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: RESUBMITTAL - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Plan Number - S04-015
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/29/2004 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/30/2004 | 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: S04-015 PRESIDIO PARK CENTRAL/REVISED TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: July 29, 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. ***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.*** jg |
| 08/05/2004 | JIM TATE | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Craig Gross; CDRC Coordinator DATE: August 5, 2004 SUBJECT: Engineering review of the Presidio Park Central Tentative Plat. The activity number is S04-015. SUMMARY: The Tentative Plat and Drainage Report were received by Engineering on July 30, 2004. Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Tentative Plat or the Drainage Report. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: TP, DR GENERAL COMMENTS 1. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Tentative Plat purposes only. 2. Please include the Assurance Package with the Final Plat submittal. This package must include the original Third Party Trust, the original Amendment to Trust, a copy of the Trust Agreement, a copy of the Deed, and a recent Title Report. 3. Include a copy of the CC&Rs with the Final Plat submittal. The specific maintenance notes specified in the Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 14.3.2 must be included in the CC&Rs. The term "owner" in the maintenance notes is to be replaced with "Homeowners Association". 4. Please provide a copy of the boundary closure calculations with the Final Plat submittal. 5. A Grading Plan and Permit will be required. Proposed grading in excess of 5,000 yards is designated "engineered grading" and a soils engineering report is required with the Grading Plan submittal. IBC Chapter 36, Section 9. The Soils Report must also address the requirements detailed in the Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 14.2.6. 6. Proposed fills in excess of two feet above existing grade at any location in the outer one hundred feet of the developing site adjacent to residentially zoned property require the procedure outlined in IBC Chapter 36 Section 13.1. This process must be complete prior to Grading Plan approval. 7. Proposed developments disturbing areas exceeding 1 acre are subject to NPDES requirements. Contact Patricia Gilbert, 791-5550 for submittal requirements. The NPDES submittal must accompany the Grading Plan submittal. 8. Prior to building plan submittal, a soils report that addresses a recommended minimum building setback from the basins is required. See Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 14.2.6 The next submittal must address the following items: TENTATIVE PLAT 1. The Drainage Report specifies 4 wall openings along the east property boundary. The plat shows 3 openings. 2. The sidewalks adjacent to the basins on this submittal have been relocated to abut the curb. However, the sidewalk scupper was not relocated (see keynote 38). Keynote 39 (concrete spillway) now shows to be crossing the sidewalk. Sidewalks must be flood free for up to the ten year event. DS 2-08.4.1.E 3. The DSMR conditions specify that the driveways must be concrete. The motor court areas are essentially driveways. These must be concrete. 4. Detail I says, "14'-8"X8" wall openings. The Drainage Report specifies 11-8"X16" wall openings (14'-8" long by 8" high). 5. Detail I specifies an overall north south dimension of 14'-8". Section F indicates this dimension as 13 ft. DRAINAGE REPORT 1. The Retention Basin rating curve shows a retention basin volume of 1314 cu.ft. for the west basin (two ft. depth) and 399 for the east basin (one ft. depth). The total required volume is 2439 cu.ft. The basins as proposed do not meet the requirement. Re-design. James C. Tate, P.E., CFM Civil Engineer |
| 08/10/2004 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING AND DESIGN COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S04-015 Presidio Park Central 08/06/04 (x) Tentative Plat () Development Plan (x) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: N/A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Grant - Alvernon Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: N/A COMMENTS DUE BY: 08/11/04 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: E. Anderson 791-4505 DATE: 08/02/04 Comprehensive Planning Task Force Comments Presidio Park Central, S04-015 – 3rd submittal 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 Grant – Alvernon Area Plan and 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. 1. The submitted landscape plan and tentative plat do not match in regards to the sidewalk and area around the sidewalk on the northern side of the property. Please amend so the path of the sidewalk is the same on both documents. Also, it seems that the proposed park benches will not be shaded. If park benches are the proposed passive recreational amenity and if this is the proposed location for the park benches, please provide shade trees around the park benches. |
| 08/13/2004 | 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 February 28, 2005. 2. General note 29 states that all lots are proposed for barrier free accessibility yet the plat provides barrier free accessibility to lots 3, 4, 7, 9, and 10 only. Barrier free accessibility is impeded to all other lots by lack of ramps, curbing, and or driveways. Provide barrier free accessibility to all lots or revise general note 29 to state the aforementioned lots as being barrier free. LUC 3.6.1.4.A.5/ D.S. 2-10.3.1.D 3. Brick pavers proposed in the driveway areas do not meet the requirement of DSMR condition number two (2), which states that all driveways must be concrete. D.S. 3-01.3.3.A.4 4. Add the typical plot plan layouts for a corner lot, an interior lot, and a lot affected by the perimeter yard and street yard setback on the tentative plat. Separate attachments do not meet this requirement. D.S. 2-10.3.1.B If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro, (520) 791-5608. |
| 08/13/2004 | CRAIG GROSS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Completed |