Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - DP18-0259
Review Name: DEV PKG - RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/10/2019 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 04/25/2019 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | The rim elevation of the next upstream manhole, 9444-18 appears as if it may be higher than or less than 12" below the first floor elevation of the existing buildings. Verify the first floor elevations and the rim elevation of manhole 9444-18 to determine if a backwater valve is required in the building sewer. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012. |
| 04/30/2019 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: Multi-family Development - Convert Storage Area to 4th Unit Development Package (3rd Review) 231 W. Laguna Street DP18-0259 - R-3 Zoning TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 30, 2019 DUE DATE: May 7, 2019 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 October 18, 2019. *** The previous comment and standard have been left as reference. For zoning responses, address only the "Follow up to previous comment" made by zoning on the latest plan review unless directed otherwise. (Some of the comments include more than one specific requirement that needs to be addressed.) Previous Information Comment: This site is considered non-conforming for multiple standards and because of the expansion of an additional unit (density) this project has been reviewed for full code compliance (per Steve Shields PDSD Zoning Manager). Address all review agency comments and revise the Development Package. Resubmit the DP for review including a response memo stating how all review agency comments were addressed on the DP. 1. Follow up to previous comment 4: The location map was not drawn as required by the standards below. Revise the location map accordingly. 2-06.3.7 - A small, project-location map shall be provided in the upper right corner of the cover sheet. Previous Comment 4: Provide a location map as noted by the standards below, 2-06.44 through 2-06.4.4.C and call or email me for a sample of a location map. The location map shall be drawn based on the section of the site location. 2-06.4.4 - The project-location map to be located on the first sheet of the development package in the upper right corner, shall cover approximately one square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of three inch equals one mile, and provide the following information. 2-06.4.4.A - Show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area; 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, 2-06.4.4.C - Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled. 2. Follow up to previous comment 7: 2-06.4.1 - List the owner's telephone number and email address on sheet one(1). 3. Follow up to previous comment 21: Revise the administrative street address next to the title block on all sheets to state "231 W. Laguna Street" 4. Follow up to previous comment 22: 2-06.4.9 - Label the zoning classification to the south of the parcel. 5. Follow up to previous comment 23: As noted already noted this is a non-conforming site that does not meet code in many areas. Several variances will be required prior to approval of the DP. See all reviewer discipline comments for possible variances that may be required. This site is considered non-conforming and it is clear that there are several vehicle and pedestrian access requirements that have not been demonstrated or will comply with today's UDC requirements. Approval of a Board of Adjustment variances may be required in order for this DP to be approved as presented. (See engineering comments plus additional zoning comments below as it relates to the vehicle and pedestrian access requirements. 6. Follow up to previous comment 25: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a, Revise the ADA parking note to state "PER 2018 IBC TABLE 1106.1" in place of ZONING. Dimension the length of the parallel parking spaces including the ADA space. The minimum length for a parallel space is 23 feet. Also dimension the length of the two standard parking spaces next to the Unit 3. 7. Follow up to previous comment 27: 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. The fully dimensioned detail drawings as noted by the standard were not included on the DP. Also, the short and long term facilities have different criteria. The short term facilities cannot be in the storage area for the long term facilities if the facility is a locked storage area. The short term facilities must be available at all times and should be distributed on the site so that at least one facility is within 50 feet of each public entrance. You can review section 7.4.9 for design regulations for the short and long term facilities. The storage area for the long term facilities must be in compliance with UDC Section 7.4.9.D. 1 -.5 and must be demonstrated on the DP. An option is to add a note that all long term bicycle spaces will be provided within each residence. 8. Follow up to previous comment 29: 2-06.4.9.Q, Label the height of the existing and new structures within the building footprint of each unit. 9. Follow up to previous comment 30: 2-06.4.9.R -A sidewalk four feet in width is required between a building and the vehicular use areas. The sidewalk must be physically separated from the travel lanes by constructing a raised concrete sidewalk. In addition the sidewalk system must connect all building on site and out to the street sidewalk. Placing the pedestrian circulation path in the center of the PAALS is not acceptable. To eliminate the sidewalk would require approval through a board of adjustment variance process. The onsite sidewalk must be connected to the on-street sidewalk location. Demonstrate the location for the connection. 10. You can review the previous zoning review comments for reference. f 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 |
| 05/03/2019 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL SECTION 2-10.0.0: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS 4.1 Identification and Descriptive Data 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. The landscape plan will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet: Any relevant case numbers for reviews or modifications that affect the site. According to Zoning comments a Board of Adjustment variance will be required. New Comments: 7.6. LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING All Landscape Borders One canopy tree is required for every 33 linear feet of landscape border or fraction thereof, excluding vehicular ingress or egress points. Canopy Tree A woody plant, other than a palm tree, with a mature crown diameter of at least 15 feet and having a trunk that, at maturity, is kept clear of leaves and branches at least six feet above grade. Catclaw (Senegalia greggii) does not meet the definition of a tree. Select an appropriate plant material. All the plant material provided are a tree or small tree species. Provide a tree species, a shrub species, and or ground cover to indicate correct coverage. 7.6.5. SCREENING STANDARDS The purpose of screening is to provide visual barriers, noise reduction, and to provide privacy. 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 5' wall is required to screen vehicle use area from adjacent residential zoned properties. Indicate the height of walls on landscape plan. Location Whether or not required by this section, screens along a street frontage must be located on the development side of the street landscape border so that they do not obstruct the view of the street landscape border from the street. Screening material must be in the back of the street landscape buffer. Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. |
| 05/07/2019 | JOHN VAN WINKLE | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DP18-0259 1) Previous comment 1. Provide a complete pedestrian circulation path. This includes a pedestrian circulation connection to Laguna St. It appears that Bollards are proposed to separate the pedestrian path from the vehicular use area. The bollards are not clearly defined or identified. Please clearly identify bollards by providing a standard detail and by enlarging the small dots that are currently used to identify them. 2) Previous comment 2. Provide Complete the waste stream calculations to show that the yearly volume of waste will be met per week with the proposed number of pick up cans. Reference TSM section 8-01.8.0. WASTE is misspelled as "WAIST" in the calculations, please correct 3) Previous Comment 3. Provide a Motor Vehicle Use Area in accordance with UDC section 7.4. The most recent submittal reduced the parallel parking space from 23' to 20'. Per UDC section 7.4.6 parallel parking spaces must be 8' wide by 23' in length. This includes the parking spaces between units 1 and 2. PAAL width to access 90 degree parking spaces 8 and 9 must be 24' wide 4) UDC section 7.4.6.H. Barriers are required to prevent vehicles from damaging adjacent landscaping and driving on to unimproved portions of the site. Provide a barrier, such as curbing between the parking/drive areas and landscape areas. 5) Provide a wheel stop at the southern end of parking space 6 6) Previous comment 5. Provide new driveway aprons for the driveways along W Laguna St per PAG standard Detail 206. So on plans the driveway aprons fully dimensioned. Update the details reference to be the current PAG detail 206 found in the following link http://apps.pagnet.org/standardspecifications/ 7) Follow up on previous comment 6. In lieu of spot grades, update the standard planting detail to show a 6" depressed area (taking into account side slopes) for water runoff. The 6" of ponding volume is not to include any materials such as much or gravel, but it purely for water runoff volume. Mulch or gravel can be below the 6" of ponding water 8) Follow up on previous comment 8. Sheet 1, Update project info note FROM "NO ADDITIONAL STRUCTURES TO BE BUILT" to "BUILDING ADDITIONS ARE PROPOSED FOR UNITS 1,4 AND 4". On sheet 1, where it says "NEW STRUCTURE" in the hatched areas of Units 1,3 and 4, change to say "PROPOSED ADDITION" 9) It is suggested that the project applicant have a meeting with each reviewer to discuss these comments before re-submitting John Van Winkle, P.E. John.VanWinkle@tucsonaz.gov 520-837-5007 |
| 05/08/2019 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PLAN RETURNED FOR CORRECTIONS NOTICE The reviews have been completed and a resubmittal is required. Activity Number: DP18-0259 Project Description: E SITE - West Laguna Street, New remodel for Max Stanerson. To view review comments, visit PRO at www.tucsonaz.gov/PRO, then search by Activity Number. (If new comments aren't shown yet, check back later as data flows to PRO periodically throughout the day.) After all corrections are made, name your 4th submittal documents accordingly, for example: 4_Plan_Set. Submit the following items to the PDSD Filedrop at https://www.tucsonaz.gov/file-upload-pdsd. In the Project Description field, include the Activity Number. 1) Comment Response Letter (lists changes made to the Plan and which reviewer comments you are responding to) 2) Corrected Plan Set (all pages, full set) 3) Items requested by review staff After resubmittal, the plans will re-enter the standard 20-working-day review cycle. Prior to the completion of the next review, we require payment of the total fees (or the Review fees at a minimum). You can either pay in person at the permit counter or mail a check payable to the City of Tucson (address is below). Include the Activity Number on your check stub. The fee balance is $82.50 (see the Balance column in the image below). The Project Manager can be reached via email or phone: Loren.Makus@TucsonAz.gov, (520) 837-4927 Thank you. Sharon Beasley City of Tucson Planning and Development Services Attn: Permit Counter 201 N. Stone Avenue, First Floor Tucson, AZ 85701 |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05/08/2019 | SBEASLE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |