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: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - DP12-0004
Review Name: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/03/2012 | CPIERCE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/05/2012 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES July 18, 2012 Zach Hilgart Hilgart Wilson 12435 N. 69th Drive Peoria, Arizona 85381 Subject: DP12-0004 AUTOZONE #4096 Development Package Dear Zach: Your submittal for the above project has been reviewed by the Community Design Review Committee and the comments reflect the outstanding requirements which need to be addressed before approval is granted. Please review the comments carefully. Once you have addressed all of the comments, please submit the following revised documents and 2 sets of the DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE ROLLED 2 Copies of Revised Development Package (PDSD2) 1 CD of all plans and documents above (PDSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4893. Sincerely, John Williams Planning Technician All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/ Via fax: zhilgart@hilgartwilson.com |
| 07/05/2012 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | 201 N. STONE AV., 2ND FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 AUDREY FARENGA ADDRESSING REVIEW PH #: 740-6800 FAX #: 623-5411 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: AUDREY FARENGA, ADDRESSING REVIEW SUBJECT: DP12-0004 AUTOZONE STORE NO. 4098/REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: July 5, 2012 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and the following matters must be resolved prior to our approval: 1. Include title blocks with all the required information on the bottom right hand corner of all pages per letters dated 02-06-12 and 06-25-12. 2. Delete all street directions per letters dated 02-06-12 and 06-25-12. 3. Correct the tax codes with the most current per letter dated 06-25-12. 4. Include the file number DP12-0004 per letter dated 06-25-12. |
| 07/06/2012 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: AutoZone - 675 W. Irvington Road. Development Package (3rd Review) DP12-0004 TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 6, 2012 DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. Section 5.3.8.2, LUC, permits a maximum of one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a development package. If, at the end of that time, the development package has not been approved, it must be revised to be in compliance with all regulations in effect at that time, and must be resubmitted for a full CDRC review. The one-year expiration date for this development plan is January 10, 2013. The following comments are based on Development Standard 2-01.0: 2. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.3 The rezoning conditions shown on sheet C0 are not readable. 3. This comment was not addressed. Show the PUE "TO BE ABANDONED, per SEQUENCE #?????". D.S. 2-01.3.8.B The "10' PUE" shown running through the building will need to be vacated prior to approval of the Development Package. 4. This comment was not addressed. The future site visibility triangles for the intersection widening are not shown on the plan. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.2 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. 5. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Per LUC Section 3.3.8.2.B, RETAIL TRADE USE GROUP, Retail Trade Uses Less Than 50,000 sq. ft. GFA: LONG-TERM BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED, 1 space per 12,000 sq. ft. GFA. Minimum requirement is 2 spaces. That said the minimum number of Long-Term bicycle parking required is two (2). Revise the bicycle parking calculation to reflect two (2) Long-Term Required and two (2) provided. Show the proposed location for the Long-Term bicycle parking on the site plan. 6. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d For the multiply Short-Term racks shown, provide a layout detail that shows the require distance between racks, LUC Section 3.3.9.2.B.6, & LUC figure 3.3.9.5. Provide a detail for the required Long-term bicycle parking that shows how the requirements of LUC Sections 3.3.9.2.A & 3.3.9.4 are met. 7. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Per LUC Section 3.3.9.2.B.4 A single rack is designed and located to accommodate two bicycles. That said revise the Short-Term Bicycle parking calculation to show that six (6) Short-Term bicycle parking spaces are provided. 8. This comment was not addressed. D.S. 2-01.3.9.O Provide building setback dimensions to all streets based on LUC Section 3.2.6.5.B and table 3.2.6.I. Provide a setback dimension from the proposed building to the back of curb along 13th Ave. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.com Sshield1 on DS1/planning/New Development Package/ DP12-0004 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 07/09/2012 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 07/17/2012, TO: Patricia Gehlen FROM: Laith Alshami, P.E. CDRC Engineering SUBJECT: AutoZone #4096 DP12-0004, T15S, R13E, SECTION 02 RECEIVED: Development Package on July 03, 2012 1. The subject submittal has been reviewed and it can not be approved at this time. Address the following comments before review can continue. Prepare a detailed response that explains the revisions that were made and references the exact location in the drainage report and on the Development Package where the revisions were made. Responses such as "revised" are not adequate and prolong the review process. Additionally, provide a copy of the red lined plan for comparison : Drainage Report: The Drainage Report is acceptable and it hereby approved. Cover Sheet: 1. The Rezoning Conditions text is small and faint. Revise the text font to at least 3/32 inch in height and make it more legible D.S. 2-01.2.3). EVERY PAGE OF PACKAGE: 1. Provide a consistent sheet numbers for all the sheets. BASE LAYER SHEET COMMENTS: 1. Provide the proper documentation that verifies the completion of the lot combo process. 2. All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided (D.S. 2-01.3.8.B) and (D.S. 2-01.3.9.L). Site/Grading Plan: 1. Revise the near side sight triangle dimensions, for the 13th Avenue access, to 20' X 185'(D.S. 20-1.3.9.H.2). SWPPP: The SWPPP is acceptable at this time. Additional revisions shall be made to the document during construction. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4933 or Laith.Alshami@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Development Plan Package |
| 07/10/2012 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approved | PIMA COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT 201 NORTH STONE AVENUE TUCSON, ARIZONA 85701-1207 JACKSON JENKINS PH: (520) 740-6500 DIRECTOR FAX: (520) 620-0135 July 5, 2012 To: Zach Hilgart Hilgart/Wilson, LLC Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6719), Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department Subject: AutoZone Store # 4098 Development Plan - 3rd submittal DP12-0004 The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD) has reviewed the proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project. The following comments are offered for your use: The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department hereby approves the above referenced submittal of the development plan. cc: Chad Amateau, PE Checked by:_________ Kristin Greene, PE, DLU Manager DLU Project folder |
| 07/12/2012 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT DP12-0004 Auto Zone _ #4096 _Irvington Rd. () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other - Elevations CROSS REFERENCE: NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: 12th Avenue/Valencia Rd Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: NO COMMENTS DUE BY: July18, 2012 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: () No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment (X) Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions () RCP Proposal Complies with Plan Policies () See Additional Comments Attached (X) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: (X) Resubmittal Not Required: () Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: msp 791-5505 DATE: 07/12/12 |
| 07/17/2012 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. A street landscape border, per Sec. 3.7.2.4 of the LUC, is a landscape area with a minimum width of ten (10) feet, running the full length of the street property line(s) bounding the site except for points of ingress-egress. On streets designated as Major Streets and Routes (MS&R), the street landscape border is measured from the MS&R right-of-way line as determined by LUC 2.8.3.4. 2. Street landscape borders shall be located entirely on site, except that, if approved by the City Engineer or designee, up to five (5) feet of the required ten (10) foot width be placed within the adjacent right-of-way area or within the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) right-of-way area. Indicate Right of Way dimensions identical to the site plan on the landscape submittal. Landscaping that is proposed within the public ROW Contact Gary Wittwer, DOT Landscape Architect for specific requirements. 3. The site plan and landscape plan must show identical site layout to avoid conflict between the two plans. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape plan. 4. Additional comments may apply. |
| 07/18/2012 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | SHEET C1.0 1. Please remove the stripes from the landing in front of the accessible parking aisle. SHEET C1.A 2. Detail 21: Please make the landing concrete. 3. Detail 12: The bottom of the main sign is to be 7'-0": a.f.g. as required by COT DOT standards. SHEET PG01 4. Please insure that all accessible route slopes comply with ICC A 117.1, section 403.3; 5% max running and 2% max cross. END OF REVIEW |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/23/2012 | CPIERCE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |