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: SITE and/or GRADING
Permit Number - DP17-0051
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/16/2017 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Principal Planner PROJECT: Hughes Federal Credit Union - Houghton Town Center Development Package (1st Review) DP17-0051 TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 20, 2017 DUE DATE: April 10, 2017 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. 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 March 09, 2018. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. 2-06.4.3 - Provide the development package case number, DP17-0051, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 2. 2-06.4.3 - Provide the following case numbers adjacent to the title block on all sheets; DP14-0246, DP16-0135, DP16-0139 & DP16-0158. 3. 2-06.4.3 - Clarify what case number SE-06-23 is for if not relevant, remove from all sheets. 4. 2-06.4.3 - Sheet 2 East Portion 24/25 the case number is not correct and should be listed as DP16-0135. 5. 2-06.4.3 - Sheet 2 Lot A the case number is not correct and should be listed as DP16-0139. 2-06.4.7 - General Notes The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable. 6. 2-06.4.7.A.6 - "BASIS OF BEARING" note 19 remove the reference to "NOISE CONTROL DISTRICT 65" as it is not applicable. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 7. 2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Per UDC Article 5.6.8.C.b For all other non-residential land use groups, the maximum FAR is .20 of the project site area. That said provide a FAR calculation that meets the requirements of UDC Article 6.4.6. 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. 8. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - Provide an access lane width dimension from the western most drive-through to the curb to the west. 9. 2-06.4.9.R - Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.B A sidewalk is required adjacent and parallel to any access lane or PAAL on the side where buildings are located. That said provide a sidewalk along the south side of the building. 10. Sheet 1 upper left corner, clarify why this group of notes is listed as "BASIS OF BEARING". 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 |
| 03/20/2017 | SSHIELD1 | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/28/2017 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/28/2017 | JOE LINVILLE | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/04/2017 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 04/05/2017 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Show the 14-foot by 40-foot approach to the solid waste enclosure with a minimum vertical clearance of 25 feet. It appears the drive-through canopy extends into this area. 2. If the drive-through area has a canopy, clearly identify the extent of the canopy and its height. |
| 04/10/2017 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/18/2017 | MMENDIB1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |