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: In Review
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.1
Permit Number - TD-DEV-1123-00451
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.1
Review Status: In Review
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12/06/2023 | External Reviewers - COT Parks & Recreation | APPROVED | TD-DEV-1123-00451 – Approved TPRD Whataburger Store, 10100 E. Old Vail Road, Parcel 14118008L. Regarding TD-DEV-1123-00451, City of Tucson Parks and Recreation has no additional requirements for the Development Plan. Regards, Joe Barr Project Manager Parks and Recreation | City of Tucson Joe.Barr@tucsonaz.gov main 520.837.2263 |
||
| 12/12/2023 | CDRC Post Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 12/12/2023 | Commercial Plumbing | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 12/12/2023 | External Reviewers - Pima County Addressing | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 12/12/2023 | External Reviewers - Tucson Electric Power (TEP) | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 12/12/2023 | Fire New Construction | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 12/12/2023 | NPPO | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 12/12/2023 | ROW Engineering Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 12/12/2023 | Site Engineering | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 12/12/2023 | Site Landscape | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 12/12/2023 | Traffic Engineering Review | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 12/07/2023 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Whataburger – Houghton Town Center Development Package (1st Review) TD-DEV-1123-00451 TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 7, 2023 DUE DATE: December 22, 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 November 19, 2024. 2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 1. COMMENT: 2-06.2.2 – Clarify why you have “DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION/ENGINEERING DIVISION” and the City of Tuson Logo within the title block. This plan was submitted to the COT Planning and Development Services Department which is the major review not Transportation and as far as the logo this is not a City project, remove both from the plan. 2. COMMENT: 2-06.2.4 – The submitted development package shall be submitted as a single multi-page pdf to include the landscape plans. 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS 3. 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 stamp. 4. COMMENT: 2-06.3.12 – An index of sheets in the development package shall be provided on the first sheet. This index shall include the landscape sheets. 5. 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.1 – Provide the email address for the owner listed on sheet 1. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.2.C - The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx) shall include the landscape sheets. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-1123-00451, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4 - The project-location map to be located on the first sheet of the development package in the upper right corner, shall be drawn at a minimum scale of three inch equals one mile. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.6 – As this project is located within the boundaries of a Planned Area Development (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 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – The use, “RESTAURANT W/ DRIVE THROUGH”, listed in the Site Data table sheet 6 is not use as classified per the UDC. The use should be listed as FOOD SERVICE, EXCLUDING SOUP KITCHEN”. 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - As Old Vail Rd. 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) 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.d - Provide the required Zoning Documentation Table on the plan, see PAD-36 Section C.1. This table shall all existing/proposed development within PAD-36. Contact the Owner/Developer for information on prior approved development. This table shall include a running Floor Area Ratio calculation for the entire PAD that meets the requirements of UDC Article 6.4.6. 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. 14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.8.C - The following information Old Vail Rd, dimensioned width of paving, curbs, 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. 15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.F - All existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) shall be indicated on the drawing with zoning boundaries clearly defined. 16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.G - 17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Clarify when the “24’ CRITICAL ACCESS BY MASTER DEVELOPER” will be constructed. If this access will not be completed by the time of C of O for this development some type of barrier is required to prevent vehicles from accessing this area, UDC Article 7.4.6.H.1. 18. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Show the required 1’-0” setback from the building to the drive-through lane at the drive-through window, UDC Article 7.4.6.F.2.a.(2). 19. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The vehicle parking space calculation shall include the number of required and provide accessible parking space to include van accessible spaces. 20. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Provide a typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. This detail shall include a wheel stop location dimension, 7.4.6.H.3. 21. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Detail 3 sheet 7 the mounting height for the accessible sign is not correct. As it appears that the proposed sign will be within a pedestrian way the mounting height is 84” to the bottom of the lowest sign. 22. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – The bicycle parking spaces calculation shall show the ratio used, number of required and provide for both short- & long-term bicycle parking. 23. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Detail 4 sheet 7 shall clearly demonstrate how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1.d, & .e, 7.4.9.B.2.a, .f, & .g are met for the short-term bicycle parking. Also, for your information per UDC Article 7.4.9.B.2.d a single rack is designed and located to accommodate two bicycles. 24. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Provide a detail for the required long-term bicycle parking that clearly demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.D are met. 25. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – The required front, street, perimeter yard setback listed is not correct. Per PAD-36 Table C.1.0 The minimum street perimeter yard setback is 21’ or the building height, whichever is greater, measured from the back of future curb. As the curb location dimensions were not provided, see comment 13 Zoning cannot verify if the existing curb is at the required location based on the street cross sections for a 90’ right-of-way as listed in the COT MS&R plan, MS&R plan can be found at: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/city-services/planning-development-services/documents/msr.pdf. 26. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – The east, west and south perimeter yard setbacks listed are not correct. Per Per PAD-36 Table C.1.0 the internal perimeter yard setbacks are per building code (lot lines internal to the PAD boundary shall not be considered lot lines for purposes of building and fire codes). 27. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – Provide the height and specific within the footprint of the proposed building. 28. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Provide a sidewalk from the proposed building out to the proposed sidewalk along the west side of the ‘PRIVATE ROAD”, TSM Section 7-01.4.1.A, 7-01.3.3.B & 7-01.4.1.D. 29. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Clearly demonstrate on the plan or short-term detail that the sidewalk area to the west of the bicycle racks maintains the minimum 4’-0” width, 7-01.4.3.A. 30. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – There is a landscape island located near the southwest corner of the building. On the north side of the island, you show a ramp and striped area, clarify with this ramp and striped area is for as it appears to direct pedestrians into the vehicle use area. 31. 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. Also provide a general note stating all signs require 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 & detailed response letter. |
||
| 11/14/2023 | CDRC Application Completeness | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 11/21/2023 | CDRC Review Coordinator | REVIEW COMPLETED | Addressing and Parks&Rec review required per SOP. Review request email sent per ADOT,TAA, and TEP. CDRC sent FYI email to PAG, USPS, SWG. | ||
| 11/21/2023 | 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. | ||
| 11/21/2023 | 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. | ||
| 11/21/2023 | 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. | ||
| 11/20/2023 | OK to Submit - Engineering | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 11/16/2023 | OK to Submit - Landscape | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 11/15/2023 | OK to Submit - Zoning | REVIEW COMPLETED |