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

Permit Number: TD-DEV-0725-00191
Parcel: 11302001H

Review Status: Requires Resubmit

Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.2

Permit Number - TD-DEV-0725-00191
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE NEW v.2
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
09/05/2025 ROW Review NOT REQUIRED
10/01/2025 Design Review Standard REQUIRES RESUBMIT Flexible Lot Development (FLD) Review:
Date: October 1, 2025
From: Richard Fe Tom, AIA, City of Tucson On-Call Design Professional
To: City Development Review Committee (CDRC)
Re: Design Professional review of the Mountain Flexible Lot Development (FLD), 3957 N
Mountain Ave, Development Package # TD-DEV-0725-00191 for compliance with Uniform
Development Code (UDC) Section 8.7.3.M.1: Design Criteria and compliance with
Sections 2-06.5.3.E and 2‐06.5.3.F of the Administrative Manual.
The following review comments are provided to detail the Design Professional’s recommendation
for approval of this project. The review is based upon Unified Development Code (UDC) Section
8.7.3.M. Design Criteria and Sections 2‐06.5.3.E and 2‐06.5.3.F of the Administrative Manual.
Unified Development Code (UDC)
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.
Not Required – Architectural Variation is
not required as this development does not
meet the applicability requirements of UDC
Section 8.7.3.M.1.b.(1) & (2) below.
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.
Not Applicable – The Mountain Ave FLD
contains less than 20 single-family detached
residential units.
Not Applicable – Units 3 & 4 that abut
Mountain Ave are single family “attached”
townhome units; therefore, they do not
require architectural variation.
d. Architectural Variation Plan Required
(1) An Architectural Variation Plan (AVP)
demonstrating compliance with the
requirements of this section shall be prepared
in accordance with the Section 2-06.5.3.E
Architectural Variation Plan, of the
Administrative Manual.
Not Required – An Architectural Variation Plan
(AVP) is not required for this proposed FLD
development.
 the architecture company
3957 N Mountain Ave - FLD Review tac# 25015 COT 3957 N Mountain Ave FLD
TD-DEV-0725-00191
Date: 10/01/25
Page 2 of 4
2. Transition Edge Treatment and Mitigation for Adjacent Properties
a. Where a single-family attached or multi-family
FLD project is adjacent to existing single-family
residential development, the FLD shall provide
buffering in order to preserve the privacy of the
existing residential development. Examples of
buffering include, but are not limited to,
landscaping, a fence, or a wall. The proposed
buffering shall be included as conditions on the
approved subdivision plat or site plan.
Requires Compliance – Lots 1, 2, 5 & 6 of
this project development contain singlefamily attached residences which are to be
constructed adjacent to existing singlefamily residences that are zoned R-2 along
the west property lines.
The proposed buffering shall be included as
conditions on the approved subdivision plat
or site plan.

b. Privacy Mitigation:
(1) Applicability: Privacy mitigation as required by
this section is required when multistory
residences are proposed adjacent to existing
single-story residences and the existing
residences are zoned R-2 or more restrictive.
Applicable – Lots 1, 2, 5 and 6 of this
project development proposes multi-story
residences to be constructed adjacent to
existing residences that are zoned R-2 or
more restrictive.
(2) Prohibited Improvements: Balconies, windows
(except for clerestory & translucent windows), or
any other feature on an upper floor that
overlook the rear and side yards of an adjacent
residence are prohibited.
Requires Submittal – Submit the floor plan
and elevation drawings of the multi-story
units proposed to be constructed on Lots 1,
2, 5 and 6. Submit proposed landscape
plans.
(3) Privacy Mitigation Plan: A Privacy Mitigation
Plan (PMP) is required demonstrating
compliance with this section.

(a) PMPs shall be prepared in accordance with
Section 2-06.5.3.F, Privacy Mitigation Plan,
of the Administrative Manual.
(b) PMPs shall demonstrate that adequate
measures, such as screening, setbacks,
building mass, solar access, air circulation,
and light access are incorporated into the
design of the project to preserve the existing
residents’ privacy.
(c) PMPs shall be included with submittal of the
tentative plat or site plan, whichever is
applicable.
(d) A PMP is reviewed and considered for
approval as part of the subdivision plat, site
plan, or building permit review procedure,
whichever is applicable, with the Design
Requires Submittal – A Privacy Mitigation
Plan (PMP) shall be submitted in
accordance with UDC Administrative
Manual Section 2-06.5.3.F
The PMP plan shall adequately demonstrate
compliance with UDC Section 8.7.3.M.2.a
and Section 8.7.3.M.2.b
 the architecture company
3957 N Mountain Ave - FLD Review tac# 25015 COT 3957 N Mountain Ave FLD
TD-DEV-0725-00191
Date: 10/01/25
Page 3 of 4
Professional included as the reviewer of the
AVP. The Design Professional will review
the PMP for compliance with this section
and forward his or her findings and
recommendation in writing to the PDSD
Director for consideration of approval.

(e) The PDSD Director ’s decision may be
appealed in accordance with Section 3.9.1,
Design Review Board Appeal Procedure.

(f) Conditions of the approved PMP, including
a description of the required mitigation and
for which units the mitigation applies, shall
be included as notes on the plat or site plan,
whichever applies, and the building plan.
(g) A PMP shall be approved prior to issuance
of a building permit.
3. Solar Access and Passive Solar
a. Solar Access
Dwelling units should be configured to allow
solar access to adjacent structures in
accordance with Section 7.3, Solar
Considerations.
Compliance Recommended – Submit a
written statement indicating how this FLD
project has been designed in compliance with
UDC Section 7.3 "Solar Considerations" to
allow the use of solar energy collectors (UDC
Section 7.3.1) and indicate what measures
have been taken to minimize the adverse
effects of shadows cast from any proposed
multistory structure (UDC Section 7.3.2).
Compliance to be reviewed by the Design
Professional prior to issuance of a Building
Permit.
b. Passive Solar:
FLD projects should incorporate passive solar
design when practicable.
Compliance Recommended – See
comments for Solar Access above.

4. Alternative Compliance
Alternative Compliance requests may be
considered for projects requiring compliance
with Section 8.7.3.M.1. These requests shall be
made per Administrative Manual Section 2-
06.5.3.E Architectural Variation Plan.
No Comment – No Alternative Compliance
requests have been submitted.
 the architecture company
3957 N Mountain Ave - FLD Review tac# 25015 COT 3957 N Mountain Ave FLD
TD-DEV-0725-00191
Date: 10/01/25
Page 4 of 4
UDC Administrative Manual
Section 2-06.5 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT
(FLD) – Additional Requirements
Design Professional's Comment:
5.3 Additional Information
E. Architectural Variation Plan:
When applicable, an Architectural Variation
Plan (AVP) is required in accordance with
Section 8.7.3.M.1 of the UDC as follows:
Not Applicable – An Architectural Variation
Plan (AVP) is not required for this FLD
development.
F. Privacy Mitigation Plan: When applicable,
a Privacy Mitigation Plan (PMP) is required in
accordance with Section 8.7.3.M.2.d of the
UDC as follows:
Required – A Privacy Mitigation Plan (PMP)
is required for this FLD development.
1. Identify on the tentative plat or site plan the
lots and/or units that must provide privacy
mitigation;
Requires Submittal – Identify on the tentative
plat or site plan that Lots 1, 2, 5 and 6 must
provide privacy mitigation.
2. Provide photographs of the site plan and
lots and/or units that must provide privacy
mitigation;
Requires Submittal – Submit photographs of
the site plan and photos of the views looking
west from Lots 1, 2, 5 and 6 that must
provide privacy mitigation.
.
3. Provide a written statement and drawings
(such as elevations and landscape plans)
demonstrating how the proposed mitigation
techniques comply with Section 8.7.3.M.2.b
of the UDC. The plan should include when
practicable additional design elements to
increase privacy such as the siting angle of
buildings, windows, and lots;
Requires Submittal – Submit a written
statement and the floor plan & elevation
drawings for the proposed units to be
constructed on Lots 1, 2, 5 and 6, and
include the proposed landscape plans to
demonstrate how proposed mitigation
techniques comply with Section 8.7.3.M.2.b
of the UDC.
End of Review 10/01/2025
Richard Fe Tom, AIA
City of Tucson, Design Professional
09/24/2025 External Reviewers - Pima County Addressing Standard REQUIRES RESUBMIT Nicholas Jordan nicholas.jordan@pima.gov 520-724-9623
Report Date: 09/24/2025
Description : Addressing review of TD-DEV-0725-00191 TP for Mountain Development
Address : , , ,
Record Type : Addressing
Document Filename : SUB1-TP
Reviewer Contact Information:
Corrections in the following table need to be applied before a plan is approved
Review Report - Resubmittal Requested
Application Number: P25AD00678
Comment ID Comment Date Corrections
Needed
Page Ref Reviewer : Department Review Comments
DSD Addressing
1 09/24/252025 Yes 2 Nicholas Jordan : DSD Addressing Adjust or add a mask to the lot labels so that they are visible.
2 09/24/252025 Yes 2 Nicholas Jordan : DSD Addressing Provide lot dimensions per Pima County Submittal Requirements.
3 09/24/252025 Yes 2 Nicholas Jordan : DSD Addressing If the private street is truly a PAAL and not classified as a street, it does not
qualify for a street name.
4 09/24/252025 Yes 2 Nicholas Jordan : DSD Addressing Provide a corner tie per Pima County Submittal Requirements.
General Comments
Pima County Public Works
201 N. Stone Ave.
Tucson, AZ 85701
If you have any questions please call 520- 724-6490 for an appointment to discuss this notice. If following discussions with staff you still disagree with the below listed deficiencies,
you may appeal to the Building Official in accordance with Pima County Code 15.04.060 by submitting the form posted on our web site with payment of appeal fee prior to permit
application expiration. Disputes about the interpretation of the Zoning Code may be appealed to a Pima County Board of Adjustment under A.R.S. § 11 -816 and P.C.C. § 18.93.060.
Please submit all plans, calculations and specifications to us electronically via the Digital Projects page in the online portal.
Re-Submittal Procedures
Please submit all documents using Citizen Access at permits.pima.gov (i.e. plans, drawings, calculations, quantities, exhibits, photographs, letters, etc.).
1. Please go to permits.pima.gov and login to your account to access review comments and resubmit.
2. If you have questions or need clarification regarding comments, please contact the reviewer.
3. Provide a response to each correction comment.
4. To resubmit, upload revised full plan set.
Should the resubmittal not completely address this request for corrections, the application maybe denied requiring a new application and payment all applicable
review fees in accordance withA.R.S. § 11-1605.
10/16/2025 External Reviewers - Tucson Electric Power (TEP) Standard REQUIRES RESUBMIT CDRC​
Permit Number: TD-DEV-0725-00191

Permit Type: Development Package

Description: Submitting a Development Package and Tentative Plat for a 7-lot single-family Flexible Lot Development (FLD) at 3957 N Mountain Ave (±0.59 acres). Project includes landscape, grading, floodplain, open space, and sidewalk circulation. A neighborhood meeting was held on May 21th, 2025, with notices mailed and emailed to property owners within 300 feet, per UDC Section 3.2.2.C.1.b. This submittal complies with UDC Section 8.7.3 (FLD) and Administrative Manual Section 2-06.

Address: Main Address: 3957 N MOUNTAIN AV TUCSON 85719

Parcel: 11302001H

City of Tucson Project?: [none]

Project Name/Title: 3957 N Mountain Ave – FLD Residential Development



Tucson Electric Power Co. (TEP) has reviewed the tentative plat submitted for review on October 14, 2025. TEP is unable to approve the plat at this time. There is an existing Public Utility Easement on the property. The plat must show the easement recording information correctly (Docket-13267 at Page-4337). TEP has existing underground cable within Mountain Avenue that must be shown on the plat. Attached for your information is TEP’s facilities map.



If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (520) 965-4030.



Thank you,



Liza Castillo

Right-of-Way Consultant for

Tucson Electric Power Co.

Land Resources

(520) 965-4030

tepdevrev@tep.com
09/26/2025 NPPO Standard REQUIRES RESUBMIT Please see site landscape comments for NPPO requirements.

Thank you.
Chad Keller, RLA
chad.keller@tucsonaz.gov
09/22/2025 ROW Engineering Review Standard REQUIRES RESUBMIT Please provide a comment response letter addressing the following comments.
1. Show Vertical curb per PAG SD 209 on Roger Rd
2. New sidewalk should be 6' on Roger Rd
3. Show ADA ramps at street intersections
4. Minimum width between arterial/collector roadway and street/driveway is 150', TSMR will be required
5. Show radius for curb returns per Street Design Guide
6. Show onsite sidewalk connection at Mountain Ave.
7. Show stop signs and private street sign (label new private street)
8. Show proper radius for private street dedication (typ.)
DTM Comment File as been added to attachments
Contact Jesus.Villezcas@tucsonaz.gov if you have any questions
10/01/2025 Site Engineering Standard REQUIRES RESUBMIT TD-DEV-0725-00191
3957 N MOUNTAIN AV

Site Engineering Comments are as follows:

1. A comprehensive drainage report is required to address first-flush retention and balanced-basin detention in accordance with chapters 2 and 3 of the DSSDR.
2. Pedestrian Circulation is required to connect all buildings, dumpster areas, and the sidewalk on the street frontage per TSM 7-01.3. 3. Provide connectivity to Mountain along the south side of the site.
3. The grade percentages on Sheet G1 do not appear to coincide with the elevation changes and distances between the spot elevations shown.
4. Delineate City recognized floodplain on eastern side of project
5. Provide a Geotech report and percolation test to address grading setbacks from residential structures and walls.
6. When a stormwater harvesting basin is located adjacent to a parking area, the inlet shall be sized to prevent ponding greater than 1 foot deep during the 100-year event within the parking area. DSSDR 5.3

Ryan Insalaco
Engineering Associate
ryan.insalaco@tucsonaz.gov
09/26/2025 Site Landscape Standard REQUIRES RESUBMIT CDRC TRANSMITTAL
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
REVIEWER: CHAD KELLER, RLA
SITE LANDSCAPE/NATIVE PLANT PRESERVATION SECTION

PROJECT: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE AND TENTATIVE PLAT FOR A 7-LOT SINGLE-FAMILY FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD)
ACTIVITY NO: TD-DEV-0725-00191
ADDRESS: 3957 N MOUNTAIN AV
ZONING: R-2 RESIDENCE ZONE
LAND USE: FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT

This plan has been reviewed for compliance with applicable development criteria in the City of Tucson Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-11 and Technical Manual (TM) Section for landscape, native plants, and water harvesting.

Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all of the Site Landscape and NPPO Section review comments have been addressed.

SITE LANDSCAPE/NPPO SECTION COMMENTS:

1. The NPPO Exception waiver included with this submittal is not approvable. Aerial imagery indicates that protected native plants may be located within the project limits. If providing the NPPO Exception option 3.3 (provide documentation including, but is not limited to, photographs of the site taken from all sides of the property and a signed statement from the property owner that Protected Native Plants are not located on the subject site.) Include photo documentation and signature by the owner of the property.

SECTION 2.11.0.0 NATIVE PLANT PRESERVATION PLAN REQUIREMENTS. See 2-11.3.0 PERMITTED EXCEPTIONS: Requests for exceptions from the Native Plant Preservation requirements in accordance with Sections 7.7.3.D.3 and .4 of the UDC are reviewed by the Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD). Submittals are required to document that the site does not contain, or the proposed project does not impact, Protected Native Plants. Submittal requirements shall consist of one or more of the following items:

NOTE: Items 3.1, 3.2 and 3.4 below require one of the plant professionals to review and or produce and to sign off on all items required by the NPPO Ordinance.

- 3.1. An aerial photograph, taken within a maximum of three years of submittal, of the site at a minimum 1-inch equals 100 feet that delineates the site boundaries and clearly shows the absence of plants within those boundaries or a site plan that clearly shows that construction will not impact any plants. Any aerial photograph submitted, which was taken more than one year prior to submittal, shall be accompanied by a letter stating that the site is substantially unchanged from the date of the aerial photograph.
- 3.2 A signed statement from one of the plant professionals listed in Section 7.7.4.D, Professional Expertise, of the UDC who has visited the site and verified that Viable Protected Native Plants are not located on the subject site.
- 3.3 Other documentation, acceptable to the PDSD Director, which clearly indicates that the site does not contain, or the project will not impact, Protected Native Plants. Such documentation includes, but is not limited to, photographs of the site taken from all sides of the property and a signed statement from the property owner that Protected Native Plants are not located on the subject site.
- 3.4 Based on factors such as the size of the site, site location, topography, and proximity to significant natural features, the PDSD Director may require submittal of specific items above.

2. SEE PRE-APPLICATION MEETING COMMENTS FOR FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENTS ON THE TDC ONLINE PORTAL -- TP-PRE-0425-00069 HELD 4/24/25. BELOW ARE SOME REQUIREMENTS THAT SHALL BE INCLUDED WITH THIS DP FOR FLD APPROVAL.

3. See UDC 8.7.3.F: OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS. See Table 8.7.3-2 for Functional Open Space Standards. Include graphic representation of the required open space and calculations per Table 8.7.3-2.

4. UDC 8.7.3.F.2 CONFIGURATION AND LOCATION OF FUNCTIONAL OPEN SPACE WITHIN AN FLD PROJECT ARE AS FOLLOWS: a. FLD projects five acres and less. Functional open space amenities should be configured as contiguous areas but may also be incorporated into the design of other elements on the site, such as detention/retention basins and buffers, to make those areas functional.

5. Depress Functional Open Space landscape planting areas 6 inches to maximize rainwater harvesting on site. COMMERCIAL RAINWATER HARVESTING STANDARDS ARE NOT REQUIRED WITHIN FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELPMENTS.

6. Check with site engineering and site zoning for wall heights and requirements associated with the height of the wall. Per the site landscape code, a 5’ masonry wall along the south property line for the entire width of the parking area is required. For more information on the location of the screen wall and landscape border requirements see UDC 7.6.5.C.

7. There are two required street landscape borders on this site and two interior landscape borders. The table has 1 street landscape border and 3 interior borders. Please update the table and add a callout to each of the borders that indicate the border number per your border table.

8. The required parking lot canopy tree to the west of the parking area needs to be within 40 feet of the parking stall. Adjust accordingly.

9. Ensure that all shrubs located within the sight visibility triangle will not exceed 30 inches in height at maturity. Leucophyllum candidum shrub variety can reach a height of 5 feet.
10. Provide the development package case number, TD-DEV-0725-00191, adjacent to the title block on all site landscape sheets, per Administrative Manual 2-06.4.3

11. Prior to Site Landscape Development Package approval, please make sure Site Zoning and Site Engineering comments are addressed.

Thank you.
Chad Keller, RLA
Landscape Architect
chad.keller@tucsonaz.gov
520.837.4923
10/16/2025 Site Zoning Standard REQUIRES RESUBMIT CDRC TRANSMITTAL


FROM:
Bobby Parsons
PDSD Zoning Review Section

PROJECT:
7 lot single family FLD 3957 N Mountain Ave Tucson, AZ 85719
Development Package (1st Review)
TD-DEV-0725-00191

TRANSMITTAL DATE: 10/16/2025
DUE DATE: 10/1/2025

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.

This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC) and the UDC Technical Standards Manual (TSM).

The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az

This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC & TSM requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above

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 September 3, 2026.

SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS)
Section

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD) - ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.1.1 PURPOSE
This standard has been prepared for the purpose of informing applicants of the submittal and review requirements for development package documents to assure proper and adequate information is presented in a consistent manner, thereby providing the basis for an efficient and timely review. The development package documents are prepared in support of applications for building permits and related reviews.

The information that is requested establishes the basis upon which the project will be approved and could affect what is required of the property in the future, should there be a proposal for expansion or for a different use of the property.

This standard does not waive any applicable city regulations or codes.

2-06.1.2 APPICABILITY
This standard shall be used for all site plans and tentative plats submitted to PDSD for review.

2-06.2.1 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Development Package applications are available from PDSD. Completed applications and accompanying materials shall be submitted to PDSD. Incomplete or inaccurate applications will not be accepted, nor will any application in which the pre-application conference or neighborhood meeting requirements have not been met. The types of documents and the specific number of copies required of each of the documents are on the PDSD website or may be obtained from PDSD. Resubmittals of development packages require a comment response letter that details how all previous comments have been addressed. Provide the same number of copies of the comment response letter as plans provided.
The following documents and information shall be submitted upon application:

2-06.2.1 Application Form
A completed application signed by the property owner or authorized designee;

2-06.2.2 Development Package
A development package must be prepared to the format and content requirements described herein;

2-06.2.3 Related Reviews
In addition to the plan process, a project may require review for other types of plans and documents. The applications for those processes are submitted to the appropriate department for review and approval. These related reviews can be applied for so that review can occur concurrently with the development package application. However, it must be understood that, should the related application be approved subject to conditions or denied, this may affect the;

2-06.2.4 Concurrent Reviews
The development package is designed to allow for concurrent review of any site related reviews. Concurrent review means that all plans and documents needed for the review are submitted as one package. Examples of site related reviews include but are not limited to: site plans, landscape plans, NPPO plans, water harvesting plans, grading plans, SWPPP plans, floodplain use permits, and overlay reviews. Separate applications are often required for the different site related reviews even if the plans are submitted concurrently; and,

2-06.2.5 Fees
Fees in accordance with Section 4-01.0.0, Development Review Fee Schedule.

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS
2-06.3.8 - The north arrow, contour interval, and scale as applicable to each sheet should be placed together in the upper right corner of each sheet.

1. COMMENT: Please include a scale applicable to each sheet as noted by the standard above.

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.7 - General Notes
The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable.

2-06.4.7.A - Zoning and Land Use Notes

2-06.4.7.A.4 - Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses.

2. COMMENT: Please clarify if the units are attached or detached and include the associated Use Specific Standard 8.7.3 as noted by the standard above.

2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide:

2-06.4.7.A.8.a - Floor area for each building;

3. COMMENT: Please include the floor area for each building as noted by the standard above.

2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Percentage and area in square feet of building and accessory building coverage;

4. COMMENT: Please provide the information as noted by the standard above including percentage and area in square feet of each building.

2-06.4.7.B - Drainage Notes
List the following notes as appropriate:

2-06.4.7.C.3.b - "Total miles of new private streets is ____________."

5. COMMENT: Plans currently call out the street as a proposed 36’ Ingress/Egress and Utility Easement however General Note 10 calls it a Private Street. Please clarify.

2-06.4.7.E - Wastewater Management Notes
List the following notes as appropriate.

2-06.4.7.E.1.b - The following note will be placed on all plans/plats in instances where off-site sewer construction is required: "The required off-site public sanitary sewer line will be designed and constructed to Pima County Wastewater Management Department Standards."

6. COMMENT: Please include the general note stated in the standard above.

2-06.4.7.E.2.b - "A property owners' association will be formed to accept responsibility and liability for construction, maintenance, operation, and control of all private sewers." (This applies only if there is more than one lot within the development.)

7. COMMENT: Please include the general note as stated by the standard above.

2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions
The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided.

2-06.4.8.A - Provide site boundary/subdivision perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system.

8. COMMENT: The site boundary information for the East boundary appears to be labeled incorrectly. Please provide the correct boundary information.

2-06.4.8.B - All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided.

9. COMMENT: The proposed 36’ Utility easement as noted on your plans will need to be recorded and that recordation information needs to be included on the site plan prior to final approval.

2-06.4.8.C - The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks.

10. COMMENT: Please include the information as noted by the standard above for the areas adjacent to the site including dimensioning widths, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks.

2-06.4.8.E.1 - For land that slopes less than approximately 1%, contour lines shall be drawn at intervals of not more than one foot. Spot elevations shall be provided at all breaks in grade and along all drainage channels or swales and at selected points not more than 100 feet apart in all directions.

11. COMMENT: If applicable, see Engineering comments in relation to the standard above.

2-06.4.8.E.2 - For land that slopes between approximately 1% and 5%, contour lines shall be drawn at intervals of not more than two feet.

12. COMMENT: If applicable, see Engineering comments in relation to the standard above.

2-06.4.8.F - Existing storm drainage facilities on and adjacent to the site will be shown.

13. COMMENT: If applicable, show existing drainage facilities adjacent to the site as noted by the standard above.

2-06.4.8.G - Other significant conditions on the site, such as major rock outcrops, structures, fences, walls, etc., shall be shown. These elements should be indicated in a different line weight than the proposed improvements and labeled "to be removed" or "to be retained."

14. COMMENT: Sheet 2 calls out an 8” block wall on the South and West property lines. Is the wall height provided on the plans correct?

2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development
The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes.

2-06.4.9.A - Draw in all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements.

15. COMMENT: Please include the information as noted by the standard above.

2-06.4.9.C - If the project has common areas, label each common area individually with a separate letter designation. Enclose with a solid line each common area, private street, etc., that will have separate restrictions, a separate homeowners' association, or any common area that is separated by a public right-of-way.

16. COMMENT: Enclose the common areas with a solid line as noted by the standard above.

2-06.4.9.E - Proposed land splits or existing lot lines shall be drawn on the plan with dimensions and the identification number and approximate square footage of each lot. (Please be aware that, if land division occurs and the number of lots falls within the definition of subdivision, a subdivision plat is required.) Land splits require a separate permit and review.

17. COMMENT: Dimension each lot line as noted by the standard above. Also, the boundary dimension provided along Mountain Avenue is incorrect. Please dimension this boundary accurately.

2-06.4.9.H.4 - Indicate if existing streets are public or private; provide street names, widths, curbs, sidewalks, and utility locations, all fully dimensioned.

18. COMMENT: Please provide the information as noted by the standard above, including across both Mountain Avenue and Roger Road.

2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

19. COMMENT: Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces fully dimensioned as noted by the standard above. Also, please include a typical parking location detail for both ADA and regular parking spaces.

2-06.4.9.L - All proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. The easements may have to be recorded and the recordation information added to the development package prior to approval.

20. COMMENT: If applicable, please draw, label, and dimension proposed easements as noted by the standard above. These easements will need to be recorded and added to the development package prior to approval.

2-06.4.9.M - Grading Plan

2-06.4.9.M.2 - Concurrent Review. For all projects, grading plans may be included in the development package and will be reviewed concurrently.

2-06.4.9.M.3 - Tentative Plats - Non Concurrent Review. A separate grading plan may be submitted after the second resubmittal of the tentative plat; however, the grading plan cannot be approved unless it is conformance with an approved tentative plat.
Note: In the case of a tentative plat submitted in conjunction with a rezoning request, the tentative plat and grading plan cannot be approved until 30 days after adoption of the rezoning ordinance. See Section 3.5.3.K.6, Ordinance Effective Date, of the UDC.

2-06.4.9.N - In conjunction with a drainage report or statement, as applicable, prepared in accordance with the City Engineer's instructions and procedures, the following information will be indicated on the development package documents. For additional information regarding drainage standards, see the City of Tucson Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management.

21. COMMENT: Please see Site Engineering comments as related to the standard above.

2-06.4.9.N 1 - Show areas of detention/retention including 100-year ponding limits with water surface elevations.

22. COMMENT: Please see Site Engineering comments as related to the standard above.

2-06.4.9.P.1.b - Where sewers must be located in easements other than drainageways, the sewer and easement must be located entirely on one lot, or a note must be added to the plan which states the following. "No permits will be issued for any structures proposed to be built within a sewer easement."

23. COMMENT: If applicable, please include a general note as stated by the standard above.

2-06.4.9.P.1.c - The minimum width of sanitary sewer easements shall be 20 feet. If applicable, indicate that off-site easements will be recorded by separate instrument. Easements may have to be recorded and the recordation information added to the development package prior to approval.

24. COMMENT: If applicable, please include the information for the proposed utility easement as noted by the standard above.

2-06.4.9.R - Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual.

25. COMMENT: Please demonstrate pedestrian circulation connecting all buildings, dumpster locations, and sidewalks as noted by the standard above per TSM 7-01.

2-06.4.9.S - Show existing or proposed pedestrian circulation along abutting rights-of-way. Such sidewalks must comply with accessibility requirements for the physically disabled and the design criteria in Section 10-01.0.0, Street Technical Standards, of the Technical Standards Manual.

26. COMMENT: Draw, label, and dimension all pedestrian circulation along abutting rights of way as noted by the standard above.

2-06.4.9.T - Show refuse collection areas, including locations of dumpsters, screening location and materials, and vehicle maneuverability, fully dimensioned, and access route. If dumpster service is not proposed, indicate type of service. For specific information on refuse collection, refer to Section 8-01.0.0, Solid Waste and Recycle Disposal, Collection, and Storage, of the Technical Standards Manual. Refuse collection on all projects shall be designed based on that section, even if collection is to be contracted to a private firm.

27. COMMENT: Please clarify how trash will be addressed as noted by the standard above.
2-06.4.9.V - For gang mailboxes indicate location to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements, such as pedestrian accessibility, utilities, and landscaping.

28. COMMENT: Indicate with a general note what type of mail delivery this development will utilize as noted by the standard above. Gang mailboxes should be connected to pedestrian circulation paths.

2-06.4.9.X - Show compliance with landscaping and screening requirements by locations, material descriptions, and dimensions. Specific plant or hardscape material shall be detailed on a landscape plan. A detailed landscape plan is required. In accordance with Section 2-11.0.0, Landscape Plan Requirements.

29. COMMENT: See Landscape review comments as it relates to the standard above.

2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD - ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS)

2-06.5.2.A - Provide, by note on the plat, the developable area calculation for the entire FLD; and,

30. COMMENT: Please provide the developable area calculation for the entire FLD as noted by the standard above. Developable area is defined in UDC 11.4.5.

2-06.5.3 Additional Information

2-06.5.3.A. Reduced Perimeter Yards
Street perimeter yards along interior street rights-of-way and perimeter yards between interior lots may be modified in accordance with Section 8.7.3.L, Perimeter Yards on Interior Lots, of the UDC. Applicants requesting a perimeter yard reduction must indicate what the required and reduced perimeter yards are and their locations. Applicants requesting a reduced street perimeter yard must provide a written description of how the reduced yard will enhance the architectural design or the vehicular circulation in the FLD and submit a transportation statement, or if required by the Department of Transportation, a traffic impact analysis;

31. COMMENT: Please include a written description of how the reduced street perimeter yard will enhance the architectural design or the vehicular circulation in the FLD and submit a transportation statement as noted by the standard above. Dimension all setbacks from buildings to adjacent parcel lines on the site plan, including any 0’ setbacks.

2-06.5.3.D - Building Elevations
Provide dimensioned building elevations of all proposed units. The elevations can be preliminary drawings. The model home construction plans will be used to determine exact setbacks and screening requirements at the time of application for building permits;

32. COMMENT: Please provide the building elevation within the footprint of each proposed building as noted by the standard above. Label elevation drawings as “For Reference Only”.

2-06.5.3.E - Architectural Variation Plan
When applicable, an architectural variation plan is required in accordance with Section 8.7.3.M.1 of the UDC as follows. These comments are provided as a courtesy. See separate review comments from “Design Review Standard” as well.

33. COMMENT: Please provide an architectural variation plan in accordance with UDC Section 8.7.3.M.1.

2-06.5.3.E.1 - Identify on the tentative plat or site plan the lots and/or units that must provide architectural variation; and,

34. COMMENT: Please identify which lots must provide architectural variation as noted by the standard above.

2-06.5.3.E.2 - Provide a written statement and drawings (such as elevations and building footprints) demonstrating how the proposed architectural variation techniques comply with Section 8.7.3.M.1 of the UDC.

35. COMMENT: Please provide a written statement and drawings demonstrating how the proposed architectural variations comply with UDC Section 8.7.3.M.1 as noted by the standard above.

2-06.5.3.F - Privacy Mitigation Plan
When applicable, a privacy mitigation plan is required in accordance with Section 8.7.3.M.2.d of the UDC as follows:

36. COMMENT: Please demonstrate that the plans meet the minimum requirements of 8.7.3.M.2.a which states “where a single family attached or multi-family FLD project is adjacent to existing single family residential development, the FLD shall provide buffering in order to preserve the privacy of the existing residential development”.

2-06.5.3.F.1 - Identify on the tentative plat or site plan the lots and/or units that must provide privacy mitigation;

37. COMMENT: Please include the information as noted by the standard above for the lots that must provide privacy mitigation.

2-06.5.3.F.2 - Provide photographs of the site and its interface with the adjacent properties documenting the existing conditions; and,

38. COMMENT: Please include the information as noted by the standard above.

2-06.5.3.F.3 - Provide a written statement and drawings (such as elevations and landscape plans) demonstrating how the proposed mitigation techniques comply with Section 8.7.3.M.2.b of the UDC. The plan should include when practicable additional design elements to increase privacy such as the siting angle of buildings, windows, and lots;

39. COMMENT: Please include a written statement and drawings demonstrating how you meet the standard noted above.

2-06.5.3.G - Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions

2-06.5.3.G.1 - Provide three copies of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) regarding the homeowner's association's responsibility for the ownership and maintenance of commonly-owned property.

40. COMMENT: If applicable, please provide the information as noted by the standard above.

2-06.5.3.G.2 - Provide two copies of the protective covenants or common use agreements for any shared areas being established by easements over individually-owned property.

41. COMMENT: If applicable, please provide the information as noted by the standard above.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Bobby Parsons at Robert.Parsons@tucsonaz.gov.

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package
09/04/2025 CDRC Review Coordinator Express REVIEW COMPLETED EXTERNAL REVIEWERS
CDRC added. TEP, ADDRESSING, SWG USPS, and PAG to the workflow. Review request email sent to TEP, ADDRESSING. FYI email sent to, SWG USPS PAG.
09/25/2025 Commercial Plumbing Standard REVIEW COMPLETED
09/04/2025 External Reviewers - Pima Association of Governments Standard REVIEW COMPLETED FYI
CDRC sent FYI email sent to PAG, USPS, SWG. No further action is required.
09/04/2025 External Reviewers - Southwest Gas Standard REVIEW COMPLETED FYI
CDRC sent FYI email sent to PAG, USPS, SWG. No further action is required.
09/04/2025 External Reviewers - United States Postal Service (USPS) Standard REVIEW COMPLETED FYI
CDRC sent FYI email sent to PAG, USPS, SWG. No further action is required.
09/25/2025 Fire New Construction Standard REVIEW COMPLETED
09/03/2025 OK to Submit - Engineering Fast REVIEW COMPLETED