Permit Review Detail
Review Status: In Review
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.3
Permit Number - TD-DEV-0325-00071
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.3
Review Status: In Review
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/02/2026 | External Reviewers - COT Environmental Services Standard | APPROVED | Approved for curbside APC solid waste collection services. | ||
| 03/06/2026 | NPPO Standard | APPROVED | |||
| N/A | CDRC Post Review Express | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| N/A | External Reviewers - Pima County Addressing Standard | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 04/01/2026 | External Reviewers - Tucson Electric Power (TEP) Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | NOT TEP REVIEW BUT WAPA REVIEW Response: Meetings have been held with WAPA representatives as well as the City of Tucson to provide an easement that meets the requirements of both parties. The modified easement is reflected on the revised plan. WAPA acknowledges that the revised development plans partially resolve’s WAPA’s concerns and request for additional easement area as an added safety measure. We also appreciate the effort to address WAPA’s concerns in the Comment Response Letter as noted above, however, we would like to see our concerns addressed in a more formal instrument. Here are WAPA’s remaining concerns and requests: WAPA Concerns: 1. Rezoning Condition #8 needs to be modified to reflect the changes in access requirements that are depicted in the revised plan 2. Rezoning Condition #8 only addresses access for the lots to the west that are north of the Enchanted Hills Wash. The lots south of Enchanted Hills Wash also appear to be using WAPA’s Transmission Line Easement as a primary access to their properties and at least one landowner south of Enchanted Hills Wash appears to be lacking adequate legal/physical access by a means other than the existing WAPA easement. The lot with questionable access is Parcel 11928132B Johnny and Michelle Quihius. WAPA Requests: 1. Modify Rezoning Condition #8 to dedicate: a. the 24-foot access to benefit the lots to the west extending the entire length of the platted area, from West 36th Street to West 44th Street b. the additional easement area to WAPA for vegetation/encroachment management purposes from West 36th Street to West 44th Street c. properly describe the area to be dedicated as east of the existing WAPA 52-foot transmission line easement and reflect this revision in the development plan 2. Include a requirement under General Notes in the Plat that the Developer obtain written concurrence of the development plan from WAPA via a License Agreement WAPA is not willing to share the transmission line easement area as a public access for safety and reliability reasons. However, we are willing to share the proposed vegetation and encroachment management easement area with the access needed by the landowners to the west of the development area. We firmly believe this solution will result in mutual benefits to all parties including the City of Tucson, the landowners to the west, the Developer, and to WAPA. The revised access road will provide a natural barrier against new structure and vegetation encroachments. This will keep the new landowners of the developed area safe, especially considering the fact that some of the new homes will likely be 2 story and could easily get too close to a high voltage transmission line with no additional barrier. The extension of the access and vegetation and encroachment management easement south of Enchanted Hills Wash should not have any negative impact on the developer since this will be a common area but still provides benefits to the landowners to the west and assists WAPA in ensuring that no vegetation comes close enough to the transmission line to cause an outage or a fire. We sincerely hope that the City of Tucson and the developer can appreciate the safety, reliability, and access benefits to this solution so we can all move forward with our projects in a timely manner! Respectfully, Angela Murphy | Project Coordinator | Transmission Asset Planning Western Area Power Administration | Desert Southwest Region | Phoenix, AZ (O) 602.726.5521 | (M) 702.308.1665 | murphy[at]wapa.gov |
||
| 03/06/2026 | Site Engineering Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Permit Activity Number: TD-DEV-0325-00071 (2nd Review) Project: Tentative Plat, Grading Plan, and related submittals for Single-Family residential subdivision Location: 2980 S LA CHOLLA BL Review Date: 3/5/2026 Reviewer: Marco Contreras – Engineering Associate - Site Engineering Related Cases: TP-PRE-0523-00209 *This plan has been reviewed for compliance with applicable development criteria in the City of Tucson Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-6 and Technical Standards Manual (TSM) Section for waste management, Pedestrian Access, Hydrology -Retention/Detention Requirements, and all site standard code. * City of Tucson Code: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Codes Drainage Manual Link: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/pdsd/documents/engineering-code/cot-drainage-manual-searchable.pdf Design standards for Stormwater Detention and Retention Link: https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/pdsd/documents/engineering-code/updated-retention-detention-manual.pdf Site Engineering Review Comments: 1. Provide the Zoning and Land Use General Note: “All new public roads within and adjacent to this project will be constructed in accordance with approved plans. Construction plans will be submitted to the City Engineer’s Office for review and approval.” AM 2-06.4.7.C.1 2. As this subdivision proposed drainage improvements and work associated with regulatory flows, it will be required that a floodplain use (FPU) permit be submitted for the work within a floodplain. This is an entirely separate permit that can be submitted for within the sub-records of this development package permit. For the FPU permit submission, please provide the plan set as well as the corresponding drainage report. a. Provide the Floodplain Use case number, when created, adjacent to the related cases section of the cover sheet. Drainage Comments: 3. In compliance with AM 2-06.4.8.I a. Provide the WSEL contour cross sections associated with all floodplains/washes on the grading plan sheets. b. The CFS rates should also be denoted entering and leaving the “Site” on the grading sheets as well. Similar to how they are shown in the Drainage report. 4. Basins designed for 100-year water depths of 2 feet or greater and with side slopes steeper than 4:1 shall have a security barrier at all locations where side slopes are steeper than 4:1. Security barriers shall meet the requirements found in Section 4.11. DSSDR 4.4.1.5 Demonstrate this for Basin 2 & 3. 5. In compliance with TSM 4-02.2.4 identify and delineate the regulated areas and the protected riparian area on the property. a. Ensure to also delineate the top of bank of all associated watercourses/washes 6. When basins are located to accept flows from predominantly natural areas, sediment basins shall be required at inlets. The configuration and volume of the sediment basin shall be determined by an engineer registered in the State of Arizona DSSDR 4.3.1.6. Demonstrate this for all basins. 7. Basins shall have a minimum of 1 sediment level measurement device, which can be incorporated into the weir or the side slope, or constructed as a separate stand-alone device. The device(s) shall be located where sediment is likely to accumulate. DSSDR 4.4.1.4 Demonstrate this for all Basins. 8. As-Built plans for all drainage grading and infrastructure will be required prior to final. DSSDR 11.2.2.3 Drainage Report Comments: 9. Provide An inspection and maintenance protocol including frequency of inspection, a checklist of items to be inspected and recommended maintenance when an inspection identifies a maintenance requirement shall be prepared by an Arizona registrant should be included at the end of the provided drainage report. DSSDR 4.1.1. This should be included within the drainage report. FOR PERMIT RESUBMISSION, IT IS REQUIRED THAT: Corrected/Revised Plan set and a detailed response letter document that clearly shows how you addressed all of Site Engineering’s and other reviewers’ comments for the completed review cycle. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Marco Contreras at Marco.contreras@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 03/06/2026 | Site Landscape Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT REVIEWER: CHAD KELLER, RLA SITE LANDSCAPE/NATIVE PLANT PRESERVATION SECTION PROJECT: CASAS OESTES - TENTATIVE PLAT, GRADING PLAN, AND RELATED SUBMITTALS ACTIVITY NO: TD-DEV-0325-00071 PRE-APPLICATION NO: TP-PRE-0523-00209 ADDRESS: 2980 S LA CHOLLA BL ZONING: MH-1 MOBILE HOME ZONE LAND USE: FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD) REVIEW #2 03.06.2026 THE PROPOSED PLANS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SITE LANDSCAPE, NATIVE PLANTS, AND RAINWATER HARVESTING, PER-THE-CITY OF TUCSON UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC), TECHNICAL STANDARDS MANUAL (TSM), AND ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL (AM). RESUBMIT REVISED DRAWINGS ALONG WITH A DETAILED RESPONSE LETTER, STATING HOW ALL SITE LANDSCAPE AND NPPO SECTION REVIEW COMMENTS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED. SITE LANDSCAPE/NPPO SECTION COMMENTS: 1. All previous comments have been addressed for site landscape and NPPO. City Site Engineering comments may require updates to the overall linework on site. If this is the case, then please coordinate the landscape plans to have identical line work throughout the plan set. Thank you. Chad Keller, RLA Landscape Architect chad.keller@tucsonaz.gov 520.837.4923 |
||
| 03/12/2026 | Site Zoning Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Krista Hansen – Lead Planner PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: Casas Oestes – Lots 1 - 107 Development Package (1st Review) TD-DEV-0325-00071 (2980 S LA CHOLLA BL) TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/12/2026 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. 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 March 19, 2026. 1. Previous Comment 13: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – Provide a general note that identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses. The proposed use should be list as Single-family, Detached, Flexible Lot Development (FLD) subject to UDC Article 8.7.3. **Follow-up Comment: This comment still stands. For General Note 3, list the Proposed Use exactly as, “Single-family, Detached, Flexible Lot Development (FLD) subject to UDC Article 8.7.3.” 2. Previous Comment 18: 2-06.4.9.O – FLD Data note 11 setbacks are not correct. Per UDC Article 8.7.3.K.2 Street perimeter yards along FLD project site boundaries are required in accordance with Section 6.4.5.C, Street Perimeter Yards, unless special zoning requirements dictate a greater distance or different point of measurement. **Follow-up Comment: This comment still stands. Per UDC Section 6.4.5.C.1.a., the minimum required front street setback is 20 ft. Correct “Street” setback under Perimeter Setbacks (FLD Data Note 11). Detail F on Sheet D1 shows an 18’ front street setback on one of the lots. A reduced front street setback requires a Design Development Option (DDO). Either change setback to 20’ or apply for a DDO. 3. Previous Comment 26: 2-06.5.3.D – Provide dimensioned building elevations of all proposed units. The elevations can be preliminary drawings. **Follow-Up Comment: This comment still stands. The Elevations attachment only includes dimensioned floor plans. Provide dimensioned building height elevations of all proposed units. Building height is the vertical distance measured from the design grade elevation to the highest point of a flat roof; to the deck line of a mansard roof; or to the middle (between the eave and ridge) of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof (UDC Section 6.4.4.A). 4. Previous Comment 27: 2-06.5.3.G.2 - Provide a copy of the protective covenants or common use agreements for any shared areas being established by easements over individually-owned property. **Follow-up Comment: Please add a Note stating that the CC&Rs will be submitted prior to the Final Plat. If you have any questions about this transmittal, contact Krista Hansen at Krista.hansen@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Corrected development package and comment response letter. To resubmit visit Tucson Development Center at https://tdc-online.tucsonaz.gov/#/home. Instructions for resubmittal - www.tucsonaz.gov/files/sharedassets/public/v/1/pdsd/documents/tdc-faq/new-pdfs/revisions-and-resubmittals.pdf. |
||
| 03/04/2026 | Commercial Plumbing Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | |||
| 03/12/2026 | Design Review Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | the architecture company at The Silverbell Ranch 2625 N. Silverbell Road Tucson, Arizona 85745 520 622-4506 / fax 520 620-6097 Flexible Lot Development (FLD) 2nd Submittal Review: Date: March 12, 2026 From: Richard Fe Tom, AIA, City of Tucson On-Call Design Professional To: City Development Review Committee (CDRC) Re: Design Professional 2nd Submittal Review of the Casas Oestes Flexible Lot Development (FLD), 2980 S La Cholla BL, Development Package # TD-DEV-0325-00071 for compliance with Uniform Development Code (UDC) Section 8.7.3.M.1: Design Criteria of the and UDC Sections 2-06.5.3.E of the Administrative Manual. The following Submittal 1 Revision Package documents were viewed as part of my Design Professional FLD Review: 2_1st Comment Response Letter_v1pdf 2_36th & La Cholla FLD - Architectural Variation Plan_v1pdf 2_36th & La Cholla FLD - Elevations_v1.pdf 2_Development Plan_v2.pdf The following review comments are provided to detail the Design Professional’s review and approval of revisions made to this project. The review is based upon Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 8.7.3.M. Flexible Lot Development (FLD) Design Criteria. FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD) DESIGN CRITERIA (UDC Section 8.7.3.M) M. DESIGN CRITERIA (Section 8.7.3.M) Design Professional's Comment: 1. Architectural Variation a. Purpose: To provide architectural diversity, visual interest, and to avoid monotony in architectural design by requiring variations in such architectural treatments as color, finished materials, massing and rooflines, orientation of units, garages and porches. Meets criteria – An Architectural Variation Plan (AVP) for the Casas Oestes Flexible Lot Development (FLD) has been submitted as part of Development Package # TD-DEV- 0325-00071. The AVP as submitted meets the “Purpose” of UDC Section 8.7.3.M. b. Applicability: (1) Projects with 20 or more single-family detached residential units except when residential units are on lots larger than 10,000 square feet or, where dwelling units are separated by 30 feet or more; or, (2) Elevations of single-family detached units abutting a public street designated as a collector or arterial street in the Major Streets and Routes Plan; or, a private or public street designed and/or designated as a residential collector street. Meets criteria – The Casas Oestes FLD will contain more than 20 single-family detached residential units. The total number of lots for the proposed development is 107, not to exceed a total of 137 lots per Condition No. 9 of Rezoning Case # C9-81-45C. |
||
| 03/10/2026 | ROW Engineering Review Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | PIA plan set required for new ROW improvements and new public roads 12' Multi use path required on 36th St, show on PIA plans. |