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

Plan Number: S04-166
Parcel: Unknown

Address:
855 E DREXEL RD

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW

Plan Number - S04-166
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
11/09/2004 FERNE RODRIGUEZ START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
11/15/2004 GLENN HICKS COT NON-DSD PARKS & RECREATION Approved DATE: November 15, 2004

TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services

FROM: Glenn Hicks, Parks and Recreation

SUBJECT: CDRC Transmittal, S04-166 Colonia Mariposa: Tentative Plat Review

CC: Craig Gross, Development Services


Staff has no comments.



Glenn Hicks
Parks and Recreation
791-4873 ext. 215
11/16/2004 JIM EGAN COT NON-DSD FIRE Denied 1. Indicate Fire Lane signs on both sides of "Typical Cross Section 1".
2. The Water Plan indicated as "Sheet 3 of 3" indicates no new fire hydrant. A fire hydrant is required. The Sheet should be omitted as the General Note #13 is acceptable for approval.
11/17/2004 TOM MARTINEZ OTHER AGENCIES AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION Approved NO COMMENT
S04-166
COLONIA MARIPOSA
11/18/2004 JCLARK3 ENV SVCS REVIEW Approved * No known landfill w/in 1000 feet of this development.
* Refuse collection is for individual APC's to be collected at curbside in front of the residents.
11/23/2004 ED ABRIGO PIMA COUNTY ASSESSOR Approved Office of the Pima County Assessor
115 N. Church Ave.
Tucson, Arizona 85701

RICK LYONS
ASSESSOR




TO: CDRC Office
Subdivision Review
City of Tucson (FAX# 791-5559)

FROM: Ed Abrigo, Mapping Supervisor
Pima County Assessor’s Office
Mapping Department

DATE: November 23, 2004


RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat
S04-166 Colonia Mariposa T151406 (140-19)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

X Plat meets Assessor’s Office requirements.
_______ Plat does not meet Assessor’s Office requirements.


COMMENTS: Thank you for your submittal. Please make the following additions/corrections in the final plat.
Add the number of miles of new road, public or private, to the general notes, even if the number is 0.
Add the interior bearings and the dimension and bearing for the street centerline.
Add the complete curve data.
Add the adjacent subdivisions; if the surrounding area is unsubdivided, please use the term “UNSUBDIVIDED” rather than “VACANT”.
Add the road information for Drexel Road.
Add the section tie.
If there are any questions, please contact Susan King at 740-4391.

NOTE: THE ASSESSOR’S CURRENT INVOLVEMENT IN PROCESSING ITS MANUAL MAPS TO DIGITAL FORMAT IS EXPEDITED GREATLY BY EXCHANGE OF DIGITAL DATA. IN THE COURSE OF RECORDING THIS SUBDIVISION YOUR ASSISTANCE IN PROVIDING THIS OFFICE WITH AN AUTOCAD COPY WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED. THANK YOU FOR ANY DIGITAL DATA PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED.





Susan King
11/30/2004 KAY MARKS PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING Denied 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: S04-166 COLONIA MARIPOSA / TENTATIVE PLAT
DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2004



The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and the following matters must be resolved prior to our approval:

1: On Location Map delete South from South First Ave, change 1/71 to 25/62 and move
Park Ave to the correct location.

2: Change Lots 1-20 to 1-18 on the first page Title Block.

3: Colonia Mariposa will require Spanish Review and the suffix should be Corte or
Placita.















sg
12/01/2004 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied J. Linville 12/01/04

Revise the plans as requested by other agencies and as requested below.

1) Landscape plans are to submitted with the CDRC application for subdivision. DS 2-03.3.1.C

2) A street landscape border is required along Drexel Road.
LUC Table 3.7.2-I
Common areas will be required. The subdivision CC&Rs and shall reference the maintenance standards in Sec. 3.7.6.
LUC 3.7.2.4.A.2

3) Dust control is required for landscape areas, retention/detention basins, and the adjacent Drexel Road right od way area. LUC 3.7.2.7, LUC 3.7.2.4.A.4

4) A masonry screen wall is required for the guest parking area per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. Revise the tentative plat and landscape plans to provide the required screen wall between the parking area and the adjacent residentially zoned property to the south.

5) A minimum distance of two (2) feet must be maintained between a PAAL and any wall, screen, or other obstruction, provided pedestrian activity is directed to another location. The additional area is necessary to provide clearance for fire, sanitation, and delivery vehicles. DS 3-05.2.2.B.3

6) Back-Up Spur. A back-up spur will be provided at the end of a row of parking if no ingress or egress is provided at that end. The spur will be a minimum of three (3) feet in depth, will have a three (3) foot radii, and will have a wheel barrier to prevent encroachment onto any unsurfaced areas. A minimum distance of three (3) feet will be provided between the back of spur and any wall, screen, or other obstruction over six (6) inches in height. DS 3-05.2.2.D

7) When the side(s) of a parking space abuts any vertical barrier over six (6) inches in height, other than a vertical support for a carport, the required width for the space is ten (10) feet to provide extra width to allow passengers to enter and exit the vehicle on the side where the barrier exists.
DS 3-05.2.1.B.3

8) A vehicular use area must be provided with post barricades or wheel stop curbing designed to prevent parked vehicles from extending beyond the property lines; damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings; or overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas or unpaved areas on or off site and to prevent vehicles from driving onto unimproved portions of the site. Revise the plans to provide a barrier for the guest parking area. DS 3-05.2.3.C.1

9) Revise the plans to provide landscaping for the retention/detention facility. LUC 3.7.4.3.A
Refer to DS 10-01.0 for design criteria for basin landscaping.

10) Provide details regarding the proposed drainage basin. Refer to pages 74-79 for slope and shape standards.
DS 2-07.2.2.B.5

The requirements and guidelines of DS 10-01 are designed to preclude the need for fencing of the basin area. The basin should be designed to function as a visual amenity or focal point.

RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED. A LANDSCAPE PLAN AND A REVISED NATIVE PLANT PRESERVATION PLAN/APPLICATION IS REQUIRED. ADDITIONAL PHOTOS OR AN INSPECTION WILL BE REQUIRED.
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

S04-166 Colonia Mariposa 12/06/04

(XXXX) Tentative Plat
() Development Plan
() Landscape Plan
() Revised Plan/Plat
() Board of Adjustment
() Other

CROSS REFERENCE:

NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Kino

GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE:

COMMENTS DUE BY: 12/06/04

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
(XXXX) 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: DCE 791-4505 DATE: 12/06/04
Urban Planning and Design Comments
S04-166 Colonia Mariposa

The Colonia Mariposa tentative plat is being proposed as a residential subdivision with 18 lots. This site is in an R-2 zone that allows up to 15 units per acre, with a minimum lot size of 5,000. Two of the lots in this subdivision do not meet the minimum 5,000 square foot requirement. As such, it would appear that this is being developed as a Residential Cluster Project (RCP), which must be in conformance with the design policies and criteria of the Kino Area Plan (KAP), the General Plan, and the Design Guidelines Manual.

In this situation, the Plans require community amenities, such as but not limited to; streetscapes with pedestrian oasis, common area(s) of appropriate land size(s) to sustain residential amenities for all ages with pedestrian path links to the on-site sidewalk circulation system. The Land Use Code, general development criteria 3.6.1.4.A.1, reads:

The RCP must be in conformance with the design policies and criteria of the General Plan and any of its components, including any applicable adopted area and neighborhood plans. (Ord. No. 9517, ss3, 2/12/01)

A resubmittal will be required addressing all of these issues and the applicant will need to identify this project as an RCP and note such, under the “general notes” section of the tentative plat in addition to identifying the number of units that will be constructed on the site. Furthermore, it must be pointed out that “guest parking” cannot be placed in common areas or on private property.

If this site is not being developed as a Residential Cluster Project (RCP), reconfiguration of the lots will need to be done to conform to the minimum lot size of 5,000, in addition to identifying the number of units that will be constructed on the site. Furthermore, it must be pointed out that “guest parking” cannot be placed in common areas or on private property.
12/06/2004 FRODRIG2 OTHER AGENCIES PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS Approv-Cond Estimated daily traffic - 172
12/06/2004 FRODRIG2 PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Denied December 2, 2004

TO: Larry Potter
Southern Arizona Community Trust, Inc.

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: Colonia Mariposa, Lots 1-20
Tentative Plat – 1st Submittal
S04-166


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.


This project will be tributary to the Roger Road Wastewater Treatment Facility via the Santa Cruz Interceptor. Provide a letter from PCWWM Planning Services, written within the past 90 days, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for this project is available. Contact Robert Decker, PCWWM Planning Services, at (520) 740-6625 regarding this matter.

Based on the evaluation of the project S02-010, this project would qualify for Participating sewer connection fee rates.

ALL SHEETS. Add the project number, S04-166, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than any cross-reference numbers.

SHEETS 1. As there are no off-site sewers proposed, please delete General Note 11.

SEWER PLAN SHEET. Delete all the General Sewer Notes.

SEWER PLAN SHEET. Show the Pima County plan number and the size for the existing public sewer.

SEWER PLAN SHEET. Designate a number to each proposed manhole.

SEWER PLAN SHEET. It is suggested that the cleanout be eliminated along with the terminal reach leaving the cleanout. A maximum of 3 HCSs may connect to the manhole.

SEWER PLAN SHEET. Show the rim and invert elevations for all proposed manholes.

SEWRE PLAN SHEET. Clearly show the length, size and slope for each proposed sewer reach. The current layout is difficult to read.

We will require a revised set of drawings and a response letter addressing each comment. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents.

The next submittal of this project will be the 2nd submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $100.00 made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter.

For any questions regarding the fee schedule, please go to http://www.pimaxpress.com/SubDivision/Documents/Fees.PDF where you may find the appropriate wastewater review fees at the bottom of page 1. If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly.

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
12/07/2004 LIZA CASTILLO UTILITIES TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER Approved SUBJECT: COLONIA MARIPOSA
Lots 1-18
S04-166

Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has no objection to the tentative plat
submitted for review November 9, 2004.

The preliminary point where TEP will serve this project is from the existing
overhead facilities south of the subdivision. Enclosed is a copy of TEP's
facility map showing the approximate location and unit numbers of the
existing facilities.

TEP will provide a preliminary electrical design on the Approved Tentative
Plat within fifteen (15) working days upon receipt of the plat. Additional
plans necessary for preparation of the design are: building plans including
water, electrical, landscape, sidewalk and paving plans. Should you have
any questions, please contact me at (520) 917-8745.


Liza Castillo
Land Management
Tucson Electric Power Company
lcastillo@tep.com
Office: (520) 917-8745
Cell Phone: (520) 904-2668
Fax: (520) 917-8700
12/10/2004 PETER MCLAUGHLIN ZONING REVIEW Denied CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Peter McLaughlin
Senior Planner

FOR: Patricia Gehlen
Principal Planner

PROJECT:
Colonia Mariposa
S04-166
Tentative Plat

TRANSMITTAL: December 10, 2004
DUE DATE: December 8, 2004

1. An applicant has one (1) year from the date of application to obtain approval of a tentative plat that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application. This tentative plat must be approved on or before November 8, 2005.
LUC 4.1.7.1

2. Please place the S04-166 number in or near the title block in the lower right hand corner of all sheets of the plat, landscape and NPPO plans.
DS 2-03.2.2.B.1

3. It is unclear if this is proposed to be a Residential Cluster Project (RCP) subdivision as no statement to that effect is in the title block. If this is an RCP subdivision refer to DS 2-10 and LUC 3.6.1 for RCP requirements and resubmit with all RCP notes and requirements shown. If this plat is resubmitted as an RCP a neighborhood notification is required and further comments will be necessary. It is advised that a CDRC presubmittal conference be scheduled prior to resubmittal of this plat. DS 2-03.2.1.G.2
DS 2-10

4. Revise the title block on sheet 1 of 2, which reads Lots 1-20, to be consistent with the plat showing only 18 lots. Provide parking calculations based on the number of units proposed, which details the number of vehicle spaces provided and required.
DS 2-03.2.2.B.4

5. If 18 lots/ 18 units are proposed the street perimeter yard building setbacks must be revised to be based on a street with an ADT of greater than 140. The street setback for all lots (developing area setback) is the greater of 21 feet or building height from edge of nearest travel lane for streets with ADT > 140. Provide elevation drawings to show how required building setbacks are met.
LUC 3.2.6.5

6. Add a note stating that the plat is designed to meet the criteria of Sec 2.8.3, Major Streets & Routes setback Zone.
DS 2-03.2.2.B.7

7. Show future sight visibility triangles at the intersection of the proposed public street and Drexel Road. The future curb and sidewalk locations along Drexel Road must be shown and dimensioned from street monument lines on site plan per the MS&R plan.
DS 2-03.2.4.M
DS 2-03.2.3.D
DS 2-03.2.4.F

8. Provide a complete parking calculation on the plat showing that there are a minimum of two vehicle spaces provided for each dwelling unit, plus visitor parking provided at a ratio of one space per unit. Dimension the visitor parking spaces on the plan. The visitor parking spaces must be evenly distributed and available on both sides of the street, within 150 feet of all lots within the subdivision. Revise as necessary.
DS 3-05.2.4.A.6
DS 2-03.2.4.G
DS 3-05.2.4.A.1
DS 3-01.2.4.D

9. Provide a lot coverage calculation on the lot typical. Show an example of the largest unit with the largest vehicle use area proposed to show that all lots will meet code. Dimension perimeter yard building setbacks to lot lines. The required minimum bldg. setback is the greater of 6 feet or 2/3 height for non-RCP lots in the R-2 zone. LUC 3.2.9

10. Provide a density calculation stating the number of units per acre (both maximum allowed = 15 RAC and proposed). LUC 3.2.10

11. The minimum lot size in the R-2 zone (for a non-RCP subdivision) is 5,000 square feet. Revise those lots that do not meet this minimum requirement. LUC

12. Attached units with common walls along lot lines are not allowed in standard non-RCP subdivision in the R-2 zone. The minimum setback is the greater of 6-feet and 2/3 the height of exterior structure walls for single family homes on R-2 zoned lots. Revise plan accordingly. LUC 3.2.6.4

13. Detached accessory structures are not allowed in front of the principal dwelling. LUC 3.2.5.3.C

14. Add the adjacent zoning to the plat. DS 2-03.2.3.J

15. Add a general note stating the development designator is "K". Also add a note stating that this R-2 development is subject to 3.5.7.1.F., and if this is an RCP subdivision add a note stating that it is subject to LUC 3.6.1. Other notes must also be added per LUC 3.6.1 if this is an RCP subdivision (see comment 3). LUC 2.3.5.2.A.2
LUC 3.6.1

16. The minimum required setback for carports and garages is 19 feet from back of sidewalk. Please provide lot typicals detailing setback dimensions and building heights. The lot typical should show the footprint of a unit and any duplex units proposed and how they will fit on a lot. Perimeter yard setbacks are required to be the greater of 6 feet or 2/3 height of structure for the R-2 lots proposed with a single family residence.
LUC 3.2.6.5.B.2.a
DS 2-03.2.4.M
LUC 3.2.6.4
LUC 3.2.6.5

17. Clearly delineate the easements for the detention basin and guest parking in a surveyable manner (with dimensions and bearings). Add the docket and page of recordation for these proposed easements or state that they are "by final plat".
DS 2-03.2.4.J

18. Revise general note 4 to read: "The number of lots is 18". DS 2-03.2.2.B.4

19. CC&R's must be provided for review and approval prior to approval of final plat. DS 2-03.6.6

20. All lettering must be a minimum of 12 point (0.12") in size for legibility when photographically reduced (microfilmed). Revise the text in the location map, which does not meet this minimum requirement. DS 2-03.2.1.C

21. Revise the location of Park Avenue in the location map to be correct relative to the section lines (it is located
approximately ¼ mile west of where the label is placed).
Also, add the name of the drainage feature (Rodeo Wash) to
the location map. DS 2-03.2.1.D.2

22. A back-up spur is required at the end of a row of visitor parking on lots 11 and 12. The spur must be a minimum of three (3) feet in depth, will have a three (3) foot radii, and will have a wheel barrier to prevent encroachment onto any unsurfaced areas. A minimum distance of three (3) feet will be provided between the back of spur and any wall, screen, or other obstruction over six (6) inches in height.
DS 3-05.2.2.D
23. All requested revisions must be made to tentative plat, landscape & NPPO plans. DS 2-07.2.1.A


If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608.
12/13/2004 DALE KELCH COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Denied Traffic Engineering REJECTS this TP:

1. Add a general note to read “All non-signalized intersection street manes must have E-W block number addresses for E-W roadways and N-S block number addresses for N-S roadways.”

2. Provide the existing ROW width, recordation data, dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts and sidewalks. (DS 2-03.2.3.D) Show and label both existing and future ROW (DS 2-03.2.3.D) This particularly applies to existing and future ROW on Drexel Road.

3. Parking is not allowed in cul-de-sacs from PRC to PRC. So indicate on the plans by showing locations of no parking signs. (DS 3-01.0 figure 21)

4. Show and label as to size (ie 20x345) both existing and future SVTs (DS 2-03.2.4.M)

5. Local streets must be designed with parking on both sides of the street unless parking is provided in common areas distributed throughout the subdivision at a ratio of one parking space per dwelling within the subdivision. (DS 3-01.2.4.D)

6. Wedge curbing encourages parking. Place vertical curb where there is to be no parking. (DS 3-01.0 Figures 1, 2)

7. The depicted cross section for the proposed Camino Colonia Mariposa is not wide enough to accommodate on-street parking. Show No Parking signs in section 1.

8. The existing curb cuts on Drexel Road at the eastern and western extremities of the Project that are called out as to remain, will be required to be closed.

9. Indicate the radius of the curb return at the intersection of Drexel Road and the proposed Camino Colonia Mariposa. (25' minimum, DS 3-01.3.2.C)

10. The proposed Camino Colonia Mariposa does not appear to meet the separation requirement of DS 3-01.6.3 from Morris Boulevard.

D. Dale Kelch, EIT
Senior Engineering Associate
Traffic Engineering Division
(520)791-4259x305
(520)791-5526 (fax)
12/13/2004 ELIZABETH EBERBACH ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied TO: Craig Gross; CDRC Coordinator
SUBJECT: Colonia Mariposa 1st Submittal Tentative Plat Engineering Review
LOCATION: T15S R14E Section 6
REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach
ACTIVITY NUMBER: S04-166

SUMMARY: The Tentative Plat sheets, Drainage Report, Native Plat paperwork, and title report paperwork were received by Engineering on November 9, 2004. Engineering has reviewed the Grading - Paving & Drainage Plan sheet 1 and Tentative Plat sheets 1 & 2, and title paperwork and does not recommend approval of the Tentative Plat. The Grading- Paving & Drainage Plan and Drainage Report was reviewed for Tentative Plat purposes only.

DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS:
1) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No.10-02.4.2.1: TDOT map center indicates soil type "D" for this site; revise hydrologic data sheets to reflect correct soils type and associated runoff coefficient. Revise design to reflect any changes in basin.
2) DS Sec.10-02.1.5.1: For basin design address the following:
a) On page 3 of the drainage report, check calculations to assure that 5-year coefficients are used to determine correct basin volume calculations.
b) Along the proposed cul-de-sac, scuppers and their associated railing usually preclude the use of the sidewalk above the scuppers for access (vehicular and pedestrian). Discuss and/or show how basin area will be accessed.
c) Show configuration calculations for basin volume. Show that volume of basin is derived from a basin configuration that includes an access ramp if one is proposed. Show access slope grade.
3) DS Sec.10-01.4.3.1: Regarding the basin wall design on detail for the basin cross section on sheet 1 of the grading concept, this retaining wall basin design is not acceptable. Provide natural looking design for the basin per DS Sec 10-01.1.1.2, to show that the proposed design provides a detention/retention facility that is multi-use and visually appealing.
4) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a: Discuss results of infiltration testing in drainage report to demonstrate how the drain time for the retained stormwater for the proposed basin meets Water Harvesting and Detention / Retention criteria, including maximum disposal time.
5) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.6.A.4.a: Describe in the drainage report:
a) Proposed permanent erosion control at basin exit.
b) Provide storage-volume estimates for routing the 100, and 10-yr events.
c) Inlet and outlet routing for weir and spillway: assumptions, equations, and results.
d) Provide depth of basin for the design events.
6) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.1: On the exhibit, label detention/retention 100-year ponding limits with water surface elevation in basin.
7) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.4.C.1: From the topography in the area, stormwater appears to be directed from the Drexel Road / Park Ave intersection westerly along Drexel Road. TSMS node (BR-0311) data shows Q100 =472cfs at intersection of Drexel Road and Park Avenue. Discuss existing flow in Drexel Road. Provide Q100 and show extents on and near the proposed project of any existing floodplain from 100-yr event in Drexel Road.
8) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.3.A.2: Curb and sidewalk will be required for this project. Discuss in drainage report how the edge of the Rodeo Wash and Airport Wash watersheds will be maintained.
9) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.H.2: Clarify in the report whether there are any existing wall openings for the existing development to the east onto the subject site. Discuss in report spacing and size of any existing wall openings and how this flow if any affects hydrology for the site.

TENTATIVE PLAT COMMENTS:
10) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.B.1: Provide subdivision case number "S04-166" at lower right hand corner next to title block.
11) DS Sec.2-03.2.1.C: Assure that the lettering on the Tentative Plat is 12 pt text size or greater for legibility.
12) DS Sec.2-03.2.1.D.2: On location map, label railroad.
13) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.D.1.a: Add as a general note: "All public roads and drainage improvements within and adjacent to this subdivision shall be constructed in accordance with approved plans. Construction plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer's Office for review and approval."
14) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.D.1.b: Label Camino Colonia Mariposa as a public or private street. Add as a general note: "Total miles of new public streets are ________" or "Total miles of new private streets are _______."
15) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.3: Provide basin and inlet elevational and dimensional information on Tentative Plat.
16) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.4: Depict and clarify whether any walls will be proposed and if so where any wall openings will be located.
17) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.4: Provide a typical lot grading detail or show direction of drainage on the lots in a detail or on the Typical Lot Concept detail on sheet 1. Address the following:
a) Clarify how distances for minimum setbacks provide appropriate area for drainage swales, mechanical equipment, A/C units, slope setbacks for screen walls, slope run-outs, and general access.
b) Assure that the detail complies with any recommendations of soils report.
c) Provide in detail the general / typical high point elevation or grade break locations as it relates to the finished pad elevation, as well as minimum flow grades around building pads.
18) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.D: The following information regarding the existing public right-of-way will be provided for Drexel Road: label total or half right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving.
19) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.F. Address the following proposed right-of-way improvements:
a) Show and label future MS&R right-of-way.
b) Provide cross section of Drexel Road labeling proposed curbs and sidewalks along Drexel Road to connect to existing adjacent properties, and conforming to DS Sec.3-10.10.Fig.11 dimensions as well as MS&R requirement of new 6-foot wide sidewalk.
20) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.6.4.a): Label proposed permanent erosion control at basin exit.
21) DS Sec.10-02.1.5.1: Show access and/or provide access / maintenance easements to the drainage basin.
22) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.1: On the Tentative Plat plan view, show detention/retention 100-year ponding limits with water surface elevation in basin.
23) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.K: Provide geotechnical report. Soils report shall include results from infiltration testing as well as the percolation test location map. Additional percolation testing may be required at post-construction inspection. Also, assure Tentative Plat conforms to geotechnical report, including basin setback from structures. The geotechnical report shall specifically address all criteria listed in this section. See last sentence in this section for items 6 (c) & (d) regarding hydro-collapsing soils for basin design per DS Sec.10-02.14.2.6.
24) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.M: Show any setback dimensions from basin ponding limits to proposed buildings on plan view.
25) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.A: Address the following survey data:
a) Label for basis of bearing on plan view.
b) Show tie to permanent survey monuments or to the nearest section or quarter section corner.
c) Provide local benchmark with datum location indicated on plan view.
26) DS Sec.10-01.4.3: Show or add note regarding basin security barriers for proposed basin along all sides of basin.
27) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C: All existing easements will be drawn on the plat, and recordation information, locations, widths, and purposes shall be included. If the easement is not in use and proposed for abandonment, so indicate. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status.
28) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.C: Label and enclose with a solid line for the basin to designate as a common area that will have separate restrictions, a separate homeowners' association.
29) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.C: Clarify common area description information in title block to clarify use of any common area, such that any proposed drainage areas for the retention / detention basin has a letter designation. At a minimum, this will need to be done at Final Plat submittal.
30) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.F: Proposed traffic circulation will be designed in accordance with Street Development Standard 3-01:
a) Provide handicap ramps
b) Show street monuments in cul-de-sac
31) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.G: Streets designed for access to all homes by life safety vehicles and by refuse collection vehicles. On sheet 1, revise street cross section to conform to DS Sec.3-01.10, to provide sidewalks, a minimum of 20 feet clear unobstructed roadway width, and parking on both sides of the streets.
32) DS Sec.3-01.5.1.A.2: Provide sight visibility triangles on plan view at Drexel Road. Provide notation for restriction of existing or proposed structures within 30" to 72" in height within the sight visibility triangles.
33) DS Sec.11-01: A Grading Plan and Permit will be required.

The next submittal should address all the above items. Submit the revised Drainage Report, soils report, a response letter, the revised Tentative Plat sheets, and concept grading sheet. You may call to schedule an appointment to go over these comments, or if you have any questions, please call me at 791-5550 extension 2204.

Elizabeth Eberbach, PE
Civil Engineer
Engineering Division
Development Services
12/14/2004 DOROTHY ROBLES COT NON-DSD REAL ESTATE Approved no objections.
12/14/2004 CRAIG GROSS ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Completed