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: RESUBMITTAL
Permit Number - T21CM01303
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/25/2021 | SSHIELD1 | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE | COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEE PROCESSING | Reqs Change | Impact fees have been charged. This project is eligible for a demo credit once permit T20BU00228 is in "Final" status and all inspections are complete. |
| 10/25/2021 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | ZONING REVIEW TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: T21CM01303, T21CM01312 3139 E Bellevue St Bellevue Apartments (2nd Review) TRANSMITTAL: October 25, 2021 This site is located in the R-3 zone (UDC 4.7.12). Multifamily is a permitted use in this zone (Table 4.8-2), subject to Use Specific Standard 4.9.7.B.6. Zoning has reviewed the building plans for compliance with DP20-0153 and the provided wall heights do not match. Perimeter yard setbacks are based on a measurement from design grade to the highest point of the wall, see UDC Article 6.4.5.B and Figure 6.4.5-A. That said the following comments will need to be addressed prior to approval of the building plans: As none of the wall heights provided on the building elevations are to design grade 6” has been added. The minimum setback is the greater of ten (10) feet, or three-fourth (3/4) the height of the structure’s wall facing each interior property line (Table 6.3-2.A). As stated above perimeter yard setbacks are based on a measurement from design grade to the highest point of the wall, see UDC Article 6.4.5.B and Figure 6.4.5-A. As height dimensions were not provided from design grade zoning has added 6” to the dimensions shown on the building plan elevations. T21CM01303 1. Based on a wall height of 21’-10” the required perimeter yard setback from the proposed Building #1 top of wall for 2nd floor to the west property line is 16.375”, proposed is 16.1’. 2. Based on a wall height of 21’-10” the required perimeter yard setback from the proposed Building #1 top of wall for 2nd floor to the north property line is 16.375”, proposed is 16.0’. 3. Based on a wall height of 21’-10” the required perimeter yard setback from the proposed Building #1 top of wall for 2nd floor to the east property line is 16.375”, proposed is 16.1’. T21CM01303 4. Based on a wall height of 21’-10” the required perimeter yard setback from the proposed Building #2 top of wall for 2nd floor to the east property line is 16.375”, proposed is 16.0’. A Design Development Option (DDO) will need to be submitted and approved for comments 1-4 prior to approval of the building plans. DDO requirements can be found at: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/pdsd/forms/DDO_for_Setback_and_Height_UDC_8.11.20.pdf. 5. DP20-0153 will need to be issued prior to issue of this building plan. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Elisa Hamblin at Elisa.Hamblin@tucsonaz.gov. |
| 10/28/2021 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | An approved development plan is not to be used for construction of on-site utilities (e.g. water service to the building, building sewer, etc.). Provide the civil plans showing the installation of the water service to the building and the installation of the building sewer as part of the building plan set. Reference: Sections 107.2.1 and 107.2.6, IBC 2018 [Initial comment: Show the location and size of the proposed water meter, backflow preventer, and the water service pipe on a site plan. The development package is not a substitute for a complete site plan. Reference: Section 107.2.1 and 107.2.6, IBC 2018.] |
| 11/08/2021 | SAFEBUILT | 2ND PARTY REVIEW | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Activity Number: T21CM01303, T21CM01312 GENERAL: Provide written responses to all review comments. Provide a complete plan set. Provide additional documents as requested by review staff. STRUCTURAL REVIEW COMMENTS: Denied 1) S1.0: Provide additional design data under design loads notes as listed in below. a) Seismic: Importance factor Ie Mapped spectral response accelerations ; Ss, S1 Spectral Response coefficients ; Sds, Sd1 Seismic Design Category appears to be "B" but not "C" as listed. b) Wind Design ASCE 7-16 Internal pressure coefficient +/- 0.18 2) Provide summary of cumulative drifts from wind and seismic forces for 3-story both Buildings 1&2 . Demonstrate that maximum story drift under seismic forces (ASCE 7-16) section 12.12 or serviceability limit of H/400 under wind loading is not exceeded. Provide C&C wind design pressures for windows and doors. 3) List the C&C roof uplift pressures for roofing attachment based on zones and tributary area of 10 sq.ft. Provide a diagram with zones and "a" dimension ( Both Buildings) 4) List C&C roof uplift pressures for roof joists based on tributary area. BUILDING REVIEW COMMENTS: Approved MECHANICAL REVIEW COMMENTS: Denied (*) Denote clarification to a no satisfied comment. 1. Provide provisions for outside air to comply with FMC-Table 403.3.1. How the outside air will be provided as per calculations on Living Area Calculations Table, provided on M1.0 sheet? IMC-(A) 106.3.1. (*) A-Apparently, Tittle o Block for Building-1 Sheet M1.1 is reading First and Second Mechanical Plans. It seems this layout correspond to 3rd Floor, instead. IMC-(A)106.4.1 (*) B-New added o/a ducts are going up from 1st floor to Roof. As designed the duct is penetrating three floor/ceiling fire resistant rated assemblies. Provide shaft or/and comply with IMC-(BF) 607.6 (*) C-Ducts penetrating roof/ceiling assembly (at 3rd floor), bathrooms exhaust, shall comply with IMC-(BF) 607.6.2 2. OK 3. OK 4. Provide detail to show how Condensing Units will be attached to building structure (upper/lower attachments) to support wind and seismic load, if applicable. IMC-301.18 and 301.15(*) What type of anchor, coordinate information with structural engineer. 5. OK ELECTRICAL REVIEW COMMENTS Approval Pending PLUMBING REVIEW COMMENTS: Approval |