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: REVISION - - 1ST
Permit Number - DP20-0179
Review Name: REVISION - - 1ST
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/30/2021 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | WRITE DECISION LETTER | Reqs Change | Email from: COTDSDPermits To: Chuck Martin Cc: Scott Kolt Mon 8/30/2021 9:35 AM REVISION Returned for Corrections: DP20-0179 (See Design review comment letter attached and also on PRO) DESCRIPTION: Tentative Plat/Grading/FLD - Houghton Reserve, 520 N HOUGHTON RD Revision Fee Balance: $0 (zero) Thank you for the payment. INCLUDE IN YOUR Revision resubmittal: 1) Comment Response Letter (your response to the reviewer's Requires Change comments) 2) Plan Set pages 3) Any other documents requested by review staff FILEDROP https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp (Select "Existing Application", then enter permit number) SEE REVIEW COMMENTS and documents on PRO: www.tucsonaz.gov/pro (If information is not available, check back later after data transfers to PRO.) - Home page, Activity Search, enter the Activity/Permit Number - Permits - click on blue tab and you will see different sections - Reviews section - click on REVIEW DETAILS - Documents section - click on VIEW Thank you. Sharon Beasley, Permit Specialist City of Tucson, Planning and Development Services Email for Development Pkgs: COTDSDpermits@TucsonAz.gov (disregard the email response that will be sent automatically) Email for Building Permits: PDSDinquiries@TucsonAz.gov |
| 08/30/2021 | SBEASLE1 | DESIGN PROFESSIONAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | (See the "Design Review Comments, 08.28.21" document on PRO, in the DOCUMENTS section): Date: August 28, 2021 From: Rick Gonzalez, Architect, City of Tucson On-call Design Professional Re: Design Professional review comments for AVP Review: DP20-0179, Houghton Reserve After review, based upon Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 8.7.3.M. of the required deferred documents submitted to PDSD (Revision #2 documents in PRO), I recommend resubmittal of this project, as noted in Italics below: M. Design Criteria 1. Architectural Variation c. Requirements The same architectural elevation shall not be repeated more often than every fourth lot. Based on the Lot Release Schedule Example provided in AVA, the requirement Complies. With the understanding all lot releases maintain the exampled pattern. It is recommended a follow-up Asbuilt review be conducted to assure compliance. Architectural variation may be accomplished by incorporating a minimum of two of the following design features into the affected elevations: different building footprint orientation, building elevation,garage placement, roof type, ornamentation, or architectural style. Complies Garage Placement. For FLD projects with over 20 or more single-family detached residential units, no more than 50% 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. Based on the Lot Release Schedule Example provided in AVA, the application does not comply. More than 50% of the models show in the example (4 out of 6) are shown with garages that protrude from or are flush with the front wall of the living area or front porch of the house. d. Architectural Variation Plan Required (1) An Architectural Variation Plan (AVP) demonstrating compliance with the requirements of this section shall be prepared in accordance with the Section 2-06.5.3.E, Architectural Variation Plan, of the Administrative Manual. (2) The AVP shall be included with the subdivisionplat, site plan, or building permit submittal. (3) An AVP is reviewed and considered for approval as part of the subdivisionplat, site plan, or building permit review procedure, whichever is applicable, with the Design Professional included as the reviewer of the AVP. The Design Professional will review AVPs for compliance with this Section and forward his or her findings and recommendation in writing to the PDSD Directorfor consideration of approval. (4) The PDSD Director s decision may be appealed in accordance with Section ’ 3.9.1, Design Review Board Appeal Procedure. (5) Conditions of the approved AVP shall be included as notes on the approved plat or site plan, whichever applies, and the building plan. (6) An AVP shall be approved prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. Transition Edge Treatment for Adjacent Properties a. Transition Edge Treatment Where a single-family attached or multi-family FLD project is adjacent to existing single-family residential development, the FLD shall provide buffering in order to preserve the privacy of the existing residential development. Examples of buffering include, but are not limited to, landscaping, a fence, or a wall. The proposed buffering shall be included as conditions on the approved subdivisionplat or site plan. Complies END OF DP REVIEW |