Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESIDENTIAL - BLDG/ZONING/ENGINE/NPPO
Permit Number - T22CM02925
Review Name: RESIDENTIAL - BLDG/ZONING/ENGINE/NPPO
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/21/2022 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | ZONING REVIEW TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: T22CM02925 301 N Olsen Ave - R-1 Attached Garage & Play Room (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL: April 21, 2022 This site is located in the R-1 zone (UDC 4.7.8). A single-family residence is a permitted use in this zone (Table 4.8-2) subject to Use Specific Standards 4.9.7.B.5 – 9. 1. It is not clear if the lot coverage calculation includes the required vehicle use area. Per UDC Article 6.4.3.B.3.b Vehicular use areas, measured within the outside edges of any area allocated to vehicle use, whether improved or unimproved is included in the calculation. 2. As the proposed playroom counts as a bedroom, See UDC Article 11.4.3 definition of a Bedroom, provide a full floor plan for the entire residence so that Zoning can determine if the requirements of UDC Article 4.9.7.B.7 apply, For any new single-family dwelling in the R-1 zone with five bedrooms, three parking spaces are required. For every bedroom over five, one additional space is required for each bedroom. For all single-family dwellings in the R-1 zone with five or more bedrooms, and for all lots containing two or more single-family dwellings, with the second dwelling having more than one bedroom, all parking spaces must be located on-site, either in a side or rear perimeter yard . Parking spaces may not be located in a vehicular use area in any front street perimeter yard. A parking area is not required to be developed to a commercial standard. A dustproof parking surface is required to at least a minimum of two inches of compacted pea gravel. An existing covered residential parking area may be used, 3. Provide a perimeter yard setback dimension from the proposed stairs to the west property line. 4. Provide a height for the proposed stairs so that setback requirements can be verified. Until the above comments are addressed full comments for the DDO cannot be provided. COMMENTS: the following comments are relative to an application for a Design Development Option (DDO) (UDC 3.11.1). The minimum setback is the greater of six (6) feet, or two-thirds (2/3) the height of the structure’s wall facing each interior property line (Table 6.3-2.A). 1. Based on a wall height of 17’-6” the required perimeter yard setback from the proposed addition to the west property line is 11’-8”, proposed setback is 9’-6”. The minimum setback to the front street perimeter property line is the greater of twenty (20) feet, or one and one-half (1 ½) the height of the proposed wall ((UDC 6.4.5.C.1.a). 2. Based on a wall height of 17’-6” the required front street perimeter yard setback is 26’-3”, proposed setback is 20’-0”. Once comments 3 & 4 above are addressed additional comments maybe forth coming for the DDO process. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Zone1.desk@tucsonaz.gov. |
| 05/04/2022 | KEN VAN KARSEN | BUILDING-RESIDENTIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Provide a complete construction plan set showing 2018 IRC compliance. |
| 05/19/2022 | PCAMARE1 | NPPO | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 05/19/2022 | PCAMARE1 | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Passed |