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: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Plan Number - S06-204
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/25/2006 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/29/2006 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | NO COMMENT S06-204 R S ENGINEERING, INC. PAVILIONS -------------------------------------------------------- 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. |
| 10/02/2006 | KAROL ARAGONEZ | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Karol Aragonez Planner PROJECT: S06-204 Pavilions Tentative Plat TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 29, 2006 DUE DATE: October 23, 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 October 22, 2007. 2. Please remove the "Book___ Page___" from the outer margins. This is only required for final plats. 3. All mapped data on a plat will be drawn at the same standard engineering scale, having no more than fifty (50) feet to the inch. Approval by the City Engineer and the Development Services Department (DSD) must be obtained to use a smaller scale. Please contact Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager 791-5608. DS 2-03.2.1.A 4. Within the project location map please identify Mesquite Ranch Wash and Civano Wash, Civano Neighborhood 1, and Block 1. DS 2-03.2.1.D.2 5. Please provide a denser hatch pattern that indicates the FEMA floodplain - Zone A in the legend. The one used does not reproduce well. 6. Case number S06-204 has been assigned to this tentative plat (TP). Please place this number in the right corner of all sheets of the tentative plat, landscape plan, NPPO, and any other associated sheets. DS 2-03.2.2.B.1 7. Please list the rezoning case number C9-05-02 in the lower right corner of each sheet of the tentative plat, landscape plan, and NPPO. DS 2-03.2.2.B.3 8. Instead of providing applicable uses to each of the proposed lots, please revise general note 40 to read "Individual development plans, landscape, and NPPO plans will be submitted for review and approval for each lot as noted on this tentative plat. The individual development plans will include all regulatory requirements as mandated by the Civano Master PAD, Commercial Pavilions PAD, Land Use Code, and Development Standards for individual lot development. A copy of the approved tentative plat and landscape plan must be included as reference for each development plan submitted for review". 9. Please remove general note 11 since this was clarified by new note (see note 8) 10. Replace general note 18 and 19 with note stating "This plat is designed to meet the overlay zones criteria: Sec. E-5.a Civano Commercial Pavilions PAD for Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ); Sec. 2.8.3, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone, Sec. 2.8.6; and Sec. 29-12 through 29-19 Water Course Amenities, Safety, and Habitat (WASH) Ordinance of the Tucson Code". DS 2-03.2.2.B.7 11. Revise general note 38 so it references all lots impacted by the WASH Ordinance as required by DS 2-03.2.2.C.3 12. Please provide documentation of easement abandonment and right-of-way vacation for the following: ten (10) foot electric easement DKT 2700, PG 49; twenty (20) foot telephone easement state license #3480; drainage/detention easement DK 10547, PG 469; and seventy-five (75) foot right-of-way state lease #3457. All other easements on the site must be shown, labeled and dimensioned. Dimension the water easement shown on lot 6 (15 feet). DS 2-03.2.3.C 13. Improvements to Houghton Road as indicated in Sec. E-4.e require a half street cross section for the east side of Houghton Road along the Pavilions PAD frontage. IT is to include a ten (10) foot half medium, two twelve (12) foot travel lanes, a five (5) foot bike lane, a tapered deceleration lane, and a twelve (12) foot multi-use path and an eight (8) foot pedestrian pathway with landscaping and drainage accommodated between the vehicular and pedestrian areas. Please provide on the tentative plat these requirements in both plan view and as a cross section. 14. Two (2) additional driveways for right-in and right-out access from Houghton Road are permitted per the Pavilions PAD (in addition to Global Solar). The plat indicates a one (1) foot no access easement along the entire frontage of Houghton except for Drexel Road entrance. If additional driveway entrances are to be utilized please identify their location and remove that portion of the no access easement. Add note stating "Two (2) driveways for right-in, right-out access from Houghton Road will be permitted for access to the Pavilions PAD (in addition to the existing driveway for Global Solar): one (1) between Drexel Road and the southern boundary of the Pavilions Pad and one between Drexel Road and the northern boundary of the Pavilions PAD. Locations may change from time to time as the PAD is developed and internal circulation established". Pavilions PAD Sec. E-4.f It appears that access to lots 1 and 6 is limited to Houghton Road which would then not meet requirements stipulated by the PAD since the reciprocal easement agreement provides for access over and across common areas defined as all curbs, roadways, driveways, aisles, and walkways on the subdivision plat. Please clarify. 15. Please provide the type and dimensioned width of current paving on the tentative plat. DS 2-03.2.3.D 16. Please show the Sierra Morado PAD Frontage Area on the tentative plat (Figure 29: Pavilions PAD) and add note listing the additional development standards for this frontage area. Pavilions PAD Sec. E-4.h 17. Please add to the Master Plan Map the height restrictions as provided in Figure 29; Pavilions PAD. 18. Per discussions with Engineering staff would suggest that the regional basin be designated as a common area with maintenance and upkeep responsibilities provided for in CC&Rs. Enclose the area with a solid line, label and provide square footage. Provide a copy of CC&Rs to verify maintenance responsibility. DS 2-03.2.4.C 19. Please provide detail as to how Drexel Road ties into the proposed right-of-way traffic circle east in Sierra Morado Unit 2. The Civano Master PAD requires connectivity and designates Drexel Road as an internal spine road through the community (Sec. C-7.a) 20. Please add all required sight visibility triangles (SVTs) to the tentative plat. DS 2-03.2.4.M 21. Please provide square footage of the thirty (30) foot scenic corridor buffer along Houghton Road. This area is part of the overall natural open space (NOS) area. Future development plans submitted are to provide running totals of NOS and functional open space (FOS) to be added to overall totals required by the Master PAD. 22. Please add the following notes relating to Scenic Corridor and PAD Requirements: a) "The following sections of the Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ) shall apply to the Pavilions PAD; LUC Sec. 2.8.2.9.A, 2.8.2.10.A, 2.8.2.4, and 2.8.2.6.B subject to Pavilions PAD Sec. E-5.a.4. All other portions of the SCZ LUC requirements shall not apply per the PAD." b) "The SCZ shall apply to properties within two hundred (200) feet of the future right-of-way of Houghton Road." c) "A buffer area thirty (30) feet wide, adjacent to Houghton Road is to be preserved and maintained in its natural state. This buffer and natural open space (NOS) may be enhanced with indigenous vegetation." d) "Building or structure surfaces, which are visible from the Houghton road, will have colors which are predominant within the surrounding landscape, such as desert and earth tones." e) "All landscaping, including preservation and reestablishment of native vegetation, shall comply with LUC Sec. 3.7.5.2." f) "The Pavilions PAD frontage as a whole will have view corridors with a combined width of at least twenty (20) percent of the frontage, which will allow vision from at least one (1) point into and through the Pavilions PAD from Houghton Road. The method of allocating view corridor areas across the Pavilions PAD and/or among different property owners shall be established and submitted to the City of Tucson's Development Services Department for approval in connection with the approval of the first development plan within the sub-PAD." g) "Building height within the SCZ shall be measured in accordance with the ordinary method for height measurement as described in LUC Sec. 3.2.7.2.A. Sec. 3.2.7.2.A.3 does not pertain." h) "The SCZ buffer area may be crossed by designated paths for access to Houghton Road as reasonably necessary." 23. Please note the Civano Certification Committee will designate the certification process to developers of the Pavilions PAD for compliance to the Revised Civano IMPACT System and Revised MOU. As each development is submitted to the City for review a letter or stamp on the plan from this committee indicating compliance will be required prior to plan approval. 24. Please add note to landscape plan stating "Landscape irrigation in the common areas, rights-of-way and some residential areas will be accomplished with reclaimed water". Civano Master PAD Sec. C-8 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\S06-204tp.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised tentative plat, CC&R's and additional requested documents. |
| 10/03/2006 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | * No known landfill within 1000 feet of this development. * No mention on how the refuse for the individual lots will be handled. Access to some of the lots are through easements. |
| 10/06/2006 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Passed | S06-204 Pavilions: Tentative Plat Review Transportation impacts cannot be determined from the information given at this time |
| 10/16/2006 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 10/23/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Title the landscape plans sheets 1-3 appropriately. The title block should include an indication that the documents are landscape plans. 2) Provide additional information regarding the note on sheet 1 of the landscape plan referencing a Riparian Mitigation Report. Submit any required reports with the tentative plat. The format should follow the WASH Guidelines available online at http://www.dot.ci.tucson.az.us/stormwater/downloads/washguidetoM_C.pdf 3) Per Section E-4 of the Civano Master Planned Area Development, the minimum "Perimeter Landscape Area around the Perimeter of the Pavilions PAD (other than along Houghton Road ) is 25 feet. It may be reduced to zero if NOS area (on-site or off-site) of 25 feet or more is adjacent to proposed landscape border under certain circumstances. Address the landscape border requirements on the landscape plan. 3) Revise the tentative plat provide easements for required landscape buffers. LUC 4.1.8.4 4) Revise the tentative plat to identify the location and total areas of Natural Open Space. Label the scenic route buffer area as Natural Open Space and include designate the area as common area or as a conservation easement. Civano Master planned Area Development E-4.d, LUC 3.8.6.4.B 5) Revise the landscape plan to correctly identify easements. Revise the call- out for native seed in utility easements to include drainage areas, as the arrow also points to the area portion of Lot 2 identified on the plat as stormdrain or channel. 6) The landscape plan include potential site features, such as vehicular circulation that are not disclosed on the tentative plat. Revise the plan to comply with DS 2-07.2.1.A which states "All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the landscape plan will be identical in size and location to those shown on the base plan." 7) A plant/habitat inventory and mitigation plan will be required for any proposed development that impacts the Mesquite Wash. It appears that portions of Drexel Road and sewer improvements impact the regulated WASH area. TCC Sec-29, Art.VIII. 8) Revise the tentative plat to delineate the Mesquite Wash study area (consisting of the channel, the banks, and the land area extending fifty (50) feet from the banks). Development in the study area is restricted, unless approved by Development Services. TCC Sec. 29-15.(b) 9) Within the Scenic Corridor Zone drainageways are to be maintained in their natural states where possible, and the discretionary authority shall be exercised only under unusual circumstances. In situations where the discretionary authority is exercised by the City Engineer or designee, modifications will be in accordance with the "Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Area Regulations." Revise the tentative plat to provide for preservation of portions of any drainageways that extend through the scenic corridor zone on the site. LUC 2.8.2.6.C 10) A separate Scenic Corridor Zone application and review may be required unless the Civano PAD specifies an alternative. Contact Patricia Gehlen or the CDRC office for application requirements. Revise the landscape plan to incorporate the Native Plant Preservation requirements into the landscape plan. Landscape plans shall include a summary of plants required for mitigation and show their site location on the landscape plans. Show the total PIP, TOS, required mitigation for each species. DS 2-15.3.4.B 11) Revise the native plant preservation plans to identify any line work used on the drawing. Provide a legend. 12) Revise the landscape plans to show the limits of grading. DS 2-07.2.2.B.5 13) Revise the native plant preservation plans to show the limits of grading. DS 2-15.3.4.A 14) A separate native plant preservation plan and landscape plan will be required for any public right-of-way construction or development. Landscaping, development or excavation proposed in right-of-way or MS&R areas must be approved by the City Engineer or designee and comply with the City Engineer's requirements on construction, irrigation, location, and plant type. Contact Gary Wittwer, DOT Landscape Architect for specific requirements. 15) Show the Divided Urban Pathway per the Civano PAD section C-5.c on the tentative plat and landscape plans. 16) Provide for a linkage to the Mesquite Wash nature trail located immediately upstream and the Multi Use Trail, as may be required by other agencies. Contact Glenn Hicks at Parks and Recreation for additional information. Show any routes or improvements on the tentative plat and landscape plans. Civano PAD C-5. 17) Landscape irrigation in the common areas, rights-of-way and some residential areas will be accomplished with the City's reclaimed water service per Civano PAD C-8. Show the location of the reclaimed water service on the tentative plat and incorporate the service into the irrigation plans for the site. |
| 10/23/2006 | 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: S06-204 PAVILIONS/TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: 10/23/06 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: It is unclear as to how all lots will be accessed. Please label all lots at point of access with a star symbol. es |
| 10/24/2006 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 10/24/2006, TO: Patricia Gehlen FROM: Laith Alshami, P.E. CDRC Engineering SUBJECT: Pavilions S06-204, T15S, R15E, SECTION 01 RECEIVED: Tentative Plat, Landscape Plan and Drainage Report on September 25, 2006 The subject submittal has been reviewed and it can not be approved at this time. Address the following comments before review can continue. Prepare a detailed response that explains the revisions that were made and references the exact location in the drainage report and on the Tentative Plat where the revisions were made: Drainage Report: 1. The report states that "Lots 11-17 will be developed as a regional hospital by Tucson Medical Center". What will Lots 1-10 be developed as? 2. Figure 3 shows two OS3's. Revise as necessary. 3. The table in Figure 3 does not include concentration point 2G. 4. It appears that the discharge values for concentration points OS1 and OS2 have been switched either in Table 1 on page 2 or the table shown in Figure 2. Additionally, show OS1 on Figure 2. 5. The calculated discharge at CP 1A is 70 cfs, yet the Q100 used for the HEC RAS analysis exceeds the 100cfs. Explain. 6. It appears that the discharge values for concentration points D16 and D18 have been shown incorrectly either in Table 1 on page 2 or the table shown in Figure 2 7. Delineate, on Figure 4, Mesquite Wash top of bank and show the wash study area and the erosion setback line from the top of bank. 8. It appears that some erosion hazard setback line dimensions do not match their locations (i.e. when the setback is 22', it appears that the location of the setback line is not located 22 feet from the top of bank, etc.) Check and revise as necessary. 9. The lot combinations in Table 3 do not include lots 9 and 10. Explain. 10. In light of the last sentence of the second paragraph on Page 1, the subsequent information regarding the stormwater conveyances and the Drexel Road improvements is confusing. Respond to the following related comments: i. Provide a time frame that explains the last sentence on page 7 (i.e. the detailed design will be submitted with this project or when the individual lots come in for development review). ii. Is Drexel road going to be improved as part of this plat submittal or will it be improved with the individual lot improvements? The street can not be improved piecemeal. The decision as to what kind of improvements Drexel will have and when the improvements will be installed has to be made with the proposed platting of the parcel. 11. It is not clear what the TMC project, mentioned in Section 4.4 on Page 9, includes. Does it include the entire parcel or only the area south of Drexel Road? 12. It is not clear where the TMC and South Blocks Concentration Points, provided in the hydrological data sheets, are located. Explain and revise as needed. 13. It is not clear how Lots 6, 7 and 8 will be discharging there runoff into the regional basin without causing a potential adverse impact on one another, especially with the uncertainty of which will be developed first. Address this issue. 14. Lot 4 Hydrologic Data Sheet shows that the lot will be developed as highly urban. The reviewer understanding is that the entire project will be developed as Commercial. Explain. 15. The sizes of the watershed areas for Lots 1-3, shown in the hydrological data sheets, do not match the area sizes shown on Figure 5. Revise as necessary 16. It seems that the hydrological data sheets do not utilize the soil types to determine the runoff coefficient. Clarify and revise if necessary. 17. It is not clear why the watersheds for Concentration Points 1A and 1C "Existing", in the hydrologic data sheets, are classified as suburban. It appears that they are mostly natural with Type "B" soil. Their runoff coefficients appear to be high. 18. The Hydrologic Data Sheets in Appendix C are not clear. The concentration points descriptions are not found on the drainage exhibits (i.e. Blocks, S1/2 BLK3, etc.). Revise to facilitate review. 19. Include the Q100 in the Combined Pipe/Node Report and Pipe Report. 20. It is not clear where the location of the Drexel Road catch basin will be. Additionally, it is not clear if Drexel Road will be improved as part of this project and if it will have a culvert crossing for Mesquite Wash. If a culvert crossing is proposed, provide the design calculations and a hydraulic rating for Drexel Road. 21. Show on the drainage exhibits the locations of the concentration points included in the "portions of Previously Approved Drainage Reports" for the information to be meaningful. 22. The report did not address erosion control requirements for this project. Address. 23. It is not clear when the regional detention basin will be developed. The report shall specify the construction time frame of all proposed drainage facilities and whose responsibility it will be. 24. Will the regional detention basin require security barriers? 25. According to Section 14.3 of the "Standard Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management In Tucson, Arizona", the proposed detention/retention basins require maintenance access ramps that shall be wide enough to accommodate vehicular access. The minimum width should be 15' and the ramp slope should not exceed 15 percent. Please be advised that maintenance ramps should be designed in such a way that does not allow access to vehicles except maintenance vehicles. Verify that the maintenance ramps will not reduce the required size of the basins. 26. According to Section 3.3.5 "Low-Flow Channels" of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual the proposed basins floors shall be sloped to provide positive drainage. The section recommends a minimum of 0.5% floor slope and 0.2% low flow concrete channel slope. Please be advised that based on the City's experience with similar projects, 0.5% slope was difficult to construct and maintain which resulted in nuisance ponding in the basins. Show the provided positive drainage on the drainage exhibit. 27. Address drainage facilities maintenance responsibility and provide a maintenance checklist. We also recommend including a copy of the check list in the CC & R's to allow the Home Owners Association access to the list and facilitate their maintenance responsibility. 28. Determine and show on the drainage exhibits the proposed slope treatment and setback lines for the proposed detention/retention basins and channels based on the Soils Report recommendation. 29. In accordance with Chapter 4 of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual, the detention/retention basins shall be designed to be natural looking, aesthetically pleasing and have multi-use. Verify compliance with these recommendations. 30. The Drainage Report does not address water harvesting and does not demonstrate how drainage will be directed to maximize water harvesting. 31. Provide the 404 Compliance Statement, and the Army Core of Engineers delineation of the jurisdictional waters and their determination of 404 Permit compliance based on the proposed development activities. Show the Jurisdictional water delineation on the drainage exhibits. Tentative Plat: 1. Provide the correct S (yr)-______ subdivision case number according to D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.1. 2. Place the C9-____-____-____ Rezoning case number as required by D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.1. 3. List, in General Note #39, the lot numbers that are impacted by the City of Tucson Floodplain Regulations (D.S. 2-03.2.2.C.2.a.). 4. Add a general note, which requires a floodplain use permit for any work within the regulatory floodplain (D.S. 2-03.2.2.C.2.b.). 5. The provided basis of bearing is the calculated one; not the recorded one as described on Sheet 1 of 2. Additionally, provide the proper tie between the basis of bearing and one of the subject parcel corner monuments (D.S. 2-03.2.3.A). 6. Due to the Scenic Corridor development restrictions and the size of the regulatory floodplain, it appears that lot #1 is not buildable. Verify that development within Lot #1 is possible. Otherwise, Lot #1 can be either designated as a common area or it can be part of other lots. 7. Provide the water surface elevations for all flows of 100-cfs or more (D.S. 2-03.2.3.J.1 and D.S. 2-03.2.4.L.6.) 8. The regional basin should be designated as a common area and its maintenance responsibility shall be addressed in the CC & R's (D.S. 2-03.2.4.C). 9. It is not clear how all proposed lots will have legal access. The "Reciprocal Easement Agreement" does not provide enough information to allow cross access over lot lines. Additionally, the Agreement describes access over the Common Areas, but the Common Areas are not shown on the Tentative Platy. Verify that all lots will have legal access and check if cross access easements are required (D.S. 2-03.2.4.F). 10. Demonstrate how the proposed Drexel Road improvements will connect to the Drexel Road improvements associated with Sierra Morado Unit 2 Development. Ensure that Drexel Road right of way and cross section match for both developments. 11. The proposed Drexel Road cross section does not match either the standard or the PAD cross section for 100-foot right of way. Additionally, the cross section does not show a bike lane. Address this issue and revise as required. 12. Dimension the Water Easement shown within lot 6 in accordance with (D.S. 2-03.2.4.J). 13. Show the detention basin ponding limits (D.S. 2-03.2.4.L.1.). 14. Provide the proposed detention basin, erosion control and channel construction details (dimensions, slopes, material, grades, maintenance access ramps, basin low flow channel, inlets and outlets, rip rap, filter fabricetc.) (D.S. 2-03.2.4.L.2 & 3). 15. Show all applicable setback lines such as sight visibility triangles and Mesquite Wash 50-foot study area setback (D.S. 2-03.2.4.M.). 16. Call out Mesquite Wash. 17. Verify that the proposed improvements on Houghton Road are what the Department of Transportation has required. 18. Clarify why Houghton Road improvements do not include sidewalks. 19. Note on the plans that the proposed wheelchair ramps shall be constructed in accordance with Standard Detail 207 with truncated domes instead of the required grooves. 20. Revise the Tentative Plat in accordance with the drainage report revisions. Landscape Plan: 1. Demonstrate that the proposed landscaping will not conflict with the detention basin maintenance access ramp and inlet and outlet structures. 2. Demonstrate compliance with water harvesting requirements. 3. Ensure that the proposed landscaping does not conflict with the sight visibility triangles. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Tentative Plat, Landscape Plan and Drainage Report |
| 10/24/2006 | 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 24, 2006 RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat S06-204 Pavilions T151501 (141-01) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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: Add the sections, township and range to the title blocks. Perimeter line must be solid and the heaviest line on the plat. Add the dimensions and bearings for the perimeter line. Remove the shading. Add the complete curve data. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUBMITTAL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL 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 |
| 10/25/2006 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | October 25, 2006 ACTIVITY NUMBER: S06-204 PROJECT NAME: Pavilions PROJECT ADDRESS: Houghton Rd/Drexel Rd PROJECT REVIEWER: Jose E. Ortiz PE, Traffic Engineer Resubmittal Required: Traffic Engineering does not recommend approval of the Tentative Plat; therefore a revised Tentative Plat is required for re-submittal. The following items must be revised or added to the plat. 1. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. 2. At Houghton Road/Drexel Road as well as all Driveways along Drexel and Houghton illustrate and label the size of both existing and future SVTs (DS 2-03.2.4.M). If the existing and future SVTs are coincident, then label both as existing and future. 3. To ensure proper future ROW dedications per the Major Streets and Routes plan illustrate existing and future ROW on the eastside and westsise of Houghton. 4. 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. 1107. 5. If applicable to this development illustrate the location of Driveway 1 per the TIA prepared by Kimley Horn. 6. The proposed Driveway 1 and Driveway 2 shall have restricted access (right in/right out) therefore schematically illustrate this restriction of access with pork chop island and temporary medians along Houghton Road (all dimensions and details to be provided on the PIA). 7. Do the off-site paving improvements illustrated on the Tentative Plat account for the recommended exclusive right turn and exclusive left turn lanes as well as all required bike lanes along Houghton Road? (Details and dimensions not required; to be provided on the PIA) 8. The access points shall have 25' radius curb returns. (DS 3-01.0 figure 6) If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x305 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 10/27/2006 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 10/31/2006 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Denied | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR# 170801 October 27, 2006 Dear : Robert Suarez SUBJECT: Pavilions Tentative Plat S06-204 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and disapproved the development plan submitted September 25, 2006 It appears that there are conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. Please show facilities on the plan. A facilities map is attached for reference. Any relocation of facilities will be billable to the customer. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. In order to apply for electric service, call the New Construction Department at (520) 918-8300. Submit a final set of plans including approved site, offsite and electrical load plans. Include a CD with the AutoCAD version of the plans. If easements are required, they will be secured by separate instrument. Your final plans should be sent to: Tucson Electric Power Company Attn: Ms. Mary Boice New Business Project Manager P. O. Box 711 (DB-101) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-917-8732 Please call the area Designer Todd Stocksdale at (520) 917-8715, should you have any questions. Sincerely, Henrietta Noriega Office Specialist Design/Build hn Enclosures cc: T. Stocksdale-TEP P. Gehlen, City of Tucson (E-Mail) |
| 10/31/2006 | 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 S06-204 Pavilions 10/30/06 ( X ) Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment ( ) Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-05-02 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Civano Master PAD – PAD 12 GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Scenic Route COMMENTS DUE BY: October 23, 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 ( X ) See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: ( X ) Resubmittal Required: ( X ) Tentative Plat () Development Plan ( X ) Landscape Plan ( X ) CC&R’s REVIEWER: JBeall 791-4505 DATE: 10/20/06 Comments 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 October 22, 2007. Within the project location map please identify Mesquite Ranch Wash and Civano Wash, Civano Neighborhood 1, and Block 1. DS 2-03.2.1.D.2 Please provide a denser hatch pattern that indicates the FEMA floodplain – Zone A in the legend. The one used does not reproduce well. Instead of providing applicable uses to each of the proposed lots, please revise general note 40 to read “Individual development plans, landscape, and NPPO plans will be submitted for review and approval for each lot as noted on this tentative plat. The individual development plans will include all regulatory requirements as mandated by the Civano Master PAD, Commercial Pavilions PAD, Land Use Code, and Development Standards for individual lot development. A copy of the approved tentative plat and landscape plan must be included as reference for each development plan submitted for review”. Please remove general note 11 since this was clarified by new note (see note 8) Replace general note 18 and 19 with note stating “This plat is designed to meet the overlay zones criteria: Sec. E-5.a Civano Commercial Pavilions PAD for Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ); Sec. 2.8.3, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone, Sec. 2.8.6; and Sec. 29-12 through 29-19 Water Course Amenities, Safety, and Habitat (WASH) Ordinance of the Tucson Code”. DS 2-03.2.2.B.7 Revise general note 38 so it references all lots impacted by the WASH Ordinance as required by DS 2-03.2.2.C.3 Improvements to Houghton Road as indicated in Sec. E-4.e require a half street cross section for the east side of Houghton Road along the Pavilions PAD frontage. The cross section is to include a ten (10) foot half medium, two twelve (12) foot travel lanes, a five (5) foot bike lane, a tapered deceleration lane, and a twelve (12) foot multi-use path and an eight (8) foot pedestrian pathway with landscaping and drainage accommodated between the vehicular and pedestrian areas. Please provide on the tentative plat these requirements in both plan view and as a cross section. Two (2) additional driveways for right-in and right-out access from Houghton Road are permitted per the Pavilions PAD (in addition to Global Solar). The plat indicates a one (1) foot no access easement along the entire frontage of Houghton except for Drexel Road entrance. If additional driveway entrances are to be utilized please identify their location and remove that portion of the no access easement. Add note stating “Two (2) driveways for right-in, right-out access from Houghton Road will be permitted for access to the Pavilions PAD (in addition to the existing driveway for Global Solar): one (1) between Drexel Road and the southern boundary of the Pavilions Pad and one between Drexel Road and the northern boundary of the Pavilions PAD. Locations may change from time to time as the PAD is developed and internal circulation established”. Pavilions PAD Sec. E-4.f It appears that access to lots 1 and 6 is limited to Houghton Road which would then not meet requirements stipulated by the PAD since the reciprocal easement agreement provides for access over and across common areas defined as all curbs, roadways, driveways, aisles, and walkways on the subdivision plat. Please clarify. Please show the Sierra Morado PAD Frontage Area on the tentative plat (Figure 29: Pavilions PAD) and add note listing the additional development standards for this frontage area. Pavilions PAD Sec. E-4.h Please add to the Master Plan Map on sheet 1 of 2 of the General Notes the height restrictions as provided in Figure 29; Pavilions PAD. Please provide detail as to how Drexel Road ties into the proposed right-of-way traffic circle east in Sierra Morado Unit 2. The Civano Master PAD requires connectivity and designates Drexel Road as an internal spine road through the community (Sec. C-7.a) Please provide square footage of the thirty (30) foot scenic corridor buffer along Houghton Road. This area is part of the overall natural open space (NOS) area. Future development plans submitted are to provide running totals of NOS and functional open space (FOS) to be added to overall totals required by the Master PAD. Please add the following notes relating to Scenic Corridor and PAD Requirements: “The following sections of the Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ) shall apply to the Pavilions PAD; LUC Sec. 2.8.2.9.A, 2.8.2.10.A, 2.8.2.4, and 2.8.2.6.B subject to Pavilions PAD Sec. E-5.a.4. All other portions of the SCZ LUC requirements shall not apply per the PAD.” “The SCZ shall apply to properties within two hundred (200) feet of the future right-of-way of Houghton Road.” “A buffer area thirty (30) feet wide, adjacent to Houghton Road is to be preserved and maintained in its natural state. This buffer and natural open space (NOS) may be enhanced with indigenous vegetation.” “Building or structure surfaces, which are visible from the Houghton road, will have colors which are predominant within the surrounding landscape, such as desert and earth tones.” “All landscaping, including preservation and reestablishment of native vegetation, shall comply with LUC Sec. 3.7.5.2.” “The Pavilions PAD frontage as a whole will have view corridors with a combined width of at least twenty (20) percent of the frontage, which will allow vision from at least one (1) point into and through the Pavilions PAD from Houghton Road. The method of allocating view corridor areas across the Pavilions PAD and/or among different property owners shall be established and submitted to the City of Tucson’s Development Services Department for approval in connection with the approval of the first development plan within the sub-PAD.” “Building height within the SCZ shall be measured in accordance with the ordinary method for height measurement as described in LUC Sec. 3.2.7.2.A. Sec. 3.2.7.2.A.3 does not pertain.” “The SCZ buffer area may be crossed by designated paths for access to Houghton Road as reasonably necessary.” Please note the Civano Certification Committee will designate the certification process to developers of the Pavilions PAD for compliance to the Revised Civano IMPACT System and Revised MOU. As each development is submitted to the City for review a letter or stamp on the plan from this committee indicating compliance will be required prior to plan approval. Please add note to landscape plan stating “Landscape irrigation in the common areas, rights-of-way and some residential areas will be accomplished with reclaimed water”. Civano Master PAD Sec. C-8 |
| 10/31/2006 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Denied | S06-204 Pavilions: Tentative Plat Review - Sht. 2 of 2 refers the State Land Lease @ Houghton Rd. as #3457. This segment of road was leased from the State by St. Land Lease #1550. State Land Lease #3457 was concerned w/ a 150' wide Drexel Rd. corridor that is no longer considered. |
| 11/06/2006 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | DATE: November 3, 2006 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov CC: SUBJECT: S06-204 Pavilions: Tentative Plat Review(9-25-06) Denied. Please contact Parks and Recreation to discuss requirements for Mesquite Ranch Wash Trail and the Houghton Greenway. |
| 11/08/2006 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | November 8, 2006 To: Robert Suarez, RS Engineering Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Project Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________ From: Michael J. Harrington (520-740-6579), representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environmental Quality Subject: Pavilions, Lots 1-17 Tentative Plat - 1st Submittal S06-204 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. This project will be tributary to the Ina Road Water Pollution Control Facility and the Roger Road Wastewater Treatment Facility via the Pantano Interceptor. Obtain a letter from the PCWMD's Development Services Section, written within the past 90 days, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for the project is available in the downstream public sewerage system and provide a copy of that letter to this office. The required form to request such a letter may be found at: http://www.pima.gov/wwm/forms/docs/CapResponseRequest.pdf. The tentative plat for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. All Sheets: Add the tentative plat case number, S06-204, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than any cross reference numbers. No wastewater review fees will be charged for sheets where this is the only required revision. All Sheets: Add the appropriate cross-reference numbers near the title block of each sheet. No wastewater review fees will be charged for sheets where this is the only required revision. Sheet 2: Public sewer assets are shown on this development plan and are not identified properly identified. Revise the site plan so that: All public sewer elements (manholes and sewer mains), that are located on this project or are less than 100’ from this project, are identified with the wastewater plan and manhole IMS numbers. Also, include the size (diameter) of the existing pipes. The IMS numbers are the sewer element identification numbers that can be found on the PCWMD Maps and Records (5th floor) basemaps or on PCWMD and PCDOT MapGuide internet websites. Sheet 2: Revise the PG. number, for the two labels that identify the existing 20’ SEWER ESMT, to read, 1762, so that the easement may be easily located in a records search. Sheet 2: Revise the proposed 30’ ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENTGRANTED BY THIS PLAT, labels so that they state: 30’ PUBLIC SEWER, ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT, BY FINAL PLAT And extent this easement North to the existing easement at MH #2. Sheet 2: Revise the proposed easement (20’ UTILITY EASEMENTGRANTED BY THIS PLAT), between MH #2 and MH #9, so that the label states: 20’ PUBLIC SEWER AND UTILITY EASEMENT, BY FINAL PLAT Sheet 2: Provide a new public sewer easement, between the proposed 30’ easement at MH #3 and the existing 20’ PUBLIC SEWER ESMT, DKT. 11879, PG. 1762, to grant legal rights to Pima County to operate and maintain the proposed 8” public sewer. 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 plat. 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 second (2nd) submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $50.00 (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. If you have any questions regarding the above mentioned comments, please contact me at the telephone number shown under my signature on the first page of this letter CC: Project File |
| 11/14/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES November 14, 2006 Robert M. Suarez R S Engineering, Inc. 140 North Tucson Blvd. Tucson, Arizona 85716 Subject: S06-204 PavilionsTentative Plat Dear Robert: Your submittal of September 25, 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 BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 12 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (Zoning, ESD, Addressing, Landscape, Engineering, Traffic, TEP, DUPD, Real Estate, Parks and Recreation, Wastewater, DSD ) 6 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Landscape, Engineering, DUPD, Parks and Recreation, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO Plan (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies CC&R's (Zoning, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Plant/Habitat Inventory and Mitigation Plan (Landscape, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608 extension 1179. 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: 791-9405 Tp-resubmittal |