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: DP18-0050
Parcel: 124051660

Address:
1121 E 7TH ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: DEV PKG

Permit Number - DP18-0050
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
03/02/2018 ALEXANDRA HINES START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
03/13/2018 JPEELDA1 FIRE REVIEW Reqs Change Please indicate existing and/or proposed fire hydrant location(s), with dimensions to buildings and/or property lines. Refer to the 2012 International Fire Code Section 507 for spacing and location requirements.
03/15/2018 KELLY LEE PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING Reqs Change DP18-0050 The Graymont / 1st Submittal is being Returned for Corrections by Pima County Addressing.

The attached pdf contains Addressing’s comments.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

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
03/27/2018 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 case # DP18-0050 on the lower right hand corner or each sheet.

2-06.3.5 - Remove Development Package PDSD approval stamp on all sheets. Reserve a three-inch by five-inch space in the lower right quadrant of each sheet for an approval stamp. The approval stamp will be applied electronically.

7.6.4. LANDSCAPE STANDARDS

Street Landscape Borders


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.

Obtain permission for use of ROW

Vehicular Use Areas

Canopy Trees in Vehicular Use Areas

General Standards
Within a vehicular use area, one canopy tree is required for each four motor vehicle parking spaces or fraction thereof.

The canopy trees must be evenly distributed throughout the vehicular use area. Every parking space must be located within 40 feet of the trunk of a canopy tree (as measured from the center of the tree trunk).

Provide trees for parking spaces to the North

Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed prior to landscape approval.

Additional comments may apply.
03/28/2018 DAVID RIVERA ZONING HC REVIEW Reqs Change see zoning comments
03/28/2018 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Completed
03/28/2018 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: David Rivera
PDSD Zoning Review Section

PROJECT: Graymont - Multi-family Development
Development Package (1st Review)
DP18-0050

TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 28, 2018
DUE DATE: March 30, 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 February 23, 2019.

SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS)
Section

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS


2-06.3.5 - A three-inch by five-inch space shall be reserved in the lower right quadrant of each sheet for an approval stamp.

1. COMMENT: Remove the Development Package PDSD approval stamp on all sheets. Reserve a three-inch by five-inch space in the lower right quadrant of each sheet for an approval stamp. The approval stamp will be applied electronically.


CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

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

2-06.4.2.D - The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx).

2. COMMENT: Correct the sheet number and number of sheets in the title blocks of sheets 1 -6. There are a total of eleven sheets in this development package. Sheets 1-6 need to be revised accordingly with the correct total number of sheets in the title block.

2-06.4.3 - The administrative street address and relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

3. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP18-0050, adjacent to the title block on each sheet.


2-06.4.4.B - Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and all streets that abut the subject property; and,

4. COMMENT: Label Euclid Avenue and Broadway Boulevard on the location map.


2-06.4.5 - When the development package documents consists of more than one sheet, a sheet index (a legible drawing of the site showing the area represented on each sheet) is to be placed on the cover sheet or the second sheet.

5. COMMENT: Correct the sheet index to include the total number of eleven sheets and the sheet names.


2-06.4.7.A.6.b - If there is more than one lot within the site, the note should specify which lots are affected by the additional applications or overlay zones.

6. COMMENT: Prior to approval of the DP a Pima County Tax parcel of the three lots will be will have to be completed or the recordation of a new metes and bounds of the three parcels as one. (A survey would be required as part of the Metes and Bounds recording.)


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

2-06.4.7.A.8.a - Floor area for each building;

7. COMMENT: List the individual building square footage in general 5. (Clarify, the total GFA listed in general note five is 24,432 SF. Within the building footprints the SF of each unit is listed as 2,290 SF which equals 16,720 SF, which is correct? Also general note five the total GFA is 24,432 and the paved area is 10,798 SF which equals 35,230 sf. The overall GFA of the subject site is 28,211 SF. Verify your calculations and revise accordingly)

2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Percentage and area in square feet of building and accessory building coverage;

8. COMMENT: Until the overall square footages are corrected it is not clear what the overall overage will be. The maximum lot coverage may not exceed 75% for a Multi-family development.


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.

9. COMMENT: If applicable, indicate on the Utility Plan if there are any existing or proposed easements.


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.

10. COMMENT: The access lane between the residential units must be a minimum of 20 feet in width revise the plan to provide a 20-foot wide access lane.


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.

11. COMMENT: Include in general note 5 the number of bedrooms per unit. If all units are to be designed with the same number of bedrooms, list it as 4 Bedrooms per unit.

Per the vehicle parking calculation, two HC space are provided, yet only one space is noted as HC. Whether providing one or two accessible parking spaces one must be a Van Accessible space. The Van Accessible space must include an eight foot wide access aisle. Revise the drawing as required.

Draw the 2.5 foot overhang or provide wheel stops for the southwest parking spaces. The area along the west side of the two parking spaces is proposed for landscaping.

Add a general note on the cover sheet that no vehicle access is allowed into or out of the site via the alley.

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.

12. COMMENT: It is acknowledged that the units will include a long term facility within each unit. How and where is the space going to be provided in each unit? Provided a detail drawing of the location with the unit where the long term parking will be provided.


2-06.4.9.R - Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual.

13. COMMENT: All on-site sidewalks must be a minimum of four feet wide. Raised concrete sidewalks are required along the south side of the two south units between the walls and the parking spaces. If Access aisles are proposed adjacent to the units, only the access aisle can be striped, the rest of the walkway must be raised concrete and a minimum of four feet wide.

The crosswalk proposed from the sidewalk adjacent to the northeast unit cannot be placed behind the parking spaces. Relocate the sidewalk from behind the parking spaces or remove it. It appears that access to the alley is possible via the proposed gates that will allow the tenants to take out the APC containers.

Label the longitudinal and cross slopes for all sidewalks on site and on street.

The Accessible parking spaces and access aisle may not exceed 2% in either direction. Review the slopes labeled on the grading plan and correct as required.


2-06.4.9.W - Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Indicate if there are any existing billboards on site. Compliance to the Sign Code, Chapter 3 of the Tucson Code, is required.

14. COMMENT: If applicable add the information as noted by the standard above.



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
03/28/2018 JOHN VAN WINKLE ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DP18-0050
1) Wall thickness of CMU block decreases net drainage area of opening. Provide additional narrative or calculations confirming that 32" and 16" wide wall openings identified in drainage report are sufficient. Revise details to show that CMU block on its side, with the 1" wall will not cause a damming effect. Current details (Sheet 4 details 1 and 2) indicate that water depth behind block must exceed 1" before water will drain through opening.
2) City of Tucson Administrative Manual (AM) section 7-01.4. Provide a concrete sidewalk to link the southern parking areas to the pedestrian circulation path.
3) AM section 7-01.4.3.A states that minimum sidewalk width is 4'. A 3' wide sidewalk is shown adjacent to north-south running PAAL. Update to show a 4' wide sidewalk
4) Sheet 3; Add note and call out that new driveway apron will be designed to PAG Standard Detail 206


John Van Winkle, P.E.
John.VanWinkle@tucsonaz.gov
520-837-5007
04/05/2018 ALEXANDRA HINES ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Reqs Change This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please submit the following items and put the activity number in the upload subject line:
1) Two rolled sets of the plans
2) All items requested by review staff to approve these plans

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
05/30/2018 KLEE1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed