Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Permit Number - DP17-0297
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/16/2018 | BLARSON1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 03/20/2018 | KELLY LEE | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Approv-Cond | December 27, 2017 RE: DP17-0297 Sueno Hermosa, Lots 1-6 / 1st Submittal, Received December 20, 2017 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on DP17-0297, Sueno Hermosa, Lots 1-6; 1st Submittal, a Tentative Plat application for a Minor Subdivision with Site/Grading of an approximately 1.5 acre site located southeast of the intersection of East Alvord Road and South Randall Boulevard. The zoning for the project site is residential (R-2) and will remain unchanged. This project site is proposed to be developed into single family homes. This site is within the Tucson International Airport avigation easement requirements and public disclosure area, FAA traffic pattern airspace, and FAA Part 77 airspace. According to the FAA Notice Criteria Tool, this project is located in proximity to a navigation facility and could impact navigation signal reception. The applicant shall file Form 7460 with the FAA at least 45 days before construction activities begin for the project. Any cranes used for the project must also be identified with Form 7460. Please file Form 7460 at https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/portal.jsp The Tucson Airport Authority conditionally approves the subject request contingent upon the following conditions of approval, as noted below. These conditions should be identified in the general notes of the approved development plan. "That prior to the City's approval of any construction permit for a permanent building, the property owner shall record the Avigation Easement prior to the subdivision process which discloses the existence, and operational characteristics of the Tucson International Airport to future owners or tenants of the property and further conveys the right to the public to lawfully use the airspace above the property. The content of such documents shall be according to the form and instructions provided." The current property owner or person authorized to sign on behalf of the current property owner shall complete, sign, and record the Avigation Easement. Please record the Avigation Easement with the Pima County Recorder's Office. Once the Avigation Easement is recorded please send a copy of the recorded easement to Tucson Airport Authority by either email (send to srobidoux@flytucson.com) or to the mailing address provided below. Scott Robidoux Senior Airport Planner Tucson Airport Authority 7250 South Tucson Boulevard Suite 300 Tucson, AZ 85756 The developer shall provide the Airport Disclosure Statement form, at time of sale, to the new property owners with new unit purchases. In the event this proposed project does not involve the sale of new units, but is instead offering rental residential units to the public, the new tenant of the rental unit shall be provided a copy of the Airport Disclosure Statement form. The intent of the Airport Disclosure Statement form is to educate and notify the new residents that they are living near an airport. The new property owner or new tenant shall forward a signed copy of the Airport Disclosure Statement form to: Scott Robidoux Senior Airport Planner Tucson Airport Authority 7250 South Tucson Boulevard Suite 300 Tucson, AZ 85756 Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or concerns regarding this comment letter. I can be reached by email at srobidoux@flytucson.com or by telephone at 520-573-4811. Respectfully, Scott Robidoux, Senior Airport Planner cc file |
| 04/10/2018 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Reqs Change | SUENO HERMOSA, LOTS 1-6 DP17-0297 April 10, 2018 Zelin Canchola TDOT The plan is acceptable however the references to standard details shall be per PAG Standard Specifications. Change all references to PAG, including key notes. zelin.canchola@tucsonaz.gov |
| 04/11/2018 | JVINCEN1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 04/13/2018 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed prior to landscape approval. |
| 04/13/2018 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/16/2018 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Reqs Change | ***Attachment can be viewed in documents table on PRO.*** DP17-0297 Sueno Hermosa, Lots 1-6 / 2nd Submittal is being Returned for Corrections by Pima County Addressing. The attached pdf contains Addressing’s comments. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Robin Freiman Addressing Official Pima County Development Services Department 201 N Stone AV – 1st Floor Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 724-7570 |
| 04/16/2018 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-RESIDENTIAL | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Provide the rim elevation of the proposed manholes. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012. 2. Where the finish floor elevation is less than 12 inches above the elevation of the next upstream manhole or cleanout in the public sewer or private sewer collection system, a backwater valve shall be installed in the building drain or branch of the building drain serving that floor. Floors discharging from above that reference point shall not discharge through the backwater valve. Indicate which lots will require the installation of a backwater valve. Reference: Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson. 3. The HCS connections to the proposed private sewer collection system shall be per standard detail RWRD 401 and the centerline of the building sewer shall be at a right angle to the axis of the private sewer collection system. |
| 04/18/2018 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | 1. Information on the tentative plat and grading plan sheets is still not completely legible because print is layered over other print. Revise the plan so all lettering is legible. Additional comments may be forthcoming once the plans are legible. 2. Explain the question mark in detail 4 on sheet 2. 3. The boundary between lot 6 and common area B is not well defined. Please use the same line weight for all interior lot lines. 4. Clearly identify the common areas in the subdivision title block with the purpose of each listed with the designation. [e.g. Common Area A, (private street)] 5. On the existing survey, both adjacent streets are identified as Randall Boulevard. Please identify the streets correctly. |
| 04/19/2018 | ALEXANDRA HINES | 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) All approved documents submitted previously 3) A disk containing all items submitted 4) All items requested by review staff 5) All items needed to approve these plans |
| 04/19/2018 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Reqs Change | see zoning comments |
| 04/19/2018 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera PDSD Zoning Review Section PROJECT: Sueño Hermosa, Lots 1- 6 and Common Areas A, B, C Development Package (2ndt Review) DP17-0297 TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 19, 2018 DUE DATE: April 17, 2018 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and any redlined plans along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. 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 December 18, 2018. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS) The Land Surveyor's information was not included on the cover sheet as noted by the standard below. Include Richard Howell's information under the other registrant's info. 2-06.4.1 - The name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s), or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional, such as a surveyor, architect, landscape architect, or engineer. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines. 1. Follow Up To Previous Comment 8: The legal description on each sheet must include the following, "Tentative Plat for Sueño Hermosa, Lots 1-6 & Common Areas, A, B, & C, A re-subdivision of Los Ranchitos Number 6 Lot 246 Exc. W135' of the N150' Thereof, as recorded in Map & Plat Bk. 8 at Pg. 41". Relocate the legal description note on sheet one to the lower right corner of the cover sheet and add the same legal description note on all sheets in the same location. 2-06.4.2.B - A brief legal description and a statement as to whether the project is a re-subdivision are to be provided. On re-subdivisions, provide the recording information of the existing subdivision plat; PREVIOUS COMMENT 8: This project is part of a previously recorded plat. Revise the legal description to include the recorded lot and subdivision as noted by the standard above. 2. Follow Up To Previous Comment 9: The DP case number must be listed on all plan sheets next to the title block. Add the case number on sheets 2 and 7 through 12. Relocate the DP case number on sheet four for legibility. 2-06.4.3 - The administrative street address and relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet. PREVIOUS COMMENT 9: Provide the development package case number, DP17-0297, adjacent to the title block on each sheet. 3. Follow Up To Previous Comment 11: For legibility, revise the text height for the street names labeled on the location map to a minimum of 3/32. 2-06.4.4.B - Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and all streets that abut the subject property; and, PREVIOUS COMMENT 11: Label the following street names on the location map; Drexel Road, Bilby Road, Park Avenue, Campbell Avenue, Valencia Road, and Nogales Highway if within the one square mile area of the location map. Include the street names that abut the subject property Alvord Road and Randall Street. 2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions 4. Follow Up To Previous Comment 18: There are still multiple annotations on sheet 2 that are not legible. Review the text, distances, and curve and line data notes on the site plan sheet and assure that the text is legible. Also, assure that the text on sheet 3 and 4 is written from left to right and bottom to top. Assure that all relevant text is legible. See the redline markups on sheet 2 and 3. 2-06.4.8.A - Provide site boundary/subdivision perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system. PREVIOUS COMMENT 18: Review the site plan on sheet 3 and assure that the distance and bearings are legible. (There is a lot of the text that is overlapping notes, dimensions etc. Review the plan and assure that all information is legible.) It may also be best to provide a separate sheet that depicts the existing site conditions and culture instead of layering it on the proposed development / tentative plat drawing. 5. Follow Up To Previous Comment 19: It is still not clear on the site plans if there is a utility easement proposed along the frontage of each lot. There is a note with an arrow pointing to a dashed line and callout for a Common Area. If this is a common area, it shall be enclosed with a solid line and is to be labeled with the purpose of the common area and square footage. Keep in mind that if this is what is proposed the lot areas will decrease and in some cases the minimum lot size may be insufficient for two dwellings. If the area identified as common area c is to be for utility placement, it is best to reserve the area as a utility easement. If so label the width of the area and remove any annotation related to common area c. Label the square footage of Common Area "A". If the area labeled as Common Area C is to remain revise the line work to a solid dark line and annotate the use and square footage. 2-06.4.8.B - All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided. PREVIOUS COMMENT 19: If applicable provide the easement information as noted by the standard above. 6. Follow Up To Previous Comment 20: The information requested per the previous comment was not added to the site plan sheet 3. Add the information as required by the standard below. 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. PREVIOUS COMMENT 20: Provide the information for Alvord Road and Randall Blvd. as noted by the standard above. 7. Follow Up To Previous Comment 21: See related follow up comment 4 above. 2-06.4.9.A - Draw in all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements. PREVIOUS COMMENT 21: As noted in comment 18, the line work for the development plan / tentative plat are not very legible due to the existing culture layer. Assure that the line work for the DP / TP is consistent, i.e. all lines shall be the same width or weight, the center lines shall all be the same type etc. There are several liens on the drawing that appear to be one type of line and then it changes or are overlapped with another line type. It is strongly suggested that the existing culture line work be placed on a separate drawing and such as a survey drawing sheet. 8. Follow Up To Previous Comment 23: This comment was not addressed; see related follow up comment 5 above. 2-06.4.9.C - If the project has common areas, label each common area individually with a separate letter designation. Enclose with a solid line each common area, private street, etc., that will have separate restrictions, a separate homeowners' association, or any common area that is separated by a public right-of-way. PREVIOUS COMMENT 23: It is clear that the street is private and is labeled as a common area "A". What is not very clear on the plan is what is common area c supposed to be? All common areas must be defined with its own boundary and labeled with the distance and bearing. Common areas "B" or "C' has not been defined as such, revise the plan accordingly. 9. Follow Up To Previous Comment 26: The previous comment was not addressed in its entirety. The requirements for visitor parking have not been addressed. Address the visitor parking requirement on the plans. 2-06.4.9.H.4 - Indicate if existing streets are public or private; provide street names, widths, curbs, sidewalks, and utility locations, all fully dimensioned. PREVIOUS COMMENT 26: It is noted that the street within the subdivision will be a private street. Streets must be designed with parking on both sides of the street. If proposing no on street parking, visitor parking can be provided in a common area at a ratio of one space per unit, in this case 12 visitor parking spaces would be required if provided in a common area that complies with the parking lot design criteria in UDC 7.4.6. Visitor parking is based on a ratio of .25 spaces per dwelling when on-street parking is provided. When a street is designed with parking on both sides of the street, the number visitor parking space requirement is usually met. As noted above, a street must be designed with parking on sides of the street. When not providing on street parking a street must be designed with 24 foot drive lanes and vertical curbs, see T.S. 10-01.9.0 Figure 1 for street design criteria. 10. Follow Up To Previous Comment 27: Annotate the required and visitor parking on sheet 3. Assure that the spaces are not proposed beyond the property line. A minimum of an 8.5' x 18' space is required for each parking space. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC. PREVIOUS COMMENT 27: All lots must be provided with a minimum of 2 parking spaces per unit on site. A total of four spaces must be depicted on the plans. Tandem parking is allowed for single family dwelling development but all vehicles must be located on site and within a parking space length of 18 feet to the property line and 19 feet from the back of the sidewalk. No part of the parking spaces may overhang onto the private street / pedestrian areas. It does not appear that all lots have been designed to comply with the onsite parking requirement. 11. Follow Up To Previous Comment 28: Common Area C as noted on sheet 3 and 4 appears to be an easement as noted per the street cross sections on sheet 2. Revise the plans correctly identify this area in question. See related follow up comment 5 above. 2-06.4.9.L - All proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. The easements may have to be recorded and the recordation information added to the development package prior to approval. PREVIOUS COMMENT 28: If applicable provide the information for any proposed easements as noted by the standard above. 12. Follow Up To Previous Comment 29: On sheet 2, list the allowed building setback as one foot from the property line as it is more restrictive in this development instead of 5 feet. However it is clear that due to the 7' easement on each lot the minimum setback will be 7 feet from the property line. Include two fully dimensioned plot plan detail drawings on sheet 2 that demonstrate the required building setbacks for the interior lots and for the lots that front on Alvord and Randall. The details shall include the boundary setbacks, interior setbacks, interior street setbacks and Randall and Alvord street setbacks. 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 COMMENT 29: Draw and label the required building setbacks as noted by the standard above. Along the subdivision boundary and interior property, the setback is the greatest of 6' or 2/3rds the hgt. The interior street building setback is the greatest of 5' or ½ H, (The setback is measured from the back of existing curb or future curb location. or 1' (The setback is measured from the property line or from the nearest edge of the sidewalk or future sidewalk location. 6.4.5.C.2.b. Carports and Garages in Single-Family and Duplex Development: For carports, garages, or similar parking structures in single-family or duplex residential development on individual lots, a minimum perimeter yard is required using one of the following alternatives: (See Figure 6.4.5-E.) (1) A minimum setback of 19 feet from the back of sidewalk to allow sufficient space for a motor vehicle to be parked in front of the carport or garage is required as follows: (a) Eighteen feet (the length of a standard parking space) must be provided in front of the carport or garage and measured so that the full 18-foot parking space is available for parking on-site; and, (b) The 18-foot parking space shall be no closer than one foot from back of sidewalk of the street from which access is gained. (c) Modifications to the structural setback and parking space length requirements of this section for carports only in single-family and duplex development may be granted in accordance with Section 3.11.1, Design Development Option. (2) A minimum setback of one foot from the back of sidewalk of the street from which access is gained, is required if all of the following apply: (a) The street from which access is provided has a projected ADT of 140 vehicle trips or less; (b) The setback is measured so that the parking structure and the parking space within that structure are located completely on-site and do not encroach into the one-foot setback; and, (c) The distance between the street pavement edge and the parking structure is eight feet or less. The purpose of this requirement is to discourage motor vehicle tandem parking that would block the pedestrian area or overhang onto the roadway. The street building setbacks along Alvord and Randall are based on the greatest of 21' or the hgt. from the nearest edge of travel lane. The building setbacks cannot be verified to be compliant as they have not been drawn or labeled. The building setback information must be added to the plans and will be reviewed on the next submittal of the DP / TP. 13. Follow Up To Previous Comment 30: The following note was not added to the plans as requested. Add the following note on sheet two as a general note; "This subdivision (Residential Development) will be designed to comply with the Inclusive Home Design Ordinance, City of Tucson Ordinance 104631" 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. PREVIOUS COMMENT 30: Draw the sidewalk connection from the street sidewalk to the dwelling front door. Also add the following as a general note; Draw the sidewalk connection from the street sidewalk to the dwelling front door. Also add the following as a general; "This subdivision (Residential Development) will be designed to comply with the Inclusive Home Design Ordinance, City of Tucson Ordinance 104631" 14. COMMENT: There appears to be conflicting information with regards to the proposed type of interior street curbing. The two cross sections on sheet 2 indicate a 6 in reveal vertical curb and on sheet 3 keynote 5 is annotated as a 2 foot wedge curb. Clarify the conflict and correct the plans and notes as required. Assure that all keynotes arrows are pointing to the correct locations. Some of the arrows do not appear to be point to the correct item on sheet 2 or 3. If you have any questions about this transmittal, Contact David Rivera on Tuesday or Wednesday at (520) 837-4957 or by email David.Rivera@tucsonaz.gov or contact Steve Shields any time during the week at (520) 837-4956 or email Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 06/15/2018 | AHINES2 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |