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

Plan Number: S03-027
Parcel: Unknown

Address:
5740 E GLENN ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW

Plan Number - S03-027
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
09/26/2003 FERNE RODRIGUEZ START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
09/29/2003 DOROTHY ROBLES COT NON-DSD REAL ESTATE Approved No Comments
09/29/2003 JIM EGAN COT NON-DSD FIRE Approved The Tentative Plat is approved 9/29/03.
10/02/2003 KAY MARKS PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING Denied 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL
TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207

KAY MARKS
ADDRESSING OFFICIAL
PH: 740-6480
FAX #: 740-6370


TO: CITY PLANNING
FROM: KAY MARKS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL
SUBJECT: S03-027 CATALINA VISTAS / TENTATIVE PLAT
DATE: October 2, 2003



The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and the following matters must be resolved prior to our approval:

1: Include resubdivision information on all Title Blocks.

2: Change “Orchard River Place” to Drive on pg. 1.

3: Spell out all Street Suffixes except on Location Plan.

4: Label approved interior Street Names on Final Plat.
10/09/2003 GLYNDA ROTHWELL UTILITIES TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER Approved From: "Castillo, Liza" <LCastillo@tucsonelectric.com>
To: 'Craig Gross' <cgross1@ci.tucson.az.us>, 'Ferne Rodriquez' <frodrig2@ci.tucson.az.us>
Date: 10/3/03 4:04PM
Subject: S03-027, CATALINA VISTAS, Lots 1-85, Common Area s "A" & "B"

CATALINA VISTAS
Lots 1-85, Common Area s "A" & "B"
S03-027

Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has no objection to the tentative plat
submitted for review dated September 26, 2003.

The preliminary point where TEP will serve this project is from existing
units #20, and #77 proceeding through the interior of the subdivision.
Enclosed is a copy of TEP's facility map showing the approximate location
and unit numbers of the existing facilities.

TEP will provide an electrical design on the Approved Tentative Plat within
fifteen (15) 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.

Should you have any questions, please contact me at (520) 884-3879.

Liza Castillo
Land Management
Tucson Electric Power Company
lcastillo@tucsonelectric.com
(520) 884-3882
10/14/2003 TOM MARTINEZ OTHER AGENCIES AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION Approved NO COMMENT
S03-027
Landmark Engineering, Inc
CATALINA VISTAS
10/14/2003 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
S03-027 Catalina Vistas:Tentative Plat 10/8/2003
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”
Craycroft (Grant to Fort Lowell)
No 0
32,600
42,000
4
42,000
52,069
4
813
Route 34, 30 Minutes,0.25 Miles
Bike route with striped shoulder
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10/15/2003 GLENN HICKS COT NON-DSD PARKS & RECREATION Approved DATE: October 14, 2003

TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services

FROM: Glenn Hicks, Parks and Recreation

SUBJECT: CDRC Transmittal, Project S03-027 Catalina Vistas: TP

CC: Craig Gross, Development Services


Staff has no comments.

Please feel free to call me at 791-4873 x 215 if you have any questions.
10/20/2003 DALE KELCH COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Denied Traffic Engineering REJECTS this T.P.:

1. The symbol used for the no parking signs in the legend is for an existing sign. Use appropriate symbol IAW SD100 PC/COT SDPI 1994 Ed.

2. In sections A, B, E, F, depict where the travel lanes and parking lanes are with dimensions. If there are to be no parking lanes, show no parking signs in the sections.

3. Several of the section lines for E and F don't match the sections drawn. The section line is pointing the wrong direction compared to the way the section is drawn or the roadway is warping the wrong way. Create new sections I and J for clarity?

D. Dale Kelch, EIT
Senior Engineering Associate
Traffic Engineering Division
(520)791-4259x305
(520)791-5526 (fax)
dkelch1@ci.tucson.az.us
10/23/2003 PETER MCLAUGHLIN ZONING REVIEW Denied CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Peter McLaughlin
Senior Planner

FOR: Patricia Gehlen
Principal Planner


PROJECT:
Catalina Vistas RCP
S03-027
Tentative Plat

TRANSMITTAL: October 23, 2003
DUE DATE: October 23, 2003

Comments:

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 September 25, 2004.
LUC 4.1.7.1

2. Fill in the S03-027 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. Local streets must be designed with parking on both sides of the street unless parking is provided in common areas, distributed throughout the subdivision at a ratio of one parking space per dwelling. There are only 47 visitor parking spaces provided for 85 proposed units. Please revise.
DS 3-01.2.4.D

4. The visitor parking must be uniformly distributed throughout the project and provided within 150 feet of the front or street side yard property lines of each residential unit. Please revise.
DS 3-05.2.4.A.1

5. Show the footprint of a unit or provide typical plot plan
layouts for a corner lot, an interior lot, and a lot affected by
the perimeter yard setback. These typicals are to be fully
dimensioned and are to be drawn at a larger scale
than the tentative plat. It is recommended that, if possible,
each lot be designed so that the largest proposed unit fits
and still complies with Code requirements. This provides
the greatest flexibility to the builder in terms of the size of
the unit that can be sold for each lot. If this cannot be done,
use the footprint of the largest unit that will fit on each
lot. Include an example showing setbacks for
garages/carports.
DS 2-10.3.1.B
LUC 3.2.6.5
LUC 3.6.1.4.D.2

6. A copy of proposed CC&R's must be provided to the Zoning Review Section for review and approval prior to approval of the final plat. The CC&R's must meet the criteria of LUC 3.6.1.5 and DS 2-03.6.6.
DS 2-10.3.2.E

7. Show the location and dimension widths of any existing or proposed easements. Add the recordation information by docket and page numbers for all easements, or state that they will be "by final plat".
DS 2-03.2.3.C
DS 2-03.2.4.J
8. The cross sections drawings E and F on sheet 2 of 4 do not match the drawing on sheet 4 of 4. Please revise.

9. Reference recorded subdivisions by book and page number in the location map on sheet 1 of 4.
DS 2-03.2.1.D.2
10. Provide the square footages and dimensions for the two common areas "A" and "B". DS 2-03.2.4.B & I

11. Label the zoning of adjacent properties on sheet 4 of 4. DS 2-03.2.3.I

12. On lots of four thousand (4,000) square feet or more, it will
be assumed that the lot is of sufficient size to accommodate
a dwelling unit; therefore, on projects with lots of this size,
floor plans will not be required. However, on lots of less
than four thousand (4,000) square feet, units have to be
custom designed to fit onto these smaller and tighter lots,
and additional information is needed to verify compliance
with RCP requirements.Therefore, on projects that have lots
less than four thousand (4,000) square feet in size, submit:

1. Floor plans or drawings of the footprint of each unit,
showing exterior dimensions. If only dimensioned building
footprints are provided, be certain that locations of second
floors (if applicable), front entrances, and motor vehicle
parking spaces are noted. The floor plans can be preliminary
plans and do not have to be complete construction drawings.
Plans can be reviewed in a more timely manner if copies of
the building footprints drawn at same scale as the plat are
provided.This allows staff the ability to check which models
fit which lots using a light table, instead of performing the
tedious lot-by-lot math work.

2. Building elevations of all proposed units with height
dimensions. These assist in determining compliance with
perimeter yard setbacks and screening of mechanical
equipment. The elevations can be preliminary drawings. The
model home construction plans will be used to determine
exact setbacks and screening requirements at the time of
application for building permits.

3. A list indicating which model homes fit which lots.Unless
a lot is planned for another use, each lot will be designed so
that at least one of the model units fits on the lot in
compliance with Code requirements. The list should
indicate whether optional covered patios, porches, etc., will
still allow the unit to fit on the lot in compliance with
requirements. DS 2-10.3.2.D

13. Provide a one-half (1/2) inch margin along the sides of the plat. DS 2-03.2.1.B

14. 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.

pmclaugh\H:\Peter\tentativeplats03\S03-027tpRCPrev.doc
10/23/2003 ROBERT YOUNG PIMA COUNTY PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW Passed
10/23/2003 FRODRIG2 PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Needs Review
10/23/2003 ED ABRIGO PIMA COUNTY ASSESSOR Approved Office of the Pima County Assessor
115 N. Church Ave.
Tucson, Arizona 85701

RICK LYONS
ASSESSOR





TO: Town of Marana (FaX-520-297-3792)
Planning and Zoning Department
13555 N. Sanders Rd.

Sahuarita, Az. 85629

FROM: Ed Abrigo, Mapping Supervisor
Pima County Assessor’s Office
Mapping Department

DATE: October 23, 2003


RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat
S03-027 Catalina Vistas T131436 (110-15)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

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.
Remove the shading.
Add bearings for the lot lines; add the complete curve data.
Add section tie to subdivision, with a dimension and bearing from the ¼ corner to the point of tie.
If there are any questions, please contact Susan C. 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
10/27/2003 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied To: Craig Gross DATE: October 27, 2003
Planning Administrator FROM: Loren Makus
Engineering Division


SUBJECT: Catalina Vistas
Tentative Plan S03-027 (First Review)
T13S, R14E, Section36

RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Tentative Plat and Drainage Report.

The Tentative Plat (TP) and Drainage Report (DR) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal.

Tentative Plat:

1. Show existing and proposed water surface elevations and floodplain limits for all flows of 100 cfs or more. Add a note stating that a Floodplain Use Permit will be required for the development. (DS 2-03.3.J)
2. Revise general note 7, adding "TOTAL MILES OF NEW PRIVATE STREETS ARE _____". (DS 2-03.2.2.D.1.b)
3. Show the basis of elevation benchmark location on the TP and show method of tie. (DS 2-03.2.3.A)
4. Show on the TP benchmark locations, the proposed location of and method of tie to permanent survey monuments or to the nearest section or quarter section corner, and the proposed location and type of subdivision control monuments will be shown. Describe all monuments found or set. (DS 2-03.2.3.A)
5. Provide closure calculations for the boundary data. (DS 2-03.2.3.B)
6. Provide 18-foot curb returns for the entrances to the motor courts. (DS 3-01.10 Figure 6)
7. Glenn Street is an MS&R collector. Show and dimension existing and future right of way cross sections. (DS 2-03.2.4.H)

Drainage Report:
1. A $150.00 review fee for the Drainage Report is required.
2. Add the basin(s) maintenance responsibility note per S.M.D.D.F.M. 2.3.1.6 C 1 and 2 to the DR.
3. Revise the DR report to provide 5-year threshold retention. Show the calculations and use the 5-year rainfall and 5-year run-off coefficients. SD/RM 2.2.
4. Show floodplain delineation and calculations for all existing and proposed flows of 100 cfs or greater. Show water surface elevations. DS 2-03.2.3.J
5. Provide freeboard calculations and cross-sections including any surface treatments for each drainage way. Show 100-year water surface elevations and minumum bank elevations. S.M.D.D.F.M. 8.5.1.4.
6. Show sizing calculations to establish that the wall openings in the perimeter wall will be sufficient to accept off-site flows.

A Floodplain Use Permit and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan will be required when the Grading Permit is issued.
Submit a revised TP, a revise DR and a soils report. Include a $150 drainage review fee and a detailed response letter, detailing how each comment has been addressed.
If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1161 or lmakus1@ci.tucson.az.us.

Loren Makus
Senior Engineering Associate
10/28/2003 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

S03-027 Catalina Vistas 10/27/03

( x ) Tentative Plat
( ) Development Plan
( x ) Landscape Plan
( ) Revised Plan/Plat
( ) Board of Adjustment
( ) Other

CROSS REFERENCE: C09-82-29

NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Arcadia Alamo Area Plan

GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: None

COMMENTS DUE BY: October 23, 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: Eric Anderson 791-4505 DATE: 10/08/03

Comprehensive Planning Task Force Comments
Catalina Vistas: Tentative Plat Review, S03-027

Because this is a Residential Cluster Project (RCP), it must be in conformance with the design policies and criteria of the General Plan, and any of its components, including the Arcadia Alamo Area Plan and the Design Guidelines Manual. In addition, the allowance of the RCP is based on the purpose to provide greater flexibility and creativity in the design of clustered residential developments. The applicant states that the tentative plat is in compliance with the Tucson General Plan by encouraging high quality development within the city and efficiently using land and public facilities.

1. The site plan shows a common recreational area in the southwest corner of the development. This area has a sand play area for children and two picnic tables. The plat does not show the recreational area being accessible by a sidewalk. Please provide a handicapped accessible sidewalk to the sand play area.

2. Common Areas "A" located throughout the development appear to present an opportunity for multiple use detention/retention basin areas, including passive or active recreational uses. These basins are centrally located, which is where the General Plan, Design Guidelines Manual, and "Safe By Design" concepts ideally desire recreational amenities to be located. In addition, the Design Guidelines Manual states that detention/retention basins should be able to be used as recreational amenities. Please provide details or cross-sections of the design for the basins on the landscape plan.

3. Please provide a typical section for any masonry screen walls that will be constructed. Please indicate the type of decorative materials and/or pattern that will be used. Also indicate that the wall will be constructed of, or painted with, graffiti-resistant materials.

4. Sheet 4 of 4 states Common Area "B", and sheet LS-5 shows a vegetated area for a common area located in the southeast corner of tentative plat. Please correct so that both are the same.

5. Rezoning condition #2 stipulates that the developer of the property shall construct a sidewalk on the south side of Glenn Street. Please show the sidewalk on the south side of Glenn Street on the tentative plat.

6. Rezoning condition #3 stipulates that the curb line to be on prolongation of existing curb west of the tract. Please show this on the tentative plat.
10/28/2003 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied The Landscape Section does not recommend approval of the tentative plat at this time. Revise the plans as requested by other agencies and as outlined below. Resubmittal of all plans is required. Additional comments may apply due to plan revisions.

1) Note the scale of the landscape plans. DS 2-07.2.2

2) Street landscape borders are required between the refuse storage locations and adjacent streets. LUC Table 3.7.2-I.

3) Include the legal description on the landscape plans. DS 2-07.2.2

4) Define the NTS abbreviation used on sheet NP2.

5) Section M on sht. 3 of the tentative plat proposes grouted rip-rap and other elements which may be in conflict with plantings proposed on the landscape plan. Per DS 10-01. p.7 The proposed channel should be designed to appear natural, unless stability problems absolutely dictate the need for full grade controls or full channel lining". In any case the resulting channel must be designed to accomodate any proposed landscaping. Revise the plans as necessary.