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
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Permit Number - DP14-0179
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/13/2015 | CPIERCE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 01/15/2015 | PGEHLEN1 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Passed | RWRD review not needed for tentative plat. RWRD review and approval will be needed for the final plat |
| 01/20/2015 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | 201 N. STONE AV, 1ST FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 MICHELENE NOWAKADDRESSING REVIEW PH #: 721-9512 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: MICHELENE NOWAK, ADDRESSING REVIEW SUBJECT: DP14-0179 2225 EAST FORT LOWELL RD/TENTATIVE PLAT-2ND REVIEW DATE: JANUARY 20, 2015 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. 1.) Submit a 24 x 36 Reverse Reading Double Matte Photo Mylar of approved Final Plat to City Planning ***PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING MUST RECEIVE A COPY OF THE RECORDED FINAL PLAT PRIOR TO THE ASSIGNMENT OF ANY ADDRESSES. PLEASE COORDINATE THE DELIVERY AND RECORDATION OF THE MYLAR WITH THE CITY OF TUCSON PLANNING*** 2.) All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection. ***The Pima County Addressing Section can use digital CAD drawing files. These CAD files can be e-mailed to: CADsubmittals@pima.gov The digital CAD drawing files expedite the addressing and permitting processes when we are able to insert this digital data into the County’s Geographic Information System. Your support is greatly appreciated.*** |
| 01/21/2015 | MARTIN BROWN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 01/28/2015 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: January 29, 2015 DUE DATE: February 11, 2015 SUBJECT: 2225 E Fort Lowell Development Plan Package- 2nd Engineering Review TO: Perry Engineering, Attn: Kenny Perry, PE LOCATION: 2225 E Fort Lowell Rd; T13S R14E Sec29 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: DP14-0179 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package and Drainage Report (Perry Engineering, SEP14 revised 12JAN15). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administration Manual (AM) and Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Refer to the links for further clarification: http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az The following items need to be addressed: SITE PLAN: 11) Restated: AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan package and Keynote #16 to correctly reference the Near and Far side SVTs. The dimensions are correct and plan view shows the SVTs correctly however the Keynote has them reversed. 15) Provide a General Note on the Development Plan Package (DP14-0179) referencing the TSMR Case #, date of approval and any conditions (if applicable). 17) Provide a General Note on the Development Plan Package (DP14-0179) referencing the TSMR Case #, date of approval and any conditions (if applicable). 35) Provide a General Note on the Development Plan Package (DP14-0179) referencing the TSMR Case #, date of approval and any conditions (if applicable). 37) Provide a General Note on the Development Plan Package (DP14-0179) referencing the TSMR Case #, date of approval and any conditions (if applicable). NEW COMMENTS 1) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.3: Revise the development plan package, specifically Sheet C2, to label the filter fabric specifications for construction purposes. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan Package that addresses the comments provided above. For expedite purposes the development plan package can be reviewed over the counter (PDSD Engineering Division comment only) for stamp approval once all items have been addressed. Please call to schedule an appointment when ready. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Department |
| 02/04/2015 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Michael St Paul Planning Technician PROJECT: DP14-0179 (2nd review) 2225 East Fort Lowell Road Residential Subdivision R-1 Zone TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 4, 2015 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Unified Development Code, The Administrative and Technical Manuals were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Package Standards listed in section 2-06 of the City of Tucson Administrative Manual. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC). 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 requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above 1. 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 . 2. 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 2-06.1.0 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 2-06.3.1 - Each sheet shall measure 24 inches by 36 inches and include a minimum one inch margin on left side and one-half inch margin on all other sides to facilitate efficient record keeping. A larger sheet format may be used with the approval of the Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD). 2-06.3.2 - All mapped data shall be drawn at an engineering scale having no more than 50 feet to the inch. This scale is the minimum accepted to assure the plan will be legible during review and when digitized and/or reduced for record-keeping purposes. The same scale shall be used for all sheets within the set. Smaller scales (60:1 or greater) may be used for some or all of the sheets with the prior approval of PDSD when it is determined legibility and the ability to be digitized and/or reduced for archiving will not be affected. 2-06.3.3 - All lettering and text (upper or lower case), and numbering, shall be a minimum of three-thirty-seconds inches in height to assure the plan will be legible during review and when digitized and/or reduced for archiving. 2-06.3.4 - A title block shall be provided in the lower right quadrant of each sheet. 1) COMMENT: Okay 2-06.3.6 - Provide a blank three-inch by five-inch block in the lower right corner of the plan adjacent to the title block on the first sheet of the development package for use by Pima County Addressing. 2) COMMENT: Provided. 2-06.3.7 - A small, project-location map shall be provided in the upper right corner of the cover sheet. 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet: 2-06.4.2.A - The proposed name of the project or subdivision, or if there is no name, the proposed tenant's name; 3) COMMENT: Provided. 2-06.4.2.C - The number of proposed lots and common areas are to be noted. If the subdivision is a Flexible Lot Development (FLD), a condominium, or a similar type of residential subdivision utilizing special provisions of the UDC, it shall be so noted; 4) COMMENT: Provided. 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. 5) COMMENT: Provide the development package number (DP14-0179) (Provided) and the subdivision plat number, when assigned in the lower-right corner near the title block of each sheet. 2-06.4.4 - The project-location map to be located on the first sheet of the development package in the upper right corner, shall cover approximately one square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of three inch equals one mile, and provide the following information. 2-06.4.2.A - Show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area; 6) COMMENT: Completed. 2-06.4.2.B - Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and all streets that abut the subject property; and, 7) COMMENT: Provided. 2-06.4.2.C - Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled. 8) COMMENT: Provided. 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.C - Streets and Roads Notes 2-06.4.7.C.2 - List the following note on all development package documents: "No structure or vegetation shall be located or maintained so as to interfere with the sight visibility triangles in accordance with Section 10-01.5.0, Sight Visibility, of the Technical Standards Manual." 9) COMMENT: Provided. 2-06.4.7.C.3 - Provided the following notes as applicable: 2-06.4.7.C.3.b - "Total miles of new private streets is ____________." 10) COMMENT: Provided. 2-06.4.7.D - Utilities Note All development package documents are to include the following note: "Any relocation or modification of existing utilities and/or public improvements necessitated by the proposed development will be at no expense to the public." 11) COMMENT: Provided. 2-06.4.7.E - Wastewater Management Notes List the following notes as appropriate. 2-06.4.7.E.2 - The following notes will be provided on the plans/plats if private sewers are proposed for construction on the property. If no homeowners' association is being formed, use the following note: "Maintenance and operation of the private sanitary sewer to its point of connection to the public sanitary sewer is the responsibility of each and every property owner within this development." 12) COMMENT: Provided. 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. 13) COMMENT: Provided. 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. 14) COMMENT: Provide both the existing and future right-of-ways and curb locations, with dimensions, on the plans. (The F/ROW is 100 feet and the F/ sidewalk area is 11 feet.) Correctly identify the future curb as describe by code. You may also depict the actual location. 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." 15) COMMENT: Provided. 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.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). 16) COMMENT: Street access is required to all lots in a proposed subdivision (UDC Section 7.8.2). See comments eighteen and nineteen. 2-06.4.9.H.3 - Indicate fire circulation, including accessibility and vehicle maneuverability. 17) COMMENT: Competed. 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. 18) COMMENT: The visitor parking may be placed on individual lots if it meets the following criteria in the UDC Sections 7.4.6.B.2.a (1), (2) and (3). Also see 2-06.4.9.H.7 below. There inadequate maneuverability for the parking and vehicle access to lot 4. Provide the TSMR information for the narrow private street. 7.4.6. MOTOR VEHICLE USE AREA DESIGN CRITERIA 2. Parking for Certain Residential Uses a. Individual Residential Lots Visitor parking spaces on individual residential lots are permitted under the following conditions: (1) At least one visitor parking space is provided on each residential lot within a project site; (2) The visitor parking space is at least eight and one half feet by 18 feet in size; and, (3) The designated visitor parking space(s) is shown on the tentative plat or site plan, whichever is applicable. The visitor parking needs to be provided on each residential lot (7.4.6.2.a(1)) not straddling two lots for each space. 2-06.4.9.H.7 - If streets are proposed, indicate if they are designed for on-street parking to accommodate visitor parking or if parking is provided in common parking areas. Visitor parking is to be evenly distributed and usable by all residents of the project. Extra parking on individual lots, such as tandem parking in driveways, does not count toward visitor parking, as it is not available to other property owners within the project. Design criteria for streets are located in Technical Standards Manual Section 10-01.0.0. Streets designed at the minimum width, without on-street parking, need clearance for access to all homes by life safety vehicles and, where no alleys are provided, by refuse collection vehicles. If motor vehicles are parked along streets that are not designed to allow for parking, life safety services will be inhibited and, in many situations, blocked. 19) COMMENT: There must be full access that meets the street standards for all lots in a subdivision. Provide the TSMR information on the plans. 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: Provided. 2-06.4.9.M - Grading Plan 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. 21) COMMENT: The pedestrian circulation and sidewalk is incomplete from the north side of parking spaces in the southwest portion of the subdivision. Provide complete pedestrian circulation (TS 7-01.3.1, 3.2, 3.3). A sidewalk is required adjacent to a PAAL between the PAAL and a building (TS 7-01.4.1.B) and "any parking space accessed by a PAAL" (TS 7-01.4.1.C; also see Fig 2 ). "Sidewalks or pedestrian refuge areas cannot be located between any motor vehicle parking space and the PAAL providing access to that space" (TS 7-01.4.1.F). "Sidewalks or crosswalks cannot cross any type of stacking areas for or drive-through lanes" (TS 7-01.4.1.G). Provide a sidewalk around the PAAL and the parking spaces for safe continuous pedestrian circulation. Do not have a crosswalk over an area that both the parked vehicles and refuse vehicles are backing up. 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. 22) COMMENT: The gang mailbox is depicted in the right-of-way of Fort Lowell Road, which is on the Major Streets and Routes Plan. A right-of-way permit and approval from the US Postal Service shall be required. Relocated. 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. 23) COMMENT: Complied. 2-06.5.3.G - Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions 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. 24) COMMENT: None provided. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Michael St. Paul, (520) 837-4959. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package site plan and any requested documents. Revise the plans as per the comments. Provide the TSMR number and information on the plans. Provide the subdivision number. |
| 02/06/2015 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. The existing dwelling was built in 1952 but the public sewer was not built until 1956; it is possible that the dwelling is using a septic system and has never been connected to the public sewer. If the septic system is located north of the dwelling, the dwelling will have to be connected to the public sewer. [Initial comment: Show the point of connection of the building sewer from the existing house to the existing public sewer. Verify that it does not traverse the proposed south retention basin.] 2. The current site plan shows the first floor elevations for all of the proposed dwellings being at least 12" above the rim of the next upstream manhole. No backwater valves may be installed in the building sewers. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012. [Initial comment: Keynotes 2 and 7 on sheet 2 of 3 refer to the installation of backflow preventers in sewer lines. Backflow preventers are for use in water supply piping only. Backwater valves are for use in drainage piping but only as required to prevent sewage overflows within buildings. Where the finished floor elevation is less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole in the public sewer or private sewer collection system, a backwater valve shall be installed in the building drain or branch of the building drain serving that floor. Floors discharging from above that reference point shall not discharge through the backwater valve. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.] |
| 02/11/2015 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/11/2015 | PGEHLEN1 | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Reqs Change | SUBJECT: ISKRA FIELDS, LOTS 1-4 2225 E. Fort Lowell DP14-0179 Tucson Electric Power Co. (TEP) has reviewed the Plat for Iskra Fields Lots 1-4 submitted January 15, 2015, and is unable to approve the plat at this time. A preliminary electrical design must be completed and easements for TEP facilities shown on the plat for TEP approval. If you have any questions, please contact me at 917-8744. Thank you, Mary Burke Right of Way Agent Tucson Electric Power Co. Mail Stop HQW603 PO Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 Office - 520-917-8744 Cell - 520-401-9895 mburke@tep.com |
| 02/11/2015 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Approved | Office of the Pima County Assessor 115 N. Church Ave. Tucson, Arizona 85701 BILL STAPLES ASSESSOR TO: CDRC Office Subdivision Review City of Tucson (FAX# 791-5559) FROM: Ada Griffin GIS Cartographer Pima County Assessor's Office DATE: January 16, 2015 RE: Assessor's Review and Comments Regarding: DP14-0179 TENTATIVE PLAT FOR ISKRA FIELDS, LOTS 1-4 _ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor's Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor's Office requirements. COMMENTS: THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUBMITTAL NOTE: THE ASSESSOR'S CURRENT INVOLVEMENT IN PROCESSING ITS MANUAL 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. THANK YOU FOR ANY DIGITAL DATA PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED. |
| 02/18/2015 | PGEHLEN1 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | Hi Patricia, Please apply the following comments for the subject DP. ES has no objections to the proposed provisions for curbside refuse and recycle collection service as called out in general note #9. The plan demonstrates an acceptable turnaround and back-up as shown. Have a great day! Andy >>> DSD_CDRC 02/11/2015 9:17 AM >>> Comments are passed due. Thanks Trish >>> DSD_CDRC 01/15/2015 11:45 AM >>> Dear Reviewers: This is an electronic distribution for a CDRC Tentative Plat review. If you normally receive paper copies of the review documents, you will receive them soon. The applicable case numbers are: CDRC Development Plan: DP14-0179 Existing and Proposed Zoning: |
| 02/18/2015 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items: 1) 4 rolled sets of the plans 2) All items requested by reveiw staff 3) All items needed to approve these plans |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 02/26/2015 | AROMERO4 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |