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.
Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Permit Number - DP15-0191
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/02/2015 | CPIERCE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/04/2015 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: DP15-0191 Address: 11311 E. MaryAnn Cleveland Way Development Package: FLD Mountain Vail Estates Part G TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 4, 2015 DUE DATE: December 2, 2015 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. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Package Standards listed in section 2-06 of the City of Tucson Administrative Manual. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC). The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, An applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One year Expiration date is November 02, 2016. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.3.11 - A key plan (if provided) shall be located on the first sheet. 01. COMMENT: Label Part "G" on the Cover Sheet Key Plan ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.4.1 - The name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s), or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional, such as a surveyor, architect, landscape architect, or engineer. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines. 02. COMMENT: List on the cover sheet, the Landscape Architects information as noted by the standard above. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet: 2-06.4.7 - General Notes The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable. 2-06.4.7.A - Zoning and Land Use Notes 2-06.4.7.A.4 - Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses. 03. COMMENT: Correct the typo for the acronym FLD on general note 5 on sheet two. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.7.A.5 - On residential projects, list the total number of units/lots proposed. 2-06.4.7.A.6 - If a plan or plat is prepared in conjunction with other applications or overlays or the parcel being developed is subject to conditions of an application processed previously, additional information must be added to the plan. Such applications and overlays include, but are not limited to: annexations; rezonings; special exceptions; Board of Adjustment variances; Design Development Options; Technical Standard Modification Request; overlays (Airport Environs Zone, Environmental Resource Zone, Gateway Corridor Zone, Hillside Development Zone, Historic Preservation Zone, Major Streets and Routes, Rio Nuevo District, Scenic Corridor Zone, WASH); Modification of Development Regulations through the Downtown Area Infill Incentive District or Rio Nuevo District; Downtown Heritage Incentive Zone; or, Design Review Board. Provide the following information on the plan. 04. COMMENT: Add a general note that states that the project is within the Davis Monthan Air Force Base Vicinity. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.7.A.6.c - If the property includes Protected Riparian Area add a note stating that the project is designed to comply with Technical Manual Section 4-02, Floodplain, WASH, and ERZ Standard, specifying all lots impacted and including a total for the regulated area and the Protected Riparian Area. 05. COMMENT: Lots 6 through 14 and Common areas B-1 and A-2 appear to be within a PC Riparian Area. If applicable, add a general note on sheet two that states that the project is designed to comply with Technical Manual Section 4-02. See the Engineering and Landscape reviewer's comments for additional info on this standard. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.7.B - Drainage Notes List the following notes as appropriate: 2-06.4.7.B.2 - If applicable, list the following notes and complete the blanks. 2-06.4.7.B.3 - List the following note on all development package documents: "Drainage will remain in its natural state and will not be altered, disturbed, or obstructed other than as shown on this site plan." 06. COMMENT: Revise general note eight on sheet two verbatim as noted in the standard above. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.7.C - Streets and Roads Notes 2-06.4.7.C.3 - Provided the following notes as applicable: 2-06.4.7.C.3.a - "Total miles of new public streets is ____________." 2-06.4.7.C.3.b - "Total miles of new private streets is ____________." 07. COMMENT: Clarify and add as a general note on sheet two, the number of miles of public and/or private streets proposed. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.7.E.1.a - The following notes will be placed on all plans/plats. 2-06.4.8.A - Provide site boundary/subdivision perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system. 08. COMMENT: Provide the site boundary information for the Part G development. The boundary information may be added to a separate overall drawing that depicts Part G. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development 2-06.4.9.F - All existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) shall be indicated on the drawing with zoning boundaries clearly defined. If the property is being rezoned, use those boundaries and classifications. The basis for this requirement is that some zoning requirements on a project are based on the zoning classification of adjacent property. Also, in some instances, each zone has to be taken into consideration on property that is split by two or more zoning classifications, as each may have different requirements. 09. COMMENT: Label the zoning classifications adjacent to the proposed development. ****************************************************************************************** 2-06.4.9.M - Grading Plan 2-06.4.9.M.1 - A conceptual grading plan is required on projects with significant topographic conditions. The PDSD Engineering Administrator or designee will determine the need for such a plan. 2-06.4.9.M.2 - Concurrent Review. For all projects, grading plans may be included in the development package and will be reviewed concurrently. 10. COMMENT: The grading plan has been reviewed concurrently with the DP Site plan. Once the DP is approved the Grading plan is also approved. ****************************************************************************************** If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package site plan and any requested documents. |
| 11/05/2015 | BVIESTE1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | See additional document in PRO. Here is our response letter for 11311 E. Mary Ann Cleveland Way. Kellie Anderson Tucson Water/New Development Administrative Assistant 520-837-2165 520-791-4718 520-791-2501 (fax) Kellie.Anderson@tucsonaz.gov |
| 11/05/2015 | DAVID RIVERA | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 11/05/2015 | DAVID RIVERA | ADA | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 11/06/2015 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | Regional Traffic Engineering has no comments on this submittal and supports its acceptance. Thank you. |
| 11/06/2015 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Reqs Change | 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: Janice Wagner GIS Cartographer Pima County Assessor's Office DATE: November 05, 2015 RE: Assessor's Review and Comments Regarding: TENTATIVE PLAT MOUNTAIN VAIL ESTATES PART G DP15-0191 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Plat meets Assessor's Office requirements. ___X____ Plat does not meet Assessor's Office requirements. COMMENTS: " INFO ON RIGHT HAND TITLE BLOCK SHOWS COMMON AREA G-1 & G-2, IT SHOULD BE C-1 & C-2. " PAGE 1 SHOWS AS CA B-2 OR SOUTHERLY PORTION OF ESMOND STATION RAIL LINE & TRAIL. IT SHOULD BE CA C-2. " MAP SHOWS PARCEL "A", BUT IT IS NOT LISTED IN THE TITLE BLOCK. " SECTION, TOWNSHIP & RANGE, NOT LISTED IN TITLE BLOCK. |
| 11/12/2015 | MARTIN BROWN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Reqs Change | 1. Please provide a note that the minimum required fire flow is 1,000 GPM for 60 minutes at 20psi residual pressure and fire hydrants will be provided per Appendix C of the 2012 IFC |
| 11/16/2015 | BVIESTE1 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | See additional documents in PRO. No objections/adverse comments. See attached. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Eric W. Kramer, Ph.D., AICP Senior Land-Use Modeler Disclaimer: This report and/or data was funded in part through grant[s] from the Federal Highway Administration and/or Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. The contents of this report and/or data reflect the views and opinions of the author(s) who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily state or reflect the official views or policies of the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Arizona Department of Transportation, or any other State or Federal Agency. This report and/or data does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation. The information in this publication is provided on an “as is” basis, and there are no warranties, express or implied, including, but not limited to, any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. In no event shall PAG be liable for any damages resulting from the use of the information. PAG provides the information in good faith and has endeavored to create and maintain accurate data. The users of this report and/or data are advised to use the information with caution and to independently verify accuracy. ____________________________ |
| 11/18/2015 | BVIESTE1 | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Reqs Change | See additional documents in PRO. DP15-0191/Tentative Plat/FLD Mountain Vail Estates Part G is returned for corrections. The attached plan has Addressing’s sticky note comments. Please let me know if you have any questions. Warm Regards, Robin Freiman Addressing Specialist Pima County Development Services Department 201 N Stone AV – 1st Floor Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 724-7570 |
| 11/19/2015 | PAUL BAUGHMAN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: November 20, 2015 DUE DATE: December 2, 2015 SUBJECT: Mountain Vail Estates, Part G TO: Warren D. Thompson, PE LOCATION: 11311 E Mary Ann Cleveland REVIEWERS: Paul Baughman, PE, CFM ACTIVITY: DP15-0191 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning and Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package. The following items need to be addressed: 1) Per UDC 8.7.3I3d please show how curbed areas shall provide openings to allow water to flow into landscaped areas and water harvesting basins. Per TSM 7-01.4.3E openings where drainage crosses a pedestrian way must pass the 10 year flow under the pedestrian way. 2) Keynote 1 requires a 5' wide meandering walkway to be built. Per AM 2.06.4.8C please reflect the meandering concept in the dimensions provided in detail 1/3. 3) Detail 2/4 is shown on both sheet 4 and sheet 13 as 2 different details. Please correct. 4) Per AM2-06.4.8D and AM2-06.4.9R and S please provide details of how power poles found within the 10' wide electrical easement shown on sheets 7 and 8 will be either relocated or incorporated into the proposed streetscape details. These details should show compliance with UDC 8.7.3J5 as it relates to barrier free space. 5) Per AM 2-06.4.8F and AM 2-06.4.9N3 and 4 please show how positive drainage will be maintained around or under air conditionings units as part of details 10/3 and/or 15/3 by either adding a notation to prohibit such units within an adequate setback sufficient to provide drainage conveyance or by showing what size diameter and material conduit will be used to convey drainage under them. 6) Per AM 2.06.4.9N6 please add the 100 year water surface elevations to sheet 14 to show water surface elevations upstream of each lot. 7) Per AM 2-06.4.8H and AM 2-06.4.9N2 please show drainage gradients of streets on the site plan. This will need to be checked against the originally approved drainage report or the new one to be submitted with the 2nd submittal. Any drainage report must contain proposed conditions watersheds. Please show compliance with Section 12.2.1 of the City of Tucson Drainage Standards Manual such that the 10 year storm is contained within the curbs and the 100 year storm is contained with the right-of-way. There is some concern about containment of street flow on uncrowned streets on the low side of the cross slope. 8) The drainage report is addressed to Jason Green. He is not reviewing plans at the City of Tucson. Please remove references to his review. If he approved a previous drainage report, please submit a copy as reference with your next submittal. Alternatively, a new drainage report will be required for review and approval. 9) Reference is made to a submittal of drainage information to Laith Alsami. It is not clear from the drainage report if he approved any drainage information. Please provide evidence of his approval with the next submittal. Please remove reference to any previous submittal if approval was not received. 10) Per AM 2-06.4.8G please provide a detail of the flood/retaining wall called out by keynote 21 on sheet 14. 11) Per TSM Section 4-04 please provide scour calculations in accordance with equation 6.3 and section 6.9 of the City of Tucson Drainage Standards Manual to provide for a minimum scour protection for the flood/retaining wall. 12) Per AM 2-06.4.8I and AM 2-06.4.9O please show where locally regulated floodplain limits will be located based on developed conditions. Please also show where FEMA floodplain limits will be based on LOMR submittal. All of the existing and developed conditions FEMA and locally regulated floodplain line work should be reflected in the legend. 13) Please initiate process with City to set up any agreements that may be required based on CFR 44 Sec 65.2 and 65.10 maintenance requirements. 14) Per AM 2-06.4.3 please reflect the development package number DP15-0191 on the development package. 15) Per AM 2-06.4.7A6 and UDC 8.7.3A2 please add a note that this subdivision is subject to the Houghton Area Master Plan. 16) Per AM 2-06.4.9N show areas of detention/retention and 100 year ponding limits with water surface elevations. Please update sheet 14 where a retention/detention basin is shown. 17) Per AM 2-06.4.9V please show location of gang mailboxes if applicable. If you have any comments questions or wish to discuss new information, please call or email me at 520-837-5007 or paul.baughman@tucsonaz.gov. |
| 11/24/2015 | FDILLON1 | DESIGN PROFESSIONAL | REVIEW | Needs Review | Project exceeding 20 lots and requires an Architectural Variation Plan (AVP) to be reviewed by the City;s Design PRofessional. FD |
| 11/24/2015 | BVIESTE1 | POLICE | REVIEW | Approved | I have no issues with this request. CSO Becky Noel #37968 Tucson Police Dept. 1100 S. Alvernon Tucson, AZ 85711 520-837-7428 |
| 11/24/2015 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Reqs Change | November 24, 2015 ACTIVITY NUMBER: DP15-0191 PROJECT NAME: Mountain Vail Estates PROJECT ADDRESS: 11311 E Mary Ann Cleveland Way PROJECT REVIEWER: Zelin Canchola TDOT 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. 1. The plan does not take into account the traffic signal at the project entrance at Mary Ann Cleveland Way. A traffic signal is warranted at the development access and Mary Ann Cleveland Way at post development conditions, according to the traffic impact analysis provided for the rezoning conditions. TDOT will require a traffic signal to be installed as a condition for approval. 2. Due to the rezoning conditions required, provide confirmation that conditions generated by Traffic Impact Study have been satisfied. 3. A private improvement agreement (PIA) will be necessary for the proposed work to be performed within the Right-of-way. Contact Permits and Codes for additional PIA information at 791-4259. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 520 837 6659 or zelin.canchola@tucsonaz.gov |
| 11/25/2015 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Reqs Change | Tucson Parks and Recreation Comments: 1) Note #17 on sheet 2 is incorrect and should be revised. According to the current Pima Regional Trails System Master Plan, there are two trails located on or adjacent to this property. The Esmond Station and the Atturbury Wash South Fork Greenways are located on this property, they are discussed in comments 2 & 3. 2) The Esmond Station Greenway (G018, described on page 103 & 104 of the PRTSMP) angles through this property following the old railroad bed. The plans already indicate a 12' paved path is to be installed along this corridor. This path with associated landscape as shown on the planting plans will meet the PRTSMP requirements for the Greenway, however, the 12' asphalt-paved path should extend to, and end at, the south property line for future extension. 3) The Atturbury Wash South Fork Greenway (G009, described on page 102 of the PRTSMP) is shown in the PRTSMP running along the south property line of this parcel and connecting to the Esmond Station Greenway. The plans already indicate that there is an 8' wide asphalt-paved path in this area. This path, along with the associated landscape as shown on the planting plan will meet the PRTSMP requirements if the path is widened to 12' and extended to the east property line for future extension. 4) The purpose of the 10' non-motorized public trail easement along the south property line is unclear. Please clarify. Howard B. Dutt, RLA Landscape Architect Tucson Parks & Recreation (520) 837-8040 Howard.Dutt@tucsonaz.gov |
| 11/25/2015 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT DP15-0191 Mountain Vail Estates Part G (FLD) 9/24/15 (X) Tentative Plat () Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other - Elevations SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: () Approved (X) Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other REVIEWER:msp DATE: 11/24/15 COMMENTS Plan Tucson on the Future Growth Scenario Map identifies the project site as Existing Neighborhoods. Existing neighborhoods are primarily developed and largely built-out residential neighborhoods and commercial districts in which minimal new development and redevelopment is expected in the next several decades. The goal is to maintain the character of these neighborhoods, while accommodating some new development and redevelopment and encouraging reinvestment and new services and amenities that contribute further to neighborhood stability. Plan Tucson supports infill and redevelopment projects that reflect sensitivity to site and neighborhood conditions and adhere to relevant site and architectural guidelines. Project is not in compliance with Plan Tucson. Original subdivision plat, Mountain Vail Estates, was rezoned, C9-06-16 from MH-1 (Medium-density Residential/Mobile Home) to R-1 (Low Density Single-family Residential), as adopted by Mayor and Council on December 16, 2008, and effectuated by recordation of Mountain Vail Estates subdivision plat on May 4, 2009. Proposed Mountain Vail Estates Part G (located within Mountain Vail Estates), is incorrectly stating current zone is R-2. Please correct proposed Mountain Vail Estates Part G to show existing R-1 zone. |
| 11/27/2015 | BVIESTE1 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Reqs Change | The DP/Tentative Plat has been reviewed on behalf of the Environmental Services Dept. and the following will need to be addressed on the resubmittal: 1. The phasing line shown on the cover sheet does not appear to agree with the phasing lines on the site plan sheets for the east side of the project. Please correct. 2. If the site plan sheet phasing is correct, add the dimensions to the proposed hammerhead at the intersection of Rincon Range Drive and Quiet Dove Drive to demonstrate it will be in compliance with TSM Section 8.01.9.0, Figure 6, and state on the plans that it will be constructed as part of the phase 1 improvements. If there are any questions, I can be reached at kperry@perryengineering.net |
| 12/01/2015 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 12/01/2015 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 12/02/2015 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 12/02/2015 | BVIESTE1 | UTILITIES | SOUTHWEST GAS | Approved | See additional documents in PRO. December 2, 2015 City of Tucson CDRC Attn: Patricia Gehlen, Manager 201 N. Stone Avenue Tucson, AZ 85701 RE: SWG Plan Review for Mountain Vail Estates, Part G Lots 339-345 & 385-501 CDRC No. S15-0191 Dear Ms. Gehlen: Southwest Gas Corporation (SWG) has no objection to the development of the above-mentioned project. Existing natural gas facilities are located in adjacent rights-of-way to the area of development and may be utilized for extension to the proposed development; specifically, an existing 6" gas main is located within the right-of-way of Mary Ann Cleveland Way, 4" gas main within the right of way of Atturbury Wash way & Chevrolet Drive. Blue Stake and potholing are suggested for best accuracy when locating SWG facilities. Please be aware that SWG requires a minimum one-foot separation from distribution facilities and any proposed structures and two-foot separation from high pressure gas facilities. SWG requests the contractor use caution when working in the vicinity of gas facilities and protect and support gas facilities per Blue Stake requirements. SWG also requests that no trees be planted within close proximity to gas facilities due to root intrusion; therefore, SWG requires all tree placements have a minimum eight-foot clearance from the tree center line to existing or proposed gas facilities. Shrubs and bushes may be planted within the eight-foot clearance zone. All information is provided for reference use only. Please note that it is the responsibility of excavators or those developers planning excavation to verify actual field conditions in advance of construction so that requests for gas service or any potential issues can be addressed in a timely manner, including payment for conflict mitigation if applicable. Please include SWG in all future development plan submittals of this project. If you have any questions or require any additional information, please contact me at (520) 794-6194 or TUCSWGDevReview@swgas.com. |
| 12/02/2015 | BVIESTE1 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Passed | |
| 12/02/2015 | BVIESTE1 | UTILITIES | EL PASO NATURAL GAS | Passed | |
| 12/02/2015 | BVIESTE1 | OTHER AGENCIES | U. S. POST OFFICE | Passed | |
| 12/02/2015 | BVIESTE1 | UTILITIES | CENTURYLINK | Passed | |
| 12/08/2015 | PGEHLEN1 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Reqs Change | Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department Jackson Jenkins Director 201 N. Stone Ave., 8th Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701-1207 PH: (520) 740-6500 FAX: (520) 620-0135 December 11, 2015 To: Warren Thompson, P.E. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc Thru: Patricia Gehlen City of Tucson Development Services ____________________________________ From: Tom Porter, P.E., PCRWRD (520) 724-6719 Subject: Mountain Vail Estates Part G Lots 1-95 Tentative Plat - 1st submittal P15WS00043 The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD) has reviewed the proposed sewer design for the above-referenced project. The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department has found the following deficiencies in the above referenced submittal of the Preliminary Sewer Layout (PSL), based upon PCRWRD Engineering Design Standards (EDS) 2012. 1. Sheet 10: The length/slope and pipe size are missing for the proposed sewer section between MH #11 and MH #10 2. Sheet 10: The length for the proposed sewer section of 50' between MH #10 and Ex. MH #3015-05 is not correct. 3. Sheet 10: Call out the inverts at proposed sewer and storm drain crossing in Quiet Dove Dr by Lot 6. 4. Sheet 11: Eliminate proposed MH #6 shown outside paved area behind berm. Also reposition MH #7 inside the paved area at the end of the Cul-de-sac in Vail Crest Dr. 5. Sheet 11: Locate the proposed sewer line in Vail Crest Dr. more toward the center line. 6. Sheet 12: The length and slope of the proposed pipe section between MH's #5 and #19 do not match between Sheets 11 and 12. 7. Sheet 12: Eliminate MH #14 located outside the pavement. 8. Sheet 12: The inverts shown for MH #12 and #18 do not match up with the length and slope of pipes shown on plan. This office will require a revised set of plans, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. All comments cited in this letter are based upon PCRWRD Engineering Design Standards 2012 and PCRWRD Standard Specifications and Details for Construction 2012. Pima County Code Title 13.20.030.A.2 requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the Preliminary Sewer Layout. The fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per Sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50.00 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet. The next plan submittal will require a review fee of $150.00 made payable to Pima County Treasurer. If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact me at your convenience. Cc. Lorenzo Hernandez, P.E., RWRD Francisco Galindo, P.E., RWRD Project file P15WS00043 |
| 12/08/2015 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | This review has been completed and resubmittal is reuqired. Please resubmit the following items: 1) 2 rolled sets of the plans 2) A disk that contains all items submitted. 3) All items requested by review staff 4) All items needed to approve this plan |
| 12/08/2015 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | SUBJECT: MOUNTAIN VAIL ESTATES PART G – TENTATIVE PLAT DP15-0191 Tucson Electric Power Co., (TEP) has reviewed and approves the Tentative Plat for Mountain Vail Estates Part G submitted for review on November 3, 2015. As you are aware, the project is in conflict with a TEP overhead double circuit distribution line. All costs for the removal and underground relocation of the existing electrical facilities will be the responsibility of the developer. If you have any questions, please contact me at 520-917-8744. Thank you, Mary Burke Right of Way Agent Tucson Electric Power Co. Mail Stop HQE613 PO Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 Office - 520-917-8744 Cell - 520-401-9895 mburke@tep.com |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12/23/2015 | KROBLES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |