Plan Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Plan Number - S04-113
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/19/2004 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/29/2004 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 11/30/2004 | 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: S04-113 TOWNHOMES AT IRWIN PLACE/REVISED TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: 11/23/04 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.*** |
| 12/02/2004 | MARILYN KALTHOFF | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approv-Cond | December 1, 2004 TO: Tom Guido, P.E. T and T Engineering LLC THRU: Craig Gross City of Tucson, Development Services Department FROM: Dickie Fernández, E.I.T. Pima County Development Services Department Development Review Division (Wastewater) SUBJECT: Townhomes at Irwin Place, Lots 1-12 and Common Areas A & B Tentative Plat – 2nd Submittal S04-113 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. SHEET 1. Revise Wastewater Management Note 1 to read ON-SITE SANITARY SEWERS, EXCEPT PUBLIC SEWERS WITHIN PUBLIC SEWER EASEMENTS OR RIGHTS-OF-WAYS, WILL BE PRIVATE AND WILL BE CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED ON A PRIVATE BASIS. THE LOCATION AND METHOD OF CONNECTION TO AN EXISTING PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME OF SUBMITTAL OF PLUMBING OR BUILDING PLANS. Subject to the above, the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality and Wastewater Management Department hereby approve the above referenced submittal of the tentative plat. The required revision(s) may be shown on the Mylars. Please note the following: Approval of the above referenced submittal does not authorize the construction of public or private sewer collection lines, or water distribution lines. Prior to the construction of such features, a Construction Authorization (Approval To Construct) may need to be obtained from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality. Also, air quality activity permits must be secured by the developer or prime contractor from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality before constructing, operating or engaging in an activity which may cause or contribute to air pollution. If you have any questions regarding the above mentioned comments, please contact me. Sincerely, Dickie Fernández, E.I.T. Telephone: (520) 740-6947 Copy: Project |
| 12/03/2004 | DAN CASTRO | ZONING | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | The Zoning Review Section approves the tentative plat for this subdivision, subject to the following changes on the executed tentative plat. However, should there be any changes requested by other CDRC members, the Zoning Review Section approval is void, and we request copies of the revised tentative plat to verify that those changes do not affect any zoning requirements. 1. Th site coverage calculation on sheet 1 of 3 shall be revised to provide the following information: (total building area plus vehicular use area divided by the gross site area). If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro at (520) 791-5608. |
| 12/03/2004 | GLYNDA ROTHWELL | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | SUBJECT: IRWIN PLACE TOWNHOMES Lots 1-12 S04-113 Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has no objection to the tentative plat submitted for review dated November 7, 2004. The preliminary point where TEP will serve this project is from the existing facilities along the north property line and the facilities at the southeast corner of the property. As you are aware, there are existing electrical facilities within the boundaries of this subdivision. All relocation costs will be billable to the developer. Liza Castillo Land Management Tucson Electric Power Company lcastillo@tep.com Office: (520) 917-8745 Cell Phone: (520) 904-2668 Fax: (520) 917-8700 |
| 12/06/2004 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Craig Gross; CDRC Coordinator DATE: December 6, 2004 SUBJECT: Engineering review of the Townhomes at Irwin Place Tentative Plat. The activity number is S04-113. SUMMARY: The Tentative Plat and Drainage Report were received by Engineering on 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 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 on the Final Plat or 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 Section13.1. This process must be complete prior to Grading Plan approval. 7. Proposed developments disturbing areas exceeding 1 acre are subject to NPDES requirements. 8. All proposed easements must be shown in a surveyable manner on the Final Plat. The next submittal must address the following items: TENTATIVE PLAT 1. All existing easements drawn on the plat must have the recordation information on the plat. Prior to plat approval the 15' ingress/egress utility easement to be abandoned must be recorded. Include the book and page on the plat. DS 2-03.2.3.C. The above comment is from the first review. The 15' ingress/egress easement has been removed from the second submittal. Is the easement actually there? Is the easement going to be abandoned? It is acknowledged that a drainage channel is proposed in that location. However if there is an existing easement in that location it will still need to be abandoned. Please clarify. 2. Sidewalks are required as part of new development of all properties. All new subdivisions shall provide a five foot wide sidewalk along the entire length of the street frontage. A five foot sidewalk is proposed along the new private street however, a five foot sidewalk is also required along Smoot Drive. Show a five foot sidewalk along Smoot Drive for the entire length of the property. Revise the plat. DS 3-01.3.3.A. It is acknowledged that the cu-de-sac is unimproved and contains a large amount of native vegetation. Smoot Drive is public ROW and is considered a street because of this the above comment still applies. Proposals not meeting the Development Standards can apply for a Development Modification Request (DSMR). For information on the DSMR process please contact Marilyn Kalthoff at 791-5550, ext. 1117. 3. Draw locations, estimate flow quantity and indicate types of off-site drainage acceptance points and on-site runoff discharge points. There is stormwater from the east (Smoot Street) that is entering the site at the northeast corner of the site. What is the exact location of the eastern offsite flow and the quantity? What kind of drainage structures will be used to handle the flow? Address and revise. DS 2-03.2.4.L.7. The above comment has not been addressed. Indicate exactly where the drainage is entering the site and the quantity. 4. Per SMDDFM 14.3.4. a minimum of one 15-foot wide vehicular access ramp shall be provided into each basin. It is not clear how a vehicle/equipment will enter the basin. The plat shows vertical curb, a scupper and rock rip rap between the street and the basin. Revise the plat to show and dimension basin maintenance access ramps. SMDDFM 2.3.1.6.A.4.b. 5. The drainage report states on page 8, second paragraph, the basin is a depth of 1.5'. On the plat it shows a depth of 2' for the retention basin. What is the correct proposed depth for the basin? The proposed basin depth on the plat and in the report do not match. The drainage report and the plat must match. Clarify the plat and the drainage report. 6. A minimum distance of 2' must be maintained between a PAAL and a wall. The wall located south of lots 11 and 12 and the PAAL must be set back two feet from the PAAL. DS 3-05.2.2.A.3. 7. Show proposed drainage flow arrows for each lot particularly lots 3 - 8. Section D/3 indicates a drainage problem adjacent to the rear wall. Are the lots draining toward the street or to the back of the lot? Clearly indicated for each lot the direction of drainage. 8. The request was made for dimensions on the proposed curb cuts for lots 1 -3 from the previous review and a curb cut was dimensioned located on the side of lot 3. It is not clear why there is a curb cut located there. The intent of the curb cut locations for lot 1 and 2 is to know how vehicles are going to access the lots and meet the curb cut requirements of chapter 25 of the City Code. Please clarify the proposed location of the curb cut and clearly indicate how vehicles are going to access lots 1 and 2. 9. The street width between lot 11 and common area "C" scales to only 21'. The street width must be 24' for the entire street. Revise to show 24' for the whole length of the street. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS: 1. The drainage report states on page 8, second paragraph, the basin is a depth of 1.5'. On the plat it shows a depth of 2' for the retention basin. What is the correct proposed depth for the basin? The drainage report and the plat must match. Clarify the plat and the drainage report. 2. Per SMDDFM 14.3.4. a minimum of one 15-foot wide vehicular access ramp shall be provided into each basin. It is not clear how a vehicle/equipment will enter the basin. The plat shows vertical curb, a scupper and rock rip rap between the street and the basin. Revise the plat to show and dimension basin maintenance access ramps. SMDDFM 2.3.1.6.A.4.b. 3. The first paragraph of the drainage report states that runoff on the north side of lots 6-9 will pass through weep holes at the base of the perimeter fence. The tentative plat indicates a wall and runoff from lots 5-8 will pass through the wall openings. The drainage report on the tentative plat must have the same information. The plat and report do not match. Was the intent in the report to state lots 5-8? Please clearly indicate what is being proposed in this area. And replace the verbiage "perimeter fence" with "perimeter wall." 4. Draw locations, estimate flow quantity and indicate types of off-site drainage acceptance points and on-site runoff discharge points. There is stormwater from the east (Smoot Street) that is entering the site at the northeast corner of the site. What is the exact location of the southern offsite flow and the quantity? What kind of drainage structures will be used to handle the flow? Address and revise. DS 2-03.2.4.L.7. The above comment has not been addressed. Indicate exactly where the drainage is entering the site and the quantity. This must be addressed in the drainage report and on tentative plat. 5. The drainage report on page 3 states that the site is not impacted by off site runoff. However, the contours indicate that stormwater from the south sheet flows across the property. This flow must be accepted. New development cannot block flows. This needs to be addressed. What is the location and quantity of this offsite flow? What kind of drainage structures will be used to handle the flow. Revise the drainage report. The above comment is a comment from the first submittal. In your response letter comment # 8 states that discharge will be captured by Irwin Place or is diverted from the site by a small earthen swale. However the drainage report and the tentative plat do not address or indicate a swale. The plat actually shows a wall without wall openings and the drainage report does not address the offsite stormwater from the south. Stormwater must be accepted and released from developments essentially at the same locations, and with the same magnitudes, as encountered under natural or existing conditions. How is the stormwater from the south going to accepted and released? Indicate appropriately sized walled openings within the screen wall. The response letter, drainage report and the tentative plat must match and have the same information. Revise all documents as necessary. |
| 12/06/2004 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S04-113 Townhomes at Irwin Place 12/06/04 (XXXX) Tentative Plat () Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Northside Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 12/02/04 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 () See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: (XXXX) Resubmittal Required: (XXXX) Tentative Plat () Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan (XXXX) Other – Photos REVIEWER: D. Estolano 791-4505 DATE: 11/29/04 Department of Urban Planning and Design S04-113 - Townhomes at Irwin Place Thank you for your response to our comments of September 14, 2004. Below are follow-up comments for your review. Please address each comment in your resubmittal. The Design Guideline Manual states that detention/retention basins should be used for open space and as additional active or passive recreational amenities. Please locate amenities such as; shade trees, picnic tables, benches, barbecues, tot lot, etc. in and around the detention/retention areas. Please make these recreational amenities handicapped accessible by an all-weather path. Please show these amenities on the appropriate landscape plan pages. Because staff will be reviewing for five-sided architecture that embraces those elements from the surrounding neighborhood, submission of photos will be required, taken of the surrounding area to assist staff in reviewing for architectural compliance and compatibility to surrounding neighborhoods. Photos of the surrounding area were not included with the revised Tentative Plat. Any required or proposed masonry screen walls around the perimeter of the RCP shall be constructed of, or painted with, graffiti-resistant materials. These screen walls shall incorporate one of the following decorative materials: (a) tile, (b) stone, (c) brick, (d) textured brick/block, (e) a coarse-textured material such as stucco or plaster, or (f) a combination of the above materials. Please provide screen wall locations on the Tentative Plat and add a note to the General Notes Section indicating the materials that will be used. |
| 12/09/2004 | CRAIG GROSS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 12/09/2004 | 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 |