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 - S05-114
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/11/2005 | MARILYN KALTHOFF | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/12/2005 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | The Tentative Plat is approved July 12, 2005. |
| 07/15/2005 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | * Boiler picked up the Irvinton - COT landfill in this section. Per the map there is no landfill with in 1000 feet of this development. * 58 individual lots with street frontage. * Approved for APC curbside service. APC's are to be placed and removed from the collection area on the day of service. |
| 07/18/2005 | 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: S05-114 ESCALANTE-HOUGHTON/TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: 07/18/05 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. NOTE: Label approved interior street names on Final Plat. . ***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.*** |
| 07/18/2005 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | NO COMMENT S05-114 FLOERCHINGER-SADLER-STEELE-BAKER, INC ESCALANTE-HOUGHTON |
| 07/28/2005 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the plans such that "A buffer area thirty (30) feet wide, adjacent to the MS&R right-of-way line, is to be preserved and maintained in its natural state" in accordance with LUC 2.8.2.4. The only permitted improvements in the scenic route buffer area are listed in LUC 3.7.5.2.C. Grading and drainage improvements are not listed. 2) Revise note 33 to include the Scenic Corridor Zone in the list of criteria the plat is designed to comply with, and revise the plat as necessary to comply. DS 2-03.2.2.B.7 3) "Walls, fences, or other screening must be placed behind the landscape border" along Houghton Road and Escalante Road. Revise all plans to locate the proposed wall behind the scenic route buffer area and the street landscape border. LUC 3.7.2.4.A.2.b 4) Revise the tentative plat to refer to the thirty-foot wide area adjacent to Houghton Road as the scenic route buffer area, rather than scenic route setback. LUC 3.7.5.2.A Identify the buffer area as undisturbed natural desert. DS 2-03.2.4.I, LUC 6.2.21 5) Revise the tentative plat and all associated plans to comply with LUC #.7.5.2.E which states "Exposed cut or fill slopes shall be no greater than a one (1) foot rise or fall over a three (3) foot length". 6) Revise the landscape plan, native plant preservation, and engineering plans to show the limits of grading. DS 2-07.2.2.B.4, DS 2-15.3.4.A.1, 7) Provide a key for the symbols used on the native plant preservation plan. DS 2-15.3.4.A 8) Identify any line work on the native plant preservation plan. DS 2-15.3.4 9) A seperate native plant preservation plan will be required by the City Engineer for any development in adjacent public right-of-way areas. LUC 3.7.2.9 The plan currently includes a portion of the MS&R right-of-way in the inventory that should be included in the right-of-way plans. 10) Revise general landscape note 2 on sheet 1 of the landscape plan. The standard for seed establishment in DS 9-06.5.3 applies. 11) The landscape plan is required to show the locations of protected native plants to remain and existing vegetation in the scenic route buffer area. Revise the plans to show the entire site and existing vegetation to remain. DS 2-07.2.2.A.1.e 12) The site is subject to the provisions of the Hillside Development Zone and the Scenic Corridor Zone. A seperate overlay zone application review and approval is required prior to approval of the tentative plat. Contact Patricia Gehlen/Zoning Manager for application procedure. TCC Sec. 23A-51 13) Add a note to the landscape plan that conveys the intent to comply with the following code sections. A) All disturbed, grubbed, graded, or bladed areas not otherwise improved shall be landscaped, reseeded, or treated with an inorganic or organic ground cover to help reduce dust pollution. LUC 3.7.2.7 B) Within the Scenic Route buffer area and the MS&R right-of-way, all areas between the MS&R right-of-way line and the existing street right-of-way that are disturbed by development shall be revegetated with native vegetation. 2. Within the SCZ, excluding the Scenic Routes buffer area, all disturbed areas on the site that are visible from the Scenic Route and are not covered by permanent improvements shall be revegetated with native plants, plants from the Drought Tolerant Plant List, or a combination of both. LUC 3.7.5.2.D C) for ESCALANTE ROAD ONLY the area between the right-of-way line and sidewalk and the area between the sidewalk and the curb, if not covered with vegetation, shall be covered with an appropriate inorganic ground cover, such as decomposed granite. LUC 3.7.2.4.A.4 RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED |
| 07/29/2005 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | No objection |
| 07/29/2005 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Denied | SUBJECT: ESCALANTE - HOUGHTON Lots 1-58 S05-114 Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has reviewed the tentative plat submitted for review July 11, 2005. This Company is unable to approve the plat at this time. There are existing electrical facilities within the boundaries of the development and along Escalante Road and Houghton Road. The facilities (equipment, underground lines) along with the easement recording information must be shown on the plat prior to approval. A copy of a TEP facility map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities is enclosed. The overhead line that crosses through the property must be relocated. 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> |
| 08/04/2005 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 08/04/2005 RECEIVED: Tentative Plat, Landscape Plan and Drainage Report on July 11, 2005 The subject project has been reviewed. We offer the following comments: Drainage Report: 1. Section 2.1 "Offsite Hydrology" includes onsite concentration points, which is confusing. Address the offsite and onsite hydrology in their respective sections. Revise the Hydrological data sheets accordingly. 2. Section 4.1, second line, references Fig 3, which was not included in the Drainage Report submittal. Provide Fig 3 or revise the text as necessary. 3. Add the word "be" in the sentence "Concentration Point 1B will…" in the fifth line of Section 4.1. 4. The unnamed wash to the south is designated as Xeroriparian Low Habitat, which should be preserved based on the WASH Ordinance requirements excluding the public notification and meeting requirement. Identify the Wash's 50' study and the resource areas and verify that the proposed development will not encroach on the resource area. If encroachment/disturbance is proposed, provide the required technical justification and the proposed mitigation report. 5. Address sediment traps or other sediment control measures in all the proposed detention/retention basins to demonstrate compliance with Section 3.4 of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual. 6. According to Section 14.3 of the "Standard Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management In Tucson, Arizona", the proposed detention/retention basins require maintenance access ramps that should be wide enough to accommodate vehicular access. The minimum width should be 15' and the ramp slope should not exceed 15 percent. Please be advised that maintenance ramps should be designed in such a way that does not allow access to vehicles except maintenance vehicles. Additionally, the proposed drainage structures maintenance responsibility should be addressed in the Report and a maintenance check list for the proposed drainage structures should be include in the Report. 7. Determine the proposed slope treatment and setback lines for the proposed basins and channels based on the Soils Report recommendations. 8. The detention/retention basin bottoms must be graded to provide positive drainage to prevent nuisance ponding. 9. Address in the Drainage Report and show on the onsite drainage map the proposed detention/retention basin side slopes, sediment traps, the type and location of the proposed outlets, the erosion control structures at the outlets, maintenance access ramps, and dimensions including depth and the 100-year water surface elevation. Verify that security barriers are not required. 10. It is not clear which concentration point is described as OVERALL in the Hydrologic Data Sheets. Clarify. 11. It is not clear if Concentration Point "D" includes the watersheds north and south of the 2-48" RCP's or only the area south of the RCP's. 12. 40% impervious cover for Concentration Point "B proposed" appears to be low. Check and revise as necessary. 13. Provide the erosion hazard setback (EHS) calculations. Clarify if the wash curves were taken into account when determining the EHS. Additionally, clarify, on Figure 4, if the depicted EHS is measured from the top of bank or the 100-year runoff floodplain limits. 14. It does not appear that the used Flood Peak Estimator software takes the type of soil and the contributing area into account in determining the amount of runoff. Revise as necessary. 15. It is not clear how the velocity, at cross section 2, does not change between existing and proposed conditions. It appears that a restriction should be applied in the HEC RAS analysis, at the proposed RCP's outlet to account for the ineffective flow adjacent to the pipe outlet. Additionally, the positioning of the proposed RCP's may create scour problem adjacent to lot 13. Address this issue and revise as necessary. 16. It is not clear if the proposed scupper at Concentration Point B.1 has 10-year or 100-year capacity. 17. The sidewalk scupper length computation table that includes Concentration Points A, B, C and D is confusing. Figure 4 does not show a scupper at C.P. A, yet the table shows a scupper length. C.P's C and D show scupper lengths that are different from what is shown on Figure 4. Clarify the discrepancies. 18. All proposed riprap channels should be underlined with filter fabric. Revise the cross section on Figure 4 to reflect this requirement. 19. Cross section C-C at Concentration Point B was rated for 15-cfs runoff. The 100-year runoff at C.P. B is 39 cfs. Revise as necessary. 20. Check the possibility of eliminating the proposed retention basins and allowing the site to discharge directly into the adjacent unnamed washes without adversely impacting adjacent properties. The washes sandy bottoms are more efficient for water recharge. 21. The proposed culvert calculations information appear to be incomplete (i.e. slope, n value, upstream and downstream invert elevations etc. are missing). Additionally, the culvert construction information (i.e. length, invert elevations, etc.) should be shown on Fig 4. 22. Splash pads should be provided at the outlets of the proposed pipes and channels within the retention basins. 23. Address water harvesting. 24. This Office recommends including the maintenance checklist in the CC & R's to allow the owners' association access to it and to facilitate their maintenance responsibility. Tentative Plat: 1. Provide the correct S (yr)-______ subdivision case number according to D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.1. 2. Provide a Legend as required by D.S. 2-03.2.1.J. 3. Add a general note stating that part of the subject parcel is affected by the City of Tucson floodplain regulations and a Floodplain Use Permit is required for any proposed improvements within the regulatory floodplain (D.S. 2-03.2.2.C.2.a. & b.). 4. As per Federal ADA requirements, all wheel chair ramps shall have the Truncated Domes instead of the standard grooves, which are shown on City of Tucson Standard Detail 207. Aside from the Truncated Domes, the wheel chair ramps shall be constructed in accordance with the Standard Detail 207. 5. On August 1, 2004, the new overlay zone procedures went into effect. All plans submitted after this date, which are in any overlay zone (i.e. SCZ, HDZ, ERZ, and W.A.S.H.), are required to go through the new procedure. Reference the applicable overlay zone in the general notes as required by D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.7. and submit an application for the overlay zone(s) that is/are applicable to this project. Contact Patricia Gehlen at 520-791-5550, Extension 1179 for additional information. Please be advised that as part of the overlay zone procedure, a public notification may be required. 6. Explain how this project will comply with Rezoning Condition #3. 7. Verify compliance with Rezoning Conditions #7 & #9. 8. In order to ensure that onsite washes runoff will flow freely and that the City has right to order the washes cleaned, maintained or repaired, dedicate a flowage easement over the onsite unnamed washes as required by Section 3.4 of Chapter III of the Standard Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management in Tucson, AZ (SMDDFM). Additionally, clarify on the Tentative Plat how the owner is proposing to dedicate the flowage easements (i.e. by final plat or a separate instrument). 9. It is not clear how the existing onsite easement will be released/abandoned. Clarify (D.S. 2-03.2.3.C). Ensure that the existing utility easements, proposed to be abandoned are not needed by the Utility Companies. 10. Indicate if streets will be private or public. Indicate the proposed street names (D.S. 2-03.2.4.F). 11. Verify compliance with Development Standard 11-01.8.0 "Fill". This includes following the required procedure to allow fills of 2' or more within the outer 100' of the subject parcel. 12. It appears that Street Section D/6 will probably have over a 1000 ADT, which would require the 56' wide typical cross section. Verify what the projected ADT for all proposed streets and revise the proposed street widths accordingly. 13. Street section B on sheet 6 shows a 45' right of way on the left half of the cross-section detail. Correct as needed. 14. Show filter fabric underneath all proposed rip rap. 15. Verify that the shown scupper cells will provide the required scupper lengths calculated in the Drainage Report. 16. Provide construction details for the proposed catch basins that match the information in the Drainage Report (i.e. COT Type 5 CB with 3' sump, 4' wing & 2'X3' grated inlet). 17. Show the proposed retention basins bleed pipes. 18. Add a general note stating that this project is designed to be in compliance with the W.A.S.H. Ordinance regulations as they pertain to preservation (D.S. 2-03.2.2.C.3). 19. Show the 100-year ponding limits in the proposed detention/retention basins (D.S. 2-03.2.4.L.1). 20. Show the proposed detention/retention basin inlet and outlet erosion control measures. Additionally, show the required detention basin Sediment Control Structures (D.S. 2-03.2.4.L.3). 21. Show building setback lines from the slopes and the proposed detention/retention basins (D.S. 2-03.2.4.M.). Please be advised that detention/retention basin setback lines are different from slope setback lines and both should be determined in the Geotechnical Report. 22. Provide the proposed detention/retention basins dimensions, side slopes and ponding depth. Additionally, verify that security barriers are not required for the basins (D.S. 2-03.2.4.L.). 23. Show the 1'no access easement wherever applicable (i.e. along parcel boundary and/or along lot lines abutting common areas) (D.S. 2-03.2.4.J.) and (D.S. 3-01.6.1.H). 24. Provide adequate spot elevations on the streets and lots, including grade breaks, to clarify the proposed drainage directions (D.S. 2-03.2.4.L.2 & 4.). 25. The proposed 25' wide private drainage easement across lots 5-7 was not addressed in the drainage report. It is not clear what drainage it is supposed to convey and if it will have capacity. Additionally, who will be maintaining the easement, and why is it not proposed to be a common area? 26. The proposed drainage structures dimensions and invert elevations should be shown. 27. Provide the dimensions of the proposed common areas as required by (D.S. 2-03.2.4.I.). 28. Submit a Geotechnical Report that addresses drainage setback lines and slope protection. Demonstrate compliance with the Geotechnical Report on the Tentative Plat. 29. Show the proposed detention/retention basin maintenance access ramps including their widths and slopes. According to Section 14.3 of the "Standard Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management In Tucson, Arizona", the maintenance access ramps should be wide enough to accommodate vehicular access. The minimum width should be 15' and the ramp slope should not exceed 15 percent. Please be advised that maintenance ramps should be designed in such a way that does not allow access to vehicles except maintenance vehicles. 30. Due to the size of this project, it will require a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Submit a SWPPP with the Grading Plan submittal. 31. The HDZ related slope calculations were not included in the submittal. 32. It appears that the proposed wall along Houghton will encroach on the 30' Scenic Route Setback area. Eliminate all proposed scenic route setback encroachments. 33. Work in the public right of way requires an excavation permit and may require a Private Improvement Agreement. Check with Transportation Department Permits and Codes for additional information. 34. This Office recommends including the maintenance checklist in the CC & R's to allow the owners' association access to it and to facilitate their maintenance responsibility. 35. Revise the Tentative Plat according to the Drainage Report revisions. Landscape Plan: 1. Show water-harvesting basins. 2. Show sight visibility triangles to ensure that the proposed landscaping will not obstruct sight at street intersections. 3. Demonstrate that the proposed landscaping will not conflict with the retention basins maintenance access ramps, inlets and outlets and sediment traps. Prepare a detailed response that explains the revisions that were made and references the exact location in the drainage report and on the Tentative Plat where the revisions were made. Due to the high number of comments for this submittal, the next submittal will require 4 weeks Engineering review time. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Tentative Plat, Drainage Report and Landscape Plan |
| 08/09/2005 | 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 July 10, 2006. 2. Since this subdivision is a Residential Cluster Project (RCP), a statement to that effect shall be included in the title block. (D.S. 2-03.2.1.G.2) 3. This plat has been assigned subdivision case number S05-114. Note the subdivision case number in the lower right corner of each sheet on all plans. (D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.1) 4. This project is within the Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ) and Hillside Development Zone (HDZ). A separate application review is required for the SCZ and HDZ. You may obtain a copy of the Overlay Zone application online at: http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Forms_Fees___Maps/Applications/Overlay_Zone_Application.pdf The Overlay Zone case number must be noted in the lower right corner of each sheet of the tentative plat, landscape, and NPPO plans. All required elements of the SCZ (i.e. 30 foot buffer, view corridors, approved colors, etc..) and HDZ as shown on the approved Overlay Zone plan must be added to the tentative plat, along with date of approval and any conditions placed on that approval. The tentative plat may not be approved prior to Overlay Zone application approval. (LUC 2.8.2) (LUC 2.8.1) (D.S. 2-12) (D.S. 9-04) 5. Add SCZ LUC Section 2.8.2 to general note 33 overlay zone criteria. (D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.7) 6. For land that slopes more than five (5) percent, contour line intervals will be drawn which will satisfy the specific requirements of Sec. 2.8.1 of the LUC, Hillside Development Zone; Development Standard 2-12.0, Hillside Development Zone (HDZ) Standard; and Development Standard 9-04.0, Hillside Development Site Improvement. (D.S. 2-03.2.3.F.3) 7. Label and dimension the on-street parking lanes on the typical street cross-sections shown on sheet 6 of 9. (D.S. 2-03.2.4.G) 8. On tentative plat sheets 3 of 9 and 5 of 9, revise the note labeled as "30' Scenic Route Setback" to "30' Scenic Route Undisturbed Natural Buffer". (LUC 2.8.2.4.A) 9. Add the following general note: "There shall be no further division of land or resubdivision without the developer or successor in interest furnishing written notice to all property owners of record within the boundaries of the RCP. In no event shall further division of land occur without the written approval of the Mayor and Council." (LUC 3.6.1.4.A.10) 10. Revise the perimeter yard setback requirements for the typical lot details on sheet 6 of 9. Setback listed as 10 ' or ¾ building height does not apply in this subdivision. Perimeter yard setbacks for lots along the north perimeter shall be based on a developing area setback of 21 feet or the building height, measured from back of existing or future curb. Perimeter yard setbacks along the east perimeter will be affected by the SCZ and will be based on a setback requirement of three (3) times the building height. Be aware that buildings with a maximum height of 12 feet or less do not have to comply with the three (3) times the building height requirement. These homes will default to the same developing area setback as the north perimeter. (LUC 3.6.1.4.E) (D.S. 2-10.3.1.A) 11. Provide a detail reflecting how barrier free accessibility will be accomplished. Barrier-free access, as applied under LUC 3.6.1.4.A.5, is access from a street and/or a parking space to the front door of the unit. (D.S. 2-10.3.1.D) 12. The Final Plat may not be approved until the CC&R's are reviewed and approved by the Zoning Review Section. The CC&R's must meet criteria listed in L.U.C. 3.6.1.5. If applicable, the CC&R's must also detail the restrictions on any proposed natural areas. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call me or e-mail me at (520) 791-5608 ext. 1180 or Daniel.Castro@tucsonaz.gov |
| 08/10/2005 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approv-Cond | August 2, 2005 TO: Michael John Baker Floerchinger-Sadler-Steele-Baker, 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: Escalante~Houghton, Lots 1-58 and Common Areas A-C Tentative Plat – 1st Submittal S05-114 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 and the Ina Road Water Pollution Control Facility via the Pantano 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. A capacity request form may be found at http://www.pima.gov/wwm/forms/docs/CapResponseRequest.pdf. Based on the construction of 300 feet of qualifying off-site public sewer, this project would qualify for 12 lots of Participating sewer connection fee rates and 46 lots of Non-Participating sewer connection fee rates, if and only if, the public off-site sewer is constructed. Should the public off-site sewer not be constructed, the entire project would qualify for Non-Participating sewer connection fee rates. ALL SHEETS. Add the project number, S05-114, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than any cross-reference numbers. SHEET 2. Add the following General Note THE REQUIRED OFF-SITE PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER LINE WILL BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED TO PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARDS. 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 |
| 08/10/2005 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Traffic Engineering REJECTS this TP: 1. Submit the Traffic Impact Analysis as required by rezoning condition #7. The TP will not be approved until this item is received and approved. 2. Rezoning condition #28: Owner is misspelled. 3. Sheet 6/9, Section B, there is a 45' ROW listed. I believe this should be 26'. Please review and correct. D. Dale Kelch, PE Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov |
| 08/10/2005 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | DATE: August 9, 2005 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: S05-114 Escalante – Houghton: Tentative Plat Review (7-11-05) CC: Craig Gross Patricia Gehlen Rezoning condition # 21 states “The owner/developer shall contribute towards the development of the Houghton Greenway in the vicinity of the project in the amount of $22 per linear foot of frontage on Houghton Road.” The project frontage on Houghton Road is indicated as 1300 ft. Therefore, the total contribution would be $28,600. Please indicate on plat the following: The owner/developer shall contribute $28,600 to the City of Tucson for the development of the Houghton Greenway. Contribution is to be made when permits are pulled for the subject development. Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov |
| 08/10/2005 | 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 S05-114 Escalante-Houghton 08/08/05 () Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment () Other – NPPO Plan CROSS REFERENCE: C9-03-14 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: South Pantano Area Plan SCENIC/GATEWAY ROUTE: Houghton Road is Scenic Route COMMENTS DUE BY: 8/08/2005 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: Joanne Hershenhorn DATE: 8/08/2005 Urban Planning and Design Comments S05-114, Escalante/Houghton Please indicate who will be responsible and liable for the operation and maintenance of Common Areas “B” and “C”. As per rezoning condition note #13, please include a note on sheet 4/9 of the Tentative Plat (TP) that indicates homes on lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 11 and 12 are limited to a single story, and building heights will not exceed 16 feet. To demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition #14, please add a general note stating that site plan submittals shall demonstrate that all buildings shall be earth-tone in color; and that building footprints, orientations and rooflines shall be varied. On sheets 7/9, 8/9 and 9/9, staff finds it difficult to read the existing grades in areas where the slope is 15% or greater. Clarify where the existing 5-foot contour intervals are, and call out existing grades in areas where the slope is 15% or greater. Clearly identify all cut and fill areas; indicate the maximum vertical extent of cut and fill; and identify edge treatments for all cut and fill areas. Provide sufficient information to demonstrate compliance with rezoning conditions #15, 16, 17, and 29.c. Identify the percentage of the site for which the combined area of cut or fill exceeds 8 feet, and 10 feet. Per rezoning condition #18, in accordance with the approved preliminary grading plan, the areas southwest of lot 12, and south of lots 37, 38, and most of 39, are to remain as Natural Undisturbed Open Space (NUOS). Please revise the TP and LP to show that there will be no grading within these NUOS areas. In addition, clearly indicate on the TP and LP that the NUOS areas will be fenced off and protected prior to any onsite development activity. As per rezoning condition #19, please identify the screen wall construction materials on Section E-E, TP sheet 6/9. On sheet L1/2, the note near lot 14 indicates each lot shall have a shade tree, yet the note points to a shrub. Please clarify (per rezoning condition #20, a street tree shall be planted at a minimum of every other lot). Also, on the LP, please provide a typical detail for the street trees, as per rezoning condition #12. Urban Planning and Design Comments S05-114, Escalante/Houghton As per rezoning condition #22, please provide a typical wall detail, including the decorative feature, on the TP and/or Landscape Plan (LP), or both. Also, on the TP and/or LP, indicate that the screen walls will be constructed of/or painted with graffiti-resistant materials. As per rezoning condition #29, on sheet L1/2, please show a 5”-6” high decorative masonry wall, painted tan and constructed of or painted with graffiti-resistant material, on the west property line, adjacent to lots 5, 6, and 7. Also, on sheet 8/9, provide a section across the drainage easement west of lots 5, 6 and 7. Clearly demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition 29.c. On the LP, please add a note stating that the west side of the roadway crossing over the wash, between lots 12 and 13, shall be landscaped. Indicate that any exposed concrete, metal or similar surfaces shall be painted a desert tan color (see rezoning condition #30). |
| 08/12/2005 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | Transportation Information for Rezoning, Subdivision and Development Review Requests File Number Description Date Reviewed E Pima Association of Governments Transportation Planning Division 177 N. Church Avenue, Suite 405 Tucson, AZ 85701 Phone: (520) 792-1093 Fax: (520) 620-6981 www.pagnet.org S05-114 Escalante-Houghton: Tentative Plat Review 8/4/2005 1. Nearest Existing or Planned Major Street 2. Is improvement planned as part of the 5-Year Transportation Improvement Program Planned Action: STREET IDENTIFICATION 3. Existing Daily Volume – Based on Average Daily Traffic 4. Existing Daily Capacity- Level of Service “E” 5. Existing Number of Lanes 9. Estimated Traffic Generation for Proposed Development (Expressed in Average 24 Hr. Vehicle Trips) 8. Future Number of Lanes TRANSIT AND BIKEWAYS CONSIDERATIONS 10. Present Bus Service (Route, Frequency, Distance) 11. Existing or Planned Bikeway Remarks: Street Number 1 Street Number 2 Year Year Planned Action: VOLUME/CAPACITY/TRAFFIC GENERATION CONSIDERATIONS 6. Future Daily Volume - Adopted Plan System Completed 7. Future Daily Capacity - Level of Service “E” Corridor Study Houghton Rd (Irvington to Escalante) Yes 2005 14,500 24,320 2 24,320 18,094 2 555 None None 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 |
| 08/15/2005 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Approved | Office of the Pima County Assessor 115 N. Church Ave. Tucson, Arizona 85701 BILL STAPLES 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: August 11, 2005 RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat S05-116 Desert Point 2 T141510 (140-32) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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. Remove all hatching and shading. Add interior bearings to lot lines. Add complete curve data and table. Add street name and distance and bearing. If there are any questions, please contact Jessica Shettleroe at 740-4398. 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. Jessica Shettleroe |
| 08/19/2005 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES August 19, 2005 Michael John Baker Floerchinger-Sadler-Steele-Baker, Inc. 326 S. Convent Tucson, AZ 85701 Subject: S05-114 Escalante-Houghton Tentative Plat Dear Michael: Your submittal of July 11, 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 8 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (TEP, Community Planning, Park & Recreation, Landscape, Traffic, Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Community Planning, Engineering, Landscape, Zoning, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO plans (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report Due to the number of comments the resubmittal will be a 4 week review. 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: 628-1375 |