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 - S06-205
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/26/2006 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/27/2006 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 10/02/2006 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | NO COMMENT S06-205 INDEVCO A&E INC. LAS SENDAS SUBDIVISION -------------------------------------------------------- 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. |
| 10/03/2006 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | * No known landfill within 1000 feet of this development. * 77 residential units utilizing six dumpsters. (Industry Standards has 16 three bedroom units for one 8CY dumpster. Seems OK for the number of dumpsters.) * Access to the dumpster seems OK. * No detail shown for the dumpster enclosures. |
| 10/05/2006 | KAROL ARAGONEZ | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Karol Aragonez Planner PROJECT: S06-205 Las Sendas Subdivision Tentative Plat TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 2, 2006 DUE DATE: October 24, 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 September 25, 2007. 2. Within the title block please identify what each common area's use is such as Common Area "A" private streets, Common Area "B" landscaping, etc. 3. Please correct the legal provided in the title block to read "a resubdivision of Mission Creek" as opposed to subdivision. 4. Please provide the contour interval with the scale and north arrow on all sheets. DS 2-03.2.1.H 5. Please list the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the primary owner of the site and the developer of the project. DS 2-03.2.2.A.1 6. Case number S06-205 has been assigned to this development plan (DP). Please place this number in the right corner of all sheets of the development plan, landscape plan, NPPO, and any other associated sheets. DS 2-03.2.2.B.1 7. Add a note identifying the DSMR case number. Include the date and conditions of approval once completed. DS 2-03.2.2.B.6 8. Please provide a separate response letter detailing compliance with rezoning conditions, which are to be completed on the plan graphically or by note. 9. 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 10. The future half right-of-way for Ajo Way west of the Santa Cruz River is sixty (60) feet based on MS&R designated right-of-way of one hundred and twenty (120) feet. Please verify with the City Engineer, Traffic Engineer, and TDOT if improvements for this part of Ajo Way are to be based on designated future right-of-way or the dedicated right-of-way (75 feet). DS 2-03.2.4.H 11. Please provide all information for Ajo Way on the both sheets of the tentative plat. This is to include name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. DS 2-03.2.3.E 12. Please revise streets and road notes 2. If all access within the development are PAALs then there are zero (0) private streets being created by plat. A note can be added stating the miles of PAALs. Engineering must make the decision whether access throughout the subdivision are to be developed as PAALs or streets. 13. Please revise off-street parking calculations as follows: a) Resident parking is required on individual lots not off-site (2 spaces within garages) per LUC. b) Parking within hammerheads is not allowed per figure 23 of DS 3-01.10.0. c) FYI - required numbers of visitor parking spaces are provided on-site. The additional off-site spaces shown are not required. d) The additional note indicating provided (on street) = 10 spaces is confusing. Are these within the common area? 14. The end of the hammerheads require a width of twenty (24) feet, have a length of one hundred and fourteen (114) feet, provide twenty-five (25) foot radii, and have a four (4) foot clearance around it's entirety. DS 3-01.10.0 Figure 23 15. Site coverage calculations are provided in two separate places, Land Use Code Calculations and Site Coverage Calculations, and denote different percentages. Please identify the correct calc. These should match. It would be easier to read if this information was combined in one location on the plat. 16. Please provide the dimension of the new sidewalks within PAALs and easements accessing fronts of units. Minimum width of sidewalks required within the boundaries of the project is four (4) feet. A minimum setback distance of five (5) feet for a pedestrian refuge area must be maintained between any enclosed structure and a PAAL. Please add sidewalk width to keynote 33 and revise section A-A and D-D dimensioning refuge area. Section D-D would require the addition of a pedestrian easement over the sidewalk for that portion on private lots. Sidewalks within Pandora Avenue are required to be five (5) feet in width (non-MS&R public street) and six (6) feet wide within Ajo Way (MS&R street). Keynotes may require revision to reflect requirements. DS 2-08.5.1.A, DS 3-01.4.1.b, DS 3-05.2.2.B.1, and MS&R Plan 17. Pedestrian access connection from Pandora Avenue to lots 1-5 and 21-24 needs to be shown as to how each sidewalk crosses through the landscape border. Please show on both the tentative plat and landscape plan. 18. Please clearly label pedestrian connection required on the northern edge of the site connecting the on site pedestrian circulation path to the sidewalk in Ajo Way to allow bus stop access as per rezoning condition 7.b. It appears that this connection is made from Common Area "D". C9-05-04 Condition 7.b 19. Curb ramps or diagonal curb ramps shall be provided at all pedestrian crossings of vehicle use areas and streets where accessible routes are required. They shall be located so they do not project into vehicular traffic lanes, parking spaces, or parking access aisles. Ramps shall be located or protected to prevent their obstruction by parked vehicles. Additional ramps are required at the entrance from Pandora Avenue and for the sidewalk leading from adjacent property from the west crossing Phoebe Avenue. ANSI 406 20. Detectable warnings (truncated domes) are required at marked crossings (crosswalks). The area covered by the truncated domes shall be twenty-four (24) inch deep and extend the full width of the crosswalk, preceding the crosswalk. All accessible curb ramps shall have truncated domes installed that shall be twenty-four (24) inches minimum in the direction of travel and extend the full width of the curb ramp or flush surface. The domes shall be located so the edge nearest the curb line is six (6) inches to eight (8) inches from the curb line. ANSI 406.12, ANSI 705 21. Please provide a parking typical detail for standard parking spaces for both ninety (90) degree and parallel spaces. Minimum dimensions for a parking space at ninety (90) degrees is eight and one-half (8.5) feet by eighteen (18) feet. Wheel stop curbing must be provided to prevent parked vehicles from overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas. Wheel stop curbing is to be located two and one-half (2.5) feet from the front of the parking space. The minimum width of a standard parallel parking space is eight (8) feet wide by twenty-three (23) feet in length, but can be reduced to eighteen (18) feet if the space is immediately adjacent to an access drive. DS 3-05.6.0 Table 1, DS 3-05.2.1.B.2 & DS 3-05.2.3.C.1&2 22. Please provide additional lot typicals for a corner lot and lot affected by perimeter yard setbacks. DS 2-10.3.1.B 23. Please provide a detail demonstrating how handicap accessibility to individual lots is accomplished from a street and/or parking space to the front door of the unit. DS 2-10.3.1.D 24. The RCP must be in conformance with the Tucson General Plan and the Santa Cruz Area Plan. Please contact the Department of Urban Planning and Design for these requirements. Per rezoning condition 12, dimensioned color elevations and color photos of the surrounding residential developments are to be submitted with the tentative plat LUC 3.6.1.4.A.1, DS 2-10.3.2.B & C9-05-04 Condition 12 25. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from adjacent streets exterior to the project and from adjacent existing residential development. Screening shall be architecturally integrated with the overall design of the RCP. Please provide a detail illustrating how this is accomplished if roof mounted. If the units are to be ground mounted and screened by patio walls then provide a note that states so. LUC 3.6.1.4.A.9 26. Please add note stating "There shall be no further division of land or resubdivision without the developer or successor in interest furnishing written notice to all property owners of record within the boundaries of the RCP. In not event shall further division of land occur without the written approval of the Mayor and Council". LUC 3.6.1.4.A.10 27. Please provide wall details that illustrate compliance to rezoning condition 18, 25 and rezoning condition 32. C9-05-04 Condition 18 & 19 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\S06-205tp.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised tentative plat, CC&R's and additional requested documents. |
| 10/05/2006 | KAROL ARAGONEZ | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | |
| 10/05/2006 | KAROL ARAGONEZ | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Karol Aragonez Planner PROJECT: S06-205 Las Sendas Subdivision Tentative Plat TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 2, 2006 DUE DATE: October 24, 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 September 25, 2007. 2. Within the title block please identify what each common area's use is such as Common Area "A" private streets, Common Area "B" landscaping, etc. 3. Please correct the legal provided in the title block to read "a resubdivision of Mission Creek" as opposed to subdivision. 4. Please provide the contour interval with the scale and north arrow on all sheets. DS 2-03.2.1.H 5. Please list the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the primary owner of the site and the developer of the project. DS 2-03.2.2.A.1 6. Case number S06-205 has been assigned to this development plan (DP). Please place this number in the right corner of all sheets of the development plan, landscape plan, NPPO, and any other associated sheets. DS 2-03.2.2.B.1 7. Add a note identifying the DSMR case number. Include the date and conditions of approval once completed. DS 2-03.2.2.B.6 8. Please provide a separate response letter detailing compliance with rezoning conditions, which are to be completed on the plan graphically or by note. 9. 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 10. The future half right-of-way for Ajo Way west of the Santa Cruz River is sixty (60) feet based on MS&R designated right-of-way of one hundred and twenty (120) feet. Please verify with the City Engineer, Traffic Engineer, and TDOT if improvements for this part of Ajo Way are to be based on designated future right-of-way or the dedicated right-of-way (75 feet). DS 2-03.2.4.H 11. Please provide all information for Ajo Way on the both sheets of the tentative plat. This is to include name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. DS 2-03.2.3.E 12. The development standards do not provide a cross-section that allows 90-degree parking off a public street or design for drives. The design of the main vehicular use area in this development is designed as a parking lot with PAALs and gang parking. The vehicular access to the lots/garages is provided by the drives, which have not been designed and do not meet the minimum width for a street (Fig. 1 D.S. 3-01). Therefore in order to proceed with this design and per a CDRC staff meeting including the Zoning Administrator, Deputy Director it has been determined that the vehicular use areas proposed within this development are to be considered private streets. The applicant will have to apply for DSMR's for both the main street design and the drives. Please call me if you have any questions related to this comment. If you have further questions please call David Rivera or Patricia Gehlen who were also part of the CDRC staff meeting. Additional comments may be forthcoming on this issue. 13. Please revise off-street parking calculations as follows: a) Resident parking is required on individual lots not off-site (2 spaces within garages) per LUC. b) Parking within hammerheads is not allowed per figure 23 of DS 3-01.10.0. c) FYI - required numbers of visitor parking spaces are provided on-site. The additional off-site spaces shown are not required. d) The additional note indicating provided (on street) = 10 spaces is confusing. Are these within the common area? 14. The end of the hammerheads require a width of twenty (24) feet, have a length of one hundred and fourteen (114) feet, provide twenty-five (25) foot radii, and have a four (4) foot clearance around it's entirety. DS 3-01.10.0 Figure 23 15. Site coverage calculations are provided in two separate places, Land Use Code Calculations and Site Coverage Calculations, and denote different percentages. Please identify the correct calc. These should match. It would be easier to read if this information was combined in one location on the plat. 16. Please provide the dimension of the new sidewalks within PAALs and easements accessing fronts of units. Minimum width of sidewalks required within the boundaries of the project is four (4) feet. A minimum setback distance of five (5) feet for a pedestrian refuge area must be maintained between any enclosed structure and a PAAL. Please add sidewalk width to keynote 33 and revise section A-A and D-D dimensioning refuge area. Section D-D would require the addition of a pedestrian easement over the sidewalk for that portion on private lots. Sidewalks within Pandora Avenue are required to be five (5) feet in width (non-MS&R public street) and six (6) feet wide within Ajo Way (MS&R street). Keynotes may require revision to reflect requirements. DS 2-08.5.1.A, DS 3-01.4.1.b, DS 3-05.2.2.B.1, and MS&R Plan 17. Pedestrian access connection from Pandora Avenue to lots 1-5 and 21-24 needs to be shown as to how each sidewalk crosses through the landscape border. Please show on both the tentative plat and landscape plan. 18. Please clearly label pedestrian connection required on the northern edge of the site connecting the on site pedestrian circulation path to the sidewalk in Ajo Way to allow bus stop access as per rezoning condition 7.b. It appears that this connection is made from Common Area "D". C9-05-04 Condition 7.b 19. Curb ramps or diagonal curb ramps shall be provided at all pedestrian crossings of vehicle use areas and streets where accessible routes are required. They shall be located so they do not project into vehicular traffic lanes, parking spaces, or parking access aisles. Ramps shall be located or protected to prevent their obstruction by parked vehicles. Additional ramps are required at the entrance from Pandora Avenue and for the sidewalk leading from adjacent property from the west crossing Phoebe Avenue. ANSI 406 20. Detectable warnings (truncated domes) are required at marked crossings (crosswalks). The area covered by the truncated domes shall be twenty-four (24) inch deep and extend the full width of the crosswalk, preceding the crosswalk. All accessible curb ramps shall have truncated domes installed that shall be twenty-four (24) inches minimum in the direction of travel and extend the full width of the curb ramp or flush surface. The domes shall be located so the edge nearest the curb line is six (6) inches to eight (8) inches from the curb line. ANSI 406.12, ANSI 705 21. Please provide a parking typical detail for standard parking spaces for both ninety (90) degree and parallel spaces. Minimum dimensions for a parking space at ninety (90) degrees is eight and one-half (8.5) feet by eighteen (18) feet. Wheel stop curbing must be provided to prevent parked vehicles from overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas. Wheel stop curbing is to be located two and one-half (2.5) feet from the front of the parking space. The minimum width of a standard parallel parking space is eight (8) feet wide by twenty-three (23) feet in length, but can be reduced to eighteen (18) feet if the space is immediately adjacent to an access drive. DS 3-05.6.0 Table 1, DS 3-05.2.1.B.2 & DS 3-05.2.3.C.1&2 22. Please provide additional lot typicals for a corner lot and lot affected by perimeter yard setbacks. DS 2-10.3.1.B 23. Please provide a detail demonstrating how handicap accessibility to individual lots is accomplished from a street and/or parking space to the front door of the unit. DS 2-10.3.1.D 24. The RCP must be in conformance with the Tucson General Plan and the Santa Cruz Area Plan. Please contact the Department of Urban Planning and Design for these requirements. Per rezoning condition 12, dimensioned color elevations and color photos of the surrounding residential developments are to be submitted with the tentative plat LUC 3.6.1.4.A.1, DS 2-10.3.2.B & C9-05-04 Condition 12 25. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from adjacent streets exterior to the project and from adjacent existing residential development. Screening shall be architecturally integrated with the overall design of the RCP. Please provide a detail illustrating how this is accomplished if roof mounted. If the units are to be ground mounted and screened by patio walls then provide a note that states so. LUC 3.6.1.4.A.9 26. Please add note stating "There shall be no further division of land or resubdivision without the developer or successor in interest furnishing written notice to all property owners of record within the boundaries of the RCP. In not event shall further division of land occur without the written approval of the Mayor and Council". LUC 3.6.1.4.A.10 27. Please provide wall details that illustrate compliance to rezoning condition 18, 25 and rezoning condition 32. C9-05-04 Condition 18 & 19 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\S06-205tp.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised tentative plat, CC&R's and additional requested documents. |
| 10/06/2006 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | Transportation Information for Rezoning, Subdivision and Development Review Requests File Number Description Date Reviewed E Pima Association of Governments Sandra C. Holland, Data Services 177 N. Church Avenue, Suite 405 Tucson, AZ 85701 Phone: (520) 792-1093 Fax: (520) 620-6981 www.pagnet.org S06-205 Las Sendas Subdivision 10/6/2006 This analysis is designed to allow jurisdictional planning departments to further assess the traffic impacts of planned residential and commerical developments that PAG expects will generate more than 500 average daily trips. Nearby roadway data include planned improvements, existing and future volumes and capacities, and bus and bike accessibility. 1. Nearest Existing or Planned Major Street 2. Is a street improvement planned as part of PAG's 5-Year Transportation Improvement Program? See http://www.pagnet.org/tip/ for more information on the TIP planning process. Planned Action: STREET IDENTIFICATION 3. Existing (2005) Daily Traffic Volume (reported in ADT) See http://www.pagnet.org/TPD/DataTrends/ for more information. 4. Existing (2005) Daily Capacity (reported in ADT) 5. Existing (2005) Number of Lanes 8. Future (2030) Number of Lanes TRANSIT AND BIKEWAYS CONSIDERATIONS 10. Present Bus Service (Route, Frequency, Distance) 11. Existing or Planned Bikeway Remarks: Street Number 1 Street Number 2, if applicable. Year Year Planned Action: VOLUME/CAPACITY/TRAFFIC GENERATION CONSIDERATIONS 6. Future (2030) Daily Volume (reported in ADT) (Assuming planned transportation improvement projects are completed.) 7. Future (2030) Daily Capacity (reported in ADT) 34900 Ajo Way (Mission to I-19) No 0 34,900 44,320 4 67,500 78,318 6 737 Route 50, 30 minutes, 0 miles Paved shoulder 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9. Average daily traffic (ADT) forecasted as a result of the proposed development Transportation Information for Rezoning, Subdivision and Development Review Requests File Number Description Date Reviewed E Pima Association of Governments Sandra C. Holland, Data Services 177 N. Church Avenue, Suite 405 Tucson, AZ 85701 Phone: (520) 792-1093 Fax: (520) 620-6981 www.pagnet.org S06-205 Las Sendas Subdivision 10/6/2006 This analysis is designed to allow jurisdictional planning departments to further assess the traffic impacts of planned residential and commerical developments that PAG expects will generate more than 500 average daily trips. Nearby roadway data include planned improvements, existing and future volumes and capacities, and bus and bike accessibility. |
| 10/13/2006 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | October 13, 2006 ACTIVITY NUMBER: S06-205 PROJECT NAME: Las Sendas Subdivision PROJECT ADDRESS: Ajo Way/Pandora Ave 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. Dimension the size of both existing and future SVTs (DS 2-03.2.4.M). 3. Provide the Traffic Impact Analysis as required by rezoning condition # 2. This plat will not be approved until an acceptable Traffic Impact Analysis is submitted. 4. A Right of Way permit or private improvement agreement (PIA) will be necessary for the proposed work to be performed within the Right-of-way. An approved tentative plat is required prior to applying for a PIA. Contact the PIA Coordinator for additional PIA information at 791-5550 ext. 11107. 5. The access points shall have 18' radius curb returns at S. Pandora Ave. (DS 3-01.0 figure 6) 6. Dimension the width of all ingress/egress points (Tucson City Code, Chapter 25, section 39 & 40) 7. On sheet 2 of 4 label Ajo Way. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x305 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 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 S06-205 Las Sendas Subdivision T141334 (119-41) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor’s Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor’s Office requirements. COMMENTS: Thank you for your submittal. Please make the following additions/corrections in the final plat. Add the sections, township and range to the title blocks on each sheet. Remove shading. Add interior bearings. Add bearing and dimension from the section to the point of tie to the boundary. Add the adjacent subdivisions with map & plat or label as UNSUBDIVIDED if it is there is no subdivision. If there are any questions, please contact Susan King at 740-4391. NOTE: THE ASSESSOR’S CURRENT INVOLVEMENT IN PROCESSING ITS MANUAL MAPS TO DIGITAL FORMAT IS EXPEDITED GREATLY BY EXCHANGE OF DIGITAL DATA. IN THE COURSE OF RECORDING THIS SUBDIVISION YOUR ASSISTANCE IN PROVIDING THIS OFFICE WITH AN AUTOCAD COPY WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED. THANK YOU FOR ANY DIGITAL DATA PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED. Susan King |
| 10/25/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Add the CDRC case number and any related case numbers to the landscape and native plant preservation plans. DS 2-07.2.1.B 2) All lettering and dimensions shall be the equivalent of twelve (0.12") point or greater in size. Revise the landscape plan to comply. DS 2-05.2.1.A 3) Indicate a limit of grading or disturbance on the landscape plan designed to protect the existing landscaping along Ajo Way. DS 2-07.2.2.B.5 4) A street landscape border is required along the east side of S. Phoebe Avenue. LUC 3.7.2.4 5) Revise the planting plan to comply with sight visibility standards. Show required sight visibility triangles on the landscape plan. Plant materials located within SVT's should consist of ground cover or low-growing vegetation of a species that will not grow higher than (30) inches. However, trees may be planted within SVT's provided that: A) The trunk caliper, at maturity, will not exceed twelve (12) inches in diameter; B) The lowest branch of any tree is at least six (6) feet above the grade of the street, and C) Trees are not planted in a line that could result in a solid wall effect when viewed from an angle. LUC 3.7.2.8 & DS 2-06 The plants in the future SVT at S. Phoebe Avenue and Ajo Way may be too tall and SVT's should be shown for Pandora Avenue. 6) Revise the landscape plan to remove keynotes that are not applicable. 7) Easements should include provisions for landscape and irrigation elements in additoin to sidewaks and access. LUC 4.1.8.4 The NPP application for exception is approved conditionally. Please confirm that vegetation to be removed as part of the median configuration in S Phoebe Avenue were included in the assessment. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL OTHER PLANS IS REQUIRED. |
| 10/25/2006 | 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: S06-205 LAS SENDAS SUBDIVISION/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: Delete direction from street names in Location Map and Tentative Plat. Completely spell the suffix for Pandora Avenue. Correct La Porte Ln. to Laporte Lane. Label Ajo Way on Sheet 2. Label approved interior street names on Final Plat. es |
| 10/26/2006 | 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 S06-205 Las Sendas Subdivision 10/25/06 () Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment () Other – elevations (black & white) CROSS REFERENCE: C9-05-04 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Santa Cruz Area Plan, General Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Ajo Way is Gateway Route in this area COMMENTS DUE BY: October 24, 2006 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: ( ) No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment ( ) Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions ( ) RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies () See Additional Comments Attached ( ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: () Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other – color elevations, photos of area development REVIEWER: J. Hershenhorn 791-4505 DATE: 10/25/06 S06-206 Las Sendas Subdivision Near the existing traffic signal and bus stop on Ajo Way, please indicate (on the plat and landscape plan) an opening in the screen wall along the northern edge of the rezoning site, and a well-lit pedestrian path connecting the onsite pedestrian walkway system with the sidewalk on Ajo Way, to demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition # 7.b. Thank you for providing the elevation drawings. Please submit color elevation drawings, and color photographs of nearby development, to demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition #12. To demonstrate compliance with rezoning conditions #18 and #25, please clearly indicate the locations of all perimeter screen walls, and provide wall details indicating the construction material(s), decorative pattern(s), and graffiti-resistant treatment(s). Are any screen walls proposed around the retention basins? If so, please indicate wall details to demonstrate compliance with rezoning condition #32. |
| 10/27/2006 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 10/30/2006 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: October 27, 2006 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov CC: SUBJECT: S06-205 Las Sendas Subdivision: Tentative Plat Review(9-26-06) Staff has no comments. |
| 10/31/2006 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | S06-205 Las Sendas Subdivision: Tentative Plat Review - No comment. |
| 11/02/2006 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Denied | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#171081 November 2, 2006 Indevco A & E, Inc. Attn: J. Lorenzo Ortiz, P.E 5995 E Grant Rd, Suite 111 Tucson, Arizona 85712 Dear Mr. Ortiz: SUBJECT: Las Sendas Subdivision Lots 1-77 S06-205 Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has reviewed the tentative plat dated September 26, 2006. This Company is unable to approve the plat at this time. There are existing electrical facilities within the boundaries of the development. The facilities along with the easement recording information must be shown on the plat prior to approval. An existing easement recorded in Docket-7956 at Page-799 must be shown on the plat. Also, easement Docket-8151 at page-1391 cannot be release by the plat, it can be released by separate instrument. All relocation costs will be billable to the developer. Please direct questions concerning easement(s) to Liza Castillo, Right-of-Way Agent in our Land Department at 520-917-8745. TEP will provide a preliminary electrical design on the Approved Tentative Plat within fifteen (15) working days upon receipt of the plat. Additional plans necessary for preparation of the design are: building plans including water, electrical, landscape, sidewalk and paving plans. Should you have any questions, please contact the area designer Frank Grijalva at (520) 918-8361. Sincerely, Elizabeth Miranda Office Specialist Design/Build lm enclosures cc: P. Gehlen and F. Rodriguez, City of Tucson (e-mail) F. Grijalva, Tucson Electric Power |
| 11/08/2006 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: November 8, 2006 SUBJECT: Las Sendas- Tentative Plat Engineering Review TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: 1425 W Ajo Way, T14S R13E Sec34/35, Ward 1 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: S06-205 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the submitted Tentative Plat, Drainage Report, Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCRs), and a copy of the Title Report. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Tentative Plat purposes only. The Tentative Plat is not approved at this time. The following items need to be addressed: TENTATIVE PLAT: 1) DS Sec2-03.2.4.C: Clarify on the Tentative Plat Common Area "A", the parking area access lanes (PAAL), property boundaries and the liability associated with each. The proposed Tentative Plat shows what appears to be paved access that run between the lots that are on private property and not associated with Common Area "A." Revise the property lines so that all PAALs are located within Common Area "A." 2) Per Rezoning Condition 1 provide the preliminary development plan dated August 2, 2006 to verify that the proposed Tentative Plat is in substantial compliance with said plan. 3) Per Rezoning Condition 5 provide a reference to Tentative Plat Keynote 35 on Sheet 3 of 4 for the 1-foot no access easement required along the southern portion of Ajo Way. 4) Per Rezoning Condition 7b provide a pedestrian path and access opening in the screen wall on the northern edge of the rezoning site connecting the on-site pedestrian circulation system to the bus stop located on Ajo Way. 5) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.B.1: The correct Tentative Plat number (S06-205) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plans where indicated by the "S06-___". 6) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.B.7: Revise General Note 7 to reference that Ajo Way is a Gateway Route and that this project is designed to comply with the overlay zone criteria. 7) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.D.1.a: Revise Street and Roads Note 1 to include "…and drainage improvements…" as worded in the development standard section. 8) DS Sec.2-03.2.4 C: Revise the Title Block on Sheets 1-4 to clarify all uses allowed within each Common Area. Provide a description for each Common Area within the Title Block and verify that the same descriptions are used within the CCRs. 9) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.F: Revise the Tentative Plat so that it is designed in accordance with Street Development Standard 3-01.0. The following items need to be revised or added to the proposed Tentative Plat: a) Label the required 18-foot radii at all ingress/egress access points along Pandora and Phoebe Avenue. b) Revise the Tentative Plat to show all handicap access ramps with truncated domes per ANSI Standards. 10) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.F: Revise Tentative Plat Key Note 19 to call out the minimum width of 5-foot for the proposed sidewalk. 11) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.F: Revise Tentative Plat Key Note 33 to call out the minimum width of 5-foot for the proposed on-site pedestrian circulation system that connects this project to the existing elementary school. 12) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.F: Revise Tentative Plat Key Note 37 to call out the typical detail for the proposed handicap access ramp and note that all access ramps are to be built with detectable warning (truncated domes) per ANSI Standard. 13) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.F: Revise Tentative Plat Key Note 48 to label and show the required 6-foot wide sidewalk along the entire frontage right of way of Ajo Way that is adjacent to the proposed subdivision as per the City's Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan. 14) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.J: Provide easements for all utilities with recordation information or provide the description for each utility in their respective Common Area, verify that the CCRs match the Common Area descriptions. 15) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L: Revise the Tentative Plat, in conjunction with the submitted Drainage Report, to reflect the following information. For additional information regarding drainage standards, see the City of Tucson Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management. a) Provide the water surface elevation within Common Area "E" b) Provide a detail for the proposed underground stormwater retention/detention system. Show manufactures recommendations and clean outs or manholes required so that sediment/debris can be removed from the stormwater chambers as per the manufacture recommendations. c) Per Rezoning Condition 15 provide spot elevations at intervals along both proposed basin bottoms to show slope percentage. The bottom of basin slopes must be 1% or greater to prevent accumulation of standing water and mosquito infestation. d) Per Rezoning Condition 16 revise both basins to accommodate for public safety. If basins are used for recreational areas then the basins must have at least one side that is at an 8H: 1V slope to allow for pedestrian access out of the basin in times of flooding. e) Per Rezoning Condition 19 and 20 provide a detail for both basins per the drainage report requirements and show the vegetation screening and security barrier that are required per rezoning. 16) DS Sec.10-02.0.14.3.2: Provide a note on the Tentative Plat for the underground detention/retention system outlining the inspection and maintenance responsibilities of the owner(s). The inspection and maintenance guidelines must be in conformance with the manufacture recommendations and outlined on the Tentative Plat. 17) DS Sec.11-01.9: Revise the Tentative Plat to provide the required 2-feet setback from all property boundaries to the proposed limits of grading, fill slopes, detention/retention basins, and associated erosion protection. The plan view on the Tentative Plat shows that the limits of grading encroach within the required 2-feet setback. Provide sufficient room to allow for the 2-feet setback from property lines to top of fill slopes and associated erosion protection. DRAINAGE REPORT: 18) Provide details for both basins that include a sediment trap or other sediment control measures to prevent sedimentation of the detention/retention basins per Rezoning Condition 14. 19) Provide details and layout for the proposed Stormtech SC-740 Chambers within Common Area "D." Provide manufactures recommendations for installation, maintenance and placement within a proposed detention/retention basin. 20) Provide manufacture recommendations for maintenance of the underground stormwater retention/detention system. Revise the drainage report and Tentative Plat to show that maintenance of the underground stormwater retention/detention system meets the recommendations of the manufacture. Clean outs or manholes will need to be provided at locations along the system so that sediment/debris can be removed from the stormwater chambers as per the manufacture recommendations. 21) Provide a geotechnical report that specifically assesses the proposed underground stormwater retention/detention system within the proposed basin (Common Area "D"). The geotechnical report shall state whether the chambers are subject to collapsing, erosion protection requirement, or whether infiltration rates meet the required 12-hour disposal time. GEOTECHICAL REPORT: 22) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a, 10-02.14.2.6: Provide a Geotechnical Report Evaluation that addresses the following: a) Soils report should provide conformance with DS Section 10-02.14.2.6 regarding 30-foot boring for basin, and provide a discussion of the potential for hydro-collapsible soils and any recommendation for setbacks from building to proposed retention/detention basins, and water harvesting basins. b) The soils report shall provide identification / assessment of any potentially hazardous geotechnical areas, and state any geotechnical recommendations and whether there are special provisions for the soil preparation for this development. c) Provide slope stability recommendations for any proposed constructed slopes. d) Provide percolation rates for retention/detention basins for 5-year threshold retention. e) Specifically assess the proposed underground stormwater retention/detention system within the proposed basin (Common Area "D"). The geotechnical report shall state whether the chambers are subject to collapsing, erosion protection requirement, or whether infiltration rates met the required 12-hour disposal time. GRADING PLAN: 23) DS Sec.11-01.2.1: For future reference a grading permit will be required for this project. A grading permit may not be issued prior to Tentative Plat approval. 24) Please ensure the grading plan is consistent with the Tentative Plat, Drainage Report, and Geotechnical Report. Grading standards may be accessed at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf. 25) Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) requirements are applicable to this project. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans and text addressing stormwater controls for all areas affected by construction activities related to this development will be required with grading plan submittal. For further information, visit www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html. GENERAL COMMENTS: Provide a revised Tentative Plat, a revised Drainage Report, and a Geotechnical Report at re-submittal. The revised Tentative Plat, Drainage Report, and Geotechnical Report must address the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the Tentative Plat, Drainage Report, and Geotechnical Report. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 1189. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division COT Development Services |
| 11/17/2006 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | November 16, 2006 To: J. Lorenzo Ortiz, Indevco A&E, Inc. 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: Las Sendas (R.C.P) Lots 1-77 & Common Areas "A"-"E" Tentative Plat - 1st Submittal S06-205 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 Roger Road Wastewater Treatment Facility via the Southwest 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 subdivision case number, S06-205, 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. Sheet 1: Revise General Notes, Wastewater Management Notes #1, by deleting the first sentence, so that it only states: A PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FROM PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. Sheet 1: Add a General Note that states: CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION FROM THE PIMA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IS REQUIRED BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. APPROVAL OF THIS PLAT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION. Sheet 1: Add a General Note that states: THE REQUIRED PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER LINE RELOCATION PROJECT WILL BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED TO PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARDS. Sheet 1: Add a General Note that states: A PROPERTY OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION WILL BE FORMED TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR MAINTENANCE, OPERATION AND CONTROL OF ALL SHARED PRIVATE SEWERS. Sheets 2 & 3: An existing public sewer easement should lie over the existing public sewer, G-335. If this is so, please show the easement on this plan. If not, please explain. Sheets 2 & 3: Revise the site plans so that: The proposed public sewer manholes are numbered sequentially from downstream to upstream. Sheets 2 & 3: Revise the site plans so that: Rim and invert elevation data is provided at the public manholes and private sewer cleanouts. This information may be provided in a table. Sheets 2 & 3: Revise the site plans so that: The percent slope and length of each reach of proposed sewer. This information may be provided in a table. Sheets 2 & 3: Revise the Keynote block, item #8, so that it states: EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINE TO BE ABANDONED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT AND REMOVED COMPLETELY. This should also be made clear in the General Notes on sheet 1. The following wording is used with public sewer improvement plans and these two notes may be modified to fit this situation. Existing manhole(s) [ #s ] of [ PCWWMD plan # ] is(are) to be removed. Contractor shall remove the rim and cover. The manhole(s) will be demolished completely and filled and compacted with select material to 95% density. The salvaged rim and cover shall be delivered to PCWWMD at the location as specified by the inspector. The contractor shall dispose of all manhole demolition material off site at a landfill or other approved location. [ Length ] lf of existing [ diameter] public sewer from manhole # [ # ] to manhole # [ # ] of [ PCWMD plan # ] is to be abandoned. Remove sewer completely. Sewer shall NOT be abandoned in place. You have proposed constructing public sewer manholes with 90 degree turns and only 0.10 fall designed into the channel inverts. The Design Standards call for a 0.20 fall at this angle. This design will require a formal variance. The process nay be initiated by contacting PCWMD Systems Management – Engineering, Eric Wieduwilt, Chief Engineer, @ 617-8200. You are proposing the use of 10” pipe to replace the 8” pipe that is to be abandoned. Tim Rowe of PCWMD Development Services Section has verbally approved the use of the 10” pipe. No other variance conserning the pipe size is required. You are proposing the construction of a private sewer collection system in a residential subdivision. This type of sewer now necessitates prior written authorization, pursuant to PCWMD Director, Michael Gritzuk’s letter to PCDSD Director, Carmine DeBonis, dated March 13, 2006, regarding Private Sewers and Public Pump Stations. Provide approval, in writing from the PCWMD Directors office. Mr. Mike Bunch, PCWMD Deputy Director, is the contact for the above-mentioned approval. A copy of Mr. Gritzuk’s letter, to Mr. DeBonis, is being provided for your inspection with this email. This office will require a revised set of bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. Pima County Code Title 13.20.030.A.2 requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the tentative or preliminary 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 $150.00 (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 |
| 11/21/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES November 21, 2006 J. Lorenzo Ortiz, P.E. INDEVCO A&E, Inc. 5995 East Grant Road, Suite 111 Tucson, Arizona 85712 Subject: S06-205 La Sendas SubdivisionTentative Plat Dear Mr. Ortiz: Your submittal of September 26, 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 10 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (ESD, Zoning, Traffic, Addressing, Landscape, DUPD, TEP, Engineering, Wastewater, DSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Landscape, DUPD, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO Exception Plan (Landscape, DSD) 3 Copies Color Elevations and Photographs (Zoning, DUPD, DSD) 2 Copies Traffic Impact Analysis (Traffic, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Geotechnical Report (Engineering, DSD) Staff from Zoning, DSD Engineering, and Traffic met and determined that the access ways in this subdivision will be private streets and maybe modified with a DSMR. Should there be conflict in the on-line comments, please revise plat as if the proposed access ways are streets. 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: 545-0092 Tp-resubmittal |