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 - S06-031
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/19/2006 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/03/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) This project is subject to the WASH Ordinance. An application per TCC 23-51 and plan approval is required prior to tentative plat approval. Incorporate any mitigation requirements with the landscape plans. 2) Replacement is required for any disturbance of riparian habitat within regulatory floodplain areas (including the Pantano Wash). If applicable submit plant/habitat inventories and mitigation plans. Incorporate any mitigation requirements with the landscape plans. 3) Landscaping proposed in public right of way areas must be approved by the City Engineer. Provide verification in writing of any approvals received. The landscaping must comply with the City Engineer's requirements on construction, irrigation, location, and plant type. (Ord. No. 9392, §1, 5/22/00) |
| 05/05/2006 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | May 4, 2006 TO: Ryan Stucki, P.E. Stantec Consulting 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: Sierra Morado, Unit 4, Lots 1118-1530 and Common Areas A-C Tentative Plat – 2nd Submittal S06-031 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. Mr. Mike Gritzuk, Director of the Pima County Wastewater Management Department, has recently sent out two policy memos regarding the use of private sewers within residential subdivisions. These memos are attached for your convenience. This submittal of the tentative has been transmitted to the PCWMD Development Services Section for guidance on how those memos would be applied to this project. Mr. Bob Decker, manager of this section, has requested that you set up an appointment to meet with him and Mr. Tim Rowe of his staff regarding how to sewer this project. Mr. Decker can be reached at 740-6625. Following this meeting, Mr. Decker or Mr. Rowe will provide you with additional written comments. Please do not submit the 3rd submittal on this project until you have met with Bob Decker and Time Rowe, and you have addressed their sewer design comments. 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 3rd submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $156.00 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 |
| 05/11/2006 | 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 S06-031 Sierra Morado Unit 4 05/10/06 () Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment () Other (NPPO) CROSS REFERENCE: PAD-12 Civano Master PAD NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Houghton Area Master Plan, South Pantano Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: N/A COMMENTS DUE BY: May 17, 2006 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: JBeall 791-4505 DATE: May 10, 2006 Per Figure 15 of the Master PAD a pedestrian trail is proposed along the eastern portion of the Civano Wash adjacent to the subdivision and along the northern portion of the PAD south of Nebraska Road. Another connection is to be made from the northwestern portion of the subdivision connecting to a path in Neighborhood 1. This trail is to be a minimum of four (4) foot wide, either paved or natural surface. A multi-use trail that is to be a minimum of eight (8) feet in width constructed of asphalt or natural surface is required along the eastern portion of the subdivision within the OHE eventually connecting to the Pantano Wash and the pedestrian trail south of Nebraska. These trails are not shown on either the tentative plat or landscape plan and are to join to the pocket parks and connect to the internal paths within the subdivision. Note 6 of the landscape plans talks about siting of trails and that they will be constructed to widths shown on the plans. These trails should be conceptually shown on the plans indicating the required widths from the PAD. Although these trails are shown conceptually, please identify in keynote section for the respective sheets and dimension the trail either in keynote and/or on the Tentative Plat. The proposed sidewalk on the north side of Drexel does not show a defining end. It should extend to Melpomene. Sidewalk not called out by keynote. Please include a keynote which identifies the sidewalk and calls out the dimension – see sheet 4 of the Tentative Plat. Also trees should continue along Drexel to Melpomene along the sidewalk (see sheet L-5 of Landscape Plan). Please have Landscape Plan show trees along Drexel to Melpomene on sheet L-5 of the Landscape Plan. On sheet 6 of 16 Street G’s alignment and cross-section should match that used by the adjacent proposed subdivision in Block 2. Please verify that the connection will be seamless. Note on Tentative Plat as a keynote that the continuation of G Street will align and match the cross-section used by the adjacent proposed subdivision in Block 2. Please verify that the street cross-section being called out for Street I is correct. Cross-section 6/3 allows for a right-of-way width of forty-four (44) feet, but sheet 10 shows a width of fifty (50) feet that is consistent with cross-section 7/3. Could not detect correction as sheet still showed fifty (50) feet. Please correct. Please indicate if there will be additional landscaping and trail placement within the OHE. The PAD allows for this area’s vegetation to be enhanced and be used for low impact active/passive recreation such as pedestrian trails and bird watching. Please include note #13 on the cover sheet of the Landscape Plan on the General Notes section of the Tentative Plat. An ADA accessible path must be provided to recreation facilities provided within the detention basin. Please verify that slopes used allow access to amenities. Please identify in Keynotes and label where accessible routes into detention basin has been provided. Pedestrian paths should be provided in open areas such as those between lots 1215 and 1216 to connecting sidewalks to paths in arbor walks providing a fully connected pedestrian network that reflects the requirements of the PAD and IMPACT System. Please call out pedestrian paths in Keynotes and label on Tentative Plat and Landscape Plan. |
| 05/22/2006 | 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: S06-031 SIERRA MORADO UNIT 4/REVISED TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: 5/19/06 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: Civano Villas (1-29) Bk/Pg 51096 is pointing to the incorrect location. Please correct. 2.) Include what portion of Civano Master Block Plat was resubdivided on all Title Blocks. es |
| 05/23/2006 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Denied | S06-031 Sierra Morado Unit 4: Tentative Plat Review - Concerning the abandonment of State Land Lease 3457 and Development Standard 7-01.4.0; It is requested the key notes in the Final Plat to show "State Lease R/W Easement recorded in Dkt. ____ Pg. ____ was abandoned by Final Plat" or words to this effect. The purpose of this request is in reference to Sierra Morado Final Plats - S05-088 & S05-208 and standardize the procedure to abandon St. Land Lease 3457. |
| 05/23/2006 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 05/23/2006 SUBJECT: Sierra Morado Unit 4 S06-031, T15S, R15E, SECTION 01 RECEIVED: Tentative Plat, Landscape Plan and Drainage Report on April 19, 2006 The subject project has been reviewed. We offer the following comments: Drainage Report: 1. Submit a copy of the Civano Master Drainage Report. 2. Include all offsite watersheds hydrological data sheets (OS-1A and OS-1B are not included). 3. There is still a discrepancy between the runoff data on the Offsite Conditions Drainage Exhibit (Figure 2) and Table 1 on page 3 for OS-1A and OS-1B. Revise. 4. The basin near lot 1527 has not been properly called out on Figure 4. Revise. 5. It appears that "Basin 4 East" was inadvertently labeled there are 2 "Basin 3 East". Revise as needed. 6. Clearly state in the report and show on Figure 4 the contributing watersheds to all proposed basins. 7. The locations of the "Northeast Channel", the "West Channel" and the "Civano" Wash", where the HEC RAS analyses were conducted are not clear on the drainage exhibits. Clarify the locations on the drainage exhibits and show the HEC RAS cross sections. 8. The information in Table 5 could not be verified because the concentration points provided in the Table do not appear to be shown on the Drainage Exhibits. Revise. 9. It is not clear how offsite runoff 1 West concentrating at Points "A" and "B" affect this project. 10. Verify that this development will have all weather access, from Houghton, to the subject development, by addressing the proposed construction time schedules for all proposed box culverts for Drexel road that will serve this development. 11. Addressing the impact of the erosion hazard setback, on some of the proposed improvements and lots, on the Grading Plan is acceptable, however ensure that it is feasible to provide the required protection in order not encounter unpleasant surprises during the preparation of the grading plan. 12. The 10-year and 100-year floodplain limits are not clearly depicted on the drainage exhibits. It appears that the lines used to delineate the floodplains do not match the lines shown in the Legend. 13. Show and call out clearly the 50'study area setback for Civano Wash in order to demonstrate that this development does not encroach on the study area. 14. Quantify the amount of runoff in the Civano Wash tributary that runs diagonally across the northeast corner. It is not clear how this comment was properly addressed in the hydrologic data sheets. 15. The pipe calculations for Basin 4 East could not be reviewed since the drainage exhibits do not show the location of the said basin. 16. Provide the sidewalk scupper, curb opening and erosion control structures calculations in the Drainage Report. 17. Provide in the Tentative Plat Drainage Report the depths of the proposed retaining walls based on the scour depth of the adjacent washes. 18. Address with the Tentative Plat submittal the Detention/Retention Basins required Maintenance Access Ramps. 19. Provide in the Drainage Report the proposed drainage structures maintenance checklist. 20. Address in the Tentative Plat Drainage Report and show on the onsite drainage exhibit the proposed retention basin side slopes, 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. Tentative Plat/Development Plan: 1. Revise the basis of bearing to show it between two found monuments. Additionally, it is not clear why the Section Line (Section 12) along Drexel was not used as a basis of bearing (D.S. 2-03.2.3.A.). 2. Draw, on the Tentative Plat, locations and indicate types of off-site runoff acceptance points and /or on-site runoff discharge points including the runoff amounts (D.S. 2-03.2.4.L.7.). 3. The State Lease R.O.W. abandonment shall be completed before the Tentative Plat can be approved. 4. The Geotechnical Report shall recommend a minimum building setback from the detention/retention basins (i.e. prolonged periods of ponding water) and the Tentative Plat shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement (D.S. 2-03.2.4.M.). Additionally, the Geotechnical Report shall recommend the required setback from existing/proposed slopes whether they are created by a cut or a fill. Please be advised that detention/retention basin setbacks are different from slope setbacks. 5. The "existing 50' sewer easement", called out within lot 1501, on Sheet 12 of 16, does not have the recordation information. Additionally, it is not clear if it is still proposed for abandonment by the Final Plat. 6. The proposed detention/retention basins maintenance access ramps shall be provided with removable barriers to prevent inadvertent vehicular access. 7. Verification of 404 permit compliance is required for the Tentative Plat approval. 8. Revise the Tentative Plat according to the Drainage Report revisions. Landscape Plan: The Landscape Plan is acceptable pertaining to Engineering and Floodplain Review. 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. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Tentative Plat and Drainage Report. |
| 05/26/2006 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Traffic Engineering REJECTS this TP: 1. Still need to add curb access ramps at the intersection of Drexel/"A." D. Dale Kelch, PE Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov |
| 05/30/2006 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | DATE: May 26, 2006 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov SUBJECT: S06-031 Sierra Morado Unit 4: Tentative Plat Review(4-19-06) Denied. Trail requirements have not been met. See comments on previous submittal. Please contact Parks and Recreation to schedule a meeting to discuss the plans. |
| 06/10/2006 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner For Dan Castro PROJECT: S06-031 Sierra Morado, Unit Four, Lots 1118-1530 and Common Areas "A", "B", and "C" Tentative Plat TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 10, 2006 DUE DATE: May 17, 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. 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 February 7, 2007. 2. The previous comment was not addressed in full. It is acknowledged that this unit is to be developed as a phased development. Please add the requested information for the each phase. The following should be listed, density, visitor parking, setbacks, site areas required and proposed, building heights, etc. Please add the requested data. (Previous comments left as reference for the zoning reviewer.) If the project is phased, each phase must comply with Code requirements as a separate entity. Provide calculations and setback dimensions indicating how this is achieved. Show phase lines on the drawing. (D.S. 2-03.2.4.E) 3. Include with the next tentative plat submittal package, a copy of the W.A.S.H. overlay approval memo. List on the tentative plat cover sheet, the case number, date of approval, and if applicable conditions of approval. (Previous comment left as reference for the zoning reviewer.) A separate application review is required for the WASH ordinance. 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 For additional information on the process please contact Patricia Gehlen at 791-5608 ext. 1179. 4. The connections have been depicted as requested. Please revise or add the note for truncated domes to detail 8, "Parking Area Typical Detail". The truncated domes are required at the access aisle or transition area from the sidewalk onto the vehicular use areas. Revise the detail as required. (Previous comment left as reference for the zoning reviewer.) Common parking spaces should provide a pedestrian connection that is ADA compliant to the internal arbor walks to allow people exiting their vehicles to walk up to the front of the residences and not have to walk down the alleys. 5. All easements that are to be abandoned by separate documents must be abandoned prior to approval of the tentative plat. If the documents that abandoned the existing easements and the recordation information is provided the tentative plat may be approved on the next submittal by zoning, pending all zoning comments are addressed. (Previous comment left as reference for the zoning reviewer.) All existing and proposed easements on this site must be shown on the plat, including the type, width, recordation information, and whether they will be private or public. If an easement is to be recorded or abandoned by final plat, please so state. (D.S. 2-03.2.4.J) 6. Add a keynote for the required concrete sidewalk for the lots mentioned in the previous comment and include the width of the sidewalk in the keynote. (Previous comment left as reference for the zoning reviewer.) An ADA compliant pedestrian connection must be made for lots 1150-1161 to Street I and Street H. Residents are not to be directed to walk within the private streets since these were not designed for pedestrian traffic. The parking areas should also provide a pedestrian connection to this path. 7. Add a keynote for the sidewalk or accessible path provided in the common areas such as the detention basins that are to be used of r access to recreation facilities. Also include in the keynote the slope of the path to ensure compliance with ADA standards. (Previous comment left as reference for the zoning reviewer.) An ADA accessible path must be provided to recreation facilities provided within the detention basin. Please verify that slopes used allow access to amenities. Pedestrian paths should be provided in open areas such as those between lots 1215 and 1216 to connecting sidewalks to paths in arbor walks providing a fully connected pedestrian network that reflects the requirements of the PAD and IMPACT System. 8. Please review all common areas labeled as Common Area "A" and ensure that all lot lines adjacent to these areas are labeled with distance and draw the cross section symbol on all common areas labeled as "A". 9. Please label the area between lot 1442 and the cul-de-sac. The area is has not been labeled with a lot number or common area designation. 10. It is not very clear on the plan how the pedestrian access is to be provided to a number of the homes. For example lots 1324 through 1328 have not been provided with pedestrian circulation facilities from the street sidewalk. The vehicular access (street) to the units are not designed with sidewalks and the common area B is indicated on the plan as a Grading, Drainage and Open Space common area, but a sidewalk has not been depicted to provide the access to the building. They're several areas on this plat with this situation. Please clarify if this is a concept approved by the PAD document or demonstrate how access is to be provided. Review the plan and revise the affected areas. Additional comments may be forthcoming on this issue or based on the revised tentative plat drawing and response comments. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. DGR C:\planning\cdrc\tentativeplat\S06031tp2forDC.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised tentative plat and additional requested documents. |
| 06/12/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES June 12, 2006 Ryan R. Stucki, PE Stantec Consulting 201 North Bonita Tucson, AZ 85745 Subject: S06-031 Sierra Morado Unit 4 Tentative Plat Dear Ryan: Your submittal of April 19, 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 10 Copies Revised Final Plat (Landscape, Community Planning, Addressing, Wastewater, Real Estate, Zoning, Engineering, Traffic, Parks and Recreation, DSD) 6 Copies Revised Landscape and Irrigation Plans (Parks and Recreation, Landscape, Community Planning, Zoning Engineering, DSD), 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608 ext. 1179. Sincerely, Patricia Y. Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 750-7470 |