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: Active
Review Details: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Permit Number - DP18-0278
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Active
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/30/2022 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/30/2022 | ANY | PIMA COUNTY - ADDRESSING | PIMA COUNTY - ADDRESSING | Active | |
| 09/30/2022 | ANY | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Active | |
| 09/30/2022 | ANY | DESIGN PROFESSIONAL | REVIEW | Active | |
| 09/30/2022 | ANY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Active | |
| 10/18/2022 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: 1048 N 2nd Ave - FLD Development Package (1st Review) DP18-0278 TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 18, 2022 DUE DATE: October 24, 2022 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings 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 , 2023. 2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 1. COMMENT: 2-06.2.4 – Sheet 5 of the submitted plans appears to be a final plat and will not be reviewed with this submittal. The final plat is a separate submittal from the tentative plat. Zoning has reviewed sheet 2 as the tentative plat. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.1 – Provide the email address for the Owner/Developer listed on sheet 1. 3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.2.B – As the proposed FLD subdivision is a resubdivision of TUCSON LOT 7 BLK 1, provide a statement in the title block that this FLD is a resubdivision of TUCSON LOT 7 BLK 1 as recorded in Book 1, Page 19. 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, DP22-0 , adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4.A – The subject property shall be centered within the one square mile area of the location map. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4.B – Label all streets that abut the subject property on the location map. 7. COMMENT: 2-06.4.4.C – Label the section, township, and range on the location map. 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 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – Revise Site Note 3 to read “PROPOSED USE IS SINGLE FAMLY DWELLING, FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT TO UDC ARTICLE 8.7.3. 9. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.5 – As a general note list the total number of proposed lots. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a – Provide a general note stating “THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC ARTICLE 5.8 HISTORIC PRESERVATION ZONE (HPZ).” 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.b – The maximum allowed site coverage listed under Site Note 20 is not correct. Review UDC Table 8.7.3-1: Dimensional Standards for FLDs R-2 Zone Development Alternative “B” and provide the correct maximum site coverage. 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.b – Remove all references to Lot Coverage as lot coverage is not applicable in an FLD subdivision. 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. COMMENT: 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. 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. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.A - Draw in all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements. 15. COMMENT: 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. Provide the zoning for the parcels east of Jacobus and west of 2nd on the plan. 16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The vehicle parking space calculation is not correct. Review UDC Table 7.4.4-1: MINIMUM NUMBER OF MOTOR VEHICLE SPACES REQUIRED, RESIDENTIAL USE GROUP, Single-Family and provide a correct calculation, this is not a multi-family development. Additional comments maybe forth coming. 17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – The bicycle parking space calculation is not correct. Review UDC Table 7.4.8-1: Minimum Required Bicycle Parking Spaces, RESIDENTIAL USE GROUP, Single-Family and provide a correct calculation. 18. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – If short–term bicycle parking is going to be proposed to reduce the required number of vehicle parking spaces provide a short-term bicycle detail that addresses all requirements of UDC Article 7.4.9.B.1, B.2 & 7.4.9.C. 19. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – As the development for lots 7-B & 7-C are existing the perimeter yard setbacks for the north & south property line may remain. The north, south & east perimeter yard setbacks for lot 7-A should be listed “As permitted by the City’s adopted Building Codes. The required east street perimeter yard setback for lot 7-C should be listed as 10’-0”. 20. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – The maximum building height listed under Site Note 21 is not correct. Review UDC Table 8.7.3-1: Dimensional Standards for FLDs R-2 Zone Development Alternative “B” and provide the correct maximum allowed height. 21. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.T – Demonstrate how refuse collection will be provided to all lots. 22. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.V - Demonstrate how mail delivery will be provided to all lots. 2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD - ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS) 23. COMMENT: 2-06.5.2.B – Show the maximum developable area of each lot (i.e., building footprint). 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: 24. COMMENT: -06.5.3.B – The density calculation is not correct. Review UDC Table 8.7.3-1: Dimensional Standards for FLDs R-2 Zone Development Alternative “B” and provide the correct calculation. 25. COMMENT: -06.5.3.B – Cleary demonstrate how this subdivision qualifies to use the Maximum Density Option, see UDC Article 8.7.3.C.3.b. 26. COMMENT: 2-06.5.3.C – Clearly demonstrate how the proposed functional open space meets the definition of functional open space. 27. COMMENT: 2-06.5.3.D – Provide dimensioned building elevations of all proposed units. The elevations can be preliminary drawings. 28. COMMENT: 2-06.5.3.G.1 – As functional open space is proposed provide a copy of the protective covenants or common use agreements for any shared areas being established by easements over individually-owned property. This covenant shall address access, maintenance & insurance for the open space. 29. COMMENT: – The proposed short-term bicycle parking shown on lot 7-A meets the definition of an accessory use or structure. Per UDC Article 6.6.2.B and accessory use is not allowed on a site without a primary use. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Nicholas Ross at Nicholas.Ross@tucsonaz.gov. To resubmit your plans for additional review, please visit: https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 10/22/2022 | FRANK PODGORSKI | HPZ ADVISORY BOARD | HPZ ADVISORY BOARD DATE | Active | |
| 10/22/2022 | ANY | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Active |