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: DP16-0144
Parcel: 11704214A

Address:
58 E 5TH ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: DEV PKG

Permit Number - DP16-0144
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
08/23/2016 KROBLES1 START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
08/25/2016 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
09/12/2016 CLAURIE1 DESIGN PROFESSIONAL REVIEW Denied Major IID review in process
09/13/2016 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Principal Planner

PROJECT: 7th Avenue Commons
Development Package (1st Review)
DP16-0144

TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 15, 2016

DUE DATE: September 21, 2016

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 August 22, 2017.

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

1. 2-06.4.3 - Provide the development package case number, DP16-0144, adjacent to the title block on all sheets.

2. 2-06.4.3 - As you will be using the Downtown Area Infill Incentive District (IID) for this plan provide the IID case number adjacent to the title block on all sheets.

3. 2-06.4.2.B - Identify all streets that abut the subject property on the location map.

4. 2-06.4.2.C - Label the section corners on the location map.

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

5. 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - Provide a general note stating the IID case number, date of approval, what has been modified, if applicable conditions of approval

6. 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - As Stone Avenue is designated on the COT Major Streets and Routes plan as an arterial street provide a general note stating "THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC ARTICLE 5.4 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R)."

7. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide:

8. 2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Per UDC Table 5.12-SSS-3 provide an open space calculation on the plan. Clearly demonstrate on the plan how the open space requirements are met.

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.

9. 2-06.4.8.C - Provide the following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site dimensioned width of paving, curbs, and sidewalks.

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.

10. 2-06.4.9.A - As the main site is made up of three (3) parcels, 117-04-214A, 117-04-214D & 117-04-214F, a lot combination is required. Provide a copy of the approved Pima County Combination Request from with your next submittal.

11. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - Per UDC Table 5.12-DLS-5 Specific Requirement 6 At corner lots, vehicular access points may not be located on a primary street. That said the vehicle access proposed off of Stone is not allowed.

12. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - Per UDC Table 5.12-DLS-5 Vehicular Access Points the maximum allowed width is 24', it appears that the proposed curb cut along Stone exceeds this width.

13. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - Provide a fully dimensioned layout of the upper level of the parking structure.

14. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - If the proposed route for the solid waste vehicles is to exit the site via the Stone entrance, see comment 29, show the required two (2) foot setback to the 24' PAAL shown along the west end of the parking structure.

15. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Provide a vehicle parking space calculation that includes the number of spaces required, ratio used.

16. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - The provided number of vehicle parking spaces may not include the vehicle parking spaces located in the right-of-way.

17. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - The required number of accessible vehicle parking spaces is not correct. 63 x 2% = 1.26 or two (2) accessible vehicle parking spaces required.

18. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Per 2012 IBC Section 1106.5 at least one (1) of the provided accessible vehicle parking spaces is required to be van accessible. Clearly show the require van accessible space on the plan.

19. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Provide a detail for both a standard and accessible vehicle parking space. The accessible detail should clearly show how all requirements of ICC A117.1-2009 are met.

20. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Provide a detail for the required accessible parking space sign.

21. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Provide a short and long term bicycle parking calculation on the plan. This calculation should include the number required, provided and the ratio used.

22. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Provide a short term bicycle parking space detail the clearly demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.B.1, .2 and .C are met.

23. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Provide a short term bicycle parking space detail the clearly demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.B.1, .2 and .D are met.

24. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Sheet 4 there is a call out for "BIKE RACK 6 SPC TYP. 12/ASD1" there is no sheet "ASD1" or detail 12 that references bicycle parking. Detail 5 sheet 18 does not meet the requirements as stated above in comment 22.

25. 2-06.4.9.Q - Provide the square footage and the height of each structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building(s).

26. 2-06.4.9.R - Sheet 10 shows 3.5' wide sidewalks. Per TSM 7-01.4.3.A. the minimum width of a sidewalk should be 4'-0".

27. 2-06.4.9.R - Provide a detail for both proposed on site ramps, see blue highlight that demonstrate how the requirements of ICC A117.1-2009 Sections 302,405 & 505 are met.

28. 2-06.4.9.R - Provide a detail for all exterior stairs shown on the plan that demonstrates how the requirements of 2012 IBC sections 1009, 1012 & 1013 are met.

29. 2-06.4.9.T - Clearly show the proposed route of the solid waste vehicle on the plan.

30. 2-06.4.9.V - Sheet 4 there is a call out for "PROPOSED MAILBOX REF. DTL.3/A7.1.3" there is no sheet "A7.1.3" or detail 3 that references mailboxes.

31. 2-06.4.9.W - If applicable show all proposed signage (wall, free-standing, pedestal) on the plan. Also provide a general note on the plan stating all signage requires a separate review and permit.

Additional comments
32. There are several discrepancies between sheets of the development package. I have highlighted several, see green highlight, this is not all inclusive and additional comments may be forth coming once all sheets reflect the same information.

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.
09/15/2016 SSHIELD1 HC SITE REVIEW Reqs Change See Zoning Comments
09/20/2016 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL SECTION 2-10.0.0:
LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS
Identification and Descriptive Data
All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the landscape plan will be identical in size and location to those shown on the base plan (site plan or tentative plat). Should amendments be required to the base plan through the review process, the same amendments will be made to the landscape plan which will then be resubmitted along with the base plan. (General comment, pertaining to plan contents)
The landscape plan will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet:
1. Legal description and address of site;
2. Cross-reference to:
a. Rezoning case;
b. Subdivision case;
c. Board of Adjustment case;
d. Design Development Option case;
e. Development Review Board (DRB) case; and/or,
f. Any other relevant case number for reviews or modifications that affect the site.


UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE


ARTICLE 5: OVERLAY ZONES
5.12.8. GENERAL IID ZONING OPTION DESIGN STANDARDS

An IID Plan under the IID zoning option design standards must demonstrate compliance with the following:
A. Streetscape Design
Streetscape design must comply with the street design standards in the Technical Manual and the Streetscape Design Policy.
Shade
a. Except as provided below, shade shall be provided for at least 50% of all sidewalks and pedestrian access paths as measured at 2:00 p.m. on June 21 when the sun is 82 degrees above the horizon. Shade may be provided by trees, arcades, canopies, or shade structures provided their location and design characteristics are compatible with the historic and design context of the street and the architectural integrity of the building. The use of plantings and shade structures in the City right-of-way is permitted to meet this standard with the approval of the Transportation Department. The shade provided by a building may serve to meet this standard. Provide shade plan and permission to use the ROW for landscape purposes.
b. Exception
The PDSD Director may approve an IID Plan providing less than 50% shade where compliance is not feasible due to a project site's location and/or building orientation and the applicant has made a reasonable attempt to comply with this standard.

Section 7.6, Landscaping and Screening
a. Section 7.7, Native Plant Preservation may not be modified.
b. Except as required by Section 5.12.8.B, Development Transition Standards, a complete or partial exception to Section 7.6, Landscaping and Screening Standards, may be granted if shade is provided for pedestrians and customers, such as along sidewalks, pedestrian circulation paths, and outdoor patios, in accordance with Section 5.12.6.A.2. The landscaping requirement may also be waived by the PDSD Director based on a written finding that the waiver is necessary to preserve the prevailing setback.
c. Any one or more of the following types of landscaping and improvements may be used to comply with this section:
(1) Existing landscaping;
(2) Shade trees in the right-of-way;
(3) Green walls or green roofs; and/or
(4) Shade structures, such as awnings.
Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed.
Additional comments may apply
09/20/2016 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved
09/20/2016 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change Reduced pressure backflow prevention assemblies (not double check detector assemblies) are required at the water meter for buildings that have three or more stories or are greater than 34-feet in height as measured from the service level and for properties with more than one water meter connected. Reference: Chapter XXVII, Article V, Section 27-72, the Tucson Code, http://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/water/docs/backflow-ordinance.pdf
09/21/2016 TIM ROWE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Approved This project not required PCRWRD review.

Regards

AL.
09/22/2016 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DP16-0144
1. The various plan sheets in this Development Package are not consistent with each other. Revise the plans as necessary to ensure they are all consistent. Additional comments may be made after all the sets are revised.
2. Revise the floodplain designation to indicate the site is within FEMA Zone X only. The definitions should reflect both the unshaded and shaded Zone X areas. Revise the label on sheet 4 to correctly characterize the floodplain limits.
3. Check, and correct as necessary, the spelling in the notes on each sheet.
4. Provide a local basis of bearing.
5. The concrete approach to the solid waste enclosure extends into the right-of-way. The enclosure and approach must be on private property.
6. The IID doesn't allow access to the project from Stone Avenue and the maximum driveway width is 24 feet (UDC 5.12.11.) Revise the plans to meet these requirements.
7. Clearly identify features on all plan sheets. For example, the landing at the south access ramp along 7th Avenue is not shown on the site plan, is shown on the grading plan and has plants shown on the landscape plan.
8. Make sure all symbols are shown in a legend.
9. Grading notes 23 and 24 are not required by the city and may be removed.
10. Clarify the alternate material proposed for the north end of Echols Avenue to demonstrate it will be smooth enough for an accessible route and will meet standard specifications and details for right-of-way improvements.
11. Clarify the extent of all improvements in the right-of-way. Sheet 4 shows curb extending along both sides of Echols Avenue. Sheet 10 shows a lesser amount. Indicate which features are existing and which are proposed.
12. Ensure the new access ramps at intersections align with existing ramps across streets.
13. Ensure all callouts are correctly referenced. Some notes reference "civil" and others reference sheets not in the Development Package. Provide sheet numbers and provide details within the Development Package.
14. The SWPP plan sheet shows a stabilized construction entrance in Echols Avenue. Echols Avenue is paved and a stabilized construction entrance is not appropriate.
15. The washdown area is shown outside the property boundary. Provide written permission from the owner of this area for this use of the property.
09/23/2016 AHINES2 ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Reqs Change This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items:

1) Two rolled sets of the plans
2) A disk containing all items submitted
3) All items requested by review staff
4) All items needed to approve these plans

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
09/23/2016 ARUIZ1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed