Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.3
Permit Number - TD-DEV-0723-00311
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.3
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12/28/2023 | External Reviewers - Pima County Addressing | APPROVED | Good afternoon, Pima County Addressing approves TD-DEV-0723-00311 Prince Multifamily. See the attached plan for approved unit numbers. Nicholas Jordan Site Review Project Manager – Addressing Official Pima County Development Services Department 201 N Stone AV – 1st Floor Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 724-9623 Pima County Development Services’ enhanced online permitting website is now live. Create an account to submit most applications online, and get your comments and documents directly from our portal. No more waiting for staff to email you! Start here at (https://permits.pima.gov). The Pima County Development Services Team – Your gateway to Building Safety |
||
| 12/22/2023 | NPPO | APPROVED | |||
| 12/27/2023 | Site Engineering | APPROVED | |||
| 01/04/2024 | CDRC Post Review Express | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 11/22/2023 | Commercial Plumbing | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | The rim elevation of the new next upstream sanitary manhole (2329.20’) is less than 12” below the first floor elevation (2329.24’) of six existing buildings. Provide backwater valves per Section 714.1, IPC 2018, as amended by the City of Tucson. [Initial comment: Compare the FFE for each existing building and compare it to the rim elevation of the new manhole (at keynote 4/C-1) and evaluate the need for backwater valves at the existing buildings per Section 714.1, IPC 2018, as amended by the City of Tucson.] | ||
| 12/06/2023 | ROW Engineering Review | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | TD-DEV-0723-00311 (540 W PRINCE RD TUCSON, AZ 85705) 2nd Review Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter which states how all comments were addressed. Comments: 1. TSM 10-01.5.1, AM 2-06.4.9 – Please provide future and existing sight visibility triangles. Reference TSM 10-01.5.1 for instructions. a. Response: Future and existing SVT has been added to the plans. b. This comment was not completely addressed. Future sight visibility triangles are still needed or are incorrect. Please email me for an illustration at faffs.riederer@tucsonaz.gov. 2. P. A. G. SD 207 - Tie-in from existing adjacent 5’ sidewalk to new 6’ sidewalk with a taper at the back of sidewalk. Tie-in per P.A.G. standard 203 labeled on plans. a. Response: Call out added with reference to P. A. G. SD 203. b. This comment was not fully addressed. Please show two details of the areas where the new sidewalk in front of this property ties into the existing sidewalks on adjacent properties. 3. P. A. G. SD 207, ICC 117.1 Sec 405.7 - Where adjoining sidewalk from the property ties to sidewalk along the ROW frontage, a 60” X 60” ADA landing is required with a maximum 2% cross slope. Please identify this landing with a callout note. a. This comment was misinterpreted. The ADA landing is required at the point where the on-site sidewalk connects to the sidewalk in the ROW (not at the point where the sidewalk in the ROW joins the sidewalk in the ROW in front of adjacent properties. Because your new sidewalk is 6’ wide, it will meet this requirement and no further change is required. 4. Paving Plan note 18 says “EXISTING DRIVEWAY AND CURB CUTS TO REMAIN”. Please show that the existing sidewalk that is crossed by the driveway has a cross slope of 2% or less by labeling the existing cross slope on the paving plan. If the existing sidewalk across the driveway has a cross slope >2%, the sidewalk and apron will need to be reconstructed or the sidewalk will need to be routed behind the apron. Email me for examples. 5. If the sidewalk will be routed behind the existing apron, a pedestrian easement will be required as the sidewalk will cross onto the property. Contact Bob Beecher with Department of Transportation and Mobility Real Estate at bob.beecher@tucsonaz.gov for an easement template and instructions. Faffs Riederer Faffs.Riederer@tucsonaz.gov Abbreviations: City of Tucson Code (COTC), Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM), Technical Standards Manual (TSM), Street Design Guide (SDG), Pima Association of Governments Standard Details (P. A. G. SD), Access Management Guidelines (AMG), Major Streets and Routes Plan (MS&R). |
||
| 12/22/2023 | Site Landscape | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Please fill out the Site Water Budget Table in full on sheet L.5. It is missing key information, e.g., the last four rows of the spreadsheet. If you have any questions about these comments, I can be reached at Matthew.Carlton@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 12/07/2023 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Prince Multifamily Development Package (2nd Review) TD-DEV-0723-00311 TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 7, 2023 DUE DATE: December 23, 2023 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 August 1, 2024. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. This comment was not fully addressed, the case number was not provided on sheets 11-16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-0723-00311, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 2. The expansion calculation does not provide the percentage of expansion. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.c - Provide a building area expansion calculation on the plan. 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. This comment was not addressed. The plan shows the vehicles turning around within the 60’ ½ future right- of -way. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Clearly demonstrate that a vehicle attempting to access the site can turn around on site without having to back out onto Prince is the gate will not open. All maneuvering must be on site. 4. This comment was not fully addressed. Provide a standard vehicle parking space detail. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Provide a detail for both a standard and accessible vehicle parking space on the plan. 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – At the southeast and southwest corner of the proposed new building there appears to be a column. Clarify on the plan how a parking vehicle will be prevented from damaging this column, UDC Article 7.4.6.H.1. 6. This comment was not addressed correctly. The provided number, “16” does not address whether these provided are short – or long-term bicycle parking spaces. Based on the 4 racks shown at the north end of the existing buildings for both phase 1 & 2 the only type of bicycle parking provided is short-term and the number provided is 8 spaces. No long-term bicycle parking has been provided. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Provide a bicycle parking spaces calculation that includes the number required & provided for both the short- & long-term bicycle parking. 7. This comment was not fully addressed. The Bike Parking detail provided on sheet A021 is for short-term only and does not address UDC Articles 7.4.9.B.1.d, .e, & 7.4.9.b.2.a. No detail was provided for long-term bicycle parking. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Provide a detail for both the short- & long-term bicycle parking that clearly demonstrates how all requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9 are met. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Detail 2 sheet A021 the distance between the racks is not correct is measured form edge of rack not center, see UDC Figure 7.4.9-C. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Phase 2 it appears that the stair landing is encroaching into the bicycle racks. Clearly demonstrate that the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.B are met in regard to the stair landing. 10. This comment was not addressed. The curb and new sidewalk shown on the plan does not appear to meet the 120’ MS&R section provided in the MS&R Plan found at: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/city-services/planning-development-services/documents/msr.pdf. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.J – Show the future curb and sidewalk locations on the plan and provided dimensions. 11. Zoning acknowledges that you are submitting a TSMR but until the TSMR is approved Zoning cannot approve this plan. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Provide a sidewalk meeting the requirements of TSM Section 7-01.4.2 & .3 along the east, west and south side of the existing structures, TSM Section 7-01.4.1.B. 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.W - Provide a general note stating all signs require separate permits. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Nicholas Martell at Nicholas.Martell@tucsonaz.gov. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package & detailed response letter. |
||
| 11/22/2023 | CDRC Application Completeness Express | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 11/27/2023 | Fire New Construction | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 12/26/2023 | TSMR/PDMR - Engineering | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 01/04/2024 | TSMR/PDMR - Zoning | REVIEW COMPLETED |