Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Number: D03-0017
Parcel: 13342001C

Address: Unknown

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Permit Number - D03-0017
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/09/2004 MARILYN KALTHOFF START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
01/09/2004 PAUL MACHADO ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied To: Craig Gross
Planning Administrator

SUBJECT: Tanque Verde Road and Kolb Road
Development Plan D03-0017 (Third Review)
T14S, R15E, Section 06

RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Development Plan and Drainage Report.

The Development Plan (DP) and Drainage Report (DR) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal.

Development Plan:

1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies with re-submittal.
2. Please call out the contour intervals under the North arrow and scale on the plan view sheets.
3. Label existing and future sight visibility triangles per D.S. 2-02.2.1.10. Although Kolb Road has been developed to it's ultimate configuration, the future SVT's on Kolb Road must be shown. Per previous comment.
4. In order to determine accordance with the 2000 IBC section 13 concerning fills, please label the existing contours near the units adjacent to Camino Serna 100 feet in from the property line. I cannot determine what the elevations are. This is for review purposes only.
5. Basins with slopes steeper than 4:1and where the water exceeds two feet in depth require security barriers per Stormwater Det/Ret. Manual 3.6.2. Retention basin 'C' does not call out any barriers in the DR nor on the DP plan, yet the depth exceeds 2 feet (per the DR). Please revise.
6. Dimension all basins on the DP and/or provide details. The details on sheet 5 do not have adequate information. An approximation will acceptable for the DP, but the grading plan will have to more precise. Per previous comment.
7. Since the EHS is a setback that may become variable, it is not recommended that the placement of the Commercial bldg. be set so close to the EHS.
8. All comments are preliminary until final approval from mayor and council.

Drainage Report:

1. The Drainage report was reviewed for DP purposes only.
2. Provide details and show dimensions for all basins. The DR did not include any details or dimensions on this submittal as the response letter indicated. Per previous comment.
3. Basins with slopes steeper than 4:1and where the water exceeds two feet in depth require security barriers per Stormwater Det/Ret. Manual 3.6.2. Retention basin 'C' does not call out any barriers in the DR nor on the DP plan, yet the depth exceeds 2 feet (per the DR). Please revise.
4. Please show the weir designs and the amount of discharge for each retention basin in the Drainage Report.
5. The discharge onto Camino Serna exceeds the maximum allowable street flow of 50 cfs per D.S. 3-01.4.4.A. Please include a cross section of the street with the WSEL included in the DR. The Average Velocity and Average Velocity Head have too much energy to approve the increase in the cfs. Perhaps an increase in the retention or a reduction in the discharge may solve this issue.

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1193 or pmachad2@ci.tucson.az.us
Paul P. Machado
Senior Engineering Associate
City of Tucson/Development Services Department
201 N. Stone Avenue
P.O. Box 27210
Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210
(520) 879-8010 fax
01/09/2004 TIM ROWE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Needs Review
01/09/2004 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied Provide revised landscape plans as requested in the previous review.
01/09/2004 ROGER HOWLETT COT NON-DSD COMMUNITY PLANNING Denied COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING TASK FORCE COMMENTS

(3rd review) Regarding

SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application

CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT

D03-0017 Finisterra Community 01/08/04

( ) Tentative Plat
() Development Plan
( ) Landscape Plan – did not receive one this time
( ) Revised Plan/Plat
( ) Board of Adjustment
() Other – Office Elevation Drawing

CROSS REFERENCE: C9-84-25 (M&C 9/2/03, Ordinance No. 9880)

NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: General Plan

GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Kolb Rd. is Gateway Route

COMMENTS DUE BY: 1/9/04

SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:

( ) No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment
( ) Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions
( ) RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies
() See Additional Comments Attached
( ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on:
() Resubmittal Required:
( ) Tentative Plat
() Development Plan
() Landscape Plan
( ) Other – as indicated in attached comments

REVIEWER: Joanne Hershenhorn 791-4505 DATE: 1/06/04
D03-0017
Finisterra Community



Please change the label on the proposed office building from “Commercial Bldg.” to “Office Bldg.”

Please provide an updated Landscape Plan (LP) with the next submittal. Information on the LP must be consistent with the Development Plan (DP), and must demonstrate compliance with rezoning conditions.

Thank you for providing keynotes 86 and 90 on the DP. Please either change keynote 86 to 85, or add keynote 85. Keynote 90 indicates a 24-foot wide vehicular access, however, it is only 17 feet wide according to the map scale on sheet 4. Please show a 24-foot vehicular access on sheet 4. Also, please clearly indicate wall openings for the vehicular and pedestrian cross-accesses, on both the DP and LP, to ensure compliance with rezoning condition 1.a. All wall openings for cross access must be dimensioned.

Thank you for showing a new, 6-foot high CMU wall along the south and southwest sides of the new office building (keynote 83). According to rezoning condition 1.d, a six-foot high masonry wall is also needed along the western property line of the office development, as indicated in our previous comment #4. Please clearly show this on both the DP and the LP.

Thank you for showing a 5-foot wall opening to allow pedestrian traffic between the on-site office development and the apartments to the south (keynote 92). The walkways for the respective developments are not, however, connected, and a flow arrow indicates onsite drainage in this area. Please clearly show a functional walkway connecting these two portions of the development, including details as needed to demonstrate that this will work.

Regarding this section’s previous comments # 9 and 10, building elevations were provided for the front and end of the office building only. Elevations of the office building sides must be provided, and building materials must be identified. Building elevations must also be provided for the apartments (dimensioned and colored, and with materials identified). A statement indicating how the design of this proposed development is compatible with the surrounding development is needed: the apartment design must be compatible with the design of The Meadows; and the office building design must be compatible with the design of the apartments, as well as the office building to the east.
D03-0017
Finisterra Community




Rezoning condition # 12 states that free-standing signs are to be architecturally consistent with the overall development, and integrated into the overall landscape plan. Please provide sufficient information to demonstrate compliance with this rezoning condition, as requested previously in comment #11.

Regarding rezoning condition #13 and previous comment #12, please provide lighting details sufficient to demonstrate that all outdoor lighting (except lighting affixed to buildings) will be directed downwards and shielded away from residential areas and public roadways. The response indicated lighting details are included with this submittal, but staff did not see them. Please clarify.

Regarding rezoning condition #14 and previous comment #13, it is unclear where the exterior mechanical equipment will be (for the office building and the apartments), and if the screening will be architecturally integrated into the overall building design. Please provide additional information to demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition #14.

Regarding comment #14 made previously, staff did not receive any LPs other than those previously reviewed (dated August 1, 2003). Please submit updated LPs, and identify the LP page and note # that indicates all masonry screen walls will be constructed of or painted with graffititi-resistant materials, in accordance with rezoning condition # 15.
01/09/2004 PETER MCLAUGHLIN ZONING REVIEW Denied CDRC TRANSMITTAL


TO: Development Services Center
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Peter McLaughlin
Senior Planner

FOR: Patricia Gehlen
Principal Planner


PROJECT:
D03-017
Finisterra Community
Development Plan
3rd review

TRANSMITTAL: January 7, 2004
DUE DATE: January 9, 2004


1. Revise the adjacent zoning on sheet 4 of 5 to read R-3 to the southwest of the site (only a portion of the property adjacent to the south is zoned O-3).
DS 2-05.2.3.H

2. Continuous pedestrian circulation must provide a direct connection to all adjacent rights-of-way. It is not clear how proposed pedestrian sidewalks will connect to the sidewalks along Kolb Road and Camino Serna. Demonstrate compliance with Rezoning Condition 8 by showing pedestrian sidewalks and crosswalks which connect all buildings directly to each public right-of-way.
DS 2-05.2.4.K
DS2-08.4.1.A & D

3. Add a lot coverage calculation for the residentially developed portion of the project site (including vehicle use area). Remove the FAR calculation for the residential development as it is not required for residential development designators. The maximum lot coverage allowed under the residential development designators, "O" and "L" is 75%.
LUC 3.2.9.2
LUC 3.2.3.1.C & .D

4. After the new easements are recorded, add the type, width and recordation information to the development plan.
DS 2-05.2.3.B

5. Correct the handicapped parking calculation for the proposed office building. For the office building, with between 151 and 200 total parking spaces provided, 6 h/c spaces are required.
IBC

6. Show the required vehicular cross-access to the adjacent Meadows Via La Paz residential development on the plan and provide recordation information per Rezoning Condition B. DS 2-05.2.4.U

7. Demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition A by showing how the pedestrian and vehicular cross-access connections (see keynotes 85, 86 and 90) continue to meet up with existing pedestrian sidewalks and existing vehicular use areas within the adjacent office development to the east. It is apparent that several vehicle parking spaces will need to be removed in order to make the vehicle cross-access connection to the adjacent office development. Also, provide the a copy of the approved plan with parking calculations for this adjacent office development to the east, to show that there is currently enough vehicle parking provided to still meet code (without causing a parking deficit) after this cross-access drive is constructed. DS 2-05.2.4.U

8. Revise the statement in the bicycle parking calculation to indicate that the total number of bicycle spaces required is based on the total vehicle spaces provided (rather than the number required) is 716. LUC 3.3.3.5


If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608.

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS IS REQUIRED: revised development plan, landscape plan
01/09/2004 GLYNDA ROTHWELL UTILITIES TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER Approved SUBJECT: FINISTERRA COMMUNITY
D03-0017

Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan
dated December 23, 2003.

As you are aware there are existing electrical facilities within the
boundaries of this development. All relocation costs will be billable to
the developer.

If easements are required, they will be secured by separate instrument.

Liza Castillo
Land Management
Tucson Electric Power Company
lcastillo@tep.com
Office: (520) 917-8479
Pager: (520) 218-6565
Fax: (520) 917-8400
01/09/2004 KAY MARKS PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING Approved 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL
TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207

KAY MARKS
ADDRESSING OFFICIAL
PH: 740-6480
FAX #: 740-6370


TO: CITY PLANNING
FROM: KAY MARKS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL
SUBJECT: D03-0017 FINISTERRA COMMUNITY / REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
DATE: January 2, 2004



The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project.

NOTE:

1. Submit a 24 x 36 Reverse Reading Double Matte Photo Mylar of approved Development Plan to City Planning. Signed and dated Mylar will be forwarded to Pima County Addressing prior to assignment of addresses.

2. All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection.
01/09/2004 CRAIG GROSS UTILITIES DUMMY CRITICAL Completed