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 - DP14-0018
Review Name: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/10/2014 | SPOWELL1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/11/2014 | KBROUIL1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 09/25/2014 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: September 26, 2014 DUE DATE: October 08, 2014 SUBJECT: Walmart Expansion Development Plan Package- 3rd Engineering Review TO: MetroTED; Attn: Lisa Bowers LOCATION: 7150 E Speedway Blvd; T14S R15E Sec08 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: DP14-0018 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package, Drainage Statement (Manhard Consulting LTD; 23APR14), Geotechnical Engineering Report (Terracon, 05MAR14 with Addendum 29MAY14) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Manhard Consulting LTD; 30SEP13). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administration Manual (AM) and Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Refer to the following link for further clarification: http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az The following items need to be addressed: SITE PLAN: 1) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.L: Revise the development plan package to provide the recordation information for any new or abandoned easements. Provide the SEQ# in plan view or as a note under the General Note Section. Specifically there is a 5-foot landscape easement shown adjacent to the Kolb Right-of-Way on the west side of the building that does not have the required Recordation information, revise. 2) New: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan package to clearly label and dimension the required 4-foot wide sidewalk located at the northeast corner of the building adjacent to the proposed 16 long-term bike racks. The plan needs to clearly show the minimum 4-foot sidewalk width per TSM Sec.7-01.4.3.A. SWPPP: 3) Per City of Tucson Code Ordinance 10209, Chapter 26 Section 26-42.2: "For land disturbing activities that fall under the jurisdiction of this Article, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan must be prepared and certified by an engineer, or a landscape architect and submitted along with the application for a grading permit to the City of Tucson Development Services Department." The SWPPP report and exhibits must be signed and sealed by the engineer of record or by a Registered Landscape Architect, revise. All other SWPPP comments have been addressed. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan Package and SWPPP that addresses the comment provided above. For expedite purposes the development plan package can be reviewed over the counter (PDSD Engineering Division comment only) for stamp approval once all items have been addressed. Please call to schedule an appointment when ready. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Department |
| 09/25/2014 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Wal-Mart Supercenter #1291-07 Development Package (3rd Review) DP14-0018 TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 25, 2014 DUE DATE: October 08, 2014 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. 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). The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC & TSM requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above 1. 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 10, 2015. Based on a building expansion of greater than 25% this development package was reviewed for full compliance of UDC Sections 7.4, 7.5, 7.6, and TSM Section 7-01. 2-06.1.0 GENERAL 2-06.1.1 PURPOSE This standard has been prepared for the purpose of informing applicants of the submittal and review requirements for development package documents to assure proper and adequate information is presented in a consistent manner, thereby providing the basis for an efficient and timely review. The development package documents are prepared in support of applications for building permits and related reviews. The information that is requested establishes the basis upon which the project will be approved and could affect what is required of the property in the future, should there be a proposal for expansion or for a different use of the property. This standard does not waive any applicable city regulations or codes. 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. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Section 7.4.9, Bicycle Parking Design Criteria, of the UDC. Provide, as a note, calculations for short and long term bicycle spaces required and provided. 1. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Provide a short term bicycle parking space detail(s) that demonstrate how the requirements of UDC Sections 7.4.9.B & .C are met. a. Per UDC Section 7.4.9.B.2.f Each required short-term bicycle parking space must be at least two feet by six feet. That said it does not appear that the proposed ribbon style bicycle rack allows for the required two foot by six foot space required for each rack. Demonstrate on the detail how this requirement is met. b. Per UDC Section 7.4.9.B.2.g A bicycle rack must be a minimum of two and one half feet from a wall or other obstruction. That said sheet 13 shows the short term racks along the north side of the building wall. Provide a dimension on the detail that shows that the two and one half foot area is provided between the short term bicycle rack and the building wall. c. Per UDC Section 7.4.9.C.2.a Location. Short-term bicycle parking must be: Within 50 feet of each public entrance to a building as measured along the most direct pedestrian access route (See Figure 7.4.9-A). It does not appear that the proposed location of the short term bicycle parking meet this requirement. Provide dimensions to the public entrances. d. Per UDC Section 7.4.9.C.2.d Where buildings have more than one public entrance or a site has more than one building, short-term bicycle parking must be distributed so that at least one short-term bicycle parking space is within 50 feet of each public entrance. Clearly identify all public entrances and show how the requirements of this section are met on the plan. 2. This comment was not addressed. COMMENT: Provide a long term bicycle parking space detail(s) that demonstrate how the requirements of UDC Sections 7.4.9.B & .D are met. a. Per UDC Section 7.4.9.B.1.a Bicycle parking may not impede on-site pedestrian access. A clearance space of at least four feet in width must be provided for pedestrian access. That said it appears that the proposed long term bicycle parking may encroach into the required sidewalk width. Provide width dimensions either on the site plan or detail that clearly show that the minimum four (4) foot width is maintained. 2-06.4.9.R - Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual. 3. COMMENT: Per TSM 7-01.4.3.A Width. All sidewalks must be a minimum of four feet wide and installed to avoid any obstruction which decreases the minimum width to less than four feet. That said it appears that the proposed long term bicycle parking may encroach into the required sidewalk width. Provide width dimensions either on the site plan or detail that clearly show that the minimum four (4) foot width is maintained. Once the above comments have been addressed Zoning is willing to provide an over-the-counter review. Call or email to schedule this appointment. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package . |
| 09/30/2014 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approv-Cond | From TDOT Zelin Canchola zelin.canchola@tucsonaz.gov dp14-0018 Wal Mart Expansion. Plan needs revision. 25 foot curb returns required. 50 foot shown on plan may need a TSMR (Technical Standard Modification Request) as required by PDSD |
| 10/02/2014 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/08/2014 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/13/2014 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items: 1) Two copies of the rolled plans 2) All items requested by review staff 3) All items needed to approve this plan. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/10/2014 | AROMERO4 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |