Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Plan Review Detail

Plan Number: S06-087
Parcel: Unknown

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW

Plan Number - S06-087
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
04/17/2006 FERNE RODRIGUEZ START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
04/21/2006 TOM MARTINEZ OTHER AGENCIES AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION Approved NO COMMENT
S06-087
CORRALES ENGINEERING
IRVINGTON WEST ESTATES

--------------------------------------------------------


Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are intended for use by the person(s)/entity(ies) named above and may contain confidential/privileged information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by e-mail, and delete or destroy all copies plus attachments.
04/28/2006 JCLARK3 ENV SVCS REVIEW Approved * No known landfill with in 1000 feet of this development.
* All lots have curb side frontage. Approved for APC curb side service.
05/05/2006 FRODRIG2 PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Denied May 4, 2006

TO: Steven Corrales, Jr., P.E.
Steve Corrales Engineering Corp.

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: Irvington West Estates, Lots 1-20 and Common Areas A-L
Tentative Plat – 1st Submittal
S06-087

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.


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.

ALL SHEETS. Add the project number, S06-087, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than any cross-reference numbers.

Based on the evaluation of the proposed sewer design, this project qualifies for Standard sewer connection fee rates. Should this conclusion change after the next submittal, it will be indicated in the next review letter.

Use the appropriate reference manuals and Pima County Development Services Department’s tentative plat wastewater requirements to show and design the sewer network for this project per the current standards. Once this requirement has been fulfilled, a technical review will take place.

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 $250.00 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
05/10/2006 LIZA CASTILLO UTILITIES TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER Denied SUBJECT: IRVINGTON WEST ESTATES
Lots 1-120
S06-087

Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has reviewed the tentative plat
dated April 17, 2006. 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. If an existing
easement is not found add a dimensioned easement by prescription and a
general note that the facilities will be abandoned. All relocation
costs will be billable to the developer. Please direct questions
concerning easement's) to Liza Castillo, Right-of-Way Agent in our Land
Department at 520-917-8745.

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. Should you have any questions, please contact the
Designer assigned to this project, Marcus Hayes at (520) 918-8705.


Sincerely,



Kathy Clark
Scheduling Coordinator
Design/Build
kc
enclosures
cc: P. Gehlen, City of Tucson
Schomac Group, Inc.
M. Hayes, Tucson Electric Power Company


Kathy Clark
Scheduling Coordinator
Design/Build
520-918-8271
kclark@tep.com
05/12/2006 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1) Boundaries of all set aside areas shall be clearly delineated on the subdivision plat. LUC 3.8.6.4.D.

2) Submit an Environmental Resource Report. LUC 3.8.6.4.A

3) Revise the portion of note 6 on sheet 1 of the tentative plat that indicates an ERR will not be required.

4) Clearly indicate all common areas and blocks on the tentative plat. DS 2-04.2.4.C

5) Include plat boundary line information and show all of the area therein. DS 2-05.2.3.B

6) All lettering and dimensions shall be the equivalent of twelve (0.12") point or greater in size (see D3, D4). DS 2-05.2.1.A common area

7) Identify all common areas and areas to be left undisturbed in the ERR/NPP exhibit. DS 1-07III.II.A.1.h

8) Identify each block within the subdivision boundary and include the approximate square footage of each on the plat. DS 2-05.2.4.B

9) Revise the calculations for natural open space on sheet 1 of the tentative plat and the related plans to correspond.
DS 2-15.3.5

10) Revise sheet 5 of the plat to list the correct area for common area E in all notations.

11) The project may be subject to HDZ and ERZ requirements. Separate applications and approvals are required for these reviews. Additional information and requirements may be applicable pending these reviews.

12) The set aside area may not include the 100' electric easement or other existing or proposed easements in the area calculation. A minimum of thirty (30) percent of the site shall be set aside in perpetuity as NUOS. LUC 3.8.6.4.B

13) Per LUC 3.8.6.4.B The set aside area shall consist of the area(s) with the highest resource value as determined by the ERR. The native plant preservation plan indicates that the wash supports the greatest density and diversity of vegetation, while the set-aside is comprised primarily of upland vegetation on a hillside adjacent to Pima County Open Space that is not dicussed in detail. Revise as necessary.

14) The SCZ requirements include a provision that requires drainage-ways be preserved in a natural state. The drainage design may be affected. The bleed pipe that crosses the scenic route buffer area is subject to approval by the City Engineer. LUC 2.8.2.6.C


RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED. AN ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE REPORT IS REQUIRED FOR NPP.
05/16/2006 ROGER HOWLETT COT NON-DSD COMMUNITY PLANNING Denied Please add the following notes to the plan.

1. Additional fire hydrants shall be provided by the developer as required by the fire code in accordance with C.O.T. Standards.

2. An approved water supply capable of supplying the projected fire flow for fire protection shall be provided and extended to serve directly any and all subdivided properties.

3. "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" signs shall be provided as needed to provide 20' clear unobstructed width along all fir apparatus access roadways in accordance with the fire code.

4. On street parking shall be prohibited on one side and signs shall be installed so indicating.
05/16/2006 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
Kristen Zimmerman, Data Services
177 N. Church Avenue, Suite 405
Tucson, AZ 85701
Phone: (520) 792-1093
Fax: (520) 620-6981
www.pagnet.org
S06-087 Irvington West Estates 5/11/2006
This analysis is designed to allow jurisdictional planning departments to further
assess the traffic impacts of planned residential and commerical developments
that PAG expects will generate more than 500 average daily trips. Nearby
roadway data include planned improvements, existing and future volumes and
capacities, and bus and bike accessibility.
1. Nearest Existing or Planned Major Street
2. Is a street improvement planned as part of PAG's 5-Year Transportation
Improvement Program?
See http://www.pagnet.org/tip/ for more information on the TIP planning process.
Planned Action:
STREET IDENTIFICATION
3. Existing (2005) Daily Traffic Volume (reported in ADT)
See http://www.pagnet.org/TPD/DataTrends/ for more information.
4. Existing (2005) Daily Capacity (reported in ADT)
5. Existing (2005) Number of Lanes
8. Future (2030) 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, if applicable.
Year Year
Planned Action:
VOLUME/CAPACITY/TRAFFIC GENERATION CONSIDERATIONS
6. Future (2030) Daily Volume (reported in ADT)
(Assuming planned transportation improvement projects are completed.)
7. Future (2030) Daily Capacity (reported in ADT)
Mission (Irvington to Ajo)
No 0
17,351
44,320
4
44,320
25,622
4
1,148
Rte 23, 30 min, 0 miles
Bike route with striped shoulder
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9. Average daily traffic (ADT) forecasted as a result of the proposed development
05/16/2006 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

S06-087 Irvington West Estates 05/16/06

(XXXX) Tentative Plat
() Development Plan
(XXXX) Landscape Plan
() Revised Plan/Plat
() Board of Adjustment
(XXXX) Other - NPPO

CROSS REFERENCE: C15-05-04

NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: General Plan

GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Scenic Route

COMMENTS DUE BY: 5-15-06

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
() No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on:
(XXXX) Resubmittal Required:
(XXXX) Tentative Plat
() Development Plan
(XXXX) Landscape Plan
(XXXX) Other – Elevations & Color Rendings

REVIEWER: D. Estolano 791-4505 DATE: 5/08/06
URBAN PLANNING AND DESIGN
S06-087 Irvington West Estates
May 8, 2006


The Irvington West Estates appear to be proposed as a Residential Cluster Project (RCP), and therefore must comply with section 3.6.1 of the Land Use Code, specifically section 3.6.1.4 of the general development criteria. In this instance, the RCP requires compliance with policies of the General Plan, and the Design Guidelines Manual. The Plans require community amenities; such as but not limited to; streetscapes with pedestrian oasis, and common area(s) of appropriate land size(s) to sustain residential amenities for all.

This project is being designed to meet the requirements of residential cluster option RCP-3, which allows heights to a maximum of 25 feet. Please correct note #8 under the General Notes Section of the Tentative Plat to read: “Maximum height is 25 feet.”

Please list all of the conditions to be included original City zoning ordinance to the “General Notes Section” of the Tentative Plat.

3. The City of Tucson’s General Plan and the Design Guidelines Manual address the importance of development that uses colors of the natural environment. The Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone states that structures visible from the scenic route are to use colors which are predominant within the surrounding landscape, such as desert and earth tones. Desert and earth tones may include a variety of blended shades such as blues, yellows, oranges, greens, purples and reds. Applying a variety of these colors to this RCP would be consistent with the variety of colors that exist in the surrounding the area. Please visit the Urban Planning and Design’s website link to view The Sonoran Desert Color Palette for Building Exteriors”: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/planning/sonorandesertcolors.pdf. Please provide a color palette to demonstrate how this requirement will be incorporated. Also, please make a note on the Tentative Plat that no two homes with the same façade or color scheme shall be placed adjacent to one another.

4. The Design Guidelines Manual states that side and rear building facades should be built with attention to architectural character and detail comparable to the front façade, particularly if rear and side facades are visible from streets or adjacent properties. Enhancement can include design treatments such a pop outs, color variation, etc. Please provide elevations to demonstrate how this requirement will be met.

The Plans call for innovative site design to include design elements of usable open space and active/passive recreational space and that those pedestrian facilities be accessible to the handicapped. In its simplest form, a detention basin should be much more than an engineering facility designed to control stormwater. There exists an opportunity for a basin to function as an amenity or focal point within the community, especially if it is landscaped as an oasis in an otherwise desert environs; thereby, serving a dual purpose. Amenities can include, but are not limited to: a table, an outdoor grill, and/or shaded sitting area(s) [An active/passive adult recreational facility, can include a tot lot with appropriate tot equipment and ground material]. The slopes surrounding the basin should be adjusted to provide handicap accessibility to the amenities by way of an all-weather ADA compliant path that connects to the proposed sidewalks within the subdivision. Please demonstrate on the landscape plan how this requirement will be met.

Any proposed masonry screen wall around the perimeter of the subdivision, or within the development shall be constructed of, or painted with, graffiti-resistant materials. These screen walls shall incorporate one of the following decorative materials: tile, stone, brick, textured brick/block, a coarse-textured material such as stucco or plaster, or a combination of the above materials. Please add this to the General Notes section and include a typical how this requirement will be met.

Please add case number S06-087 to the Tentative Plat and the Landscape Plan.
05/16/2006 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: Gary Ault, Mapping Supervisor
Pima County Assessor’s Office
Mapping Department

DATE: May 15, 2006


RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat
S06-087 Irvington West Estates T141334 (119-41)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

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.
Add the section, township and range to the title block on each sheet.
Add the bearings for the lot lines, the dimensions and bearings for the street centerline.
Add the complete curve data.
Remove shading.
Label the basins on each sheet, as to what common area they are.
The perimeter line must be solid and the heaviest line on the plat.
Add the tie from a section corner to a point on the subdivision boundary, with bearing and dimension.
Add the names of the adjacent subdivisions, label areas that are unsubdivided.
If there are any questions, please contact Susan King at 740-4391.

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.



Susan King
05/16/2006 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: S06-087 IRVINGTON WEST ESTATES/TENTATIVE PLAT
DATE: 5/15/06



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:

Correct Bk. 23, Pg. 27 to Pg. 97 on Location Map.

Label adjacent sheet numbers on all sheets.

What address is being used by the existing home?




es
05/26/2006 DALE KELCH COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Denied Please add the following notes to the plan.

1. Additional fire hydrants shall be provided by the developer as required by the fire code in accordance with C.O.T. Standards.

2. An approved water supply capable of supplying the projected fire flow for fire protection shall be provided and extended to serve directly any and all subdivided properties.

3. "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" signs shall be provided as needed to provide 20' clear unobstructed width along all fir apparatus access roadways in accordance with the fire code.

4. On street parking shall be prohibited on one side and signs shall be installed so indicating.
05/26/2006 DALE KELCH COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Denied Traffic Engineering REJECTS this TP:

1. List the name, ROW width, recordation data, type and dimensioned with of paving, curbs, curb cuts and sidewalks. (DS 2-03.2.3.D) While the ROW is shown, it is not labeled as to whether it is existing or future or both. If the existing and future ROWs are coincident, label it as both existing and future. There is no recordation data for either Mission or Ohio.

2. Show and label as to size (ie 20x110) both existing and future SVTs (DS 2-03.2.4.M). If the existing and future SVTs are coincident, label it as both existing and future. the only SVTs depicted are for intersections at local streets. The SVTs at the intersections with Mission will not be the size depicted in the detail provided.

D. Dale Kelch, PE
Senior Engineering Associate
Traffic Engineering Division
(520)791-4259x305
(520)791-5526 (fax)
dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov
05/26/2006 GLENN HICKS COT NON-DSD PARKS & RECREATION Approved Please add the following notes to the plan.

1. Additional fire hydrants shall be provided by the developer as required by the fire code in accordance with C.O.T. Standards.

2. An approved water supply capable of supplying the projected fire flow for fire protection shall be provided and extended to serve directly any and all subdivided properties.

3. "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" signs shall be provided as needed to provide 20' clear unobstructed width along all fir apparatus access roadways in accordance with the fire code.

4. On street parking shall be prohibited on one side and signs shall be installed so indicating.
05/26/2006 GLENN HICKS COT NON-DSD PARKS & RECREATION Approved DATE: May 26, 2006

TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services

FROM: Glenn Hicks
Parks and Recreation
791-4873 ext. 215
Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov

CC:


SUBJECT: S06-087 Irvington West Estates: tentative Plat Review(4-18-06)

Staff has no comments.
06/04/2006 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Denied CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office
FROM: David Rivera
Principal Planner

PROJECT: S06-087
Irvington West Estates, Lots 1-120 and Common Areas "A" through "L"
Tentative Plat for and RCP Development

TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 4, 2006

DUE DATE: May 15, 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 April 17, 2007.

2. It appears that some of the text height does not meet the minimum text height of 12 point (.12). Please adjust as required all text that does not meet the minimum height.
DS 2-03.2.1.C

3. Label the street name "Irvington Place" on the location map. Also draw and Label the COT/PC jurisdiction limits.
DS 2-03.2.1.D.2

4. Add to the legend, the linework used for the individual lot lines, buildable area lines, Floodplain lines, and protected peak boundary line . Clarify if the line work used for the subdivision boundary is the same as property line. If so please revise the property line designation to subdivision boundary.
DS 2-03.2.1.J

5. Add to the Owner/Developer text block a contact name with the Shomac Group Inc.
DS 2-03.2.2.A

6. As noted in comment 2 all text height must be a minimum of 12 point. Please adjust the text height used in the consultant's text block and the title block, which does not meet the minimum requirement.
DS 2-03.2.2.A.2

7. This project has been assigned the subdivision case number S06-087. Please list the case number in the lower right corner of all plan sheets including the landscape and NPPO sheets.
DS 2-03.2.2.B.1

8. It is acknowledged that this is a portion of land that has been annexed by the City of Tucson within the past six months. It is also understood that a zoning hearing may be pending to assign a COT zoning classification to the TR zoned portions of the site. Once the decision has been made as to the new zoning classification, please revise General note one accordingly.
DS 2-03.2.2.B.2

9. If applicable, add the following note "Proposed zoning is ____." List the applicable rezoning file number and conditions of approval, if available.
DS 2-03.2.2.B.3

10. Per the plan and general note 2, block numbers are proposed. Please list the block numbers in the title block and the under the title of sheet one. The labels for the Block numbers have not been labeled correctly on the tentative plat sheets. Please revise as required.
DS 2-03.2.2.B.4

11. Revise general note 3 to the following, "Proposed use is "Detached Single Family Using the RCP-3 development designator, Subject to LUC section 3.6.1"
DS 2-03.2.2.B.5

12. Add the following note only if it applies to this project. Add a note identifying by case number any zoning variances or modifications that are applicable to the project, such as a Board of Adjustment variance, a Lot Development Option (LDO) modification, Project Design Option (PDO) modification, or Development Standard Modification Request (DSMR) together with the date and conditions of approval or, if the review has not been completed, a statement that it is in process.
DS 2-03.2.2.B.6

13. Add the following Land use code sections to general note 6, for HDZ add LUC section 2.8.1, for SCZ add LUC section 2.8.2 and for ERZ add LUC section 2.8.6. Add the following to general note 7, LUC section 3.6.1. Also add a note that states that this development has been designed to meet the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone, LUC section 2.8.3.
DS 2-03.2.2.B.7

14. If applicable to this project or annexation area add the following note. If the WASH ordinance is applicable, add a note referencing all lots impacted, and state that the plat is designed to comply with the regulation.
DS 2-03.2.2.C.3

15. The following plat boundary line information will be provided: the bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearings noted or shown; distances in feet and hundredths or other functional reference system. These will be delineated with solid lines. Add the requested information as requested.
DS 2-03.2.3.B

16. If applicable draw, dimension and label the purpose and recordation of all existing easements. If easements are to be abandoned, please label state so and label if by separate instrument and label the recordation information.
DS 2-03.2.3.C

17. The following information regarding the Mission Road existing public right-of-way will be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. Add the items that have not been labeled or dimensioned.
DS 2-03.2.3.D

18. Please delineate clearly the 300-foot setback from the protected peaks. Draw and label the ridge and dimension the 300-foot setback.
DS 2-03.2.3.F.3

19. Add the lot dimensions for lots 33 and 97. Two lot dimensions are missing one on each lot. Please review the plan and add the missing dimensions. Also the lot pins (property corners) or symbol used is not legible. Please revise to ensure clarity.
DS 2-03.2.4.B

20. Label all common areas appropriately to match the Common Area Designations listed in the title block and add the square footages of each. (All common areas should be clearly delineated and labeled)
DS 2-03.2.4.C

21. Please delineate the zoning boundary and label. Add to the legend the line work used for the zoning boundaries. The TR zoning or the COT equivalent has not been clearly delineated on the plan. Please add the requested information as requested.
DS 2-03.2.4.D

22. Access ramps have not been provided anywhere in this subdivision. Please add access ramps at corners and key locations where the pedestrian may be likely to use as a crosswalk location. All access ramps must be constructed with truncated domes and meet the maximum slope requirements for handicapped accessibility. Add to sheet two the details for the access ramps labeled with the slope requirements and truncated domes.
Label the streets as public.
DS 2-03.2.4.F

23. Identify and provide dimensions, approximate areas in square footage, and purposes of any lots proposed for dedication (such as open spaces, recreation areas, or natural areas) or for reservation for a public use (such as public parks, water facilities, or school sites).
DS 2-03.2.4.I

24. This site is subject to COT overlay requirements. A separate submittal has been received but not yet reviewed by zoning. Expect additional comments related to the overlay criteria and make revisions to the tentative plat as required.

The following comments are related to the RCP requirements that must be addressed.

1. Add the dimension between the lots and the subdivision boundary for the lots 27 through 33 and lot 39 along the north line and the dimension between the lots along the south line and portion of the east line 104, 105, 115 and 116 through 120.
DS 2-10.3.1.A

2. The following items related to the development criteria for this development must be revised or addressed.

a. RCP-3 is not a zoning classification as listed in the site coverage calculations. RCP-3 is a development designator. Please revise all notes that refer to RCP-3 as zoning.

b. The note(s) that refers to the allowed building height must be revised to state that 25 feet is the maximum allowed per development designator RCP-3. Per the SCZ criteria all residential units within the 400-foot buffer zone cannot exceed 24 feet to the highest point of any part of the building as measured from design grade within the building footprint. Revise all notes that refer to 30-foot height allowed. Revise the detail on sheet two that depicts the allowed height. The detail is incorrect.

c. Add a note listing the lots that will be constructed with barrier free access. Also add a detail drawing that demonstrates compliance with this requirement.

d. Please ensure that detail drawings used for building setbacks are consistent for garage building setbacks.

e. If the project is within an adopted neighborhood or area plan, submit plans showing how the RCP will comply with design requirements of such adopted plans as required in Sec. 3.6.1.4.A.1 of the LUC.

f. On lots of four thousand (4,000) square feet or more, it will be assumed that the lot is of sufficient size to accommodate a dwelling unit; wherefore, on projects with lots of this size, floor plans will not be required. However, on lots of less than four thousand (4,000) square feet, units have to be custom designed to fit onto these smaller and tighter lots, and additional information is needed to verify compliance with RCP requirements. Therefore, on projects that have lots less than four thousand (4,000) square feet in size, submit:

1. Floor plans or drawings of the footprint of each unit, showing exterior dimensions. If only dimensioned building footprints are provided, be certain that locations of second floors (if applicable), front entrances, and motor vehicle parking spaces are noted. The floor plans can be preliminary plans and do not have to be complete construction drawings. Plans can be reviewed in a more timely manner if copies of the building footprints drawn at the same scale as the plat are provided. This allows staff the ability to check which models fit which lots using a light table, instead of performing the tedious lot-by-lot math work.

2. Building elevations of all proposed units with height dimensions. These assist in determining compliance with perimeter yard setbacks and screening of mechanical equipment. The elevations can be preliminary drawings. The model home construction plans will be used to determine exact setbacks and screening requirements at the time of application for building permits.

3. A list indicating which model homes fit which lots. Unless a lot is planned for another use, each lot will be designed so that at least one of the model units fits on the lot in compliance with Code requirements. The list should indicate whether optional covered patios, porches, etc., would still allow the unit to fit on the lot in compliance with requirements.

25. Label all the detail drawings on sheet with a number or letter. It is not clear what detail is used reviewing the plan.

26. Please be aware that additional zoning comments may be forthcoming based on the revised tentative plat drawing or responses to comments.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608.

DGR C:\planning\cdrc\tentativeplat\S06087tp.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan, tentative plat, final plat, CC&R's and additional requested documents.
06/05/2006 JIM EGAN COT NON-DSD FIRE Denied Please add the following notes to the plan.

1. Additional fire hydrants shall be provided by the developer as required by the fire code in accordance with C.O.T. Standards.

2. An approved water supply capable of supplying the projected fire flow for fire protection shall be provided and extended to serve directly any and all subdivided properties.

3. "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" signs shall be provided as needed to provide 20' clear unobstructed width along all fir apparatus access roadways in accordance with the fire code.

4. On street parking shall be prohibited on one side and signs shall be installed so indicating.
06/05/2006 JIM EGAN COT NON-DSD FIRE Denied Please add the following notes to the plan.

1. Additional fire hydrants shall be provided by the developer as required by the fire code in accordance with C.O.T. Standards.

2. An approved water supply capable of supplying the projected fire flow for fire protection shall be provided and extended to serve directly any and all subdivided properties.

3. "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" signs shall be provided as needed to provide 20' clear unobstructed width along all fir apparatus access roadways in accordance with the fire code.

4. On street parking shall be prohibited on one side and signs shall be installed so indicating.
06/19/2006 ELIZABETH EBERBACH ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Coordinator
FOR: Corrales Engineering
SUBJECT: Irvington West Estates Subdivision Tentative Plat submittal Engineering Review
REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach
ACTIVITY NUMBER: S06-087

SUMMARY: The Tentative Plat, Drainage Report, environmental assessment reports, Landscape documents, and title report schedule were received and reviewed for Tentative Plat conformance. Development Services Department Engineering Division has completed the review of the received items and does not recommend approval at this time. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Tentative Plat purposes only.

DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS:
1) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No.2-03.2.4.L: Address the following comments for the Drainage Report:
a) DS Sec.1.5.1: In Drainage Report, address the following street drainage comments:
i) Sidewalk with scuppers are required at street stormwater entrances to basins; provide scupper calculations.
ii) DS Sec.10-02 page 8.06: Table 8.1: For determining capacity of proposed roadways, provide worksheets for roadway capacities to reflect a roadway Manning's coefficient of .020 for the maximum value for asphalt when cars are present, per this section of the standards. (A value of 0.016 will not be accepted.)
b) On Drainage exhibits, address the following comments:
i) Regarding the basins, provide a percolation test result discussion in the drainage report.
ii) Delineate FEMA and calculated floodplain limits in exhibits.
iii) Provide erosion hazard setback calculation and show on planview on exhibits.
c) DS Sec.10-02.1.5.1: Revise drainage improvements maintenance notes on page 16 to remove reference to County. Add maintenance list that specifies maintenance required for any stormdrain systems, culverts, channels, drainage outlets, and other drainage facilities besides basins.

TENTATIVE PLAT COMMENTS:
2) Land Use Code Section (LUC) 2.8.2.2: This project is within the Scenic Corridor Zone where drainageways are to be maintained in their natural state, and slopes no steeper than 3:1(H:V) are acceptable. See overlay comments below. It is imperative that all SCZ and other Overlay comments are addressed prior to resubmittal of the Tentative Plat.
3) LUC Sec. 2.8.2.2: Revise 400 foot SCZ line on Tentative Plat plan view sheets to begin from the project boundary / right-of-way and include the 30-ft SCZ buffer. Also, show 400 foot SCZ line on sheet 6 or other overview map planview of the Tentative Plat.
4) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L: Address the following drainage comments for the Tentative Plat sheets:
a) DS Sec.10-02.1.5.1 & -14.3.4: Clarify locations of basin access; clarify on planview and/or by notation, that 15-ft.wide basin maintenance access ramps with maximum ramp slope of 15% maximum will be provided. Basin access and scupper location typically can not overlap.
b) Label and delineate FEMA floodplain limits on planview.
c) Clarify the following drainage elevation information:
i) Provide elevations on planview sheets:
(1) Provide invert elevations of any pipes from basins.
(2) Provide elevations at all scupper inlets at pavement.
(3) Provide elevations at all stormdrain outlets
ii) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.A: Label and identify a local basis of elevation on plan view and provide datum.
d) On planview, label Q100 entering and exiting the site as well as those flows entering the basins.
e) Due to C and D soils present at the site per drainage diagram, provide bleed pipes to all basins to minimize future standing water issues.
f) On drainage way sections, label freeboard.
5) DS Sec.10-01.4.3: Multi-purpose basins must be provided. Human activity zones within the basins need 8:1(H:V) side slopes at various locations of pedestrian access for emergency exits, and shall not conflict with inlets to the basins. Clarify / label 8:1(H:V) or shallower grades for some of the side slopes in all drainage basin areas.
6) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a, 10-02.14.2.6, DS Sec.2-03.2.4.M: Provide a geotechnical report that provides geotechnical recommendations for maximum slope grades and basin setbacks and other geotechnical considerations. Also, provide proposed, minimum distance between wall footings to edge of slopes, and provide infiltration test results for basins.
7) DS Sec.11-01.14.2&3 & DS Sec.2-03.2.4.M: On planview, label dimension of any minimum setback from demarcation of ponding limits in the basin areas to edge of building footprint or to any pavement structure. This dimension should be at an acceptable distance per geotechnical recommendations.
8) Per D.S. 2-03.2.4.K: For RCP lot grading clarification, the minimum side and rear setbacks, building setbacks to swales shall reflect recommendations per geotechnical report.
9) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.H: All significant conditions on the site, such as major rock outcrops, structures, fences, walls, etc., are to be shown. These elements should be indicated in a different line weight than the proposed improvements. Specifically, identify and label all existing entities including all outcrops, any water wells, all building structures, stockpiles, or dirt roads. Entities to be retained, removed, or relocated shall be noted on the plan. Show the following existing structures:
a) Identify any water wells to be abandoned.
b) Explain whether there is any development impact regarding section 4.5, page 11, and 4.9, page 13 of the GRC ESA report.
c) Show phone line / OHE along north and west boundaries.
d) Some outcrop areas are depicted; label these outcrop areas.
10) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C, 3.1.E: The title report submitted for this project indicates items 5-19 in Schedule B. Some easements have been labeled with width and information; assure all easements including those for any sewer, electric, communications, etc are shown on the tentative plat. It is imperative that all proposed abandoned easements shall be abandoned and the docket and page for each shall be labeled on the Tentative Plat. All existing easements will be drawn on the plat, and recordation information, locations, widths, and purposes shall be included.
a) If the easement is not in use and proposed for abandonment, so indicate. The docket and page for each abandoned easement shall be provided at Final Plat submittal.
b) Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status.
c) Each of the easements listed in the Schedule B of the Title Report shall be shown on the plat planview or listed in the general notes (if a blanket easement).
d) Specifically check and show Schedule B items 5-19 and explain in response letter if the items are not shown on the revised Tentative Plat.
11) DS Sec.2-03.3.1.J: Provide a copy of any rezoning conditions. In response letter, provide status of engineering related rezoning conditions.
12) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.B: Label bearings and distances for project boundary on a planview.
13) Dimension typical cul-de-sac radii on sheet planviews or on a typical detail.
14) Label those streets as public on planview.
15) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.M: Label SVT's on planviews per SVT details.
16) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.G: In compliance with state law, a tentative plat cannot be approved unless there is an assured water supply to the proposed subdivision as certified by the Arizona Department of Water Resources. One of the following notes will be provided on the plat, as applicable.
a) "This subdivision is within the planned water service area of the Tucson Water Department which is designated by the Arizona Department of Water Resources as having an assured water supply."
b) "This subdivision is not within the planned water service area of the Tucson Water Department but is within the service area of (list name of water utility) which is designated by the Arizona Department of Water Resources as having an assured water supply." (If this note applies, a certification letter from the Arizona Department of Water Resources is required at the time of tentative plat submittal.)
17) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.D, 2.4.F: Provide all existing public right-of-ways: the name, widths, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks within 100 feet of the site. Also address the following proposed right-of-way improvements:
a) Provide cross section of Mission Road to clarify MS&R future curb and right-of-way. Clarify centerline and proposed curbs along Mission Road.
b) Sidewalk width along Mission Road shall be labeled 6 feet for the MS&R right-of-way.

SCZ and HDZ OVERLAY COMMENTS:
18) Land Use Code Section (LUC) 2.8.2.2: This project is within the Scenic Corridor Zone where drainageways are to be maintained in their natural state, and slopes no steeper than 3:1(H:V) are acceptable. Natural state includes both vegetative and topographic characteristics of the existing terrain. Thus, grading for drainage improvements must be designed in such a way to maintain the topographic consistency of the area. Discuss in the drainage report how a revised natural grading design will accommodate drainage, and show on the conceptual grading plan for the Tentative Plat how natural grading design for basins and channels will be achieved (see additional comments below). Address the following:
a) LUC Sec.2.8.1.2.C: The drainage needs to be maintained in natural state. Basin 1 location is not accepted and the basin design for basins 1, 3 and 6 will need to be revised.
b) Per LUC Sec.3.7.5.2.E: Exposed cuts or fills within the 400 foot scenic corridor shall be no greater than 3:1(H:V). In SCZ submittal, provide a sheet that shows on plan view, exposed slopes areas within the 400 foot SCZ area that may be affected by this restriction. It shall be clear which areas are restricted by 3:1(H:V) maximum slope requirement. Revise the conceptual grading design on Tentative Plat accordingly. Clarify slope at south side of basin 6.
19) DS Sec.9-04.2.1.G: Submit one sheet with topographic contours and the project boundary line based on an engineering scale for review of HDZ calculations, so that DSD may determine HDZ review applicability and confirm proposed ACS. This sheet shall be a part of either the revised Tentative Plat or revised conceptual grading plan.
20) DS Sec.11-01.9.3: The toe of fill slope shall be made not nearer to the site boundary line than one half of the height of the slope with a minimum of 2 feet. Assure that the Tentative Plat conceptual grading plan reflects conformance with regard to HDZ grading (DS Sec.9-04.3) and grading standards (DS Sec.11-01). Specifically, assure that there is sufficient runout and area within the grading limits to show any interceptor swales, benching, and/or grading setbacks. Show that runout for the slopes provides sufficient area to meet grading requirements. Slopes must conform to DS Sec.9-04.3 & 11-01.
21) Per D.S. 2-03.2.4.K, LUC Sec.2.8.1: Per Hillside Development Zone, development for these projects should utilize construction methods which ensure slope stabilization and minimize soil erosion. The plans show extreme slopes and extensive amounts of runout and disturbance for the 3:1(H:V) slopes between lot 115 and basin 6. In order to provide sufficient runout that allows for SCZ requirement of 3:1(H:V) within the 400' SCZ, and to comply with required slope setback (see comment above), the slope along the south side of basin 6 would need more area to accommodate this basin. There is also the consideration that the shape and layout of the basins throughout this project do not meet the Detention Retention Manual with regards to natural, curvilinear shaped basins. Angles proposed in basin 6 do not seem feasible as the sharp angled slopes at the west two corners would eventually smooth out over time if not during construction and not provide the adequate volume required. Specifically address the following:
a) Redesign basins to provide acceptable basin shape, slope grades, and setbacks.
b) Situate end of cul-de-sac to accommodate for slope setback from edge of pavement structure as well as edge of project boundary.
22) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.B.7: Approval of the Tentative Plat may not be recommended prior to completion and approval of the Overlay processes.
23) Submit revised Tentative Plat, revised conceptual grading plan, revised Drainage Report, a revised bound copy of the geotechnical report, response letter, and any other supporting documentation.

The next submittal should address all the above items. If you have questions or would like to set up a meeting, call me at 791-5550, extension 2204.

Elizabeth Eberbach, PE
Civil Engineer
Engineering Division
Development Services
06/23/2006 PGEHLEN1 TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Passed
07/11/2006 FRODRIG2 COT NON-DSD REAL ESTATE Denied Please add the following notes to the plan.

1. Additional fire hydrants shall be provided by the developer as required by the fire code in accordance with C.O.T. Standards.

2. An approved water supply capable of supplying the projected fire flow for fire protection shall be provided and extended to serve directly any and all subdivided properties.

3. "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" signs shall be provided as needed to provide 20' clear unobstructed width along all fir apparatus access roadways in accordance with the fire code.

4. On street parking shall be prohibited on one side and signs shall be installed so indicating.
07/11/2006 FRODRIG2 COT NON-DSD REAL ESTATE Denied S06-087: Irvington West Estates: Tentative Plat Review - Water easement, Dkt./Pg. 602/95, may be abandoned by final plat. Request a "1' no vehicle access" along designated open spaces. No title report provided.
07/14/2006 PATRICIA GEHLEN ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Denied COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
***REVISED***

September 21, 2006

Charles Corrales
Corrales Engineering
1008 West St Mary's
Tucson, AZ 85745

Subject: S06-087 Irvington West Estates Tentative Plat

Dear Charles:

Your submittal of April 18, 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

12 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (TEP, Fire, Real Estate, Addressing, Wastewater, Landscape, Engineering, Traffic, Community Planning, Parks and Recreation, Zoning, DSD)

6 Copies Revised Landscape and Irrigation Plans (Parks and Recreation, Engineering, Landscape, Community Planning, Zoning, DSD),

2 Copies Revised Bound Geotechnical Report (Engineering, DSD)

2 Copies Revised Conceptual Grading Plan (Engineering, DSD)

2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD)

2 Copies Color Palette and Elevations (Community Planning, DSD)

THE CDRC DECISION LETTER IS BEING REVISED DUE TO THE ANNEXATION CONDITIONS THAT WERE NOT ADDRESSED ON THE ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL OF THIS PLAT. WITH THE NEXT RESUBMITTAL, COPIES OF THE ANNEXATION CONDITIONS MUST BE PROVIDED TO EACH REVIEWER. IN ADDITION, COMPLIANCE WITH THE ANNEXATION CONDITIONS MUST BE DEMONSTRATED ON THE PLAT. PLEASE INCLUDE AN EXPLAINATION OF THE ANNEXATION CONDITIONS IN THE RESPONSE LETTER.


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: 622-2553