Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - OVERLAY ZONE REVIEW
Permit Number - T05SA00404
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - OVERLAY ZONE REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/28/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | The Landscape Section does not recommend approval of the WASH Mitigation Plan at this time. 1) A site plan per DS 2-02.0 is required. Include all specified information and add all required notes and references regarding the Overlay Zones. 2) "All exposed exterior walls and roofs of structures, retaining walls, and accessory structures, except satellite dishes, shall be earth tone in color and will blend with the predominant natural colors found on the lot or parcel. Satellite dishes may be black. White is not permitted." No notes were identified on the plans. 3) Revegetation/native plant preservation will be required for the disturbance shown north of the wash study area where the new 8" water main is to be installed. See sheet C-9. 4) The site plan is not yet approved. Potential changes in project design make it impossible to recommend approval of HDZ and WASH applications at this time. 5) Revise the HDZ and WASH plans for consistency. For instance the WASH plan indicates utility construction in areas identified as Natural HDZ slopes not to be graded. 6) Revise L3 to include the mitigation plantings proposed on MR1. |
| 09/08/2006 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL FROM: Michael St.Paul, Planner Technician PROJECT: T05SA00404 HDZ and WASH Overlays 2656 West Broadway Boulevard Canyon Ridge Apartments 3rd Review TRANSMITTAL: September 8, 2006 COMMENTS: Please attach a response letter with the next submittal, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. This review is for the Hillside Development Zone (HDZ) and the Wash Ordinance (WASH) overlays. The HDZ cannot be approved as presented. 2. There are no adverse comments concerning the WASH Overlay from Zoning Review at this time. 3. Please provide dimensions for the full height of the structure on the elevation drawings along with the midpoint between the eave and the ridge so that the building height can be determined. This height measurement is from design grade (usually ground level) to the midpoint. The elevation plans submitted provide the dimensions from finished grade. It appears that these buildings maybe too high. The top of the ridge is twenty-seven feet six inches (27'-6") and the eave is twenty-two feet (22'-0"). This would make the midpoint twenty-four feet nine inches (24'-9") from finish grade. When measured from design grade usually adds several inches to the height over finished grade. (LUC Section 3.2.7.2.A and Section 2.8.1.8.A with illustration). 4. The deck for a mansard roof is at the top; therefore the minimum building height as presented is twenty-six feet four inches (LUC Section 3.2.7.2.A). The elevations as presented may be even higher that claimed. |
| 10/09/2006 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Manager SUBJECT: Canyon Ridge Overlay Re-submittal Engineering Review REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach ACTIVITY NUMBER: T05SA00404 SUMMARY: Development Services Department Engineering Division has completed a review of the revised W.A.S.H. package and does not recommend approval of the revised overlay package at this time. The private improvement plans were reviewed for overlay purposes only. W.A.S.H. OVERLAY COMMENTS: 1) Tucson Code Sec. 29-15(b)(1): The W.A.S.H. Ordinance Mitigation Report submitted does not completely address all of the items listed in this section of the Tucson Code. Per this section of the W.A.S.H. Ordinance, address the remaining Maxwell Wash W.A.S.H. Report comments: a) It was stated in the response letter that the project does not encroach into the W.A.S.H. Area. However, the exhibits within the revised W.A.S.H. Report do not show the grading limits and proposed development, except for sewer crossing, on planviews. Show both the W.A.S.H. Study area limits as well as the development on an exhibit as basis of determination of how the project encroaches the Maxwell Wash W.A.S.H. b) Figure 4 exhibit shows a City W.A.S.H. Ordinance Limits line along the boundary of the development near the wash. This line does not appear to describe the edge of the W.A.S.H. study area. Per 29-15(a), revise the location of the study area from the top of bank and provide any delineation for the resource area found within that study area. Project to the northeast had undefined top of bank whereas this project has a more clearly defined wash bank along the southwest side and thus the top of bank is defineable. Clarify which W.A.S.H. delineations are used for this project on the planview. Depict a top of bank line, and a 50-ft offset for the 50-ft Study Area. Otherwise, provide copy of approved document that supports other delineation for the W.A.S.H. and any other supporting documents from Engineering Administrator. c) Tucson Code Sec.29-15(b)(1): Assure that there are complete discussions regarding any effects on hydrology and hydraulics to the study area due to each of the elements a - i listed in this section of the Tucson Code. Address the remaining comments for Element h - There are two proposed utility crossings shown on sheet VRI of the mitigation/landscape documents. However they are not clearly depicted on the improvement plans. Show extents of sewer or water easement disturbance areas within the W.A.S.H. study and resource areas on the W.A.S.H. exhibit with revised contour lines along the embankments. i) Explain how any proposed new utility crossings are laid out on the topography to prevent scour or erosion problems. Add scour depth calculation to W.A.S.H. report. ii) Provide cross sections for existing and proposed grades and conditions at the utility crossings through the 50-ft study area and across the wash. d) Provide introductory or closing statement in the W.A.S.H. report as to whether the development proposed, whether in the study area but not in the resource area, or within the resource area, is compatible with the purpose and intent of the W.A.S.H. Ordinance regulations. To further clarify this comment, see verbiage in section TC Sec.29-12(a; it may be necessary to add discussions to the W.A.S.H. Report regarding whether the proposed project is designed to accomplish the following: i) Maximizes opportunities for groundwater recharge through the preservation of specific washes with earthen channels and banks. ii) Protects existing vegetation found within and near specific washes. iii) Provides for restoration of vegetation disturbed as a result of development in and adjacent to specific washes. iv) Assists in the reduction of the urban heat island effect by retaining existing vegetation and minimizing structural improvement of urban washes. A meeting is requested to go over comments for the project. At resubmittal, provide the revised W.A.S.H. report with revised exhibits, a response letter, any revised improvement plans, and any other supporting documentation. The next submittal should address all the above W.A.S.H. items. If you have questions, call me at 791-5550, extension 2204. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Development Services |
| 10/13/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | WRITE DECISION LETTER | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES October 13, 2006 Paul Keesler Stantec 201 North Bonita Avenue Tucson, Arizona 85745 Subject: T05SA00404 Hillside and WASH Overlays for Canyon Ridge Apartments (T05CM01524) Dear Paul: Your submittal of July 24, 2006 for the above project has been reviewed by the Community Design Review Committee and the comments reflect the outstanding requirements which need to be addressed before approval is granted. Please review the comments carefully. Once you have addressed all of the comments, please submit the following revised documents and a DETAILED cover letter for each agency explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLUELINES MUST BE FOLDED 4 Copies Revised Scenic Corridor Overlay zone submittal package as detailed in the on line comments (Zoning, Landscape, Engineering, DSD). Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608, ext. 1179. Sincerely, Patricia Y. 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 |