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: Requires Resubmit
Review Details: LAND DIVISION/SUBDIVISION v.1
Plan Number - TD-DIV-1025-00097
Review Name: LAND DIVISION/SUBDIVISION v.1
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| External Reviewers - Pima County Wastewater (RWRD) Standard | APPROVED | PC Wastewater “Approval letter provided | |||
| External Reviewers - Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) Standard | NOT REQUIRED | Review not needed per Zoning Administrator, reviewed on TD-DEV-0324-00070 | |||
| External Reviewers - Tucson Electric Power (TEP) Standard | NOT REQUIRED | Review not needed per Zoning Administrator, reviewed on TD-DEV-0324-00070 | |||
| Residential Building Standard | NOT REQUIRED | ||||
| CDRC Post Review Express | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | ||||
| External Reviewers - Pima County Assessor Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | Office of the Pima County Assessor 240 N. Stone Ave. Tucson, Arizona 85701 SUZANNE DROUBIE PIMA COUNTY ASSESSOR TO: City of Tucson Development Services FROM: Karl Christensen GIS Analyst II Pima County Assessor’s Office Karl.Christensen@pima.gov (520)724-3125 DATE: October 31, 2025 RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding: (SUBMITTAL 1) TD-DIV-1025-00097 – TUCSON HOUSE - FINAL PLAT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ___ ___ Plat meets Assessor’s Office requirements. ___X___ Plat does not meet Assessor’s Office requirements. COMMENTS: INITIAL NOTES: * Can some clarity be provided for the labeling annotation of the Elevators mentioning Unit numbers (10 & 4), either with a change to the plat itself or at least in a response to this review. Is the intent for those elevator boundaries on each Level within each Unit to actually be a part/extension of Units 10 & 4? …Or are they CE/LCEs with names that happen to also be Unit #s? …Or is it just a case of the Unit # from a copy/paste not being updated to match the Unit of each Level? I’m sure you can see from those questions where the provided annotation information is causing confusion. * Can some clarity be provided as well for why the “Limited Common Element 1” boundary is floating out in space nowhere near the exterior of the building (and thus Units) itself, when the CC&Rs seem to indicate the LCE perimeter should be the perimeter of things like the balconies and such? * Please ensure a tie is provided for the Basement to the Subdivision boundary (as “Limited Common Element 1” does on Sheet 2), or to a point on a Unit boundary on another Level, or to the “Limited Common Element 1” boundary. Please also ensure that the “Limited Common Element 1” boundary ties to Unit boundaries (it looks like there’s linework for that tie, just not labeling annotation and dimensions/Line Table codes yet). See below for the full boilerplate list of generalized requirements the Assessor’s Office reviews Final Plats for, with items in this plat needing improvement to receive approval underlined and/or bolded, along with a descriptive note: • The title block must be in the lower right-hand corner and it must have the number of Lots or Units or Blocks or Elements or any combination of these. It must have the Common Areas listed if there are any. It must have the section, township, and range and if it is a resubdivision, it must mention the plat name and the map & plat or sequence number. • The Location Map must be in the upper right-hand corner and must have the section, township, and range. The project area should be outlined and/or have an arrow pointing to it. Location Map Note: Just a heads up, the Subdivision boundary represented in the Location Map includes the property with APN: 115-18-0250 as well as the “NOT A PART” residue property (presumably a relic of the creation of the Location Map for the Development Plan), rather than the true Subdivision boundary of this plat. • General notes must have the gross area of the subdivision, the number of Lots and/or Units, the number of miles of new road, public or private (even if the number is 0), and the Basis of Bearings. • There must be a section tie, with a bearing and dimension from the section corner or quarter corner to the point of tie on the subdivision. Section Tie Note: If at all possible, it would be great to have a tie to a Section or Quarter Corner, not just a 1/16th Corner. • The perimeter line must be solid and the heaviest lineweight on the plat. The Lot and/or Unit lines and Common Area and/or Element lines must be solid and the next heaviest. Lines for easements, erosion setbacks, floodplain lines, etc. should be the lightest lineweight and be dashed or dot-dashed. • There must be bearings and dimensions for the perimeter and all Lot/Unit lines and all Common Areas/Elements. Bearing/ Dimensions Notes: * I’m sure this is obviously something you already knew when you submitted, but Sheet 5 showing ‘LEVEL 1’ does not have the Line Table codes you seem to have prepared for it on Sheet 16. Those will need to be added. * It also looks like there was quite a bit of copy/pasting of Sheet items for each of the individual ‘LEVEL #’ Sheets, so you’ll need to decide if each Sheet will have Line Table codes (as implied by the copy/pasted “NOTES” section in the top-right corner of each Sheet), or if you’ll instead indicate somewhere that a specific ‘LEVEL’ Sheet is typical for other ‘LEVEL’ Sheets. * It appears there are differences in Unit interior element design between the LEVEL 1 Units and LEVEL 2-17 Units, while having the same exterior dimensions. You’ll want to find a way to indicate differences between Units on different LEVELs that aren’t typical. * Obviously there will also need to be dimensions for ‘Unit 17’ of ‘LEVEL 17’ on Sheet 13, and for the ‘CE Bs’ of ‘LEVEL 18’ on Sheet 14 (all of which are currently missing). • All lots and Common Areas must be numbered and have square footage. If the area is too small, there can be a table to the side for the square footage. Square Footage Notes: * I can see tables are being used on individual Sheets for size/volume of Units and Elements, but that they were copy/pasted. While the “Level # Summary” title of each table got updated on each Sheet, the Unit number did not (they’re all still “UNIT 02”). These should be updated, or the individual tables removed from individual Sheets since they aren’t strictly necessary due to the “LEVEL SUMMARY” tables on Sheet 3. * LEVELs 16-18 are missing size/volume tables for Units 16, 17, & CE Bs. on the individual ‘LEVEL #’ Sheets (13 & 14) and/or the “LEVEL SUMMARY” Sheet (3). A table for those will need to be added. * Please include the Square Footage of “Common Element A” on Sheet 2 (where there is already unfinished annotation for it) or in the General Notes. Please also remove the total Square Footage/Acreage for the Subdivision from Sheet 2, as it is listed in the General Notes and might cause confusion as to whether it is for the Subdivision as a whole or for “Common Element A”. Additionally, the plat has annotation showing the parent parcel APN (115-18-0220) and the 168,749 SqFt/3.874 Acre annotation is placed underneath that parent parcel label, seeming to imply that is the area of the parent parcel, which is incorrect. • All hatching, stippling, striping, etc. must be removed in the final plat, unless another agency requires it. If so, all lettering must have the hatching, etc. cut away so they are legible. • All streets must be named in the final plat, and have dimensions, bearings, and curve data. • All adjacent subdivisions should be named, with map and plat or sequence number in the appropriate areas around the subdivision. Ownership printed in the Dedication section or elsewhere in the plat will need to match Assessor data at Recordation. For reference, the Assessor’s Office currently recognizes ownership of APN 115-18-0220 as being held by: TUCSON HOUSE APARTMENTS LP; ATTN: HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NOTE: THE ASSESSOR’S CURRENT INVOLVEMENT IN PROCESSING ITS MAPS TO DIGITAL FORMAT IS EXPEDITED GREATLY BY EXCHANGE OF DIGITAL DATA. IN THE COURSE OF RECORDING THIS SUBDIVISION YOUR ASSISTANCE IN PROVIDING THIS OFFICE WITH AN AUTOCAD COPY WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED. AUTOCAD DWGS CAN BE SENT TO THE EMAIL ABOVE AND/OR ASRGIS@PIMA.GOV. THANK YOU FOR ANY DIGITAL DATA PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED. NOTE: THE ASSESSOR’S OFFICE FOLLOWS A.R.S. 33-1204. PURSUANT TO THIS STATUTE THE PROPERTIES WILL BE ASSIGNED A SINGLE ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER UNTIL A CONVEYANCE TO A NEW OWNER FOR A SPECIFIC UNIT IS FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE PIMA COUNTY RECORDER. |
|||
| Site Engineering Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | 1. Since the Plat contains more than one sheet provide a sheet index for the plat and fill in the sheet numbers on each sheet. 2. Ensure that sheet number references are filled in throughout the plat. 3. Ensure the square footage or acreage for Common Element A and Limited Comon Element 1 are filled out throughout the plat set. 4. The title report includes in schedule B part II an Easement from DK 11335 PG 866 and a DK 1955 PG 505 that are not shown or addressed on the plat. Revise/clarify as needed. Stephen Blood (520) 837-4958 Stephen.blood@tucsonaz.gov |
|||
| Site Zoning Standard | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Loran Shamis Principal Planner PROJECT: TD-DIV-1025-00097 Final Plat (1st Review) Tucson House Condominium Plat TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 3, 2025 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. 1. COMMENT: Address Site Engineering comments. 2. COMMENT: 2-07.5.3.B.3 : Delete the duplicate statement - “We, the undersigned, do hereby hold harmless the City of Tucson, its successors and assigns, their employees, officers, and agents from any and all claims for damages related to the use of the property depicted on this plat now and in the future by reason of flooding, flowage, erosion, or damage caused by water, whether surface flood or rainfall.” If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Loran Shamis at loran.shamis@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised final plat. |
|||
| CDRC Application Completeness Express | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| CDRC Review Coordinator Express | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC added Addressing, Assessors, ADOT, TEP, and SWG to the workflow. Review request email sent to Addressing, ADOT, and TEP. FYI, email sent to SWG. | |||
| Commercial Building Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Commercial Plumbing Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Design Review Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | Review not needed per Zoning Administrator | |||
| Entitlements Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | Review not needed per Zoning Administrator | |||
| External Reviewers - Pima County Addressing Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | Good morning, Pima County Addressing approves of TD-DIV-1025-00097 (Tucson House). Thank you, David Wilging Planner I - Addressing Division Pima County Development Services 201 N. Stone Avenue 1st Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701 520-724-6381 |
|||
| External Reviewers - Southwest Gas Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | CDRC sent FYI email sent to SWG. No further action is required. | |||
| Fire New Construction Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Historic Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | Review not needed per Zoning Administrator | |||
| New Services/JOC Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| OK to Submit - Engineering Fast | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| OK to Submit - Zoning Fast | REVIEW COMPLETED | ||||
| Real Estate Standard | REVIEW COMPLETED | Review not needed per Zoning Administrator |