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.
Plan Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Plan Number - S02-037
Review Name: CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/15/2002 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | INITIALIZE THE WORKFLOW | Completed | |
| 08/16/2002 | JIM EGAN | CITY OF TUCSON - NOT DSD | FIRE | Denied | 1. PROVIDE TURNAROUND IN ACCORDANCE WITH COT DEV. STD. 3-01 AT DEAD-END OF PAAL. 2. ADD A NOTE TO THE PLAN STATING: "ADDITIONAL FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL BE PROVIDED, BY THE DEVELOPER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FIRE CODE. |
| 08/20/2002 | CDRC Review Process | DEVELOPMENT SERVICES | ZONING | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Center Plans Coordination Office FROM: Peter McLaughlin Senior Planner FOR: Patricia Gehlen Principal Planner PROJECT: Proposed Apartments, RCP 26 W. Roger Road S02-037 Tentative Plat TRANSMITTAL: September 6, 2002 DUE DATE: September 5, 2002 1. An applicant has one (1) year from the date of application to obtain approval of a tentative plat that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application. This tentative plat must be approved on or before August 14, 2003. LUC 4.1.7.1 2. Fill in the S02-037 number near the title block in the lower right hand corner of all sheets of the plat, landscape and NPPO plans. DS 2-03.2.2.B.1 3. Revise the legal description to be correct. The southern boundary of the parcel does not fall on the south section line of Sec 24, T 13S, R 13E as stated in the legal. The section line falls in the center of the Roger Road right-of-way. Also, the dimensions listed in the legal description do not match those shown on the drawing. The property dimensions shown on the drawing do not match those shown on the Assessor's map. The property lines do not scale to dimensions shown. The dimensions shown do not correlate with the site area given. Please revise. DS 2-03.2.1.G.3 DS 2-03.2.4.A 4. Add the adjacent zoning to the north (R-3 and R-2) on the drawing. DS 2-03.2.4.D 5. Provide a density calculation which gives the number of units per acre proposed and allowed. The maximum allowable density under designator "RCP-6" with development alternative "B" (density increase) is 22 units per acre, and the calculation for proposed density should read as follows: "31 units ¸ 1.5 acres = 20.67 units per acre". See comment 6 regarding density increase criteria. 6. This project proposes a density increase ("RCP-6" criteria B) and therefore compliance with at least one of the development categories listed in LUC 3.6.1.3.B is required. Please indicate on the plat under which of these categories this project is being developed. Please demonstrate compliance with LUC 3.6.1.4 by detailing how handicap accessibility will be achieved. LUC 3.6.1.3.B 7. Revise the lot coverage calculation so that the vehicle use area plus the area of building footprint add up to equal total site coverage (21,614 square foot vehicle use area + 13,507 square foot building area = 35, 125 square foot site coverage = 54% site coverage. Also, revise recreational use area calculation accordingly, and provide the dimensions of the recreational use area on the drawing. LUC 3.2.9.2.B 8. It is unclear if the proposed use is multifamily dwelling (apartments) as stated in the title block, or group dwelling as in the site and zoning data. Please clarify and provide floor plan typicals of both the one and two bedroom units. If the proposed use is multifamily, revise parking calculation to indicate that 1.5 vehicle spaces are required per 1 bedroom unit and 2.0 vehicle spaces are required per 2 bedroom unit. If the proposed use is group dwelling, revise parking calculation to indicate that 0.5 vehicle spaces are required per resident plus two spaces for the resident family. LUC 3.3.4 9. Barrier-free accessibility must be provided to twenty-five percent of all ground floor units and all common use areas. Provide a general note listing which units are proposed to be barrier-free. Add a detail showing how barrier-free accessibility will be provided. LUC 3.6.1.4.A.5 DS 2-10.3.1.D 10. Add a statement to general note 2 that this RCP-6 development is subject to LUC Sec. 3.6.1 and Sec. 3.5.7.1.F. LUC 2.3.5.2.A.3 11. The site and zoning data indicates that the perimeter yard setback is "none". Please revise to indicate that the required minimum perimeter yard setback to adjacent R-2 and R-3 zoned properties is the greater of 10 feet or 3/4 height of the proposed exterior walls of structure. Dimension perimeter yard building setbacks from the east, west and north property lines. Keynote 1 reads: "perimeter yard setback is ¾ height of building" but the keynote cannot be found on the drawing. Please revise. Clarify the 16'-6" setback dimension from the west property line. If the building wall height is 24 feet, the required perimeter yard setback is 0.75 × 24' = 18'. LUC 3.2.6.4 12. The required street yard building setback is the greater of 21 feet or height of proposed structure measured from back of future curb location. Please revise data. Keynote 5 reads: "street frontage perimeter yard", but it cannot be found on the drawing. Please revise. LUC 3.2.6.5 13. Please detail any existing easements on the tentative plat, including recordation information, dimensioned width and purpose. Also, add recordation information for all proposed easements on the plat, or state that proposed easements are "by final plat". DS 2-03.2.3.C DS 2-03.2.4.J 14. Add a general note to the plat which specifically details the requirements for completion of project amenities and site improvements as stated in LUC 3.6.1.4.H. LUC 3.6.1.4.H 15. Remove the reference to LUC Sec. 3.6.1.B.3 in the bottom right-hand note, as there is no such section in the LUC. 16. Remove the note which reads: "On street parking shall be prohibited on both sides and signs shall be installed so indicating." 17. If these are 31 proposed units on a single lot, add a general note which reads: "the number of lots is 1, the number of units is 31." Refer to DS 2-03.2.2.B for all general notes required on a tentative plat. DS 2-03.2.2.B.4 18. List as a general note: "Existing zoning is R-2." DS 2-03.2.2.B.2 19. Add a general note which states that the plat is designed to meet the overlay zone criteria of LUC Sec. 2.8.3, Major Streets & Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone. DS 2-03.2.2.B.7 20. The title block must contain the proposed name of the subdivision. The proposed name shall not duplicate or approximate the name of any other recorded subdivision in Pima County, Arizona. DS 2-03.2.1.G.1 21. The title block must contain a statement that the proposed subdivision is a Residential Cluster Project (RCP). DS 2-03.2.1.G.2 22. Mechanical equipment must be screened from adjacent streets and residential development exterior to the project. Provide a screening detail for mechanical equipment. LUC 3.6.1.4.A.9 23. Because the site area is less than four acres, submit drawings, photos, or both showing how architectural compatibility requirements of LUC 3.6.1.4.A.3 will be met. LUC 3.6.1.4.A.3 DS 2-10.3.2.C 24. Dimension the width of the ingress-egress point on the drawing. 25. Dimension the depth of the back-up spurs and the distance between the end of the two back-up spurs and the west and north property lines. A minimum 3-foot deep back-up spur is required, and 3 feet is required between the end of the backup spurs and the west and north property lines, if there is a wall, fence or other obstruction along property lines. This is to allow for vehicle overhang and to prevent vehicles from hitting walls/fences. DS 3-05.2.2.D 26. Keynote 10 states "bicycle rack", which is considered class 2 bicycle parking, but the bicycle parking calcs indicate that only class 1 bicycle parking is being provided. Please revise. Also, revise bicycle calc to be based on 8 percent of the number of vehicle parking spaces provided. Provide a bicycle parking detail (see comment 25) showing bicycle parking fully dimensioned per DS 2-09. DS 2-09.6 LUC 3.3.3.5 27. Four of the twenty-five keynotes indicate that details are provided but there are no details on the drawing. Please revise by adding details to the plat. 28. To avoid confusion between the keynotes and the parking count indicators, provide a shape other than a circle, such as a diamond, for one or the other. 29. The handicap parking calculation states that only two spaces are required. However, based on the 55 vehicle parking spaces provided, three handicap parking spaces are required. Revise handicap parking calculation to so indicate. The data states that three handicap parking spaces are provided but only two are shown on the drawing. Revise drawing. Provide a handicap parking detail (see comment 25) dimensioning the width/length of handicap spaces, the width of the handicap access aisle, and the dimensions/slopes of the handicap ramps. ANS/IBC 30. Keynote 12 indicates disabled parking signs but it is not used on the drawing. Please revise. 31. Remove the wheelstop from the handicap access aisle. 32. The project location map must be revised to show the subject property within a one square mile area at a scale of 3" = 1 mile. Revise the Section, Township and Range to be correct (Sec. 24, T 13 S, R 13 E). This section is bordered by First Avenue on the east rather than Stone Avenue. Include a north arrow, label section corners and the city's jurisdictional limits and the Rillito River (located within the square mile shown). Also, include all recorded subdivisions by book and page numbers within the square mile shown. DS 2-03.2.1.D 33. The sight visibility triangles are not drawn correctly. The east stem sides should be flush with the edge of the PAAL, not the property line. Dimension the length of the SVT's along face of existing/future curbs. 34. All requested revisions must be made to tentative plat, landscape & NPPO plans. DS 2-07.2.1.A If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608. |
| 08/26/2002 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | PIMA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION 201 N. Stone Avenue, 2nd Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701-1207 CARMINE DEBONIS, JR. Phone: (520) 740-6586 Director FAX: (520) 740-6380 October 1, 2002 TO: Edward Fagin, E. A. Fagin & Associates Architects AIA, Inc. THRU: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Development Services FROM: Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (Wastewater) Pima County Development Review Division SUBJECT: Roger Plaza Tentative Plat - 1st Submittal S02-037 We have reviewed the above-referenced project on behalf of the Pima County Wastewater Management Department. The following comments are offered for your use: 1. There is currently capacity in the existing downstream sewerage system for this development. This response is not to be construed as a commitment for conveyance capacity allocation, but rather an analysis of the existing sewerage system as of this date. 2. Based on our evaluation, this project would qualify for Non-Participating sewer connection rates. 3. Add the subdivision plat case number, S02-037, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than the cross reference numbers. 4. Show the existing public sewer line in Roger Road, and any existing manholes in this sewer line that are adjacent or near this property. Label this existing public sewer line with its size (10") and plan number (G-145). 5. Show the House Sewer Connection sewer line(s) and how they will connect to the existing sewer line. (Note: This connection will need to be made at a new or existing manhole. If this will be done at a new manhole, label the manhole as "NEW MANHOLE #1." If this will be done at an existing manhole, show the existing manhole number, as listed on Base Map 23.) 6. Show the manhole rim and invert elevations where the HCS will connect to the existing public sewer system. 7. Label the House Sewer Connection sewer line(s) with their size (diameter, in inches) and the the letters "HCS" 8. Show and appropriately label any cleanouts and/or manholes in the on-site, private sewer lines. If manholes will be installed in the on-site, private sewer lines, label each manhole with its rim and invert elavation, and each sewer line between the manholes with its length, slope, and size. 9. Add a General Note that states: ON-SITE SANITARY SEWERS WILL BE PRIVATE AND WILL BE CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED ON A PRIVATE BASIS. THE LOCATION AND METHOD OF CONNECTION TO AN EXISTING PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME OF SUBMITTAL OF PLUMBING OR BUILDING PLANS. 10. Add a General Note that states: A PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FROM PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. 11. Show who will be responsible for maintaining the onsite private sewers by adding one of the following General Notes: MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF THE PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER TO ITS POINT OF CONNECTION TO THE PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OWNER OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. Or, if a property owners association will be formed: A PROPERTY OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION WILL BE FORMED TO ACCEPT THE RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, OPERATION AND CONTROL OF ALL PRIVATE SEWERS. 12. Show the proposed number of wastewater fixture units in another General Note. 13. We will require a revised tentative plat. Additional comments may be forthcoming. If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact me at 740-6563. Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (Wastewater) Pima County Development Review Division TR/tr Copy: Project |
| 08/26/2002 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | COMMENTS ON FILE |
| 08/29/2002 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | COMMENTS ON FILE |
| 08/29/2002 | GLYNDA ROTHWELL | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | August 29, 2002 E. A. Fagin & Associates 110 S. Church Avenue Tucson, AZ 85701 Ladies and Gentlemen: SUBJECT: Roger Plaza S02-037 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan dated July 3, 2002. It appears that there are no existing facilities or conflicts within the boundaries of this proposed development. Please submit a final set of plans including electrical load plans, to determine how TEP will serve this commercial development. If easements are required, they will be secured by separate instrument. Your final plans should be sent to: Jim Marchbanks Distribution Services – WI-102 Tucson Electric Power Company P. O. Box 711 Tucson, AZ 85702 Please call me at (520) 884-3879, should you have any questions. Sincerely, S. Glynda Rothwell Right-of-Way Agent Land Management sgr |
| 09/06/2002 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | DEVELOPMENT SERVICES | ENGINEERING | Denied | SUBJECT: Roger Plaza Tentative Plat Engineering Review REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach DATE: September 9, 2002 ACTIVITY NUMBER: S02-037 SUMMARY: The Tentative Plat and Drainage Report were received by Engineering on August 15, 2002. Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Tentative Plat or the Drainage Report. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Tentative Plat purposes only. TENTATIVE PLAT COMMENTS 1) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No.2-03.2.1.A: Assure all mapped data is drawn to 20-scale. 2) DS Sec.2-03.2.1.D.2: On location map, label adjacent subdivisions with recorded book and page numbers. 3) DS Sec.2-03.2.1.D.3: Clarify Township Range Section. Add section corners and north arrow on location map. 4) DS Sec.2-03.2.1.G.1: Provide title block at lower right corner on first sheet. Include number of units. 5) DS Sec.2-03.2.1.G.3: For legal description, provide bearings and place in title block at lower right corner of cover sheet. 6) DS Sec.2-03.2.1.J: Add the following to the Legend: a) -----x---------------x--------------x----- b) sewer line c) water line d) sight visibility triangle 7) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.A.1: Provide Owner / Developer's name, address and phone number on cover sheet. 8) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.A.2: On both sheets C-1 and L-1 of Tentative Plat, provide the applicable registration signature and seal of the land surveyor or professional engineer for the person, firm, or organization that prepared the Tentative Plat. 9) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.B: Remove GENERAL GRADING / PAVING NOTES and add Tentative Plat General Notes as outlined in this section. 10) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.C.1: Add as a Tentative Plat General Note. 11) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.D.1.A: Add as a Tentative Plat General Note. 12) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.E: Add as a Tentative Plat General Note. 13) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.B: Label boundary line bearings on Tentative Plat plan view. Also, provide basis of bearings for project. 14) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.D: Provide existing public right-of-way recordation data for Roger Road. 15) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.E: Label pipe diameters for all existing utilities. Show closest existing fire hydrant on plan view with dimension from site. 16) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.H: Add notation regarding removal of object ( ---x-----x--- fence? ). 17) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.H: Under the provision of the MS&R Setback Zone, the landscape buffer shall be placed outside of the future half right-of-way. Revise Tentative Plat to show Landscape Border outside of future half right-of-way. (see below) 18) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.1: Show ponding limits for the retention basin on plan view per Drainage Report. (see below) 19) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.4: Depict positive drainage and allowable grades for the following: a) Provide proposed spot elevations in parking lot with minimum grade of 0.5%; b) Provide proposed spot elevations in sidewalk areas with minimum longitudinal grade of 0.5% and cross slope of 2%; c) Provide retention basin cross section on Tentative Plat depicting north boundary line, minimum setback, basin, and parking area ; d) Provide cross section on Tentative Plat depicting west retention basin. (see below) 20) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.7: Label where flows will exit basin. Provide proposed permanent erosion control at basin exit(s). (see below) 21) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.M: Show all building setback lines. 22) DS Sec.3-05: Provide typical parking detail per this section. 23) DS Sec.3-05.6.Fig.2: Provide setbacks and radii per Back-up Spur detail. 24) Show location of "CICYCLE RACK", noted AS Keynote 10 on sheet C-1. 25) International Building Code (IBC) Chapter 36 Section 14: Top of proposed slopes adjacent to site boundary shall meet criteria outlined in this section. Revise location of basin top of slopes. 26) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.2.1: Revise basin sizing according to revised Retention Calculations. (see below) 27) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a: Add note to Tentative Plat regarding stormwater runoff that shall have a maximum disposal time of 12 hours. 28) Clarify Tentative Plat sheet numbering. 29) Show all plan view data and details from the Grading Plan on sheet C-1 of the Tentative Plat. 30) Per ADA guidelines, provide proposed spot elevations depicting Handicap stalls and access aisles with grades no steeper than 2%. Also revise detail Section A-A. DRAINAGE COMMENTS 31) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.F: For the existing stormdrain facilities adjacent to site, show where stormwater flows / exits. 32) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.1: Provide ponding limits for the retention basin in Drainage Report. 33) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.4: Depict positive drainage for the following: a) Provide retention basin cross section depicting north boundary line, minimum setback, basin, and parking area in Drainage Report; b) Provide cross section in Drainage Report depicting west retention basin; 34) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.7: Discuss in Drainage Report where flows will exit basin. Provide any calculations for permanent erosion control at basin exit(s). 35) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.2.1: Revise Retention Calculation using 5-year runoff coefficient values for equation 3.3 on page 7 and APPENDIX C of Drainage Report. Revise basin sizing accordingly. 36) DS Sec.10-02.V.5.2: Provide legible copies of FIGURE 3 and the existing onsite 50-scale topo figure in APPENDIX A. 37) Remove City of Tucson logo from cover sheet of Drainage Report. LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS 38) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.H: Under the provision of the MS&R Setback Zone, the landscape border shall be placed outside of the future half right-of-way. Revise Landscape Plan. 39) DS Sec.3-01.5: Show sight visibility triangles for existing and future conditions. Provide notation regarding clear line of sight that must be maintained above 30" and below 72" within sight visibility triangles. GENERAL COMMENTS 40) IBC Chap. 36 Sec. 13.1: Proposed fills require the procedures outlined in this section. 41) The next submittal should address all the above items. Submit revised Drainage Report and revised Tentative Plat. 42) Prior to resubmittal, schedule a meeting with me to go over your comments. If you have any questions, please call me at 791-5550 extension 2204. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Section Development Services |
| 09/10/2002 | JOE LINVILLE | DEVELOPMENT SERVICES | LANDSCAPE | Denied | The project qualifies for an exception the the Native Plant Preservation regulations. No additional submittal is required to comply. Palm Trees as proposed on the plant list should be located on the landscape plan. Palm trees may not be used wherever canopy trees are required. The palm species indicated is not included on the approved plant list. Plants not listed may be used on the site subject to the limitations in LUC 3.7.2.2.C.3. Provide calculations as necessary. Provide information on the landscape plan regarding the height and materials used to comply with screening requirements. DS 2-07.2.2, LUC 3.7.3 A 5' high masonry screen wall is required along the west property line to screen the parking lot from the adjacent residentially zoned property. LUC Table 3.7.2-I Keynote 19 on sheet C-1 refers to the landscape plan which provides no additional information. Correct as necessary. Revise the notes related to Landscape/Screeening Requirements on Sheet C-1. They are innaccurate; landscape borders and screening are required elements for this project based on the proposed land use and specific uses located on the site. See LUC Table 3.7.2-I particularly the rows dealing with multifamily uses and parking lots. See LUC 3.7.4.4 regarding requirements for water features and revise the plan to comply, include calculations if necessary. Resubmittal of the Development Plan and the Landscape Plan is required. |
| 09/16/2002 | GLENN HICKS | CITY OF TUCSON - NOT DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: September 13, 2002 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks, Senior Planner, Parks and Recreation RE: CDRC Transmittal, Project S02-037 Roger Plaza CC: Craig Gross, Development Services Staff has reviewed and approved. |
| 09/16/2002 | CDRC Review Process | CITY OF TUCSON - NOT DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | No objection |
| 09/26/2002 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Approved | PIMA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION 201 N. Stone Avenue, 2nd Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701-1207 CARMINE DEBONIS, JR. Phone: (520) 740-6586 Director FAX: (520) 740-6380 October 1, 2002 TO: Edward Fagin, E. A. Fagin & Associates Architects AIA, Inc. THRU: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Development Services FROM: Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (Wastewater) Pima County Development Review Division SUBJECT: Roger Plaza Tentative Plat - 1st Submittal S02-037 We have reviewed the above-referenced project on behalf of the Pima County Wastewater Management Department. The following comments are offered for your use: 1. There is currently capacity in the existing downstream sewerage system for this development. This response is not to be construed as a commitment for conveyance capacity allocation, but rather an analysis of the existing sewerage system as of this date. 2. Based on our evaluation, this project would qualify for Non-Participating sewer connection rates. 3. Add the subdivision plat case number, S02-037, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than the cross reference numbers. 4. Show the existing public sewer line in Roger Road, and any existing manholes in this sewer line that are adjacent or near this property. Label this existing public sewer line with its size (10") and plan number (G-145). 5. Show the House Sewer Connection sewer line(s) and how they will connect to the existing sewer line. (Note: This connection will need to be made at a new or existing manhole. If this will be done at a new manhole, label the manhole as "NEW MANHOLE #1." If this will be done at an existing manhole, show the existing manhole number, as listed on Base Map 23.) 6. Show the manhole rim and invert elevations where the HCS will connect to the existing public sewer system. 7. Label the House Sewer Connection sewer line(s) with their size (diameter, in inches) and the the letters "HCS" 8. Show and appropriately label any cleanouts and/or manholes in the on-site, private sewer lines. If manholes will be installed in the on-site, private sewer lines, label each manhole with its rim and invert elavation, and each sewer line between the manholes with its length, slope, and size. 9. Add a General Note that states: ON-SITE SANITARY SEWERS WILL BE PRIVATE AND WILL BE CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED ON A PRIVATE BASIS. THE LOCATION AND METHOD OF CONNECTION TO AN EXISTING PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME OF SUBMITTAL OF PLUMBING OR BUILDING PLANS. 10. Add a General Note that states: A PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FROM PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. 11. Show who will be responsible for maintaining the onsite private sewers by adding one of the following General Notes: MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF THE PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER TO ITS POINT OF CONNECTION TO THE PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OWNER OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. Or, if a property owners association will be formed: A PROPERTY OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION WILL BE FORMED TO ACCEPT THE RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, OPERATION AND CONTROL OF ALL PRIVATE SEWERS. 12. Show the proposed number of wastewater fixture units in another General Note. 13. We will require a revised tentative plat. Additional comments may be forthcoming. If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact me at 740-6563. Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (Wastewater) Pima County Development Review Division TR/tr Copy: Project |
| 09/26/2002 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Approved | COMMENTS ON FILE |
| 09/27/2002 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | CITY OF TUCSON - NOT DSD | ENGINEERING - TRAFFIC | Denied | From: Dale Kelch To: Gross, Craig Date: 9/16/02 10:31 AM Subject: S02-037 Roger Plaza Reply requested when convenient Traffic Engineering recommends DISAPPROVAL of this tentative plat. The near side SVT is not completely shown on the plans nor is it dimensioned. Projection of the SVT lines indicate that the SVT is only 165'. Required is 265' from a PAAL to a collector. Label with dimensions current and future SVT's. Ensure the entire SVT is visible on the TP. Dimension PAAL on east side of project. D.Dale Kelch, EIT Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520) 791-4259x305 (520) 791-5526 (fax) dkelch1@ci.tucson.az.us cc: Canchola, Zelin; Richards, Cecilia; Rodriguez, Ferne |
| 09/30/2002 | CDRC Review Process | CITY OF TUCSON - NOT DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S02-037 Roger Plaza 8-23-02 ( ) Tentative Plat () Development Plan ( ) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: N/A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: North Stone Neighborhood Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: N/A COMMENTS DUE BY: September 5, 2002 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 REVIEWER: JBeall DATE: 8-23-02 Community Planning and Preservation Comments Roger Plaza, S02-037 Since this is an RCP, it must be in conformance with the design policies and criteria of the North Stone Neighborhood Plan, the General Plan, and any of their components. The Design Guidelines Manual, which offers insight and clarification into land use and community design policies is also used as an additional resource to the General Plan. The proposed development plan does not appear adequately address or indicate as to the height and design of the perimeter wall along the north and east property line. The Plans cal for the softening of freestanding walls through variations in scale, surface material, texture and pattern. Please indicate on the tentative plat as to the height of the perimeter wall along the north and east property line, and include in Keynotes (25) a statement that all walls shall be graffiti-resistant and are to incorporate visually appealing design treatments, such as varied wall alignments (jog, curve, notch, setback, etc.); trees and shrubbery in voids created by wall variations; the use of two or more wall materials on the wall surface; the incorporation of a visually interesting design on the wall surface; and/or the use of decorative features of tile, stone or brick; and include a detail cross-section of the wall, which depicts design treatment and specifications. There is also concern for the siting of the dumpster, which is located near the R-2 zoned east property line. The Plans call for the siting of undesirable elements to be located away from adjacent residential properties that may cause conflict with residential neighbors. Please address this concern by relocating the dumpster 50’ away from the adjacent residential property to the east. The proposed tentative plat does not appear to have labeled the Notes section. Please label the Notes section using numeric or alphabetical labeling. |
| 10/03/2002 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | PIMA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION 201 N. Stone Avenue, 2nd Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701-1207 CARMINE DEBONIS, JR. Phone: (520) 740-6586 Director FAX: (520) 740-6380 October 1, 2002 TO: Edward Fagin, E. A. Fagin & Associates Architects AIA, Inc. THRU: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Development Services FROM: Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (Wastewater) Pima County Development Review Division SUBJECT: Roger Plaza Tentative Plat - 1st Submittal S02-037 We have reviewed the above-referenced project on behalf of the Pima County Wastewater Management Department. The following comments are offered for your use: 1. There is currently capacity in the existing downstream sewerage system for this development. This response is not to be construed as a commitment for conveyance capacity allocation, but rather an analysis of the existing sewerage system as of this date. 2. Based on our evaluation, this project would qualify for Non-Participating sewer connection rates. 3. Add the subdivision plat case number, S02-037, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than the cross reference numbers. 4. Show the existing public sewer line in Roger Road, and any existing manholes in this sewer line that are adjacent or near this property. Label this existing public sewer line with its size (10") and plan number (G-145). 5. Show the House Sewer Connection sewer line(s) and how they will connect to the existing sewer line. (Note: This connection will need to be made at a new or existing manhole. If this will be done at a new manhole, label the manhole as "NEW MANHOLE #1." If this will be done at an existing manhole, show the existing manhole number, as listed on Base Map 23.) 6. Show the manhole rim and invert elevations where the HCS will connect to the existing public sewer system. 7. Label the House Sewer Connection sewer line(s) with their size (diameter, in inches) and the the letters "HCS" 8. Show and appropriately label any cleanouts and/or manholes in the on-site, private sewer lines. If manholes will be installed in the on-site, private sewer lines, label each manhole with its rim and invert elavation, and each sewer line between the manholes with its length, slope, and size. 9. Add a General Note that states: ON-SITE SANITARY SEWERS WILL BE PRIVATE AND WILL BE CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED ON A PRIVATE BASIS. THE LOCATION AND METHOD OF CONNECTION TO AN EXISTING PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME OF SUBMITTAL OF PLUMBING OR BUILDING PLANS. 10. Add a General Note that states: A PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FROM PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. 11. Show who will be responsible for maintaining the onsite private sewers by adding one of the following General Notes: MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF THE PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER TO ITS POINT OF CONNECTION TO THE PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OWNER OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. Or, if a property owners association will be formed: A PROPERTY OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION WILL BE FORMED TO ACCEPT THE RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, OPERATION AND CONTROL OF ALL PRIVATE SEWERS. 12. Show the proposed number of wastewater fixture units in another General Note. 13. We will require a revised tentative plat. Additional comments may be forthcoming. If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact me at 740-6563. Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (Wastewater) Pima County Development Review Division TR/tr Copy: Project |
| 10/03/2002 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | PIMA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION 201 N. Stone Avenue, 2nd Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701-1207 CARMINE DEBONIS, JR. Phone: (520) 740-6586 Director FAX: (520) 740-6380 October 1, 2002 TO: Edward Fagin, E. A. Fagin & Associates Architects AIA, Inc. THRU: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Development Services FROM: Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (Wastewater) Pima County Development Review Division SUBJECT: Roger Plaza Tentative Plat - 1st Submittal S02-037 We have reviewed the above-referenced project on behalf of the Pima County Wastewater Management Department. The following comments are offered for your use: 1. There is currently capacity in the existing downstream sewerage system for this development. This response is not to be construed as a commitment for conveyance capacity allocation, but rather an analysis of the existing sewerage system as of this date. 2. Based on our evaluation, this project would qualify for Non-Participating sewer connection rates. 3. Add the subdivision plat case number, S02-037, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than the cross reference numbers. 4. Show the existing public sewer line in Roger Road, and any existing manholes in this sewer line that are adjacent or near this property. Label this existing public sewer line with its size (10") and plan number (G-145). 5. Show the House Sewer Connection sewer line(s) and how they will connect to the existing sewer line. (Note: This connection will need to be made at a new or existing manhole. If this will be done at a new manhole, label the manhole as "NEW MANHOLE #1." If this will be done at an existing manhole, show the existing manhole number, as listed on Base Map 23.) 6. Show the manhole rim and invert elevations where the HCS will connect to the existing public sewer system. 7. Label the House Sewer Connection sewer line(s) with their size (diameter, in inches) and the the letters "HCS" 8. Show and appropriately label any cleanouts and/or manholes in the on-site, private sewer lines. If manholes will be installed in the on-site, private sewer lines, label each manhole with its rim and invert elavation, and each sewer line between the manholes with its length, slope, and size. 9. Add a General Note that states: ON-SITE SANITARY SEWERS WILL BE PRIVATE AND WILL BE CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED ON A PRIVATE BASIS. THE LOCATION AND METHOD OF CONNECTION TO AN EXISTING PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME OF SUBMITTAL OF PLUMBING OR BUILDING PLANS. 10. Add a General Note that states: A PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FROM PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. 11. Show who will be responsible for maintaining the onsite private sewers by adding one of the following General Notes: MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF THE PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER TO ITS POINT OF CONNECTION TO THE PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OWNER OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. Or, if a property owners association will be formed: A PROPERTY OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION WILL BE FORMED TO ACCEPT THE RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, OPERATION AND CONTROL OF ALL PRIVATE SEWERS. 12. Show the proposed number of wastewater fixture units in another General Note. 13. We will require a revised tentative plat. Additional comments may be forthcoming. If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact me at 740-6563. Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (Wastewater) Pima County Development Review Division TR/tr Copy: Project |
| 10/11/2002 | CDRC Review Process | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | Case Number: S02-037 Project Name: Roger Plaza Estimated Traffic Generation: 206 trips If you have any questions or need more information, please contact me. Sandy White Research & Statistical Analyst Pima Association of Governments ph: 520-792-1093 x108 fax: 520-792-9151 swhite@pagnet.org |