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: DP16-0151
Parcel: 12404097C

Address:
950 N TYNDALL AV

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: DEV PKG

Permit Number - DP16-0151
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
08/25/2016 AHINES2 START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
08/30/2016 PGEHLEN1 COT NON-DSD ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Reqs Change Trish,




The City of Tucson - Environmental Services Department (ES) has completed our review of Development Package DP16-0151, Sterling - Tyndall Avenue. The Sterling - Tyndall Avenue project is a 148 unit student housing complex with two parking levels.



Revisions to the Development Package shall include the following:



Solid waste will be stored in two 2 cubic yard "mini - mac" compactors to be located in a first floor trash room. The waste stream calculations on Sheet 1 of 25 state that two of the compactor units will be provided. Keynote No. 6 on Sheet 4 of 25 states that a (one) compactor unit and a spare container will be provided. The wording in Keynote No. 6 shall be revised to clarify that two compactor units will be provided.



The applicant shall provide information on proposed recycling plans for the building.



In general, ES approves the proposed solid waste management plan for the student housing project with the above noted comments.



Please contact me if there are any questions concerning this review.



Tom Ryan

City of Tucson - Environmental Services Department
08/30/2016 JENNIFER STEPHENS PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING Reqs Change See letter in Documents Folder in PRO.

DP16-0151 Sterling - Tyndall Avenue / 1st Submittal is being Returned for Corrections by Pima County Addressing.

Please see the sticky note comments in the file 1_DevPkg_DP16-0151.pdf. A comment summary is also included for your use.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Robin Freiman
Addressing Specialist
Pima County Development Services Department
201 N Stone AV – 1st Floor
Tucson, AZ 85701
(520) 724-7570
08/31/2016 CLAURIE1 DESIGN PROFESSIONAL REVIEW Denied
09/12/2016 KBROUIL1 COT NON-DSD FIRE Approved
09/19/2016 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: David Rivera for Steve Shields - Principal Planner
PDSD Zoning Review Section

PROJECT: Sterling Tyndall Avenue - Group Dwelling (Student Housing)
Development Package (1st Review)
DP16-0151

TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 19, 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.

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 23, 2017.


2-06.3.12 - An index of sheets in the development package shall be provided on the first sheet.

1. COMMENT: Ensure that the sheet names are listed correctly in the title block as listed under the Sheet index on the cover sheet or rename the following sheets to match the sheet index. Sheet 5 and 6, 10 and 11, and sheets 21 through 25.

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.1 - The name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s), or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional, such as a surveyor, architect, landscape architect, or engineer. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines.

2. COMMENT: Provide on the cover sheet the information as noted by the standard above the information related to the Professionals, Landscape Architect - Timothy S. Johnson and Registered Engineer Paul Iezzi.

2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet:

2-06.4.2.B - A brief legal description and a statement as to whether the project is a re-subdivision are to be provided. On re-subdivisions, provide the recording information of the existing subdivision plat;

3. COMMENT: Include in the legal description within title block of all plans sheets the words "A Portion of Lot 1".


4. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP16-0151, adjacent to the title block on each sheet.


2-06.4.2.B - Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and all streets that abut the subject property; and,

5. COMMENT: Label in the location map the street name "6th Street".


2-06.4.2.C - Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled.

6. COMMENT: Label the section corners on the location map, see cover sheet.


2-06.4.7.A.2 - List the gross area of the site/subdivision by square footage and acreage.

7. COMMENT: Please review the gross site area in square feet. The square footage for .711 acres is approximately 30,971.16 acres. Revise as required.


2-06.4.7.A.6.a - List additional applications and overlays, by case number (if applicable), in lower right corner of each sheet. As a general note provide the type of application processed or overlays applicable, a statement that the project meets the criteria/conditions of the additional application or overlay, the case number, date of approval, what was approved, and the conditions of approval, if any.

8. COMMENT: If applicable add the information as noted by the standard above. If the design professional is to review the DP for compliance with the Main Gate criteria in addition to the Zoning review, include any changes DP that are required by the Design Professional.


2-06.4.7.A.7 - If the property is part of a subdivision plat that is being reviewed or has been recorded, provide the case number in the lower right corner of each sheet. As a general note, indicate whether the project is part of a Flexible Lot Development (FLD), condominium, or another similar type project.

9. COMMENT: List as reference next to the title block the lot split case number S16-046.


2-06.4.7.C.2 - List the following note on all development package documents: "No structure or vegetation shall be located or maintained so as to interfere with the sight visibility triangles in accordance with Section 10-01.5.0, Sight Visibility, of the Technical Standards Manual."

10. COMMENT: Revise general note 9 to read as noted by the standard above, verbatim.


2-06.4.8.B - All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided.

11. COMMENT: If applicable draw, label, and dimension any easements on the property. Indicate whether a cross access easement or agreement is to be recorded for access to the site.


2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show future and existing sight visibility triangles. On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section.

12. COMMENT: Draw the sight visibility triangles from the 1st Street / Tyndall Avenue south.


2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

13. COMMENT: Van accessible parking spaces that are angled shall have the access aisle located on the passenger side, per Chapter 5 ICC A11.1-2009. Designate on sheet 5 by keynote the accessible parking space(s) that are Van Accessible space(s).


2-06.4.9.H.5.c - Show all loading zones, vehicle maneuverability fully dimensioned, and access route. Provide as a note the number of loading spaces required, the number provided, whether the loading space is a Type A or B as provided in UDC Section 7.5.4.

14. COMMENT: A 12' x 24' loading zone is proposed on 1st Street along the north side of the building. Per section C-6.1, C-6.a.3 an optional on-street loading zone of up to 8' to 30' is permitted, but only if approved by the TDOT. Provide approval granted by TDOT unless approval is noted as part of the DP review by Traffic/TDOT.


2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Section 7.4.9, Bicycle Parking Design Criteria, of the UDC. Provide, as a note, calculations for short and long term bicycle spaces required and provided.

15. COMMENT: Per section C-5.b.1.ii Non-Residential: minimum of 2 short term spaces or 1 per 5,000 SF of GFA, whichever is greater. Based on the square footage of less than 5,000 SF for the retail the minimum of 2 short term spaces is required. Revise the short term number from 1 space to 2 and the number of short term spaces provided for each use under the "Parking Provided" column.

Per section C-5.b.2.ii Non-Residential: minimum of 2 long term spaces or 1 per 12,000 SF of GFA, whichever is greater. Based on the square footage of less than 5,000 SF for the retail the minimum of 2 long term spaces is required. Revise the long term number from 1 space to 2 and the number of long term spaces provided for each use under the "Parking Provided" column.


2-06.4.9.H.7 - If streets are proposed, indicate if they are designed for on-street parking to accommodate visitor parking or if parking is provided in common parking areas. Visitor parking is to be evenly distributed and usable by all residents of the project. Extra parking on individual lots, such as tandem parking in driveways, does not count toward visitor parking, as it is not available to other property owners within the project. Design criteria for streets are located in Technical Standards Manual Section 10-01.0.0.
Streets designed at the minimum width, without on-street parking, need clearance for access to all homes by life safety vehicles and, where no alleys are provided, by refuse collection vehicles. If motor vehicles are parked along streets that are not designed to allow for parking, life safety services will be inhibited and, in many situations, blocked.

16. COMMENT: On sheet 4, the cross section for First Street is noted as detail N/11. On sheet 11, detail N is for Tyndall Avenue. Revise the detail number on sheet 4 to O/11.


2-06.4.9.L - All proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. The easements may have to be recorded and the recordation information added to the development package prior to approval.

17. COMMENT: See related comment 12.


2-06.4.9.M - Grading Plan

2-06.4.9.M.1 - A conceptual grading plan is required on projects with significant topographic conditions. The PDSD Engineering Administrator or designee will determine the need for such a plan.

18. COMMENT: Zoning has reviewed the grading and will approve the grading plan as part of the DP.


2-06.4.9.V - For gang mailboxes indicate location to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements, such as pedestrian accessibility, utilities, and landscaping.

19. COMMENT: Indicate by Keynote or general note how and where mail pick-up and delivery will be provided


2-06.4.9.X - Show compliance with landscaping and screening requirements by locations, material descriptions, and dimensions. Specific plant or hardscape material shall be detailed on a landscape plan. A detailed landscape plan is required. In accordance with Section 2-11.0.0, Landscape Plan Requirements.

20. COMMENT: See the Landscape Reviewer's comments related to landscape and screening requirements.


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
09/20/2016 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Completed
09/20/2016 JOHN BEALL COT NON-DSD COMMUNITY PLANNING Denied PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
COMMENTS

Regarding

SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application

CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT

DP16-0151 Sterling-Tyndall Avenue 09/19/2016

() Final Plat
(X) Development Plan
() Landscape Plan
() Revised Plan/Plat
() Board of Adjustment
() Other - Elevations



SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:

() Approval
(X) Denied
(X) Rezoning history on site
() No Rezoning history on site - No Resubmittal Required:
() Tentative Plat
(X) Development Plan
() Landscape Plan
() Other










REVIEWER: MM DATE: 09/19/2016

COMMENTS

Development Package did not include the review letter from the design professional.
09/20/2016 DAVID RIVERA ZONING HC REVIEW Reqs Change see zoning comments
09/21/2016 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
4.1 Identification and Descriptive Data
A. 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.
B. The landscape plan will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet:
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.
LANDSCAPING
Mail Gate District Development
Obtain approval by the City Engineer or designee that proposed landscape within the City of Tucson R.O.W complies with the City Engineer's standards on construction, irrigation, location, and plant type;
Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed.
Additional comments may apply.
09/21/2016 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved
09/21/2016 ZELIN CANCHOLA COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Reqs Change September 21, 2016
ACTIVITY NUMBER: DP16-0151
PROJECT NAME: Sterling - Tyndal Avenue
PROJECT ADDRESS: 1950 N Tyndal Ave
PROJECT REVIEWER: Zelin Canchola TDOT

Resubmittal Required. A revised Plan is required for re-submittal. The following items must be revised or added to the plan. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed.

1. The proposed improvements in right of way, as outlined in the Traffic impact analysis, are acceptable although the Curb return radius for the driveway does not meet development standards. Revise the curb returns to 18 feet curb return radius.

2. Provide pedestrian sight visibility triangles at the pedestrian crossing the exit of the garage/driveway.

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 520 837 6659 or zelin.canchola@tucsonaz.gov
09/21/2016 TIM ROWE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Approved This project is currently still under extensive engineering review because the capacity are not available near the project and required offsite public sewer modification.

At the moment we cannot provide a formal review for the project but it is on hold for alternation acceptable design for offsite sewer.

Regards

Al.
09/21/2016 TIM ROWE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Approved September 26, 2016

To: Tri Miller
Rick Engineering Company.

____________________________________
From: Hussein Al Zubaidi, PCRWRD (520) 724-6934

Subject: FIRST ST & TYNDALL AVE APARTMENTS
P16WS00073 (DP19-0151)
PSL- 1st Submittal

The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD) has reviewed the proposed sewer design for the above-referenced project. The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department hereby approves the above referenced submittal of the Preliminary Sewer Layout (PSL), based upon PCRWRD Engineering Design Standards (EDS).

If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact me at your convenience.

Cc. Lorenzo Hernandez, P.E., RWRD
Thomas Porter, P.E., RWRD
Francisco Galindo, P.E., RWRD
09/22/2016 AHINES2 COT NON-DSD TUCSON POLICE DEPARTMENT Reqs Change Since this is the first submittal I guess it does not have the types of things that would be looked at from a safe by design or CPTED perspective. My concerns with this would be sidewalks, lighting, parking, balconies and more detail of what the roof top level/pool entails.
09/27/2016 GARY WITTWER COT NON-DSD TDOT Reqs Change Sorry to be so late on this. I have reviewed the Hardscape and Landscape Plans and have the following comments:

1. Per the latest Streetscape Manual - please revers the pavers and the concrete. The larger pedestrian walk areas should be concrete with small spaces and bands becoming the paver areas..

2. I do not see City of Tucson Standard notes for planting in ROW. If they are not on the plans- Please add them.

>>> DSD_CDRC 09/26/2016 8:56 AM >>>

Hi Gary-



This review was due on the 21st. Any idea when you will get it completed?



Thanks

Trish

>>> DSD_CDRC 08/25/2016 12:58 PM >>>

Afternoon-



You have been added to this review so please see the link and due date below.



Thanks

Trish

>>> DSD_CDRC 08/24/2016 12:32 PM >>>

Dear Reviewers:


This is an electronic distribution, 1st submittal, for a MGD Development Plan review. The paper copies are available in the plans room.



The applicable case numbers are:



CDRC Development Plan: DP16-0151

Existing and Proposed Zoning: C-1

Proposed Use: Group Dwelling and Retail

Due Date: Tuesday, September 20, 2016

Electronic Documents may be found at the following link: http://www.tucsonaz.gov/PRO/Command?mode=permit&firstTime=true&number_key=dp16-0151&command=InitialProcess
09/28/2016 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change Revise grading note 26 to provide for a maximum depth of 9 inches.
Grading note 29 is not required and may be omitted.
Revise note 11 to include Pima County since PDEQ enforces dust regulations.
09/30/2016 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) All documents previously submitted
3) A disk containing all items submitted
4) All items requested by review staff
5) All items needed to approve these plans

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
10/04/2016 RBENT2 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed