Plan Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL- OTHER SUBDIVISION REVIEW
Plan Number - S03-034
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL- OTHER SUBDIVISION REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/01/2004 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 06/02/2004 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | The plat is approved June 02, 2004. |
| 06/03/2004 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/04/2004 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | SUBJECT: San Francisco Subdivision Exception S03-034, T13S, R14E, SECTION 35 RECEIVED: Record of Survey and Drainage Statement on June 02, 2004 The subject submittal has been reviewed. We offer the following comments: 1. The Drainage Statement is acceptable for Record of Survey purposes. 2. All lettering and dimensions will be the equivalent of twelve (0.12) point or greater in size. 3. The first line in the Title Block should read "RECORD OF SURVEY". 4. Line weights will reflect the nature of the line, e.g. right of way lines will be more prominent than lot lines or easements. 5. Add the following Utility Note: "Any relocation or modification of existing utilities and/or public improvements necessitated by the proposed development will be at not expense to the public". 6. Add the "DEDICATION" block. 7. Indicate primary control points, or descriptions and ties to such control points, to which all dimensions, angles, bearings, and similar data on the Record of Survey will be referred. At least one (1) corner of the property will be tied by course and distance to a section corner, a quarter section corner, or an established City or County survey monument. The plan must include a description of that corner marker and an indication of how the bearings were determined. Corner tie recordation information is to be provided on the plan. 8. Provide the basis of bearing and the method by which the project ties into it. The purpose of the basis of bearings on a survey is to enable another surveyor to retrace the original survey. As such, the statement must be referenced to found, readily locatable monuments. 9. Provide all established lot corner monuments and label them as either found or set. 10. All easements of record will be drawn on the plan, and recordation information, locations, widths, and purposes shall be included. 11. The following information regarding the existing public right-of-way will be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. 12. 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. Recordation information (docket and page) must be included on the plan prior to final approval. 13. Show no-vehicular access easements where applicable. 14. Show clearly locations of all proposed driveways. A driveway can only access two units. Accessing three or more units off a single access point requires the development of a street or PAAL. The development of a street or PAAL requires a plat. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 or lalsham1@ci.tucson.az.us SUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Record of Survey |
| 06/15/2004 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 06/16/2004 | 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: S03-034 SAN FRANCISCO SUB EXCEPTION RESUBMITTAL/REVISED SUB EXCEPTION DATE: June 16, 2004 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. NOTE: 1. All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection. |
| 06/19/2004 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera Senior Planner FOR: Patricia Gehlen Principal Planner PROJECT: S03-034 San Francisco Lots - Lots A-D Subdivision Exception Record of Survey TRANSMITTAL: June 19, 2004 DUE DATE: June 15, 2004 COMMENTS 1. An applicant has one (1) year from the date of approval of tentative plat to obtain approval of a final plat that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application. This final plat must be approved and recorded on or before December 16 2004. 2. All text height is to be 12 point (.12) or greater. Adjust the text on the location map to 12 point. The names of the subdivisions do not need to be listed just the book and page numbers i.e. 32/44. (Previous Comment: The location map must be at a scale of 3"=1 mile. Show north arrow and scale. Identify major streets and list the Section, Township, and Range. Identify the subject property within the location map.) 3. As of the last review of this project we have made some changes to the requirements and although we still do not have an approved development standards document for the record of survey drawings we are requiring some of these changes on the plans. As indicated in the first set of comments that this was a work in progress and as a result we would have additional comments on subsequent reviews. One the requirements has been by the Recorder's Office is for the title block to include the words "Record of Survey" placed in the title block, and then the name of the division of land, i.e.. "RECORD OF SURVEY" followed by, Re-subdivision of Venice Addition, followed by, the legal description of the lots to be re-subdivided, followed by the new lot names/numbers and common areas if applicable. (The Pima County Recorder's Office is mainly requiring that the words "Record of Survey" be included above or within. The title block.) Please revise the title block. 4. As has been mentioned in the previous set of comments and in comment 3 of this set, this process is still evolving and other requirements will be necessary to refine the final outcome of the development standards and final documents that the Development Services Department will require. As noted in comment 21 of the previous set of comments it may be necessary to add additional drawings, information, and even a second or third sheet depending on the complexity of drawing. In this case we are to review a drawing which has legal descriptions that have been written to define the lot splits and the easements. Per the drawing the new legal descriptions of the lots are fairly easy to follow but the easements are a different story. Add a drawing that depicts the legal descriptions for the lots and the easements without the development design. The drawing should be the survey based on the legal descriptions. I believe that all future record of survey drawings will have to include the development drawing with the development criteria for the specific use and a survey drawing depicting the development itself (a site plan if you will). 5. This development is required to provide a maximum of one visitor parking space per lot if there is no on street parking allowed on San Francisco Boulevard. Per DS 3-05.2.4.A.5 tandem parking does meet the requirement for visitor parking. Technically if this were a standard subdivision the parking requirement would be .25 visitor parking spaces per unit, in this case one space would be required if on street parking is allowed. I will do some further review on this issue and I will call you regarding the visitor-parking requirement. 6. Please submit copies of the floor plans and building elevation drawings for verification of square footages and building heights. Also it is not clear on this drawing what the use of the structure next to the garages are to be. The building floor plans will clear this up. 8. Per the title block a common area has been listed but has not been defined on the plan. Please indicate if the common area is to be a separate parcel or is the utility/access easement to be considered the common area. Please clarify. 9. Previous comment 21 left as reference. The Record of Survey drawing is to be formatted similar to a final plat. A second and/or third sheet is to be included when necessary, with the Record of Survey that demonstrates how the proposed subdivision will meet the applicable LUC criteria for the proposed use/development designator and development standards. As indicated in comment two (2) this is the first project to be reviewed for a Subdivision Exception Record of Survey utilizing a set of standards that is a work in progress. Additional comments may forthcoming on the subsequent submittal. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. DGR C:\planning\cdrc\finalplat\S03034SER2oS.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised Subdivision Exception Record of Survey and additional requested documents |
| 06/22/2004 | CRAIG GROSS | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | June 22, 2004 TO: Rob Paulus, Rob Paulus Architect, Ltd. THRU: FROM: ____________________________________ representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environmental Quality SUBJECT: Resubdivision of Venice Addition - Submittal S03-034 The proposed sewer collection lines to serve the above-referenced project have been reviewed on behalf of the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) and the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. Please add the following symbols to the legend and follow these symbols in the layout. These symbols shall be easily differentiated for engineering review purposes. - Include a symbol for PROPOSED PRIVATE SEWERS - Include a symbol for PROPOSED PUBLIC SEWERS - Include a symbol for EXISTING PUBLIC SEWERS - Include a symbol for EXISTING PRIVATE SEWERS Should any of those symbols not apply to this project, it is not necessary to have it included in the legend. The legend currently includes a symbol for EXISTING SEWER MANHOLE. The layout shows a manhole right in front of the property which is not found in our database, thus it is assumed it would be a proposed manhole. Should it be a proposed manhole, then it should be shown with a different symbol to that of an existing manhole. Adjust the legend to show existing manholes and proposed manholes. Label the easement to read 17’ ACCESS, UTILITY AND PRIVATE SEWER EASEMENT FOR PARCELS B, C AND D The easement appears to widen when reaching parcels C and D. Label this part of the easement to read XX’ ACCESS, UTILITY AND PRIVATE SEWER EASEMENT FOR PARCELS C AND D Add the following General Note PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS, A JOINT USE AND MAINTANCE AGREEMENT FOR THE SHARED PRIVATE SEWER LINE WILL BE RECORDED. The Joint Use and Maintenance Agreement will need to be reviewed and approved by Ms. Ilene Deckard of the Pima County Wastewater Management Department before it is signed and recorded. Please contact Ms. Deckard at 740-6544 regarding the required content of this Agreement. Show and label all proposed private sewer easements that will need to be created along with their width, type and all necessary survey data necessary to locate the boundaries of the easements. Check with City of Tucson CDRC to find out if you can grant and record any necessary private sewer easements with this instrument, or whether this must be done via a separate instrument, and label the easement appropriately on the Record of Survey. Please let me know what you were told, in your review letter, and by whom, so that I may contact them if I have any questions about this matter. There are 2 existing sewer manholes at the intersection of San Francisco Boulevard and Torino Avenue. Pima County records show that there is only 1 existing manhole at said location. Please revise the sewer layout to show only the correct manhole. We will require a revised set of bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. County Ordinance 2003-29 went into effect on April 11, 2003. This ordinance requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the subdivision exception. The fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet. The next submittal of this project will be the third (3rd) submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $39.00 (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter. If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly. If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact me at the phone number provided above, under my signature. Copy: Project |
| 06/22/2004 | CRAIG GROSS | ZONING | RECORD LEGAL DESC | Completed |