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 - DP15-0224
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/05/2016 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | Regional Traffic Engineering has no comments on this submittal and supports its acceptance. It will not affect any ADOT facilities. Thank you. |
| 01/05/2016 | MARTIN BROWN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 01/05/2016 | BVIESTE1 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | See additional documents in PRO. No objections/adverse comments. See attached. |
| 01/07/2016 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: The Bridges - Block I Development Package - Tentative Plat (1st Review) DP15-0224 TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 14, 2016 DUE DATE: January 25, 2016 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 December 21, 2016. 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 2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet: 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. 1. COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP15-0224, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 2. COMMENT: Provide the following relevant case numbers on the plan, either in a table or adjacent to the title block; S12-055, S13-039, S15-027, D09-0010, D11-0001, DP12-0113, DP13-0227, DP13-0228, DP15-0039, DP15-0103 & DP15-0138. 2-06.4.6 - If the project is located within the boundaries of a Planned Area Development (PAD) zone, include a reduced-scale map of the PAD on the first sheet, indicating the location of the portion being developed. 3. COMMENT: The reduced-scale map of the PAD shown on page 2 needs to be relocated to sheet 1. 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.6 - If a plan or plat is prepared in conjunction with other applications or overlays or the parcel being developed is subject to conditions of an application processed previously, additional information must be added to the plan. Such applications and overlays include, but are not limited to: annexations; rezonings; special exceptions; Board of Adjustment variances; Design Development Options; Technical Standard Modification Request; overlays (Airport Environs Zone, Environmental Resource Zone, Gateway Corridor Zone, Hillside Development Zone, Historic Preservation Zone, Major Streets and Routes, Rio Nuevo District, Scenic Corridor Zone, WASH); Modification of Development Regulations through the Downtown Area Infill Incentive District or Rio Nuevo District; Downtown Heritage Incentive Zone; or, Design Review Board. Provide the following information on the plan. 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - List additional applications and overlays, by case number (if applicable), in lower right corner of each sheet. As a general note provide the type of application processed or overlays applicable, a statement that the project meets the criteria/conditions of the additional application or overlay, the case number, date of approval, what was approved, and the conditions of approval, if any. 4. COMMENT: Provide a copy of the required Residential Architectural Design letter of recommendation from the DRC with your next submittal, see PAD 15 Sections C.2.3.C.9 & C.6. 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 2-06.4.7.A.8.d - When the proposed site is part of a larger site, the calculations encompass the entire site, whether existing or proposed. If the project is being phased, calculations must show that, at each phase, requirements are being met. 5. COMMENT: Sheet 2 Tracking Table the vehicle parking space provided does not appear to match the last approved development package, DP15-0103, see redline. 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. 6. COMMENT: Provide the bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds for the subdivision perimeter. 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.F - All existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) shall be indicated on the drawing with zoning boundaries clearly defined. If the property is being rezoned, use those boundaries and classifications. The basis for this requirement is that some zoning requirements on a project are based on the zoning classification of adjacent property. Also, in some instances, each zone has to be taken into consideration on property that is split by two or more zoning classifications, as each may have different requirements. 7. COMMENT: The zoning shown for the parcel west of Park Avenue, between 39th Street and the alley to the north, is not shown correctly. This parcel should be shown as R-2. 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.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. 8. COMMENT: Sheet 4 there are three (3) areas where the proposed public sidewalk shown along the right-of-ways of 36th Street and Nobel Way encroach on to private property, common area "A". An easement is required for the encroachments. 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. 9. COMMENT: Show any proposed gang mailboxes on the plan. 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. 10. COMMENT: Provide a copy of the proposed CC&Rs with your next submittal. 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 |
| 01/13/2016 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | SUBJECT: THE BRIDGES – BLOCK 1 – TENTATIVE PLAT DP15-0224 Tucson Electric Power Co., has reviewed and approves the Tentative Plat for The Bridges – Block 1 subdivision submitted on December 23, 2015. If you have any questions, please contact me at 520-917-8744. Thank you, Mary Burke Right of Way Agent Tucson Electric Power Co. Mail Stop HQE613 PO Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 Office - 520-917-8744 Cell - 520-401-9895 mburke@tep.com |
| 01/14/2016 | SSHIELD1 | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 01/15/2016 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Provide the rim elevations for manholes 5 and 6. Reference: City of Tucson Development Standard No. 2-06.4.9P.1 |
| 01/19/2016 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 01/21/2016 | BVIESTE1 | UTILITIES | SOUTHWEST GAS | Passed | |
| 01/21/2016 | BVIESTE1 | UTILITIES | EL PASO NATURAL GAS | Passed | |
| 01/21/2016 | BVIESTE1 | UTILITIES | CENTURYLINK | Passed | |
| 01/25/2016 | BVIESTE1 | OTHER AGENCIES | U. S. POST OFFICE | Passed | |
| 01/25/2016 | PGEHLEN1 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | The Development Plan has been reviewed on behalf of the Environmental Services Dept and the following will need to be addressed on the resubmittal: 1. Add a general note stating the refuse and recycling service is to be individual curbside service. Plastic containers (APCs) shall be placed and removed from the curbside collection area on the day of service and shall be stored from public view. If there are any questions, I can be reached at kperry@perryengineering.net |
| 01/25/2016 | ELIZABETH LEIBOLD | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4: address the following Tentative Plat comments: a. Label all property boundary dimensions. b. Assure all general notes are provided per Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.7. c. Provide thicker linetype for boundary lines on planviews. 2) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Address the following grading related comments: a. Revise/correct delineation for SVT at Corduroy and Nobel. b. Clarify that positive gradients will be provided in basin areas. c. Provide detail for typical lot grading. d. Show SVT's at intersections of 36th Street. e. Revise design to accommodate for 2-ft min setback from property lines. 3) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.9.I: Clarify/revise sidewalk layout to assure public sidewalk is located in ROW, or revise right-of-way delineation (dedicate). 4) Tech Man Sec.2.3.1: Address the following drainage related comments: a) Clarify on sheet 9 whether beehive inlet provides maintenance accommodation (manhole for cleanout access). Identify who will maintain the offsite drainage improvements in drainage report. b) Show and label, on site and grading sheet planviews, with recordation information, all offsite easements to accommodate for offsite improvements. c) Keep in mind that any drainage improvement on offsite parcels will need authorization from property owner for proposed improvement. Include documentation in next submittal with copies in revised drainage report. d) Clarify hydrology in drainage report as discussed on phone. e) On sheet 5 & 9 identify / label entities as existing or proposed improvements. Meeting required prior to resubmittal. Elizabeth Leibold, P.E., CPM, CFM Civil Engineer Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Dept http://pdsd.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd City of Tucson (520) 837-4934 |
| 01/25/2016 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1) Revise the plans to clarify compliance with the following PAD provisions: Construction of each of the public improvement projects identified in Figure 38 (p. 93), and Table J (p. 91), are triggered by the development of each individual commercial phase, residential sector, etc. P.91, The Bridges Planned Area Development Public Improvement Project #5 (36th Street from Park Avenue to Kino Parkway) Completion of the balance of a five-lane street cross-section (two travel lanes in each direction, with a continuous center left-turn lane) on 36th Street from Park Avenue to Kino Parkway. Street improvements to include curb & gutter, sidewalks on both sides, lighting, and bike. Extension of all existing adjacent sewer, water, and dry-utility infrastructure (presently within the 36th Street right-of-way) as necessary to serve the PAD site. P.92, The Bridges Planned Area Development Perimeter Path: A 10' wide meandering multi-use asphalt path adjacent to Park Avenue, 36th Street and Kino Parkway will create a perimeter jogging/walking loop (Figure 32, p. 78). This will be installed in place of a standard sidewalk. The Perimeter Path will be set back from the roadway an absolute minimum of 6' from back-of-curb, with the understanding that the path will wander and that it can be integrated into on-site landscape borders in order to meet the 6' criteria. P.77, The Bridges Planned Area Development. |
| 01/25/2016 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | No existing or planned Tucson Parks and Recreation facilities are affected by this plat. Howard B. Dutt, RLA Landscape Architect Tucson Parks & Recreation (520) 837-8040 Howard.Dutt@tucsonaz.gov |
| 01/25/2016 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | . |
| 01/27/2016 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 01/27/2016 | 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) A disk containing all items submitted. 3) All items requested by review staff 4) All items needed to approve these plans |
| 01/27/2016 | PGEHLEN1 | POLICE | REVIEW | Approved | I have no issues with this submittal. Thank you, Kara Curtis Community Service Officer Tucson Police Department Operations Division Midtown 1100 S. Alvernon Tucson, AZ 85711 kara.curtis@tucsonaz.gov (520) 837-7428 |
| 12/23/2015 | AROMERO4 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 12/28/2015 | 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: Janice Wagner GIS Cartographer Pima County Assessor's Office DATE: December 28, 2015 RE: Assessor's Review and Comments Regarding: TENTATIVE PLAT THE BRIDGES-BLOCK 1 DP15-0224 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor's Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor's Office requirements. COMMENTS: |
| 12/29/2015 | BVIESTE1 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Approv-Cond | Good afternoon, Please review the attached document for project DP15-0224. Please let me know if you need additional information or if you have any questions. Thank you, Scott Robidoux Airport Planner (ATTACHMENT) December 28, 2015 Dear Ms. Gehlen, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on DP15-0224 Tentative Plat, The Bridge Block 1; a development plan review application for an approximately 32.56 acre site located on the southeast corner of Park Avenue and 36th Street. The proposed land use is residential. This site is within the Tucson International Airport public disclosure area and traffic pattern airspace. The Tucson Airport Authority conditionally approves the subject request contingent upon the following condition of approval, as noted below. This condition should be identified in the general notes of the approved development plan. Condition of approval: "That prior to the City's approval of any construction permit for a permanent building, the property owner shall record the Airport Disclosure Statement form that discloses the existence, and operational characteristics of the Tucson International Airport to future owners or tenants of the property and further conveys the right to the public to lawfully use the airspace above the property. The content of such documents shall be according to the form and instructions provided." "That development shall not cause or potentially affect aviation in the vicinity of the site, including but not limited to, physical obstructions to aircraft operations, interference with operations by way of electrical static, visual obstructions through emissions or glare, and/or the open storage of petroleum products, explosive materials, or materials which attract or lead to the concentration of wildlife." The property owner should forward a copy of the recorded Airport Disclosure Statement form to: Scott Robidoux Airport Planner Tucson Airport Authority 7250 South Tucson Boulevard Suite 300 Tucson, AZ 85756 Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or concerns regarding this comment letter. I can be reached by email at srobidoux@flytucson.com or by telephone at 520-573-4811. Respectfully, Scott Robidoux, Airport Planner |
| 12/29/2015 | BVIESTE1 | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Reqs Change | See additional comments in PRO. Please see the attached plans with Addressing comments attached as sticky notes for the above project# |
| 12/30/2015 | BVIESTE1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | See addition document in PRO. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01/28/2016 | AROMERO4 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |