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: DP14-0126
Parcel: 99999999A

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: DEV PKG

Permit Number - DP14-0126
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
07/28/2014 PGEHLEN1 START PLANS SUBMITTED Approved
07/30/2014 MARTIN BROWN COT NON-DSD FIRE Denied No Parking - Fire Lane signs required. Please refer to Appendix D of the 2012 International Fire Code for spacing and location requirements. Indicate on plans.
07/31/2014 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: La Estancia De Tucson Tentative Plat Addendum - Phasing
Development Package (1st Review)
DP14-0126

TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 6, 2014

DUE DATE: August 25, 2014

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a 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.

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

2-06.3.5 - A three-inch by five-inch space shall be reserved in the lower right quadrant of each sheet for an approval stamp.

1. COMMENT: Provide the PDSD Development Package approval stamp on all sheets. The required stamp can be found at http://pdsd.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/development-permits under Development Package.

2-06.3.12 - An index of sheets in the development package shall be provided on the first sheet.

2. COMMENT: As the Landscape sheets are part of this review include them in the "SHEET INDEX" on sheet 1 of 3.

2-06.4.2.D - The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx).

3. COMMENT: As the Landscape sheets are part of this review the total number of sheets should be 23.

2-06.4.3 - The administrative street address and relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

4. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP14-0126, adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

2-06.4.9.G - If the project is to be phased, provide calculations, setbacks, etc., to indicate that each phase complies with all requirements as a separate entity. Show phase lines on the drawing. Show and label any temporary improvements that may be needed to make the site function for each phase as one entity. If such temporary improvements are off the site of the phase under consideration, a temporary easement or other legal documentation to assure legal use of the property is required. Note recording information.

5. COMMENT: Sheet 1 of 3, General Note 2 references "PHASING" and "SPECIAL/OPTIONAL" notes that are to be "MODIFIED BY THIS ADDENDUM". It is not clear what was modified. Provide any and all of the "PHASING" and "SPECIAL/OPTIONAL" notes from S05-098 that are still applicable on this development package.

2-06.4.9.H - Proposed Traffic Circulation

2-06.4.9.H.1 - Proposed traffic circulation will be designed in accordance with Section 10-01.0.0, Street Technical Standards, of the Technical Standards Manual, to include streets, intersections, street names, right-of-way widths, curve radii of centerlines and curb returns, and proposed improvements, such as pavement, curbs, access points (driveways), accessible ramps, and sidewalks. Street improvements, such as sidewalks, curbs, pavement, and accessible ramps, do not need to be drawn on the plan if such information is provided on typical street cross sections.
Please be aware that, if a new street is created (for other than for subdivisions) which divides the property into two or more lots, a subdivision plat is required (refer to the definition of subdivision in Section 11.4.20 of the UDC).

6. COMMENT: Provide a note on the plan that lists the two (2) "ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF REQURIED ONSITE ROADWAY INPROVEMENT" agreements and the recordation information on the development package.

7. COMMENT: Provide a detail for the "TYPE 4 OBJECT MARKER" referenced on the development package.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package
.
08/08/2014 RONALD BROWN ZONING HC REVIEW Reqs Change 1. Insure compliance with the Inclusive Home Design Ordinance Number 10463 and provide a note on the drawings to that effect.
2. Insure accessibility to all common areas:
a. Playground areas and play ground equipment
b. Swimming Pool
c. Community Building
d. Event Lawn
as per the 2012 IBC, Section 1103.1 and 1109.4 and the 2009 ICC A117.1, sections 1101, 1108 and 1109.
END OF REVIEW
08/14/2014 LAITH ALSHAMI ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 08/20/2014,


SUBJECT: La Estancia De Tucson-Phasing of Phase I
DP14-0126, T15S, R15E, SECTIONS 18 & 19
Reference: S05-098

RECEIVED: Tentative Plat Addendum on July 18, 2014

The subject project has been reviewed. The project can not be approved at this time. Address the following comments before review can continue. Prepare a detailed response that explains the revisions that where made and references the exact locations where the revisions were made:

Development Package:

1. Provide a three-inch by five-inch space in the lower right quadrant of each sheet for an approval stamp (A.M. 2-06.3.5).
2. Provide an index of sheets on the first sheet as required by (A.M. 2-06.3.12).
3. If the Landscape Sheets are part of the Package, revise the sheet numbers of the Package in accordance with the requirements of A.M. 2-06.4.2.D.
4. Provide the subject project Administrative Address in accordance with A.M. 2-06.4.3.
5. The Development Package Case number is DP14-0126. Provide, on every sheet, the correct case number (A.M. 2-06.4.3).
6. Provide, on the plan, all applicable general notes (A.M. 2-06.4.7).
7. Show, on the plan, the tie between the basis of bearing and one of the corners of the parcel (A.M. 2-06.4.8.A).
8. Ensure that all required drainage structures for the proposed sub-phases will be constructed at the proper time to serve the different sub-phases appropriately. Provide on the plan a time schedule that shows when the different drainage structures will be constructed (A.M. 2-06.4.9.N.).

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4933 or Laith.Alshami@tucsonaz.gov

RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Development Plan Package
08/15/2014 PGEHLEN1 COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Approved Permits Plus has been locked out. Please consider this TDOT's comments and approval.

Approved by TDOT Permit Center/Traffic No issues at this time.

It is my understanding that since this is a phasing addendum no modifications, according to current standards, are required to roadway details due to previous PAD approvals.

Zelin
08/22/2014 PGEHLEN1 COT NON-DSD ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Approved The Tentative Plat Addendum has been reviewed on behalf of Environmental Services and is approved. If there are any questions, I can be reached at kperry@perryengineering.net
08/25/2014 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change 1) Provide confirmation of approval and acceptance from the City of Tucson Parks and Recreation Department for the proposed parks and Julian Wash Greenway.

2) Provide an update for the Native Plant Preservation Plans.
UDC 7.7.3. Revise the landscape plans to incorporate mitigation.

3) Provide evidence of approval from the TDOT Landscape Architect.

4) Provide recording information for the monument easement at Wilmot Rd.

5) Revise the landscape plans to indicate the phasing proposed on the plat.
08/26/2014 PATRICIA GEHLEN ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Reqs Change This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items.:

1) Two rolled sets of the plans
2) All items requested by review staff
3) All items needed to approve this project.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
09/02/2014 CPIERCE1 REJECT SHELF Completed