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 - S08-096
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/29/2008 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 08/06/2008 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | ADOT has NO COMMENT on this project. -------------------------------------------------------- Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are intended for use by the person(s)/entity(ies) named above and may contain confidential/privileged information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by email, and delete or destroy all copies plus attachments. |
| 08/06/2008 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 08/07/2008 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/12/2008 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Houghton/22nd Street S08-096 TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 12, 2008 DUE DATE: April 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. 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 July 29, 2009. 2. This project requires a separate review and fees for the SCENIC CORRIDOR ZONE (SCZ) & ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ZONE (ERZ) overlay reviews. Please incorporate the SCZ & ERZ plans into your next submittal. Contact Patricia Gehlen for submittal requirements. Both the SCZ & ERZ Overlays must be approved prior to approval of the tentative plat/development plan. 3. Provide a cross access cross parking agreement for this center. 4. D.S. 2-03.2.1.D.2 Identify all subdivisions on the location map by book and page number. 5. D.S. 2-03.2.1.D.2 & D.S. 2-05.2.1.D.2 Identify major watercourse on the location map. 6. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.1 & D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.8 Place the S08-096 subdivision case number in the lower right corner of the plat next to the title block. 7. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.2 & D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.1 Revise general note 1 to read "EXISTING ZONING IS SR, PROPOSED ZONING IS C-1". 8. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.5 & D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.3 Revise General Note 3 to include each use, the development designator and if applicable any subject to sections listed in the LUC. 9. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.7 & D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.10 Revise General Note 4 to include "2.8.6 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ZONE (ERZ). 10. D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.11 Revise General Note 2 to include the area of the site by square footage. 11. D.S. 2-05.2.3.B If applicable all existing easements will be drawn on the plan along with the recordation information width and purposed of the easement. 12. D.S. 2-03.2.4.A & D.S. 2-05.2.4.A Draw in all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements for the interior lot lines. 13. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 The parking area access lanes (PAAL's) located to the south of the buildings located on Lots 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 are required to have a minimum setback distance of two (2) feet to the property line, see D.S. 3-05.2.2.B.3. Cross section 17 shows a retaining wall that it appears that a railing maybe required, please clarify how high this retaining wall will be. 14. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D.3 Show the required vehicle stacking spaces for the drive-throughs shown adjacent to the proposed buildings located on lots 1 & 2. 15. D.S. 2-05.2.4.I Per LUC Section 3.2.6.5.B the setbacks for the proposed buildings adjacent to 22nd Street are measured from the back of future curb. Show the required setbacks correctly on the plan. 16. D.S. 2-05.2.4.I Based on the setback of 57.87 feet shown from Houghton Road to the proposed building on lot 1 the maximum height allowed for this building would be 19.29 feet. See LUC Section 2.8.2.5 Structure Height. A. The maximum height of a structure will be one-third (1/3) the distance of the structure from the future right-of-way line. 17. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K There area numerous locations on the plan where the proposed "4' x 4' LANDSCAPE PLANTER", Keynote 8, appear to reduce the sidewalk width to less than four (4) feet, south side of proposed building on Lot 1, south side of proposed building on Lot 2, west and south side of proposed building on Lots 3, 4 & 5, north side of proposed building on Lots 7, 8, 9 & 10, and the north, south and east of proposed building on Lot 11. Per D.S. 2-08.5.1.A the minimum width of a sidewalk is four (4) feet. Provide dimensions on the plan that show that the minimum width is maintained. 18. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Per D.S. 2-08.3.1 show the required accessible route to the refuse container enclosure located at the south end of Lot 7. 19. D.S. 2-05.2.4.M Provide, as a note, the square footage of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed. The specific use will also help verify that Rezoning Condition 3 is met. 20. D.S. 2-05.2.4.N Per Rezoning Condition 3 it appears that the proposed building located on Lot 6 exceeds the maximum allowed height of twenty-four (24) feet. Until the specific use is provided the maximum height cannot be verified. 21. D.S. 2-05.2.4.O Provide a loading zone calculation that provides the total number of loading spaces required and the total provided on the plan. Per LUC Section 3.4.4.1.B.2 More Than One (1) Building. On a project containing more than one (1) building, loading spaces shall be provided for each building, based on the number of spaces required for the uses within each building. If more than one (1) use is located within a building, the loading space for each principal use shall be located in close proximity to the service entrance of the use it serves. If a building has a corridor, interior to the building, specifically allocated for the delivery of goods from a centralized loading area to all uses within the building, then the required number of loading spaces for uses within that building may be located at that one (1) location. Until the specific use for each building is provided the required number of loading spaces cannot be verified. At a minimum one (1) loading space is required for each building. 22. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Per LUC Section 3.3.5.1 Land Uses Sharing Common Elements. For a mixed use development, the total number of required spaces is ninety (90) percent of the sum of the amount required for each separate principal use in Sec. 3.3.4. Zoning acknowledges that the required parking will not change but the parking calculation needs to be shown correctly. Adjacent to the USE break down it appears that the numbers listed under "PROVIDED" are the required number of vehicle parking spaces prior to the reduction. There are two (2) numbers listed under "PROVIDED", 269 and 245, please clarify which number is correct. 23. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Within the parking space calculation, handicapped parking show the required and provided number of van accessible vehicle parking spaces. 24. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Please be aware that if any of the "MEDICAL SERVICES, OUT PATIENT" use is planned to be rehabilitation facilities or outpatient physical therapy facilities the required number of accessible parking spaces must be increased per International Building Code (IBC) Section 1106.4. 25. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Per D.S.3-05.2.3.C.1 A vehicular use area must be provided with post barricades or wheel stop curbing designed to prevent parked vehicles from extending beyond the property lines. This said there are twenty-four (24) vehicle parking spaces shown along the east property line and twelve (12) vehicle parking spaces shown along the south property line that over hang the property line, revise the plan so that the vehicles will not overhang property lines. 26. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Based on the provided bicycle parking calculation there are ten (10) Class 1 bicycle parking spaces provided. Zoning was only able to locate nine (9) on the plan. 27. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q It does not appear that there is any bicycle parking provided for the proposed building on lots 7, 8, 9 & 10. 28. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Clearly identify the main entrance of all buildings on the plan so that compliance with D.S. 2-09.4.1. 29. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q On the Class 2 bicycle parking detail provides; materials for lighting and the specific type of rack and the number of bicycles it supports. 30. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q The provided Class 2 bicycle parking detail does not correctly reflect the Class 2 bicycle parking shown on the plan. The bicycles as shown are not provided with the required two (2) point security, see D.S. 2-09.2.3 31. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q On the Class 2 parking detail provide the thirty-six (36) inch dimension from the end of the rack to any perpendicular wall or obstruction, see D.S. 2-09.2.5.1.B. 32. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q On the Class 2 parking detail show the thirty (30) inch dimension from space to the parallel wall or obstruction, see D.S. 2-09.2.5.1.B. 33. D.S. 2-05.2.4.U Provide a letter stating how all rezoning condition have been met. 34. D.S. 2-05.2.4.V If applicable show the location and type of postal service for this site. 35. D.S. 2-05.2.4.W. If applicable show the location and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) on the plan. 36. Cross Sections 8 & 9 on sheet 5 are for PAALS adjacent to buildings. The call outs on sheet 3 appear to be through a buffer area, please clarify. 37. Show the four hundred (400) foot scenic corridor zone on the plan. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\cdrc\tentativeplat\S08-096tpca.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised tentative plat, and additional requested documents. |
| 08/12/2008 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 12 AUGUST 2008 D08-096/HOUGHTON/22ND STREET DEVELOPMENT REVIEWED BY RON BROWN ACCESSIBLE REVIEW 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1 DENIED: SEE COMMENTS BELOW I. SHEET 1 of 5 A. DENOTE GOVERNING ACCESSIBILITY CODE; 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1 FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY, DENOTE RIGHT OF WAY ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS; COT DOT STANDARDS FOR CURB RAMPS AT DRIVE WAYS. II. SHEET 3 AND 4 of 5: A. PROVIDE AND IDENTIFY ACCESSIBLE ROUTE THROUGHOUT SITE TO ALL BUILDING ENTRANCES AND EXITS AND PARKING FACILITIES AND TO NEAREST PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION POINT AS PER 2066 IBC, SECTION 1104 AND ICC 117.1, SECTION 402. 1. SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 403.3 BY INDICATION SLOPES THROUGHOUT ENTIRE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE. B. KEYED NOTES: 1. NUMBER 5: THERE ARE NO RAMPS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN THAT MATCH THE DETAILS PROVIDED AT DETAIL 4/5. C. NONE OF THE DESIGNED RAMPS ARE DETAILED AS TO SIZE, SLOPE, DIMENSIONS, DETECTABLE WARNINGS AND ETC. PROVIDE LARGE SCALE DETAIL OF ALL TYPES OF INTERIOR CURB AND SIDE WALK RAMPS SHOWING SIZES, DIMENSIONS, ALL SLOPES, DETECTABLE WARNINGS AS REQUIRED AND COMPLYING WITH 2006 IBC, SECTION 1010 AND ICC 117.1, SECTIONS 405 AND 406. D. NONE OF THE ISLAND CUTS ARE PROPERLY DETAILED. PROVIDE LARGE SCALE DETAIL OF ALL TYPES OF ISLAND CROSSINGS AND CUT THROUGH MEDIANS SHOWING SIZES, DIMENSIONS, ALL SLOPES, DETECTABLE WARNINGS AS REQUIRED AND COMPLYING WITH 2006 IBC, SECTION 1010 AND ICC 117.1, SECTION 406. E. ONLY ONE TYPE OF GROUPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING IS DETAILED PROPERLY. PROVIDE LARGE SCALE DETAIL OF ALL TYPES OF GROUPED PARKING SHOWING SIZES, DIMENSIONS, ALL SLOPES REQUIRED, RAMPS AND DETECTABLE WARNINGS AS REQUIRED AND COMPLYING WITH 2006 IBC, SECTION 1106 AND ICC 117.1, SECTION 502. F. III. SHEET 5 of 5: A. DETAIL 5/NOTE 5: NO RAMP AS SHOWN AT THE PARKING AISLE IS DETAILED AT DETAIL 5. B. DETAIL 4: 1. CHANGE ALL DOT 207 REFERENCES TO 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1, SECTIONS 405 AND 406 2. CHANGE ALL ADA REFERENCES TO 2006 IBC/ICC 117.1 3. ALL RAMP FLARED SIDES TO BE MIN 1:10 SLOPE, REFERENCE ICC 117.1, FIGURE 406.3. 4. REDESIGN RIGHT SIDE RAMP TO HAVE A MIN 4' WIDE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE, LANDING AT TOP OF RAMP. 5. END OF REVIEW |
| 08/15/2008 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | August 15, 2008 To: JOE ZEMAN LEADSTAR, LLC Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ___________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6579), representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environment Quality Subject: HOUGHTON / 22ND STREET LOTS 1-11 AND COMMON AREA "A" TP/DP - 1st Submittal S08-096 The proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project have been reviewed on behalf of the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) and the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. This project will be tributary to the Ina Road Wastewater Treatment Facility via the Tanque Verde 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 development plan for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. Sheet 1: There are two symbols in the Legend for existing public sewer. Change one to proposed sewer. Sheet 1: Revise General Note #12 to read as follows: THE ON-SITE SANITARY SEWERS WILL BE PRIVATE AND WILL BE CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED ON A PRIVATE BASIS, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN APPROVED OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN, IF REQUIRED. THE LOCATION AND METHOD OF CONNECTION TO AN EXISTING PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT. Sheet 1: Revise General Note #18 to read as follows: THE REQUIRED OFF-SITE PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER LINE WILL BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED TO PIMA COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT (PCRWRD) STANDARDS. Sheet 3: Call out the sewer(including manholes and cleanouts) existing and proposed as either public or private. Sheet 3: Show the entire length of proposed off-site sewer on plan so that we can determine the amount of qualifying off-site sewer for connection fee discounts. Sheet 3: Proposed manhole #2 should be located just inside the property and should be made public. A public sewer easement surrounding this proposed public manhole would have to be created. Sheet 3: The invert shown for manhole #2 does not appear to be correct @ 48.05. 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 development plan. 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 $100.00 (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. |
| 08/21/2008 | 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 S08-096 Houghton/22nd Street 08/21/08 (XXXX) Tentative Plat (XXXX) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment ( ) Other CROSS REFERENCE: C9-07-18 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Rincon Southeast Subregional Plan (Map Detail #14) GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: HOUGHTON COMMENTS DUE BY: 8/15/08 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: (XXXX) Resubmittal Required: (XXXX) Tentative Plat (XXXX) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan (XXXX) Other - Dimensioned color elevations. REVIEWER: DRCORRAL 791-4505 DATE: 8/06/08 This site is subject to the restrictions of rezoning case number C9-07-18. Please add/revise the following items to the development plan: 1. Write case number on all sheets of the tentative/development plan. 2. Per Rezoning Condition #4 which reads "building facades at rear and side…etc." and Rezoning Condition #11 which reads "the owner/developer shall submit building elevations and color palette …etc." Please submit colored elevation drawings to demonstrate compliance with this rezoning condition. Drawing to be submitted on Mylar. 3. Per Rezoning Condition #5 which reads "a signage plan will be combined with landscape …etc." Please submit a signage plan to demonstrate compliance with this rezoning condition. 4. Per Rezoning Condition #8 which reads "the owner/developer shall coordinate with property owner to the east on the development of a new screen wall. The new screen wall may replace portions of existing walls. The owner/developer shall finance and construct the new wall, six feet in height, and remove any existing walls that are to be replaced, as agreed to by the owner/developer and the adjacent property owner to the east …etc." Please submit documentation of agreement to between owner/developer and adjacent property owner to the east. |
| 08/25/2008 | CDRC1 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | CASE: S08-096, Houghton/22nd St: Tentative Plat Review COMMENT: NO OBJECTIONS OR ADVERSE COMMENTS Vehicle Trip Generation: Daily: 3,297 PM Peak: 431 Please call if you have questions or need additional information. ------------------------------------------- KoSok Chae, Ph.D. 177 N. Church Ave., Suite 405 Tucson, AZ 85701 520-792-1093 x487 [tel] 520-620-6981 [fax] www.PAGnet.org |
| 08/26/2008 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | August 26, 2008 S08-096 Houghton/22nd Street Tentative Plat/Development Plan Review This Tentative Plat/Development Plan cannot be approved as submitted. The following comments must be addressed. Since there are significant design issues unresolved at this review additional comments may be forthcoming in subsequent reviews. Drainage Report Comments: 1. Use 5 year run-off coefficients for retention analysis. 2. Provide more detail for inspection and maintenance of the basin. The basin must be maintained to meet the retention and detention requirements of the site. 3. The Este Wash in the area of this project is an Environmental Resource Zone watercourse. The ERZ review process must be completed before the Tentative Plat/Development Plan can be approved. Contact Patricia Gehlen for details on submitting the ERZ review package. 4. The drainage report on page 7 has a sticky note indicating a required revision. Please review the report for completeness and correctness. The report also alternatively indicates that the project is within a balanced basin and within a critical basin. Provide the correct information and revise the report as necessary. 5. Clearly identify the locations where the hydraulic analyses are applicable. Tentative Plat/Development Plan Comments 6. Add a note indicating that a floodplain use permit will be required for this development. 7. Provide water surface contours for the Este Wash at intervals no greater than 200 feet. 8. Label Houghton Road and 22nd Street as MS&R arterials. 9. Houghton Road is a scenic route arterial. Revise the plan to be consistent with the scenic route requirements. The DSD full notice procedure must be followed for this project. Contact Patricia Gehlen to discuss the requirements for this review. 10. Revise the Tentative Plat/Development Plan and the drainage report so they present consistent drainage information. 11. Delineate the erosion hazard setback on the plan for all areas not protected by erosion protection. 12. Clearly show the extent of all erosion protection proposed. 13. Use consistent symbols for locations of details. Ensure that the call outs and details match the plan view. 14. Include parking blocks in the parking sections where applicable. 15. The sheet index on the cover sheet only lists 4 of the 5 sheets in the plan set. Revise accordingly. 16. Show on the plan or by note how the drainage requirements in the rezoning conditions will be met. 17. Revise the basin design to provide the required emergency spillway with required erosion control and energy dissipating measures. 18. Include an estimate of the cut and fill quantities for the proposed project. 19. Note that a grading permit, floodplain use permit and stormwater pollution prevention plan will be required for this project. Loren Makus, EIT Senior Engineering Associate |
| 08/26/2008 | ANDY STEUART | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Denied | Concerning access between the 11 parcels, request a "cross-access easement" to allow shared access for vehicles and pedestrians. |
| 08/27/2008 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approv-Cond | 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 JENNIFER STEPHENS ADDRESSING OFFICIAL PH: 740-6480 FAX #: 740-6370 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: JENNIFER STEPHENS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL SUBJECT: S08-096 HOUGHTON/22ND ST/TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: 8/27/08 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. NOTE: ON FINAL PLAT: 1.) Delete street directions. ***The Pima County Addressing Section can use digital CAD drawing files when submitted with your final plat Mylar. These CAD files can be submitted through Pima County Addressing. The digital CAD drawing files expedite the addressing and permitting processes when we are able to insert this digital data into the County’s Geographic Information System. Your support is greatly appreciated.*** |
| 08/28/2008 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) All lettering and dimensions shall be the equivalent of twelve (0.12") point or greater in size. DS 2-05.2.1.A Correct the landscape plans. 2) An unpaved planting area, a minimum of thirty-four (34) square feet in area and four (4) feet in width, must be provided for each canopy tree. Redesign the tree planters on the site as necessary to comply. The planters are noted as 4' X4' on sheet 3 and 6' x 6' on sheet 4 of the tentative plat/development plan. The planters proposed cannot be accomodated as designed without interfering with parking spaces. 3) A separate application is required for the Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ), which shall be reviewed in accordance with the DSD Full Notice Procedure, Sec. 23A-50 and 23A-51. (Ord. No. 9392, §1, 5/22/00; Ord. No. 9967, §2, 7/1/04) LUC 2.8.2.11 A) A buffer area thirty (30) feet wide, adjacent to the MS&R right-of-way line, is to be preserved and maintained in its natural state. LUC 2.8.2.4.A B) Revise all plans, details and cross sections to eliminate grading, disturbance, or construction from the 30' scenic route buffer area. For instance, the 3:1 slopes designated by key note 13 are not allowed. C) Revise all plans to eliminate portions of landscape planters that extend into the 30' scenic route buffer. 4) A separate application is required for the Environmental Resource Zone . LUC 2.8.6.4.B.1. A development submittal in accordance with the DSD - Full Notice Procedure, Sec. 23A-50 and 23A-51. is required. A) Submittal material will include an Environmental Resource Report as established in Development Standard 9-06.0. This Report presents a study of the resource corridor and documents locations of the resource corridor and critical riparian habitat. (Ord. No. 9967, §2, 7/1/04) DS 9-06.2.5.B. B) If preservation of the critical riparian habitat cannot be accomplished as provided in these regulations, the submittal will include a mitigation plan as required in Sec. 2.8.6.5.D. DS 9-06. C) The Protected Riparian Area is required to be protected through a conservation or public easement or other legal restriction prohibiting future development. Provide appropriate documentation of the easement. This easement may also be used to meet the Natural Undisturbed Open Space requirements of Native Plant Preservation regulations. DS 9-06.2.6.B, LUC 2.8.6.4.B D) The landscape plan must be revised to document implementation of the mitigation plan requirements. 5) If the Set Aside Methodology of Native Plant Preservation is used, an Environmental Resource Report per Sec. 3.8.6.4 and Development Standard 1-07.0 shall be submitted. LUC 3.8.4.C 6) A minimum of thirty (30) percent of the site shall be set aside in perpetuity as Natural Undisturbed Open Space (NUOS) area. Correct the tentative plat and landscape/NPP plans to identify the protected area as NUOS. The NUOS must be shown in surveyable manner on the tentative and final plats. LUC 3.8.6.4.D 7) The copy of the native plant aerial photo we received was difficult to read. 8) Sheet 2 of the landscape plan indicates a 10' landscape border. This is not the correct border designation along Houghton Road. The development also includes a reference to a "10' Yard Setback" that may not be appropriate. LUC 2.8.2.4.A 9) Show the Houghton Greenway and the Este Wash Trail on the landscape plans. C9-07-18 10) Revise the plans as necessary to comply with rezoning conditions 5, 15, 17, 18, and 19. 11) Sheet 2 of the landscape plan indicates a 30" masonry wall along the 22nd street landscape border. Per LUC 3.7.Fences or walls constructed in a single continuous line shall extend into a street landscape border no more than the actual width of the fence or wall. Where a fence or wall incorporates offsets or similar design features, a screen may extend a maximum of three (3) feet into the street landscape border. Revise as necessary to comply. 12) Show all proposed screen walls on the development plans. DS 2-07. 13) Revise the landscape plans to remove Cercidium "Desert Museum" from the Protected Riparian Area. DS 9-06.2.4.B.3.A.1.a 14) Add the CDRC case number and any related case numbers to the landscape and native plant preservation plans. DS 2-07.2.1.B 15) Provide a signage plan per C9-07-18 with the landscape plan. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED. In addition, SCZ and ERZ applications are required. A DSMR application is also required for the proposed encroachment into Protected Riparian Areas. |
| 08/28/2008 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Identify type of user/business for each lot. 2. There does not appear to be a sufficient number of solid waste storage/enclosure areas to accomodate for user access and volume. Recommend including provisions for both refuse and recycle service for this development. Provide a minimum of two single or one double wide enclosure/s for lot 6, lots 7 thru 10, lot 11, lots 3 thru 5, and lots 1 & 2. 3. The following GENERAL NOTE must be included where centralized collection is proposed for multiple users: "One single owner, property management, or association (specify which) will be responsible for the management and maintenance of the solid waste collection service/s and storage area/s for all buildings/tenants/development." 4. The triangular vertical curbed center island at two of the entrance/exit points identified does not allow for the required, 36 ft inside and 50 ft outside, turing radius for collection vehicle. Include a minimum 3ft clear on at least one side of the collection vehicle so as to not conflict with curb or any other structure. DS 6-01.3.1.A & Figure 1. 5. Sheet 5 - Trash enclosure detail - Require a minimum 10 ft x 10 ft inside clear container service area between the rear and side wall protectors and the front gates and fully dimension. DS 6-01.4.1.B. 6. Provide a post at the face of each side of the CMU wall for mounting the gates to. Please provide corrections on resubmittal. If you have any questions you may contact Andy Vera at (520) 791-5543 ext 1212 or e-mail: Andy.Vera@tucsonaz.gov |
| 08/28/2008 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#201472 August 27, 2008 Leadstar, LLC Attn: Joe Zeman 63030 E Tanque Verde Rd Tucson, AZ 85715 Dear Mr. Zeman : SUBJECT: Houghton / 22nd St S08-096 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted August 18, 2007 It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. If the City of Tucson wants the developer to do the road improvements along Houghton and the intersection of 22nd then TEP will be in conflict. All the relocation costs will be billable to the developer. Only one (1) pole shown on plans, TEP has two (2) poles. I indicated the second pole on the plan. The location is only approximate.. In order to apply for electric service, call the New Construction Department at (520) 918-8300. Submit a final set of plans including approved site, offsite and electrical load plans. Include a CD with the AutoCAD version of the plans. If easements are required, they will be secured by separate instrument. Your final plans should be sent to: Tucson Electric Power Company Attn: Ms. Mary Boice New Business Project Manager P. O. Box 711 (DB-101) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-917-8732 Please call the area Designer Nancy DiMaria at (520) 918-8267, should you have any questions. Sincerely, Henrietta Noriega Office Specialist Design/Build hn Enclosures cc: City of Tucson, (Email only) N. DiMaria, Tucson Electric Power |
| 08/28/2008 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 08/28/2008 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Approv-Cond | 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: 08/07/08 RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat S08-096, Houghton/22nd St., 141524. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor’s Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor’s Office requirements. COMMENTS: Please identify parking areas as either a common area or lot, as it is unclear. 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. Brian Sloan 740-4395 |
| 08/29/2008 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | DATE: August 29, 2008 TO: DSD_CDRC@ tucsonaz.gov FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov SUBJECT: S08-096 Houghton/22nd St: Tentative Plat Review(7-30-08) Denied. Show the Houghton Greenway and the Este Wash Trail. If the option of paying a fee in-lieu of constructing the greenway has been selected, please provide verification of this along with the approval of the Transportation Dept.. It is advisable to schedule a meeting with staff to determine the most appropriate location for the Este Wash Trail. |
| 09/03/2008 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | September 3, 2008 ACTIVITY NUMBER: S08-096 PROJECT NAME: Houghton/22nd St PROJECT ADDRESS: 1201 S Houghton Rd PROJECT REVIEWER: Jose E. Ortiz PE, Traffic Engineer Resubmittal Required: Traffic Engineering does not recommend approval of the Tentative Plat; therefore a revised Tentative Plat is required for re-submittal. The following items must be revised or added to the plat. 1. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. 2. Provide a Traffic Impact Analysis to determine what off-site improvements will be warranted due to trip generation increases (i.e. right/left turn lane warrants, median improvements, and/or traffic signal modifications) 3. The proposed pork chops may restrict truck maneuverability entering and exiting the site. Confirm that delivery trucks will not be effected by the proposed pork chops. Provide separate exhibits that ensure adequate maneuverability. 4. A private improvement agreement (PIA) will be necessary for the proposed work to be performed within the Right-of-way. An approved tentative plat is required prior to applying for a PIA. Contact the PIA Coordinator for additional PIA information at 791-5550 ext. 74937. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x76730 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 09/08/2008 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES September 8, 2008 Joe Zeman Leadstar, LLC 6303 East Tanque Verde Road, Suite 101 Tucson, Arizona 85715 Subject: S08-096 Houghton/22nd Street Tentative Plat Dear Joe: Your submittal of July 30, 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 12 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (ADA, Zoning, Wastewater, DUPD, Real Estate, Engineering, Assessor, ESD, Landscape, Parks and Recreation, Traffic, DSD) 6 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, DUPD, Engineering, Landscape, Parks and Recreation, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO Plan (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Color Elevations (DUPD, DSD) 3 Copies Cross Access/Cross Parking Agreement (Zoning, Real Estate, DSD) 2 Copies Wall Agreement (DUPD, DSD) 2 Copies Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Environmental Resource Report (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Traffic Impact Analysis (Traffic, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608 extension 1179. Sincerely, Patricia Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 547-0195 Tp-resubmittal |