Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D03-0017
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/26/2004 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 02/27/2004 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approv-Cond | March 24, 2004 TO: Dave Martin, P.E., R.L.S., AMEC Infrastructure, Inc. THRU: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Development Services FROM: Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (representing Pima County Wastewater Management and Environmental Quality) Pima County Development Review Division SUBJECT: Finisterra Community Development Plan - 5th Submittal D03-0017 The proposed sewer collection lines to serve the above-referenced project have been reviewed on behalf of the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) and the Pima County Wastewater Management (PCWWM) Department. This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. Separate review letters from PDEQ and PCWWM representatives will not be prepared for this project. The following comments are offered for your use: 1. Sheet 4: Extend the paving to and around the existing public sewer manhole designated by Keynote 4. 2. Sheets 2, 3, 4 & 5: Take the following actions to clarify which public sewer lines to be abandoned have an associated public sewer easement to be released, and which do not: a. Sheet 5: Delete the phrase, NO RECORD OF PUBLIC SEWER EASEMENT PER TITLE REPORT from Keynotes 10 and 29, and make this phrase into a new Keynote (Keynote 106). b. Sheets 2, 3 & 4: Use new Keynote 106 to identify those public sewer lines to be abandoned which do not have associated public sewer easements. The public sewer lines to be abandoned are identified by Keynotes 10 and 29 in the following locations: i. Sheet 2: A 6" sewer line designated by Keynote 10 in the lower left quarter of the sheet. ii. Sheet 3: An 8" sewer line designated by Keynote 29, and a 6" sewer line designated by Keynote 10 in the upper left quarter of the sheet. iii. Sheet 4: Two sections of 8" designated by Keynote 29 between the manholes designated by Keynotes 4 and 18 on the left side of the sheet. iv. Sheet 4: One section of 8" sewer line designated by Keynote 29, and one section of 6" sewer line designated by Keynote 10, between the manhole designated by Keynote 2 and the cleanout designated by Keynote 105. 3. Sheet 5: Delete the phrase Docket _______, Page ______ from Keynotes 39 and 96, as it will not be possible for the blanks to be filled in prior to the submittal of Mylars. The legal description and location maps for both the new 20' public sewer maintenance easements, and the 24' public sewer access easements will be reviewed during the public sewer improvement plan review and approval process. I will be the reviewer for the 24' public sewer access easements. Ed Scalzo will be the reviewer for the new 20' public sewer maintenance easements. 4. Subject to the above, the development plan is hereby approved. If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact me at 740-6563. Tim Rowe, P.E., Development Review Engineer (Wastewater) Pima County Development Review Division TR/tr Copy: Project G-2004-027 NOTE: Changes should be made to Mylars and shown to Wastewater PRIOR to submitting to City of Tucson for signature. |
| 02/27/2004 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approv-Cond | PREVIOUS COMMENTS February 27, 2004 TO: David Martin, P.E., R.L.S. AMEC Infrastructure, Inc. THRU: Craig Gross City of Tucson Development Services FROM: Tim Rowe, P.E. Development Review Division (Wastewater) SUBJECT: Finisterra Community Development Plan - 3rd and 4th Submittals D03-017 The above-referenced project has been reviewed on behalf of the Pima County Wastewater Management Department. The following comments are offered for your use: 1. AMEC Infrastructure elected to make the 4th submittal of this development plan, before this office had reviewed the 3rd submittal. This was done with the understanding that this would not create any obligation by this office to approve the 4th submittal, or to expedite any necessary subsequent submittals. This office reviewed the 4th submittal in the 3rd submittal=s place in our queue of plans to review. As the 3rd submittal was not reviewed, no 4th submittal review fees are due. Any necessary subsequent submittal will be subject to such fees, however. The following comments apply to the 4th submittal: 2. Sheets 1-6: Show the development plan case number, D03-017 larger or bolder than the cross-reference numbers. 3. Sheet 1: Separate General Note 16 into two separate General Notes. 4. Sheet 2: Per the Arizona Administrative Codes, the private sewer lines have to be designed with future maintenance needs in mind. Relocate the private manhole shown in the roundabout, to the Parking Area Access Lane (PAAL) that encircles the roundabout. 5. Sheets 2-4: Label all existing public sewer lines within, or within 100' of, the development plan boundaries, with their size and plan number. 6. Sheets 2-4: Provide all of the design data for the proposed public and private sewer lines, including: a) The manhole number (as shown on PCWWM's base and section maps) rim elevation, and invert elevation of all existing public sewer manholes that be a point of connection for any proposed public or private sewer line. b) The rim and invert elevation of each proposed public or private manhole. c) The length, size and slope of each segment of proposed public or private sewer line. None of this information was shown for the proposed public sewer lines, and some of it is missing for the proposed private sewer lines. 7. Sheets 2-4: The existing public sewer easements have not been identified properly with their recording information. Revise as necessary. 8. Sheets 2-4: The existing public sewer easements to remain, and those to be released have not been identified. Revise as necessary. 9. Sheets 2-4: Label each of the proposed building connection sewers with its size and the letters, BCS. 10. Sheets 2-4: These sheets show 6' CMU walls being built across a number of existing public sewer easements. No walls or other obstructions may be constructed across the existing public sewer easements that will remain without both of the following: a) Adequate legal and physical vehicular access being granted to Pima County in the form of new easements, and b) Separate written permission from Pima County Wastewater Management's Planning Services Division. Ms. Ilene Deckard of PCWWM Planning Services may be contacted at 740-6544 regarding such written permission, but she will not grant such permission until adequate legal and physical vehicular access is granted. 11. Sheets 2-4: The proposed 15" public sewer easements are inadequate, as they do not provide adequate legal and physical vehicular access to the proposed public sewer lines, or comply with our Standard Details. Take all of the following actions to provide adequate legal and physical vehicular access to the proposed public sewer lines: a) Design the proposed public sewer easements be designed in accordance with PC/COT Standard Details PC/COT Standard Details WWM A-3, WWM 109, WWM 110, and WWM 111. b) Provide both full blown public sewer easements (hereafter refered to as Type A easements) and public sewer access easements (hereafter referred to as Type B easements) as necessary. Type A easements allow PCWWM to disturb the area within the easement to repair, clean, operate or replace the public sewer lines. Type B easements only allow PCWWM sewer maintenance vehicles to have 24 hour per day/365 day per year, all weather unrestricted access to the Type A easements. They do not allow PCWWM to dig up, or otherwise disturb the area. c) Locate the Type A easements over the proposed public sewer lines. d) Locate the Type B easements in the PAALs so that the sewer maintenance vehicles can enter the building clusters via one driveway, drive to the Type A easement where they will do their work, and then drive out back out of the building clusters via a different or the same driveway onto a public street. e) Make the width of both the Type A and Type B easements the full width of the Parking Area Access Lanes (PAALs). 12. Sheet 3: Show the existing public sewer manhole between buildings 12 and 13 using the proper symbol for such (shown in the legend). 13. Sheet 4: Show the proposed private sewer lines using the same line width as that used for the proposed private sewer lines on Sheets 2 and 3. 14. Sheet 4: There are two terminal reaches of existing public 6-inch line missing from the layout of the existing sewers. Revise as necessary, showing the terminal reaches and the associated public sewer easements. 15. Sheet 4: What do you plan to do with the 6" terminal reach of existing sewer line G-72-11 that runs along the east side of the property? It hasn't been shown on the development plan, but keynotes have been shown which indicate that it will remain. In the remainder of this letter, we have assumed that this existing public sewer line will remain. 16. Sheet 4: Revise the development plan as necessary to prevent any encroachment into the public sewer easement over this line. 17. Sheet 4: Revise the development plan as necessary to provide PCWWM's public sewer maintenance vehicles with adequate legal and physical access to enter the exsting easement at the manhole denoted by Keynote 4 and exit the exsting easement into a new Type B easement at the cleanout denoted by Keynote 6. 18. Sheet 4. The flow from the existing 6-inch terminal reach of G-72-11) will have to make a turn of more than 90º at the manhole denoted by Keynote 4. Revise the design as necessary so that flow makes a turn of no more than 90º to comply with PC/COT Standard Detail WWM 201. 19. Sheet 5: Revise as necessary to provide the information required in the above comments. 20. The three signed and notarized originals of the Sewer Service Agreement still need to be returned to this office. 21. We will require a complete set of revised bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. A check for $156.00 made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter for the next wastewater review of this project. If the number of revised sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly. If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact me at 740-6947. Tim Rowe, P.E. Development Review Division (Wastewater) Copy: Project TR/tr |
| 03/05/2004 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Approved | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Center Plans Coordination Office FROM: Peter McLaughlin Senior Planner FOR: Patricia Gehlen Principal Planner PROJECT: D03-017 Finisterra Community Development Plan Zoning Approval TRANSMITTAL: March 5, 2004 DUE DATE: March 10, 2004 The Zoning Review Section approves the development plan for this project. However, should there be any changes requested by other CDRC members, the Zoning Review Section approval is void, and we request copies of the revised development plan to verify that those changes do not affect any zoning requirements. Please have the applicant submit sign-off copies of the development and landscape plans for approval. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608. |
| 03/09/2004 | ANY | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | To: Craig Gross Planning Administrator SUBJECT: Tanque Verde Road and Kolb Road Development Plan D03-0017 (Fourth Review) T14S, R15E, Section 06 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: None Development Plan: 1. All comments have been addressed. The Development plan is approved by Engineering. Drainage Report: 1. The Drainage report has been accepted for DP purposes only. Additional comments may be forth coming when submitted with the grading plan. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1193 or pmachad2@ci.tucson.az.us Paul P. Machado Senior Engineering Associate City of Tucson/Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210 (520) 879-8010 fax |
| 03/09/2004 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | The Landscape Section recommends approval of the development plan subject to the following conditions: Revise keynote 83 of the development plan, as necessary. A masonry wall is not allowed in the location specified along the Kolb Road frontage. |
| 03/11/2004 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING TASK FORCE COMMENTS (4th review) Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D03-0017 Finisterra Community 03/10/04 ( ) Tentative Plat (3) Development Plan (ü) Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment (ü) Other - Office Elevations & Photographs of surrounding development; design compatibility statement CROSS REFERENCE: C9-84-25 (M&C 9/2/03, Ordinance No. 9880) NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: General Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Kolb Rd. is Gateway Route COMMENTS DUE BY: 3/10/04 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 (3) APPROVED - See Attached Comments (ü) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: 1/8/04 (3) No Resubmittal Required ( ) Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan ( ) Landscape Plan ( ) Other - as indicated in attached comments REVIEWER: Joanne Hershenhorn 791-4505 DATE: 3/8/04 Finisterra Community D03-0017 1) After reviewing the plans and information that was distributed on February 26, 2004, and talking with Dave Martin of amec, inc., the only outstanding item was the 24-foot cross-access between this office development and the development to the east. For safety purposes, I requested that a) the plans show bollards blocking the vehicular and pedestrian access until such time as it becomes functional, and b) that the following note be added to the plans: If, at some time in the future, it becomes possible to implement cross-access between this office development and the office development to the east, cross- access easements will be obtained, and pedestrian and vehicular cross-access will be implemented. On March 8, 2004, I met with Dave Martin, who updated the plans in response to my comments. Based on a walk-through review on 3/8/2004, my comments have been addressed, and this memo constitutes my approval. No resubmittal is required. |