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.

The login landing page when selecting 'View' is still occurring and is still pending further investigation. 

Plan Review Detail

Plan Number: S06-185
Parcel: Unknown

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW

Plan Number - S06-185
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
02/22/2007 FERNE RODRIGUEZ START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
02/26/2007 JOSE ORTIZ COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Approved
03/01/2007 TOM MARTINEZ OTHER AGENCIES AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION Approved NO COMMENT
S06-185
RICK ENGINEERING
STARR PASS VISTAS VILLAGE I

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


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 email, and delete or destroy all copies plus attachments.
03/07/2007 JIM EGAN COT NON-DSD FIRE Approved
03/13/2007 KAROL ARAGONEZ ZONING REVIEW Denied CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Karol Aragonez
Planner

PROJECT: S06-185
Starr Pass Village
Tentative Plat Resubmittal

TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 8, 2007

DUE DATE: March 22, 2007

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. The title block indicates a Common Area A-1 thru A-2, but the plan shows Common Area A-3 also. Please correct. Common Area D is labeled as a public street. If the street is public it should not be in a common area. Either remove Common Area D or label the streets as private. This also affects general note 10b.
DS 2-03.2.1.G.1

2. Please add to general note 3 with the proposed use the "subject to LUC Sec. 3.6.1 & 3.5.7.1.F".

3. Please draw all existing easements on the plan along with recordation information, location, width, and purpose. If an easement is no longer in use and scheduled to be vacated or has been abandoned, so indicate. If none exist provide response to reviewer's comments. Also if easements are purposed please draw, dimension and label as to their purpose and whether they will be public or private. If none exist provide response to reviewer's comments.
DS 2-03.2.3.C & DS 2-03.2.4.J

4. Please provide the type and width of existing pavement and sidewalks/paths.
DS 2-03.2.3.D

5. There does not appear to be a defined boundary line separating Common Area A-2 and A-3. Please enclose each with a solid line.
DS 2-03.2.4.C

6. Please provide the names of the proposed streets internal to the subdivision.
DS 2-03.2.4.F

7. The required perimeter yard setback for lots adjacent to Greasewood Road and Starr Pass Boulevard will be six (6) feet from interior lot lines. This provides a greater setback than the MS&R setback, which would place the required setback within the landscape border. Please show and label the six (6) foot setback on the plan view on sheet 3 of 4. This should also be noted in the perimeter yard tabulations on sheet 1 of 4
DS 2-10.3.1.A, LUC 1.2.2, & LUC 3.6.1.4.D.2.d.2

8. The project site is within the Tumamoc Area Plan. Please submit to the Department of Urban Planning and Design, plans showing how the RCP will comply with design requirements of the Plan as required by LUC Sec. 3.6.1.4.A.1.
DS 2-10.3.2.B

9. Please provide three (3) copies of the CC&Rs to allow for review of responsibility for the ownership and maintenance of commonly owned property.
DS 2-10.3.2.E

10. The RCP shall be designed so that any potentially adverse impacts from yards, balconies, courts, landscaping, lighting, or noise producing activities are mitigated within the RCP.
LUC 3.6.1.4.A.8

11. Please provide a detail as to how screening of the mechanical equipment is done. If ground mounted and screened by property walls please provide note stating that. If roof mounted provide a detail showing how screening will be architecturally integrated with the overall design of the RCP.
LUC 3.6.1.4.A.9

12. Along interior lot lines for detached dwellings, the minimum separation between a dwelling unit and interior lot line is six (6) feet in RX-2 zoned property. Please revise lot typicals for interior and corner lots to reflect this dimension.
LUC 3.6.1.4.D.2.d.2

Overlay Zone Comments:

1. The Overlay Zone case number must be noted in the lower right corner of each sheet of the tentative plat, landscape, and NPPO plans. All required elements of the HDZ and ERZ as shown on the approved Overlay Zone plan must be added to the tentative plat, along with date of approval and any conditions placed on that approval. The tentative plat may not be approved prior to Overlay Zone application approval. (LUC 2.8.2) (LUC 2.8.1) (D.S. 2-12) (D.S. 9-04)

HDZ LUC 2.8.1 Comments:

1. Maximum building height allowed within a designated HDZ area is limited to twenty-four (24) feet for residential development. Please revise building height on sheet 1 of 4 in the Tabulations Section.
LUC 2.8.1.8.A

2. Please add the following notes to the HDZ section:
a) "All proposed site work, including grading, will comply with Development Standard 9-01.0." and
b) "All exposed exterior walls and roofs of structures, retaining walls, and accessory structures, except satellite dishes, shall be earth tone in color and will blend with the predominant natural colors found on the lot or parcel. Satellite dishes may be black. White is not permitted.
LUC 2.8.1.8.B & C

3. Prior to approval of a subdivision plat or issuance of building permits, establishment of covenants, assurances, or homeowners' associations, may be necessary to ensure the long-term maintenance of slope control measures. Please provide copy of document for review if needed.
LUC 2.8.1.9

ERZ LUC 2.8.6 Comments:

1. Development in the ERZ has two options available for development.
a) The ERZ does not apply when there is no encroachment of the 100-year floodplain. Temporary fencing is required between the project site and the floodplain area.
b) If encroachment occurs requiring an Environmental Resource Report and a mitigation plan to be reviewed by Stormwater Advisory Committee (SAC), who then makes recommendations to the DSD Director.

The plan shows encroachment of a trail within the 100 year floodplain. The ERZ submittal must contain the following:
a) An Environmental Resource Report (ERR) as established in the Development Standard 9-06.0. This report presents a study of the resource corridor and documents locations of the resource corridor and critical riparian habitat.
b) A mitigation plan as required in LUC Sec. 2.8.6.5.D

4. Permits for grubbing, grading, construction, or any other improvements will not be issued until all applicable requirements of Sec. 2.8.6.5 and Sec. 2.8.6.6 are met.

5. Walkway improvements into critical riparian habitat areas will be limited and approved only if there are no other alternatives in the design of the project. Where allowed walkway improvements will cross riparian habitat areas, and not run parallel to the critical riparian habitat.
LUC 2.8.6.6.A.1

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Karol Aragonez, (520) 791-5550, ext. 1197.

KAA S:\zoning review\karol\planning\cdrc\tentativeplat\S06-185tpr.doc


RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised tentative plat, CC&R's and additional requested documents.
03/19/2007 FRODRIG2 OTHER AGENCIES PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS Approved Transportation Information
Rezoning, Plat, and Development Plan Reviews Provided by:
Pima Association of Governments
Data Services Department
Kristen Zimmerman
kzimmerman@pagnet.org
www.pagnet.org
This information is provided to assess the impact of the proposed development on surrounding traffic and roads.
_____X_________ City of Tucson, Development Services Department, Community Design Review Committee
___________________ City of Tucson, Development Services Department, Rezoning
___________________ Town of Marana Planning Department
__S06-185_____ Starr Pass Vistas Village I
____3-16-2007______ Date
___________________ The transportation impact of this plan cannot be determined at this time; more detailed information regarding the
nature of the development is required.
___________________ This project has no associated transportation impacts.
____287_________ Average number of 2-way daily trips (ADT) forecasted as a result of the proposed development
____23,300_________ 2-way capacity on nearest existing major street
_____12,980________ Most recent (less than 3 years old) 2-way PAG traffic count on nearest existing major street
If the forecasted ADT is greater than 500 ADT, additional traffic and road considerations are noted below.
STREET IDENTIFICATION
Nearest existing major street ___________________
Is a road improvement planned as part of PAG's 5-Year Transportation Improvement Program? _______ Yes _______ No
(See http://www.pagnet.org/tip/ for more information on the PAG TIP program.)
VOLUME, CAPACITY, TRAFFIC GENERATION CONSIDERATIONS
On Nearest Existing Major Street
(See http://www.pagnet.org/TPD/DataTrends/ for more information on local traffic volumes.)
___________________ 2005 Daily 2-way Traffic Volume (ADT) Estimated by PAG Traffic Model
___________________ 2030 Daily 2-way Traffic Volume (ADT) Predicted by PAG Traffic Model
___________________ 2005 2-way Road Capacity (ADT)
___________________ 2030 2-way Road Capacity (ADT)
___________________ 2005 Number of Lanes
___________________ 2030 Number of Lanes
TRANSIT AND BIKEWAYS CONSIDERATIONS
Existing bus service ___________________
(Route, frequency, distance from proposed development)
Existing bikeway ___________________
s06-185.xls 3/16/2007
03/22/2007 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1) Basin slopes in most instances (except where a DSMR is approved) are required to have slopes no steeper than 4:1 where depths exceed three feet. Revise the development plan and all related plans as necessary or provide DSMR documantation. DS 10-01.4

2) The Native Plant Preservation plan received was difficult to read as the information over the dark area on the aerial photo obscure lines, text, and symbols. Submit the plan again for review.

Approval of the HDZ/ERZ application is required prior to tentative plat approval. Following are the remaining comments from the Landscape Section overlay review:

The Landscape Section recommends approval of the HDZ application subject to compliance with Zoning Section comments.

The Landscape Section does not recommend approval of the project for ERZ compliance due to the trail easement over the regulatory floodplain. We have discussed the issue with Parks and Recreation and have concluded that the easement should be located outside of the floodplain which includes riparian habitat and that the trail should be located in the 25' wash buffer zone if possible.

An ERZ submiital per LUC 2.8.6.4.B will be required if the trail easement remains in the floodplain.
03/22/2007 ANDY VERA ENV SVCS REVIEW Approved * ES has no objections to this DSMR.
* Approved for APC curbside refuse collection.
03/22/2007 FRODRIG2 PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Approved March 16, 2007

To: Mirela Hromatka, Rick Engineering

Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager
City of Tucson Development Services Department

____________________________________
From: Thomas Porter((520) 740-6579), representing the Pima County
Departments of Wastewater Management and Environmental Quality

Subject: Starr Pass Vistas Village I, Lots 1-32 & Common Area “A-1” thru “A-3”, “B” & “C”
Tentative or Preliminary Plat – 2nd Submittal
S06-185


The proposed sewer collection lines for 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.

The Pima County Department of Environmental Quality and Wastewater Management Department hereby approve the above referenced submittal of the tentative or preliminary plat as submitted on 2/20/07.

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 the construction of such features, a Construction Authorization (Approval To Construct) may need to be obtained from the Pima County Environmental Quality.

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 questions regarding the above mentioned comments, please contact me .

CC: Project File
03/22/2007 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: S06-185 STARR PASS VISTAS VILLAGE I/REVISED TENTATIVE PLAT
DATE: 3/22/07



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 Pima
County Addressing. 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.***
03/23/2007 FRODRIG2 COT NON-DSD REAL ESTATE Approved S06-185 Starr pass vistas Village I: Resubmittal - CDRC -Tentative Plat Review - No comment.
03/23/2007 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: March 22, 2007





RE: Assessor's Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat

S06-185 STARR PASS VISTAS VILLAGE I T141316





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



X Plat meets Assessor's Office requirements.

_______ Plat does not meet Assessor's Office requirements.





COMMENTS:



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
03/26/2007 PGEHLEN1 TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Passed
03/27/2007 GLENN HICKS COT NON-DSD PARKS & RECREATION Denied DATE: March 27, 2006

TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services

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

CC:


SUBJECT: S06-185 Starr Pass Vistas Village I: Tentative Plat Review (2-22-07)

Please realign trail easement to correspond with 25ft wide wash buffer zone. Indicate trail will be constructed within this area.
03/28/2007 GLYNDA ROTHWELL UTILITIES TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER Approved 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714
Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702


WR#168629 March 28, 2007


Rick Engineering Company, Inc.
Attn: Mirela Hromatka
1745 E. River Rd, Suite 101
Tucson, AZ 85718


Dear Ms. Hromatka:

SUBJECT: STARR PASS VISTAS VILLAGE I
Lots 1-30
S06-185

Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has no objection to the preliminary plat submitted for review March 12, 2007.

Enclosed is TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. Though the number or lots have decreased from 32 to 30, the possible feeds will remain the same. Feeds will be from pole #1 or PB STAR-113, both along Starr Pass Blvd. The copy of the tentative plat showing where TEP will be placing the aboveground equipment for this subdivision will be mailed to you under separate cover.

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. Also, submit the AutoCAD version of the plat on a CD or email to lmiranda@tep.com. Should you have any questions, please contact the area designer, Ron Grant at (520) 918- 8712.


Sincerely,



Henrietta Noriega
Office Specialist
Design/Build
Hn
Enclosures
cc: P. Gehlen, City of Tucson (e-mail)
D. Sloane, Title Security Agency of AZ (Letter only)
J. Necas, Tucson Electric Power
03/28/2007 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

S06-185 Starr Pass Vistas Village 1 03/27/07

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

CROSS REFERENCE: N/A

NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Tumamoc Area Plan, Subarea 4

GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: N/A

COMMENTS DUE BY: March 22, 2007

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: Joanne Hershenhorn 791-4505 DATE: 3/26/07


S06-185
Starr Pass Vistas Village


Thank you for showing the 25-foot wash buffer zone, which is a no development/no encroachment area adjacent to the Silvercroft Wash. Other reviewers (Joseph Linville, Landscape Review Section, Development Services Department, and Glenn Hicks, Parks and Recreation Department) have indicated they want the trail easement to be outside the 100-year floodplain and in this 25-foot buffer area, if possible. That is acceptable with us if it is also OK with Ann Audrey of the Office of Conservation and Sustainable Development.

In response to our previous comment, General Note #23 has been added, which indicates the access to the Silvercroft Wash buffer zone “… shall be from one common access point located at Common Area A.” Sheet 3 of 4 shows a paved trail from the public street, north of lot 14, out to Common Area A-2. Please clarify in the general note that the access is from the public street via a paved trail north of lot 14 to Common Area A-2. If the Common Area name changes, please modify the note accordingly.
03/28/2007 GLYNDA ROTHWELL UTILITIES TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER Approved 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714
Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702


WR# 168629 May 16, 2007


Rick Engineering Company
Attn: Mirela Hromatka
1745 E River Rd, Suite 101
Tucson, Arizona 85718


Dear Ms. Hromatka :

SUBJECT: Starr Pass Vistas Village I - Resubmittal
Lots 1-30
S06-185

Please find enclosed the tentative plat showing where TEP will be placing the aboveground equipment for this subdivision. This is not a preliminary design. TEP has provided this drawing to show where the proposed locations are for transformers, pedestals, secondary and primary. Feed from pole #1 on Starr Pass and new J-2 feeding new J-1 from the west.

TEP will provide a preliminary electrical design on the Approved Tentative Plat within Twenty (20) 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. Any relocation costs will be billable to the customer. Also, submit the AutoCAD version of the plat on a CD or email to kclark@tep.com. Should you have any questions, please contact the Designer for this project Ron Grant 917-8712.




Sincerely,



Elizabeth Miranda
Office Specialist
Design/Build
kc
Enclosures
cc: Diane Sloane, Title Security of Arizona (Letter only)
Ron Grant, Tucson Electric Power Company
04/30/2007 ELIZABETH EBERBACH ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Coordinator
SUBJECT: Starr Pass Vistas Village 1 Tentative Plat Engineering 2nd Review
REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach
LOCATION: T14S R13E Section 16
ACTIVITY NUMBER: S06-185

SUMMARY: The revised Tentative Plat sheets, revised Drainage Report, geotechnical report, landscape documents, and schedules of title report were received by Engineering for review. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Tentative Plat purposes only. Engineering does not recommend approval of the Tentative Plat at this time.

DRAINAGE COMMENTS:
1) LUC Sec.2.8.6.5: ERZ washes are reviewed under the LUC code for this section and are subject to required notification procedure, Stormwater Advisory Committee, and other overlay review, scheduling, and procedural requirements. Any encroachment, including any trail located within the floodplain limits shall be subject to SAC review.
2) Tucson Code Sec.29-15(b)(1)f: Section 5.0 needs clarification.
a) Provide 404 compliance statement sheet in the Drainage Report (not found in appendix A).
b) Clarify section 5.0 in report to use verbiage in response letter to explain "non-jurisdictional".
3) Provide street capacity analysis at a northeast street section using 42cfs entering basin.
4) Explain multi-use design for proposed basin.
5) LUC 3.7.4: Surface stormwater should be directed into the landscape areas to promote water harvesting surface drainage. State in response letter where in the drainage report that it is clearly explained how water harvesting will be accomplished to the maximum extent possible and whether drainage from lots are to be discharged into water harvesting areas prior to discharge into wash. Show how stormwater will be directed toward the water harvesting areas. Consult the Water Harvesting Guidance Manual (Adopted October 18, 2005) for design guidelines. The manual is available online at http://dot.tucsonaz.gov/stormwater/downloads/2006WaterHarvesting.pdf
6) DS Sec 10-01.1.1.2: Discuss in the drainage report how the proposed basin design provides a detention/retention facility that is multi-use and visually appealing.
7) DS Sec.10-01.4.3.1: Show 8:1(H:V) slopes along basin sides where human activity zones are proposed.
8) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.2: Check/revise PAD elevations and proposed finished floor elevations for lots adjacent to wash to assure lots adjacent to floodplain are elevated to meet minimum floodplain ordinance requirements. In particular, check lots along west side of project to assure minimum 1-foot above adjacent WSEL.
9) Explain how trail will be protected in the areas where it crosses into the 100-year floodplain.
10) Update threshold retention calculations.
11) Erosion hazard setback does not clearly account for area where tributary joins Silvercroft Wash. Erosion hazard setback shall be clearly drawn to reflect variation in discharge along wash and direction of flow within wash.

TENTATIVE PLAT COMMENTS:
12) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.B.7: Where the overlay zone requires a separate review process (HDZ and ERZ), add as a separate general note the file number, date of approval, and any conditions placed on that approval or, if the review has not been completed, that it is in process.
13) LUC Sec.2.8.1: Per Hillside Development Zone, address the following comment:
a) Add a general note that any slopes steeper than 3:1 with the exception of retaining walls, will be stabilized with properly engineered stone riprapping or sculptured rock that is hand-placed on the slope, and, that the development should utilize construction methods which ensure slope stabilization and minimize soil erosion.
14) Address the following comment for sheet 1:
a) Clarify delineation of a floodplain line that appears to be the 404 bottom of the wash by providing as legend symbol.
15) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.A: For survey and boundary data, clarify the following on sheet 2:
a) DS Sec.2-03.2.1.J: Clarify locations and make legible all survey monuments to be set and found. Specifically identify existing monuments at west boundary.
b) Label ties to section corner(s) on sheet index or other plan view. Also show section corners on planview.
c) Boundary data needs to match title report exhibit, provide exhibit of legal description (not found in submittal).
d) A local benchmark for project will be required for grading plan review.
16) DS Sec.3-01: Provide any correspondence from reference to discussions with TDOT regarding right-of-way improvements.
17) Address the following drainage / floodplain related comments:
a) Tucson Code Sec.26-5.2(13): Add a general note that states that no walls, any type of fences, or other permanent obstacles will be allowed within the floodplain.
b) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.J: EHS encroachment shall be substantiated; also assure that appropriate erosion hazard setback is calculated at the tributary entering at the north west side of the project.
c) DS Sec.10-01.1.1.2: Show on the Tentative Plat planview sheets how the proposed basin design provides a detention/retention facility that is multi-use and visually appealing.
18) DS Sec.11-01: Address the following conceptual grading design questions:
a) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.2: Revise PAD elevations and proposed finished floor elevations per the revised drainage report for lots adjacent to wash to assure lots adjacent to floodplain are elevated to meet minimum floodplain ordinance requirements. In particular, check lots along west side of project to assure minimum 1-foot above adjacent WSEL.
b) DS Sec.11-01.8.1: Adjacent parcels are zoned as residential zoning RX. Proposed fills in excess of two feet above existing grade at any location in the outer one hundred feet of the developing site adjacent to residentially zoned property require the procedure outlined in this section. Clarify finished pad elevations showing extent of proposed fill. If fill exceeds the 2 feet differential along boundary portions of the project, procedures for excavation and grading as outlined in this section shall apply, including written justification based on engineering / technical reasons submitted as first step in the procedure. Check proposed PAD elevations after providing minimum pad elevations to account for floodplain condition.
c) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.M: Provide geotechnical report that includes soils analysis for site, recommendations for maximum slope grades, minimum slope treatments / scour protection, minimum setbacks from basin, percolation testing data and results. The typical lot grading detail shall reflect recommendations from geotechnical report for minimum sideyard setbacks for positive drainage from structure.
d) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.K: Feasibility for project must be shown at Tentative Plat stage. Lots indicate side yard setbacks that do not comply with typical building setbacks nor geotechnical report. Revise lot sizes or show that lot grading is feasible with a typical lot detail. Provide typical lot grading details on sheet 3, show lot grading information / clarification:
i) The minimum side and rear setbacks, building setbacks to swales shall reflect recommendations per geotechnical report.
ii) Show any A/C unit / utility pads if located along the side yards. This setback must be recommended/referenced in the Geotechnical Report.
iii) Show high point and minimum slope grades away from and around building structure.
19) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.I: Clarify the following common area issues:
a) Clarify areas in square footage, and purpose of common area C undisturbed area to include ERZ floodplain area and wash buffer area.
b) Clarify title block to include common area A-3.

LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENT:
20) DS Sec.3-01.5.1.A.1: Revise Landscape Notes 3 on sheets 2 and 3 and other sheets to clarify vegetation restrictions per this section of the standards, to read: "Other than trees as noted below, plant materials located within existing and future sight visibility triangles shall be limited to ground cover or low-growing vegetation of a species that will not grow higher than thirty inches. Trees may be located within existing and future sight visibility triangles only if clear of leaves and branches to a height of at least six feet above grade upon installation, and at all times thereafter. The trunk caliper of any species selected may not exceed twelve inches in diameter at maturity. Trees with multiple trunks are not allowed. Trees may not be planted in a line that could result in a solid wall effect as viewed from the motorist's perspective. The number and location of trees within existing and future sight visibility triangles may be restricted or modified by the City of Tucson in order to preserve visibility."

The next submittal should address all the above items. Submit revised Tentative Plat, a bound copy of the geotechnical report, revised Drainage Report, copy of revised Landscape Plan, title report, and response letter. A meeting is recommended to go over comments to assure that each comment is understood and addressed. In order to expedite next review, please call to set up a meeting after resubmittal to go over project. If you have any questions before resubmittal, please call me at 791-5550 extension 2204.

Elizabeth Eberbach, PE
Civil Engineer
Engineering Division
Development Services
05/01/2007 PATRICIA GEHLEN ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Denied COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

May 1, 2007

Mirela Hromatka
Rick Engineering Company, Inc.
1745 East River Road, Suite 101
Tucson, Arizona 85718

Subject: S06-185 Starr Pass Vista Village I Tentative Plat

Dear Mirela:

Your submittal of February 22, 2007 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 BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED

6 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (Zoning, Landscape, DUPD, Parks and Recreation, Engineering, DSD)

6 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Landsacpe, DUPD, Parks and Recreations, Engineering, DSD)

2 Copies Revised NPPO Plan (Landscape, DSD)

2 Copies Bound Geotechnical Report (Engineering, DSD)

2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD)

2 Copies Title Report (Engineering, DSD)


Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608 extension 1179.

PRIOR TO RESUBMITTAL OF THESE PLANS, THE EXISTING BLOCK PLAT MUST BE REVISED.

Sincerely,

Patricia Gehlen
CDRC Manager

All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/
Via fax: 322-6956