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: REVISION - - 2ND
Permit Number - DP16-0026
Review Name: REVISION - - 2ND
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/13/2020 | MGAYOSS1 | DESIGN PROFESSIONAL | REVIEW | Approved | DATE: July 12, 2020 TO: Maria Gayosso, Urban Planner/Principal Planner/Project Manager, City of Tucson FROM: Rick Gonzalez, Architect (#26992) COT On-Call Design Professional RE: DP Revision 2 Review, Graduate Hotel & Apartments Phase 5, DP Revisions, DP16-0026 I have reviewed the Revisions to the Development Package submitted June 2020 for the purpose of determining its conformance with the Design Package of the IID. I have checked the submittal against the Main Gate District (MGD) Ordinance Requirements relative to Section C-19, Design Standards under procedure described in Section B-2.d. Submittal Requirements Status 1. Lighting: No changes adversely minimize light glare and trespass, conserve energy, affect the approved promote safety and security, full cut-off fixtures, Design Package concealed from public right-of-way view 2. Building Materials and Colors: No changes adversely chosen for tactile effects, contrast... like rough to affect the approved smooth, vertical patterns vs. horizontal. Etc., integral Design Package colors, visual and physical permanence in the Sonoran Desert. Localizing effect, ambiance, coherence with the neighborhood. Facades on public streets or open space: Use high quality materials such as: brick, stone, pre-cast concrete, cast stone, CMU's. Brick panels... Architectural metals... panels, sheets... with expressed seams, cuts, stamps, casts, or ornamental panels. Glass/glass block... Modular panels: EIFS, stucco, but less than 25% of total facade at the base along public streets. At lower floors adjacent to street frontage, respond to pedestrian ways... using quality scale, texture color, detail. Material combinations reinforce architectural scaling requirements. Reflects tradition of U of A, COT, adjacent historic neighborhoods. Use accent colors consistently throughout: signs, architectural features, lighting, window/door frames, and accent walls. Avoid glare reflective producing materials. 3. Architectural Elements and Features: No changes adversely Balconies, outdoor stairs, ornaments and surface details affect the approved such as screening, cladding and fenestration shall be Design Package provided to enhance the architectural style of the building. No balconies allowed in group dwellings. Consider appropriate use, scale, proportion, texture Carefully integrate in the concept design. Clear visual distinction between the ground and upper floors. Arcades, when used, place along south and west facades, unless along Park Avenue. Construct out of wood, brick, canvas, metal, stone or concrete. Street facing facades: 20' maximum single plane without architectural detailing. Outdoor vending and gathering areas encouraged. Delineate with hardscape, grade change, or vegetation. 4. Building Articulation: 3 consecutive street facing facade areas: same paint No changes adversely or method of articulation. Articulate facades at entries affect the approved between retail spaces for patio and outside engagement. Design Package Building long than 85' – articulate each 85' to appear as separate buildings along a front property line. Building corners – add articulation to emphasize and promote gathering (e.g. roof/facade higher at corner). Local public art encouraged (e.g. sculpture art). 5. Doors No changes adversely shade and weather protection at entries, clear affect the approved identification, safe, secure, universally accessible. Design Package Storefronts – provide awnings, canopies for shade, color, and material variation; integrate with sidewalk design and treatment. Clearly identifiable “front door” at each facade on a major street. Residential Units - provide separate street access, residential scale, demarcated by awning, stoop or recess. 6. Windows and Glazing: No changes adversely low e, visual connection through either side. Size, affect the approved proportion, pattern relates to unit type/layout. Design Package Reinforces facade patterns of scale and variety. property and the proposed use(s). Mixed usesuses a variety of ratios of clear to opaque surfaces (i.e. glass to wall) and on commercial greater glass to wall. 7. Building Facades: No changes adversely Base to have at least two of the following... affect the approved trellis or vertical garden with 50% vegetation. Design Package. Local artist Artwork (e,g, public mural, custom panel, small retail space (50 sf plus GFA, coffee cart, kiosk, etc.). Outdoor dining, gathering patio, delineated by low wall, fence, planter, change of elevation, or other buffers. Distinctive Lighting. Shade structure, changes of plane such as indentations, textures, or accent materials. Windows – 75% minimum visible light on each side of window. Window displays or visible activity on ground floor. 8. Streetscape: No changes adversely along Speedway and Euclid Avenue, design to affect the approved promote community. Design Package General Comments: Based on review of the Revision 2 Submittals, which primarily consist of floor plan reductions and changes to vehicular and increased bike parking, solid waste calculations, hardscape, and added detailing of an ADA ramp. Also, some vents were added to the north side of the building, as well as utility call-outs, and landscape revisions. I see no changes that adversely affect the approved Design Package. Therefore, I recommend approval as submitted. Sincerely, Rick Gonzalez, Architect RGA |
| 07/16/2020 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 07/23/2020 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/23/2020 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/29/2020 | NICHOLAS ROSS | ZONING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/27/2020 | ALEXANDRA HINES | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | WRITE DECISION LETTER | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/27/2020 | AHINES2 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |