Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Active
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Permit Number - DP15-0139
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Active
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/12/2015 | AROMERO4 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/13/2015 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Reqs Change | See additional document in PRO. Office of the Pima County Assessor 115 N. Church Ave. Tucson, Arizona 85701 BILL STAPLES ASSESSOR TO: City of Tucson Planning and Development Services Department FROM: Suzanne Gilpin GIS Cartographer Pima County Assessor's Office (520)724-4387 DATE: November 13, 2015 RE: Assessor's Review and Comments Regarding DP15-0139/485 SOUTH STONE RUSSELL TOWNHOMES-Tentative Plat 2nd Submittal * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Plat meets Assessor's Office requirements. __X___ Plat does not meet Assessor's Office requirements. COMMENTS: " The title block must be in the lower right hand corner. It must have the number of Lots or Units or Blocks or any combination of these. It must have the common areas listed, if there are any. With particular reference to Lot 10 missing in title block. It must have the Section, Township and Range. " There must be a Section Tie, with a bearing and dimension from the Section corner or Quarter corner to the Point of Tie on the subdivision. " There appears to be two names for the subdivision. The title block says "485 South Stone Russell Townhomes" and the top states "485 South Stone Avenue Lofts" Which one is correct? 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. |
| 11/18/2015 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Reqs Change | See additional documents in PRO. Please see the attached plans with Addressing comments attached as sticky notes for Project #DP15-0139. |
| 11/20/2015 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera, Principal Planner PROJECT: DP15-0139 485 S. Stone Avenue Development Package - Tentative Plat Lot 1-9 and Common Area A - FLD TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 30, 2015 DUE DATE: December 11, 2015 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. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Package Standards listed in section 2-06 of the City of Tucson Administrative Manual. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC). 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 October 15, 2016. ********************************************************************* 2-06.4.7 - General Notes The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable. 01. FOLLOW UP TO PREVIOUS COMMENT 6 - The document noted in the response comment from Matt Stuart was not included with the re-submittal package. 2-06.4.7.A.6 - If a plan or plat is prepared in conjunction with other applications or overlays or the parcel being developed is subject to conditions of an application processed previously, additional information must be added to the plan. Such applications and overlays include, but are not limited to: annexations; rezonings; special exceptions; Board of Adjustment variances; Design Development Options; Technical Standard Modification Request; overlays (Airport Environs Zone, Environmental Resource Zone, Gateway Corridor Zone, Hillside Development Zone, Historic Preservation Zone, Major Streets and Routes, Rio Nuevo District, Scenic Corridor Zone, WASH); Modification of Development Regulations through the Downtown Area Infill Incentive District or Rio Nuevo District; Downtown Heritage Incentive Zone; or, Design Review Board. Provide the following information on the plan. PREVIOUS COMMENT 6: This site is within the Armory Park National Register District. While the existing buildings on lot 10 are listed as non-contributing buildings but as a courtesy, contact should be made with the Historic Preservation Manager Jonathan Mabry at 837-6968 to verify if any additional review is required with regards to the existing or proposed development. Provide with the next submittal of the DP any documentation related to this comment. ********************************************************************* 02. FOLLOW UP TO PREVIOUS COMMENT 13 - The interior lot lines were not re-drawn in a bolder line type and are still hard to Distinguish. Draw a bolder interior lot line(s). Once the interior lot lines have been redrawn in a bolder line weight the Common areas will also be clearly defined as was requested in the Previous comment 15. 2-06.4.9.A - Draw in all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements. PREVIOUS COMMENT 13: Label on the site plan, sheet four (4), the information as noted by the standard above. The lot lines on sheet four (4) shall be drawn in a bolder line work to clearly delineate each lot. The lot lines are very light and are not very easy to distinguish from the rest of the line work. Revise as required. ********************************************************************* 03. FOLLOW UP TO REVIOUS COMMENT 20 - List the B of A Case number as a general note on the cover sheet along with the date of approval and conditions of approval. The B of A case number shall also been listed as reference in the lower right corner of all plan sheets. 2-06.4.9.I - Show all right-of-way dedications on or abutting the site and label. If the development package documents have been prepared in conjunction with a subdivision plat or is required as a condition of approval of a review process, such as a rezoning, street dedications in accordance with the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan may be required by these processes. Projects bounded by streets having only a portion of the right-of-way width dedicated will be required to dedicate right-of-way, up to one-half, to complete the street width. Should there be any proposed street or alley vacation, provide this information. If vacation has occurred, include the recording information. 2-06.4.9.J - If street dedication is not required or proposed and the project site is adjacent to a Major Street or Route, draw the Major Street right-of-way lines for those streets. (Add the MS&R future sidewalk, right-of-way lines, sight visibility triangles, etc.) PREVIOUS COMMENT 20: Stone Avenue is listed on the MS&R map as a major street. The future right of way for Stone Avenue per the current MS&R map is 90 feet. Currently the right of way is 79.2' total. Unless the MS&R map is revised and adopted and the ROW for Stone Avenue is reduced, additional ROW will be necessary for the overall widening. This will affect the site and could require B of A variances for such items as building setbacks, density and coverage. It does not appear that this project has been designed to comply with the future right of way taking for future roadway widening. Contact Russlyn Wells for information on the B of A process. If a variance application is processed and approved, list the case number in the lower right corner of all plan sheets and list as a general note on the cover sheet, the B of A case number, date and conditions of approval. ********************************************************************* 04. FOLLOW UP TO REVIOUS COMMENT 21 - The accessible route to Stone Avenue has not been demonstrated on Sheet four (4) or Sheet five. Revise all plan sheets depicting the site with the accessible route to Stone Avenue. 2-06.4.9.M - Grading Plan 2-06.4.9.M.1 - A conceptual grading plan is required on projects with significant topographic conditions. The PDSD Engineering Administrator or designee will determine the need for such a plan. 2-06.4.9.M.2 - Concurrent Review. For all projects, grading plans may be included in the development package and will be reviewed concurrently. PREVIOUS COMMENT 21: The grading plan is reviewed concurrently with site plan. Ensure that any changes that are made to the site plan are also made to the grading plan, landscape sheets, etc. Once the DP plan is approved the grading plan is also approved. On the grading plan sheet, clarify if there is an accessible sidewalk that connects to the Stone Avenue sidewalk. It appears on the grading plan that a sidewalk is proposed next to the sidewalk that includes stairs to the bicycle parking area but does not show up on the site plan sheet. Label the running and cross slopes of the accessible sidewalk to Stone Avenue. ********************************************************************* 05. FOLLOW UP TO PREVIOUS COMMENT 22 - It is acknowledged that a B of A Variance is being requested that includes Street building setbacks. This comment will remain until the B of A process has been completed. 2-06.4.9.O - All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown. PREVIOUS COMMENT22: Draw and label the building setbacks from all street frontages based on the ADT of each street that is adjacent to this development. General note 16 on sheet one (1) must be revised to correctly list the required building setbacks from Stone Avenue, 16th Street and Russell Avenue. List the required and proposed building setbacks based on the wall heights adjacent to each street. The interior building setbacks may be zero as long as the building code requirements are met. Draw and label the interior building setbacks from all residential units. ********************************************************************* 06. FOLLOW UP TO PREVIOUS COMMENT 24 - See follow up comment 4. 2-06.4.9.R - Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual. 24. COMMENT: See related comment 21. ********************************************************************* 07. FOLLOW UP TO PREVIOUS COMMENT 31: Same as previous comment 31. PREVIOUS COMMENT 31: Additional comments may be forthcoming based on the revisions to the DP plan sheets and responses to the zoning review comments. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package site plan and any requested documents. |
| 11/30/2015 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Reqs Change | see Zoning comments related to pedestrian access. |
| 12/04/2015 | PAUL BAUGHMAN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | Approved per approval of TSMRs and clarification from Jim V. on pedestrain access and PAAL separation requirements. |
| 12/07/2015 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 12/09/2015 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL SECTION 2-10.0.0: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS Identification and Descriptive Data 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. The landscape plan will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet: Development Review Board (DRB) case; and/or, Any other relevant case number for reviews or modifications that affect the site. Include with re-submittal approval documentation. Indicate on the lower right hand corner of the site plan, the variance case number, date of approval, and any conditions imposed. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ARTICLE 7: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING Residential Subdivisions Street landscape borders for residential subdivisions of eight or more lots shall conform to the following standards. Street landscape borders are only required along the exterior boundaries of subdivisions. Landscape borders are not required along front yard street frontages. Street landscape borders must be a minimum of ten feet wide as measured from the street property line. Portion of street landscape buffer along Stone Ave is not 10'. It's understood that a variance is being requested for this The landscape border must be recorded as common area and maintained by the homeowners association (HOA) for the subdivision. The subdivision CC&Rs shall reference and require compliance with the maintenance standards in Section 7.6.8, Maintenance. The PDSD Director may allow the recording of a public use easement with the subdivision plat in cases where the standards of this section are the only reason for the creation of an HOA. The public use easement shall require the abutting property owner to install and maintain a landscape border in accordance with the standards in this section. Street landscape borders fronting on local streets may be reduced to a minimum of five feet. Use of the Public Right-of-Way Provide written approval from Gary Wittwer for tree plantings within the public ROW. Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. Additional comments may apply. |
| 12/10/2015 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Provide the basis for the daily flow calculations; the current Arizona Administrative Code Title 18 Chapter 9 Table 1 does not use the same values that you used in your calculations. [Initial comment: Determine the total daily flow for the private sewage collection system for this activity using Table 1, Chapter 9, Title 18 of the Arizona Administrative Code. If the total daily flow is greater than 3,000 Gallons per Day, the system must be submitted to the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality for their approval prior to obtaining a permit for constructing the sewage collection system from the City of Tucson. Reference A. R. S. 49-104 (B) (13).] |
| 12/14/2015 | BVIESTE1 | COT NON-DSD | ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES | Approved | The Development/Tentative Plat Package has been reviewed on behalf of the Environmental Services Dept. and is approved. If there are any questions, I can be reached at kperry@perryengineering.net. |
| 12/15/2015 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | 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) A disk containing all items submitted 3) All items requested by review staff 4) All items needed to approve this tentative plat |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/12/2015 | ANY | REJECT SHELF | RECEIVED |