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

Plan Number: S04-003
Parcel: Unknown

Address:
2215 E BILBY RD

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW

Plan Number - S04-003
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/20/2004 FERNE RODRIGUEZ START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
01/21/2004 JIM EGAN COT NON-DSD FIRE Approved The Development Plan is approved 01/21/04.
01/27/2004 TOM MARTINEZ OTHER AGENCIES AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION Approved NO COMMENT
S04-003
RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY
TRES PUEBLOS
02/05/2004 LIZA CASTILLO UTILITIES TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER Approved SUBJECT: TRES PUEBLOS
Lots 1-595
S04-003

Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has no objection to the tentative plat
submitted for review dated January 16, 2004.

The preliminary point where TEP will serve this project is from the existing
facilities along Campbell Avenue and Bilby Road then proceeding through the
interior of the subdivision. Enclosed is a copy of TEP's facility map
showing the approximate location and unit numbers of the existing
facilities.

TEP will provide an electrical design on the Approved Tentative Plat within
thirty (30) working days after receipt of the plat. Additional plans
necessary for design completion are: building plans including water,
electrical, paving and driveway placements. at the customer's request, a
design can be provided prior to the Approved Tentative Plat, however, once a
design is provided, any design changes will be billable to the developer.



Liza Castillo
Land Management
Tucson Electric Power Company
lcastillo@tep.com
Office: (520) 917-8479
Pager: (520) 218-6565
Fax: (520) 917-8400
02/10/2004 ROGER HOWLETT COT NON-DSD COMMUNITY PLANNING Denied COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING TASK FORCE COMMENTS

Regarding

SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application

CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT

S04-003 Tres Pueblos 02/10/04

() Tentative Plat
( ) Development Plan
() Landscape Plan
( ) Revised Plan/Plat
( ) Board of Adjustment
() Other (NPPO)

CROSS REFERENCE: C9-94-18

NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Kino Area Plan

GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Gateway (Campbell Avenue)

COMMENTS DUE BY: February 16, 2004

SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:

( ) No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment
( ) Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions
( ) RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies
() See Additional Comments Attached
( ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on:
() Resubmittal Required:
() Tentative Plat
( ) Development Plan
() Landscape Plan
( ) Other

REVIEWER: K. Aragonez 791-4505 DATE: 2/6/2004

Because this is a Residential Cluster Project (RCP), it must be in conformance with the design policies and criteria of the Kino Area Plan (KAP), the General Plan, and the Design Guidelines Manual. In addition, the allowance of the RCP is based on the purpose to provide greater flexibility and creativity in the design of clustered residential developments.

The Kino Area Plan, the General Plan, and the Design Guidelines Manual encourages the creation of cooling microclimates along pedestrian paths that are internal to the subdivision. In order to provide such a microclimate it is required to provide a minimum of one fifteen (15) gallon tree, no more than ten (10) feet from the back of the sidewalk, on every other lot frontage. This should be shown on the landscape plan along with a note indicating such.

The applicant must dedicate a public recreational trail easement over a fifty (50) foot wide landscaped corridor along the south side of the Rodeo Wash the length of the proposed development.

Within a Residential Cluster Project (RCP) all areas of common use provided for the enjoyment of the residents are required to be handicapped accessible. The majority of the common areas except for common area “C-1”, are provided with only a soft path composed of compressed DG. An additional path made of an all-weather material such as concrete or asphalt needs to be added to the current circulation path that would allow access for bicycles, physically impaired individuals, and stroller use. The DG trail needs to be a minimum of eight (8) feet wide and the all-weather path shall be a minimum of twelve (12) feet in width. The final pathway design, landscaping of corridor and trail connections shall be subject to approval of the City of Tucson Parks and Recreation Department and Pima County Natural Resources Parks and Recreation.

All-weather eight (8) foot wide paths needs to connect from the development to the trail corridor along the Rodeo Wash, to provide handicapped accessibility to the river park.

Please demonstrate how the screening for the mechanical equipment is achieved. Provide as either a detail or note on the plan.

The Kino Area Plan, the General Plan, and the Design Guidelines Manual promote safe by design concepts. Lots abutting common areas along the Rodeo Wash and Campbell Avenue should not utilize high walls that isolate the common areas that could promote criminal activities. Placing the “eyes of the community” into these areas creates a safe environment for residents. Where perimeter walls are provided along lot lines that abut designated open areas, common areas, and trail systems, specifically, lots 13-67, and 455-484, the masonry portion of the wall should not exceed three (3’) feet in height, except for pillars, with wrought iron or other similar open fencing materials on top. A detail of this wall needs to be provided on the tentative plat.

Please provide verification that the proposed subdivision meets the requirements of the Airport Environs Zone (AEZ) (LUC Sec. 2.8.5.7). The project falls within the Airport Hazard District (AHD) which requires that no structure, use of land, or tree may exceed the height limitations based on distances away from established ends of runways of Tucson International Airport (TIA).

Any required or proposed masonry screen walls around the perimeter of the RCP shall be constructed of, or painted with, graffiti-resistant materials. These screen walls shall incorporate one of the following decorative materials: (a) tile, (b) stone, (c) brick, (d) textured brick/block, (e) a coarse-textured material such as stucco or plaster, or (f) a combination of the above materials. Please provide a detail of the wall indicating materials that will be used and identify the location of all walls on the tentative plat.
02/11/2004 DAN CASTRO ZONING REVIEW Denied COMMENTS
CODE SECTION/ DEVELOPMENT STANDARD

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 January 19, 2005.

2. This project has been assigned subdivision case number S04-003. Please note the subdivision case number in the lower right corner of each sheet on all plans.
D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.1

3 Please add the following note to the typical lot details on sheet 4 of 13: "18 feet must be provided in front of the garage and measured so that the full 18 foot parking space is available for parking on-site."
D.S. 2-10.3.1.B

4. Delete the note on the typical lot details "6' or (H-15') to building", as it is not required.

5. Under general note 17, revise "Planning Director" to "Development Services Department Director."
LUC 3.6.1.4.A.5/ D.S. 2-10.3.1.D

6. The site coverage calculations for Phase 2A and Phase 2B on sheet 1 of 13 do not add up correctly.

7. A) Add a general note, which provides the Airport Mean Sea Level elevation for the N.E. end of runway 21 (2,567') and states that all structures do not exceed the maximum building height allowed in the Airport Hazard District (AHD).
B) Add the Airport Hazard District boundaries, which note the maximum height in feet above elevation at end of runway. Boundaries are found on zoning map page at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/planning/maps/1514/az151417.dwf
This information is required to verify compliance with building heights allowed in the AHD. For additional information regarding the AHD maps please contact Harold Schwartz at 791-5550.

8. Provide a continuous pedestrian circulation path east of basin 5.
D.S. 2-08.3.1

9. The Final Plat may not be approved until the CC&R's are reviewed and approved by the Zoning Review Section. The CC&R's must meet criteria listed in L.U.C. 3.6.1.5. If applicable, the CC&R's must also detail the restrictions on any proposed natural areas.
D.S. 2-10.3.2.E

10. All requested revisions must be made to the plat, Landscape and NPPO plans.
D.S. 2-07.2.1.A

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro, (520) 791-5608.
02/11/2004 FRODRIG2 PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Denied February 20, 2004

TO: James King, Rick Engineering

THRU: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Development Services

FROM: Brandon Matheson, E.I.T.
Pima County Development Review (Wastewater)

SUBJECT: Tres Pueblos, Lots 1-595
Tentative Plat - 1st Submittal
S04-003



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. This project will be tributary to the Southeast Interceptor and the Roger road Wastewater Treatment Plant. Treatment and conveyance capacity is not currently available. Capacity will be available when the Plant Interconnect project is completed. Mr. Robert Decker of PCWWM Planning Services may be contacted regarding this matter at 520-740-6625. Provide a letter from PCWWM Planning Services, written within the past 90 days, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for this project is available.

2. The downstream conveyance system, G-75-008, must be augmented by constructing a 12" sewer line.

3. Based on our evaluation, this project would qualify for Non-Participating sewer connection fee rates.

4. We will prepare a Sewer Service Agreement during the Final Plat process.

5. All Sheets: Add the Plan case number, S04-003, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than the cross reference numbers.

6. Label C9-94-18 as a cross reference number.

7. Label Common Areas with labels that are consistent with the labels used in the Title Block.

8. Label all new manholes as new.

9. Sheet 2: Provide existing grade at manholes in Campbell Avenue for Rim Elevation.

10. Sheet 2: Revise 12" sewer line so that slope is less than or equal to 0.19%.

11. Sheet 2: Show existing culvert with invert elevation in Campbell Avenue.

12. Sheet 2: Correct sewer reference number from G-74-008 to G-75-008.

13. Sheet 2: Provide 30' sewer easement to Campbell Avenue.

14. Sheet 6: Provide inlet invert elevation at culvert.

15. Sheet 9: Eliminate acute angle at manhole (lots 281, 282, 367 and 368.)

16. Sheet 9: Revise the spot elevation at street intersection (lot 382.)

17. Sheet 10: Clarify the rim elevation at lots 245 and 248. Provide a 1.00% slope at the terminal manhole (lots 311 and 351).

18. Sheets 11 & 12: Revise the sewer reference number G-73-55 to G-99-066 and the sewer line size from 8" to 12".

19. Lot 27 can not be served without violating frontage of lot 28.

20. We will require a revised Tentative Plat.

21. The next submittal of this project will be the second submittal. Please include a $300.00 check for the wastewater review fees (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) with the revised set of bluelines and response letter.

If other sheets are added to the set of plans, or revised in such a manner that the sewer design is impacted, please adjust the review fee accordingly.

If you wish to discuss the above comments, please contact Brandon Matheson at 740-6315.





Brandon Matheson, E.I.T.
Pima County Development


BM/ST/dk
Copy: Project
02/11/2004 KAY MARKS PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING Denied 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL
TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207

KAY MARKS
ADDRESSING OFFICIAL
PH: 740-6480
FAX #: 740-6370


TO: CITY PLANNING
FROM: KAY MARKS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL
SUBJECT: S04-003 TRES PUEBLOS/REVISED TENTATIVE PLAT
DATE: February 11, 2004



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:

Correct page divisions.

Correct Location Map scale.

Put “Los Ranchitos Elementary School” in the correct location on Location Map.

Include entire lot numbers on all pages.

Spell out all street suffixes, except on Location Map.

Move “Los Ranchitos No. 4 BK 7, PG 84” to the correct location and delete “Los Ranchitos No. 3, BK 7, PG 76” on pg. 11.

Change “Los Ranchitos No. 3 BK 7, PG 76” to Los Ranchitos No. 4, BK 7,
PG 84 on pgs 12 & 13.

Include Common areas on pg. 1.

Label approved interior street names on Final Plat.



jg
02/18/2004 DALE KELCH COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Denied Traffic Engineering REJECTS this T.P.:

1. 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."

2. Show and label existing and future ROW on Campbell Avenue, Tucson Boulevard and Bilby Road (all are Major Streets and Routes)

3. Show and label with dimensions both existing and future SVTs at the entrances to the development.

4. There is no parking in cul-de-sacs from PRC to PRC. So indicate by showing locations of no parking signs on the plans.

5. There shall be no parking on the entrance roadways to the development (those roadway portions depicted in section B/4). So indicate by showing no parking signs on the plans and in the section view.



D. Dale Kelch, EIT
Senior Engineering Associate
Traffic Engineering Division
(520)791-4259x305
(520)791-5526 (fax)
dkelch1@ci.tucson.az.us
02/19/2004 DOUG WILLIAMS ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied TO: Craig Gross, CDRC
SUBJECT: Tres Pueblos Lots 1-595 Tentative Plat Review
REVIEWER: Doug Williams
DATE: 18 February 2004
CDRC NUMBER: S04-003
T15S, R14E, Sec. 8

Resubmittals Required: Revised Tentative Plat, Landscape Plan, Drainage Report, Soils Report and infiltration test results.

SUMMARY: The Tentative Plat and Drainage Report have been reviewed for Tentative Plat purposes only. Approvals are not recommended at this time. The Plat must demonstrate compliance with Floodplain Development regulations, the City of Tucson's Major Streets and Routes Plan and Watercourse Amenities and Safety Habitat (WASH-) Regulation requirements, at a minimum. A revised Drainage Report with soils report and infiltration test results, Tentative Plat, and Landscape Plan addressing the comments below must be resubmitted. The following comments are offered:

TENTATIVE PLAT:

1. City of Tucson Watercourse Amenities and Safety Habitat (WASH-) Regulations-Chapter 29, Article VIII, Tucson Code affect this project. A separate hydrology/hydraulic study and Plant/Habitat Inventory must be submitted to Engineering and Zoning Review Divisions respectively, for review and approval, demonstrating compliance with this ordinance. The following comments must be addressed for W.A.S.H. Ordinance compliance, at a minimum:
a. provide a W.A.S.H. report with complete discussions regarding any effects on hydrology and hydraulics to the 50-foot Study Area due to the elements outlined in section 29-15(b)(1)a - i;
b. the W.A.S.H. report must define the resource area within 50-foot Study Area and provide a description of proposed mitigation as shown on the Mitigation-Revegetation sheets;
c. delineate the allocated W.A.S.H. Ordinance 50-foot Study Area on plan views for all Mitigation-Revegetation and Tentative Plat sheets;
d. delineate the Resource Area on all Mitigation-Revegetation and Tentative Plat sheets;
e. no disturbance of the resource area is allowed without mitigation, as described in this section of code;
f. if development is proposed within the resource area, the applicant shall demonstrate in the W.A.S.H. report why this area cannot be left in its natural condition;
g. W.A.S.H. Ordinance submittals have separate time lines for acceptance, review, and approvals than plat with drainage report submittals. Some information, sediment transport for example, which normally is not contained in reports for tentative plat review, is necessary in a W.A.S.H. report study of hydraulics. It is suggested that a checklist be prepared by the consultant to accompany the W.A.S.H. submittal. This checklist should mirror the items listed in Sec. 29-15(b)(1) of the W.A.S.H. Ordinance.
h. Any W.A.S.H. submittal should be noted on the transmittal form so that CDRC staff are aware of the time line for which the 5-day acceptance period begins.
2. The Tentative Plat General Notes section must provide a note (a) designating all lots that are affected by the City of Tucson Floodplain Regulations, and (b) that a floodplain use permit and/or lowest floor elevation will be required for those lots. Provide a table or identify individual lot minimum pad elevations in accordance with Development Standard (DS) 2-03.2.2 C 2 a & b and 10-02.5.2.6.
3. Provide a General Note stating that the plat is designed to meet the overlay zone(s) criteria: Sec. 29-12 through 29-19 Watercourse Amenities, Safety, and Habitat (W.A.S.H.) Ordinance of the Tucson Code. Where the overlay zone requires a separate review process, note the case file number, date of approval, and any conditions placed on that approval or, if the review has not been completed, that it is in process (DS 2-03.2.2 C 3 & 2-03.2.2.B.7).
4. Add the General Note: "Lots with frontage on a street designated as a Major Street and Route shall have ingress-egress designed in a manner so that motor vehicles do not have to back out onto the Major Street or Route through the use of circular drives, turnarounds, or other similar solutions" (DS 2-03.2.2 D 2).
5. Explain the star provided on the west side of Campbell Avenue on sheet 2, in a response letter.
6. Existing and proposed floodplain delineations provided are too similar to discern between the two on the plan sheets. Please revise as necessary to ensure there is clear differentiation between existing and proposed floodplain limits (DS 2-03.2.1 J).
7. Provide the dimensioned width of existing paving, curb locations and sidewalks for Campbell Avenue public right of way on sheets 5 and 8 (DS 2-03.2.3 D).
8. Depict new 6' sidewalk to continue southward in the Campbell Avenue right of way (sheets 8 & 11). Identify existing sidewalk along Bilby Road frontage, if existing, on sheets 11 and 12. If no sidewalk exists, new 6' sidewalk will be required, per Mayor and Council Policy directive for new sidewalk requirements on Major Streets and Routes. All new projects must provide new sidewalk along the entire property frontage (DS 3-01.2.7, 2.8, 3.3).
9. Label all existing and developed conditions floodplains as "Regulatory Floodplain", with an additional note labeling each in one of the ways provided in item 7 of the City of Tucson's Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management (SMDDFM), Sections 2.3.1.4 C 4, 6 and 7 (DS 10-02.0).
10. Continue or revise the "proposed floodplain" delineation on sheet 2, north of lot 31, adjacent to the Rodeo Wash FEMA floodplain delineation (SMDDFM, Section 2.3.1.4 C).
11. Section 26-5.2 (4) of the City of Tucson Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Management Regulations states that development in the floodway fringe shall not unnecessarily alter riparian habitats of watercourses and adjacent bank areas. The resubmittal must address the proposed alteration/development within the riparian habitat in the western portion of the site, in the floodway fringe. Specifically, discussion in the resubmittal must address development of Lots 13-18, 455-484, 557-562, 574-591 detention Basin #5, the proposed channel and 16' access easement that lie within the existing floodway fringe. W.A.S.H. Ordinance development guidelines should be followed for development within these areas (see Tentative Plat comment #1).
12. Label each common area individually with a separate letter designation to differentiate retention/detention areas on applicable plan sheets. Enclose with a solid line each common area, private street, etc., that will have separate restrictions, a separate homeowners' association, or any common area that is separated by a public right of way (DS 2-03.2.4 C).
13. Street dedications in accordance with the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan will be shown.
14. Provide dimensions for the additional right of way to be dedicated on Tucson Blvd., in accordance with the MS&R Plan on sheets 4, 7, 10 and 13;
15. Re-check the Bilby Road intersection widening/dedication depicted, and the Tucson Blvd. future half right of way dimension of 65'(75' intended?), provided on sheet 13;
16. Depict and label Campbell Ave. and Bilby Rd. intersection widening/dedications on sheet 11 (DS 2-03.2.4 H).
17. Depict the future (MS&R) sight triangles on the major streets and routes bounding the project. Future triangles shall be drawn from the face of future curbs (DS 2-03.2.4 M & DS 3-01.5.0).
18. Section 1.5.1 of the City of Tucson's Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management (SMDDFM - DS 10-02.0) states that, "As a condition of approval of all Subdivision Plats and Development Plans, the City of Tucson will require that all drainageways be encumbered by either a drainage easement or a flowage easement, depending upon whether or not public maintenance is desired or required". The plat and drainage report must address this requirement in the resubmittal. Please refer to this section for additional CC&R and Final Plat note requirements for scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, access/maintenance easements and rights of access requirements. Add an applicable General Note or notes on sheet 1 and ensure all easements are depicted and labeled accordingly on the plat (DS 2-03.2.4 J & 10-02.0).
19. Label all basin perimeter slopes to be 8:1, H:V or flatter for human activity zone exit requirements (DS 10-01.4.3.1).
20. Provide retention/detention basin spillway inlet and outlet weir details and maintenance access ramp cross-sections, fully labeled and dimensioned with critical elevations provided, for each basin (SMDDFM, Sec. 2.3.1.6 A 4 a & b).
21. Provide clear depiction of the proposed conveyance mechanism, with discharge location indicated for outflow from basin 5. Include a detail for the tie-in to the proposed north-south channel (SMDDFM, Sec. 2.3.1.6 A 4 a).
22. The basin outlet weir locations relative to the 100-year WSEL's depicted indicate no outflow will occur from the basins during a 100-year event - revise as necessary (SMDDFM, Sec. 2.3.1.6 A 4 e).
23. Please identify and label the dashed lines at the tops and bottoms of detention basin and channel slopes on all plan views. Include a symbol in the legend and ensure the line type is clearly distinguishable from existing line types used, such as Erosion Hazard Setback and easement lines.
24. Please clarify the callout note "INV OUT 2559" as an INLET invert elevation, if this is the intent of the note, for the 4 - 42" SRP's on sheet 6 (basin 4).
25. Provide a basin inlet detail (item # 16, above) and include depiction of a sidewalk and scupper, labeled with number of cells and opening height provided on sheet 2, between Lots 26 and 27.
26. Provide accurate dimensioning for section A/5 through E/5, fully labeled.
27. The WSEL provided in channel section detail D/5 indicates a water depth higher than the adjacent (Basin 4) top of basin elevation proposed of 53.5 (note proposed spot elevation of 51.0 in channel, with 3.5' typical flow depth indicated in channel detail - resulting in 1' overtopping of the top of basin). Revise and provide additional spot elevations. Depict and label in the section(s) all pertinent items, including drainage swales, side yard walls, lot lines, pad grades, location of foundation edge, and slopes, fully dimensioned, meeting the intent of the drainage report.
28. Basin 4 (sheets 6 and 9) 100-year ponding limits depicted do not correspond with the water surface elevation (WSEL) provided in the callout note and the proposed spot elevations provided.
29. Provide inlet and outlet invert elevations for the 5-36" SRP's adjacent to Lot 557 (sheet 9), and provide the 100-year WSEL on plan view and in cross-section B/5.
30. Identify and label the apparent bank protection adjacent to Lots 557, 581-585, and provide a symbol and description in the legend for such. Provide a separate detail, fully dimensioned and labeled, or include additional construction details (material, thickness, toe-down, tie-in details) in B/5 for this proposed bank protection, in accordance with drainage report scour depth calculations and resulting toe-down recommendations.
31. Clearly depict all proposed riprap, gunite or other bank protection and scour protection/toe-down recommendations from the drainage report on all affected sheets of the plat (see drainage report comment # 3, below).
32. Provide cross sections depicting change of pad grades for the rears of the following:
a. Lots 97-112 and the rear of Lots 128 -113
b. Lots 80-92 and the rear of Lots 144-133
c. Lots 79-68 and the rear of Lots 145-157
d. Lots 256-247 and the rear of Lots 282-293
e. Lots 355 and the rear of Lots 348 and 349
f. Lots 361-358 and the rear of Lots 337-343
33. Depict and label in cross section(s) all pertinent items, including drainage swales, side yard walls, lot lines, pad grades, location of foundation edge, and slopes. Provide a side yard cross section for grade differential information between the following lots:
a. Lots 24 and 25
b. Lots 96 and 97
c. Lots 159-160
d. west grading of Lot 364, adjacent to Lots 361-363

DRAINAGE REPORT:

1. Correct the statement in Section 4.2 of the report to specify current policy requirements of a 15% or greater decrease in discharge rates for the 2-10- and 100-year events for development within critical basins. Revise all subsequent hydraulic and hydrologic calculations as necessary, demonstrating conformance to this policy.
2. The drainage report should provide discussion and a detail or details for acceptance of offsite flow from concentration point IV (114 CFS). Please ensure any proposed acceptance mechanism is clearly depicted on the plat, fully labeled and dimensioned (see item 14, below).
3. Section 1.5.1 of the City of Tucson's Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management (SMDDFM - DS 10-02.0) states that, "As a condition of approval of all Subdivision Plats and Development Plans, the City of Tucson will require that all drainageways be encumbered by either a drainage easement or a flowage easement, depending upon whether or not public maintenance is desired or required". The plat and drainage report must address this requirement in the resubmittal. Please refer to this section for additional CC&R and Final Plat note requirements for scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, access/maintenance easements and rights of access requirements (DS 2-03.2.4 J & 10-02.0, Sections 1.5.1 and 5.2.2).
4. Please ensure all proposed riprap, gunite or other bank protection and scour protection/toe-down locations are depicted on the proposed drainage map (Figure 5), and on all affected sheets of the Tentative Plat, fully labeled and dimensioned.
5. Provide retention/detention basin cross-sections, in-flow and outflow structures and maintenance access ramp cross-sections, fully labeled and dimensioned, with all critical elevations noted, for each retention/detention basin (SMDDFM, Section 2.3.1.6 A 4).
6. Provide clear depiction of the proposed conveyance mechanism, with discharge location indicated for outflow from basin 5. Include a detail, fully labeled and dimensioned, for tie-in to the proposed north-south channel (SMDDFM, Sec. 2.3.1.6 A 4 a).
7. The Pima County/City of Tucson Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual requires that a soils report be submitted in conjunction with the design of each surface storage facility which utilizes infiltration as a method of basin drainage. The report shall address at a minimum soil classification, erodibility, permeability, slope stability and ground water elevations. Infiltration test results shall be included with the report, demonstrating the drain time for retained stormwater for any proposed basin does not exceed the maximum disposal time allowed. Testing should be performed in accordance with the Pima County Department of Transportation - Flood Control District's recommended procedures. Discuss results in the drainage report (Section 3.5.1, SMDDFM - DS 10-01.0).
8. The WSEL provided in channel section detail D/5 indicates a water depth that is higher than the adjacent (Basin 4) top of basin elevation proposed of 53.5 (note proposed spot elevation of 51.0 in channel, with 3.5' typical flow depth indicated in channel detail - resulting in 1' overtopping of the top of basin). Clarify the intent of drainage in this area in the drainage report.
9. Address the following HEC-RAS model comments for the westerly watercourse
a. explain the section configurations of existing and proposed conditions to clarify proposed encroachment and conveyance;
b. explain and justify the change in "n" values and other parameters which have changed from existing to proposed conditions;
c. explain the drop in water surface elevations under the proposed model;
d. explain how the model results demonstrate there will be no adverse impact to adjacent property or right of way, upstream or downstream. Revise part 1 of 2 on page 13 (Section 5.4).
10. The report must include freeboard and any superelevation calculations in a resubmittal
11. The report must address and discuss emergency spillway requirements for any basin design that may employ embankments for storage volume requirements. Please ensure appropriate depictions, fully labeled and dimensioned, are provided with the drainage report where appropriate (DS 10-01.0, section 3.3.4).
12. Provide a legible topographic map at a scale of 1 inch equal to 200 feet, or larger, or (preferably) a photo-topo showing the offsite watershed boundaries affecting the site, parcel boundaries, principal points of drainage concentration, flowlines and grade breaks used to compute basin lengths and average watercourse slopes (SMDDFM, Sec. 2.3.1.3 A 3).
13. The resubmittal must address the proposed floodplain encroachment on the southern perimeter of the site, with discussion in the report assessing the effects that this development may have upon the floodplain and/or floodway and adjacent properties or right of way, upstream or downstream. All tentative plats in floodprone areas shall show proposed grading and improvement for areas which are subject to flooding or erosion or which have poor drainage. Also included will be a description and location of all facilities proposed to be used to alleviate flooding, erosion or other drainage problems, both in the proposed subdivision or development, and downstream and upstream of any watercourse affected by the subdivision or development, whether they are within or outside the project boundaries (SMDDFM, sec. 2.3.1.4 F and Tucson Code, Section 26-8.3).
14. Describe and present hydraulic calculations sheets for any revised hydraulic system proposed for collection and conveyance of offsite flows, such as collector channels, existing drainageways, interceptor swales, wall openings, and for the overall project, such as streets, unlined channels, swales, culverts, etc. (SMDDFM sec. 2.3.1.5 B & C).
15. Describe and present hydraulic calculation sheets for each of the hydraulic systems used to return flow to either its natural or existing location and magnitude along the downstream property line (SMDDFM, sec. 2.3.1.5 F).
16. Provide a basin inlet detail (see item 1, above) and sidewalk scupper calculations for conveyance of 100% of the 10-year flow at a minimum, to basin 5 between Lots 26 and 27 - sheet 2 (DS 2-08.5.1 E).
17. The report must contain a detailed site plan (or copy of the tentative plat), clearly showing the dimensions and locations of the following:
a. All proposed detention/retention systems, including the location, size, and type of inflow/outflow structures to be employed, fully labeled and dimensioned. Include dimensions and elevations of critical portions of those structures (SMDDFM, sec. 2.3.1.6 A 4 a);
b. The locations, dimensions and slopes of all basin maintenance access ramps (SMDDFM, sec. 2.3.1.6 A 4 b and 14.3.4);
c. Clearly marked dimensions of all building and/or erosion hazard setbacks, with dimensions between structures and any proposed basins or drainageways (SMDDFM, sec. 2.3.1.6 A 4 d);
d. maximum water-surface elevations, limits of ponding and locations and types of all security barriers to be installed (SMDDFM, sec. 2.3.1.6 A 4 e & f).
18. As part of the basin and drainageway maintenance checklist, state that the annual inspection report shall contain the summaries listed in section 2.3.1.6 C 2 a & b and 14.3.3 of the SMDDFM (include the language provided in this section in the report, as part of the checklist).

LANDSCAPE PLAN:

1. Provide a landscape note and/or typical details demonstrating water-harvesting maximization in all landscaped areas (LUC, Section 3.7.4).

2. Add an appropriate note for compliance with Development Standard 3-01.5.0, noting that lines of sight will not be obscured between 30" and 6' within any existing or future (MS&R) sight visibility triangle (SVT).

GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please include a copy of sample CC&R's and a current Title Report with the resubmittal.

More than one grading permit will be required for grading of this parcel. A grading permit may be issued for no more than 35 acres, in accordance with section 6.4 of the 2000 International Building Code - local amendment. Site grading should conform to all soils and geotechnical report recommendations and grading/excavation requirements outlined at the following website address: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/2000_IBC_Amendments.pdf.

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.

Resubmittal will require a revised Tentative Plat and Drainage Report, Landscape Plan, soils report with infiltration test results, a copy of sample CC&R's and a current Title Report addressing the comments provided above.

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 1189 or Dwillia1@ci.tucson.az.us.

Doug Williams
Sr. Engineering Associate
Engineering Division
Development Services Department
02/20/2004 CRAIG GROSS OTHER AGENCIES PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS Passed
02/20/2004 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1) If the project is to be phased, provide calculations, setbacks, etc., to indicate that each phase complies with all requirements as a separate entity. Show and label any temporary improvements that may be needed to make the site function for each phase as one entity. If such temporary improvements are off the site of the phase under consideration, a temporary easement or other legal documentation to assure legal use of the property is required. Note recording information. DS 2-05.2.4.C
Submit revised plans which meet all requirements for individual phases.

2) The WASH ordinance is applicable, add a note referencing all lots impacted, and state that the plat is designed to comply with the regulation. DS 2-03.2.2.C.3
Submit a Plant Habitat Inventory and Mitigation Plan. TCC Sec. 29-12

3) The Kino Area Plan encourages planting of native desert trees along internal streets to reduce heat absorption and provide for pavement shading. Provide additional trees where possible.

4) Revise the landscape plan to include the area of detention/retention basins, depths of basins, and percentage of side slope or slope ratios. Basins are subject to the requirements of DS 10-01.4.3.1 related to basin side slopes (p. 78).

5) Check the easement information shown on sheet N6 for accuracy.

6) Check the calculations for Cercidium floridum on sheet N8 for accuracy.

7) Revise the landscape plan to clarify compliance with LUC 3.7.2.7 and LUC 3.7.2.4.A.3 by including a dust control treatment for the public right of way areas adjacent to the site which may be disturbed by development.

8) Show the complete limits of grading on the landscape and NPP plans. DS 2-07.2.2.B

9) Show the drainage channel on sheet L10 and L14. DS 2-07.2.2

10) Identify the bold line used on sheet L10 and L6.

11) A 5' landscape area is shown along Tucson Boulevard. Per Gateway Route requirements a 10' wide buffer is required. LUC 3.7.5.1

12) Clarify the call outs for "existing" and "to remain" on sheet L14. Identify what is referenced.

13) Provide a copy of any required riparian habitat inventories and mitigation plans.

Resubmittal of all plans is required.
02/20/2004 DOROTHY ROBLES COT NON-DSD REAL ESTATE Approved no comments
02/20/2004 ED ABRIGO PIMA COUNTY ASSESSOR Approved Office of the Pima County Assessor
115 N. Church Ave.
Tucson, Arizona 85701

RICK LYONS
ASSESSOR




TO: CDRC Office
Subdivision Review
City of Tucson (FAX# 791-5559)

FROM: Ed Abrigo, Mapping Supervisor
Pima County Assessor's Office
Mapping Department

DATE: February 13, 2004


RE: Assessor's Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat
S04-003 Tres Pueblos

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

X Plat meets Assessor's Office requirements.
_______ Plat does not meet Assessor's Office requirements.


COMMENTS: Thank you for your submittal.

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.






Susan C. King
02/20/2004 GLENN HICKS COT NON-DSD PARKS & RECREATION Denied DATE: February 19, 2004

TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services

FROM: Glenn Hicks, Parks and Recreation

SUBJECT: CDRC Transmittal, Project S04-003 Tres Pueblos: TP

CC: Craig Gross, Development Services


Staff has reviewed the tentative plat and has the following comments:

Applicant shall maintain a landscaped trail corridor at last 50' in width along the south side of Rodeo Wash that crosses the subject site, and shall dedicate a public recreational trail easement over the entirety of the corridor. Please show corridor and easement on plans.

Applicant shall construct a 12 ft wide, paved, handicapped-accessible, shared-use pathway and an 8 ft wide, decomposed granite trail along the south side of the Rodeo Wash within the landscaped trail corridor. Path and trail to be constructed according to the City/County Divided Urban Pathway standard(see attached). Please show a cross-section of the pathway and trail on plans. Show specifications for the trail and path(see attached). Show transitions between path, trail and sidewalks. The 12 ft paved path shall be located closest to Rodeo Wash and north of the trail.

Applicant shall provide trail connections from the development to the trail corridor along the Rodeo Wash.
Please show trail connections on plans.

Final pathway design, landscaping of trail corridor and trail connections shall be subject to approval of the City of Tucson Parks and Recreation Department and Pima County Natural Resources Parks and Recreation.

Drainage structures crossing the trail corridor should be located at least 18" below ground to allow for landscape irrigation.

Walls along trail corridor should incorporate one of the following decorative materials: tile, stone, brick, textured brick/block, a coarse-textured material such as stucco or plaster, wrought iron, or a combination of the above materials to create a see-thru "view wall".

Please feel free to call me at 791-4873 x 215 if you have any questions.





The City/County Divided Urban Pathway Standard, includes a minimum 12' paved path (construction standard is 2" of asphalt over 4" of compacted AB), a minimum 8' meandering natural surface path (construction standard is 2" of stabilized DG compacted to 95% over native subgrade compacted to 95%), as well as landscaping between the path and trail and along both sides of the path an trail. Native shade trees (preferably Prosopis species) shall be installed along both sides of the path at least every 30', and between the paths where appropriate and feasible.