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: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Plan Number - S05-094
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/13/2005 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 06/15/2005 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | The Tentative Plat is approved June 15, 2005. |
| 06/16/2005 | 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: S05-094 ALDEA DEL NORTE/TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: 6/16/05 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: Change Greenlee St. to Road on Location Map. Delete Prince Tucson Subdivision on Site Map. Delete addresses on Site Map & pg. 2. Aldea is a duplicate street name. Please submit a list of street names to check for duplication. Spell out Road of Country Club Rd. on Site Map. |
| 06/17/2005 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Denied | Real Estate has pending RES 2005-044 to vacate and convey a portion of Country Club Road right of way. To complete the vacation and conveyance per the Paper Plat process, the following is required: 1. Submittal to Real Estate of Legal description and sketch of the R/W to be vacated(including area calculations). 2)A general note on the Final Plat to read as follows: The Right of Way shown herein as "Vacated" was vacated by Mayor and Council adoption of Ordinance # on day of 20 , and recorded in Docket , Page . Real Estate will have the vacation of the right of way agendized for Mayor and Council's adoption simultaneously with the agenda of the subject final plat. We need at least 1 month notice of the M&C meeting to get our paper work thru the system. |
| 06/24/2005 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | * Catus landfill is in the NW quarter of this section. This development is over 1000 feet from the landfill foot print and does not reply to the City'S Landfill Ordinance. * Development is approved for single family APC service to be picked up at curbside off the 20 foot PAAL. Note: Since lots 2 and 5 do not have direct frontage on the PAAL the location of their pickup points needs to be placed on the Tentitave Plat and it should be noted in the CCR's of the subdivision. |
| 07/06/2005 | RBABBIT1 | LANDFILL | ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES | Approved | PARCEL 112-01-078C DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE DESIGNATED AREA DEFINED BY ORDINANCE NO. 10037 AND THEREFORE NOT SUBJECT TO IT. |
| 07/07/2005 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Denied | SUBJECT: ALDEA DEL NORTE Lots 1-12 S05-094 Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has reviewed the tentative plat submitted for review June 13, 2005. This Company is unable to approve the plat at this time. There are existing electrical facilities within the boundaries of the development. The facilities along with the easement recording information must be shown on the plat prior to approval. A copy of the plat with the approximate location of the existing facilities is enclosed. The existing transformer (DONS-2) is in conflict. All relocation costs will be billable to the developer. 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. Also, submit the AutoCAD version of the plat on a CD or email to lcastillo@tep.com <mailto:lcastillo@tep.com> . Should you have any questions, please contact me at (520) 917-8745. Liza Castillo Right of Way Agent Land Management Tucson Electric Power Co. (520) 917-8745 lcastillo@tep.com <mailto:lcastillo@tep.com> |
| 07/07/2005 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | 115 ESTIMATED DAILY TRIPS IN 24 HR PERIOD. |
| 07/11/2005 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) The landscape border along Country Club Drive, south of Aldea Pl. shall be recorded as common area and maintained by the homeowners association (HOA). The subdivision CC&Rs and shall reference the maintenance standards in Sec. 3.7.6. Revise all plans to delineate and identify the common area. LUC 3.7.2.4.A.2.c 2) City of Tucson standards require dust control for all disturbed portions of the site and for the adjacent right-of-way areas. Revise the plant note 3 on sheet 1 of the landscape plan to eliminate the reference to "as directed by owner's representative" as this may be less restrictive than the City standard. LUC 3.7.2.7, LUC 3.7.2.4.A.4 Contact the Department of Transportation for dust control standards within right-of-way. 3) Review the planting plan for the retention basin and revise as necessary to use only plants that tolerate inundation in the flood zone. DS 10-01.IV |
| 07/11/2005 | 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 S05-094 Aldea Del Norte 7/11/05 () Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other: Residential Cluster Project RCP CROSS REFERENCE: N/A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Northside Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: N/A COMMENTS DUE BY: July 12, 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: () Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: vf 791-4505 DATE: July 7, 2005 DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN S05-094 Aldea Del Norte This project is being developed using the Residential Cluster Project (RCP) option. According to the Land Use Code (LUC § 3.6.1.1), the purpose of the RCP is to provide greater flexibility and creativity in the design of clustered residential development. In addition, RCPs must be in conformance with the design policies and criteria of the General Plan and any of its components, including adopted area and neighborhood plans (LUC § 3.6.1.4). NORTHSIDE AREA PLAN (Subarea 2: Tucson-Prince) The purpose of the Northside Area Plan is to guide future development while protecting and enhancing existing uses. Residential Subgoal: Encourage new residential development that preserves and enhances the existing residential character of the area. Policy 1: Preserve and enhance the integrity of established neighborhoods. General Design and Buffering Subgoal: Ensure that the design of new developments enhance the visual appearance of the Northside area and that such developments are designed in a manner that is compatible with existing, adjacent land uses Subarea 2: Tucson-Prince: The intent of the Tucson-Prince polices is to preserve the character of the interior neighborhood. Land Use - Tucson-Prince Design Guidelines 1. Retain low-density residential uses within the interior of the neighborhood. 4. Encourage architectural design of buildings, colors, and landscaping to conform to a southwestern motif. Staff Comments: The project site is within the bounds of the Northside Area Plan (Subarea 2: Tucson-Prince), therefore, both the General Plan and Northside Area policies apply, along with guidelines for policy implementation from the Design Guidelines Manual. Compatibility Single-family structures need to be architecturally compatible with single-family structures on adjacent parcels (LUC, RCP Development Criteria, Sec. 3.6.1.4. A.3, DS 2-10.3.2.C). The General Plan, Design Guidelines and the Northside Area Plan policies also address the need for compatibility with existing neighborhoods. Please submit elevations that reflect four-sided architecture for the proposed development and photographs of surrounding residential development to demonstrate how the proposed development will be architecturally-compatible with surrounding single-family structures. Also, please make a note on the plat that no two homes with the same façade or color scheme shall be placed next to one another. Amenities Common areas on subdivisions of more than 10 lots should be centrally located and provide for passive/active recreation amenities, such as benches, tot lots, picnic areas, etc. Please revise tentative plat/landscape plans to show the centrally located detention basin/common area “B” to be a passive and/or active recreation area, and include amenities such as benches or picnic tables. Please show that the recreational area is handicapped-accessible by an all-weather path. Please label the common area as passive/active recreation area or provide a note on tentative plat. Note: Do not locate any vegetation that has thorns at maturation in the recreation areas. Connectivity Plans and the LUC state that every RCP shall have a pedestrian circulation system connecting all elements of the RCP to all units. Barrier-free accessibility for the elderly and physically disabled shall be provided to twenty-five (25) percent of the ground floor units and all common use areas, including parking areas, within the project (3.6.1.4.A.5). The Design Guidelines Manual also addresses the need for providing safe and convenient access when detention/retention basins are used for open space use and as additional recreational amenities for the development. . Please revise tentative plat to provide a pedestrian handicap accessible crossing to the centrally located common/recreation area “B.” Landscaping To create a more pleasant pedestrian micro-climate in RCPs, the Design Guidelines Manual states that shade trees should be located along pedestrian walkway areas. Please provide a minimum of one 15-gallon shade tree along the sidewalk on every other lot. Please locate these trees no more than 10 feet from the back of the sidewalk. 5. Please correct the label for Common Area “A” on sheet 2, which identifies the private roadway as Common Area “B”. |
| 07/12/2005 | JOSE ORTIZ | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: JULY 13, 2005 TO: Dave Martin FROM: Jose E. Ortiz SUBJECT: Aldea Del Norte TENTATIVE PLAT Job S05-094 T13S, R14E, Sec29 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Tentative Plat and Drainage Report. The Tentative Plat and Drainage Report (DR) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Please attach a response letter with the next submittal, which states how all Engineering/Floodplain Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. TENTATIVE PLAT 1. Benchmark locations, the proposed location of and method of tie to permanent survey monuments or to the nearest section or quarter section corner, and the proposed location and type of subdivision control monuments will be shown. All monuments found or set will be described. D.S. 2-03.2.3.A 2. Provide additional dimensions for existing, proposed, and future right of way. 3. Provide additional survey information and/or clarify the private road information to establish a tie in point with Country Club Road. 4. Provide additional bearing information on various utility lines (such sewer and water) to establish exact routes. 5. If applicable, existing storm drainage facilities on and adjacent to the site shall be shown. D.S. 2-03.2.3.G 6. Proposed traffic circulation will be designed in accordance with Street Development Standard 3-01.0, to include streets, street names, right-of-way widths, curve radii, cul-de-sac dimensions, and curb returns, and proposed improvements, such as access points (driveways), and handicap ramps. Street improvements, such as handicap ramps, do not need to be drawn on the plat if such information is provided on typical street cross sections. 7. Provide proposed ground elevations at different points on each lot for reference to future grading and site drainage. D.S. 2-03.2.4.L.4 8. Verification is required when any drainage solution occurring outside the boundaries of the plat is constructed with adjacent owners' permission. (Additional notarized documentation of that approval will be submitted with the drainage report.) D.S. 2-03.2.4.L.5 9. Grading Plan. Generally, the grading plans may be submitted for review upon approval of the tentative plat. Should the applicant wish, the grading plan can be submitted after the second resubmittal of the tentative plat; however, the grading plan cannot be approved unless it is in conformance with an approved tentative plat. In the case of a tentative plat submitted in conjunction with a rezoning request, the grading plan and the tentative plat cannot be approved until thirty (30) days after adoption of the rezoning ordinance. D.S. 2-03.5.2 DRAINAGE REPORT 1. Demonstrate how this site will except the existing off-site drainage patterns located just south of this project. Avoid changing the existing flow patterns with proposed improvements such as walls, and grading of the new development site. Illustrate or explain how the existing flow patterns will be routed through this development. 2. It appears that the existing off site drainage enters the site as sheet flow. This type of drainage pattern must remain or resemble sheet flow when proposed flows exit this development. Therefore, avoid concentrated outlet flow points on the project such as the spillways on the detention basins. These spillways will need to be modified to prevent any concentrated outlet flow points. If you have any questions or would like to meet with me before your next submittal, you may contact me at 791-5550 ext.1191 or at Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 07/13/2005 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Traffic Engineering REJECTS this TP: 1. Traffic received two copies of sheet 1 of this plat. 2. The symbol for the new fire lane sign is incorrect in the legend. The symbol depicted is for an existing sign. 3. Traffic will have additional comments when we receive sheet 2 for review. D. Dale Kelch, PE Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov |
| 07/13/2005 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Traffic Engineering REJECTS this TP: 1. The symbol used for new street signs is not correct in accordance with Standard Details for Public Improvements, SD100, 2003 edition. This applies in both the legend and the plan view. 2. The SVTs as depicted on sheet 2 are oversized. These are acceptable as they are conservative. The correct size is near side 260', far side 110'. 3. Why is there a no parking sign at the bump out across from lot 8 breaking up a very obvious parking lane? Is this a parking area or not? Remove the sign from this area. 4. 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) This plan as submitted only shows parking on one side. 5. Section A-A, show no parking sign in the section where there is to be no parking. 6. If using wedge curbing provide a 2' shy space between back of curb and the sidewalk. Must use vertical curb if adjacent to the sidewalk. (DS 3-01.0 fig 2) 7. Must use vertical curb if using a 7' parking lane. (DS 3-01.0 fig 2) 8. Change detail B-3 to the attached no parking sign detail. D. Dale Kelch, PE Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov |
| 07/18/2005 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 07/18/2005 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: July 14, 2005 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: CDRC Transmittal, S05-094 Aldea Del Norte: Tentative Plat CC: Craig Gross Patricia Gehlen, Development Services No comments. Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov |
| 07/18/2005 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | |
| 07/18/2005 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | July 14, 2005 TO: Dave Martin, P.E. Tetra Tech, 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: Aldea del Norte, Lots 1-12 and Common Areas A & B Tentative Plat – 1st Submittal S05-094 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 South Rillito (Central Line) 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 site, this project would qualify for Non-Participating sewer connection fee rates. ALL SHEETS. Add the project number, S05-094, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than any cross-reference numbers. SHEET 2. Show the length, size and slope of all newly proposed public sewers. SHEET 2. Be aware that ductile iron pipe will be required in several sections of this project due to the cover being less than four feet. Less than three feet of cover is not permitted. 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 $50.00 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 |
| 07/18/2005 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Approved | PLAT MEETS ASSESSOR'S OFFICE REQUIREMENTS |
| 07/20/2005 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: S05-094 Aldea Del Norte Tentative Plat Review--RCP TRANSMITTAL: 07/20/05 DUE DATE: 7/12/05 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 July 11, 2005. 2. This tentative plat was reviewed in compliance with the requirements of the Development Standards, Land Use Code, and the American National Standard Institute (ANSI). The structuring of the plat was reviewed under the requirements of Development Standards section 2-03. 3. As per DS 2-03.2.1.C There are several areas of required information which are shown in a lighter line weight than is able to be reproduced or microfilmed for recording purposes i.e. subdivision boundary dimensions and bearings, Country Club MS&R information, etc. Please correct with readable line weight. 4. As per DS 2-03.2.1.D.1 & .2 regarding the provided project location map. The location map will provide the following information. 1. Show the subject property approximately centered within a one (1) square mile area. 2. Identify conditions within the square mile area, such as subdivisions, major streets, major watercourses, and railroads. Reference recorded subdivision plats by book and page numbers. 5. As per DS 2-03.2.2.B.1 This project has been assigned the case number S05-094, list in the lower right corner next to the title block of all pages of the plat including the landscape and NPPO pages. 6. As per DS 2-03.2.2.B.7 a note is required stating this project is designed to meet the requirements of the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) overlay zone as per LUC Sec. 2.8.3. and the Residential Cluster Project (RCP) overlay zone as per LUC Sec. 3.6.1. At note #2 the "subject to" section should read as follows: Family Dwelling "RCP-4" subject to: Sec. 3.6.1 and Sec. 3.5.7.1.E and .F. 7. As per DS 2-03.2.2.B.9 If applicable, add the following note: "This subdivision is subject to Ordinance No. 5055 which established zoning in the Prince Rd/ Tucson Blvd Annexation Area." 8. As per DS 2-03.2.3.D The following information regarding the existing and future public right-of-way will be provided: existing curbs, and sidewalks, future curb, future sidewalk, future sight visibility triangles, and distance from property line to future curb location for Country Club Rd. as per MS&R requirements. 9. Remove the note #3 of general notes indicating minimum lot size. Lot sizes are indicated on the plat and an RCP does not have a minimum lot size. 10. As per DS 2-03.2.4.D. The adjacent zoning at the western side of the property is indicated as R2, the correct zoning is R1. Please correct on both pages. 11. The private street as indicated on the plat and detail section A-A must meet Development Standards. See the following comments and code sections regarding minimum standards. DS 2-03.2.4.F The minimum width of pavement with zero parking lanes is twenty four (24) feet . Wedge curbs are not allowed if using the twenty four foot wide street, vertical curbs only. See DS 3-01.2.3.A.1 Table 1. & DS 3-01 Sup. No. 8 Figure 1 The seven (7) foot parking lane as indicated must be used with a vertical curb as required by DS 3-01.2.4.A. As per DS 3-01.2.7.A All streets require a sidewalk area on each side of the street. A sidewalk area generally consists of a space between the curb and sidewalk, area for a sidewalk, and a ground slope area. Improvements include, but are not limited to, wheelchair ramps, sidewalks, driveways, utilities, street furniture, landscaping, and drainage structures. The private driveway leading to lots #2 and #5 require sidewalks on both sides of the driveway as well as above mentioned handicap accessibility requirements. If you choose not to redesign the street to meet the above requirements a Development Standards Modification Request (DSMR) will be required for those areas which will not meet code. 12. Clearly indicate pedestrian circulation to all lots. Clearly indicate the location of, and provide details for, all required handicap ramps and cross walks. They are required between lots #3 & #4 at the sidewalk, the end of the side walk at lot #12, and at the existing and future sidewalk in the right of way. Visitor parking must be located and accessible within 150' of the lot it is serving, with the vertical curbs being required, show location of handicap ramps which will fulfill this requirement. Access ramps at crosswalks connecting to sidewalks must be provided. In addition Truncated Dome (early warning systems) must be added to all access ramps where transitioning from the pedestrian area to the vehicular use area or at HC access aisles transitioning to the sidewalk area. DS 3-01.2.8.A, .B, & .C The private driveway leading to lots #2 and #5 require sidewalks on both sides of the driveway as well as above mentioned handicap accessibility requirements. The plat as per general note #20 is providing barrier free accessibility to only one lot. As per LUC Sec.3.1.6.4.A.5 Barrier-free accessibility for the elderly and physically disabled shall be provided to twenty-five (25) percent of the ground floor units and all common use areas, including parking areas, within the project. As per 2-10.3.1.D Indicate by note how many and which units will be provided with barrier-free accessibility in conformance with Sec. 3.6.1.4.A.5 of the LUC. The drawing should reflect how accessibility will be accomplished. Barrier-free access, as applied under this criterion, is access from a street and/or a parking space to the front door of a unit. Add a detail drawing that demonstrates compliance. 13. As per DS 2-03.2.4.H Provide the recordation information for the vacated and conveyed right of way. (Book and Page numbers are missing) 14. As per DS 2-03.2.4.J and DS 2-03.2.3.C All proposed easements and existing easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. In order for the "driveway" to Lots #2 and #5 to be considered a driveway and not a street a no vehicular access easement will be required at the west side of lot #3 and the east side of lot #4. Depending on the placement of the required sidewalk leading to lot #5 (see previous comment) a pedestrian access easement for the sidewalk on lot #4 will be required or a reduction in the square footage for lot #4 will need to be indicated. 15. As per DS 2-03.2.4.M The property lines on the typical interior and corner lot setback details should extend to the front property line which is at the front of curb. Lot #1 is the only corner lot and should be used as the detail for a corner lot. The setback from the MS&R indicated for lot #1 should be from the future curb location and indicated as 21' or the height of the structure. Provide the dimension from property line to future curb location. The 10' landscape border as well as the future sight visibility will affect the setback requirements and should be indicated on this detail. 16. The last portion of general note #10 should read,---------without the written approval of Mayor and Council. 17. Provide the information regarding DD RCP-4 density calculations. The allowed and proposed for the following, minimum site area, density, site coverage ( the largest model on all 12 lots), and building heights. LUC 3.2.3.1.F. Clearly indicate that though the property is zoned both R1 and R2 that the DD RCP-4 is being used for the entire site. 18. As per LUC Sec. 3.6.1.4.A.3 When the RCP site area is less than four (4) acres, architectural design of the RCP must be compatible with, or complementary to, the design characteristics of those existing single-family detached or attached structures along the same block frontage and the block frontage across the street. If the RCP is proposed on a corner lot, then its design will also be compatible with, or complementary to, the design characteristics of existing residential development on the opposite lot corners. Architectural compatibility will be in compliance with design criteria in applicable adopted neighborhood or area plans. Submit the above information to the Department of Urban Planning and Design. 19. Clearly indicate in general note #16 if the mechanical equipment is ground or roof mounted. If ground mounted include in the note that screening will be a patio wall. If roof mounted provide a detail of proposed screening. Screening shall be architecturally integrated with the overall design of the RCP. LUC Sec. 3.6.1.4.A.9 20. As per 2-10.3.2.E If available at this time, provide three (3) copies of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) which are required if there is to be an association of home owners to assume responsibility for the ownership and maintenance of commonly-owned property. If not available at this time they must be submitted with the final plat for review and approval. 21. Depending on changes and responses to the above comments further comments may be forth coming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 791-5550 ext. 2000. TLS C:\planning\cdrc\tentativeplat\S05-094tp.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan, tentative plat, final plat, CC&R's and additional requested documents. |
| 07/21/2005 | CRAIG GROSS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Completed |