Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: T07CM02414
Parcel: 10712231B

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T07CM02414
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
06/22/2007 DAVE MANN FIRE REVIEW Approved
06/28/2007 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: David Rivera
Principal Planner

PROJECT: T07CM02414
2820 N. Castro Avenue
Multi-family Development

TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 29, 2007

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with redlines and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed.

1. List the legal description of the property. Per the Pima County Assessor's information, the parcel has been recently split. Provide DSD stamped and approved copies of the lot split drawings. List the lot split case number on the site plan sheet and date of approval. If a lot split was not approved by the COT/ DSD the owner must apply for a lot split and provide the documentation related to the split, such as survey drawing, site plan for the existing development, copies of the recorded legal descriptions of each lot and deeds, and address certificates. Additional comments may forthcoming on the next submittal. DS 2-02.2.1.A.2

2. Add the section, township and range under the location map. DS 2-02.2.1.A.4

3. List the development criteria for the existing development (duplex building). Due to the lot split the new created lot must meet the minimum lot size and comply with the development criteria for the existing residential use. This includes building setbacks, lot coverage, parking etc. Include details of the building elevations for the existing building in order to verify the building setbacks comply with the minimum requirement. Provide a DSD approved and stamped copy of the floor plan for the existing building. Additional comments may be forthcoming on this issue. DS 2-02.2.1.A.6

4. The building height is measured from design grade at any point around the perimeter of the proposed structure. It appears that the building height is measured from FFE as noted on plan. The building setback is based on the overall height of the proposed structure as measured from design grade. Clarify what type of roof structure is proposed for the new building or is the building to be constructed with parapet walls and draw overhang if applicable. DS 2-02.2.1.A.6 and.7

Label on the site plan the building setbacks for both the proposed and the existing
buildings. Ds 2-02.2.1.A.7

5. Clarify if the duplex is part of the proposed development. It appears that the same corporation or individual does not own both properties. If the duplex development is not owned and operated by the same owner a perpetual ingress/egress easement is required over the large parcel to provide access to the duplex lot. If the duplex is an extension of the proposed development a perpetual cross access easement is required between the two parcels. Additional requirements such as vehicular use design criteria may apply as well as sidewalks, landscaping and screening, refuse containers etc. A lot combo covenant must be recorded prior to approval of the site plan. The covenant does not combine the lots but does provide for a method to ensure that the development continues to function as approved unless direct access is provided to the duplex from Castro Avenue.

The number of parking spaces for the duplex development cannot be verified until a floor plan is provided for review. Additional comments may be forthcoming on this issue.

DS 2-02.2.1.A.8

6. A two setback between the five (5) foot wall and the PAAL is required. Label the dimension along the South Side of the PAAL next to the new wall and along the West Side of the turnaround.

Remove the handicapped detail drawings on sheet C1.2. Replace the detail with a detail drawing that is consistent with the proposed conditions. Also revise the truncated detail drawing to be consistent with the ANSI section 406.12.

Label and dimension the turnaround as such. Label the width of the standard and van accessible spaces as well as the access aisle. DS 2-02.2.1.A.8

7. Two class two (2) bicycle spaces are required for this development. Draw and label the bicycle parking facility. Add the bicycle parking calculation on the cover sheet.
Draw a fully dimensioned detail drawing that depicts the type of facility to be used and the number of bicycles the facility supports and complies with DS 2-09.
Review development standards section 2-09 for more on the bicycle parking facility requirements. DS 2-02.2.1.A.9

8. Depict the pedestrian access to the existing duplex. Draw, dimension, and label the required sidewalk. DS 2-02.2.1.A.12

Draw and label the bicycle access to the bicycle parking facility.

9. If applicable draw the location and label the type freestanding signage proposed. DS 2-02.2.1.A.13

10. It appears the public sidewalk along Castro Ave. has been drawn with half of the sidewalk on private property. The public sidewalk must be with the pedestrian/utility area between the curb and property line. Revise the sidewalk as required. See engineering comments related to this issue. DS 2-02.2.1.A.21

11. All existing easements of record must be graphically shown n the plan. The use, width and recordation information must be labeled. The same must be provided for all proposed or required easement. All new easements shall be recorded by separate instrument and the respective recordation information shall be labeled on the plan. DS 2-02.2.1.A.20

12. If applicable draw and label freestanding lighting, ie parking lot lighting. The pole location, type of lighting and height of the pole must be drawn on the plan. DS 2-02.2.1.A.25

13. See the landscape reviewer comments for information related to landscape borders/screening and NPPO requirements. DS 2-02.2.1.A.26 and .27

14. Under the Code Review Checklist, revise the Public Ways or Yards to perimeter and street building setbacks. The perimeter yard setback is based on the designator BB and the street perimeter yard setback is based on 3.2.6.5.A

The required perimeter yard setbacks along the north, south, and east are based on the height of the structure. The street building setback is based on the greatest of 20 feet or the height of the structure as measured from the street property line. Revise as required.

15. Revise the building area square footage to 4183. Under the code review the building square footage is listed as 4160. The square footage listed on the building footprints on sheet two equal 4183.

16. As mentioned in a previous comment the development criteria specific to the duplex lot must be listed on the plan.


If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608.

C:\planning\cdrc\DSD\T06CM02414.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents
07/02/2007 DAVID RIVERA ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Denied see zoning comments.
07/03/2007 PATRICIA GILBERT ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: July 8, 2007
ACTIVITY NUMBER: T07CM02414
PROJECT NAME: COPE Multi-family housing
PROJECT ADDRESS: 2820 North Castro Avenue
PROJECT REVIEWER: Patricia Gilbert, Engineering Associate

The following items must be revised or added to the site plan. Please include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed.

RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: SITE PLAN

DRAINAGE REPORT APPROVED

1. Dimension entrance/exit into offsite parking area. DS 2-02.2.1.A.11.

2. In addition to the above comment clearly indicate on the plan what this area is utilized for.

3. Provide a 2' dimension between the south wall and the PAAL. DS 3-05.2.2.B.3.

4. Is the intent to provide the sidewalk along Castro Avenue within the ROW and private property? If this is the case a pedestrian/sidewalk easement will be required. Proposed sidewalks within the ROW have specific locational requirements per DS 3-01.3.3.B. Please clarify intent in the response letter and revise the plan accordingly.

5. All existing and new easements must be provided on the plan with recordation information (book and page). A description of the easement must be provided and if public or private. DS 2-02.2.1.A.20.

6. Clearly indicate on the plan that truncated domes will be utilized at the transition from the ramp within the ROW to the pavement edge.
07/12/2007 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved Exception
07/12/2007 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1. A 5' wall is required to screen office zoned properties from vehicle use area per LUC Table 3.7.2-I.

2. Revise the landscape plan to show the locations, height and materials for proposed or required screen walls as shown on the site plan per DS 2-07.A.3.

3. An unpaved planting area, which is a minimum of thirty-four (34) square feet in area and four(4) feet in width, must be provided for each canopy tree within vehicle use area. Verify planter width for tree adjacent to pedestrian access.

4. Landscape plan shall include irrigation specification design and layout per DS 2-06.5.4.A & DS 2-06.5.4.B including source of irrigation, sleeves for driveways and sidewalks, locations of valves, low-flow bubblers or drip irrigation.

5. All landscape areas will be depressed to accept water flow from roofs, PAAL, and parking areas. Show by detail or spot elevations how landscape areas will accommodate water harvesting.

6. Note: The site plan and landscape plan must show identical site layout to avoid conflict between the two plans. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape & grading plan.

7. Additional comments may apply.
07/18/2007 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Provide the invert and rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (south of the manhole shown on sheet C1.0).
2. The minimum slope for a 6" building sewer is 1/8" per foot, not 0.75% as shown for sewer line S2. Reference Section 718.1, UPC 2003.
3. Keynote 4, sheet C1.0 indicates a possible future addition of dwelling units. Depending upon the design of the activity center and the number of additional dwelling units, it is possible that the daily sewer flow could exceed 3,000 gallons per day, making it subject to review by the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality. See the following links: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Forms_Fees___Maps/Fees___Instructions/Daily_Design_Flows.pdf http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Forms_Fees___Maps/Fees___Instructions/pdeq_flow_chart_A4.pdf

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
07/20/2007 GERARDO BONILLA OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
07/20/2007 GERARDO BONILLA REJECT SHELF Completed