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 - S06-094
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/14/2006 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/20/2006 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | * Letter sent to the Engineer (Baker & Associates) stating that the project was approved but the detail needed to be revised to show the side wall protection. The letter pointed out that it was assumed that the construction drawings would show the revisions. |
| 09/26/2006 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approv-Cond | A private improvement agreement (PIA) will be necessary for the proposed work to be performed within the Right-of-way. An approved tentative plat is required prior to applying for a PIA. Contact the PIA Coordinator for additional PIA information at 791-5550 ext. 11107. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x305 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 10/04/2006 | 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 S06-094 Desert View Plaza, L. 1-7 10/03/06 () Tentative Plat/Development Plan ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment ( ) Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-90-18 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: General Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Valencia is a Gateway Route COMMENTS DUE BY: October 12, 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 Comment Attached ( ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: () Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat/Development Plan ( ) Development Plan ( ) Landscape Plan ( ) Other REVIEWER: J. Hershenhorn 791-4505 DATE: 10/03/06 S06-094, Desert View Plaza, L. 1-7 TP/DP This purpose of this review is to verify compliance with certain rezoning conditions. Regarding our previous comment #1, thank you for showing the internal pedestrian and bikeway system, and how this connects with Antrim Loop. Staff erred in not requesting that the TP/DP show a pedestrian connection between the residential area north of Antrim Loop and the commercial area south of Antrim Loop (please see rezoning condition #1.c, aka General Note #4.A.3.). Please show this on the Tentative Plat/Development Plan, sheet 2/5. |
| 10/06/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) An unpaved planting area, which is a minimum of thirty-four (34) square feet in area and four (4) feet in width, must be provided for each canopy tree. Dimension the unpaved portions of the parking lot tree planter located in the island north of the southern driveway at Alvernon Road abutting the third parking row to the east. 2) Revise the landscape plan to show the locations and note the height and materials used to construct any proposed or required screen walls. Also show and label the walls on the development plan. The site is required to include screening along the east property line. Per LUC Table 3.7.2-I a 5-foot wall minimum and a 6' high wall for the personal storage use, loading, and refuse areas is required to screen the development from the adjacent R-1 zoned property. Revise as necessary. DS 2-07.A.3 3) The area between the right-of-way line and sidewalk (or sidewalk area) and the area between the sidewalk and the curb, if not covered with vegetation, shall be covered with an appropriate inorganic ground cover, such as decomposed granite. Revise the plans to clarify compliance. LUC 3.7.2.4.A.4 4) Revise the interior landscape border on the east side of the side such that one tree is provided for every thirty-three foot segment. The space between trees should never be greater than 66 feet based on the code requirement. LUC 3.7.2.4 5) Correct the scale of the landscape plan. It is not 1"=30. 6) The development plan is proposed as two phases. Revise the landscape/irrigation and NPP plans to include phased plans. |
| 10/06/2006 | MARILYN KALTHOFF | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | October 5, 2006 TO: Marty Magelli, P.E. Baker & Associates Engineering, Inc. THRU: Patricia Gehlen City of Tucson, Development Services Department FROM: R S Engineering (Contract Reviewer) Chandubhai Patel, P.E. Pima County Development Services Department Development Review Division (Wastewater) SUBJECT: Desert View Plaza Lots 1 - 7 Tentative Plat/Development Plan - 2nd Submittal S06-094 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. 1. Sheet 1:Revise General Note #7 so that it states: THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE ZERO EXISTING AND 885 PROPOSED WASTEWATER FIXTURE UNIT EQUIVALENTS PER TABLE 13.20.045(E)(1) IN PIMA COUNTY CODE 13.20.045(E). 2. Sheet 1: Add a Permitting or General Note that states: NO PERMITS FOR PERMANENT STRUCTURES (I.E., MASONRY WALLS, FENCES, ETC.) ON OR THROUGH THE PUBLIC SEWER EASEMENT WILL BE ISSUED WITHOUT SEPARATE WRITTEN CONSENT OF PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT. 3. Sheet 1: Add a General Note that states: THE LANDSCAPING WITHIN ALL PUBLIC SEWER EASEMENTS SHOWN HEREON SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANTING GUIDELINES OF PC/COT STANDARD DETAIL WWM A-4. 4. Sheets $ & 5: The comments in Dickie Fernandez' letter of May 8, 2006, and Tim Rowe's e-mail of May 26, 2006 regarding easement requirements do not appear to be satisfied in/with this submittal. Construction and completion of the public sanitary sewer line is independent of the recording of the final plat for this project. There has to be a guarantee of public access for construction and maintenance of the sanitary sewer line. Also, the depth of the public sewer, approximately 12.5 feet would call for a 25'wide PUBLIC SEWER EASEMENT. Dickie had asked that the the PAAL be dedicated as the PUBLIC SEWER ACCESS EASEMENT. I would like to modify this request in order to clarify what we need for access to operate and maintain the public sewer. Revise the site plan so that: The 20' easement is widened to 25', by adding an additional 5' in the PAAL.Add two SEWER ACCESS EASEMENTs, BY FINAL PLAT, to the S. Alvernon Way entry drives that will ensure Pima County Wastewater maintenance trucks access to all reaches of public sewer without requiring that vehicles drive over the curbs and landscape islands. 5. Sheet 5: Revise the site plan and New Sewer Rim and Invert Table so that: New Private sewer manholes 8 - 11 are clearly labeled as PRIVATE. 6. This office will require a revised set of bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. Pima County Code Title 13.20.030.A.2 requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the tentative or preliminary plattentative plat/development plan. The fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet. The next submittal of this project will be the third (3rd) submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $78.00 (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter. If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly. Sincerely, Chandubhai Patel, P.E. Telephone: (520) 740-6563 Copy: RSE Job #0432.76 |
| 10/12/2006 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: S06-094 Desert View Plaza Tentative Plat / Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: 10/12/06 DUE DATE: 10/12/06 COMMENTS: 1. Zoning acknowledges your response. Provide documentation of the approved Temporary Revocable Easement at the next submittal. The following comments will remain as a reminder for the reviewer. The monument signs indicated in the public right of way along Alvernon will not be allowed. Relocate or remove. 2. DS 2-05.2.3.D Clearly indicate the location of the required stacking spaces. Building 11 does not have the minimum number of six (6) stacking spaces as per DS 3-05.2.1.C.2.c. 3. DS 2-05.2.4.C If the project is to be phased, provide calculations, setbacks, etc., to indicate that each phase complies with all requirements as a separate entity. Show and label any temporary improvements that may be needed to make the site function for each phase as one entity. If such temporary improvements are off the site of the phase under consideration, a temporary easement or other legal documentation to assure legal use of the property is required. Note recording information. 4. DS 2-05.2.4.I All applicable building setback lines will be shown. On zoning setbacks, if the building is proposed for location at a greater distance from the property line than the required setback, show only the dimension of the distance between the building and the property line. If the setback's point of measurement is not the property line, include the distance from the property line to the point of measurement. The e-mail response by Terry was as follows: 2. Provide on the plans the maximum heights of the structures and the required minimum setbacks base on the proposed heights. The locations of the proposed structures are required to be defined on the plan in order to verify the effects on pedestrian circulation, vehicular use areas, loading zones, etc. Zoning acknowledges that the developer does not want to be tied down to exact locations. If a change is desired at a later date a revision to the plan can be made at that time. Clearly indicate if any of the structures are two story or a portion of the building being used as two story. It appears with 30' height of some of the structures may be two story. If this is the case the FAR calculations will need to be revised. 5. DS 2-05.2.4.K Show on-site pedestrian circulation as required by the LUC utilizing location and design criteria in Development Standard 2-08.0. Including, location, widths of sidewalks, handicap ramps, crosswalks, pedestrian refuge areas, connecting both streets to all structures, etc. Clearly indicate the location of all required sidewalks and pedestrian refuge areas. Clearly indicate that bicycle parking spaces, postage boxes, handicap ramps, or other obstructions do not limit the width of the sidewalk to less than the minimum 4''requirement. Provide a pedestrian circulation path connecting to all structures from building #16. The cross walk located at the northwest corner of building #10 adjacent to the parking space is required to be physically separated from the vehicular use area. (must be a side walk adjacent to the parking space. Truncated Dome (early warning systems) must be added to all access ramps where transitioning from the pedestrian area to the vehicular use area or at HC access aisles transitioning to the sidewalk area. Indicate the required minimum 24" depth. 6. DS 2-05.2.4.M Zoning acknowledges your response in regards to the ingress/egress easements being provided in the CC&Rs. Provide a note on the plan that CC&R's with cross parking and cross ingress/egress will be recorded at time of Final Plat. The following comment will remain as a reminder to the reviewer. In order to meet the requirements of a shopping center for parking purposes it appears the personal storage has not been considered in the calculations. If this is the case, provide documentation for a cross access only agreement for lot 1 and the rest of the shopping center. Provide documentation for cross access and cross parking agreements for the rest of the Lots in the shopping center. 7. DS 2-05.2.4.O Provide dimensions for each required loading zone. The loading zone requirements for size are different for Personal Storage than for Retail. The typical loading zone detail does not reflect the proper size loading zone for a Personal Storage Use. See LUC 3.4.5. Clearly indicate vehicle maneuverability for the loading zones with in the Personal Storage Use area. 8. DS 2-05.2.4.P Clearly indicate the parking spaces requiring wheel stops or barriers. See DS 3-05.2.3.C. Clearly indicate that when the sidewalk is used as a barrier for the parking spaces that the sidewalk will not be limited to less than four foot in width for pedestrian circulation. Provide dimensions. (example: parking spaces along the east side of building #15, the 4 parking spaces east of building #1, etc.) The handicap parking sign indicated in detail 4 cannot be located in the overhang portion of the parking space. Provide a detail of the required handicap parking sign. A copy of the required verbiage for the sign can be obtained a DSD zoning counter. FYI: The minimum height of the sign is 7' from grade to the bottom of the sign. 9. DS 2-05.2.4.Q Show, on the drawing, off-street bicycle parking locations. When adjacent to pedestrian paths, indicate the width of clearance available for the pedestrian area. For specifics, refer to Development Standard 2-09.0. 10 . Based on responses to the comments and changes to the plans further comments may be forth coming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 791-5550 ext. 2000. TLS C:\planning\cdrc\tentativeplat\S06-094tp.doc |
| 10/12/2006 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | S06-094 Desert View Plaza: Resubmittal - CDRC - Tentative Plat Review - Defer to DOT/Traffic Engineering review and comments concerning the 1' No Vehicle Access Easement along Valencia Rd. and Alvernon Way. |
| 10/13/2006 | 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: S06-094 DESERT VIEW PLAZA/REVISED TENTATIVE PLAT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: October 10, 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. NOTE: Submit a 24 x 36 Reverse Reading Double Matte Photo Mylar of approved Development Plan to City Planning. Signed and dated Mylar will be forwarded to Pima County Addressing prior to assignment of addresses. 2.) All addresses will need to be displayed per Pima County Address Standards at the time of final inspection. ***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 |
| 10/13/2006 | 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: October 12, 2006 RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat S06-094 DESERT VIEW PLAZA T151410 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor’s Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor’s Office requirements. COMMENTS: PLEASE MAKE THE FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENTS BY FINAL PLAT STAGE: Remove shading and stripping. Add dimensions, bearings and curve data for all lots. Perimeter dimensions and bearings must be on both site plan sheets (2 & 3). The P.A.A.L. should be listed as a common element if it is not to be part of each lot; if it is to part of each lot, then the lot lines need to have a heavier line weight in order to stand out from the buildings. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUBMITTAL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL ROSANNA WERNER AT 740-4390 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. ROSANNA WERNER |
| 10/24/2006 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: October 24, 2006 SUBJECT: Tentative Plat/Development Plan of Desert View Plaza - Engineering review 2nd Submittal TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: Desert View Plaza- 3943 E Valencia Road, T15S R14E Sec10, Ward 5 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: S06-094 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the re-submitted Tentative Plat, Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, and Landscape Plan. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Tentative Plat purposes only. The Tentative Plat is not approved at this time. The following items need to be addressed: TENTATIVE PLAT: 1) DS Sec.2-03.3.1.G: Submit a letter of certification from the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) on assured water supply, if the project is not served by the City of Tucson Water Department. DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 2) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.T: Revise Tentative Plat to show maneuverability for all refuse containers. It is acknowledged that a detail for the most restrictive situation can be used. However Detail 12 shown on Sheet 5 of 5 is not the most restrictive area on the subject parcel. The four trash enclosures adjacent to the north side of building #14 and the PAAL radius at both intersections need to show maneuverability for refuse vehicles. 3) DS Sec.6-01.4.2.C.1: Provide a note on Detail 11 on Sheet 5 of 5 to state that for all refuse container enclosures that service the proposed restaurants or other food service establishments a sewer-connected drain in the center of the slab will be provided to facilitate container cleaning. 4) Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) requirements are applicable to this project. An additional site visit showed that sediment from the subject parcel is been tracked off-site onto Antrim Loop. All sediment from the parcel must be contained on-site by the use of temporary control measures. Temporary control measures must be installed at this time to prevent off-site sediment accumulation. GENERAL COMMENTS: Provide a revised Tentative Plat/Development Plan and a letter of certification from ADWR on assured water supply at re-submittal. Provide evidence that temporary control measures have been installed along Antrim Loop where sediment has been tracked off-site. The revised Tentative Plat/Development Plan must address the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the Tentative Plat If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 1189. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division COT Development Services |
| 10/27/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES October 27, 2006 Marty Magelli, P.E. Baker & Associates Engineering, Inc. 1636 North Swan Road, Suite 200 Tucson, AZ 85712 Subject: S06-094 Desert View Plaza Tentative Plat Dear Marty: Your submittal of September 15, 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 8 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (Fire, Environmental Services, Landscape, Engineering, DUPD, Wastewater, Zoning, DSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plans (DUPD, Landscape, Engineering, Zoning, DSD), 2 Copies Revised NPPO Plans (Landscape, DSD) PER AN E-MAIL DISCUSSION WITH JEAN ARMSTRONG DATED 8/28/2006 IF PHASE LINES WERE TO BE ADDED TO THE PLAN, AN ADDTION COPY OF THE TENTATIVE PLAT WAS TO BE SUBMITTED FOR FIRE REVIEW. THIS DID NOT OCCUR WITH THE LAST SUBMITTAL OF THIS PLAN SO AN ADDITIONAL SET HAS BEEN REQUEST FOR FIRE. PLEASE CLEARLY DETAIL IN THE RESPONSE LETTER THAT PHASE LINES HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE PLANS. 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: 318-1930 |