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 - S04-108
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/04/2005 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 02/11/2005 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | DATE: February 11, 2005 To: Craig Gross Planning Administrator FROM: Loren Makus, EIT Engineering Division SUBJECT: Pantano Overlook Tentative Plat S04-108 (Third Review) T14S, R15E, Section 17 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Tentative Plat, Drainage Report, The Tentative Plat (TP) and Drainage Report (DR) have been reviewed by the Engineering Division and we do not recommend approval at this time. The following review comments must be addressed. Tentative Plat 1. Show on the Tentative Plat how the increased discharge from the two new channels will be handled without causing an increase in erosion of the bank of the Pantano Wash. The tentative plat and the drainage report must address potential erosion all the way to the banks of the wash. A complete discussion of the potential effects of the increased discharge on the existing and future sand and gravel pit as well as the on the banks of the wash must be presented in the drainage report. Drainage Report 2. As previously commented, the drainage report indicates that the existing direct discharges to the Pantano Wash are predominately sheet flow. The proposed drainage improvements concentrate much of the flow into two discharge locations. Show how that the concentrated discharges will not cause additional erosion or other adverse impacts on the adjacent properties or to the banks of the Pantano Wash. Erosion protection may be required all the way up to the banks of the wash. 3. As previously commented, permission from Pima County Flood Control District will be required for the increased volume and more concentrated discharges from this project. Provide a letter from the district indicating that they have reviewed the proposed project and accept the additional discharges. 4. The status of the gravel pit and the mineral right claimed by the gravel pit operators must be substantiated by the applicant before the tentative plat can be approved. Address the effect of the increased discharge on the full extent of any present or future mining right. (DS10-02.2.3.1.5.G) A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan will be required when the Grading Permit is issued. Once the remaining issues have been resolved, submit a revised TP, and a revised DR. Include a detailed response letter, detailing how each comment has been addressed. Please contact me to set up a meeting to discuss these comments. I can be reached at 791-5550 x1161 or loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov. Loren Makus, EIT Senior Engineering Associate |
| 02/11/2005 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | KB Homes supplied documentation meeting the requirements of the previous comments. |
| 02/22/2005 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | Traffic Engineering recommends APPROVAL of this TP. D. Dale Kelch, EIT Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov |
| 02/22/2005 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/22/2005 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approv-Cond | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S04-108 Pantano Overlook 02/18/05 (x) Tentative Plat () Development Plan (x) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-95-06 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: N/A GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: N/A COMMENTS DUE BY: February 18, 2005 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: 02/18/05 Department of Urban Planning and Design Comments Pantano Overlook – S04-108: 3rd Review 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 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. Please place the required zoning conditions from the pending change of condition request on the tentative plat. Staff will need to review the tentative plat again to make sure that all applicable rezoning conditions are met. 2. To allow functional pedestrian circulation, construct a sidewalk along the far western portion of 22nd Street. Connect the internal pedestrian circulation system with the sidewalk along 22nd Street. 3. The purpose of a RCP is to allow greater flexibility and creativity in the design of clustered residential developments. Due to the size and location of this RCP there are numerous ways to have creative and enhanced design. Please make a note on the plat that no two homes with the same color scheme shall be placed adjacent to each other. Also, please make a note on the plat that no two homes with the same building elevation will be placed adjacent to each other. This property has numerous opportunities. Please address any additional ways that the subdivision will have creativity, enhanced design, and be an asset to the community. 4. To create a shaded microclimate, please locate, at minimum, a 15-gallon shade tree on every other lot. The trees shall be located no more than 10 feet from the back of the sidewalk. |
| 02/22/2005 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approv-Cond | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S04-108 Pantano Overlook 03/10/05 ( x ) Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan ( x ) Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment ( ) Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-95-06 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: N/A GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: N/A COMMENTS DUE BY: N/A 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 ( x ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: 02/18/05 ( ) Resubmittal Required: ( ) Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan ( ) Landscape Plan ( ) Other: REVIEWER: E. Anderson 791-4505 DATE: 03/10/05 Department of Urban Planning and Design Comments Pantano Overlook - S04-108: 4th Review Staff has been in contact with the applicant and the applicant has agreed to address the remaining four comments. The applicant will amend the subdivision plat and address the four remaining issues on the mylar. Staff feels that it is reasonable for City of Tucson staff to check the submitted mylar at the time the mylar is submitted to verify that the four issues have been addressed by the applicant. |
| 02/23/2005 | CRAIG GROSS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Completed |