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.2
Permit Number - TD-DEV-1122-00057
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE REVIEW v.2
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
05/23/2023 | CDRC Post Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
03/02/2023 | Commercial Plumbing | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | The maximum distance between cleanouts shall be 100-feet, measured along the developed pipe length from the upstream entrance of the cleanout. For example, a section of the building sewer downstream of a cleanout with a rim elevation of 3004.27’ and a 2999.84’ invert can have a maximum horizontal length of 95.57’. Reference: Section 708.1.1, IPC 2018. | ||
03/07/2023 | Site Engineering | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | 1. Remove all the references to final plat S19-016 as this plat was withdrawn and not recorded. 2. The final plat that this development is within will need to be reviewed and approved before this development package can be approved. 3. The parking spaces next to the cart corrals need to be at minimum 10 feet wide. 4. There needs to be sidewalk in between the building and the PAAL along both the east and west sides of the building. Stephen Blood (520) 837-4958 Stephen.blood@tucsonaz.gov |
||
03/16/2023 | Site Landscape | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PROJECT: HOME DEPOT ACTIVITY NO. TD-DEV-1122-00057 ADDRESS/PARCEL: 10100 E OLD VAIL RD/ 141-18-008L ZONING: PAD-36 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. Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Landscape Review Section comments are addressed. COMMENTS: 1. Lantana ‘New Gold’ is not on the approved plant list for PAD-36. Either choose a new plant from the list or show that this substitution is allowed by the Architectural Review committee. See PAD-36 page 38 Landscape Plant Pallette Shrubs, Accents, Vines, and Groundcovers 2. Add a construction detail showing depressed landscaping for rainwater harvesting to the detail page or indicate with notes. 3. The Commercial Rainwater Harvesting Water Budget Table is labeled incorrectly, has only WHIA 2&3 not 1&2. Please revise. 4. The area to the west of the proposed Home Depot is not included in the rainwater harvesting calculations. Can this area be added to the calculations or would that require a regrade of the site to allow for this? 5. Water harvesting areas should be depressed between 6 and 9 inches. If using dg, at a 2” depth, make sure that the rainwater harvesting basins are 8” deep to allow for dg depth. 6. The landscape, water harvesting, and grading plans must match. If you have any questions about these comments, I can be reached at Matthew.Carlton@tucsonaz.gov or 520-837-4988 |
||
03/02/2023 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Home Depot @ Houghton Town Center Development Package (1st Review) TD-DEV-1122-00057 TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 02, 2023 DUE DATE: March 08, 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 February 13, 2024. 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Remove the reference to S19-016 from the title block on all sheets as the plat has been withdrawn. 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.6 – As this project is located within the boundaries of PAD-36, include a reduced-scale map of the PAD on the first sheet, indicating the location of the portion being developed. 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.7 – As it appears that some type of final plat will be needed this plat must be approved prior to approval of this DP. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.b – Provide a floor area ration calculation that meets the requirements of UDC Article 6.4.6 on the plan. Remove the reference to lot coverage from the plan as it is not applicable. 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.d – Provide the required Zoning Documentation Table on the plan, see PAD-36 Section C.1. 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. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.B – Provide the recordation information for all proposed easements on the plan. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.B – As access is proposed across the property to the east provide a copy of the required access agreement/easement with the next submittal. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.F – Sheet 3 under Zoning Classification you list “PIMA COUNTY”, remove this reference from the plan. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The required number of vehicle parking spaces is not correct. Per UDC Article 7.4.3.G Fractional Amounts, when the calculation of required motor vehicle, bicycle parking spaces, and EVSE spaces results in a fractional number, a fraction of one-half or more is adjusted to the next higher whole number, and a fraction of less than one-half is adjusted to the next lower whole number. Also the Seasonal Sales area is not required to be parked. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The number of accessible spaces required “10” is not correct. Per 2018 IBC Chapter 11 Table 1106.0 when 492 vehicle parking spaces are provided the number required is 9. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Demonstrate on the plan how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.11 & 7.4.12 are met. 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Clarify what “THD PARKING” is. 13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – As most cart corrals have metal railings around 3 sides demonstrate that the vehicle parking spaces adjacent to the corrals meet the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.6.D.2.b. 14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The proposed accessible parking space signs at the two (2) individual accessible parking spaces appear to encroach in to the 2’-6” vehicle overhang. Clearly demonstrate that the required overhang is maintained, UDC Article 7.4.6.H.3. 15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.c - Provide a loading space calculation that provided the number required, provided and type. 16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – The short- & long-term bicycle parking calculations are not correct, the Seasonal Sales area is not required to be parked. 17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – As the proposed short-term bicycle parking is directly adjacent to the building demonstrate that the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.B.2.g are met. 18. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – As the proposed building has several entrances demonstrate that the requirements of PAD-36 Section C.2, Where buildings have more than one public entrance or a Development Area has more than one building, short-term bicycle parking shall be distributed so that at least one short-term bicycle parking space is within seventy-five (75) feet of each public entrance. 19. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Demonstrate that the requirements of TSM Section 7-01.4.1.C along the east and west side of the proposed building. 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 |
||
02/06/2023 | CDRC Application Completeness | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
02/16/2023 | CDRC Review Coordinator | REVIEW COMPLETED | EXTERNAL REVIEWERS ADDED AND FYI EMAILS SENT | ||
02/21/2023 | Entitlements | REVIEW COMPLETED | No comments. | ||
05/23/2023 | External Reviewers - COT Parks & Recreation | REVIEW COMPLETED | Hello CDRC team, On behalf of the City of Tucson Parks and Recreation Department, I have no comments on the above development plan. Tom Fisher Project Manager City of Tucson Parks and Recreation Department 900 S. Randolph Way Tucson, Arizona 85716 (520) 837-8037 |
||
02/16/2023 | External Reviewers - Pima Association of Governments | REVIEW COMPLETED | Sent Fyi email to PAG per PDSD - SOP. | ||
02/16/2023 | External Reviewers - Southwest Gas | REVIEW COMPLETED | Sent Fyi email to SWG per PDSD - SOP. | ||
02/16/2023 | External Reviewers - Tucson Electric Power (TEP) | REVIEW COMPLETED | Sent Fyi email to TEP per PDSD - SOP. | ||
02/16/2023 | External Reviewers - United States Postal Service (USPS) | REVIEW COMPLETED | Sent Fyi email to USPS per PDSD - SOP. | ||
03/08/2023 | Fire New Construction | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
02/16/2023 | NPPO | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
02/10/2023 | OK to Submit - Engineering | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
02/07/2023 | OK to Submit - Landscape | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
02/14/2023 | OK to Submit - Zoning | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
04/07/2023 | ROW Engineering Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
04/07/2023 | Traffic Engineering Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | No Comments David Stiffey David.Stiffey@tucsonaz.gov |