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: FLEXIBLE LOT DESIGN
Plan Number - S10-027
Review Name: FLEXIBLE LOT DESIGN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/06/2010 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/06/2010 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Passed | |
| 07/07/2010 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | Not a COT owned or operated property |
| 07/08/2010 | DAVID MANN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 07/12/2010 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | 7/14/2010 No objection regarding trip numbers. Let me know if you have any further questions. Thanks, Malini -- |
| 07/12/2010 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | >>> Douglas Kratina <DKratina@azdot.gov> 07/09/2010 9:45 AM >>> S10-027 Limberlost Estates Regional Traffic Engineering has no comments on this submittal and recommends approval of this development. It will have no impact on any existing ADOT facilities. Thank you |
| 07/14/2010 | JWILLIA4 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | 7/14/2010 No objection regarding trip numbers. Let me know if you have any further questions. Thanks, Malini -- |
| 07/21/2010 | FRODRIG2 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | Due Date Case Number Project Address August 03, 2010 S10-027 LIMBERLOST ESTATES FLEXIBLE LOT DESIGN Comments: Approved Environmental Services Department Development Plan Review Reviewer: Tony Teran Office Phone (520) 837-3706 E-mail: Tony.Teran @tucsonaz.gov |
| 07/22/2010 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | July 22, 2010 ACTIVITY NUMBER: S10-027 PROJECT NAME: Limberlost Estates PROJECT ADDRESS: 831 E Limberlost Dr 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. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. A PIA plan may not be required for this development therefore a separate drawing is required to address the required off-site improvements. 1. Install R1-1 (Stop Sign) with street names at the proposed roadway entering this development off Limberlost Drive per PCDOT & TDOT Signing Manual (2002) Chap 5-11, 5-12, and Chap 9-2. 2. Install a W14-2a (No Outlet) or W14-1a (Dead end) plaque beneath the street name signs along Limberlost Drive. 3. Provide a typical cross section of Limberlost Drive illustrating existing and proposed lane widths, curbs, and sidewalks. 4. A vertical profile along the Limberlost Drive curbline will be required to verify proper drainage. The profile is needed prior to obtaining an excavation permit. 5. An Excavation permit will be necessary for any work performed within the Right-of-way. Contact Permits and Codes at (520) 791-5100 for permit information. 6. A striping plan is required for the re-striping of Limberlost Drive 7. Add a general note to read "All non-signalized intersection street names must have E-W block number addresses for E-W roadways and N-S block number addresses for N-S roadways." If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x76730 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 07/27/2010 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | 201 N. STONE AV., 2ND FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 AUDREY FARENGA ADDRESSING REVIEW PH #: 740-6800 FAX #: 623-5411 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: AUDREY FARENGA, ADDRESSING REVIEW SUBJECT: S10-027 LIMBERLOST ESTATES/TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: July 27, 2010 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: Change “University Commons Dormitory” to “Jefferson Commons at Tucson” to the north and east of the project on sheet 1. Delete all adjacent tax codes. Change the suffix of Lulu Way to Court or Place. These are the suffixes used for a cul-de-sac. |
| 07/27/2010 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | 1. The accessible route connection to the public right of way pedestrian way does not work. It is connected to the sloping side of the ramp. Reference COT DOT standard ramp details series 207. Redesign connection accordingly. 2. Provide detectable warnings at both sides of the marked crossing. 3. Provide a gerneral note to the effect that this project will be built in strict accordance with The Inclusive Home Design Ordinance, No. 10463. END OF REVIEW |
| 07/30/2010 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: July 30, 2010 SUBJECT: Limberlost Estates Flexible Lot Design Tentative Plat- Engineering Review TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: 831 & 841 E Limberlost Drive, T13S R14E Sec19 Ward 3 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: S10-027 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the submitted Tentative Plat, Drainage Report (Bogardus Engineering, LLC, 24JUN10) 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: DRAINAGE REPORT: 1) Tucson Code Chapter 26 Sec.26-5.2.4: Revise the Drainage Report, Tentative Plat and the location of the development to show no unnecessary disturbance of the riparian 100-year floodplain. The north half of the proposed development is located within the mapped 100-year floodplain per the Drainage Report and is not considered a necessary disturbance. Review and approval for the disturbance and proposed mitigation is required by the Landscaping Department prior to Tentative Plat approval. Due to infill development a DSMR maybe applied for to alleviate some of the development standards within DS Section 9-06. 2) DS Sec.9-06 Refer to this section for the definitions, preparation, submittal, and review procedures for development within areas that have environmental habitat, Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Area Regulations. Any disturbance of the riparian habitat will require an Environmental Resource Report (ERR) approval from PDSD Landscaping prior to Tentative Plat approval. 3) Tucson Code Chapter 26 Sec.26-7.2: Provide a discussion within the Drainage Report on the required erosion hazard setback from the regulatory flow that are within the constructed drainage channel. When banks are stabilized to the level of the base flood (plus an appropriate freeboard) the setback to the structures shall be minimum 10-feet provided that the stabilization is constructed to the appropriate toe down depth. Determinations of setbacks are found in the Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management in Tucson, AZ. 4) DS Sec.10-01.4.3.1: Revise the basin configuration to meet the basin shape requirements of curvilinear shapes. If rectilinear or geometric slopes are used soften the contours with minimum 10-foot radius curves at all basin corners. 5) DS Sec.10-01.3.6.2: Per the Drainage Report and details on the Tentative Plat the retention basin has a water depth in excess of 2 feet with steeper than 3:1 (H:V) side slopes and the constructed channel has a safety issue with the vertical retaining wall as a side slope therefore a security barrier is required. Provide on the Tentative Plat and details the location for the required security barrier for pedestrian and owner safety. Security barriers may consist of any combination of vegetation, masonary, or metal pipe material 6) Ds Sec.10-02.14.3.3: Revise the site plan to clarify the required maintenance access ramp that is proposed into the basin. The curb inlet for street drainage into the basin can satisfy both inlet and access requirements as long as the development standards have been addressed. Revise the Tentative Plat sheets to clearly label the maximum 15 % slope for all ramp along with the minimum 15-foot access width for the ramp. Alternate means of access will be reviewed by the City Engineer on a case-by-case basis. 7) DS Sec.10-02.5.3.2: Provide a back-water flow depth analysis for the proposed channel. The normal-depth rating used to evaluate the channel design does not take into account the sudden changes (90 degree bends) in the proposed channel design. Provide for the additional energy losses for both 90 degree bends. Verify that the water surface elevations submitted on the proposed Tentative Plat match the hydraulic information that is calculated within the Drainage Report. 8) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.5.B: Given the proposed restricted space for the realignment channel design it is required at the Tentative Plat stage to provide for verification that the proposed channel has the design capacity and design area within the project boundary for the 100-year flow event. Hydraulic calculation sheets for the channel system and for both 90 degree bends used to collect the offsite flow must be presented in a Drainage Report with scour analysis, super-elevation calculations, and/or any proposed cut-off walls. Refer to DS 10-02.8.5 for constructed open-channel design requirements. Channel design must be submitted for review and approved by Engineering Division prior to the Tentative Plat approval. Provide hydrology and hydraulic information with all pertinent details for channel design. 9) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.6.4.a: Revise the Tentative Plat and Drainage Report so that all proposed drainage improvements match. Specifically the curb cut inlet from the private street to the retention basin. Since the curb inlet will also have to act as the maintenance access ramp rock rip rap will not work. The access ramp must be constructed so that small equipment can access the basin. Verify load weights and proposed erosion protection for the curb inlet. 10) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.6.4.a: Provide a geotechnical report that discusses the proposed outlet design of the retention basin. Specifically verification of the existing wall and the hydrostatic pressure design for ponding the retained basin water behind the wall during a 100-year event. 11) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.K: Provide a Geotechnical Report that is required for this project. The soils report needs to discuss suitability and feasibility of the project and must provide specific discussion with recommendations for the proposed retention basin, constructed channel and retaining wall design (both existing and proposed walls). Description of existing soil constraints for the site, structural design recommendations, and other typical geotechnical data is needed. The soil report shall provide identification / assessment of any potentially hazardous geotechnical areas. The Geotechnical Report shall specifically address all criteria listed in this section. Recommendations need to be incorporated into the Tentative Plat and Drainage Report. TENTATIVE PLAT: 12) Due to the scope of the project and comments below this comment letter does not reflect all of the comments or quality control comments that must be addressed prior to resubmittal of the Tentative Plat. Make sure that all dimensions, details, sections, keynotes, proposed improvements and all other aspects of this project meet the minimum requirements within DS Sec.2-03, 9-06 and Chapter 26 of the Tucson Code and are reflected on the plan sheets 13) This project is has been reviewed under the Flexible Lot Design requirements per the Land Use Code Section 3.6.1. All proposed basins must meet the open space requirements and to the greatest degree practical be designed as Functional Open Space by incorporating Multi-Use Concepts per the Detention/Retention Manual. Refer to Drainage Report comments and comments below under the Tentative Plat review for further clarity. 14) DS Sec.9-06.2.1: All site plans, development plans, Tentative Plats, plot plans or other plans providing for approval of development within property that includes any Regulated Area as defined in Development Standard 9-06.2.2 shall identify and delineate the Regulated Areas and the Protected Riparian Area. The Regulated Areas on this site are the existing 100-year floodplain limit. Revise the Tentative Plat as necessary to clearly document the locations of the exiting 100-year floodplain limit with water surface elevations per the Drainage Report. Show the same information (regulatory limits) on the plant inventory, landscape/mitigation plans, and future grading plan. 15) Tucson Code Sec 26-5.2.4: The proposed development can not unnecessarily alter the regulatory riparian habit that is located within the mapped 100-year regulatory floodplain that is contained on the property. The riparian vegetation is protected per DS 9-06.2.2.C.4. Review and approval for the disturbance and proposed mitigation is required by the Landscaping Department prior to Tentative Plat approval. 16) DS Sec.9-06.2.5.B.2: All development within the Protected Riparian Area shall be reviewed to insure that there is no unnecessary disturbance of the riparian resources. Refer to this section on Development Restrictions and revise the plans as necessary. Necessary development shall include only the crossing of riparian habitats with roadways, bikeways, paved walkways and utilities as listed below where there is no viable alternate crossing available and the crossing is necessary for the reasonable development of the property. A written explanation as to why the development is necessary shall be submitted with the appropriate plans. The Drainage Report and Tentative Plat indicate that a full build out of the property within the existing 100-year floodplain is proposed. This is not consistent with the provisions for "necessary development". 17) Tucson Code Sec 26-11: A Floodplain Use Permit (FUP) is required at the next Tentative Plat submittal for the proposed grading and alteration of the mapped regulatory 100-year floodplain. Per Chapter 26 of the Tucson Code a Floodplain Use Permit is required for any improvements within a mapped 100-year floodplain. Provide the FUP application with the resubmittal for review and approval. 18) DS Sec.2-03.2.1.E: Revise the Tentative Plat to include a small index drawing of the site showing the areas represented on each sheet. If the plat contains more than one sheet an index map or a Sheet Index reference is required on the first sheet. 19) DS Sec.2-03.2.1.J: Revise the legend to show all symbols that are used on the proposed Tentative Plat. Specifically the existing and proposed 100-year floodplain limits and Water Surface Elevations. 20) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.B.1: The correct Tentative Plat number (S10-027) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plans on all sheets. 21) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.C.2.a: Provide a note on the Tentative Plat to state the following; "The following lots are affected by the City of Tucson Floodplain Regulations: ____." (List Lots 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8) 22) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.C.2.b: Provide a note on the Tentative Plat to state the following; "A Floodplain Use Permit and finish floor elevation certificates are required for the following Lots: ____." (List Lots 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8) 23) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.C.3: Provide a note on the Tentative Plat to state the following; "This plat is designed to comply with Development Standard 9-06. Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are all impacted by said regulation." 24) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.G.1: Revise General Note #13 to read per the Development Standard referenced; "This subdivision is within the planned water service area of the Tucson Water Department which is designated by the Arizona Department of Water Resources as having an assured water supply." 25) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.A: Revise the Tentative Plat to clearly label the nearest section corner that is shown at the intersection of 1st and Limberlost. The benchmark location that is being used as the method of tie to the permanent section corner must be fully described. 26) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C: Provide a letter from the utility company that has an interesting the existing 22-foot public utility easement stating no objections to the proposed improvements as shown. The proposed drainage channel is within the existing easement and must be reviewed and approved by the utility company with a letter of approval prior to Tentative Plat approval. 27) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C: Revise the Tentative Plat to clarify if Items #4, 5, 6 and 7 on Schedule B of the Title Report affect this property. All existing utilities must either be in an easement or a blanket note must be provided on the Tentative Plat to prevent alteration, relocation or demolition of the existing utilities in the future. 28) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.D: Revise the Tentative Plat to label and dimension the existing width of paving, curbs, curb cuts and existing versus dedicated right-of-way for Limberlost Drive. Label the shown right-of-way as existing or future. Per the plat 15-feet of additional right-of-way will be dedicated by final plat which would make the existing right-of-way for Limberlost a 35-foot dimension. Label the roadway as "Public." 29) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.G: Revise the Tentative Plat to label all existing storm drains and drainage infrastructure within the right-of-way of Limberlost Drive. Provide the referenced improvement plan number in plan view. 30) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.I: Revise the Tentative Plat to show existing conditions on adjacent land significantly affecting the design of the subdivision, both properties on the upstream and downstream side of the property and regulatory wash. This includes items such as the approximate direction and gradients of ground slope; character and location of adjacent development; and drainage ways and channels, including their existing conditions. 31) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.J.1: Revise the Tentative Plat to include the Water Surface Elevations and cross sections per the Drainage Report for the existing 100-year regulatory floodplain. 32) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.J.3: Application where the property includes Protected Riparian Area within the 100-year floodplain shall conform to Development Standard 9-06. 33) 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) Revise the Tentative Plat to label and dimension all proposed handicap ramps for the access drive. Provide a detail or the Standard Improvement detail number with a referenced keynote for the proposed ramp. b) Revise the Tentative Plat to label the vertical curve for the intersection of the Private Roadway and Public Roadway as shown on the Lulu Centerline Profile detail. Provide all underground storm drain or utilities in the section view that are located within the Public Right-of-Way. 34) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.G: Revise the Tentative Plat to include the parking area for all visitor parking within a common area. Per plan view it appears that the parking space are located in Common Area B, revise the Title Block and Common Area B description to include this reference. 35) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.J: Provide a sewer easement with recordation information or provide the description for the sewer in a respective Common Area, verify that the Title Block and CC&Rs match the Common Area descriptions. 36) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.K: Either provide separately, or show a conceptual grading plan on the Tentative Plat, with the resubmittal of the Tentative Plat and Drainage Report. The conceptual grading plan is required on this project due to the realignment of the 100-year regulatory floodplain and the constructed drainage channel/basin. A Geotechnical Report is required to discuss the suitability of the project site. The soils report needs to discuss suitability and feasibility of the project. Besides description of existing soil constraints for the site, structural design recommendations, pavement design section, and other typical geotechnical data is needed. The soils report shall provide identification / assessment of any potentially hazardous geotechnical areas, provide proposed recommendations for setbacks from building to drainage areas include minimum distance from foundations to drainage channels, retention basin, and provide infiltration test results. The geotechnical report shall specifically address all criteria listed in this section. See last sentence of this section for items 6 (c) & (d) regarding hydro-collapsing soils and 30-foot test boring for basin design. Recommendations need to be incorporated into the conceptual grading plan, Tentative Plat, and Drainage Report. The soils report needs to discuss suitability and feasibility of the project and must provide specific discussion with recommendations for the proposed use of all walls (existing and proposed) for the basin and channel for structural integrity. 37) 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 (10-02) or the Detention/Retention Manual (10-01). a) Revise the Tentative Plat to verify that the proposed drainage channel meets the minimum percent longitudinal slope requirement of 0.5%. The bottom of channel slope must be 0.5% or greater to prevent accumulation of standing water and mosquito infestation. b) Revise the Tentative Plat to label the proposed 100-year water surface elevations for the regulatory wash and the proposed constructed channel and retention basin per the Drainage Report and the sections on the post-exhibit map. c) Revise the Tentative Plat to match all other aspects of the proposed revised Drainage Report. Specifically the curb cut inlet, multi-use design for retention basin, erosion protection for all 90 degree bends, channel outlet into basin, etc. 38) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.M: Revise the Tentative Plat and Drainage Report to label and dimension the required erosion hazard setback from the regulatory flow across the north portion of the site. Clearly delineate the EHSB line on the Tentative Plat to verify building locations are outside of the required setback or provide erosion protection calculations with toe down design to ensure stability of all side slopes. 39) DS Sec.10-02.14.3.2: Provide a General Note on the Tentative Plat to state that; "(a) the owner or owners shall be solely responsible for operation, maintenance, and liability for all detention/retention basins, drainage infrastructure, drainage channels and water harvesting areas; (b) that the owner or owners shall have an Arizona Registered Professional Civil Engineer prepare a certified inspection report for the drainage and detention/retention facilities at lease once every 12-months, and that these regular inspection reports will be on file with the owner for review by City staff, upon written request; (c) that City staff may periodically inspect the drainage and retention/detention facilities to verify that scheduled and unscheduled maintenance activities are being performed adequately; and (d) that the owner or owners agree to reimburse the City for any and all costs associated with the maintaining of the detention/retention basins and drainage structures should the City find the owner or owners deficient in their obligation to adequately operate and maintain their facilities." 40) DS Sec.6-01: Refer to Environmental Services comments for all refuse containers locations and detail corrections and maneuverability for refuse vehicles. Show circulation path of collection vehicle and ensure adequate turning radii and the required minimum 14 ft x 40 ft clear approach to enclosures. 41) Due to the above comments not all comments have been reflected within this letter. The minor redlines and other quality control issues will be addressed after the major comments have been addressed. 42) Review and approval from TDOT Permits and Codes for all improvements within the public right-of-way will be required. A right-of-way use permit application will be required prior to construction. Refer to the following links for TDOT Forms and applications: a) http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Forms_Fees___Maps/Applications/applications.html / b) http://www.dot.ci.tucson.az.us/engineering/pia.php c) Or contact Thad Harvison at 837-6592 for all additional questions regarding r-o-w. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE REPORT: 43) DS Sec.9-06.2.2.C: Within floodplains that are not designated as ERZ or WASH watercourses Development Standard 9-06.2.2.A and B above, the Regulated Area is the area within the one hundred (100) year floodplain for watercourses with flows of one hundred (100) cfs or more including, but not limited to, those areas which contain any of the following: a) Hydroriparian, Mesoriparian, or Xeroriparian Types A, B or C habitats as delineated by Pima County as part of Article X of the Pima County floodplain and Erosion Hazard Ordinance. b) Hydroriparian, Mesoriparian, or Xeroriparian High or Xeroriparian Intermediate Habitats as delineated in the TSMS Phase II Stormwater Master Plan. c) Xeroriparian Low Habitats as delineated in the TSMS Phase II Stormwater Master Plan or Type D habitat as delineated by Pima County for connectivity between higher habitat classes, if low-volume, high-value habitats are present, including tabosa swales or similar habitats. d) Unclassified or undocumented riparian habitat of equivalent value to the above criteria. 44) DS Sec.9-06.2.5.B: If the project proposes encroachment within the Regulated Areas, it shall conform to the following. a) Environmental Resource Report. Applicants are required to submit an Environmental Resource Report as defined in Sec. 6.2.5 of the LUC. The supporting material for preparation of the Environmental Resource Report is based on information from the Hydrologic Data and Wash Information maps on the Tucson Department of Transportation internet web site: The Critical and Sensitive Wildlife Habitat Map and Report, the Mayor and Council Interim Watercourse Improvement Policy and subsequent adopted policies, the Tucson Stormwater Management Study, the following Basin Management Plans: 1) West Branch, Santa Cruz; 2) Houghton East; 3) Este Wash; and 4) Arroyo Chico. The Tucson Stormwater Management Study, Phase II and field observation. An application may request that an element listed below be waived or that the report addresses only a specified area where a full report is not applicable to the proposed encroachment. PDSD may grant such waivers where the elements or full report are not required by code. The Environmental Resource Report must include all items (a-x) within this section. GEOTECHICAL REPORT: 45) DS Sec.10-02.14.2.6: A geotechnical evaluation needs to be submitted for review. The soils report needs to discuss suitability and feasibility of the project and must provide specific discussion with recommendations for the proposed retention basin, drainage channel and retaining walls. The report must also address the following a) Soils report should provide conformance with DS section 10-02.14.2.6 regarding 30-foot boring for the proposed retention basin and provide discussion of potential for hydro-collapsible soils and any recommendation for setbacks from building to the proposed retention basin. 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. Including proposed and existing retaining walls that are being used for the basin side slopes, basin outlet and for those walls adjacent to the structures and proposed channel. d) Provide pavement structure design recommendations. e) Provide infiltration rates for retention basin design. GRADING PLAN: 46) DS Sec.11-01.2.1: For future references a grading permit application will be required for this project. A grading permit may not be issued prior to Tentative Plat approval. 47) 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. 48) 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, a Geotechnical Report and an Environmental Resource Report at re-submittal. The revised Tentative Plat, Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report and ERR 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, Geotechnical Report and ERR. If you have any questions, I can be reached at (520) 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Planning & Development Services |
| 07/30/2010 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | PIMA COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT 201 NORTH STONE AVENUE TUCSON, ARIZONA 85701-1207 MICHAEL GRITZUK, P.E. PH: (520) 740-6500 DIRECTOR FAX: (520) 620-0135 July 27, 2010 To: TONY TSANG, P.E. A.C. TSANG ENGINEERING Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6719), Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department Subject: LIMBERLOST ESTATES, LOTS 1-10 AND COMMON AREA'S "A, B, C, D, & E" Tentative Plan – 1ST Submittal S10-027 The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD) has reviewed the proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project. The following comments are offered for your use: Obtain a letter from the PCRWRD’s Development Liaison Unit, written within the past year, 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/developer.htm#permits The development plan for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. The proposed large line connection will need to be evaluated further. We will contact you before your next submittal if the proposed connection to the 18” line is deemed unacceptable. 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 $50.00 (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter. If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly. This comment letter has been reviewed and accepted for substantial conformance to Pima County Code Title 13 by: ___________________________ Chad Amateau, P.E., Civil Engineer PCRWRD, Planning Services Section, Development Liaison Unit cc: Chad Amateau, PE Kristin Borer, PE, DLU Manager DLU Project folder |
| 08/03/2010 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) The site contains regulatory floodplain areas that may contain riparian habitat. This habitat may not unnecessarily altered per TCC Sec. 26-5.2. Refer to DS 9-06 for the preparation, submittal, and review procedures for development within areas that have environmentally valuable habitat in conformance with Article 1, Division 1, Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Area Regulations. 2) Submit an Environmental Resource Report (ERR) per DS 9-06.2.5.B.1 for proposed encroachment in the regulatory area. The report will document (1) the areas that contain riparian and wildlife habitat that is to be preserved and (2) those areas without such habitat within the regulatory floodplain. 3) All development within the Protected Riparian Area shall be reviewed to insure that there is no unnecessary disturbance of the riparian resources. Refer to DS9-06.2.5.B.2 for the section on Development Restrictions and revise the plans as necessary to comply. 4) Where any development encroaches within the Protected Riparian Areas, mitigation will be required. A mitigation report shall be submitted with the Environmental Resource Report demonstrating that the proposed mitigation is in conformance with this subsection and applicable codes. DS 9-06.2.5.B.3 5) Landscape plans are required to document compliance with the mitigation plan requirements. A summary of mitigation and preservation requirements shall be included on the plans. The plans shall show the location of mitigation areas; techniques used for mitigating impacts to, or preservation of, natural areas; specifications for restoration and revegetation of disturbed areas; and general compliance with the applicable standards. Revise as necessary. 6) Ownership of the Protected Riparian Area shall be provided in one or more of the methods set forth in DS 9-06.2.6 to insure continued preservation of the area. Refer to the standards and revise the plans and provide additional documentation as appropriate. 7) Where natural washes cannot be maintained, a mitigation plan shall be established with emphasis being placed on earthen or naturally appearing channels with landscaping and texture/color added to bank protection materials. The design of earthen channels will be encouraged in order to allow for a more permeable surface which permits reintroduction of the water into the groundwater system, allowing for the reintroduction of native plant species which promotes a natural, partially soil-stabilized system. TCC 26-8(a)(3) 8) Revise the NPP Plans to correspond with the proposed tentative plat. Currently PIP plants are designated in areas proposed to be covered with concrete. Revise the calculations as necessary. 9) Identify on plat where Detail E/E applies. 10) Revise the Landscape/NPP plans to remove the term Selective Plant Method. City of Tucson regulations cite the Native Plant Inventory Method. 11) Revise the tabulations on L-1 to cite the correct amount of disturbed area based on the NPP and Environmental Resource Report and the riparian area figures based on the Environmental Resource Report. 12) Revise sheets L2 -L4 to correctly identify the zoning for the LA Fitness site. The zoning is C-1. 13) A presubmittal meeting to discuss the proposal to develop the floodplain is recommended. 14) Slopes should be no steeper than 4:1 where water depths exceed two (2) feet within a detention or retention basin so that a safety barrier is not required. LUC 3.6.1.4.D.3.b.ii |
| 08/03/2010 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | |
| 08/03/2010 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: S10-027 Limberlost Estates Tentative Plat - FLD TRANSMITTAL: 08/03/2010 DUE DATE: 08/03/10 COMMENTS: 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 07/05/11. 2. DS 2-03.2.2.B.1 This project has been assigned case number S10-027. Place the case number near the lower right corner of all sheets. Please place the annexation ordinance case #7199 near the lower right corner of each sheet. 3. DS 2-03.2.2.B.5 List the proposed use in general note #9 as follows: "Family Dwelling "FLD-4", subject to: the development regulations in Sec. 3.6.1" 4. DS 2-03.2.4.A Draw in all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements. 5. DS 2-03.2.4.G Visitor parking spaces must be located within 150' of each lot per DS 3-05.2.4.A.1. Lot #10 is approximately 170' from the nearest vistor parking space. Revise. Wheel stop curbing will be required at the visitor parking spaces along the sidewalk. Provide a dimensioned detail of a standard parking space clearly indicating the location of the wheel stop curbing. Clearly indicate the location of curbing along the parking spaces and proposed streets to prevent vehicles from driving onto unimproved portions of the site. Provide a detail of the backup spur clearly indicating the required 3' radius and 3' clear are behind the backup spur. Note the indicated trash enclosure cannot be located behind the backup spur. See engineering comments. 6. DS 2-03.2.4.I Provide approximate square footage of all common areas and describe the use of each common area. 7. DS 2-03.2.4.J If applicable, provide all easements with dimensions and label as to the use. 8. DS 2-03.2.4.M Clearly indicate the location of existing and future sight visibility triangles. 9. LUC Sec. 3.6.1.2.B.2.d Clearly indicate on the plan how this project meets the requirements of this section of the LUC. 10. LUC Sec. 3.6.1.4.D Clearly indicate on the plan how this project meets the requirements of this section of the LUC. 11. LUC Sec. 3.6.1.5.B.5 and .6 Add the following notes to the plan: Mechanical equipment, utility boxes, irrigation equipment and similar elements 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 FLD. If a perimeter wall is proposed along a public right-of-way, it shall be constructed of, or painted with, graffiti-resistant materials. The wall shall incorporate one or more of the following decorative materials: a. tile; b. stone; c. brick; d. adobe; e. a textured material such as stucco or plaster; or f. metal 12. LUC Sec. 3.6.1.4.C.1 Add a note stating: "All amenities and improvements must be completed when no more than fifty percent (50%) of the residential units served by the project amenities and site improvements are constructed." 13. LUC Sec 3.6.1.5.D.2 Street perimeter setbacks must meet LUC Sec. 3.2.6.5.B.2, garages must be 18' from property line and 19' from back of sidewalk or a maximum of 8' from street pavement edge. Revise plot plans. 14. LUC Sec. 3.6.1.5. G.1 The cross section of the proposed street does not meet the requirements of DS 3-01 Figure 1. Revise. The proposed depressed sidewalk and curb indicated on the plan will be required to have as a minimum a wedge curb. Provide a cross section of this area clearly indicating the wedge curb and the pedestrian circulation path with a minimum 5' sidewalk. Review LUC Sec. 3.6.1.5.G and clearly indicate compliance. 15. LUC Sec. 3.6.1.7 Provide a copy of the CC&Rs for review by time of final plat. 16. Depending on changes to the plan and responses to the above comments additional comments may apply. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 837-4961 TLS C:\planning\cdrc\tentativeplat\S10-027tp.doc |
| 08/03/2010 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S10-027 Limberlost Estates: FLD Reviewed: (X) Tentative Plat (X) Landscape Plan CROSS REFERENCE: Northside Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: No COMMENTS DUE BY: August 3, 2010 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 837-6971 DATE: 07/22/10 Department of Planning and Development Services Community Planning Staff S10-027 - Limberlost Estates (Flexible Lot Development), Tentative Plat Review July 22, 2010 The request is for tentative plat S10-027, Limberlost Estates, zoned MH-1, designed with a total of ten (10) lots and will utilize the flexible lot development (FLD-4) option. As per the Land Use Code (LUC § 3.6.1), the purpose of the FLD is to provide greater flexibility and creativity in the design of a clustered residential development. The FLD proposal must be in conformance with the design policies and criteria of the General Plan and applicable neighborhood/area plan policies (LUC § 3.6.1.4). Based on the submittal, the site is located within the boundaries of the Northside Area Plan. Staff offers the following comments: 1. Land Use Code (LUC), Section 3.6.1.1.c (FLD), among other requirements states that recreational amenities should be suitably located within the subdivision. Staff requests the applicant reconsider the location of the proposed recreational use area (Common Area E) to a more centralized location. One recommendation is to relocate it between lots 7 and 8 where visual (eyes) corridors from facing townhomes (doors/windows) and parking lot activity would deter negative influences. 2. Land Use Code, Section 3.6.1.4.D.2., and 3.6.1.D.3.i, state that functional open space may include elements such as detention/retention basins in order to make those areas functional. Please address how "Common Area A" may be incorporated as functional open space (view) for the residents of the development. 3. Please revise landscape plan, sheet L3 of 5 to identify by keynote, the passive recreational amenities shown within "Common Area E," and that such amenities include "barrier free access." 4. Please provide four-sided building elevations to scale and in color which demonstrates a southwestern architectural design and motif. Although the site is exempt from providing architectural diversity as outlined under LUC, Section 3.6.1.6.B, the Northside Area Plan, encourage under the Campus Farm Design Guidelines 2 to incorporate a southwestern motif in architectural style, colors, and landscaping. Include the following please: 4a. Please provide four-sided architectural elevations that are drawn to scale to determine proposed building height of thirteen (13) feet and in full size 24" X 36" sheet(s) as part of the tentative plat pagination. The 24" X 36" sheet(s) shall be drawn in black & white but need to identify colors with paint codes that are to be provided in the color palette. In addition, provide in smaller print color versions [may use color pencils which best resemble the proposed color(s)] of the four-sided architectural building renderings/elevations. The color version to include a color palette that identifies each color by brand name and color code. The color versions can be submitted on a small print such as 11" X 17." 5. Northside Area Plan, Campus Farms Design Guideline #3 addresses outdoor lighting. If outdoor lighting is proposed, please show pole lights and/or exterior structural mounted lights not exceeding ten (10) feet in height from fi |
| 08/03/2010 | PGEHLEN1 | DESIGN EXAMINER | REVIEW | Denied | Sec. 3.6.1.4.D.3.b.i - To the greatest degree practicable, the retention/detention basin shall be designed as Functional Open Space by incorporating Multiple-Use Concepts and Aesthetic Design Guidelines described in Chapter IV of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual (Development Standard 10-01.0.0) and Section 3.7.4.3. Provide exhibits demonstrating compliance with this requirement. |
| 08/03/2010 | PGEHLEN1 | DESIGN EXAMINER | REVIEW | Denied | July 29, 2010 S10-027 Limberlost Estates: Flexible Lot Design Attn: COT Planning and Development Services Department Patricia Gehlen Adam Smith John Beal Following are comments from the City of Tucson Design Professional Re: S10-027 1. Functional Open Space (Sec. 3.6.1.4. D.1) a. 1090 sf of functional open space is required according to the submitted plat drawing. 1560 sf is provided. Show diagram of how this is computed. Where is the functional open space located? b. Provide a description of the amenities to be provided in the functional open space. See 4.1.1. Multiple Use Concepts and Design Guidelines and 4.2. Multiple Use Concepts both in Development Standard 10-01.00. c. Provide a description or drawing that shows how the Functional Open Space will be a visual amenity. Respectfully submitted, James A. Gresham, FAIA COT Design Professional |
| 08/04/2010 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 08/04/2010 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/05/2010 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Denied | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#226947 August 5, 2010 AC Tsang Engineering Group Attn: Antony 4626 E Ft. Lowell Rd, Suite S Tucson, Arizona 85712 Dear Antony: SUBJECT: Limberlost Estates Lots 1-10 S10-027 Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has a conflict to the preliminary plat submitted for review August 3, 2010. There is a lift pole serving one of the units. Enclosed is TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. Feeds will be possible from south side of Limberlost or east side of property. The copy of the tentative plat showing where TEP will be placing the aboveground equipment for this subdivision will be mailed to you under separate cover. TEP will provide a preliminary electrical design on the Approved Tentative Plat within ten (10) working days upon receipt of the plat. Additional plans necessary for preparation of the design are: building plans including water, electrical, landscape, sidewalk and paving plans. Also, submit the AutoCAD version of the plat on a CD or email to lmiranda@tep.com. Should you have any questions, please contact the area designer, Jennifer Crawford at (520) 917- 8708. Sincerely, Elizabeth Miranda Office Specialist Design/Build lm Enclosures cc: P. Gehlen, City of Tucson (e-mail) J. Crawford, Tucson Electric Power |
| 08/09/2010 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Denied | 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: Sherry Hyde Senior Property Technician Pima County Assessor’s Office DATE: 8/9/10 RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding S10-027 LIMBERLOST ESTATES TENTATIVE PLAT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor’s Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor’s Office requirements. COMMENTS: THE TITLE BLOCK IN THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER STATES SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 13, RANGE 14E. THE LOCATION MAP IN THE UPPER RIGHT HAND CORNER STATES SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 13, RANGE 13E & SECTON 19, TOWNSHIP 13, RANGE 14E. THEY SHOULD BE THE SAME. GENERAL NOTES MUST HAVE THE BASIS OF BEARING. THERE MUST BE BEARINGS AND DIMENSIONS FOR THE PERIMETER AND ALL LOT LINES AND ALL COMMON AREAS. ALL LOTS MUST HAVE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. ALL HATCHING, STIPPLING, STRIPING, ETC. MUST BE REMOVED IN THE FINAL PLAT, UNLESS ANOTHER AGENCY REQUIRES IT. THEN ALL LETTERING MUST HAVE THE HATCHING, ETC. CUT AWAY SO THEY ARE LEGIBLE. STREETS MUST HAVE DIMENSIONS, BEARINGS AND CURVE DATA. 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. |
| 08/09/2010 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES August 9, 2010 Antony C. Tsang A.C. Tsang Engineering Group, Inc. 4626 E. Fort Lowell Road # S Tucson, Arizona 85712 Subject: S10-027 Limberlost Estates FLD Tentative Plat Dear Antony: Your submittal of July 6, 2010 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 set of 12 DETAILED cover letters explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 12 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (Traffic, Addressing, HC Site, Engineering, Wastewater, COT Design Pro, Planning, Landscape, Zoning, TEP, Assessor, PDSD) 7 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Engineering, COT Design Pro, Planning, Landscape, Zoning, TEP, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO Plan (Landscape, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised Geotechnical Report (Engineering, PDSD) 3 Copies Environmental Resource Report (Engineering, Landscape, PDSD) 2 Copies 4 Sided Building Elevations (Planning, PDSD) 1 Check Made out to "Pima County Treasurer" for $50.00 (Wastewater) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4917. Sincerely, John Williams Planning Technician All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: (520) 325-0979 |