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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/10/2014 | AROMERO4 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 12/03/2014 | 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 (4th Review) DP14-0018 TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 3, 2014 DUE DATE: December 10, 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. This comment was not addressed. See UDC Figure 7.4.9-C and show the 2' x 6' area required for each bicycle on each side of each rack. 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. This comment was not addressed. The plan does not show any short term bicycle parking within 50' of the eastern most public entrance, garden center entrance. 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. c. Construction Note 18 calls out 16 short term bike racks west of the main entrance, there are only 8 racks shown on the plan. Per UDC Section 7.4.9.B.2.d A single rack is designed and located to accommodate two bicycles. That said if 16 bike racks are proposed than the total number of short term bicycle parking provided should be 32 spaces not 26 as shown on the parking table. 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 |
| 12/03/2014 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 12/09/2014 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 12/09/2014 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | This review has been completed. Once Zoning comments have been address please resubmit the 2 rolled sets of the plans. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12/12/2014 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |