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
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG
Permit Number - DP21-0301
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/12/2021 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/12/2021 | SBEASLE1 | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | Engineering was approved by Loren Makus during the OK to Submit. |
| 12/03/2021 | AWARNER1 | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Needs Review | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department, Plans Coordination FROM: Anne Warner, RLA PDSD Landscape/Native Plant Preservation Section PROJECT: Presidio Townhomes ACTIVITY NO: Dp21-0301 Address: 3428 E Presidio Zoning: R-2 Existing Use: Multi-family Proposed Use: Multi-family TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 3, 2021 DUE DATE: December 8, 2021 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Landscape Review Section comments were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with applicable development criteria in the City of Tucson Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-11 and Technical Manual (TM) Section for landscape, native plants and water harvesting. 1. The Unified Development Code (UDC) requires all new development or an expansion of less than 50 % of an existing development submit a landscape plan, UDC 7.6.2. Preparation of the landscape plan shall adhere to UDC 7.6.4. and Administrative Manual 2-10. 2. An approved Native Plant Preservation Plan Sections 7.7.4 is required or a request for an exception from the Native Plant Preservation requirements in accordance with Sections 7.7.3.D.3 & .4 of the Unified Development Code (UDC) and Admin. Manual Section 2-11.0.0 is required prior to Grading Plan approval. 3. Please label the existing and future rights of way for Presidio Rd. UDC 7.6.4.C.2.a. 4. Placing trees along the edge of a parking area or at the ends of parking row does not meet the intent of the UDC. All spaces within 40’ of a tree is only one of the requirements. The intent is to provide as much shade on the asphalt as possible, and the requirement is 1 tree per 4 parking spaces; trees are expected to be placed within the parking area itself to mitigate the heat and glare radiated by the built environment, UDC 7.6.1.A.3. Trees are to be distributed evenly throughout the parking area, UDC 7.6.4.B.1.a., UDC Technical Standards Manual 5-01-.3.2. 5. An irrigation plan and specifications are required per UDC Administration Manual 2-10.4.2.C and Technical Standards Manual Section 4-01.4.2, Irrigation Standards. 6. Maximize water harvesting. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package YOUR NEXT STEPS: Submit documents to the Filedrop https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp Select "Existing Application" 1) Comment Response Letter (your response to the reviewer's Requires changes comments) 2) Plan Set (or individual sheets) 3) Any other items requested by review staff If you have any questions, please contact me at anne.warner@tucsonaz.gov |
| 12/06/2021 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 12/07/2021 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Presidio Townhomes (Multi-Family) – Two (2) Unit Addition Development Package (1st Review) DP21-0301 TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 7, 2021 DUE DATE: December 8, 2021 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 November 07, 2022. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, DP21-0301, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4 – It does not appear that the location map is drawn to scale, i.e. the distance from County Club to Alvernon is 1 mile making the scale 3” = 2 miles 3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4.A – 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 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a – Remove ZONING AND LAND USE NOTE #8 as it does not apply. 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. 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Fully dimension the back-up spur shown at the south end of the southern most parking area, see UDC 7.4.6.F.4. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The vehicle parking space calculation is not correct. The required numbers shown for the “1-BR” and the “2-BR” are not correct. Review UDC TABLE 7.4.4-1: MINIMUM NUMBER OF MOTOR VEHICLE SPACES REQUIRED and correct the number of spaces required. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The code reference, 7.4.5.7.A.2, stated for the vehicle parking space reduction does not exist in the UDC. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – As it appears that you are trying to use a reduction based on providing additional trees within the vehicle use area a landscape plan is required, see Landscape comments. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The vehicle parking spaces shown along the west side of Ex. Building #4104 & 4102 appears to be allowed to overhang what appears to be a 5’-0” wide sidewalk. As the 2’-6” vehicle overhang will reduce the sidewalk width to less than 4’-0” wheel stop curbing or some other type of barrier is required to prevent the vehicles from overhanging the sidewalk. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – There appears to be a vehicle parking space shown along the north side of Ex. Building #1101. As pedestrian circulation is running between the parking space and the PAAL that accesses it this space cannot be counted or used, see TSM Section 7-01.4.1.F. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Based on the number of bedrooms shown under the vehicle parking space calculation, 4 1-BR & 6 2-BR the total number of bedrooms used for the short- & long-term bicycle parking space calculation should be 16. 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Clearly identify the location for the proposed short-term bicycle parking. 13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Clearly show the require 2’ x 6’short-term bicycle parking space, UDC Article 7.4.9.B.2.f, on the detail and clearly show that the space does not encroach into the required 4’-0” wide sidewalk. 14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Demonstrate on the plan or detail how UDC Article 7.4.9.B.1.e requirements are met for the short-term bicycle parking. 15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – Remove the perimeter yard setback lines shown on the plan as some are not correct. Depending on the how the proposed buildings are designed and orientated on the site based on a 14’ @ ridge the required perimeter yard setback will be 10’-6”. 16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Cleary demonstrate on the plan that a parking vehicle will not reduce the minimum sidewalk width along the west side of Ex. Building #4104 & 4102, see TSM Section 7-01.4.3.A. 17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.V – Clearly show and identify the proposed gang mailbox on the plan. 18. COMMENT: There are three (3) call outs for a “NEW WALL AT EDGE OF PAVEMENT” shown on the plan. It is not clear where this wall is proposed as one (1) call out points to be back of a 5.0’ SDWK and the other two (2) point to the middle of a sidewalk. Clearly shown this wall on the plans. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Elisa Hamblin at Elisa.Hamblin@tucsonaz.gov. To resubmit your plans for additional review, please visit: https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 12/08/2021 | JPEELDA1 | FIRE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | IFC 2018, Appendix D, Section D103.4 Dead Ends. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with width and turn around provisions in accordance with Table D103.4 Questions: Jennifer Peel-Davis 520-837-7033 Jennifer.Peel-Davis@Tucsonaz.gov |
| 12/09/2021 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Email from: COTDSDPermits To; Jason Shinn Thu 12/9/2021 5:24 PM Returned for Corrections: DP21-0301 DESCRIPTION: Site/Grading: Presidio Townhomes. Two building additions, pavement adjustment. 3428 E PRESIDIO RD FEE BALANCE: $ 1,206.50 Please pay at a minimum, the REVIEW category fees. A payment is required before your next submittal. ONLINE PAYMENT If amount doesn't match "Fees Due", check back in a few hours https://www.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/fees 1- Click on: Pay Planning & Permit Fees 2- Enter Permit Nbr, example: dp20-0000 (not case-sensitive but a hyphen-dash- is needed) 3- Business/Individual Name: Leave this field blank 4- "Continue" 5- In the Pay column - check the boxes 6- "Continue" SEE REVIEW COMMENTS and documents on PRO: www.tucsonaz.gov/pro (If information is not available, check back later after data transfers to PRO.) - Home page, Activity Search, enter the Activity/Permit Number - Permits - click on blue tab to see different sections - Reviews section - click on REVIEW DETAILS - Documents section - click on VIEW INCLUDE IN RESUBMITTAL 1) Comment Response Letter (your response to REQUIRES CHANGE comments) 2) Plan Set (all pages, full set, even if no changes were made) 3) Any other documents requested by review staff Please title your SECOND submittal documents according to this example: 2_Comment Response Letter FILEDROP for your Resubmittal https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp - Select "Existing Application" - In the "Permit Number" field, enter the number and, if applicable, any notes for our staff Thank you. Sharon Beasley, Building Permit Specialist City of Tucson, Planning and Development Services Email: COTDSDpermits@TucsonAz.gov (disregard the email response that will be sent automatically) |
| 12/09/2021 | SBEASLE1 | PIMA COUNTY - ADDRESSING | PIMA COUNTY - ADDRESSING | Needs Review | To Applicant: Please contact Pima County Addressing. An invoice needs to be paid before they can begin their review of this project. Thank you. Sharon Beasley, Permit Specialist City of Tucson email: COTDSDpermits@TucsonAz.gov |