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: DP17-0102
Parcel: 14032100A

Address:
6133 S ANTRIM LP

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW

Permit Number - DP17-0102
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
10/16/2017 ARUIZ1 START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
11/03/2017 ALEXANDRA HINES DESIGN PROFESSIONAL REVIEW Reqs Change Date: November 1, 2017
From: Rick Gonzalez, Architect, City of Tucson On-Call Design Professional
To: Alex Hines, Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD)
Re: Design Professional review comments for Flexible Lot development Review DP17-0102 6133 S. Antrim Loop.
After review, based upon Unified development Code (UDC) Section 8.7.3M, of the required plans and documents submitted to PDSD, I recommend resubmission of this project, as noted below:
Identify on the Tentative Plat, or provide a Site Plan as part of the AVP, indicating the footprint, location, and associated model number on each lot for determination of compliance with UDC Design Criteria. Refer to Administrative Manual Section 2-06.5.3.E.
Reduce garage dominance and vary the model plan at least every forth unit.
With Regards,
Rick Gonzalez
COT DP
11/03/2017 ALEXANDRA HINES PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING Approved DP17-0102 Desert Point 2 / 2nd Submittal is Approved by Pima County Addressing.

Thank you,

Robin Freiman
Addressing Official
Pima County Development Services Department
201 N Stone AV – 1st Floor
Tucson, AZ 85701
(520) 724-7570
11/08/2017 GLENN HICKS COT NON-DSD PARKS & RECREATION Approved No existing or proposed Tucson Parks and Recreation facilities are affected by this development.

Howard B. Dutt, RLA
Landscape Architect
Tucson Parks & Recreation
(520) 837-8040
Howard.Dutt@tucsonaz.gov
11/09/2017 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change 4.1 Identification and Descriptive Data
A. All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the landscape plan will be identical in size and location to those shown on the base plan (site plan or tentative plat). Should amendments be required to the base plan through the review process, the same amendments will be made to the landscape plan which will then be resubmitted along with the base plan.
Detention and Retention Basins
1. To the greatest degree practicable, detention and retention basins within an FLD shall be designed as Functional Open Space by incorporating the Multiple-Use Concepts and Aesthetic Design Guidelines described in Chapter IV of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual, the Floodplain Ordinance, and in accordance with UDC Section 7.6.6.C, Stormwater Runoff. Functional Open Space amenities within detention and retention basins may count toward meeting Functional Open Space requirements; and, developed in accordance with Section 7.11, Detention and Retention Basins.
Verify that basins meet the above criteria.
H. Landscaping, Screening and Wall Requirements
1. FLD projects shall comply with Section 7.6, Landscaping and Screening Standards, except as otherwise provided by this section.
2. One canopy tree shall be provided every 40 feet of pedestrian circulation systems, excluding crossings with streets, alleys, and driveways. If providing canopy trees every 40 feet is not achievable, the applicant shall:
a. Provide the equivalent number of trees that would be obtained using the 40-foot increment measure; and,
b. Distribute the trees within the FLD project site along pedestrian circulation systems and within functional open space areas.
3. Landscape plans shall incorporate water-conserving design as defined in Section 7.6.6, Use of Water, and as described in the Technical Standards Manual.
4. Water harvesting techniques shall be incorporated as part of the landscape design based on the Water Harvesting Guidance Manual prepared for the City of Tucson Transportation Department Stormwater Section.
Indicate trees for pedestrian circulation.
Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed prior to landscape approval.
Additional comments may apply.
11/09/2017 ALEXANDRA HINES OTHER AGENCIES TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY Approv-Cond November 9, 2017

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on DP17-0102, Desert Point 2 Subdivision; 2nd Submittal, a tentative plat subdivision application for an approximately 8.37 acre site located east of South Alvernon Way, north of East Valencia Road, and south of East Benson Highway. This project site is specifically located north of the intersection of East Spring Water Drive and South Antrim Loop. The proposed land use is residential, establishing a single family residential use.

The Tucson Airport Authority recognizes that the applicant has acknowledged the receipt of the 1st submittal comment letter, submitted by the Tucson Airport Authority on 5/10/2017. After reviewing the set of plans for the 2nd submittal, dated 10/12/2017, it was discovered that the Tucson Airport Authority's condition was omitted from this plan set. Please have the applicant update the plan set with the condition of approval included below:

"That prior to the City's approval of any construction permit for a permanent building, the property owner shall record the Avigation Easement prior to the subdivision process which 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."

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,
Senior Airport Planner

cc file
11/09/2017 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved
11/13/2017 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change Comment not addressed. [Initial comment: Based on the proposed first floor elevation of lot 20 and the rim elevation of manhole 7, a backwater valve will be required for lot 20. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.]
11/13/2017 JOHN BEALL COT NON-DSD COMMUNITY PLANNING Approved
11/13/2017 MARTIN BROWN COT NON-DSD FIRE Approved
11/14/2017 SSHIELD1 H/C SITE REVIEW Approved
11/14/2017 ALEXANDRA HINES PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Needs Review The engineer has not responded to comments or sent in the 2nd submittal to Sewer <Sewer@pima.gov>.

Thank you,
Denice Elie
520-724-6369
11/14/2017 LIZA CASTILLO UTILITIES TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER Approved Tucson Electric Power Co., (TEP) has reviewed and approves the Tentative Plat for Desert Point 2 subdivision. Removal or relocation of existing TEP facilities will be billable to the developer.

TEP will prepare a preliminary electrical design on an Approved Tentative Plat. Please provide the Approved plat and water plans to mburke@tep.com

If you have any questions, please contact me at 520-917-8744.

Thank you,

Mary Burke
Right of Way Agent III
Tucson Electric Power Co.
Land Resources – RC 131
3950 E. Irvington Road
Tucson, AZ 85714-2114
Office - 520-917-8744
Cell - 520-401-9895
mburke@tep.com
11/14/2017 ED ABRIGO PIMA COUNTY ASSESSOR Reqs Change Office of the Pima County Assessor
115 N. Church Ave.
Tucson, Arizona 85701

BILL STAPLES
ASSESSOR

TO: CDRC Office
Subdivision Review
City of Tucson


FROM: Ada Griffin
GIS Cartographer
Pima County Assessor's Office


DATE: November 14, 2017

RE: Assessor's Review and Comments Regarding:

DP17-0102 2ND SUBMITTAL TENTATIVE PLAT DESERT POINT 2

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Plat meets Assessor's Office requirements.
___X___ Plat does not meet Assessor's Office requirements.

COMMENTS:

" RE: THE TITLE BLOCK IN THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER. THE REQUIRED INFORMATION IS ALL THERE, HOWEVER THE NUMBER OF LOTS & COMMON AREA INFORMATION SHOULD IMMEDIATELY FOLLOW THE SUBDIVISION NAME. THE RESUBDIVISION INFORMATION SHOULD FOLLOW NEXT, THEN THE SECTION INFORMATION.

LIKE SO: A FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
TENTATIVE PLAT FOR
DESERT POINT 2
LOTS 1 THRU 42 & COMMON AREA "A"
OPEN SPACE & COMMON AREA "B" DET./RET. BASIN

A RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 28-30
AND LOTS 40-43 OF VALENCIA ALVERNON
COMMERCE CENTER, BK 47 PG 4


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.
11/14/2017 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Principal Planner

PROJECT: Desert Point 2
Development Package (1st Review)
DP17-0102

TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 14, 2017

DUE DATE: November 13, 2017

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).

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 April 27, 2018.

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

1. 2-06.3.8 - Move the north arrow, contour interval, and scale to the upper right corner of each sheet.

2. 2-06.3.9 - The plan drawing shall be oriented with north toward the top of the sheet. If it is not practical to orient north to the top of the sheet, the plan drawing shall be oriented with north to the left side of the sheet. Revise sheets 2 & 5 to meet this standard.

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

3. 2-06.4.1 - Move the owner and engineer's information to the right half of the cover sheet.

4. 2-06.4.1 - Provide the following information for the landscape architects on the right half of the cover sheet; name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number.

5. 2-06.4.4 - Remove the subdivision references from the location map as it is not required on the tentative plat.
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

6. 2-06.4.7.A.1 - General note 1 should list the existing zoning as I-1 as the rezoning has not been effectuated.

7. 2-06.4.7.A.3 - Revise general note 1 to include "THE PROPOSED ZONING IS R-2".

8. 2-06.4.7.A.4 - Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses.

9. 2-06.4.7.A.4 - General note3 remove the reference to "RCP" from the note.

10. 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - This project is located within the Airport Avigation Easement and Disclosure Area and will require review by Scott Robidoux Airport Planner. Contact Kelly Lee, Lead Planner COT at Kelly.Lee@tucsonaz.gov for requirements.

11. 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - General Note 32 the annexation case number is not correct and should be listed as 7090.

12. 2-06.4.7.A.7 - Provide a general note stating that this subdivision is part of a Flexible Lot Development (FLD).

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.

13. 2-06.4.8.B - There are numerous easements shown on the existing plat, Valencia Alvenon Commerce Center, BK 47 PG 4 that will need to be abandoned prior to approval of this development package.

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.

14. 2-06.4.9.H.1 - Based on street sections 1 & 3 sheet 3 vertical curb is proposed along Antrim Loop, clearly demonstrate how vehicle access will be provided to each lot.

15. 2-06.4.9.H.1 - Until such time as Antrim Loop is connected to the proposed development to the north demonstrate how fire and environmental services will be able turn around at the end of the street.

16. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Remove the reference to "2 IN FRONT OF EACH GARAGE" as this are cannot be counted for provided vehicle parking.

17. 2-06.4.9.O - Provide typical setback details on the plan.

18. 2-06.4.9.O - The setback shown for "FRONT SETBACK" only applies to a carport and garage setback. Per UDC Article 6.4.5.C.2 and Table 6.4.5.C-1 show the correct front street perimeter yard setbacks for the main residence. Also review UDC Article 6.4.5.2.b carport and garage street perimeter yard setback requirements.

19. 2-06.4.9.O - It appears that you have shown less than required perimeter yard setbacks along the perimeter of the subdivision. Per UDC Table 6.3-2.A a Res Use to a Nonres Zone requires 10 or ¾ the height of the proposed building wall, this perimeter yard setback applies to the east subdivision boundary adjacent to the "TR" County Zoning. For all other perimeter yard setback to the subdivision boundary Res Use to Res Zone requires 6' or 2/3 he height of the proposed building wall. All other interior perimeter yard setbacks, excluding streets, shall meet what is allowed by current building code.

20. 2-06.4.9.U - Based on Rezoning Condition 3 a 6' high wall is required along the eastern boundary of this subdivision but sections 4 & 17 sheet 3 & 6 show 5'.

21. 2-06.4.9.V - Show gang mailboxes locations to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements, such as pedestrian accessibility, utilities, and landscaping.

2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD - ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS)

2-06.5.3 Additional Information
The following are required in addition to the requirements of the tentative plat or site plan, whichever is applicable:

22. 2-06.5.3.B - Applicants requesting a Maximum Density Option in accordance with Section 8.7.3.C.3.b must demonstrate compliance with the applicable criteria by written report or on the plat or site plan, whichever is appropriate;

23. 2-06.5.3.B - Under 'BUILDING SETBACK/DEVELOPMENT REGULATION" the "DENSITY ALLOWED 25" is not correct. Review UDC Table 8.7.3-1 and provide the correct allowed density.

24. 2-06.5.3.D - Provide height dimensions on the elevations provided in the architectural variation plan.

25. 2-06.5.3.E.1 - Identify on the tentative plat or site plan the lots and/or units that must provide architectural variation; and,

26. 2-06.5.3.F.1 - Identify on the tentative plat or site plan the lots and/or units that must provide privacy mitigation;

27. 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.

28. Clarify why there are basically two (2) cover sheets, sheet 1 & 4 that provide basically the same information.

29. Clarify why there are basically two (2) detail sheets, sheet 3 & 6 that provide basically the same information.

30. Sheet 3 the details shown along the top of the sheet have information cut off by the border.
31.

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

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package
11/17/2017 ALEXANDRA HINES 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 approved documents submitted previously
3) A disk containing all items submitted
4) All items requested by review staff
5) All items needed to approve these plans
11/17/2017 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change 1. The site is within a critical basin. Critical basin detention cannot be waived. Provide critical basin detention for all onsite watersheds. (Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual 1.4, page 6)
2. The project proposal is assuming off-site retention in the county-owned basin adjacent to the project site. Provide written permission from the flood control district for this off-site drainage solution.
3. Provide evidence that the off-site basin has sufficient surplus volume to accommodate the retention requirements for this site.
4. The proposed detention basin is proposed with a low flow pipe. Provide a geotechnical report showing that the basin will not infiltrate naturally. In any case, the use of the low flow pipe will require a TSMR.
5. Provide a turnaround at the north end of Antrim Loop.
6. Note 15 is not consistent with the drainage report. Revise the note or the drainage report to be consistent.
7. The DP/TP provides two bases of bearing and two bases of elevation. Provide just one of each or demonstrate their equivalence.
8. Clearly show drainage patterns throughout the site.
9. Detail 20 on sheet 3 has a section callout. Clarify which detail is intended.
10. Clearly describe the features under the parking lanes in the street sections on sheet 3.
11. Clearly show security barrier for the basin.
12. Clearly show how street drainage will be directed to the open space park as required by the rezoning conditions.
13. The details show Tappan drive as paved. Represent existing conditions correctly.
14. Revise grading note 1 to reference the Pima Association of Governments details and specifications. Revise all other references to the standard specifications and standard details.
15. Fill for lots 13-21, 30, and 37 exceed 2 feet. Provide the engineering justification and mitigation per the differential grading standard.
16. The label on sheet 5 indicates some lines are to be abandoned. Clearly identify what is being abandoned.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
12/04/2017 QJONES1 APPROVAL SHELF Completed
12/04/2017 QJONES1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
12/04/2017 QJONES1 REJECT SHELF Completed