Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you can not find what you are looking for please submit a records request.
Plan Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Plan Number - S07-110
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/25/2008 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 02/12/2008 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Add a note indicating that, prior to grading, grubbing, or construction, temporary fencing will be provided to protect riparian areas to be preserved in a natural state and that the temporary fencing shall remain in place during all phases of construction that could affect the protected riparian areas. DS 9-06.2.5.B.2.h 2. One of the symbols for plants to be removed from site (a cross symbol) on sheet N-2 located within the sidewalk area along the east side of proposed Chevrolet Avenue and just south of the Atterbury Wash, does not have an identification number associated with it. Revise by adding a label. |
| 02/12/2008 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 02/25/2008 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Denied | S07-110 Mountain Vail Estates: Resubmittal - CDRC - Tentative Plat Review -Sht 29/30, request clarification if emergency road (Keynote 29) is within C.A. "B". -Concerning drainage pipes within proposed public right-of-way, request confirmation if the City or H.O.A will be responsible to provide service & maintenance (refer to Shts. 15, 20, 22, 24 & 28). -Sht. 24 & 29, request confirmation if proposed drng. esmt. is public or private. -Sht. 14, request a "1' No Vehicle Access Easement" along the N. boundary of Lots 69-82. -Sht. 14, concerning the area between the N. boundary of Plat & Lots 70-82, request clarification the area is C.A. "B". -Sht. 1, under Legend, (None Access Easement) probably should read (No Access Easement). |
| 02/29/2008 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | February 29, 2008 ACTIVITY NUMBER: S07-110 PROJECT NAME: Mountain Vail Estates PROJECT ADDRESS: Houghton Rd/Mary Ann Cleveland Way 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. We discussed showing the Old Vail Road offsite improvements on the PIA, but DSD staff recommends that the offsite improvements be illustrated on the tentative plat (TP). This will convey to TDOT Permits and Codes the parameters of the required off-site improvements to Old Vail Road when the approved TP is submitted to TDOT during the PIA process. Schematically illustrate the recommended off site improvements on the tentative plat. Final dimensions for all off site improvements will be illustrated on the PIA plans. 3. Per TDOT staff a 24' wide pavement section with 8' graded shoulders in each direction will be sufficient for Old Vail Road within the city limits and fronting this development. 4. It has been brought to my attention that an IGA with Pima County may warrant a review by the county due to the vicinity of this project with respect to the county jurisdiction. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x76730 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 02/29/2008 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S07-110 Mountain Vail Estates (X) Tentative Plat () Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-06-16 – Weinberg – MaryAnn Cleveland Way NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: H.A.M.P. SCENIC ROUTE: Yes COMMENTS DUE BY: February 25, 2008 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 () Other REVIEWER: msp 791-4505 DATE: February 22, 2008 Department of Urban Planning and Design S07-110 Mountain Vail Estates Tentative Plat February 22, 2008 The following comments are from the Department of Urban Planning and Design (DUPD) and subject to change/re-evaluation by staff, pending a scheduled on-site meeting on February 29, 2008, between the applicant and staff from the Department of Parks and Recreation. Staff comments below are based entirely on the applicant’s submittal dated January 24, 2008 and does not yet address any input that may be generated at the February 29, 2008, on-site meeting. Staff again recommends the applicant schedule a meeting with DUPD staff (Roger Howlett and Manuel Padilla) to discuss tentative plat, S07-110 Mountain Vail Estates. Staff can be reached at 791-4505 to schedule a meeting. Tentative plat submitted, dated January 25, 2008 is not in compliance with rezoning case C9-06-15, condition #1. The landscape plan dated January 23, 2008 identifies three recreational areas, one open space, and the larger Community Park. However, landscape plan has yet to address the additional recreational detention basins to be located through the entire site. The preliminary development plan identified 11 basins; the landscape plan dated January 23, 2008 identifies 12 basins. These recreational detention basin sites are identified in the rezoning approval as each having landscape screening, lawn/play area, BBQ with picnic table, and street parking. In addition, landscape plan dated January 23, 2008, identifies an “open space” area east of lot 296. The approved rezoning, preliminary development plan identifies this area as a “Recreational Area.” Furthermore, recreational areas #1, # 3, and #4, as identified in landscape plan dated January 23, 2008 are inadequate in design and function, as per the preliminary development requirements listed above. Additional reference is provided below (bullet-excerpt from staff’s previous comment #1, dated November 5, 2007), in which staff has continuously requested corrections to tentative plat and landscape plan to bring the site design into substantial compliance with rezoning C9-06-15, condition #1: In response to staff’s previous comment, the resubmittal states that vegetation and trees within the detention basins will also serve as passive recreational area. The trees, hydro-seed, and native plants shown within the detention basin area are a requirement of rezoning condition #7.e., which reads that vegetation shall be uses as screening and/or security barrier for a minimum of ten percent (10%) of the basin perimeter. Rezoning condition #7.e, complements recreational amenities but are not the amenities in themselves. Therefore, staff again makes reference to the recreation/detention basin requirements as it relates to recreation amenities (rezoning), which includes: That rezoning case C9-06-15, condition #1, requires the subdivision plat to be in substantial compliance with the preliminary development plan. The preliminary development dated October 8, 2006, specifically identifies in the upper left hand corner a “Typical Recreation/Drainage Area,” that calls out recreation amenities such as picnic tables, BBQ, lawns & play areas, landscape screens, and street parking. The PDP identifies eleven (11) “Recreation Detention Basins” and three additional “Recreation only Areas,” which are not detention basins. The commitment to provide ample recreational opportunities at the time Mayor and Council approved the rezoning request is further confirmed by the Land Use Concept Plan, which also identifies the eleven basins with recreational opportunities. Again landscape material alone does not constitute a recreation area to staff. Please revise tentative plat and the landscape plan to address the recreation/detention basin amenities called out on the preliminary development plan dated October 8, 2006. 2. Staff’s previous comment #2, dated November 5, 2007, which addressed interior and perimeter pedestrian overall connectivity among the required recreational amenity sites and the Esmond Station Railway corridor. This issue is pending further review and anticipated input to be generated at a scheduled site review on February 29, 2008. The Department of Urban Planning and Design defers further comments on this issue until after the scheduled on-site meeting. Listed below (bullet) for your convenience is staff’s previous comment #2, dated November 5, 2007: In response to staff’s previous comment #2b, you state that the tentative plat is in compliance with the PDP. Although connections are provided between detention basins and the Esmond Station Railway corridor, its unclear if adequate view corridor (open space) have been provided along the length of the proposed centralized pedestrian path (Esmond Station Railroad Corridor). In addition to the pedestrian friendly concept for the Esmond Station Railroad Corridor, there are the perimeter ERZ pockets and the Atterbury Washes that were also part of the pedestrian friendly trails/path system in the PDP and the Land Use Conceptual Plan. However, in the tentative plat site design these perimeter amenities of open spaces and the Atterbury Wash have been removed as part of the on-site pedestrian circulation path/links. It is recommended that the applicant meet with staff from both the Department of Parks and Recreation and the Department of Urban Planning and Design to review the site design as it relates to rezoning requirements to address adequate pedestrian open space areas and connectivity not only within the interior but also along the perimeters. Staff’s previous comment #3, dated November 5, 2007, requests the applicant to address the issue of a second basketball court being deleted (deleted from plans by the time of the second review), from the intended recreational amenities at the larger community park that is to be located at the northwestern area of the site. In response the applicant indicates in their submittal, dated January 23, 2008, that “Park design works better and more efficient without the added basketball court.” DUPD staff defers this issue to the Department of Parks and Recreation staff to further review. Please provide a written agreement/approval/e-mail, etc, from the Department of Parks and Recreation, as it relates on the removal of the second basketball court use at the larger Community Park. As with staff’s previous comment # 4, dated November 5, 2007 (in bullet below), staff defers to the Department of Parks and Recreation on the final design and function of the Esmond Station Railway Corridor/Ped Trail: In response to staff’s previous comment #3 & 4, as it relates to the Esmond Station Railroad Corridor/Ped. Trail, DUPD staff emphasizes that the proposed centralized pedestrian trail width and view corridors are not in compliance with the rezoning PDP and Land Use Concept Plan. However, DUPD staff will again defer to the Department of Parks and Recreation for final design approval. As with staff’s previous comment # 5, dated November 5, 2007, (in bullet), staff defers the final approval of tentative plat, sheet 19, keynote 23, as to its context and language, as may be approved by the Department of Parks and Recreation. Applicant is requested to correct keynote # 23 throughout the plat, as it is not consistent in the plat. See sheet # 15 and sheet #19 as an example. After correction, please provide written agreement/approval/e-mail, etc..from the Department of Parks and Recreation, which states tentative plat, keynote 23 (context and language) has been resolved to their satisfaction. Correction noted to tentative plat and landscape plan that identifies the proposed recreational amenities within the large park area. However, staff request that tentative plat, keynote #23 be revised to indicate these are the proposed recreational elements/amenities. As with staff’s previous comment # 6 (in bullet below), staff defers to the Office of Conservation and Sustainable Development as it relates to the issue of Desert Tortoise habitat issues. Please provide written agreement/approval/e-mail, etc…from the Office of Conservation and Sustainable Development, which states this item has been resolved to their satisfaction. DUPD staff defers to the Office of Conservation and Sustainable Development as it relates to staff’s previous comment # 6, in reference to Desert Tortoise habitat issues. |
| 03/03/2008 | HEATHER THRALL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Heather Thrall Senior Planner PROJECT: S07-110 Mountain Vail Estates Tentative Plat Resubmittal, 3rd Review TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 27, 2008 DUE DATE: February 25, 2008 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. PRIOR REVIEW: The lands which lies within the AEZ must be given a block number and remain as part of the subdivision unless the property has been split prior to tentative plat approval. Because it is within the ADC-3 of the Airport Environs Overlay, its area cannot be counted toward compliance to RCP criteria for density and site coverage. Your response indicated you are requesting to split off the land. The actual lot split process can be done over the counter. Provide copies of a drawing, legal descriptions and easements that may be required. Bring this information to the zoning counter at DSD, then follow the review procedure for lot splits as prescribed at the zoning counter. Once the lot split is done, the area shown on the tentative plat currently as "unsubdivided" should be omitted from the plat drawings. 2. THIS REVIEW: Staff noted on this review that Old Vail Road is shown with "hatching", suggestive that it is included as a possible dedication in this project. It appears that Old Vail is in existence and has a corresponding book and page for the right of way maps. Please remove the hatching from the Old Vail Road to ensure it is clear that it is already dedicated. 3. PRIOR REVIEW: Please provide the boundary of Common Area "A" and the public street on either sheet 15 of 30 or 17 of 30. It is still not clear where this separation occurs. Your response indicated that Chevrolet was going to be public, and other streets would be private. Please clearly delineate with a distinct line and keynote where the private streets will begin off Chevrolet. In addition, change sheet 17 to state that Chevrolet is public. 4. PRIOR REVIEW: Please add lot number and common areas to title sheet of CC&Rs. Your response indicates this was done. I am unable to verify, as I have not received a revised copy of the CCRs within the submittal package. 5. PRIOR REVIEW: The proposed public roadway link between phase 1 and phase 3 and proposed drainage improvements construction is on a separate parcel that is not part of this subdivision. A signed agreement and dedication must be provided from the property owner allowing the off-site improvement of the road to be done within the access easement on that parcel. Per Engineering this will still be required incase proposed subdivision for rezoning case C9-06-15 is postponed or never constructed Your response indicates that the adjacent subdivision, S07-173, provides this agreement and will be constructed at the same time. Please provide copies of the signed agreement, per the above. Staff needs to see this information please. Thank you. 6. Staff reviewed the plat for any changes that were made as well. It was noted that several changes were made to lot numbering, drainage details, pathways added, new drainage basin and reconfigurations between common areas and new lot locations. The plat comments will be done page by page. 7. Page 1: A) Please show the 400' Scenic Corridor Overlay lines on both sides of Mary Ann Cleveland Way on the overall index sheet drawing. 8. Page 2: A) comment 49, please remove all references to Houghton Road. B) Comment 9, add note " the maximum height of residences within the SCZ is 24 feet" C) Note 57 references a DSMR process. Please add case number D07-56 with an approval date of January 7, 2008. 9. Page 3: A) in the building height section - add a note "the maximum height of residences within the Scenic Corridor Zone is 24 feet." 10. Page 4: A) under building height notes, add note "the maximum height of residences within the Scenic Corridor Zone is 24 feet." 11. Page 5: A) under building height notes, add note "the maximum height of residences within the Scenic Corridor Zone is 24 feet." B) it appears the 2nd set of building coverage notes are for lots 50x110 - however, the notes indicate 40x115 size- a repeat of the lot size in the first calculation - are used. Please check and revise if necessary. C) A check of the actual overall site coverage for phase 3 confirms an overall site coverage of 51.1%. Per LUC 2.3.4. RCP requirements, the maximum site coverage permitted for this phase is 50%. Revise. 12. Page 15: A) provide the 400' Scenic Corridor Overlay zone line, labeled B) provide the 30' Undisturbed landscape buffer line, labeled 13. Page 16: A) add 400' Scenic Corridor Overlay zone line, labeled 14. Page 20: A) add 30' Scenic Corridor Overlay zone undisturbed landscape buffer, labeled. B) Add widths of sidewalks in Common Area B C) Add slope of sidewalks in common area B - must be accessible route 15. Page 27: A) please label the new basin between lots 393 and 394 as common area B B) in the new basin area between lots 393 and 394 is a new path. Label width and provide slope to ensure it is an accessible route 16. Page 29: A) please clarify why common area B is referred to as "B-10" - I don't see any other notations separating out common areas in this labeling manner. SCZ Comments: T07SA00168 - RESUBMIT 1. PRIOR REVIEW: Please replace Houghton Road with Mary Ann Cleveland Way in general note 49. Reviewers mistake. The response indicates this was done, however, there remain two references to Houghton Road. Please remove reference to Houghton Road. 2. Staff noted that the 400' Scenic Corridor Overlay line is not shown for the north side of Mary Ann Cleveland Way. Please add the 400' line. 3. Staff noted that the 30' undisturbed landscape buffer on the north side of Mary Ann Cleveland Way is also missing. Please add this in. 4. The maximum height for any residential unit within the Scenic Corridor is 24'. Please place this note as the 2nd part of the height note for building height on sheet 4. 5. Once Landscaping and Engineering have approved the WASH ordinance portion of the overlay review Zoning can then approve the WASH overlay/tentative plat. At this review, Landscaping has approved the overlay - Engineering has not reviewed the resubmittal yet. 6. Page 15: A) provide the 400' Scenic Corridor Overlay zone line, labeled B) provide the 30' Undisturbed landscape buffer line, labeled 7. Page 16: A) add 400' Scenic Corridor Overlay zone line, labeled 8. Page 20: A) add 30' Scenic Corridor Overlay zone undisturbed landscape buffer, labeled. 9. Please note, depending upon responses provided, further review comments may be forthcoming. I may be reached at Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov or at 837-4951. C:Heather\planning\\tentativeplat\S07-110 mountain vail estates 3rd.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised tentative plat, revised Scenic Corridor Overlay & CC&R's. |
| 03/03/2008 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 03/03/2008 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 03/03/2008 | PGEHLEN1 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Passed | |
| 03/03/2008 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Passed | |
| 03/06/2008 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT COMMENTS City of Tucson CDRC – Community Design Review Committee CASE NUMBER: S07-110 CASE NAME: Mountain Vail Estates Submittal #: 3 COMMENTS DUE: 2/25/08 COMMENTS SENT: 3/6/08 Items being reviewed: () Tentative or Final Plat ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan ( ) Other - Related Cases: annexation - N/A rezoning - C9-06-16 CDRC – S07-173, Mountain Vail Shipley Land Use Plan: Houghton Area Master Plan (HAMP) Parks and Recreation Department Staff has reviewed this proposal and offers the following comments: () APPROVED – No Resubmittal Required. () No comment () Proposal complies with annexation or rezoning conditions () Proposal satisfies trails, recreational amenities, and/or parks and open space requirements () No additional comments - complies with comments submitted on: () NOT APPROVED – Resubmit the following. See attached comments. () Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan ( ) Other REVIEWER: Joanne Hershenhorn DATE: 3/6/08 S:\PARKS_AND_RECREATION_DEPT\REVIEW_COMMENTS\CDRC_Cases\2008_ReviewsS07-110_Mtn_Vail_Estates.doc S07-110 Mountain Vail Estates GENERAL COMMENTS Staff is reviewing the plat for consistency with the rezoning conditions, the first of which requires that subdivision plats be in substantial compliance with the preliminary development plan (PDP) dated August 25, 2006, and the Design Compatibility Report (DCR). These comments are being generated after an onsite meeting between the property owners (Mountain Vail Estates and Mountain Vail Shipley) and Parks and Recreation Department Staff. Preservation of Esmond Station Rail Line & Corridor The PDP and DCR indicate the abandoned Esmond Station rail line will be preserved and utilized as a trail in an open space corridor. The DCR indicates that … the proposed trail and open space corridor along the abandoned railway line will allow pedestrian and bicycle access to the project and other portions of the Houghton Area Master Plan (HAMP) community. The DCR identifies the abandoned railway line as “… part of the culturally significant old Esmond Railroad Station, and indicates that “… attractive open space areas and the preserved railway line will enhance the community’s visual character and sense of identity.” A key concern is that the plat does not preserve the historical Esmond Station railway line in a wide, open space corridor as per the PDP and DCR. The design does not utilize the corridor as an open space amenity in a way that will enhance the community’s visual character or contribute to the sense of place or identity. Key issues are 1) a lack of preservation of the historic railway corridor alignment and elevated railway bed, 2) a significantly narrowed corridor width in places, and 3) conversion of the open space corridor area to engineered drainage facilities. Staff sees very little resemblance between the open space corridor identified on the PDP and described in the DCR, and the overlaying lots, roadways, drainage swales and detention/retention basins shown on the plat. Recreational Areas and Open Space Areas The PDP identifies several types of interconnected open space areas, including the historical rail line corridor, recreation areas, recreation/detention areas, ERZ wash areas, the Atterbury Wash, and miscellaneous open space areas strategically located throughout the site. In addition to addressing internal site connectivity, the PDP and DCR provide for links to offsite areas, including an open space corridor around the site perimeter, to allow opportunities for and promote a fully interconnected community in the future, as the surrounding areas are developed. Internal and external connectivity via multiple routes, as addressed in the PDP and DCR, is consistent with and supported by the policy direction in the HAMP. Mountain Vail Estates S07-110 According to the DCR, “The project is designed … to promote both pedestrian-friendly and bicycle-friendly environments. The pedestrian circulation system includes a hierarchy of linkages, including formal street sidewalks and trail pathways throughout the open space network … the proposed trail and open space corridor along the abandoned railway line will allow public pedestrian and bicycle access to the project and other portions of the HAMP community.” “Several mini-parks are shown in the PDP as being integrated into the floodplain areas to enhance … open green space. They will be easily accessible from surrounding residential areas, and primarily used for passive recreation.” The plat layout has eliminated and/or reduced the size of several of these open space areas, which will reduce the open space and recreational amenities available for future residents and visitors. In many locations, what remains of these open space areas has been replaced by drainage features that have not designed to facilitate and promote recreational activity and pedestrian and bicycle connectivity. Trails and Pathways - Connectivity Two guiding principles of the PDP and DCR are 1) a design that incorporates the Esmond Station rail line trail alignment as an open space feature that can become a segment of a continuous trail system throughout the area, as well as a central feature providing public trail access throughout the site; and 2) the interconnectedness of the open space, recreation, wash and trail areas, which provide internal linkage within the development, as well as external linkage opportunities. External linkage will become more important when the surrounding areas are developed. However, it will not be possible unless we plan and provide for it now. Internal and external connectivity and opportunities for using alternative transportation modes are key site design features addressed in the PDP and DCR, to demonstrate compliance with the HAMP. The PDP specifically identifies pedestrian trails/paths in the following locations: Esmond Station rail line trail (within historical rail line corridor) Atterbury Wash trail and trail along western parcel boundary (northern parcel) Powerline trail along western site boundary Trail/path along main access road connecting Powerline trail to Esmond Station rail line trail to Mary Ann Cleveland Way Trail/path connecting two open space/recreation area nodes in southeastern project area Mountain Vail Estates S07-110 Most of these trails have not been shown on the plat, except for the trail along the proposed alternative to the Esmond Station rail line corridor. The elimination or reduction in size of several open space areas that were shown on the PDP will reduce and in some places eliminate the internal and external connectivity that the HAMP is striving to create in this area. Marketability, Changing Design Paradigm and Setting a New Precedent Across the country, studies have shown and real-life projects have demonstrated that the provision of enhanced open space and recreational amenities in development projects contributes to the success of the project. In the greater Tucson area, readily accessible parks, open space areas, trails and paths are well-used. The HAMP vision includes a shift away from the post World War II automobile-focused, dominant design paradigm, towards a more human-scale oriented design theme. HAMP policies require providing multiple opportunities for alternative modes of travel, as well as recreational and open space amenities within short walking distance of a majority of residences. This approximately150-acre project is the first in the HAMP area. It provides an exciting opportunity to design with the future in mind. Implementation of the design in accordance with the approved PDP and DCR will help establish a new model for residential development in the Tucson area - one that provides greater opportunities for use of alternative travel modes, and more recreational and open space amenities than is typically available today. SPECIFIC COMMENTS Esmond Station Rail Line Corridor Staff is concerned about the elimination of the historical rail line corridor, including remnants of the elevated rail bed. The alignment of the diagonal open space feature has, in locations, been shifted southwest of the historical rail line alignment. In some locations the width of the corridor has been narrowed considerably. Portions of the historical rail line corridor are now underneath platted lots, roads, engineered drainage facilities and/or graded areas. The rail line corridor as shown on the PDP and discussed in the DCR should be a primarily natural open space corridor along the historical rail line corridor, with an ADA-accessible paved trail, landscaping enhancements, and park facilities at the northwestern end. The rest of the site is to be designed around that historical feature. It was intended to serve as both a mostly-natural open space and a historical/cultural amenity for those in the immediate area, as well as the southern portion of the HAMP. It was not intended that the rail line corridor would be converted into detention and drainage facilities for the Mountain Vail Estates development. Mountain Vail Estates S07-110 Beginning at the southern edge of the plat area, plat lots 387-402 overlay the majority of the historical corridor area and remnants of the elevated railway bed. The roadway and lot configuration is different from that on the PDP. What remains of the open space corridor has been shifted to the southwest, narrowed considerably in places, especially in the vicinity of lots 394-402, and devoted primarily to drainage purposes. None of the exiting approximately 220-foot-wide corridor has been left natural. Continuing northwest, in the vicinity of plat lots 189-95/295-302, the PDP railway corridor widens to an average of about 150 feet, then narrows down to about 80 feet, and it is crossed perpendicularly by a roadway. The plat is similarly configured, however, none of the corridor has been left natural. Lots and engineered drainage facilities overlay the historical railway corridor and elevated railway bed, and the corridor width has been narrowed, especially south of the roadway crossing. Near lots 300/195, the corridor width has been reduced to approximately 50 feet, and most of this is an engineered detention basin. North of the roadway crossing, the width of the corridor more closely resembles the PDP. However, none of it appears to be left natural. The PDP shows an approximately 300-foot-wide corridor with park facilities, including constructed ball fields. Lots border the eastern edge of the corridor. The plat shows a roadway along the eastern edge of the engineered corridor. The sloping sides at the edge of the fill pad overlay elevated railway bed. Based on a field trip to the site on 2/29/08 and subsequent discussions, the intent is for the historical rail line/bed and surrounding, natural open space corridor to be preserved, to the maximum extent reasonably practicable, consistent with the PDP and DCR. Staff is investigating issues related to the preservation of the elevated rail bed. The roadway and lot configuration on the plat differs in several locations from what is shown on the PDP. The plat should be reconfigured to minimize roadway crossings of the Esmond Station historical rail line corridor, and encroachments into open space areas. Recreation and Open Space Areas Please remove keynote # 23 from the TP. Keynote #23 reads, “The recreational elements as shown herein are shown in concept only. The final location and type of improvements to be shown on the improvement plans.” The location and type of recreational improvements must be shown on the TP. Mountain Vail Estates S07-110 Regarding the southeastern portion of the site, east of the Chevrolet Avenue alignment and east of the Shipley property (i.e., the area that includes lots 332-521): Recreation Areas and Drainage Recreation Areas Please include a recreation area that is approximately the of size three lots in the vicinity of plat lots 449-451, as shown on the PDP, and indicate on the TP and landscape plan (LP) the types of recreational amenities that will be provided. Identify on the TP and LP the recreational facilities that will be provided in the following recreation/detention areas: between lots 344 and 497; 327 and 328; and west of lots 443 and 476. Open Space Areas Please provide the following open space areas, as shown on the PDP: a wide, walkable, open space corridor along the southern site boundary, wrapping around the southwest edge and connecting to an open space area to be provided on the Shipley property. Currently, there is a road and a rip-rapped drainage swale along the southern boundary, and a drainage swale or detention basin along the southwestern edge of this area. a continuous, walkable, open space corridor around the eastern, northeastern and northern edges of the site, configured in a manner similar to what is shown on the PDP. a larger open space area in the vicinity of plat lots 369-371, consistent with the configuration shown on the PDP. a landscaped open space corridor that has an approximate width of 20 feet between the recreation area that should be near lots 449-451 and the recreation area/detention basin between lots 327 and 328, as shown on the PDP. This corridor should be designed to incorporate the wash, if feasible. A landscaped, walkable corridor along the western side of plat lots 380-387, as shown on the PDP. Relocate the recreation/detention area located west of plat lots 443 and 476 to the west so that it is directly adjacent and connected to the central Esmond-Station rail corridor, as shown on the PDP. Mountain Vail Estates S07-110 Regarding the area west of the Shipley property, west of the historic E-S rail line corridor, and south of the NE/SW trending road that connects directly to Mary Ann Cleveland Way: Note: The roadway and lot configuration has changed from the PDP. Open Space Areas and Recreation Areas Please provide walkable, open space connections between the roadway and the natural area along the western site boundary, in configurations similar to those shown on the PDP, as follows: south of lot 246 and north of lots 247-251; south of lots 241-242 and north of lot 244; and between lots 230 and 232. Please provide readily accessible recreational facilities in the western side of the open space/detention facility south of Mary Ann Cleveland Way, west of the Chevrolet Avenue alignment, and north of plat lot 202, as shown on the PDP. Regarding the area south of Mary Ann Cleveland Way and north of the NE/SW trending road that connects directly to Mary Ann Cleveland Way: Open Space Areas and Recreation Areas Please provide walkable, open space connections in configurations similar to those shown on the PDP in the vicinity of lots 177-178. Please provide readily accessible recreational facilities in the detention area west of plat lot 136, as shown on the PDP. Regarding the area north of Mary Ann Cleveland Way: Open Space Areas and Recreation Areas Please provide walkable, open space connections in configurations similar to those shown on the PDP, as follows: in the vicinity of plat lots 17-18; and please include recreational facilities in this area; south/west of lots 17-25, connecting to the open space/detention area north of lot 25; the “L-shaped” area in the vicinity of lots 47/48 to 56/57; Mountain Vail Estates S07-110 the wide, open space corridor along the eastern site boundary, east of plat lots 1-9; along the eastern side of lots83-93; the wide open space corridor along the north side of lots 69-82; Please show the recreational facilities in the open space/recreation/drainage areas as follows: west of lot 26; north of lot 1; north of lot 83; between lots 68 and 69; and the corridor on the western side of lots 107-135. Trails and Connectivity Pedestrian trails/paths, including cross-sections showing construction details, must be shown on the TP and LP, in the locations indicated on the PDP (unless the reconfigured plat shows a roadway in an area where a trail was identified, and the roadway is acceptable to staff). Except as noted below, the minimum trail cross-section width is 8 feet. In predominantly natural areas, all trails alignments shall be designed around and to create minimal disturbance to sensitive habitat areas to the maximum extent reasonably practicable. a) The trail along the historic Esmond-Station rail line corridor is to be 12 feet wide, paved, bi-directional, and designed for pedestrians and bicycles. Native landscaping shall be provided. Signage shall be provided. The Powerline trail along the western property boundary south of Mary Ann Cleveland Way, and that portion at the southern end that connects to Old Vail Road, shall be 12 feet wide, bi-directional, paved and designed for pedestrians and bicycles. Native landscaping shall be provided. This trail will provide an off-road connection between the Old Vail Road alignment, the E-S Corridor trail, and ultimately Mary Ann Cleveland Way; and will allow also for future connections to the HAMP Town Center planned west of and adjacent to the site. Where adjacent to Mary Ann Cleveland Way, in place of the sidewalk provide a 25-foot-wide corridor with a minimum 10-foot-wide paved path and landscaping on both sides, as per the DCR. Mountain Vail Estates S07-110 Miscellaneous The reconfigured plat shows a road and a drainage swale along the southern property boundary west of the Chevrolet alignment. Please reconfigure this area to provide for the wide, open space corridor as shown on the PDP. Please reconfigure/reduce the size of the ball fields and recreation areas in the northwest corner of the site, so that they do not encroach into the Esmond Station historical rail line alignment, along the eastern side of the preserved corridor. Due to the number of comments made, subsequent reviews may generate additional comments. Please call Joanne Hershenhorn at 791-4505 if you want to discuss any of these comments. |
| 03/17/2008 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 03/17/2008, TO: Patricia Gehlen FROM: Laith Alshami, P.E. CDRC Engineering SUBJECT: Mountain Vail Estates S07-110, T15S, R16E, SECTION 31 RECEIVED: Tentative Plat, Landscape Plan and Drainage Report on January 25, 2008 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 detention basin outlets appear to concentrate the discharge onto adjacent parcels, which is not acceptable. Revise the basin outlet design to reestablish to pre-development discharge patterns. The basin outlets may be flared out to allow the discharge to be in more spread out fashion that will not have erosive velocities. Tentative Plat: 1. Several lots do not appear to meet the differential grading requirements (i.e. Lots 2-7, 16-18, 59, 60, 69, 204-209, 227, 281-284, 287-285, 300, 302, 338, 398, 414, 421, etc.) Refer to Development Standard 11-01.8.0. for more information and verify compliance with this requirement. This issue must be addressed on the grading plan, either by adjusting the proposed grades or submitting a formal technical justification for not being able to meet the 2' requirement. 2. Provide all street names as required by D.S. 2-03.2.4.F. Please be advised that this is a tentative plat requirement. 3. Cross-section Detail 6/6 does not look like the standard 100' right of way street cross section, shown in Development Standard 3-01.0. Check with "Permits and Codes" if the proposed cross section is acceptable and revise as necessary. Provide written acceptance by TDOT and apply for a Development Standard modification request (DSMR) for the proposed modification (D.S.1-01.4.7.). The DSMR case number shall be included on the Tentative Plat 4. Cross-section Detail 4/8 does not look like the standard 51' right of way street cross section, shown in Development Standard 3-01.0. Check with "Permits and Codes" if the proposed cross section is acceptable and revise as necessary. Provide written acceptance by TDOT and apply for a DSMR for the proposed modification (D.S.1-01.4.7.). The DSMR case number shall be included on the Tentative Plat. 5. The DSMR case number, to waive phasing the project during grading, shall be included on the Tentative Plat. 6. Address Zoning Review comments concerning the proposed tentative plat changes from the previous submittal and how they relate to Engineering and Floodplain Review. 7. Revise the Tentative Plat in accordance with the drainage report revisions. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Tentative Plat and Drainage Report |
| 03/19/2008 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES March 19, 2008 Warren D. Thompson Stantec Consulting, Inc. 201 North Bonita Avenue, Suite 101 Tucson, Arizona 85745 Subject: S07-110 Mountain Vail Estates Tentative Plat Dear Warren: Your submittal of January 25, 2008 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 8 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (Real Estate, Landscape, Zoning, Traffic, Engineering, DUPD, Parks and Recreation, DSD) 6 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, DUPD, Parks and Recreation, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Tortoise Study (DUPD, DSD) Per comments from DUPD, written approval is required from OCSD prior to approval of this tentative plat. Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. 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: 750-7470 |