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: RESUBMITTAL - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW

Plan Number - S04-003
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
04/01/2004 FERNE RODRIGUEZ START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
04/05/2004 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: April 2, 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 Location Map scale per letter dated 2-11-04.

Put Los Ranchitos Elementary School in the correct location on Location Map per letter dated 2-11-04.

Correct project shading on Location Map. A portion is excluded.

Delete “Los Ranchitos Elementary School” on pg. 3.

Correct scale on pg. 4.


SUGGESTION: This plat would be a lot easier to read if there was not such a big overlap in the page divisions.






jg
04/06/2004 DALE KELCH COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Denied Traffic Engineering REJECTS this T.P.:

1. There is no parking in cul-de-sacs from PRC to PRC. So indicate by showing locations of no parking SIGNS on the plans. This is not indicated on the cul-de-sac on sheet 13. Nor is it indicated on the bump out on sheet 10 in front of lots 314-317. No signs are indicated on these plans.

D. Dale Kelch, EIT
Senior Engineering Associate
Traffic Engineering Division
(520)791-4259x305
(520)791-5526 (fax)
dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov
04/12/2004 DAN CASTRO ZONING REVIEW Approv-Cond COMMENTS
CODE SECTION/ DEVELOPMENT STANDARD


The Zoning Review Section approves the tentative plat for this subdivision, subject to the following changes on the executed tentative plat. 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 tentative plat to verify that those changes do not affect any zoning requirements.

1. Provide a continuous pedestrian circulation path east of basin 5 connecting the sidewalk south of lot 27 with the sidewalk east of lot 26.
D.S. 2-08.3.1

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro at (520) 791-5608.
04/12/2004 ROGER HOWLETT COT NON-DSD COMMUNITY PLANNING Denied DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING AND DESIGN COMMENTS

Regarding

SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application

CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT

S04-003 Tres Pueblos 004/09/04

() Tentative Plat
( ) Development Plan
() Landscape Plan
( ) Revised Plan/Plat
( ) Board of Adjustment
() Other (NPPO, and WASH Inventory)

CROSS REFERENCE: C9-94-18

NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Kino Area Plan

GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Gateway (Campbell Avenue)

COMMENTS DUE BY: April 14, 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 Not Required, DSD May Review:
( ) Tentative Plat
( ) Development Plan
( ) Landscape Plan
( ) Other

REVIEWER: K. Aragonez 791-4505 DATE: 4/12/2004

Staff of the Zoning Review Section at Development Services may review these comments at time of final submittal. Resubmittal to the Department of Urban Planning and Design will not be required.


Please add to general note 23 that height limitation also extends to the use of land, or trees on property within the AHD.

Response to comment 6 has been read and staff acknowledges it. Staff will again stress the importance of not creating common areas that are “walled” off from the community and the importance of utilizing “safe by design” techniques. We hope that as a safety issue this concept is mandatory to future homeowners. Alteration of the open wall could be controlled through the CC&Rs by allowing only minimum changes to its design. Staff strongly urges the applicant to reconsider this request.

Per response 3 you indicated that a ten (10) foot all-weathered path would be installed along the Rodeo Wash as discussed between Eric Barret, TMHS Associates, and Glenn Hicks City of Tucson Parks and Recreation. Staff realizes that the placement of the path depends on the approval of the Wash Inventory/mitigation by DSD Landscape Review. It appears that on the page W5 of the Wash Inventory that the trail is described as a six (6) foot stabilized DG path. The Plan should match response that was given to this Department. Please correct.
04/13/2004 FRODRIG2 PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER Denied PIMA COUNTY
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
201 N. Stone Avenue, 2nd Floor
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1207

CARMINE DEBONIS, JR. Phone: (520) 740-6586
Director FAX: (520) 740-6380
April 13, 2004

TO: James King, Rick Engineering

THRU: Craig Gross, City of Tucson Development Services

FROM: Tim Rowe, P.E. (representing the Pima County Departments of
Wastewater Management and Environmental Quality)

SUBJECT: Tres Pueblos, Lots 1-595
Tentative Plat - 2nd 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:


Please be advised that treatment capacity for this project may not be available. Please provide a letter from Robert Decker, written within the past 90 days stating that treatment and conveyance capacity is available, previously requested. We will not be able to approve the tentative plat for this project until such a letter has been obtained, and submitted to this office.

All Sheets: Revise the labels of the common areas shown in the drawings and/or revise the labels for the common areas shown in the title blocks, so that they match, as previously requested: Please be aware of the following:
All Sheets: Common Areas A3, B1, & B5 could not be found. Revise as necessary.
All Sheets: There are more than 4 Common Area As. A-5 and A-6 were found on the plans. Revise the Title Block or the common areas.
Sheets 1, 12 & 13: Common Area A3 on the index map is shown as common area A5 on sheets 12 and 13. Revise or clarify

Sheet 2: The offsite sewer has not been shown with manhole numbers or rim elevations as previously requested. Please provide the rim elevations, so that we can verify that the off-site sewer line will have sufficient cover

Sheet 2: All of the 15” off-site sewer line must be run within the public right of way of Campbell Avenue.

Sheet 2: The manholes and invert elevations shown in Detail A do not match those shown in the main drawing. Revise as necessary.

Sheet 2: Show a 30’ public sewer easement by final plat centered over the proposed sewer line that crosses Basin 5 and Common Area A-1 to Campbell Avenue as previously requested..

Sheet 12: Extend the sewer line in the street between Lots 309 and 310 so that the terminal manhole is located within the curved pavement returns of this street where at the intersection with the pavement in Tucson Boulevard.

We will require a revised Tentative Plat.

The next submittal of this project will be the third submittal. Please include a $39.00 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 me at 520-740-6563.



Tim Rowe, P.E.
Pima County Development Review Divsion


TR/ST/tr
Copy: Project
04/16/2004 GLENN HICKS COT NON-DSD PARKS & RECREATION Denied DATE: April 15, 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:

Indicate on the plans:
The paved pathway along the south side of the Rodeo Wash shall be 12 ft wide, rather than 10 ft wide.
The paved path shall be 2” of asphalt over 4” of compacted AB.
The 8’ meandering trail shall be 2” of stabilized DG compacted to 95% over native subgrade compacted to 95%.



Please feel free to call me at 791-4873 x 215 if you have any questions.
04/20/2004 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1) Show the complete limits of grading in the vicinity of the Rodeo Wash on the landscape and NPP plans. Although a path may be allowed to be located on grade within unvegetated portions of the study area, a grading limit along with preservation fencing is required.
DS 2-07.2.2.B

2) Revise the notes in appendix D of the WASH report to correspond with the path improvements on the landscape plans. The plans and report include different descriptions of the width and materials used to construct the path.

3) Provide the correct calculations for vegetative coverage for the Tucson Boulevard street landscape border on sheet L.1. The plan reviewed indicates only 8,6 feet.

4) Revise the references on the landscape plan to a DG path if an asphalt path is provided.

5) Revise the WASH Ordinance Report and associated plans to include necesssary preservation elements such as fencing for preserved areas.

6) Revise the temporary fencing note on sheet N1 to clarify where it is to be installed. Fencing solely on the property line does not meet the intent of the NPP plan and wash related plans.

Resubmittal of all plans is required.
04/21/2004 DOUG WILLIAMS ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied TO: Craig Gross, CDRC
SUBJECT: Tres Pueblos Lots 1-595 Tentative Plat Review
REVIEWER: Doug Williams
DATE: 21 April 2004
CDRC #: S04-003
T15S, R14E, Sec. 8

Resubmittals Required: Revised Tentative Plat, Landscape Plan, Drainage Report, WASH Report, Infiltration test results.

SUMMARY:
A drainage report response letter could not be found with the resubmittal. Due to the number of comments pending and observation of proposed elevations provided, drainage report revisions may still be necessary. Please include a response letter with a resubmittal, specifically addressing all drainage report comments, in addition to all Tentative Plat comments. The majority of the Tentative Plat previous review comments have not been adequately addressed. Comments 1-15 below address the portions of previous comments 1-24 that were not addressed. Items relating to previous comments 25 -33 are to be discussed in a requested conference with the Engineer of Record, in order to fully address all items, including those not discussed below that must be revised and/or provided on a revised Tentative Plat. Please address all comments provided below, including previous comments 24-33 in their entirety. Please call or email me to schedule an appointment at your convenience.

TENTATIVE PLAT:

1. New 6' sidewalk must be constructed 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. All new projects must provide new sidewalk along the entire property frontage (see previous comment # 8) (DS 3-01.2.7, 2.8, 3.3). The response to this comment regarding the creation of a separate parcel is not acceptable. Such a split would require a separate platting process. Lot split approval documentation by Zoning and Engineering Divisions, Development Services Department must be provided for this split.
2. Please add appropriate labeling for each of the developed conditions regulatory floodplains 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 7 (see previous comment # 9) (DS 10-02.0).
3. Previous comment #12, "Label each common area individually with a separate letter designation to differentiate retention/detention areas on applicable plan sheets..." must be revised for Final Plat purposes, and should occur prior to Tentative Plat approval. Detention/retention basins and drainageways must have their own individual designations, and may not be combined with open space, streets, etc. (DS 2-03.2.4 C).
4. Previous comment # 13; "Street dedications in accordance with the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan will be shown." has not been sufficiently addressed. The plat must be revised to reflect future right of way dedications for Campbell Ave. and Bilby Rd., to include intersection widening (sheet 11), in accordance with the city's Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan.
5. Omit the letters "MSR" from the existing right of way dimensioning on sheets 2, 5, 7, 8, 10 -13.
6. Correct the dimensions for the additional right of way to be dedicated on Tucson Blvd., in accordance with the MS&R Plan on sheets 7, 10 and 13;
7. Re-check the Bilby Road intersection widening/dedication depicted. Intersection widening for 64' future rights of way should be 90', per the MS&R Plan (sheet 13).
8. Depict and label Campbell Ave. and Bilby Rd. intersection widening/dedications on sheet 11 - see comment # 2, above (DS 2-03.2.4 H).
9. 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 - see previous comment # 17 and comment #2, above (DS 2-03.2.4 M & DS 3-01.5.0).
10. In order to address previous comment # 18, Engineering Division requires that all private drainageways conveying regulatory flow (100-cfs or greater) be encumbered with a public flowage easement, at a minimum, in accordance with Section 1.5.1 of the City of Tucson's Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management (SMDDFM - DS 10-02.0).
11. Please refer to the SMDDFM, section 1.5.1 for CC&R and Final Plat note requirements for scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, access/maintenance easements and rights of access requirements for the drainageways discussed in item 11. 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).
12. Previous comment # 20 has not been adequately addressed. Provide retention/detention basin spillway inlet and outlet weir details, fully labeled and dimensioned; and maintenance access ramp cross-sections, fully labeled and dimensioned with critical elevations provided in all cases, for each basin (SMDDFM, Sec. 2.3.1.6 A 4 a & b).
13. Previous comment # 21 has not been fully addressed. "Provide clear depiction of the proposed conveyance mechanism, with discharge location indicated for outflow from basin 5 (outlet weir detail, fully labeled and dimensioned with elevations provided). Include a detail for the tie-in to the proposed north-south channel (SMDDFM, Sec. 2.3.1.6 A 4 a)
14. Information provided in response to comment # 24 does not clarify the proposed detention/drainage mechanism at the basin outlet. The plat must include a complete outlet weir detail - fully labeled and dimensioned, with elevations provided. **Also note that there are two separate proposed basin # 4's (sheets 4 and 6) - revise as necessary**

** Previous comment numbers 25-33 are to be discussed in a scheduled meeting**

DRAINAGE REPORT:

See summary above regarding response letter instructions. The comments below may have been addressed in this resubmittal. However, due to the large nature of this project, a response letter specifically addressing each comment is necessary, with references to specific locations in the report and supporting exhibits, for revisions that have been made. Please address all of the following comments:

1. Previous comment #1 has not been adequately addressed. Revise the statement in section 4.2 that detention may be waived, and revise the report accordingly, to meet critical basin flow reduction requirements, as previously stated. Stormwater detention requirements may not be waived if a proposed development is within a critical basin or any portion of a critical channel, reach, or structure is located downstream from the development (Stormwater Retention/Detention Manual - Section 2.3 - pg. 15, second paragraph)
2. 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. Specifics (SMDDFM, Section 2.3.1.6 A 4).
3. 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. Address any potential headcut, and proposed erosion protection at this location (SMDDFM, Sec. 2.3.1.6 A 4 a).
4. 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.
5. Address freeboard and any superelevation calculations in a resubmittal. Please explain in a response letter whether such calculations have been necessary, and where they can be found in the report.
6. Section 5.4 of the report proposes channelization of the existing channel, which represents a potential for reduced times of concentration and/or possible increases in flow rates discharging from the site. Explain in the text how the proposed channelization will not result in adverse impact downstream, and will comply with critical basin development.
7. 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).
8. 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).
9. 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).
10. Provide a basin inlet detail (see item 2, 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 of the Plat (DS 2-08.5.1 E).
11. 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).
12. Provide percolation testing results and discussion/analysis in the report addressing times of disposal of retained volumes for each basin. Test results should be performed in accordance with the recommended procedure of the Pima County Department of Transportation - Flood Control District (DS 10-01.0, section 3.5.1).

LANDSCAPE PLAN:

All portions of the 10' asphalt path depicted within the Rodeo Wash Study Area must be clearly addressed in the WASH Report. Those portions of the path that are to be constructed within the Resource Area must be fully addressed in the report and clearly shown on a mitigation plan. Please ensure all required pedestrian paths depicted on the Landscape plan are also provided on the Tentative Plat, for consistency

WASH REPORT:

The W.A.S.H. submittal does not contain the required mitigation, wash treatment and preservation/revegetation plans necessary for a proper review of the proposed alterations within the resource area. A revised report is required with the Plat resubmittal. The following comments are offered:

1. Provide a note in the legend, or a callout note representing all hatched areas on sheets W 1-W3.

2. Please clarify the depiction and labeling of all Resource Area on sheets W1-W3. The exhibits must clearly delineate, and differentiate between the Study Area; Resource Areas and any proposed disturbed areas. The disturbed areas proposed and grading limits appear to vary, and are not clear on sheets W1 - W3. Please revise these sheets to clearly discern between each of these items.

3. Section 3.2 states that no modifications to the existing channel are proposed, yet the Tentative Plat, drainage report and supporting exhibits indicate modification are proposed at the west channel/Rodeo Wash confluence, northwest of basin 5. The report must address this proposed disturbance to the channel's south bank in the proposed conditions hydraulics modeling section of the report for this location.

4. Provide details in the report, fully labeled and dimensioned with elevations provided, for the proposed basin outlet erosion protection and the West Channel/Rodeo Wash confluence. The details must be included with a Tentative Plat resubmittal, and be depicted in plan view and as details as part of the Tentative Plat submittal. Include any other details for proposed disturbed area(s) with the Resource Area.

5. The WASH Ordinance Report specifies a DG path, with no reference to asphalt, as is depicted on the Landscape Plan. The report must address both proposed paths in detail, and must demonstrate why the resource area cannot be left in its natural condition [Tucson Code, Sec. 29-16 (a)].

6. Submit a mitigation plan addressing all proposed disturbances in the Resource Area, including a plan for proposed wash treatment at the West Channel/Rodeo Wash confluence [Tucson Code, Sec. 29-16 (b)]. Refer to all of Sections 29-16 and 29-19, and attachments A-E for submittal requirements. These may be accessed at: http://fws.municode.com/CGI-BIN/om_isapi.dll?infobase=11294.nfo&jump=ch029.x1-29-12&softpage=newTestMainnonFrame#JUMPDEST_ch029.x1-29-12, or go to http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/clerks and click on "City Code".


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 response letter addressing all of the comments listed above, a revised Tentative Plat, Drainage Report, WASH Report, and Landscape Plan. Retention basin 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