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

Permit Number: TD-DEV-0424-00114
Parcel: 13810013C

Address:
5745 S 6TH AV

Review Status: Requires Resubmit

Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.3

Permit Number - TD-DEV-0424-00114
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.3
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
11/27/2024 NPPO APPROVED
01/17/2025 CDRC Post Review Express PENDING ASSIGNMENT
11/19/2024 Commercial Plumbing REQUIRES RESUBMIT 1. The revised grading plan now shows that none of the buildings have a finished floor elevation less than 12” above the rim elevation of the next upstream manhole. A backwater valve shall not be installed. [Initial comment: The rim elevation of the new next upstream sanitary manhole (2506.80 +/-) is less than 12” below the first floor elevation (2507.60). Provide a backwater valve per Section 714.1, IPC 2018, as amended by the City of Tucson. No fixtures located more than 12” above the rim elevation of the next upstream manhole (i.e., on the second floor) may discharge through the backwater valve.]
2. Provide a clean out in the building sewer immediately prior to entering the right of way. Reference: Pima County Standard Detail RWRD 401.
01/17/2025 External Reviewers - Tucson Electric Power (TEP) REQUIRES RESUBMIT Adding TEP to the next review cycle.
11/15/2024 ROW Engineering Review REQUIRES RESUBMIT TD-DEV-0424-00114 • 5745 S 6TH AV

1. Per 10-01.3.3.C.7 of the UDC Technical Standards Manual, sidewalks are not required on streets in established areas without existing curbs.

2. It is recommended that an asphalt paved driveway with header returns or a concrete driveway be provided. The driveway should be flush with the adjoining grade.

If you have any questions, please contact Richard Leigh at 520-403-0970 or email richard.leigh@tucsonaz.gov.
11/25/2024 Site Engineering REQUIRES RESUBMIT 1. Provide a detail for the 1.25' deep detention basin including side slopes, stabilization method, and inlet/outlet design. Provide drawdown calculations and ensure the basin will drain within 12 hours.

Mike Ortiz
michael.ortiz@tucsonaz.gov
11/27/2024 Site Landscape REQUIRES RESUBMIT CDRC TRANSMITTAL
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
REVIEWER: CHAD KELLER, RLA
PDSD SITE LANDSCAPE/NATIVE PLANT PRESERVATION SECTION

PROJECT: 28 MULTIFAMILY APARTMENTS, 7 BUILDINGS
ACTIVITY NO: TD-DEV-0424-00114
ADDRESS: 5745 S 6TH AV
ZONING: R-2 RESIDENCE ZONE
LAND USE: MULTIFAMILY

This plan has been reviewed for compliance with applicable development criteria in the City of Tucson Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-11 and Technical Manual (TM) Section for landscape, native plants, and water harvesting.

Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Landscape/NPPO Review Section comments are addressed.

SITE LANDSCAPE/NPPO SECTION COMMENTS:

1. Label sight visibility triangles as well as existing and future ROWs on all plan sheets within the set.

2. Add the street name to all plan sheets showing S 6th Ave.

3. Label the project property lines on all plan sheets within the set.

4. The irrigation legend schematic is helpful, but construction details are required to complete the irrigation plans. Some irrigation details can be found on the CoT website here: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/Departments/Transportation-Mobility/Landscape/Landscape-Architects. For your reference/use in completing your landscape development package.

Example details:
- Automatic Controller: wall mount, or pedestal mount
- Backflow Preventer
- Irrigation pipe sleeving
- Irrigation trenching
- Drip control valve assembly
- Multi-outlet emitter
- Single outlet emitter
- End flush cap
- Rain shut off device

5. It appears that the layout of the water harvesting plan will function properly. However, the 374% calculation does not seem to line up as an average of the seven WHIA’s shown on the water budget table. If a clean version of the spreadsheet is needed, please reach out and I will send over a new copy for your use.

6. Add a bold note on the Commercial Rainwater Harvesting Plan to refer to the grading plan for all grades, spot elevations, and construction of the water harvesting basins. The two plans should match identically in linework.

7. A rainwater harvesting basin schematic detail is not a requirement but adding it to the CRWHP would be a nice addition for construction clarity. If you would like to add the detail and need an example, please reach out and I will send an example for reference.

8. Tree staking is only needed for single trunk trees or if a multi-trunk tree is in poor condition and needs the extra stability during establishment. All of the trees in the planting legend are multi-trunk trees. Multi-trunk trees don’t require staking. Provide a detail for a multi-trunk tree planting with no stakes and add a note to remove the nursery stake.

9. The tree root barrier detail is shown on the CRWHP. Can it be placed with the Tree/Shrub/Accent details on sheet 8 of 17?

10. The parking tree requirements are called out on sheet 7 of 17, but I don’t see any tree symbols within the parking lot area, or tree planter islands for the trees to be planted in. Provide the required number of trees in all vehicular parking areas (1 tree to 4 parking spaces).

11. The landscape border calculations on sheet 7 of 17 indicate that trees are supposed to be present in the landscape borders. No tree symbols are shown in any of the borders, only shrub and accent symbols are shown. Add the trees to the borders on the planting plan sheet.

12. The quantities shown in the site coverage calculations don’t match what is shown in the landscape legend and inventory. Coordinate the quantities to match.

13. Address Zoning and Engineering comments prior to landscape section approval.

If you have any questions about these comments, I can be reached at chad.keller@tucsonaz.gov 520.837.4923
12/13/2024 Site Zoning REQUIRES RESUBMIT PDSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: PDSD Zoning Review

PROJECT: Lomeli Apartments
Development Package (2nd Review)
TD-DEV-0424-00114

TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 13, 2024

DUE DATE: November 22, 2024

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 May 22, 2025.

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.

1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – This comment was not fully addressed. The 20’-0” PAALs providing access to 90-degree parking spaces shown on the plan do not meet the minimum 24’-0” requirements of UDC Figure 7.4.6-A & Table 7.4.6-1. Zoning acknowledges a one-way traffic is being proposed to meet requirements of Table 7.4.6-2, however, plans must show one-way traffic on all proposed phases of the project.

2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – This comment was not addressed. Phase 1 & 2 appears to show some type of temporary access lane along the east end of each phase. Clearly demonstrate that the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.6.D, .H.1 & .I are met. A vertical barrier must be provided along the perimeter of the gravel access lane to prevent vehicles from entering unimproved portion of the site.

3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – This comment was not fully addressed. Demonstrate how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.B.1.e are met for the short-term bicycle parking. A motion activated light does not meet these requirements.

4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – This comment was not fully addressed. The required street perimeter yard setback shown is not correct. Review UDC Article 6.4.5.C.2.a, and provide the correct required setback. Sheet D1 still shows incorrect setback.

5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – This comment was not addressed. The required interior setbacks, north, south & east shown is not correct. Review UDC Table 6.3-2.A and provide the correct required setbacks. Multi-family is considered a non-residential use.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Nicholas Ross at Nicholas.Ross@tucsonaz.gov.

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: A revised development package as well as a comment response letter. To resubmit, visit the Tucson Development Center Online at https://tdc-online.tucsonaz.gov/#/home. The instructions for resubmittal can be found at https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/pdsd/documents/tdc-faq/new-pdfs/revisions-and-resubmittals.pdf.
10/24/2024 CDRC Application Completeness Express REVIEW COMPLETED
11/26/2024 ROW Review REVIEW COMPLETED