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.
Plan Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: PREAPPLICATION LABELS
Plan Number - T20PRE0183
Review Name: PREAPPLICATION LABELS
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/05/2021 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Completed | No adverse comments. Standard requirements will apply. Zelin Canchola |
| 01/06/2021 | ELISA HAMBLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Completed | Comments from Jodie Brown, Historic Preservation Officer • The house on the corner at 629 E 9th Street as well 214/216 N Jacobus (not part of the project) are contributors to the Iron Horse Expansion National Register Historic District. • It would be helpful to understand the height of the proposed construction and the historic house. • Plans indicate a ramp on the side of the historic house, provide more information on the materials and design of the ramp. • Provide information on the proposed design of the new construction and any changes to the historic house. • Provide information on the distance between the new construction and the historic house. |
| 01/06/2021 | SBLOOD1 | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Completed | 1. Show complete circulation paths between all public buildings and adjacent streets 2. Waste stream calculations show total waste capacity at 356 gal/week and so dumpsters will need to be provided along with proper access and maneuverability for collection service. Stephen Blood (520) 837-4958 Stephen.blood@tucsonaz.gov |
| 01/06/2021 | ELISA HAMBLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Completed | Comments from Corky Poster, City Design Professional ============================ DATE: December 31, 2020 FROM: Corky Poster, Architect/Planner (AICP) City of Tucson On-Call Design Professional RE: T20PRE0183 – 635 East 9th Street Infill Incentive District, Iron Horse Mixed-Use Parcel No. 117-06-025A, Tucson W86’ E132’ S150’ BLK 78 OWNER: 9th Street Tucson LLC c/o Christopher Pela ARCHITECT: Studio Pela ***Reviewers Comments are in red: PHASE OF REVIEW: Pre-Submittal MATERIAL REVIEWED: • Assessors Record Map • Assessors Report • Pre-Application Site Plan • Agenda Topics to Discuss • Application • On-Line Submittal Page IID STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO PROJECT: • UDC Section 5.12.2. Establishment • UDC Section 5.12.5. Submittal Requirements • UDC Section 5.12.6. Plan Review and Procedures Under Zoning Option • UDC Section 5.12.8 General IID Zoning Option Design Standards • UDC Section 5.12.15 Iron Horse Area (IHA) (Entirely within) Mixed Use Sub-Area (AIH-MS) STANDARDS AND REVIEWER COMMENTS: This application is an IID-Application. It falls entirely into Iron Horse Area (IHA), Mixed Use Sub-Area (AIH-MS) of the Downtown Links SubDistrict IID (DLS). The following elements would apply (please address them in the formal application): UDC Section 5.12.8. GENERAL IID ZONING OPTION DESIGN STANDARDS An IID Plan under the IID zoning option design standards must demonstrate compliance with the following: A. Streetscape Design- Streetscape design must comply with the street design standards in the Technical Manual and the Streetscape Design Policy. 1. Pedestrian-orientation: Projects shall be pedestrian-oriented and comply with all of the following standards: a.New construction shall have architectural elements/details at the first two floor levels; b.Buildings shall provide windows, window displays, or visible activity on the ground floor for at least 50 percent of frontage; c.A single plane of façade shall be no longer than fifty feet without architectural detail; d.Front doors shall be visible or identifiable from the street and visually highlighted by graphics, lighting, or similar features; e.Construction and maintenance of sidewalks must be done in compliance with the City's Streetscape Design Policy. Existing sidewalk widths shall be maintained so as to provide effective, accessible, connectivity to adjoining properties. Sidewalks may be widened to accommodate a project's design characteristics. Where no sidewalks exist, sidewalks shall be provided. Outdoor seating and dining areas and landscaping may be located in the sidewalk area where safe and effective sidewalk width around the design feature can be provided; f. To the extent practicable, bus pull-outs shall be provided where bus stops are currently located; g. If drive-through service is proposed, it shall not interfere with pedestrian access to the site from the right-of-way. 2. Shade a.Except as provided below, shade shall be provided for at least 50% of all sidewalks and pedestrian access paths as measured at 2:00 p.m. on June 21 when the sun is 82 degrees above the horizon. Shade may be provided by trees, arcades, canopies, or shade structures provided their location and design characteristics are compatible with the historic and design context of the street and the architectural integrity of the building. The use of plantings and shade structures in the City right-ofway is permitted to meet this standard with the approval of the Transportation Department. The shade provided by a building may serve to meet this standard. b.Exception- The PDSD Director may approve an IID Plan providing less than 50% shade where compliance is not feasible due to a project site's location and/or building orientation and the applicant has made a reasonable attempt to comply with this standard. B. Development Transition Standards The purpose of the Development Transition Standards is to mitigate excessive visual, noise, odor, vibration intrusion, and other similar public health and safety concerns that may be created by the proposed project. 1.Applicability - Developing sites that abut an affected single family or duplex dwelling shall comply with this section. For purposes of the IID, the following terms and examples describe elements of applicable transitional areas: a."Affected residential property" refers to an existing detached single-family or duplex dwelling that is adjacent to a developing site; b."High density residential" refers to residential development that is neither existing single-family detached nor attached dwellings; c. Examples of applicable transitional areas include a nonresidential developing site adjacent to existing single-family detached or attached dwellings within a subdivision, or a developing highdensity residential site adjacent to existing single-family detached or attached dwellings within a subdivision; and, d.For projects within the DCS, the Development Transition Standards apply only to those projects adjacent to affected residential properties outside the DCS boundaries. 2. Mitigation of Taller Structures: Compliance with the following standards is required where the developing site has taller buildings than adjacent affected residential properties: a.Within the GIIS and DCS, the maximum building height is 25 feet within 30 feet of the property line adjacent to an affected residential property. Proposed buildings may be developed to the maximum height permitted by the underlying zone or as permitted by the IID Subdistrict, whichever is applicable, when the building is 30 feet or more from the property line adjacent to an affected residential property; b.Building Bulk Reduction c. If a building façade faces a property line adjacent to a single-family detached or duplex residential property, the PDSD Director may require bulk reduction. The Design Professional shall make a finding and recommendation, after consulting with the DRC and/or Historic Commission if applicable, that the proposed design provides an effective way of breaking up the mass, so the building mass of the façade is less imposing. d.Balconies shall be oriented away from affected residential property or use a screening device to reduce views into the rear or side yards of the affected residential property. e.The developing site's buildings shall be oriented so as to reduce views onto an affected residential property; and f. Buffers and/or screening consistent with the purpose of this section shall be provided between a developing site and affected residential properties and shall include features such as, but not limited to, landscaping, walls, and architecturally decorative features. 2.Mitigation of Service Areas- Potential nuisance or noisy areas shall be oriented away from affected residential property, such as by placing service areas for loading and garbage disposal between the developing site's buildings, behind opaque barriers, or by using architectural or landscaping treatments that effectively reduce nuisance impacts from service areas. The service area shall be mitigated to reduce the noise and view of the service features, reduce the emission of offensive odors to owners or occupants of adjacent properties or create a nuisance or hazard beyond the property lines of the project site, and prevent vibrations that are discernible beyond the property lines of the project site. 3.Mitigation of Parking Facilities and Other Areas- Where the site has parking areas or an area with noise and outdoor lighting features, the areas shall be screened from affected residential property by a combination of a wall or opaque non-chain link fence with a vegetative hedge or a row of trees that shall be dense enough to screen views onto the development site. An alternative treatment may be used, such as using architectural or landscaping treatments that effectively reduce nuisance impacts from parking facilities and other areas. Where there is a finding that the vegetative screen will be opaque, the requirement of a masonry wall may be waived by the PDSD Director. C. Alternative Compliance 1.The PDSD Director may approve an urban design best practice option for compliance with Section 5.12.8.A, Streetscape Design, and Section 5.12.8.B, Development Transition Standards. 2.For purposes of this section, urban design best practices may include urban design studies approved for the City of Tucson, adopted urban design standards for a downtown area in an Arizona city of comparable size or a city in the Southwest of comparable size, books written by urban design experts or endorsed by a professional organization, such as the American Institute of Architects, addressing downtown development , or any comparable report, study, or standards recommended by the City's Design Professional and approved by the PDSD Director. D. Utilities- Plans shall include information on the layout and demonstrate availability of utilities such as water, wastewater, natural gas, electric, and telecommunication utilities. E. Parking 1.Parking spaces may be located as follows: a.On site; or b.Off-site within ¼ of a mile of the project site under a shared parking agreement that is approved by the City. 2.Required vehicle and bicycle parking may be reduced pursuant to an IID Parking Plan in accordance with Section 7.4.5.A, except as modified as follows: a.Section 7.4.5.A.3 in Permitted Uses and Types of Development does not apply. An IID Parking Plan may be used to reduce required residential parking. b.Bike parking shall be provided when motor vehicle parking is provided. The PDSD Director may reduce the required number of bike parking spaces depending on the use, setting, and intensity of the proposal. c. The neighborhood meeting that is required for under Section 7.4.5.A.6.a may be held concurrently with the neighborhood meeting required by Section 5.12.6.B. d.Section 7.4.5.B, Downtown Parking District, does not apply. 3.Where Parking is provided, the parking area must comply with standards of Section 7.4.6.C and D. 4.Parking must be in a parking structure with the ground floor of the parking structure screened from view. a.Exception b.Parking may be located on a surface parking lot if it is determined by the PDSD Director to be impracticable to be located elsewhere and other options are not available. c. Parking may be located on a surface parking lot if it is determined by the PDSD Director to be impracticable to be located elsewhere and other options are not available. If located onsite, parking areas must be located at the rear or side of the building. d.Changes of use and expansion of existing structures may use the site's current parking configuration. e.Parking structures shall be designed so that parked vehicles are screened from view at street level through incorporation of design elements including, but not limited to, landscaping, pedestrian arcades, occupied space, or display space. 5.Special IID Parking Agreement- Where a developer can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the PDSD that the parking options provided for in this Section are not feasible, and the City makes a specific finding that the project will have significant economic development value for the IID Sub-District in which it will be located, the following parking options are allowed as follows: a.A percentage of long-term residential parking may be located in a City public parking garage by an agreement with Park Tucson if the project is of significant economic benefit to the City to allow this option. b.The agreement must be reviewed by PDSD, the Design Professional, Park Tucson and approved by the City Manager. F. Multi-zone Parcels- Where a development parcel contains more than one zoning district, uses and building massing may be distributed across the zoning districts on the parcel , provided that the development complies with the design standards in Section 5.12.8.B to mitigate the impact of the new development on existing, less intensely developed adjacent parcels. Section 5.12.6.E – IID Historic Preservation Review 2. Projects not in an HPZ a. The Tucson-Pima County Historical Commission (TPCHC) Plans Review Subcommittee reviews all projects listed below: (2) Projects proposing new development using IID zoning option that are either adjacent to the boundaries of an HPZ or adjacent to a structure meeting any one or more of the following characteristics: (a) Listed or eligible to be listed in the National or Arizona Register of Historic Places, individually or as a contributing property. d. The TPCHC Plans Review Subcommittee reviews for compliance with the design requirements of the applicable sub-district and for design compatibility of a proposed development project. Reviewers comment: As per the maps above, the site is in the Iron Horse National Register District (blue) and the two residential structures (grey) are listed as “Contributing Structures” to that District. The two buildings in white on the upper map, were both “Non-Contributing Structures” and have apparently since been demolished. As such, the following compatibility requirements apply: (1) New development must be designed to complement and be compatible with the architecture of adjacent historic structures. (2) Compatibility with adjacent historic structures is to be achieved through architectural elements such as building setbacks, building step-backs, textures, materials, forms, and landscaping. (3) Exceptions The PDSD Director may waive the compatibility requirement of this section under the following circumstances: (a) Where the adjacent lot is vacant; or (b) If the property owner of the adjacent historic structure waives the requirement; or (c) If the adjacent lot is developed with a non-residential building. e. It is not the intent of the design review process to impose additional limitations or building preservation requirements on the allowable building heights in the IID. Unless a building height limitation in a Sub-District is specifically required herein, the proposed development may use the entire building height allowed by the IID. 3. Demolition a. Whether a proposed development is within or outside the boundaries of a HPZ, IID zoning option may not be used for a development project that proposes demolition of an historic structure that is any one or combination of the following: (1) A property listed or eligible to be listed in the National or Arizona Register of Historic Places, individually or as a contributing property. (2) Designated as a City Historic Landmark. b. For purposes of sub-section (a) above, the prohibition against the use of the IID zoning option applies to anywhere any demolition of an historic structure occurs on that property on or after the effective date of Ordinance No. 11640 (May 23, 2019). For anywhere a demolition of a occurred on the property during the time period from February 18, 2015 and May 23, 2019, the application will be governed under the provisions of Ordinance No. 11246 (adopted February 18, 2015). c. Exception Partial demolition of an historic structure is allowed if the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) determines that the demolition will not cause the structure to be de-listed or to become ineligible for listing in the future. 4. De-Listing In no event may the IID zoning option be used if the development would, in the opinion of the Historic Preservation Officer, cause an historic structure in the IID to be de-listed or no longer eligible for listing. In addition, the regulations of 5.12.15 IID-IHA-AIH-MS, pages 73 – 78 apply. Reviewers comment: • The application seems complete and accurate • The site plan is clear and describes well the execution and intent of the development. • In general, this well-scaled mixed-use development is precisely what was intended in IID AIH-MS • Thank you for the thoughtful Pre-Application Discussion Topics. Many of them will be more appropriately answered by the Site Review Team. Issues of concern by this Design Professional Review (to be discussed in Pre-Application meeting and clarified in final submittal): • Compliance with language and diagrams in UDC IID 5.12-AIH-MS 1, 2, 3 • Compliance with Section 5.12.6.E – IID Historic Preservation Review, 2. Projects not in an HPZ. • Future uses of historic “Existing Buildings” on western edge of site. • Clarification of the height of the commercial building along 9th Street (it states both: 15’0” T.O Parapet, or “2-story total”) • Rear yard setbacks on north property line. • Front yard “prevailing setback” as per your Pre-Application Discussion Topics: even though you are closer to the street than the historic “contributing” building(with a wall on the property line) immediately to the west, the “contributing” buildings in the next block west of Jacobus and the “non-contributing” buildings in the next block east of North First Avenue are all closer to the street property line. I would look to those for the prevailing setback. • Mechanism of trash pick-up on eastern property edge (comments by Solid Waste). • Absence of buffer and/or pedestrian-vehicular refuge area on eastern property line PAAL. • Elevation compatibility with adjacent Contributing Structures (What are the heights of existing historic structures?) • Development Transition Standards. • Resolution of complex grades at 9th Street asphalt sidewalk (red arrow) at 9th and Jacobus. • Feasibility of proposed perpendicular parking on a street with existing diagonal back-in parking. I look forward to our Pre-Submittal meeting on Thursday January 7, 2021. Submitted by: Corky Poster, Architect/Planner, Poster Mirto McDonald City of Tucson Design Professional |
| 01/06/2021 | ELISA HAMBLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Completed | CDRC Thursday Pre-Submittal Transmittal PDSD Zoning Review FROM: Elisa Hamblin, AICP; Principal Planner PROJECT: Thursday Pre-submittal meeting – T20PRE0183 Address: 635 E 9th St Parcel(s): 117-06-025A Zoning: C-3 (IID -Iron Horse/Armory Park Mixed Use Sub-Area) Existing Use: Vacant Proposed Use: Commercial/Retail and Multifamily Development TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 6, 2021 COMMENTS: 1. Development must comply with the Administrative Manual Section 2-06 - Development Package. 2. The proposal is for a mixed-use site which includes four dwelling units and two commercial shell buildings. As more than 2 units are proposed, the residential use is considered Multifamily Development, which is a permitted use in the C-3 zone. Most commercial and retail uses are permitted in the C-3 zone, but information on specific uses would be needed to determine if permitted and any use-specific standards. 3. As presented, this development does not meet several standards. Some of these include: street setback, rear (north) setback, parking, parking access, accessible parking, and pedestrian access. Some or all these standards could potentially be modified through the IID process. 4. Please note, the Multifamily Development portion of the site is required to provide handicap accessible parking. 5. Clarification is needed regarding the use of multiple parcels. If the property at 629 E 9th St is part of the site, a lot combination processed with Pima County will be required. 6. The comments provided are preliminary and are not to be assumed as a complete review of the proposal. During the Development Package review process, a full review will be made by Zoning to assure compliance with the applicable UDC development criteria and Technical Standards. If you have any questions please contact me at elisa.hamblin@tucsonaz.gov. |
| 01/11/2021 | SBEASLE1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 130 - 200 pm - T20PRE0183 - 635 E 9TH ST - Site IID Iron Horse 1. There is an existing 6" cement asbestos water main in 9th Street. 2. The water pressure in this water main is estimated to be in the 40-47 psi range. An on-site water pressure booster may be desirable, and possibly necessary, as there will be a pressure drop across the water meter(s) and backflow preventer(s). 3. Fire flow may be an issue with this project, if the Fire Department decides a large fire flow is necessary. The existing 6" cement asbestos water main in 9th Street may not be able to support a fire flow of much more than 1000 -1500 gpm. Please note that the only way of determining the maximum fire flow this existing water main can support is hydraulic modeling, which is outside of the scope of this CDRC meeting. 4. After a water fixture unit count has been conducted for the project using the 2018 International Plumbing Code, and the fire flow requirements have been established by the local fire authority, please contact Tucson Water's New Services section by sending an e-mail to TW_COMMON@tucsonaz.gov to discuss: o The number of water service lines, water meters, and meter sizes, necessary to serve this development. o The advantages and disadvantages of installing the necessary water meters via Tucson Water's Job Order Contract (JOC) process. Please note that if hydraulic modeling is determined to be necessary, it can be done within this process. 5. Any questions, comments or concerns about these comments may be directed to: Tim Rowe, P.E., Civil Engineer Tucson Water, New Development Section 310 W. Alameda St., P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, AZ 85726-7210, (520) 837-2106 |
| 12/15/2020 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Completed | LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING The site is within DOWNTOWN LINKS SUBDISTRICT: A complete or partial exception to the landscaping and screening requirements in Section 7.6 may be granted by the PDSD Director, if shade along sidewalks, pedestrian circulation paths or outdoor patios is provided for pedestrians and customers in accordance Section 5.12.6.A.2. Alternative pedestrian access that creates connectivity between public entrances to the project and abutting sidewalk is allowed if no safety hazard is created. All pedestrian access must conform to the accessibility standards of the City's Building Code. |
| 12/17/2020 | GDAURIA1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Reqs Change | * If 30' or greater in height, 26' wide aerial ladder access required at center building (suggest reducing height). |
| 12/17/2020 | GDAURIA1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Reqs Change | *Sprinklers are required in the residential units |