Plan Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Plan Number - S03-009
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/07/2003 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/08/2003 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | The Tentative Plat is denied. A General Note must be provided on the plan stating: "Additional fire hydrants shall be provided by the Developer in accordance with Section 508 of the Fire Code." |
| 05/13/2003 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | NO COMMENT S03-009 RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC. RANCHO DEL ESTEII: |
| 06/02/2003 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami SUBJECT: Rancho Paraiso S03-009, T14S, R15E, SECTION 23 RECEIVED: Tentative Plat, Landscape Plan and Drainage Report on May 07, 2003 The subject project has been reviewed. We offer the following comments: Drainage Report: 1. Provide the Erosion Hazard Setback calculations for Eastview Wash. 2. Eastview Wash HEC RAS analysis should include a cross section which contains the 3-42" RCP's which run under Golf Links, in order to determine any possible back water situation. 3. Revise on the onsite drainage exhibit, the existing and proposed 100-year floodplain, if applicable. 4. The Eastview Wash is classified as a Xeroriparian Intermediate Habitat, which is protected under the provisions on Chapter 26 "Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Management" of the City Code. The City's Policy concerning protected Riparian Habitat Washes is to apply the WASH Ordinance mitigation requirements if the protected wash has defined banks. If the wash has no defined channel, it is treated as an ERZ Wash for mitigation purposes. Address this issue and provide the appropriate mitigation report. 5. Depict on the drainage exhibits Eastview Wash top of banks or the revise 100-year floodplain and delineate the resource areas. 6. The discharge velocities at culverts 1, 2 and 3 are high and erosive. Address this issue and the need for erosion control structures at the outlets. Analyze Box Culvert 1 existing conditions and compare to post development conditions. 7. Show the water harvesting areas and how you propose to convey onsite runoff to the proposed water harvesting basins. You may verify compliance with a note. 8. Based on the requirements of Section 1.5.2. and Chapter 14 of the Standard Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management in Tucson, Arizona, provide a maintenance access for the proposed detention/retention basin and include in the Drainage Report the basin maintenance check list. 9. It is not clear if the proposed detention/retention basins require security barriers. Address the detention/retention basin Security Barriers requirements based the information on page 82 of the "Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual". 10. Show the proposed detention/retention basins side slopes and dimensions. 11. Delineate on the drainage exhibits the limits of all 100-year runoffs of 100 cfs or more. 12. Submit percolation test results, which demonstrate that the proposed retention basin will operate Adequately. If the percolation test results show that the site soils are not adequate for the retention basin, provide a design for a different discharge method such as a bleed pipe. Please be advised that the bleed pipe should not discharge directly onto a street nor should it create a drainage problem for the downstream properties. Tentative Plat: 1. Provide the correct S (yr)-______ subdivision case number according to D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.1. 2. The word "To" is repeated twice in the "Basis Of Elevation". Revise. 3. It appears that lots 167-173, 177-179, 1-5, and 15 do not comply with the differential grading requirements stated in Section 13-FILLS of Chapter 36 "Excavation and Grading". This includes following the required procedure to allow fills of 2' or more within the outer 100' of the subject parcel. For your convenience, I have included below Section 13-FILLS from Chapter 36: SECTION 13 - FILLS Section 13.1 This criteria applies to all non-residential developments, and all residential developments with lots that are less than 24,000 square feet, that are adjacent to an existing residential development or residentially zoned property (excepting multifamily developments greater than single story), or unsubdivided non-commercial property. This criteria does not apply to phase boundaries within a master planned development or to individual lots within the interior of a residential development, or to small swales and drainage rills. Placement of fill in excess of two (2) feet [or a finished floor elevation (FFE) in excess of two (2) feet plus the slab thickness] above existing grade at any location in the outer one hundred (100) feet of the developing site (less any intervening non-developable property outside of the site) shall require: 1) Written justification based on engineering/technical reasons. 2) Written permission of the Director of the Development Services Center (DSC) or his/her assignee. 3) Notification of the property owner(s) adjacent to the fill site (with copies to the Council Office and the Director of DSC) prior to the approval of a grading plan. Said notification shall include reference to this ordinance, the justification presented as the basis for the excess fill, the approval letter from DSC, and the name, address, & phone number of the owner/developer and the engineer of record. This notification shall occur early in the development process. 4) Preparation of a mitigation plan (i.e. additional setbacks, terracing, enhanced buffering/landscaping, etc.) acceptable to a simple majority of the notified property owners. The acceptability of the mitigation plan by the notified property owner(s) must be documented and made a part of the approved grading plan and permit. If the owner/developer and the notified property owner(s) cannot reach consensus on a mitigation plan within 15 working days of receipt of the mitigation plan by the notified property owners, the Director of DSC shall review the issues and information and then render a final decision. Monitoring of grading activities shall be the responsibility of the engineer of record and certification of FFE's shall be done by a registered land surveyor hired by the permittee. Regulation, inspection, control of work, and enforcement of the above criteria shall be the responsibility of the Director of DSC/Building Official as stated in Section 17 of Exhibit 3 of Ordinance No. 9155. 13.2 Preparation of Ground. Fill slopes shall not be constructed on natural slopes steeper than 1 unit vertical in 2 units horizontal (50% slope). The ground surface shall be prepared to receive fill by removing vegetation, non-complying fill, topsoil and other unsuitable materials scarifying to provide a bode with the new fill and, where slopes are steeper than 1 unit vertical in 5 units horizontal (20% slope) and the height is greater than 5 feet (1524 mm), by benching into sound bedrock or other competent material as determined by the soils engineer. The bench under the toe of a fill on a slope steeper than 1 unit vertical in 5 units horizontal (20% slope) shall be at least 10 feet (3048 mm) wide. The area beyond the toe of fill shall be sloped for sheet overflow or a paved drain shall be provided. When fill is to be placed over a cut, the bench under the toe of fill shall be at least 10 feet (3048 mm) wide but the cut shall be made before placing the fill and acceptance by the soils engineer or engineering geologist or both as a suitable foundation for fill. 13.3 Fill Material. Detrimental amounts of organic material shall not be permitted in fills. Except as permitted by the Building Official, no rock or similar irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches (305 mm) shall be buried or placed in fills. EXCEPTION: The Building Official may permit placement of larger rock when the soils engineer properly devises a method of placement, and continuously inspects its placement and approves the fill stability. The following conditions shall also apply: 1. Prior to issuance of the grading permit, potential rock disposal areas shall be delineated on the grading plan. 2. Rock sizes greater than 12 inches (305 mm) in maximum dimension shall be 10 feet (3048 mm) or more below grade, measured vertically. 3. Rocks shall be placed as to assure filling of all voids with well-graded soil. 13.4 Compaction. All fills shall be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density. 13.5 Slope. The slopes of fill surfaces shall be no steeper than is safe for the intended use. Fill slopes shall be no steeper than 1 unit vertical in 2 units horizontal (50% slope). Revise the non-compliant grades and/or verify compliance with the aforementioned Section. 4. Delineate the existing 100-year flood limits for all flows of 100 cfs or more with 100-year flood water surface elevations (D.S. 2-03.2.3.J). 5. In order to ensure that Eastview Wash runoff will flow freely and that the City has the right to order the cleaning and the maintenance of the wash, dedicate a flowage easement over Eastview Wash 100-year floodplain as required by Section 3.4 of Chapter III of the Standard Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management in Tucson, AZ (SMDDFM). 6. Dimension all proposed easements (i.e. keynote 4, flowage easement, etc.) (D.S.2-03.2.4.J). 7. Provide the proposed detention/retention basins 100-year water ponding limits (D.S.2-03.2.4.L.1). 8. The post development 100-year flood limits and elevations may need to be revised (D.S.2-03.2.4.L.6). 9. Show the proposed detention/retention basins side slopes and dimensions. Additionally, provide the proposed detention/retention basins inlet and outlet details including the construction materials. 10. All survey monuments should be shown and described as either found or set (D.S. 2-03.2.3.A). Additionally, Provide survey monuments for all proposed lots. 11. Provide the parcel boundary information (including future parcel lines) as required by D.S. 2-03.2.3.B. 12. Show 1' (foot) no vehicular access easement along parcel boundary and/or along lot lines abutting common areas as required by D.S. 2-03.2.4.F. and D.S. 3-01.6.1.H. 13. The proposed detention/retention basins require maintenance access ramps (A minimum of one 15-foot-wide vehicular access ramp shall be provided into each basin. The maximum roadway or access ramp slope shall not exceed 15 percent. Alternate means of access will be reviewed by the City Engineer on a case-by-case basis. SMDDFM 14.3.3 & 4 and 2.3.1.6.C)). Please be advised that maintenance ramps should be designed in such a way that does not allow access to vehicles except the maintenance vehicles. 14. It is not clear on Channel Section C/1 has hand placed or grouted rip rap. Hand placed riprap requires filter fabric. Grouted riprap should be thick enough to last. It has been the City's experience with six inch grouted riprap that it cracks and deteriorates easily, which may require the owner to provide continuous and costly maintenance 15. Due to the size of this project, it will require a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Submit a SWPPP with the Grading Plan submittal. 16. Revise the Tentative Plat according to the Drainage Report revisions. Landscape Plan: 1. Show the sight visibility triangles to ensure that the project is in compliance with the requirements of D.S. 3-01.5.1.A.1. 2. Show water-harvesting basins. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Tentative Plat, Drainage Report and Landscape Plan LFA:lfa S:\Engineering\S03-009 Rancho Paraiso TP, LP & DR comments.doc |
| 06/03/2003 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Indicate the limits of grading on the Native Plant Preservation Plan. DS 2-15.3.4.A.1 2) Include the existing topography on sheet N-5. DS 2-15.3.4.A.3 3) Revise the plans as necessary to demonstrate compliance with conditions of rezoning #10 and #11 related to wall requirements. 4) Provide any trails or easements requested by the Parks Department. General Plan (2001) Element 10 Policy 11.2. Resubmittal of all plans is required. |
| 06/04/2003 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Traffic Engineering rejects this T.P. on the following conditions: 1. The symbol used for no parking signs in the cul-de-sac is not IAW SD100. Use correct symbol with solid post. 2. Add general note "All non-signalized intersection street names must have E-W block number addresses for E-W roadways and N-S block number addresses for N-S Roadways." FYI Craig, The cover sheet and the application page for this project list it as Ranch Del Este II. The actual plans call the project Rancho Paraiso. Is this a problem? D. Dale Kelch, EIT Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dkelch1@ci.tucson.az.us |
| 06/04/2003 | DAN CASTRO | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | COMMENTS CODE SECTION/ DEVELOPMENT STANDARD 1. Section 4.1.7.1, LUC, permits a maximum of one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a tentative plat. If, at the end of that time, the tentative plat 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 tentative plat is May 6, 2004. 2. This project has been assigned subdivision case number S03-009. Please note the subdivision case number in the lower right corner of each sheet on all plans. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.1 3. Add the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Overlay Zone to general note 20. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.7 4. Common Area 6 located between lots 23 and 24 is not referenced in the title block. In addition, Common Area 4 is not shown on the plat. D.S. 2-03.2.4.C 5. Label and dimension the future curb location along Golf Links Road. South lot line building setback (greater of 21 feet or the building height) for lot 183 is measured from the face of future curb along Golf Links Road. D.S. 2-03.2.4.M 6. Please add the following note to the typical lot details on sheet 1 of 3: "18 feet 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.". D.S. 2-10.3.2.A/ L.U.C. 3.2.6.5.B.2.A 7. The Final Plat may not be approved until the CC&R's are reviewed and approved by the Zoning Review Section. The CC&R's must meet criteria listed in L.U.C. 3.6.1.5. If applicable, the CC&R's must also detail the restrictions on any proposed natural areas. D.S. 2-10.3.2.E/ L.U.C. 3.6.1.5 If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro, (520) 791-5608. |
| 06/04/2003 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 06/04/2003 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | Transportation Information for Rezoning, Subdivision and Development Review Requests File Number Description Date Reviewed E Pima Association of Governments Transportation Planning Division 177 N. Church Avenue, Suite 405 Tucson, AZ 85701 Phone: (520) 792-1093 Fax: (520) 792-9151 www.pagnet.org S03-009 Rancho del Este II 6/2/2003 1. Nearest Existing or Planned Major Street 2. Is improvement planned as part of the 5-Year Transportation Improvement Program Planned Action: STREET IDENTIFICATION 3. Existing Daily Volume – Based on Average Daily Traffic 4. Existing Daily Capacity- Level of Service “E” 5. Existing Number of Lanes 9. Estimated Traffic Generation for Proposed Development (Expressed in Average 24 Hr. Vehicle Trips) 8. Future Number of Lanes TRANSIT AND BIKEWAYS CONSIDERATIONS 10. Present Bus Service (Route, Frequency, Distance) 11. Existing or Planned Bikeway Remarks: Street Number 1 Street Number 2 Year Year Planned Action: VOLUME/CAPACITY/TRAFFIC GENERATION CONSIDERATIONS 6. Future Daily Volume - Adopted Plan System Completed 7. Future Daily Capacity - Level of Service “E” Golf Links (Harrison to Houghton) No 0 9,900 44,000 4 44,000 32,493 4 1,751 Route 7, 30 minutes, 0.5 miles Bike route with striped shoulder 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 |
| 06/04/2003 | FRODRIG2 | 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 June 25, 2003 TO: Colleen Stoetzel / Paul Iezzi, Rick Engineering THRU: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Development Services FROM: Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (Wastewater) Pima County Development Review Division SUBJECT: Rancho Paraiso Tentative Plat - 1st Submittal S03-009 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. Per Pima County Wastewater Management’s Planning Services, 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 the preliminary sewer layout as shown on the referenced tentative plat, this project would qualify for Non-Participating sewer connection fee rates. However, a final determination of this status cannot be made until approval of the sewer construction plans and/or preparation of the sewer service agreement. 3. All Sheets: Add the subdivision plat case number, S03-009, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than the cross reference numbers. No wastewater review fees will be charged for sheets where this is the only required revision. 4. Sheets 2 & 3: Several of the proposed sewer lines have a slope of 0.33%. The sewer lines may have a minimum slope of no less than 0.44% to comply with PCWWM’s Manual of Engineering Standards and Pima County Title 13.20.030.A 5. Sheet 3: Pursuant Pima County Title 13.20.030.A, PCWWM is requiring that a flow-through sewer line be provided from the intersection of County Shadows Drive and Aztec Point Trail to the intersection of Country Shadows Drive and Golf Links Road. This sewer line must terminate with a manhole located within the curved pavement returns. Make this terminal manhole approximately 10' deep, if possible. 6. Sheet 3: Show the proposed invert elevations for the ends of the 3 - 42 RCPs that cross County Shadows Drive to demonstrate that this feature, and the required flow-through sewer line, do not interfere with each other. 7. We will require a complete set of the revised bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. The next submittal of this project will be the second (2nd) submittal. Please include a $100.00 check for the wastewater review fees (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) with the revised set of bluelines and response letter. If other sheets are revised in such a manner that the sewer design is impacted, please adjust the review fee accordingly. 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 |
| 06/04/2003 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Approved | Office of the Pima County Assessor 115 N. Church Ave. Tucson, Arizona 85701 RICK LYONS ASSESSOR TO: CDRC Office Subdivision Review City of Tucson (FAX# 791-5559) FROM: Ed Abrigo, Mapping Supervisor Pima County Assessor’s Office Mapping Department DATE: June 2, 2003 RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat S03-009 Rancho Del Este II T141523 (136-08) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor’s Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor’s Office requirements. COMMENTS: Thank you for your submittal. Please make the following additions/corrections in the final plat. Add the bearings to the lot lines, the bearings and dimensions to the street centerlines and add the complete curve data. If there are any questions, please contact Susan King at 740-4391. 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. Susan C. King Office of the Pima County Assessor 115 N. Church Ave. Tucson, Arizona 85701 RICK LYONS ASSESSOR TO: CDRC Office Subdivision Review City of Tucson (FAX# 791-5559) FROM: Ed Abrigo, Mapping Supervisor Pima County Assessor’s Office Mapping Department DATE: June 2, 2003 RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat S03-009 Rancho Del Este II T141523 (136-08) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor’s Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor’s Office requirements. COMMENTS: Thank you for your submittal. Please make the following additions/corrections in the final plat. Add the bearings to the lot lines, the bearings and dimensions to the street centerlines and add the complete curve data. If there are any questions, please contact Susan King at 740-4391. 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. Susan C. King Office of the Pima County Assessor 115 N. Church Ave. Tucson, Arizona 85701 RICK LYONS ASSESSOR TO: CDRC Office Subdivision Review City of Tucson (FAX# 791-5559) FROM: Ed Abrigo, Mapping Supervisor Pima County Assessor’s Office Mapping Department DATE: June 2, 2003 RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat S03-009 Rancho Del Este II T141523 (136-08) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor’s Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor’s Office requirements. COMMENTS: Thank you for your submittal. Please make the following additions/corrections in the final plat. Add the bearings to the lot lines, the bearings and dimensions to the street centerlines and add the complete curve data. If there are any questions, please contact Susan King at 740-4391. 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. Susan C. King |
| 06/05/2003 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING TASK FORCE COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S03-009 Rancho Del Este II 06/04/03 (X) Tentative Plat () Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-02-26 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Pantano East Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Gateway: Golf Links Road COMMENTS DUE BY: June 3, 2003 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 (X) See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: (X) Resubmittal Required: (X) Tentative Plat () Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: Robyn Welch 791-4505 DATE: 5-27-03 Comprehensive Planning Task Force Comments Rancho Del Este II, S03-009 The applicant’s request to rezone the property located at the northeast corner of Golf Links Road and Bonanza Avenue that was approved by Mayor and Council is subject to meeting certain rezoning conditions. Although the tentative plat shows the provision of vehicular and pedestrian connectivity to the vacant parcel to the east (as required by rezoning condition no. 7), please provide and identify on the landscape plan how CA “B-3” will be integrated into the development while it is being held for this future vehicular/pedestrian connectivity. (Rezoning condition no. 4). Defer to Traffic Engineering for comments and compliance with the following rezoning conditions: 5, 6, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20. The tentative plat does not show that all units along the western and southern property lines (lots 163-183 and 75-90), as well as units along the northern property line adjacent to Arizona La Victoria (lots 24-26 and 153- 162), shall be limited to one story. Please indicate in the General Notes section and/or on the tentative plat compliance with this rezoning condition. (Rezoning condition no. 8). Provide building elevations for proposed residential units at time of submittal for development plan. (Rezoning condition no. 9). Although a six-foot high masonry wall along the east perimeter is indicated on the tentative plat, please provide sectional detail identifying graffiti-resistant and decorative materials, dimensions, and variations in wall alignment. Further, please include in the General Notes details for the other perimeter walls -- identified as boundary segments “A” and “B” in the landscape border and screening schedule of the landscape plan (sheet L-1). (Rezoning conditions no. 10-11). Defer to Development Services for comments and compliance with the following rezoning condition: 12. Defer to Tucson Police Department for comments and compliance with the following rezoning condition: 13. Although a six-foot high masonry wall along the east perimeter of the rezoning site is identified on the tentative plat, it is contradicted in the landscape border and screening schedule of the landscape plan (sheet L-1). Here, it indicates that a five-foot wall will be provided along boundary segment “C”. Please reconcile this discrepancy in the tentative plat and screening schedule. (Rezoning condition no. 21). |
| 06/05/2003 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 KAY MARKS ADDRESSING OFFICIAL PH: 740-6480 FAX #: 740-6370 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: KAY MARKS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL SUBJECT: S03-009 RANCHO DEL ESTE II / TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: June 5, 2003 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. ***The Pima County Addressing Section can use digital CAD drawing files when submitted with your final plat Mylar. These CAD files can be submitted through the Pima County Subdivision Coordinator. The digital CAD drawing files expedite the addressing and permitting processes when we are able to insert this digital data into the County’s Geographic Information System. Your support is greatly appreciated.*** |
| 06/09/2003 | GLYNDA ROTHWELL | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | WR#106224 June 10, 2003 Ms. Colleen Stoetzel Rick Engineering Company, Inc. 1745 E. River Road, Suite 101 Tucson, Arizona 85718 Dear Ms. Stoetzel: SUBJECT: Rancho Paraiso (Rancho Del Este II) Lots 1-183 S03-009 Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has no objection to the Tentative Plat submitted for review dated April 24, 2003. The preliminary point where TEP will serve this project is from Golf Links Road. Enclosed is a copy of TEP's facility map showing existing electrical facilities in the area. TEP will provide an electrical design on the Approved Tentative Plat within twenty (20) working days after receipt of the plat. At the customer's request, a design can be provided prior to the Approved Tentative Plat, however, once a design is provided, any design changes will be billable to the developer. For your information, a complete set of building and site plans, including square footage of the homes, will be required. Also, TEP's designer will need to know if the recreation area will require power Should you have any questions, please contact me at (520) 884-3879. Sincerely, S. Glynda Mastrangelo Right-of-Way Agent Land Management sgm cc: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Lisa Hoskin, Monterey Homes |
| 06/09/2003 | DOROTHY ROBLES | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | no objection. |
| 06/09/2003 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | DATE: June 06, 2003 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: CDRC Transmittal, Project S03-009 Rancho Del Este II: Tentative Plat CC: Craig Gross, Development Services Staff has reviewed and has the following comments. The development plan should indicate dedication of 20 ft wide public trail easements on either side of the tributary of Eastview Wash at the southeast corner of development. Trail easements should be located just inside of flowage easement. Please feel free to call me at 791-4873 x 215 if you have any questions. |