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 - S06-117
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/03/2006 | MARILYN KALTHOFF | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 10/16/2006 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approv-Cond | October 16, 2006 TO: Ryan Stucki, P.E. Stantec Consulting THRU: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson, Development Services Department FROM: Chandubhai C. Patel, P.E. Pima County Development Services Department Development Review Division (Wastewater) SUBJECT: Wingate Lot 3, Lots 1-336 and Common Areas A - F Tentative Plat – 3rd Submittal S06-117 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. A few of the proposed manholes have a symbol using a circle with a filled square inside. This is different from the symbol shown in the legend which is a circle with a filled circle inside.. Either label these manholes, or change the symbol if they don’t have a different meaning, or show this symbol also in the legend and explain what it means. Subject to the above, the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality and the Wastewater Management Department hereby conditionally approve the above referenced submittal of the tentative plat as received by us on October 3, 2006. The correction may be shown on the Mylars. Please note the following: Approval of the above referenced submittal does not authorize the construction of public or private sewer collection lines, or water distribution lines. Prior to construction of such features, a Construction Authorization (Approval To Construct) may need to be obtained from the Pima County Environmental Quality Department. Also, air quality activity permits must be secured by the developer or prime contractor from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality before constructing, operating, or engaging in an activity which may cause or contribute to air pollution. If you have any question regarding the above comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, If you have any questions regarding the above comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Chandubhai C. Patel, P.E.. Telephone: (520) 740-6563 Copy: Project File |
| 10/18/2006 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | S06-177 Wingate Lot 3: Resubmittal - CDRC - Tentative Plat Review - No comment. |
| 10/20/2006 | 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: S06-117 WINGATE LOT 3/TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: 10/20/06 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. ***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.*** ES |
| 10/23/2006 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: WINGATE LOT 3 S06-117 TENTATIVE PLAT - 3rd Review TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 23, 2006 DUE DATE: October 31, 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 May 14, 2007. 2. The Zoning Review Section approves the tentative plat for this subdivision, subject to the following changes on the executed tentative plat. However, should there be any changes requested by other CDRC members, the Zoning Review Section approval is void, and we request copies of the revised tentative plat to verify that those changes do not affect any zoning requirements. 3. This comment has not been fully addressed. The required front yard setback is the greater of 21 feet or (H) measured from outside edge of nearest travel lane. Remove the 10' reference. Also the side street setback is the greater of 21 feet or (H) measured from outside edge of nearest travel lane. Add to plan and remove the 8' reference. Both the front and side street setbacks are measured from the edge of nearest travel lane. Revise detail 8 to show the front and side yard setbacks measured from the nearest edge of the travel lane. Also show the requirements for minimum distance of 18' from the face of garage to street property line and 19' to the back of sidewalk. Perimeter Yard requirements on sheet 2 of 17 and on detail 8 sheet 3 of 17 are incorrect. The Front should be 21' or Height of the building measured from the outside edge of nearest travel lane. LUC 3.2.6.5.B.1 along with minimum distance of 18' from the face of garage to street property line and 19' for back of sidewalk. LUC 3.2.6.5.2.a. Add a side street setback of 21' or Height of the building measured from the outside edge of nearest travel lane. LUC 3.2.6.5.B.1. Side yard setbacks for detached single family homes in an RCP are 3' it does not appear from the elevations provided that any of these homes will be attached. 3.6.1.4.D.d. Revise note 10 and the details. 4. The elevations provided show a scale of 1" = 100' if this is the case then the homes would be over 400' wide. The dimensions shown on the floor plan show the homes at 39' wide. Provide the correct scale for the elevations. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 791-5608 ext. 1180. C\planning\cdrc\tentativeplat\S06-117tp-3rd.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised tentative CC&R's and additional requested documents. |
| 10/23/2006 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: WINGATE LOT 3 S06-117 TENTATIVE PLAT - 3rd Review TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 23, 2006 DUE DATE: October 31, 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 May 14, 2007. 2. The Zoning Review Section approves the tentative plat for this subdivision, subject to the following changes on the executed tentative plat. However, should there be any changes requested by other CDRC members, the Zoning Review Section approval is void, and we request copies of the revised tentative plat to verify that those changes do not affect any zoning requirements. 3. This comment has not been fully addressed. The required front yard setback is the greater of 21 feet or (H) measured from outside edge of nearest travel lane. Remove the 10' reference. Also the side street setback is the greater of 21 feet or (H) measured from outside edge of nearest travel lane. Add to plan and remove the 8' reference. Both the front and side street setbacks are measured from the edge of nearest travel lane. Revise detail 8 to show the front and side yard setbacks measured from the nearest edge of the travel lane. Also show the requirements for minimum distance of 18' from the face of garage to street property line and 19' to the back of sidewalk. Perimeter Yard requirements on sheet 2 of 17 and on detail 8 sheet 3 of 17 are incorrect. The Front should be 21' or Height of the building measured from the outside edge of nearest travel lane. LUC 3.2.6.5.B.1 along with minimum distance of 18' from the face of garage to street property line and 19' for back of sidewalk. LUC 3.2.6.5.2.a. Add a side street setback of 21' or Height of the building measured from the outside edge of nearest travel lane. LUC 3.2.6.5.B.1. Side yard setbacks for detached single family homes in an RCP are 3' it does not appear from the elevations provided that any of these homes will be attached. 3.6.1.4.D.d. Revise note 10 and the details. 4. The elevations provided show a scale of 1" = 100' if this is the case then the homes would be over 400' wide. The dimensions shown on the floor plan show the homes at 39' wide. Provide the correct scale for the elevations. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 791-5608 ext. 1180. C\planning\cdrc\tentativeplat\S06-117tp-3rd.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised tentative CC&R's and additional requested documents. |
| 10/24/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | 1) The Landscape Section recommends approval subject to compliance with the following conditions: 2) The native plant preservation plan is to be revised to correctly document the status of protected plants. It was noted that the calculations include no preservation credits and that the inventory list includes no PIP's. Protected plants that are outside of the designated grading limits and within Natural Open Space are to be designated as PIP in the Native Plant Inventory. See sheet N2.11 for an example of area where plants are to be preserved. Revise the inventory list and affected calculations. 3) Revise the native plant preservation plan to establish a limit of disturbance at the property line south of Linderbrook. Seperate plans for native plant preservation in public right-of-way areas and adjacent parcels. Permits for right-of-way construction or excavation may not be issued until the preservation plans are approved. Add notes to the plan to clarify, if necessary. 4) Revise Basin "B" (sht.10) as necessary to be in accordance with DS 10-01 Refer to pp. 78 & 79 of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual for design criteria regarding basin slopes/depths. The slopes for this basin should not be steeper than 4:1. DS 10-01.3.6, DS 2-07.2.2.B A DSMR is required to modify this standard. Landscaping and compliance with the slope requirements is not optional, unless a development standard modification is approved. 5) Basin 'B' is required to be landscaped to meet the design criteria of DS 10-01.0. Include this basin in the landscape plans. LUC 3.7.4.3.A 6) The landscape borders are required to harvest rain water for supplemental irrigation. Provide details and typical cross sections where necessary. Grading, hydrology, and landscape structural plans are to be integrated to make maximum use of site storm water runoff for supplemental on-site irrigation purposes. The grading plans for the subdivision plan shall indicate use of all runoff. LUC 3.7.4.3.B It is unclear how the submitted plans demonstrate compliance with the water harvesting requirements without the information requested. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED. |
| 10/31/2006 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Approved conditionally per our agreements at the meetings with DSD staff and per the comments that were posted for the second review. |
| 11/09/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES November 9, 2006 Ryan Stucki Stantec 201 North Bonita, Suite 100 Tucson, AZ 85706 Subject: S06-117 Wingate Lot 3 Tentative Plat Dear Ryan: Your submittal of October 4, 2006 for the above project has been reviewed by the Community Design Review Committee and the comments reflect the outstanding requirements which need to be addressed before approval is granted. Please review the comments carefully. Once you have addressed all of the comments, please submit the following revised documents and a DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLUELINES MUST BE FOLDED 5 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (Wastewater, Landscape, Engineering, Zoning, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Elevations (Zoning, DSD) CDRC MANAGER COULD NOT DETERMINE WHETHER A REVISED DRAINAGE REPORT IS REQUIRED SO IT HAS BEEN REQUESTED. IF IT IS NOT NEEDED PLEASE DISREGARD. REVIEW CYCLE FOR NEXT SUBMITTAL WILL BE SET FOR ONE (1) WEEK. 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 |