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
Permit Number - DP16-0203
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/15/2016 | KROBLES1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/17/2016 | AHINES2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Passed | Agency does not need to respond -- for notification purposes only. |
| 11/17/2016 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Passed | per okay to submit |
| 11/17/2016 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Passed | Agency does not need to respond -- for notification purposes only. |
| 11/17/2016 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Passed | Per okay to submit |
| 11/17/2016 | AHINES2 | OTHER AGENCIES | U. S. POST OFFICE | Passed | Agency does not need to respond -- for notification purposes only. |
| 11/17/2016 | AHINES2 | UTILITIES | SOUTHWEST GAS | Passed | Agency does not need to respond -- for notification purposes only. |
| 11/23/2016 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | Regional Traffic Engineering has no comments on this submittal and supports its acceptance. The project will have no impacts to ADOT facilities because of the location. Thank you. Tom Martinez |
| 12/06/2016 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera for Steve Shields - Principal Planner PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: Community Food Bank - Caridad Kitchen Expansion Development Package (1st Review) DP16-0203 TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 6, 2016 DUE DATE: December COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and any redlined plans along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. 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 15, 2017. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS) Section 2-06.4.3 - The administrative street address and relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 1. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP16-0203, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 2-06.4.7.A.4 - Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses. 2. COMMENT: The use listed in general note 3 is not subject to a Use Specific Standard. The note includes a USS 4.9.12 that needs to be removed. Also, this site includes an accessory use that is considered "Perishable Goods Manufacturing" and is subject to a use specific standard section 4.9.5.C.9. List the accessory use and applicable use specific standard under general note 3. Section 4.9.5.C.9.b limits the floor area of the Perishable Goods Manufacturing to 33% of the GFA of the building. Include a calculation that demonstrates compliance with the use specific standard 4.9.5.C.9.b. 2-06.4.9.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. 3. COMMENT: Draw and label the future svt's along the Main Avenue driveway and street intersection on the site plan sheet. 2-06.4.9.H.5.c - Show all loading zones, vehicle maneuverability fully dimensioned, and access route. Provide as a note the number of loading spaces required, the number provided, whether the loading space is a Type A or B as provided in UDC Section 7.5.4. 4. COMMENT: Per table 7.5.5-A, 1 Type B loading area is required for the Wholesaling Use Group with less than 50,000 SF of GFA. Draw and label the required loading zone and demonstrate maneuverability in and out of the loading zone area. 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. 5. COMMENT: Draw, dimension, and label within the building footprint on sheet 3 the area for the long term bicycle parking. 2-06.4.9.J - If street dedication is not required or proposed and the project site is adjacent to a Major Street or Route, draw the Major Street right-of-way lines for those streets. (Add the MS&R future sidewalk, right-of-way lines, sight visibility triangles, etc.) 6. COMMENT: The future face of curb to PL is 11 feet from the future ROW line. The dimensions labeled on the future row detail on sheet 6 do not add to the 11 feet. Review and verify that the cross section detail for the half row of way is labeled correctly with the dimensions that add up to 11 feet. 2-06.4.9.M - Grading Plan 2-06.4.9.M.1 - A conceptual grading plan is required on projects with significant topographic conditions. The PDSD Engineering Administrator or designee will determine the need for such a plan. 2-06.4.9.M.2 - Concurrent Review. For all projects, grading plans may be included in the development package and will be reviewed concurrently. 7. COMMENT: Once zoning approves the DP site plan the DP grading plan is also approved by zoning as it pertains to the zoning review purview. Assure that any changes that are made to the base site plan are also made to the grading and landscape plan site sheets. 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. 8. COMMENT: For consistency, label on the grading plan sheet, the cross slopes for the new sidewalk along the south side of the new addition. 2-06.4.9.X - Show compliance with landscaping and screening requirements by locations, material descriptions, and dimensions. Specific plant or hardscape material shall be detailed on a landscape plan. A detailed landscape plan is required. In accordance with Section 2-11.0.0, Landscape Plan Requirements. 9. COMMENT: Review the landscape reviewer comments related to landscaping and screening requirements. 10. COMMENT: Zoning is requiring that a Pima County Tax Parcel Combo of the three lots be processed and completed prior to approval of the DP. Provide a copy of the combo document with the next submittal. 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 |
| 12/07/2016 | DAVID RIVERA | HC SITE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | see zoning comments |
| 12/08/2016 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 12/12/2016 | KBROUIL1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 12/12/2016 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | No existing or proposed Tucson Parks and Recreation facilities are affected by this development. Howard B. Dutt, RLA Landscape Architect Tucson Parks & Recreation (520) 837-8040 Howard.Dutt@tucsonaz.gov |
| 12/14/2016 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1) Street landscape borders must be located entirely on site, except that, if approved by the City Engineer or designee, up to five feet of the required ten foot width may be placed within the adjacent right-of-way area or within the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) right-of-way area on MS&R streets. UDC 7.6.4.C.2 The landscape border along Main Ave, as measured from the MS&R line is required to include required code elements. These elements, if located in the future right of way do not count, except as approved by the City Engineer. Provide verification in writing of any approvals received from the City Engineer. 2) Screens along a street frontage must be located on the development side of the street landscape border so that they do not obstruct the view of the street landscape border from the street. UDC 7.6.5.C.2 The proposed fence or wall along Main Ave is shown in front of the required street landscape border. |
| 12/14/2016 | JOE LINVILLE | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 12/14/2016 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Show roof drainage patterns. Provide a note that roof drainage will not be discharged to any sidewalk. Provide pedestrian access to Main Avenue. (TSM 7-01.4.1.A) |
| 12/14/2016 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 12/15/2016 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items: 1) Two rolled sets of the plans 2) All approved documents submitted previously 3) All items requested by review staff 4) All items needed to approve these plans |
| 12/15/2016 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON POLICE DEPARTMENT | Passed |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12/27/2016 | KROBLES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |