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: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D07-0019
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/04/2007 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/18/2007 | KAROL ARAGONEZ | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Karol Aragonez Planner PROJECT: D07-0019 The Lofts at Dorado Country Club Development Plan TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 17, 2007 DUE DATE: June 4, 2007 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. Section 5.3.8.2, LUC, permits a maximum of one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a development plan. If, at the end of that time, the development plan has not been approved, it must be revised to be in compliance with all regulations in effect at that time, and must be resubmitted for a full CDRC review. The one-year expiration date for this development plan is May 3, 2007. 2. A final plat will be required for the platting of the condominiums and common areas. Please refer to LUC 4.1.9. 3. Within the location map please show the subject property centered within one (1) square mile, and label the Rosehill Wash. DS 2-05.2.1.D.1 & 2 4. Please include the contour interval with the north arrow on all applicable pages of the development plan. DS 2-05.2.1.H 5. Case number D07-0019 has been assigned to this development plan (DP). Please place this number in the right corner of all sheets of the development plan, landscape plan, NPPO, and any other associated sheets. DS 2-05.2.2.B.2 6. Please add to general note 2 and notes and calculation note 1 the additional proposed use "Food Service" subject to 3.5.4.6.C, Development Designator "35". DS 2-05.2.2.B.3 7. Please clarify if the Golf Clubhouse is open to the public or restricted to residents, their guests, and employees of the condo and retail/commercial uses on site. Please review LUC Sec. 3.2.5.1 as this defines accessory uses. If the clubhouse meets this definition then separate parking is not required for the clubhouse and is based solely on the principal uses on site allowing the required number of motor vehicle parking spaces to be reduced by twenty-five (25) spaces. LUC 3.2.5.1 8. As a general note list the total number of residential units proposed. DS 2-05.2.2.B.4 9. Please correct general note 4 by removing Sec. 2.8.4 Gateway Corridor Zone and adding Sec. 29-12 through 29-19 Watercourse Amenities, Safety, and Habitat (WASH) Ordinance of the Tucson Code. DS 2-05.2.2.B.10 10. Please draw all existing easements on the plan along with recordation information, location, width, and purpose. If an easement is no longer in use and scheduled to be vacated or has been abandoned, so indicate. If none exist provide response to reviewer's comments. Also if easements are purposed please draw, dimension and label as to their purpose and whether they will be public or private. If none exist provide response to reviewer's comments. DS 2-05.2.3.B & DS 2-05.2.4.G 11. Please dimension the existing curbs and sidewalks. Indicate if the existing curbs and sidewalks are the same location as required for future curbs and sidewalks per the MS&R street cross-section and label. Sidewalks within MS&R rights-of-ways are required to be six (6) feet wide and edges of curb are nine (9) feet from property line. DS 2-05.2.3.C and MS&R Plan 12. Please add the zoning designation to the north (RX-2, west (RX-2), and south across Speedway Boulevard (R-1). DS 2-05.2.4.B 13. Please correct the lot coverage calculation. Sidewalks are not included in required coverage. This will reduce the total coverage to 242,564 sq. ft. to be 48% LUC 3.2.9 14. Please correct the total required parking for three (3) bedroom units from ninety-three (93) to ninety-two (92). Fractional amounts less than one-half (1/2) are rounded down to the nearest whole number. LUC 3.3.3.8 15. Please correct provided parking calculations. Totals provided under provided parking, garage and surface parking, and what is actually shown in plan view does not match. This total will affect the bicycle parking calculations depending on the correct amount. 16. Please add wheel-stop curbing to all applicable parking details for standard and handicap spaces where vehicles can overhang on to sidewalks, landscape areas, and to prevent damage to walls. The wheel-stop curbing will be placed two and one-half (2 1/2) feet from the front of the eighteen (18) foot long parking space. DS 3-05.2.3.C.1 & 2 17. The handicap parking detail does not provide an accurate depiction of parking being provided for this site. Spaces do not abut each other head-on. Van accessible spaces and access aisles must be a combination of sixteen (16) feet. Please revise and provide a detail that clearly depicts what is proposed for this site. 18. Please revise handicap sign detail. The fine amount is now $518. A note must be added stipulating that signage will be posted seven (7) feet to bottom of sign per TDOT regulations. 19. Parking spaces within the garage that abut a wall or pillar over six (6) inches in height, the required width of that parking spaces must be increased to ten (10) feet to provide extra width to allow passengers to enter and exit the vehicle on the side where the barrier exists. DS 3-05.2.1.B.3 20. Please dimension all PAALs within the garage. Minimum width for a two-way PAAL is twenty-four (24) feet. DS 3-05.2.1.C.1 21. Access aisles for handicap spaces shall be a minimum of sixty (60) inches and extend the full length of the parking spaces they served. This width is not to be reduced by placement of doors, storage rooms opening onto them. Please verify that all handicap access aisles within the parking garage meet this criterion. ANSI Sec. 502.4.2 and 502.4.3 22. Please provide details of all handicap access ramps. Curb ramps or diagonal curb ramps shall be provided at all pedestrian crossings of vehicle use areas and streets where accessible routes are required. They shall be located so they do not project into vehicular traffic lanes, parking spaces, or parking access aisles. Ramps shall be located or protected to prevent their obstruction by parked vehicles. ANSI 406 Curb ramps shall be a minimum of three (3) feet in width, exclusive of flared sides. The curb ramp flares shall not be steeper than 1:10. Counter slopes of adjoining gutters and road surfaces immediately adjacent to the curb ramp shall not be steeper than 1:20. The adjacent surfaces at transitions at curb ramps to walks, gutters and streets shall be at the same level. All slopes are to be indicated on the plan/plat and associated details. ANSI 406.2, 3, & 4 All accessible curb ramps shall have truncated domes installed that shall be twenty-four (24) inches minimum in the direction of travel and extend the full width of the curb ramp. The domes shall be located so the edge nearest the curb line is six (6) inches to eight (8) inches from the curb line. ANSI 406.12, ANSI 705 23. Please provide the dimensions from the edge of buildings to the property line for the north, east, and west. From the south provide the setback from the future curb location within Speedway Boulevard. DS 2-05.2.4.I 24. Please dimension all sidewalks on the development plan. Minimum width of sidewalks on site is four (4) feet And will be accessible. All accessible routes shall consist of a walking surface with a slope not steeper than 1:20. The cross slope of a walking surface shall not be steeper than 1:48. All slopes are to be indicated on the plan/plat and associated details (ANSI 403.3). All cross slopes will not exceed two (2) percent and the sidewalk will be designed and constructed to convey the ten (10) year flood flows under the sidewalk. DS 2-08.5.1 25. Please provide a sidewalk from the existing sidewalk in Speedway to the pedestrian path within the project site. Per DS 2-08.4.1.D sidewalks must connect all areas of the development and must connect to the pedestrian circulation path located in any adjacent street. DS 2-08.4.1.D 26. The pedestrian path crosses through the off-street loading zone. This creates an unsafe situation for pedestrians. Please relocate sidewalk to go around the front of the off-street loading space or relocate the off-street loading space. 27. Per rezoning condition 16 there is to be a pedestrian connection from the interior pedestrian circulation path to the private path along Rosehill Wash. Where the system crosses parking area access lanes, crosswalks of a different texture and/or color than the surrounding, access lane materials shall be used. C9-06-21 Condition 16 28. The GFA provided within the building footprints does not correspond to the GFA provided on sheet 1 of 8. Please verify and correct. 29. Please dimension all building footprints shown on the development plan. DS 2-05.2.4.N 30. If the condominium clubhouse is open to the public than the square footage must be included in the off-street loading calculation, thus requiring that two off-street loading spaces be provided instead of one (see comment 6). LUC 3.4.5.3 31. The off-street loading space is required to demonstrate maneuverability into and out by a vehicle that it was intended for. The size of the maneuvering area shall be based on the national standards for turning radii. Please provide. LUC 3.4.4.2.C 32. Bicycle parking provided on the DP does not meet the requirements of DS 2-09. Per DS 2-09.4.1 Class 2 bicycle parking facilities will be located no more than fifty (50) feet from the main building entrance(s) and will be along the front side of the building as well as along other sides of the building that has an entrance. Bicycle access through the development will be separate from the pedestrian ways. Vehicular access may be used as bicycle access. Bicycle access to a parking facility may cross a pedestrian way at a right angle (DS2-09.3.2). Multiple rack bicycle parking require a minimum thirty (30) inches between spaces of posts or racks (DS 2-09.5.1.A). The type of rack proposed does not provide two-point support for bicycles. See DS 2-09.8.0 Figures 2-7 for acceptable and unacceptable rack types, Figure 8 for rack location, and Figure 9 for dimensional requirements. Please review DS 2-09 and provide the necessary corrections to the bicycle parking as required. Once changes are provided and reviewed further comments may result. 33. Please note that depending on what is determined as the correct amount of motor vehicle parking provided the bicycle parking calculations may change. (See comment 14) 34. Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, freestanding, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Also indicate if there are existing billboards on site. Billboards will be required to meet all LUC requirements as stated in LUC Sec. 3.5.4.26. If none exists please state so. DS 2-05.2.4.W & LUC 3.5.4.26 35. Please provide a detail of how mechanical equipment is screened and integrated into the overall site design as required by Rezoning Condition 14. C9-06-21 Condition 14 If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Karol Aragonez, (520) 791-5550, ext. 74960. KAA S:\zoning review\karol\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D07-0019dp.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents. |
| 05/21/2007 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#181319 May 17, 2007 Transwest Partners, LLC Attn: Joshua T. Westling 2850 E. Skyline Dr, Ste 200 Tucson, AZ 85741-2107 Dear Joshua Westling: SUBJECT: The Lofts @ Dorado Country Club D07-0019 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted May 10, 2007. It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. Not all PM equipment was shown on the drawings. See sheet 4 of 8 if there is a a conflict with the existing underground feeder. The customer will pay to relocate and install the civil system. There are a lot of electrical / utility easements and there is a note on sheet 5 of 8 that indicates where there may be underground lines. A bluestake will help the developer to identify the actual location of the facilities and to determine if there are any conflicts with the proprosed development. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. In order to apply for electric service, call the New Construction Department at (520) 918-8300. Submit a final set of plans including approved site, offsite and electrical load plans. Include a CD with the AutoCAD version of the plans. If easements are required, they will be secured by separate instrument. Your final plans should be sent to: Tucson Electric Power Company Attn: Ms. Mary Boice New Business Project Manager P. O. Box 711 (DB-101) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-917-8732 Please call the area Designer Nancy DiMaria at (520) 918-8267, should you have any questions. Sincerely, Henrietta Noriega Office Specialist Design/Build hn Enclosures cc: J. DeZubeldia, (Copy of letter only) N. DiMaria, Tucson Electric Power |
| 05/21/2007 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 05/21/2007 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | May 21, 2007 To: Jaime DeZubeldia, Olsson Associates Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6579), representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environmental Quality Subject: The Lofts at Dorado Country Club Tentative Plat/Development Plan – 1st Submittal D07-0019 The proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project have been reviewed on behalf of the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) and the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. Obtain a letter from the PCWMD's Development Services Section, written within the past 90 days, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for the project is available in the downstream public sewerage system and provide a copy of that letter to this office. The required form to request such a letter may be found at: http://www.pima.gov/wwm/forms/docs/CapResponseRequest.pdf. The development plan for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. All Sheets: Add the case number, D07-0019, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than any cross reference numbers. No wastewater review fees will be charged for sheets where this is the only required revision. Sheet 1: Show the public and private sewer lines using different line-types, so that they can readily be distinguished from each other. Also show and describe examples of these different line types in the legend on Sheet 1. This can be accomplished by labeling the existing sewer line in the legend as PUBLIC and the proposed sewer line as PRIVATE. Sheet 4:The existing sewer line pipe size is not clearly marked on the plan. Also the sewer directional flow arrows are missing. Sheet 4: Clearly mark the sewer line easement with width and recordation information for the existing public sewer running across the property. Sheet 4: The last public manhole (furthest east ) needs to be labeled w/IMS # rim and invert elevations. Sheet 4: The two manholes labeled on the plan are both mislabeled. Please revise. Sheet 4: In to remove a section of the public sewer line approval must be granted from PCWMD. Contact Tim Rowe @ (520)740-6547. Sheet 4 & 5: Show all of the BCS connections to the buildings on plan. Show the slope/length/size and pipe material for all BCS. Also show the cleanouts with rim and invert elevations. Sheet 4 & 5: The Keynote 19 should be revised to read as follows: EXISTING SEWER LINE TO BE REMOVED. Sheet: 5: The IMS #’s w/rim and invert elevations for all existing manholes within 100’ of this project need to be shown on plan. The existing manholes at the south end of the project are not labeled. Sheet 5: The terminal sewer line segments marked as 8 and 12 must have a minimum slope of 1%. Please revise. Also the sewer line segments should be labeled as private in the sewer key notes. This office will require a revised set of bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. Pima County Code Title 13.20.030.A.2 requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the development plan. The fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet. The next submittal of this project will be the 2nd submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $150.00(made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter. If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly. If you have any questions regarding the above mentioned comments, please contact me . |
| 05/23/2007 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: July 17, 2007 To: Patricia Gehlen CDRC/Zoning Manager FROM: Loren Makus, EIT Engineering Division SUBJECT: The Lofts at Dorado Country Club Development Plan / Tentative Plat D07-0019 (First Review) T14S, R15E, Section 6 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Tentative Plat The Tentative Plat and Drainage Report have been reviewed by the Engineering Division and we do not recommend approval at this time. The following review comments must be addressed. 1. Clarify the status of the existing utility easements. Are they to be abandoned or are they compatible with the proposed structures. 2. Add to note 4 that the project is designed to meet the requirements of the WASH Ordinance. 3. Indicate that truncated domes will be used for all curb access ramps. (See keynotes 2 and 5) 4. Indicate the area of Block 1. 5. Revise the typical street sections to provide 5 foot sidewalks along each proposed street. Clarify whether the sections are for streets or for PAALs. Four foot sidewalks are acceptable along PAALs. 6. Provide recordation information for access easements to this parcel or explain how legal access will be provided. 7. Information on sheets 4 and 5 is overlapping to the extent that it is illegible in several areas. 8. Ensure that all lettering is in at least 12 point type. 9. Show a pavement or concrete pad connection between the vehicle use area and the solid waste enclosure. 10. Delineate the existing and proposed floodplains on the tentative plat/development plan. Provide a general note indicating that a floodplain use permit will be required for this project. Note that FEMA water surface elevations will be used to establish finish floor elevations until a letter of map revision is issued. The current FIRM indicates a water surface elevation of 2539 ft NGVD29 just north of Speedway. 11. Show how a sediment trap is incorporated into the design of the retention/detention basin. 12. Show the proposed path on the tentative plat/development plan. The delineaton of the path on the landscape plan seems to indicate that the path will enter the wash. 13. Show the proposed water harvesting areas on the tentative plat/development plan. Also indicate that all landscape areas will be depressed six to ten inches to maximize water harvesting unless it is technically infeasible to achieve this. The depressed landscape areas must be reflected on the grading plans submitted for the grading permit. 14. Provide the cut and fill quantities on the plan. There are significant issues that remain to be decided as part of the WASH review. Additional comments may be forthcoming once the overlay issues have been resolved. Please note that a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan will be required as part of the grading permit submittal. Submit a revised Development Plan / Tentative Plat. Include a detailed response letter, detailing how each comment has been addressed. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 520.837.4927 or loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov. Loren Makus, EIT Senior Engineering Associate |
| 05/23/2007 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | Pima Association Of Governments5/22/07CASE: D07-0019 LOFTS @ DORADO CNTRY CLUB: DEVEL PLANCOMMENT: NO OBJECTIONS OR ADVERSE COMMENTSDescription/ITE CodeUnitsExpectedExpected PM PeakUnitsDaily TripsTrips - TotalTruck Terminal 030AcresGeneral Light Industrial 110TSF GrossMini Warehouse 151TSF GrossSingle Family Homes 210DUApartments 220DUCondo, Townhouse 230DU1971,154102Mobile Home Park 240DUAssisted Living 254DUAll Suites Hotel 311RoomsMotel 320RoomsHealth/Fitness Club 493TSF GrossChurch 560TSF GrossDaycare Center 565TSF GrossGeneral Office 710 (Equation)TSF GrossGeneral Office 710 (Rate)TSF GrossMedical Dental Office 720TSF GrossBuilding Materials/Lumber 812TSF GrossHardware/Paint Store 816TSF GrossNursery (Garden Center) 817TSF GrossShopping Center 820 (Equation)TSF GrossShopping Center 820 (Rate)TSF GrossQuality Restaurant 931TSF Gross5.751343High Turnover/Sit Down Rest. 932TSF GrossFast Food w/o Drive Thru 933TSF GrossFast Food with Drive Thru 934TSF GrossDrive Thru Only 935TSF GrossNot AvailableService Station 944Fuel PositionServ.Station w/ Conven.Mkt 945Fuel PositionTire Store 848Service BaysNot AvailableSupermarket 850TSF GrossConvenien. Mkt (Open 24 hrs) 851TSF GrossConvenien. Mkt (Open 16 Hrs) 852TSF GrossNot AvailableConvenien. Mkt w/ Gas Pumps 853TSF GrossDiscount Club 861TSF GrossPharmacy/Drugstore w/ Drive-thru 881TSF GrossFurniture Store 890TSF GrossWalk-In Bank 911TSF GrossDrive-In Bank 912Drive-In LanesTOTAL1,667145Expected PM PeakDaily TripsTrips - TotalFor questions please contact:Tom Cooney, Travel Forecasting ManagerPima Association of Governments177 N. Church Ave, #405Tucson, AZ 85701Tel: (520) 792-1093, Fax: (520) 620-6981Web: www.PAGnet.org and www.RTAmobility.comTrip Generation Using Rates From The 7th Edition ITE Trip Generation Report |
| 05/25/2007 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Required 14ft x 40ft clear approach to refuse enclosure not provided. DS 6-01.4.1.C. Approach in conflict with concrete curb. Recommend repositioning enclosure so service vehicle has a direct approach from PAAL. Or angle enclosure slightly to allow for approach. 2. One double enclosure at NE corner of complex is not sufficient for whole complex. Clarify limited accomodations. Commercial property should require separate enclosure from residential. Recommend providing an additional double enclosure at the SW corner and two single enclosures, one at southcentral and one at northcentral. 3. Double trash enclosure detail A sheet 8, Gates must be designed with the ability to be secured in the open postion during service. DS 6-01.4.2.C.4. Identify and annotate on detail. Recommend including " Qty of 4-1in dia. x 6in long galvanized pipe to be flush with concrete. Locate per design. Also, mount gates to face of post so allows gates to open a minimum of 180 degrees. Please make necessary corrections upon resubmittal. |
| 05/30/2007 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Add the CDRC case number and any related case numbers (rezoning and WASH) to the landscape and native plant preservation plans. DS 2-07.2.1.B 2) Show all proposed screen walls and landscape borders on the development plans in accordance with DS 2-07.2.X. 3) An unpaved planting area, which is a minimum of thirty-four (34) square feet in area and four (4) feet in width, must be provided for each canopy tree. Revise the landscape and development plans to provide dimensions in compliance with. LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.c 4) The project is subject to the provisions of the Watercourse, Amenities, Safety, and Habitat Ordinance, TCC 29. A separate application and review is required. Contact Patricia Gehlen/Zoning Manager at 791-5640 Ext. 1179 for submittal requirements. A pre-submittal meeting is required. 5) The site contains regulatory floodplain areas that may contain riparian habitat. This habitat may not unnecessarily altered per TCC Sec. 26-5.2. Refer to DS 2-13 for the preparation, submittal, and review procedures for development within areas that have environmentally valuable habitat in conformance with Article 1, Division 1, Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Area Regulations. 6) Submit an Environmental Resource Report (ERR) per DS 2-13.2.5.B.1 if encroachment is proposed in the regulatory area (50' study area or 100 year floodplain). The report will document (1) the areas that contain riparian and wildlife habitat that is to be preserved and (2) those areas without such habitat within the regulatory floodplain. Include all required content. A written explanation as to why the development is necessary shall be submitted with the appropriate plans. DS 2-13.2.5.B 7) A written explanation as to why the development is necessary shall be submitted with the appropriate plans. DS 2-13.2.5.B 8) All tentative plats, development plans, site plans, plot plans or other plans providing for approval of development within property that includes any Regulated Area as defined in Development Standard 2-13.2.2.A shall identify and delineate the Regulated Areas and the Protected Riparian Area Revise the plans as necessary. 9) Revise the development plan to include floodplain information, including the location of the 100-year flood limits for all flows of one hundred (100) cfs or more with 100-year flood water surface elevations, shall be indicated. 10) All development within the Protected Riparian Area shall be reviewed to insure that there is no unnecessary disturbance of the riparian resources. Refer to DS 2-13.2.5.B.2 for the section on Development Restrictions and revise the plans as necessary to comply. 11) Where any development encroaches within the Protected Riparian Areas, mitigation will be required. A mitigation report shall be submitted with the Environmental Resource Report demonstrating that the proposed mitigation is in conformance with this subsection and applicable codes. DS 2-13.2.5.C 12) Landscape plans are required to document compliance with the mitigation plan requirements. A summary of mitigation and preservation requirements shall be included on the plans. The plans shall show the location of mitigation areas; techniques used for mitigating impacts to, or preservation of, natural areas; specifications for restoration and revegetation of disturbed areas; and general compliance with the applicable standards. Revise as necessary. 13) Encroachments that cross the Protected Riparian Area shall be located and constructed to minimize disturbance of the habitat and wildlife movement and utilities will be placed either in proposed or existing public right of way along roadway, bike path, or paved walkway improvements or within approved easements. DS 2-13.2.5.B.2 14) Ownership of the Protected Riparian Area shall be provided in one or more of the methods set forth in DS 2-13.2.6 to insure continued preservation of the area. Refer to the standards and revise the plans and provide additional documentation as appropriate. 15) Where natural floodprone areas, such as washes, channels, drainageways, etc., exist within the development plan boundaries of the drawing, water surface contours for the 100-year flood with water surface elevations indicated must be shown and clearly labeled. 16) Revise the native plant preservation plans to show the limits of grading and identify preserved areas on the site. DS 2-15.3.4.A 17) Show gabion locations and existing vegetation to be preserved on the landscape plan. DS 2-07.2.2.B & DS 2-07.2.2.A.1 18) The site is subject to conditions of rezoning. The conditions require compliance with the preliminary development plan that shows a natural drainageway bottom with retention of existing vegetation. Clarify how the condition is met or exceeded. C9-06-21. 19) The NPPO refers to a Wash Plan that includes details and mitigation calculations. No plans were received by the Landscape Section. The W.A.S.H. Mitigation calculations could not be verified. Provide mitigation per DS 2-15.2.5.B.3. 20) Include all of the protected plants in the NPPO mitigation calculations on sheet NPPP-2. The preservation requirements of LUC 3.8.6.2.A also apply. LUC 3.8.3.3 21) Revise the landscape plan to identify and provide the square footage of any oasis allowance areas and the maximum allowable area calculation. include existing turf areas. DS 2-07.2.2.A.2.b 22) Identify any improvements or groundcover treatments for the courtyards. LUC 3.7.2.7 23) The proposed commercial uses and vehicular use areas are required to be screened from adjacent parcels along the north and west sides of the site per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. Revise the plans as necessary to comply. The east side qualifies for a partial exception per LUC 3.7.3.6.C. |
| 06/01/2007 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D07-0019 The Lofts at Dorado Country Club () Tentative Plat/Development Plan ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment () Other – Elevations (west and south only) CROSS REFERENCE: C9-06-21 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: General Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: N/A COMMENTS DUE BY: June 4, 2007 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 ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other – north and east color elevations REVIEWER: J. Hershenhorn 791-4505 DATE: 6/1/07 D07-0019 Lofts at Dorado Country Club Please add the following General Notes: Signs shall be designed to be architecturally integrated into the site, including colors and textures; and they shall be incorporated into the landscaping so that they will not be concealed by mature landscaping. Exterior mechanical equipment shall be screened and integrated into the site design. Commercial loading activities shall be restricted to the hours between 6:00 AM and 7:00 PM. To demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition #11, please submit north and east color elevations. To demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition #16, please show the perimeter path, including all connections between the path and the onsite sidewalk system, on the Development Plan (DP). Detail I on sheet 5/8 of the DP shows gabion bank stabilization along the Rose Hill Wash. It appears that the perimeter path crosses over the gabions in seven locations. Please provide a detail of the pedestrian crossings over the gabions on the DP. These crossings need to be safe and easily traversed. On the DP, please provide a detail of the crosswalks over the parking area acess lanes, and show that the crosswalks will be of a different texture and/or color than the surrounding access lane materials. The key to the keynotes shows 4 (concrete sidewalk), 13 (72” high masonry screenwall) and 33 (60” high masonry screenwall), but I don’t see these anywhere on the plans. Please address this. Please provide a decorative wall detail on the DP, to demonstrate how rezoning condition 17 will be satisfied. Indicate the materials that screen walls will be constructed of, to demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition 18. |
| 06/04/2007 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | June 4, 2007 ACTIVITY NUMBER: D07-0019 PROJECT NAME: The Lofts at Dorado Country Club PROJECT ADDRESS: 6601 E Speedway Blvd PROJECT REVIEWER: Jose E. Ortiz PE, Traffic Engineer Resubmittal Required: Traffic Engineering does not recommend approval of the Development Plan; therefore a revised Development Plan is required for re-submittal. The following items must be revised or added to the development plan. 1. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. 2. The sight visibility triangle for a PAAL to an arterial roadway should be 20' x 345' (DS 3-01.5.3) drawings illustrates 15' x 320'. 3. Label the radius of all curb returns off of Speedway. The access points shall have 25' radius curb returns. (DS 3-01.0 figure 6) 4. Provide a copy of the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Kimley Horn. The analysis shall meet the requirements established in the City of Tucson Transportation Access Management Guidelines Section 6.3.2 Category I. 5. A permit or a private improvement agreement will be necessary for any work performed within the Right-of-way. Contact Permits and Codes at (520) 791-5100 for permit information. 6. Cross section L/3 refers to Street "A" as a PAAL, but Street "A" is labeled as a public street on sheet 5/8. Traffic Engineering recommends that the status of Street "A" remain private if the following standard roadway section (DS 3-01 Figure 2) cannot be obtained. 7. Is the main roadway entrance into this proposed development a public or private roadway? 8. If Street "A" is public then the street must be designed with parking on both sides of the street, unless parking is provided in common areas distributed throughout the subdivision, at a ratio of one parking space per dwelling within the subdivision. (DS 3-01.2.4.D) If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x76730 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 06/05/2007 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | 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: D07-0019 THE LOFTS AT DORADO COUNTRY CLUB/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 6/05/07 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and the following matters must be resolved prior to our approval: Delete direction from street names in Location Map. Delete “North” and spell out Boulevard for Dorado on sheets 3, 5 & 7. Title Block Legal Description should include the Block Numbers of Dorado Country Club Estates that this project will be located on. What will become of Dorado Club Drive platted from Speedway through Blocks 20, 21-1 and 21-2? Is the existing Club House located within this project or are buildings new? Label Condominium Units per Pima County Code (see attached). Unit Numbers will need to be listed in the Title Block for recordation of Final Plat. Please explain the use of Block 1. Please provide a copy of the recorded deed for parcel split prior to approval. es |
| 06/05/2007 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Passed | |
| 06/05/2007 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 06/05/2007 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: June 5, 2007 TO: DSD_CDRC@ tucsonaz.gov FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov SUBJECT: D07-0019 The Lofts at Dorado Country Club: Development Plan(5-4-07) Staff has no comments. |
| 06/05/2007 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 06/06/2007 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | No comment |
| 07/18/2007 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES July 18, 2007 Jaime M. DeZubeldia Olsson Associates 3025 West Ina Road Tucson, Arizona 85741-2107 Subject: D07-019 Lofts @ Dorado Country Club Development Plan Dear Jamie: Your submittal of May 4, 2007 for the above project has been reviewed by the Community Design Review Committee and the comments reflect the outstanding requirements which need to be addressed before approval is granted. Please review the comments carefully. Once you have addressed all of the comments, please submit the following revised documents and a DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 9 Copies Revised Development Plan (Zoning, Wastewater, Engineering, ESD, Landscape, DUPD, Traffic, Addressing, DSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Engineering, Landscape, DUPD, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO Plan (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Color Elevations (DUPD, DSD) 2 Copies Traffic Impact Analysis (Traffic, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. Sincerely, Patricia Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 777-6728 |