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 - S05-182
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/03/2006 | 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: S05-182 THIRD STREET LOFTS / REVISED TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: January 3, 2006 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. On Final Plat 1: Change Richey Rd. to Boulevard on Location Map. ***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.*** |
| 01/03/2006 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 01/12/2006 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Coordinator DATE: January 12, 2006 SUBJECT: Engineering review of the Third Street Lofts, Lots 1 through 22, Tentative Plat. The activity number is S05-182. SUMMARY: The Tentative Plat and Drainage Report were received by Engineering on December 29th, 2005. Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Tentative Plat or the Drainage Report. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: TENTATIVE PLAT GENERAL COMMENTS 1. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Tentative Plat purposes only. 2. Please include the Assurance Package with the Final Plat submittal. This package must include the original Third Party Trust, the original Amendment to Trust, a copy of the Trust Agreement, a copy of the Deed, a Title Report and a copy of the location map on an 8" by 11" paper. 3. Include a copy of the CC&Rs with the Final Plat submittal. The specific maintenance notes specified in the Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 14.3.2 must be included on the Final Plat or in the CC&Rs. The term "owner" in the maintenance notes is to be replaced with "Homeowners Association". 4. Please provide a copy of the boundary closure calculations with the Final Plat submittal. 5. A Grading Plan and Permit will be required. Proposed grading in excess of 5,000 yards is designated "engineered grading" and a soils engineering report is required with the Grading Plan submittal. Development Standard 11-01.4.1.C. The Soils Report must also address the requirements detailed in the Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 14.2.6. 7. Proposed developments disturbing areas exceeding 1 acre are subject to AzPDES requirements. 8. All proposed easements must be shown in a surveyable manner on the Final Plat. 9. Flood Use Permit is required prior to grading plan approval. The next submittal must address the following items: TENTATIVE PLAT 1. Section 2/3 on sheet 4 is incorrect. The common areas shown should be labeled , C.A. "B." Revise accordingly. 2. The square footage of the lots appears to be incorrect. Correct and revise accordingly. D.S. 2-03. 2.2.4.I. |
| 01/12/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the landscape plan to accurately show all locations of the required screen walls. Clarify where walls are used and where fencing is used. DS 2-07.2.2.A.3 2) Podranea ricasoleana is not listed on the City Of Tucson Regulatory Plant List. Refer to LUC 3.7.2.2 for standards regarding use of plants not on the approved plant list. Refer to DS 9-06, Exhibit III for the list of approved plants. Refer to DS 2-06.3.2.B for oasis area locations. 3) Submit the native plant preservation plan. We will need to verify that the plan continues to coordinate with the development plan. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED. |
| 01/28/2006 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: S05-182 an RCP Third Street Lofts, Lots 1-22 and Common Areas "A" and "B" Tentative Plat TRANSMITTAL: 01/28/06 DUE DATE: 1/12/06 COMMENTS: 1. Your response regarding previous comment #6 is noted. The response indicates general notes #32 and #33 which are not on the plan. Notes are numbered only to #28. Your response to previous comment #11 is noted regarding email correspondence with Patricia Gehlen. Patricia will be contacting you regarding the following comment. This plan will require a DSMR or a redesign of the project for the required number of visitor parking spaces. As per DS 3-01 Figure 1 when visitor parking is not provided on a street but is provided in a common area, one visitor parking space per dwelling unit must be provided. This requirement increases the number of required parking spaces to 3 per dwelling unit for a total of 66 parking spaces required. Revise the parking calculations. As per DS 3-05.2.4.A & .1 the visitor parking spaces must be located within 150' of the front or street side yard property line of each residential unit. It does not appear that lots 6 and 17 meet this requirement. If a DSMR is to be applied for, indicate on the plan the DSMR case number and any conditions of the DSMR. The tentative plat cannot be approved until the DSMR is approved and any conditions of the DSMR are meet. Previous comment #11: 11. This development is proposed similar to an apartment complex rather than the typical subdivision with streets and on street parking. Based on this proposal the parking calculations as listed on the plan will not work. The number of vehicle parking spaces that must be provided for each unit is 2 per unit plus one additional visitor parking space for each unit. The parking calculation must be revised and the drawing must be designed to accommodate the number of required parking spaces. A total of 33 spaces must be provided on each of the sites. DS 2-03.2.3.F All parking spaces that are adjacent to a vertical structure, which is taller than six inches in height, must be revised to meet a minimum of ten feet in width. The spaces in question are the ones adjacent to the refuse enclosure. Provide a dimension on the plan clearly indicating the 10'6" width for the above parking spaces. 2. Your response to the following comment is noted. All existing or proposed easements must be drawn, labeled, and dimensioned. All existing easements must be labeled with the recordation information. DS 2-03.2.3.C and 2-03.2.4.J The existing 10' PUE indicated in note #46 on page 2 is noted. The storage sheds indicated on lots 1,2 & 3 are not allowed to be built over or into the indicated easement. Relocate the structures or provide recordation information of the abandonment of the easement. On sheet 2 along the west side of lots 18 thru 22 and common area B is indicated an "OHE" which is assumed to be an over head electric line. This would require an easement for crossing of property lines. Indicate recordation information, width and use of the easement. If there is an easement in this location the storage sheds indicated will not be allowed to be constructed in an easement. If the easement is to be abandoned provide recordation information. Clearly indicate the location of electric, water, and gas lines to the proposed dwelling units. If located in the common area easements are not required. If the utilities are crossing property lines provide locations of the proposed easements. Structures of any kind are not allowed to be constructed in or over an easement. Contact all the utility companies for criteria regarding structures built within an easement and if applicable provide documentation from the appropriate utility company approving structures built within the easement. 3. It is acknowledged that a Board of Adjustment variance is going to be applied for the location of the carports and the storage buildings. A redesign or a BOA variance will also be required for the required 6'setbacks of the opposite yard. See later comment. The tentative plat cannot be approved until the BOA variance has been completed and approved. List on the plans the BOA case number and any conditions required by the variance. The following comments are information that is required on the plans in order to apply for the BOA variance. All structures must meet the minimum street perimeter building setback, which is based on the greatest of 20 feet or one and one-half the height of the structure. Provide a dimension from the street property line to the columns of the carports and indicate the overhang towards the street property line. The maximum over hang into a required setback is 2'. All structures must meet the required side yard setback of 10' or ¾ the height of the structure. Provide a dimension from the carport column to the side yard property line as well as dimension from the fascia of the carport to the side yard property line. The maximum over hang into a required setback is 2'. Provide on the elevation plans the indicated water storage tank and storage building. Clearly indicate if these structures are attached or detached structures. Provide on the plans a dimension from the above structures to the property line. As per LUC Sec. 3.2.6.6.A The screened balcony indicated on the elevation plans is considered part of the dwelling unit and must meet the required setbacks. The balcony appears to encroach into the required setback (3/4 the height of the structure). Provide dimensions from grade to the top of the screened balcony and distance projecting out from the building. Indicate on the site plan as well, showing the balcony as part of the second floor and dimensions to the property line from the balcony. Provide on the elevation plans the heights of all structures as measured from grade and not from finished floor. If setbacks are affected please revise. AS per LUC Sec. 3.6.1.4.D.2.d.3 Along interior lot lines for detached dwellings a zero setback is allowed on one side provided the opposite yard is a minimum 6'. As indicated on the typical lot plan detail 9 on page 3 the setbacks do not appear to meet this requirement. Provide a dimension from the structure to the property line. A redesign will be required or apply for a BOA variance. An option which would meet this requirement is to record a non-buildable easement for each lot where the opposite side setback is less than 6'. 4. The following comments are related to the requirements or criteria of the RCP overlay standards 2-10 A. Please ensure that the following information has been provided on the plan, developable area, density for each lot (remove the note stating 80 units each site), the site coverage for each site should be listed separately, and the required number of parking spaces must be listed for each site. The above comment has not been addressed. The data provided is for each individual lot and not for each site. Note #23 on the first submitted plans was correct except for clarification of the storage area which should be included in the building area. The site coverage calculations must include vehicular use area and building area. Please revise. Note # 22 on the first submitted plans for the parking calculation was in the correct format but with wrong information. See comment #1. 5. The parking spaces indicate on the east side of the property along the adjacent sidewalk must be provided with barriers to prevent vehicles from over hanging the side walk and reducing the sidewalk to less than 4' in width. Provide a sidewalk that will allow a clear space of 4''in front of the vehicle on the sidewalk when the vehicle overhangs the sidewalk by 2'-6". ( a 6'-6" sidewalk in these areas would meet this requirement) DS 3-05.2.3.C 6. Additional comments may be forthcoming based on the revised plan and responses to any of the zoning comments. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 791-5550 @ ext. 2000. TLS C:\planning\cdrc\tentativeplat\S05182tp.doc |
| 02/07/2006 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approv-Cond | February 6, 2006 TO: Steven Gregor, P.E. Gregor & Grenier 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: Third Street Lofts, Lots 1-22 and Common Areas A & B Tentative Plat – 2nd Submittal S05-182 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. SHEET 2. Be aware that a new five foot diameter public sewer manhole will have to replace existing manhole 8960-32B in order to accommodate the newly proposed incoming private sewers from opposite bearings. 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. 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 |
| 02/17/2006 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S05-182 Third Street Lofts 02/16/06 (XXXX) Tentative Plat () Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment (XXXX) Other – Elevations CROSS REFERENCE: NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Alvernon-Broadway GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 01/12/06 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 (XXXX) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: 11/09/05 () Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER: D. Estolano 791-4505 DATE: 02/16/06 |
| 02/23/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES February 23, 2006 Steven Gregor Gregor and Grenier Engineering, Inc. 5232 East Pima Street, Suite A Tucson, AZ 85712 Subject: S05-182 Third Street Lofts Tentative Plat Dear Steve: Your submittal of December 29, 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 4 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape & NPPO Plans (engineering, landscape, zoning, DSD) 2 Copies Floor Plans and Elevations (zoning, 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: 319-1181 |
| 12/28/2005 | MARILYN KALTHOFF | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed |