Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - DP17-0169
Review Name: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/29/2018 | DAVID RIVERA | HC SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/29/2018 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 03/29/2018 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Provide the correct contact information for the IVR and online inspection request systems. 2. Clearly dimension existing sidewalk. Sidewalk in the right of way that is less than 4 feet wide must be replaced with 5- or 6-foot wide sidewalk. 3. Provide recordation for right-of-way acquired from the city. 4. Correct the matchline reference on sheet 33. 5. The proposed grading adjacent to the existing building as shown in detail 3 on sheet 13 doesn't clearly demonstrate positive drainage away from the building. Provide slope information and spot grades to demonstrate ADA compliance and positive drainage. 6. Show roof drainage directions and locations. Primary roof drains cannot be directed onto sidewalks. 7. Provide cut and fill quantities on the plan. |
| 03/29/2018 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TDOT | Approved | |
| 03/29/2018 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | Good Afternoon, DP17-0169/ Camino Miramonte / 2nd Submittal is Approved by Pima County Addressing. Thank you, Robin Freiman Addressing Official Pima County Development Services Department 201 N Stone AV – 1st Floor Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 724-7570 Description: Description: cid:image001.png@01CE70DF.60625CC0 |
| 03/29/2018 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: Miramonte Development Package (2nd Review) DP17-0169 TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 20, 2018 DUE DATE: March 23, 2018 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 July 12, 2018. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS) Section A comprehensive review was made by Zoning due to changes from the first submittal. Please address the following remaining zoning comments. 2-06.4.7.A.4 - Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses. 1. COMMENT: Revise General Note 4 to include the use specific standards applicable to each specific use in the proposed land use class within the specific zone; In the R-3 zone, Multifamily - Subject to 4.9.7.B.6. In the C-2 zone, for Food Service (excluding food kitchens) Subject to 4.9.4.M.1 and 4.9.13.O, for General Merchandise - Subject to 4.9.9.B.1, for Food and Beverage Sales (excluding large retail establishments) No applicable Use Specific Standards, In the C-3 Zone, for Office and Professional Office No applicable Use Specific Standards, for Food Service - No applicable Use Specific Standards, for Multi-family Residential - No applicable Use Specific Standards, for General Merchandise - Subject to 4.9.9.B.1, for Food and Beverage Sales (excluding large retail establishments) No applicable Use Specific Standards. List the applicable use specific standards for each specific use. Refer to the permitted use and zoning tables to verify the use specific standard(s) applicable to each use. 2-06.4.7.A.5 - On residential projects, list the total number of units/lots proposed. 2. COMMENT: Under general note 4 list the number of units proposed in the R-3 zone along with the actual density calculation. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 2-06.4.7.A.8.a - Floor area for each building; 3. COMMENT: List building 2 in the site data table on sheet 1. (Clarify if the building square footages listed on the site data table on sheet 1 are based on the outside perimeters of the building and if the building square footages listed on the tenant and residential units tables on sheet 2 are based on the interior square footage?) 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. 4. COMMENT: The recordation information for the abandonment of any easement or for new easements must be listed on the DP prior to final approval. (It may be possible to defer the submittal of the easement documentation until building plan review.) 2-06.4.8.C - The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. 5. COMMENT: It is acknowledged that a process to purchase street right of way was underway. The additional right of way is required in order to provide the necessary vehicle use area in order to maneuver into and out of parking spaces adjacent to Miramonte Avenue without backing up directly onto Miramonte or the bicycle lane. Prior to approval of the DP the right of way acquisition must be completed and the recordation information annotated on the DP and the recorded documents included with the DP. 2-06.4.9.H.5 - If utilizing parking area access lanes (PAALs), they shall be designed in accordance with Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC. 6. COMMENT: Include a keynote on sheet 6 that states the minimum clearance of the overhang is 15 feet above the vehicle use travel lane. (Label the actual clearance proposed if greater than 15 feet.) 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. 7. COMMENT: If the Shared Parking Adjustment reduction is related to an IPP, add "IPP" in parenthesis behind the tile Shared Parking Adjustment title. If an IPP application is processed for the vehicle parking reduction, list as a general note the case number date of approval and the number of spaces reduced per the IPP. Also list as reference the IPP case number next to the title block of all plan sheets. Also, please clarify where the location of the shared parking is located. 2-06.4.9.H.5.b - If any of the required parking is located off-site as permitted by the UDC, a drawing of that parking area is to be provided, together with the city's required parking agreement (include a copy of the lease agreement if applicable) must be provided. Please remember that in these situations, if the off-site parking location is a new parking area, it must comply with all parking area requirements and must be allowed as a principal use by the zoning classification of that property. If the off-site parking area location is an existing parking lot, the parking spaces utilized for the proposed land use must be non-required parking for the existing use for which the parking area was established. 8. COMMENT: See the last sentence in the comment 8 above. 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. 9. COMMENT: A minimum of one 12'x35' loading area is required for the Food Service Use with 5,000 SF or greater based on the GFA of the use. Per UDC section 7.5.4.A.3 - a loading area may be collocated within the approach area for the dumpster containers. (The approach area in front of the dumpster can be striped as the approach area for the Refuse Truck and a key note added that the area is also the colocation for the loading area.) Add a calculation on Sheet 2, for the loading area required and provided. 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. 10. COMMENT: Demonstrate that the short term bicycle parking facilities have been evenly distributed throughout the development and meet the minimum 50 feet distance from a main public entrance to each use. Include dimensioned detail drawings that demonstrate how the long term facilities meet the requirements in UDC section 7.4.9.D Clarify why only 30 Long term spaces have been provided when 37 are required? It is acknowledged that the long term facilities are depicted on the building plans. The detail drawings specific to the locations within the building shall also be provided on the details sheet of the DP. 2-06.4.9.O - All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown. 11. COMMENT: Revise in the Zoning table the building setback requirement for the west side yard related to the R-3 Zone. The residential use in the R-3 zone is residential use but for applying the dimensional standards, A multi-family residential use is considered Nonres Use adjacent to a residential zone. The required setback should be listed as 10' or ¾ hgt. It is acknowledged that DDO application for the non-compliant building setbacks will be processed after this review. The following are comments related specifically to the building setbacks and where building setbacks are non-compliant. Building 3: Label the building setbacks from Speedway Blvd. and Miramonte. The setback from Speedway shall be measured from the back of curb and the setback from Miramonte shall be measured from the east side edge of the bike lane. Building 1: Label the building setback from Speedway back of curb to the closest edge of the overhang. DDO Comments- Building 2: The required building setback from the west property line (R-3 zone) to Building 2 is based on the greatest of 10' or ¾ the Hgt of the wall from design Grade. Based on a 40 foot tall building, assuming that is the measurement from design grade times ¾ the hgt, the required building setback must be 30 feet. The plan indicates a 26.67' as an average which does not meet the minimum requirement. A DDO approval will be required unless the building can be located to the east to provide the 30 foot setback. Keep in mind that for the purposes of determining the applicable dimensional standards, a multifamily development is considered a nonresidential use. (See table 6.3-2.A Non-residential use to residential zone. Section 11.3.7.A.3 for the definition of multifamily development.) Building 1: The required building setback along the Miramonte frontage is based on the greatest of 21' or the hgt of the building, measured from design grade to the top of the wall(s). The setback is measured from the nearest edge of travel lane and in this case from the east side edge of the bike lane to the face of the wall(s). Because of the design of the building the top three floors extend into the required building setbacks as follows. The top (6th) floor is approximately 75 feet in height from design grade. The required setback should be 75 feet from the nearest edge of travel lane. The architectural plan depicts a proposed setback of ±56'-1" feet. The 5th floor is approximately 60.42' feet in height from design grade. The required setback should be 62.42 feet from the nearest edge of travel lane. The architectural plan depicts a proposed setback of ±53'-1" feet. If you have any questions about this transmittal, Contact David Rivera on Tuesday or Wednesday at (520) 837-4957 or by email David.Rivera@tucsonaz.gov or contact Steve Shields any time during the week at (520) 837-4956 or email Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 03/29/2018 | 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. Include DDO or Board of Adjustment case numbers on the lower right hand corner of each sheet. This entire project will need to meet current code requirements. a) DDO will be necessary for any replacements of landscape requirements. b) A BOA variance will be necessary for removal of any elements. Street Landscape Borders To enhance the visual appearance of the streetscape, a street landscape border is required in accordance with Table 7.6.4-1 along the street frontage of a site as follows, except as provided in Section 7.6.4.C.4, Exceptions to the Landscape Border Standards: 7.6.4. LANDSCAPE STANDARDS: Street landscape borders are required along all street frontages. Street Landscape Borders a. Minimum Width Street landscape borders must be a minimum of ten feet wide as measured from the street property line. On streets designated as Major Streets and Routes (MS&R), the street landscape border must be measured from the future MS&R right-of-way line as determined by Section 5.4.4, Establishment of MS&R Right-of-Way Lines and Gateway Routes. c) Portions of Landscape border along Speedway and 2nd Street are not 10' measured from street property line. d) Large portion of the street landscape buffer along Camino Miramonte is not measure according to above criteria. e) Parking spaces are located within required buffer area along Camino Miramonte f) No landscape buffer or screening is proposed along 1st St. Located on Site Street landscape borders must be located entirely on site, except that, if approved by the City Engineer or designee, up to five feet of the required ten foot width may be placed within the adjacent right-of-way area or within the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) right-of-way area on MS&R streets. Portions of the required landscape buffer along Speedway are located entirely within the Public ROW. Use of the Public Right-of-Way 1. The landscaping is approved by the City Engineer or designee and complies with the City Engineer's standards on construction, irrigation, location, and plant type; 2. 2. All vegetation complies with the standards of Section 7.6.4, Landscaping Standards; and, 3. The landscaping does not interfere with the use of the sidewalk. Provide written approval for use of ROW for required landscaping to be placed within public right-of-way. 7.6.5. SCREENING STANDARDS The purpose of screening is to provide visual barriers, noise reduction, and to provide privacy. A. When Required Screening for individual land uses and zones must be provided as determined in Table 7.6.4-1 and in addition to the required landscape borders. Screening is not required between similar uses in accordance with Table 7.6.4-1. A 30" screen is required to screen vehicle use area from adjacent streets. No screening is indicated along Camino Miramonte for proposed parking. Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed prior to landscape approval. Additional comments may apply. |
| 03/29/2018 | KELLY LEE | 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 approved documents submitted previously 3) A disk containing all items submitted 4) All items requested by review staff 5) All items needed to approve these plans |
| 03/29/2018 | KROBLES1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 03/29/2018 | JPEELDA1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Reqs Change | D105.1 Where required. Where the vertical distance between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceeds 30 feet (9144 mm ), approved aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be provided. D105.3 Proximity to building. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15' (4572 mm ) and a maximum of 30 feet (9144 mm) from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. |
| 03/29/2018 | JIM ROSSI | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Needs Review | |
| 03/29/2018 | GARY WITTWER | COT NON-DSD | TDOT | Reqs Change | 1. Please provide better notes on the irrigation plan to preserve the City's irrigation lines and wires along Speedway 2. Please add the attached notes for planting in the ROW. Gary Gary.Wittwer@tucsonaz.gov City of Tucson Department of Transportation Standard Notes for Planting in ROW 1. It is the owner's responsibility to keep the Sight Visibility Triangles (SVT), and the pedestrian access area clear of vegetation at all times, per Land Use Code (LUC) section. 2. It is the owner responsibility to keep a 5' wide by 7' tall clear pedestrian access open across the entire property. 3. It is the owner responsible to keep vegetation from growing past the curb line clear, and keep a 15' high clear zone over the travel lane. 4. Final plant locations must be in compliance with all utility setback requirements. 5. The owner understands that if the City of Tucson Transportation Department or any utility company needs to work within the ROW in the landscaped area, plants and irrigation may be destroyed without replacement or repair. 6. The owner takes full liability for this landscape and irrigation, and any damage to roadway, sidewalk and utilities. 7. The only private irrigation equipment that is allowed within the ROW are lateral lines, tubing and emitters that are not under constant pressure. All other equipment must be on private property. (excluding water meter) 8. Contractor to obtain a Right Of Way permit prior to construction within the right-of-way. |
| 03/29/2018 | GARY WITTWER | COT NON-DSD | TDOT | Reqs Change | ***See attachment for Standard Notes for Planting in ROW.*** 1. Please take a close look at the SVT at Speedway for east bound traffic. You have tree mesquite trees very close together - this may be a SVT issue. 2. Ironwoods adjacent to the sidewalk along Speedway. (would be ok if they were standard trees) You have called them out to be low branching. This may be an issue with peds. 3. Please add notes to landscape and irrigation plans to preserve and protect the existing City irrigation lines. We also need a note for them to be sleeved at the driveway. (there may also be control wires at this location to be sleeved) 4. If you have not already added the COT standard notes for planting in ROW - Please add them. See attached. Let me know if you have questions, Gary |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/03/2018 | BLARSON1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |