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 - DP22-0066
Review Name: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/03/2022 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 08/08/2022 | JPEELDA1 | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/08/2022 | SBLOOD1 | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/12/2022 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Biolife Plasma Services Center Development Package (1st Review) DP22-0066 TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 14, 2022 DUE DATE: April 20, 2022 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings 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 21, 2023 2-06.4.7 - General Notes The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable. 2-06.4.7.A - Zoning and Land Use Notes 1. This comment was not fully addressed. Remove the reference to “ALL ACTIVITIES SHALL BE CONDUCTED ENTIRELY WITHIN AN ENCLOSED BLDG.” from Development Plan General Note 3 as it is not applicable. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – The use specific standard listed under Development Plan General Note 3 is not correct. Review UDC TABLE 4.8-4: PERMITTED USES - COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USEZONES, C-3 zone and provide the correct reference. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided. 2. This comment was not addressed. Once all other comments have been addressed if the easement has not been abandoned Zoning will put a hold on the C of O for building permit T22CM00666 until recorded documents are provided. If you wish to go this route show the easement to be abandoned per separate instrument. COMMENT: 2-06.4.8.B – There is an “EXIST 15’ WATER EASMENT DOCKET 12109 PAGE 481” located under the proposed building. This easement will need to be abandoned prior to approval of this DP. 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. 3. The number of required Van Accessible spaces shown in the parking calculation is not correct and should be 2 required, per 2018 IBC Chapter 11 Section 1106.5 Van Spaces. “For every six of fraction of six accessible spaces, at least one shall be a van-accessible parking space.” COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Under the “HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE PARKING” calculation provide the number of van accessible spaces required & provided. 4. This comment does not appear to be addressed correctly. The short-term bicycle provided number shows “9 PROVIDED” but Keynote 27 points to a single rack and detail 4 sheet 8 only shows a single rack. Per UDC Article 7.4.9.B.2.d A single rack is designed and located to accommodate two bicycles. Cleary show the 9 short-term spaces on the plan and if more than one rack is located in a single location the detail should reflect the layout. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – The bicycle parking space calculation is not correct. Review UDC Table 7.4.8-1: Minimum Required Bicycle Parking Spaces and provide a correct calculation. This calculation shall show the number of short- & long-term bicycle spaces required & provided. 5. This comment was not fully addressed. Clearly demonstrate how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.2.a, & 7.4.9.C.2.a are met for the short-term and 7.4.9.D.5 is met for the long-term. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – As the COT PDSD Site Inspectors do not carry a copy of the UDC revised the short-term bicycle parking to demonstrate how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1.e, 7.4.9.B.2.a, 7.4.9.B.2.f & 7.4.9.C.2.a are met. Also, for the long-term demonstrate how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1.e is met. 6. This comment was not addressed. Once all other comments have been addressed if the easement has not been recorded Zoning will put a hold on the C of O for building permit T22CM00666 until recorded documents are provided. If you wish to go this route show the easement to be per separate instrument. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.L – There is a proposed “15’ PUBLIC WATER EASEMENT” shown on the plan. This easement will need to recorded prior to approval of this DP. Once recorded provide the sequence number on the plan. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Nicholas Ross at Nocholas.Ross@tucsonaz.gov. To resubmit your plans for additional review, please visit: https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 08/15/2022 | AWARNER1 | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/24/2022 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | An email was not sent. |