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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/13/2005 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 01/14/2005 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Craig Gross; CDRC Coordinator DATE: January 14, 2005 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. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: TP APPROVED: DRAINAGE REPORT 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. 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 also required along Smoot Drive. Show a five foot sidewalk along Smoot Drive for the entire length of the property. Revise the plat. 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. DS 3-01.3.3.A. The above comment is for reference only. It is acknowledged that a DSMR to remove the required sidewalk along Smoot Avenue will be submitted. Once the DSMR is approved include the case number and a general note describing what the DSMR was for on the plat. 2. 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. The first comment is from the second review. It is acknowledged that the wall is going to be removed. However keynote number 9, screen wall is indicated in the location where the response letter states the wall is removed. If the wall is going to be removed from the proposed development, remove keynote number 9. |
| 01/28/2005 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S04-113 Townhomes at Irwin Place 01/27/05 (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: 1/26/05 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 () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: D. Estolano 791-4505 DATE: 01/26/05 Department of Urban Planning and Design S04-113 - Townhomes at Irwin Place Thank you for your response to our comments of January 8, 2005. Below are follow-up comments for your review please address such in your resubmittal. When RCP site areas are less than four acres in size, the single-family structures need to be architecturally compatible with single-family structures on adjacent parcels. Please provide a note on the General Notes section indicating color designations of all proposed buildings on the site. All sides of buildings are to have similar architectural treatment. |
| 01/28/2005 | CRAIG GROSS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 01/28/2005 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S04-113 Townhomes at Irwin Place 02/17/05 (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: 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 (XXXX) RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies () See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: () Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: D. Estolano 791-4505 DATE: 02/16/05 Department of Urban Planning and Design S04-113 - Townhomes at Irwin Place Thank you for your response to our comments of January 8, 2005. Below are follow-up comments for your review please address such in your resubmittal. When RCP site areas are less than four acres in size, the single-family structures need to be architecturally compatible with single-family structures on adjacent parcels. Please provide a note on the General Notes section indicating color designations of all proposed buildings on the site. All sides of buildings are to have similar architectural treatment. |