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: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Permit Number - DP15-0046
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/01/2015 | AROMERO4 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 06/03/2015 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: DP15-0046 - FLD 8950 E Wrightstown Road Tentative Plat for "The School Yard" Lots 1-56 and Common Areas A-C TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 3, 2015 DUE DATE: June 15, 2015 COMMENTS: Zoning conditionally approves the Tentative Plat at this time based on following comments being addressed. Correct General Note 5 as required. 02. Follow up comment to previous comment 12: Review general note 5 on sheet one and revise as required. The calculation for the functional open space is noted as 18,077 required and 20,634 provided. On sheet two (2), there are two (2) areas labeled and delineated as functional open space. The total square footage of both areas does not equal the listed functional open space on sheet one. Clarify if there is an additional area that is supposed to be designated as FOS, if so delineated and annotate. 2-06.5.3.C - Functional Open Space Delineate the boundaries of the proposed functional open space on the tentative plat or site plan, whichever is applicable. Provide, by note on the plat, the required and proposed functional open space calculations; 12. COMMENT: Label on plan sheet two (2) the square footage of the functional open space for the area proposed along the west side of the subdivision, if needed, dimension this FOS area. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. |
| 06/15/2015 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | The tentative plat will be approved once the Differential Grading Mitigation Plan is approved. The conditions from the mitigation plan must be incorporated into the general notes. |
| 06/16/2015 | FDILLON1 | DESIGN EXAMINER | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Rick Gonzalez, Architect May 25, 2015 DESIGN PROFESSIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS & MODIFICATIONS REPORT LETTER PROJECT: COT FLD DP15-0046 THE SCHOOL YARD PEPPER VINER AT WRIGHTSTOWN FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT DESIGN PROFESSIONAL REVIEW This project has been selected for review by Rick Gonzalez, Architect (RGA), a contracted Design Professional for the City of Tucson (COT). RGA has conducted a Flexible Lot Development Design Criteria Review report #2 for compliance with the Unified Development Code on behalf of the Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD) Director, Ernie Duarte, Planning Administrator (PA), Jim Mazzocco, and Principal Planner (PP), Frank Dillon. This letter contains recommendations and modifications to be addressed by written responses indicating any actions taken. In order to facilitate a shorter 3rd review, provide all indicated responses and revisions to the plans. Please return revised plans and response letter to the COT PDSD in accordance with their submittal requirements. To avoid delays, ensure that all responses are made and are complete, and have been coordinated on all applicable details and note sheets. When the plans are found to be in accordance with the UDC FLD recommendations and modifications listed below, RGA will forward a letter of recommendation of compliance to the COT PDSD Director and PA, and PP. The PDSD shall make the final decision on the project's compliance with FLD design Criteria for this development (UDC 8.7.3.M). GENERAL NOTE: 11 point letter Times New Roman - Indicates excerpts or edited excerpts from the FLD or UDC for reference and clarity. 12 point bold and italicized Arial - Indicates Design Professional's Comments In the 1st Review, Comments 3 and 4, the request for further information regarding adjacent properties and privacy mitigation were satisfied. The applicant provided evidence that lots 44 and 45 would be limited to one story, no PMP is required for this project. 2nd REVIEW COMMENTS: M. Design Criteria 1. Architectural Variation c. Requirements (1) The same architectural elevation shall not be repeated more often than every fourth lot. Comment 1: Please provide a Site Plan indicating the location of the two models and showing the same model will not be repeated in lot sequence more than four times in a row. (3) Garage Placement. For FLD projects with over 20 or more single family detached residential units, no more than 50 percent of detached residential units throughout the FLD shall be designed with garages that protrude from or are flush with the front wall of the living area or front porch of the house. Comment 2: Unless the FLD has less than 20 reattached SFR's, please provide a Site Plan indicating no more than 50% of the detached units are flush or project from the front wall living area. Architectural Variation Plan Required (2) The AVP shall be included with the subdivision plat, site plan, or building permit submittal. (5) Conditions of the approved AVP shall be included as notes on the approved plat or site plan, whichever applies, and the building plan. END OF 2nd FLD REVIEW, DESIGN PROFESSIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND MODIFICATIONS |
| 06/16/2015 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Plans are conditionally approved. Please make changes requested by zoning and engineering prior to signing of the plans |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 06/23/2015 | KROBLES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |