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 - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Plan Number - S05-048
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/12/2005 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/13/2005 | 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: S05-048 STONE CROSSING CONDOMINIUMS / REVISED TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: JULY 13, 2005 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: Delete all street directions per letter dated 4/8/05. 2: Include page divisions on Pg. 3 per letter dated 4/8/05. 3: Change Stone Cureves to Stone Curves on all applicable pages per letter dated 4/8/05. 4: Include a site plan of the occupant identifiers for condominiums per letter dated 4/8/05. sg |
| 07/15/2005 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise to provide 6' high screen walls for refuse storage areas. |
| 07/25/2005 | 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 S05-048 Stone Crossing Condominiums 7/25/05 (XXXX) Tentative Plat (XXXX) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-84-51 – Conditions Not Met C9-89-26 – Conditions Not Met C9-80-68 - Annexation NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: North Stone GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: July 26, 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 () See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: (XXXX) Resubmittal Required: (XXXX) Tentative Plat (XXXX) Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: DCE 791-4505 DATE: 7/25/05 Department of Urban Planning and Design Comments Stone Crossing Condominiums S05-047 Since this is an RCP, it must be in conformance with the design policies and criteria of the North Stone Area Plan and the General Plan, and any of its components. The Design Guidelines Manual, which offers insight and clarification into land use and community design policies is also used as an additional resource to the General Plan. Although the proposed development appears to have addressed landscaping and design elements along the site perimeter wall, the development plan does not indicate specific design treatment of the site perimeter wall. Please add a note to the General Notes section stating that all walls visible from a public right-of-way to be graffiti-resistant and to incorporate one or more visually appealing design treatments, such as; the use of two or more decorative materials like stucco, tile, stone, or brick; a visually interesting design on the wall surface. Walls should be visually interesting when viewed from off-site. For reference, the applicable North Stone Neighborhood Plan policy reads as follows: Soften the visual impact of a continuous solid mass, such as a wall of greater than 75 feet in length and three feet in height, by one or more of the following techniques: vary the wall alignment (jog, curve notch, or set back, etc.), and plant trees or shrubs in the voids created by the variations. plant trees and shrubs, which are proportional in scale to the proposed wall, at least every 25 feet. The Design Guidelines Manual states that side and rear building facades should be built with attention to architectural character and detail comparable to the front façade, particularly if rear and side facades are visible from streets or adjacent properties. Enhancement can include design treatments such a pop outs, color variation, etc. Please submit elevations illustrating how this requirement will be satisfied for the units abutting N. Thurston, Lane, N. Stone Avenue and Limberlost Drive. |
| 07/25/2005 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | * Notes as stated in the first review still applies. The enclosures,clear area, backup distances and truck turnaround due not meet COT Developments Standards Chapter 6. * With these properties being Condominiums the responsibility for refuse service will be the City. Because of this it has been suggested to Mr. Elder to consider APC service that would be the responsibility of the individual property owner. The requirement for this service is curb space for the APC's and proper truck turnaround areas where they are required. |
| 07/26/2005 | JOSE ORTIZ | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: July 27, 2005 ACTIVITY NUMBER: S05-048 PROJECT NAME: Stone Crossing Condominiums PROJECT REVIEWER: Jose Ortiz, P.E. The following items must be revised or added to the grading plan. Please include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. Resubmittal Required: Grading Plan, and Hydrology Report General Comments The Hydrology Report was reviewed for Tentative Plat, and Development Plan purposes. Tentative Plat Comments 1. Two different FFE's callout for units 26 & 27 on Sheets 4 and 6. 2. Typical section on sheet 4 illustrates flow arrows in the wrong direction. 3. Comment 22 of the first review comments was not properly addressed. Please revisit that comment and address. In addition any location where detention/retention basins exceed a 2 foot WSE and side slopes exceed a 4:1 slope hand railing is required at all locations. 22. In detention basin 2 the 100 year WSE is 2325.43, and the drainage report (appendix PG 21) shows the basin elevation of 2323.0 which exceeds 2 feet, therefore security barriers are required per PCDOT Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual PG 82. In addition the grate is at 2325, but due to the weir factor in the flow of water the overall depth will exceed 2 feet. Refer to the Standard Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management Section 10.6.1 for design guidance and calculation formulas of grate height. 4. Include in grading plans all necessary drainage facility details. These details include scuppers, weirs, RCP pipe and profile, and catch basins. Include labeling, dimensions of all drainage facilities. Many details in the drainage report are suitable for details in future grading plans. 5. On sheet 3 vertical curb note 16 points to existing curb and not to the proposed location of new vertical curb. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1191 or Jose.Ortiz@ci.tucsonaz.govs Jose E. Ortiz Civil Engineer City of Tucson/Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210 (520) 791-5550 x1191 office (520) 879-8010 fax |
| 07/26/2005 | DAN CASTRO | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | COMMENTS 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 March 22, 2006. 2. Under general note 13, revise the LUC Section listed as 3.5.7.1 to 3.5.7.1.F. (D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.5) (D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.3) 3. Upon further discussion with David Rivera, Principal Planner, cross section C2 will require a minimum two-way travel lane width of 24 feet. 20 foot is currently proposed. In addition, remove all references to street and replace them with PAAL. None of the interior drives meet street standards. (D.S. 2-03.2.4.G) (D.S. 2-05.2.4.D) 4. Proposed 10 foot landscape/drainage easement on sheets 5 of 17 and 7 of 17 shall include recordation information, and whether they will be private or public. If the easement is to be recorded by either final plat or by separate instrument, please so state. (D.S. 2-03.2.4.J) (2-05.2.4.G) 5. Dimension the building sections. 6. Dimension existing and future curb locations along Limberlost Drive and Stone Avenue. (D.S. 2-05.2.4.C) (D.S. 2-05.2.4.F) 7. Vehicle parking calculation shall be based on "Multi-family Dwelling" under LUC Sec. 3.3.4, which is based on the number of bedrooms in the unit and not as a single family dwelling. Floor plans indicate a 3-bedroom option. Either base the parking calculation on the more restrictive 3-bedroom option for all units or provide the exact number of 3-bedroom units and 2-bedroom units proposed. (D.S. 2-05.2.4.P) (LUC 3.3.4 "Multi-Family Dwelling") 8. All back-up spurs at the end of a PAAL shall have a minimum three (3) foot radii. 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. It appears that the screen wall will interfere with the three (3) foot separation required between the back up spur and the wall. (D.S. 3-05.2.2.D) 9. Since a density increase is proposed, indicate which of the provision/s under LUC Section 3.6.1.3.B is being utilized and how the increased density criteria are being met. In addition, LUC Sec. 3.6.1.4.A.2 requires that at least 25% of the site area that is not part of the site coverage be commonly owned or set aside as accessible to all residents of the development. Indicate how the 25% area will be applied and include applicable calculation/s. (LUC 3.6.1.4.B) 10. As a general note, indicate which units are proposed for barrier-free accessibility. In addition, provide a detail showing how accessibility it to be provided. (LUC 3.6.1.4.A.5) (D.S. 2-10.3.1.D) 11. Label and dimension the street perimeter yard (building setback) required on the plat. All streets bounding the project are considered "developing area". Refer to LUC Sec. 3.2.6.5.B.1 for developing area building setback requirements. 12. Your response is acknowledged, copy of CC&R's to be provided. Previous comment: See LUC section 3.6.1.5 A. - .C "Management of Common Properties" (CC&R's) requirements. A copy of the proposed CC&R's must be provided for review. 13. Previous comment was not addressed: Dimension length of on-street parallel parking spaces on the plat. Minimum 23 foot length required per D.S. 3-05.2.1.B.2." If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro, (520) 791-5608. |
| 07/28/2005 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Traffic Engineering REJECTS this TP: 1. 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. This plan as submitted only provides 11 guest parking spaces with no parking lanes. (DS 3-01.2.4.D) 2nd request for this correction. 2. Show and label as to size (ie 20x110) both existing and future SVTs (DS 2-03.2.4.M). Show SVTs on sheets 5, 6. This is specifically in reference to the intersections at the interior streets. 3. List the name, ROW width, recordation data, type and dimensioned with of paving, curbs, curb cuts and sidewalks. Only the name is listed for Thurston Lane. Where is Thurston Lane recorded in the road maps? It is spelled out on the plat and as required for Limberlost (Bk 2 Pg 36 Road Maps). (DS 2-03.2.3.D) D. Dale Kelch, PE Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov |
| 07/29/2005 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approv-Cond | July 28, 2005 TO: E. Bruce Wilson, P.E., R.L.S. Landmark Engineering, Inc. THRU: Patricia Gehlen City of Tucson, Development Services Department FROM: Dickie Fernández, E.I.T. Pima County Development Services Department Development Review Division (Wastewater) SUBJECT: Stone Crossing, 40 Condominium Units and Common Areas A-D Tentative Plat/Development Plan – 1st Submittal S05-048 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. A private Sewer Service Agreement for the proposed number of wastewater fixture unit equivalents has been sent to your office. After three original Sewer Service Agreements have been signed by the Owner of Record, the three originals should be returned to Pima County Wastewater Management in order to satisfy the necessary requirements needed to approve the project. SHEET 6 & 7. Show the existing public sewers. The manholes and their respective information is shown, however the existing sewer lines should be shown as well. 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 |
| 08/05/2005 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES August 5, 2005 Bruce Wilson Landmark Engineering 3845 N. Business Center Drive Tucson, AZ 85705 Subject: S05-048 Stone Crossing Condominiums Tentative Plat Dear Bruce: Your submittal of July 12, 2005 for the above project has been reviewed by the Community Design Review Committee and the comments reflect the outstanding requirements which need to be addressed before approval is granted. Please review the comments carefully. Once you have addressed all of the comments, please submit the following revised documents and a DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLUELINES MUST BE FOLDED 9 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (addressing, ESD, community planning, waste water, landscape, zoning, engineering, traffic, DSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (engineering, landscape, community planning, zoning, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Grading Plan (Engineering, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608, ext 1179. Sincerely, Patricia Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 628-1392 |