Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG
Permit Number - DP21-0312
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/05/2022 | JPEELDA1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Reqs Change | Buildings that exceed 30' shall be provided with fire department aerial access that shall conform with IFC 2018, Appendix D. Provide a diagram showing the distance from the road to the building. Questions: Jennifer Peel-Davis Jennifer.Peel-Davis@Tucsonaz.gov 520-837-7033 |
| 01/12/2022 | SBLOOD1 | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Development Package Comments: Sheet 1 1. Please provide relevant case numbers in the title bock. 2. Please provide a 3"x5" space adjacent to the title block on all sheets reserved for approval stamps. Please provide an additional 3"x5" space adjacent to the title block on the title sheet. 3. Please include number of lots and common areas and types in the project title 4. Please show all symbols, linetypes, and hatches used within the legend, including rip-rap, curb cuts, retention basins, etc. 5. Please include a general note stating, "The Eastern Pima County Trails System Master Plan does not show any trails on or adjacent to the development site." if applicable. 6. In general notes, please indicate if visitor parking is provided in common parking areas. 7. Provide street name label for Nebraska St or Olive St in location map Sheet 2 8. Please provide a north arrow for the "Future Right-of-Way Detail" Sheet 3 9. Please show the locations of gang mailboxes on the site plan. Sheet 4 10. Please dimension dumpster enclosures. Sheet 5 11. Please provide onsite existing contours or sufficient spot elevations. Show and label significant existing conditions (fences, structures, etc.) and call out as to be removed or retained. 12. Please show existing slopes and drainage patterns adjacent to the site. 13. Please provide 100-yr flood limit and water surface elevation where flows in adjacent channels exceed 100cfs, and in natural flood prone areas. 14. Please include the hatch type for the detention basins in the legend on sheet 1. 15. Please verify the depth of the detention basins. Grading Keynote 3 states "10.2' max depth". Please also verify keynote 2 on sheet 6. 16. Please include the 100-yr ponding limit in the detention basins. 17. Please show direction and destination of flows exiting the detention basins / exiting the site. Identify all on / off site discharge and acceptance points. 18. Please show limits of grading. (typ) 19. Please show minimum 2% drainage away from buildings (typ) 20. Please provide FL slopes within proposed cross gutters at driveway entrances. 21. Please show slopes on ADA ramps within the Grading Details 2, 3, and 4. Please provide detectable warnings consistent with ADA standards. 22. Provide WSE for Nebraska Wash (typ for sheet 5 & 6) 23. Please clarify top of wall versus top of fence. 3.75TW wall shows to be retaining nothing (0.25 FG) 24. Sheets 5 and 6 - Provide section and demonstrate that wall is on subject property (and not within wash) using erosion toe down callouts, EHS lines, 100-year floodplain lines, and discharge of wash. Sheet 6 25. Please provide slope call outs in and around trash enclosures. 1% within, 2% away required. 26. Please show flow directions surrounding all building. More information needed adjacent to buildings 1, 4, and 7. 27. Please show all ridge lines and grade breaks within parking lots, including driveways. 28. Please show more finish spot elevations surrounding the play areas, adjacent to detention basins. Sheet 7 29. Please include invert elevation on all manholes and cleanouts. 30. Private sewer easement needed in the public alley. SWPPP Comments: 1. The proposed flow arrows do not show anything flowing towards the basin behind building 2. Please revise as needed. 2. Please clearly show the area of soil disturbance / limits of grading. 3. Please show all stormwater outfalls (discharge points), using arrows to indicate direction of flows offsite. 4. Please use arrows to show direction of flows on driveways and existing flow direction within adjacent curb and gutter. Note that these flows will discharge into the MS4 system. 5. Please identify the big black arrow in legend. Drainage Report Comments: Page 3 1. Developed Conditions - Descriptions of watersheds with associated discharges generated do not add up to the 23.4 listed as total Proposed Discharge "prior to detention." These numbers do also do not match table on Figure 4 or COT Hydrologic Data sheets. Please review and revise as necessary. Page 6 2. First Flush - Please provide calculations to indicate the required volume for First Flush is met with the Water Harvesting/Detention Basins. Page 14 (Appendix A) 3. Appendix A - Figure 4: Watershed DE appears to be the label for the southern watershed but the northern does not have a label. Please label all watersheds for clarity. Page 23 (Appendix B) 4. Appendix B - Future Conditions Hydrological Data Sheets: Drainage Concentration Point names listed do not all match the Watershed ID names and areas shown on Figure 4 summary table. Please review and revise as necessary. Page 29 (Appendix C) 5. Appendix C - HEC-RAS Summary Sheet: The Proposed Encroachment results summary table has red numbers but they do not directly correlate to the existing conditions results. Suggest providing additional explanation within the text. Please review and revise as necessary. 6. Appendix C - HEC-RAS Summary Sheet: The Proposed Encroachment results summary table indicates the velocity within the Nebraska Wash increases at Cross Sections 4 & 5 (at the bend in the wash). As the angle of the channel bend is affected by the encroachment of the wall, suggest providing additional explanation within the text about whether there is a need for stabilization of the north bank to protect from lateral migration. Please review and revise as necessary. Review and Comments provided by third party engineer reviewers under contract with the City of Tucson. For Questions or Concerns contact: Stephen Blood (520) 837-4958 Stephen.blood@tucsonaz.gov |
| 01/13/2022 | JVWINKL1 | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Reqs Change | DP21-0312 1) Show on plans that the curb access ramp at E Olive St and S Nogales Highway will be updated to PAG standard detail 207 2) Update Utilities and Easements Sheets 7 and 8 as needed to show the existing 24" CMP which runs parallel to the existing sidewalk on S Nogales Higway. Reference following link https://www.tucsonaz.gov/apps/maps-and-records/construction-plans/details/I-89-044 3) On the north of the development there is a water harvesting basin and feature being proposed within the ROW. The City will not accept stormwater basins in the ROW. Basin needs to be located within the project boundaries. Please also show additional stabilization in as needed so that erosion potential at this outlet point, beyond the basin, is not an issue. 4) A PIA for the proposed drainage improvements at each driveway, in the S Nogales Hy ROW, will be needed John Van Winkle, P.E. John.VanWinkle@tucsonaz.gov |
| 01/14/2022 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Email from: COTDSDPermits to: lisa bowers Fri 1/14/2022 8:52 AM REVIEW NOTICE Returned for Corrections: DP21-0312 DESCRIPTION: Site/Grading/Swppp - Newport at Rodeo. Multi-family. FEE BALANCE: $ 3,989.97 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" YOUR NEXT STEPS 1. 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 2. UPLOAD A RESUBMITTAL and include: 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 Sharon Beasley, Building Permit Specialist City of Tucson, Planning and Development Services Email: COTDSDpermits@TucsonAz.gov |
| 12/06/2021 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 12/06/2021 | SBEASLE1 | COT NON-DSD | REVIEW | Approved | Email from: Bea Paulus To: CDRC Mon 12/6/2021 9:23 AM Sun Tran has no conflicts with this project. Thank you. Bea Paulus, Programs & Projects Manager Sun Tran / Transit 520-206-8826, bea.paulus@tucsonaz.gov |
| 12/17/2021 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Newport at Rodeo – Multi-Family Development Package (1st Review) DP21-0312 TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 17, 2021 DUE DATE: December 20, 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 17, 2022. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, DP21-0312, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided. 2. 2-06.4.8.B – All existing easements shown to be abandoned shall be abandoned prior to approval of this DP. 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. 3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Per 2018 IBC Table 1106.1 the required number of accessible parking spaces is based on the number of provided vehicle parking spaces. Based on 130 spaces provided the number of accessible spaces required is 5. 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.J – Zoning acknowledges the future right-of-way detail on sheet 2. Provide dimensions from the property line to face of curb and sidewalk width. 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – The North & East (Street) perimeter yard setbacks shown under General Note 17 are not correct. As Nogales Hy is an Arterial designated on the COT MS&R Map per UDC Article 11.4.6 Definition of Established Area Setback a street designated on the MS&R Map does not qualify as Established Area therefore is considered Developing Area for street perimeter yard setback. Per a Zoning Administrator determination developing area and established area street setbacks cannot be mixed on a site therefore the street setbacks for Olive & Vaquero are based on UDC Table 6.4.5.C-1 ADT over 140 but less than 1,000. Revise the setbacks listed in the general note and on the plan. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – Provide a perimeter yard setback dimension from the southeast corner of building 3 to the east property line. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – Provide a street perimeter yard setback from the proposed parking canopies, called out under Keynote 30 to the back of future curb along Nogales Hy. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – Under General Note 17 you have a “NOTE” that states “FOR DIMENSIOANL STANDARDS PURPOSES, MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT IS CONSIDERED A COMMERCIAL USE PER SECTION 6.3.3.C”. 6.3.3.C does not call out “COMMERCIAL” but state that multifamily is a “NONRESIDENTIAL USE”. 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 |
| 12/17/2021 | SBEASLE1 | PIMA COUNTY - ADDRESSING | PIMA COUNTY - ADDRESSING | Reqs Change | (The ATTACHED PDF mentioned below can be viewed in the "Documents" section of PRO: "Pima Co Addressing, review comments, first submittal") Email from: <Addressing@pima.gov> To: CDRC Wed 12/15/2021 11:13 AM Newport at Rodeo, 1st Submittal Review: DP21-0312 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 |
| 12/21/2021 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 12/28/2021 | AWARNER1 | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department, Plans Coordination FROM: Anne Warner, RLA PDSD Landscape/Native Plant Preservation Section PROJECT: Newport at Rodeo ACTIVITY NO: DP21-0312 Address: 5301 S Old Nogales Hwy Zoning: C-2, R-2, O-3 Existing Use: disturbed, vacant land Proposed Use: Multi-family TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 28, 2021 DUE DATE: December 20, 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. Please label the existing and future rights of way for Old Nogales Highway, UDC 7.6.4.C.2.a. 2. 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. 3. Per Admin. Manual 2-10-4.2.D, provide page/detail reference to civil drawings/details that show bike racks, walkways, and screening/retaining walls on landscape plans. See civil drawing is not sufficient. 4. Provide a detail to show tree planting with root barrier adjacent to walkways. 5. Provide a maintenance schedule for the landscape and irrigation for this project. UDC 2-10-4.2.A.4., please be specific. 6. A Commercial Rainwater Harvesting plan is required. Multi-family projects are commercial development. UDC Technical Standards Manual - Section 4-01.0.0. and Section 5-01.0.0 Landscaping and Screening. 7. Adherence to the Low Impact Development Standards outlined in Section 5 of the PCRFCD Design Standards for Stormwater Detention and Retention is required and shall work in conjunction with the Commercial Rainwater Harvesting design. https://webcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government/Flood%20Control/Rules%20and%20Procedures/Stormwater%20Detention-Retention/dssdr-manual-board-version-201511.pdf 8. Grading, hydrology, and landscape plans must be integrated to make maximum use of site storm water runoff for supplemental on-site irrigation purposes. The landscape plan shall indicate use of all runoff, from individual catch basins around single trees to basins accepting flow from an entire vehicular use area or roof area. UDC 7.6.6.C.2. The landscape, water harvesting, and grading plans must match. 9. Identify the point of drainage off roof areas, amount of flow, and disposition of flow. 10. Identify curb inlets/splash pads to landscape areas on water harvesting or landscape plans. 11. Indicate basin inlets/outlets on both landscape and water harvesting plans. Provide spot elevations. 12. Retention/detention basins should be designed naturally and organically, whenever practicable. 13. Please show RFS locations on native plant plan, screened back or dashed symbols is acceptable. 14. Please note that smaller caliper trees can used for TOS and may be counted towards larger caliper tree quantities. 15. Please check Note 5 on the NPP plan to ensure that the verbiage is correct and references the UDC and LUC references removed. The below notes (Note 17, 18, & 19) should be on the plan - UDC 7.7.5 On- monitoring of all aspects of site clearing, grading, plant protection, preservation, salvage, and mitigation must be provided during project construction at the expense of the developer for all residential development that is over five acres and for all commercial and industrial development that is over one acre . The monitoring must be performed by an individual who is qualified in arid lands native plant resource identification and protection as specified in UDC Section 7.7.4.D, Professional Expertise. The monitor must provide periodic progress reports to the developer outlining the status of work accomplished and any problems encountered. A copy of these reports must be submitted to the PDSD for the project file. 16. UDC 7.7.6 The monitor is responsible for an assessment of the condition of the site's plants one year after the final inspection has been performed on the site. The monitor shall visit the site and prepare a report on plant status, including general plant condition, the identification of plants under stress and the appropriate method to relieve the stress, and recommendations for replacement of plants that are dead or dying. Dead or dying plants must be replaced with the same size plant at a one-to-one ratio of like genus and species. Copies of the report must be submitted to the site owner/developer and to PDSD. The owner must respond to the plant needs as outlined in the status report within six months of report submittal or within a shorter period if required to improve the health of stressed plants and prevent plant loss. 17. Add the following note to the Native Plant Preservation Plan - The site developer must include language in all contracts with contractors about the importance of staying out of all areas and away from all individual Protected Native Plants to be preserved-in-place. 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 |