Plan Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Plan Number - S05-244
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/25/2006 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/06/2006 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | Posted approved with requirement for service vehicle to back out into the alley to service the dumpster. |
| 09/18/2006 | KAROL ARAGONEZ | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Karol Aragonez Planner PROJECT: S05-244 Fourth Street RCP Tentative Plat TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 18, 2006 DUE DATE: September 25, 2006 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. Please list the case number, S05-244 in the lower right corner of all sheets of the NPPO and landscape plan. DS 2-03.2.2.B.1 2. Please indicate in the title block of the tentative plat, NPPO, and landscape plan the proposed common area "A" by letter designation and use. DS 2-03.2.4.C 3. Written verification from Traffic Engineering that parking is allowed along Fourth Street was not found in the review packet. Please provide. Please show the Fourth Street cross-section the no parking for the north side of the street. DS 2-03.2.4.G 4. The required setback per the perimeter yard matrix "CC" when the project is adjacent to R-2 or R-3 zoning is the greater of ten (10) feet or three-fourths (3/4) the height of the building wall. Per the elevations provided showing a twenty (20) foot wall height the required building setback for the RCP perimeter would be fifteen (15) feet. Please revise the tentative plat to meet this requirement. LUC 3.2.6.4 5. Please show the required street setback from Fourth Street as the greater of twenty-one (21) or the height of the exterior building wall. The setback that is indicated in keynote 1 would be the noted as the provided setback. 6. The setback of six (6) feet and zero (0) allows for a staggered setback, which ultimately provides six (6) feet between each lot to meet building code. When designing a real zero (0) setback, as with this project, the setback criteria for attached dwellings is utilized as described in LUC Sec. 3.6.1.4.D.2.c. To meet this requirement three hundred (300) square feet of outdoor space must be located on each lot and meet the following: a) Of the three hundred (300) square feet, a minimum of one hundred (100) square feet is provided as one (1) consolidated outdoor space; and b) The one hundred (100) square foot space is a minimum of ten (10) feet in width in any direction; and c) Such consolidated space is designed as an extension of the indoor space with access from that space; and d) The consolidated space is not obstructed by any overhang less than seven (7) feet above design grade; and e) The consolidated space is not within the sight visibility area as provided in Development Standard 3-01.0. Please demonstrate on the tentative plat. 7. Based on responses to the above comments and changes to the plat, further comments may be forth coming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Karol Aragonez, (520) 791-5550. KAA S:\zoning review\karol\planning\cdrc\tentativeplat\S05-244tpr.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised tentative plat and additional requested documents. |
| 09/19/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Add the subdivision case number (S05-244) to the lower right hand corner of all sheets of the Landscape Plan and NPPO Plan. DS 2-03.2.2.B.1 2. Delineate the limits of grading on the landscape and NPPO plans to show where protective fencing is to be located to protect the palo verde and mesquites to be preserved in place. The symbol for the Tree listed in note 6.4 could not be located on the plans. The tree is also identified as in an area to be graded. LUC 3.8.6.4.D The tentative plat should indicate retention of the existing grades in the required plant non-disturbance area. LUC 3.8.6.7.C 3. Indicate square footage of all landscaped areas and calculation of the percentage of vegetative coverage per DS 2-07.2.2.2.g. 4) Submit a native plant inventory per DS 2-15.3.1 that show the location of each protected native plant and a list that documents the viability and transplantability of each plant. 5) Submit a native plant preservation plan on a seperate sheet that does not serve as the landscape plan. DS 2-15.3.4 6) Refer to DS 2-07.2.2 and DS 2-06.5.4 for the specific content required in the following elements of the landscape plan: Maintenance Schedule, Grading Information, Irrigation Plan. Revise landscape plan to include required content and specifications. Grading information on the landscape plan shall include contour lines, spot elevations, percent slope across the site and direction of slope of paved areas, existing grades on adjacent rights-of-way and adjacent sites, and the methods by which water harvesting/ storm runoff is used to benefit planting areas on the site. DS 2-07.0 7. The landscape plan shall include irrigation specification design and layout per DS 2-06.5.4.A & DS 2-06.5.4.B including sleeves for driveways and sidewalks, locations of valves, low-flow bubblers or drip irrigation. 8. Revise Native Plant Preservation Note 6.1 to specify the status of the palo verde noted. Refer to DS 2-15 for NPP standards. Include calculations. It may be designated as PIP, or RFS with 2 mitigation plants required. The mitigation plants however could not be located in the same location. A minimum size planter is required per LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.c. 9) The refuse collection area may not be accessed from the alley. Per LUC Table 3.7.2-I a 5' high masonry wall is required to screen the vehicular use area proposed to provide access to the dumpster. The refuse location also conflicts with DS 6-01.2.2.B.3: A twenty-five (25) foot minimum height clearance, free of any overhead obstructions (wires, branches, etc.), shall be provided above the collection site. The overhead electic easement in the alley makes collection at this location impossible. In addition, at this location the refuse would have to be completely screened with a 6' masonry wall due to the adjacent zoning. LUC Table 3.7.2-I 10) Provide information regarding screening for the opening of the trash enclosure in accordance with LUC Table 3.7.2-I. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED. |
| 09/22/2006 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Coordinator DATE: September 21, 2006 SUBJECT: Engineering review of the Fourth Street RCP Tentative Plat. The activity number is S05-244. SUMMARY: The Tentative Plat and Drainage Report were received by Engineering on August 25th, 2006. Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Tentative Plat or the Drainage Report. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: TENTATIVE PLAT, DRAINAGE REPORT 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, and a Title Report. 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. The Soils Report must also address the requirements detailed in the Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 14.2.6. 6. Proposed fills in excess of two feet above existing grade at any location in the outer one hundred feet of the developing site adjacent to residentially zoned property require the procedure outlined in Development Standard 11-01.8.1. This process must be complete prior to Grading Plan approval. 7. All proposed easements must be shown in a surveyable manner on the Final Plat. The next submittal must address the following items: TENTATIVE PLAT 1. Per the Transportation Access Management Guidelines (TAMG) for an ingress/egress to a local street 18' curb returns are required. Indicate 18' curb returns for the ingress/egresses to 4th Street. TMAG was adopted on March 17, 2003 by Mayor and Council. The above comment is from the first review. The response to the above comment was a modified driveway apron has been proposed and a DSMR may be required. This office wanted to communicate that a DSMR will not be required based on DS 3-01.4.3.B. Driveway is acceptable when the ADT of a "driveway," is less than 100. 2. It was requested with the 1st set of comments to clarify the height of the wall indicated in keynote 17. The keynote indicates specific heights on the north side and the south side, with retaining section to remain. It is not clear where the north and south sides are located. North and south side of common area A? North and south side of the project boundary? Keynote 17 is only provided within common area A. The leader points to the north, west and east sides of common area A. Please clarify keynote 17 on the plan view and in the response letter. Revise appropriately. DS 2-03.2.3.H. 3. Please indicate in the title block of the tentative plat the proposed common area "A" by letter designation and use. DS 2-03.2.4.C 4. It appears there are telephone poles located within the alley behind the existing wall. The minimum width for solid waste vehicle access is 20' for an alley. The location of the telephone phone poles reduce the required access of 20'. Call out the location of the telephone poles on the plan and provide verification on the plan view the alley has 20' of clear access for the solid waste vehicle. Sec. 6-01.2.1.B.1.C. 5. When garbage can enclosures and bins are used for centralized collection (the alley) a twenty-five (25) foot minimum height clearance, free of any overhead obstructions (wires, branches, etc.), shall be provided above the collection site. Provide verification on the plan demonstrating compliance with this standard. A general note will be sufficient, however this office requests that field visit is in order, for verification of this standard. |
| 09/25/2006 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | September 25, 2006 ACTIVITY NUMBER: S05-244 PROJECT NAME: Fourth Street RCP PROJECT ADDRESS: 3164 E 4th St PROJECT REVIEWER: Jose E. Ortiz PE, Traffic Engineer Resubmittal Required: Traffic Engineering does not recommend approval of the Tentative Plat; therefore a revised Tentative Plat is required for re-submittal. The following items must be revised or added to the plat. 1. The tentative plat is approvable, but the required DSMR needs to be approved prior to final approval of the tentative plat. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x305 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 09/25/2006 | 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: S05-244 FOURTH STREET RCP/REVISED TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: September 25, 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.) DELETE E FROM E. 4TH STREET ON PG. 2 PER LETTER DATED 01-03-06. ***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.*** jg |
| 09/25/2006 | 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 S05-244 Fourth Street RCP 09/25/06 (XXXX) Tentative Plat () Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment (XXXX) Other – Elevations, Floor Plans & Colors CROSS REFERENCE: NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Alvernon Broadway Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 9/25/06 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: 1/12/06 () Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other – REVIEWER: D. Estolano 791-4505 DATE: 9/22/06 |
| 09/26/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES September 26, 2006 Steven Gregor Gregor & Grenier Engineering, Inc. 5232 East Pima Street, Suite A Tucson, Arizona 85712 Subject: S05-244 Fourth Street RCP Tentative Plat Dear Steven: Your submittal of August 25, 2006 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 5 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (Traffic, Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plans (Engineering, Landscape, Zoning, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO Plans (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (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: 319-1181 |