’ of a tree is only one of the requirements, and it is required to meet all. The intent is to provide as much shade on the asphalt as possible, and the requirement is 1 tree per 4 parking spaces; trees are expected to be placed within the parking area itself to mitigate the heat and glare radiated by the built environment, UDC 7.6.1.A.3. Trees are to be distributed evenly throughout the parking area, UDC 7.6.4.B.1.a., UDC Technical Standards Manual 5-01-.3.2 15. Please label the separate irrigation meter “irrigation only”. UDC Technical Standards 4-01.6.1.A.1. 16. Identify the type of irrigation controller with soil moisture gauge, tensiometer, weather station and/or evaportranspiration data. UDC Tech Standards 4-01.4.A. 17. Provide a detail to show tree planting with root barrier adjacent to walkways. 18. Provide a maintenance schedule for the landscape and irrigation for this project. UDC 7.6.8, Admin Manual 2-10-4.2.A.4. and Technical Standards 5-01.9., please be specific. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package YOUR NEXT STEPS: Submit documents to the Tucson Development Center https://tdc-online.tucsonaz.gov/#/home 1) Comment Response Letter (your response to the reviewer's Requires changes comments) 2) Plan Set (or individual sheets) 3) Any other items requested by review staff If you have any questions, please contact me at anne.warner@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 01/05/2023 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Broadway Wilmot Plaza Development Package (1st Review) TD-DEV-1122-00049 TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 5, 2023 DUE DATE: January 4, 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 December 11, 2023. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.2.D – The total number of sheets listed on sheets 1 – 4 is not correct. 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-1122-00049, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 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.2 – As Parcel “B” cannot stand alone, i.e. vehicle parking, access etc. the parcel shall be included in the gross area of the site. 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – General Note 3 is not correct. “RETAIL” is a use group not a use. Provide a use as classified per the UDC. Also review UDC Table 4.8-4: PERMITTED USES - COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE ZONES, C-1 ZONE and provide all applicable Use Specific Standards that apply to the uses. 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - As Broadway is designated as an Arterial Gateway and Wilmot 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) & UDC ARTICLE 5.5 GATEWAY CORRIFOR ZONE (GCR)” 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.a – Provide the square footage of the building shown on Parcel “B”, see comment 3 above. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.c – The expansion shall include the existing building square footage of Parcel “B”, see comment 3 above. 2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.8.C - The following information shall be provided for both Broadway & Wilmot: dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. 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. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.A – Clearly show all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.F – Provide the zoning for the parcel located to the west of this site. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.2 – Until comment 7 is addressed zoning cannot determine if this standard applies; Show future and existing sight visibility triangles. On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section. 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Provide an access lane width for the access lane south of “BLDG 3”. 13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Show the required 1’-0” setback from the building to the drive-through lane for both BLDG 3 & 4, see UDC Article 7.4.6.F.2.a.(2). 14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The vehicle parking spaces calculation is confusing. Provide a vehicle parking space calculation that clearly shows the use of each building, square footage, number vehicle parking spaces required and provided to include accessible spaces required & provided. This calculation shall clearly show the requirements of Parcel “B”, see comment 3 above. Zoning recommends that you use the Shopping Center calculation, see UDC Article 11.3.9.C.3. 15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The vehicle parking spaces calculation shall clearly show the number of required and provided van accessible parking spaces. Detail E sheet 4 does not meet the width requirements for a van accessible vehicle parking space, see ICC A117.1, Section 502.2. 16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Some type of cross access/parking agreement or easement is required for this site. Provide a copy of the recorded documents with the next submittal and provide the recordation information on the plan. 17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Provide a copy of the “(BY AGREEMENT)” recorded document listed on the 1st sheet. 18. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.c – The loading space calculation for “BUILDINGS 3 & 4” is not correct. Per UDC TABLE 7.5.5-A: REQUIRED LOADING AREA, Commercial Services Use Group (Section 11.3.4), Restaurants/Bars, Less Than 5,000 sq. ft. GFA, no loading space is required. 19. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Clearly show the location of the short-term bicycle parking for “BLDG 4” on sheet 2. 20. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Based on the bicycle parking calculation shown for “BUILDINGS 3 & 4” you are proposing to provide 2 long-term spaces for each building but Zoning was not able to find the lont-term bicycle parking on the plan. Also, if you are going to provide long-term bicycle parking provide a detail that demonstrates that the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9 are met. For your information per UDC Article 7.4.8.B.1.a.(1) No long-term bicycle parking is required on a site where there is less than 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. 21. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.J – Depending on how comment 8 is addressed future curb location may need to be provided on the plan. 22. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – Under ‘DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS” you list the required street perimeter yard setback for Broadway and Wilmot as 21’ OR 1.5 “H” which is not correct. Per UDC Article 6.4.5.C.2 the correct required setback should be 21’ OR “H”, greater of the two. 23. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – Provide the square footage, height and specific use of each building within footprint of the building(s). This includes Parcel “B”. 24. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Provide a sidewalk width for the sidewalk shown along the north & west side of BLDG 3. 25. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Provide a sidewalk width for the sidewalk shown along the south side of BLDG 4. 26. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.G Sidewalks or crosswalks cannot cross any type of stacking areas for drive-through lanes. That said the sidewalk/crosswalk shown south of BLDG 4 connecting to the trash enclosure is not allowed as shown. 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 |
||
| 12/05/2022 | CDRC Application Completeness | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 01/04/2023 | CDRC Review Coordinator | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 01/04/2023 | Fire New Construction | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 12/09/2022 | OK to Submit - Engineering | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 12/12/2022 | OK to Submit - Zoning | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 01/04/2023 | ROW Engineering Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | No Comments |