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
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Plan Number - S04-188
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/13/2006 | FRODRIG2 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | January 11, 2006 To: Steven W. Hill, Leadstar Engineering Company, LLC Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Project Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________ From: Tim Rowe, P.E. (520-740-6563), representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environmental Quality Subject: Silverbell Crossings, Lots 1-143 and Common Areas A-D Tentative or Preliminary Plat - 3rd Submittal S04-188 The proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project have been reviewed on behalf of the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) and the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. The proposed off-site sewer lines are located entirely on the greens of a public golf course, which precludes them from being utilized by any properties down gradient from the property under development. Therefore pursuant to Pima County Ordinance 2005-112, the proposed off-site sewer lines are not qualifying public sewer lines and no lots within this subdivision will qualify for any sewer connection fee discounts. Sheet 2: Combine General Notes 10 and 13 into a single General Note that reads: THE ON-SITE SANITARY SEWAGE COLLECTION LINES WILL BE PUBLIC AND DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED TO PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARDS AND MUST BE ACCEPTED AND RELEASED FOR SERVICE BY THE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF SEWER CONNECTION PERMITS. Sheets 8 & 9: The proposed on-site sewers still do not conform to PCWMD's design standards. As stated in my June 20, 2005, review letter for this project, Development Services may approve the tentative plat for this project, only when these documents demonstrate full compliance with PCWMD's design standards, or the following conditions have been satisfied: Written authorization has been obtained from the PCWMD for the following deviations from PCWMD's design standards and flow management practices: The use of 8" sewer pipes installed at a slope of 0.33% where PCWMD's design standards require a slope of at least 0.44% No drop specified across any of the manholes where the sewer lines change slope or direction, where PCWMD's design standards require a 0.1' or 0.2' drop across such manholes. Two connections being made to the 48" Northwest Outfall without a bypass of flow around the two points of connection. The written authorization from the PCWMD for these deviations has been shown in its entirety on one of the sheets of the tentative plat. As stated in my June 20, 2005, review letter for this project, to obtain the written authorization from the PCWMD for the proposed deviations from its design standards, the following documents will need to be submitted to Mike Bunch, PCWMD Deputy Director, or Eric Wieduwilt, PCWMD's Chief Engineer: A written request for the proposed deviations from the PCWMD's design standards, including a statement acknowledging that the resulting sewers will require expenditures for operation, maintenance, repair or replacement that are in addition to the established expenditures of the PCWMD associated with the public gravity-flow wastewater system, and a Special Facility Agreement per Pima County Code Title 13.24.035 will be executed to compensate the County for those additional expeditures. Adequate documentation from the City of Tucson to the effect that the COT is willing to grant public sewer easements across the adjacent COT golf course. As the proposed off-site public sewer lines and easements will also cross two 100' electrical easements, Leadstar Engineering will also need to obtain written authorization from the appropriate electrical transmission authorities, for the proposed off-site public sewer lines and easements to cross their easements. A copy of these written authorizations must be submitted to this office before this office can approve the tentative plat for this project. As stated in my June 20, 2005, review letter for this project, flow through sewers ending at terminal manholes between the curved pavement returns of Kellen Canyon and Baby Bruno Avenues, where these proposed streets intersect with Silverbell Road, must be provided. The manholes at these locations shall be as deep as possible, i.e. if a variance is obtained to utilize 8" sewers at 0.33%, the flowthrough sewer lines should also have a slope of 0.33% to provide the maximum depth. Sheet 9: If a variance is obtained to utilize 8" sewers at 0.33%, The sewer line between New MH# 14 and New MH# 15 must also have a slope of 0.33%, so that New MH#15 is as deep as possible to accommodate flow-through from the adjacent subdivision to the south. Sheets 8 & 9: Delete the public sewer easement shown across Common Area C. All of Common Area C will need to be granted to Pima County for use as a public sewer easement by the Dedication of the final plat. We will require a revised set of bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. Pima County Code Title 13.20.030.A.2 requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the . The fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet. The next submittal of this project will be the fourth (4th) submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $78.00 (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER ) must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter. If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly. If you have any questions regarding the above mentioned comments, please contact me at the telephone number shown under my signature on the first page of this letter CC: Project File |
| 01/19/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES January 19, 2006 Steve Hill Leadstar Engineering 10101 Finance Center Drive Tucson, AZ 85710 Subject: S04-188 Silverbell Crossing Tentative Plat Dear Steve: Your submittal of November 3, 2005, for the above project has been reviewed by the Community Design Review Committee and the comments reflect the outstanding requirements which need to be addressed before approval is granted. Please review the comments carefully. Once you have addressed all of the comments, please submit the following revised documents and a DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLUELINES MUST BE FOLDED 6 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (zoning, engineering, addressing, landscaping, wastewater, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (zoning, engineering, landscaping, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Bound Geotechnical Report (engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO (landscaping, DSD) 2 Copies All additional items requested by Landscape and Engineering Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608. Sincerely, Patricia Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 571-1961 |
| 11/02/2005 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 11/09/2005 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | 1) The applicant in variance case C10-04-30 requested "to allow a project slope greater than one foot rise over three (3') foot length, as shown on the submitted plan". Copies of the "submitted plan" were requested in the previous review. The response letter indicates that the term "submitted" referred to an anticipated future submittal of the plan. Review and approval by the DRB is required. 2) The conditions of approval for variance case C10-04-30 require review and approval of the landscape plan by the DRB. Provide documentation of the required review and approval. 3) The conditions of approval for variance case C10-04-30 require up to a ten (10) foot wide natural vegetative buffer area along that portion of the Silverbell Road right-of-way in front of the north drainage channel. Obtain approval, in writing, from the City Engineer for right-of-way landscaping. 4) Approval of a scenic corridor zone application is required prior to tentative plat approval. Be sure to include a conceptual grading plan with the application. 5) Where natural washes cannot be maintained, a mitigation plan shall be established with emphasis being placed on earthen or naturally appearing channels with landscaping and texture/color added to bank protection materials. Revise the plans to provide channels that appear more natural. Refer to the Standards Manual for Drainage Design for appropriate techniques. This comment applies to newly created drainage channels in addition to the CDO Wash. 6) Provide verification of approval from W.A.P.A. for basin landscaping within the 100' easement. LUC 3.7.2.6.B 7) The scenic route buffer planting is subject to review by the Board of Adjustment and subject to staff and community review as part of the SCZ application. SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING IN ADDITION TO THE REVISED TP, LS, AND NPP PLANS: documentation of review and approval of the landscape plan and tentative plat by the DRB, approval, in writing, from the City Engineer for right-of-way landscaping, approval letter for landscaping in the WAPA easement, response letter that addresses each comment (the previous letter from the landscape architect included only landscape plan related comments). |
| 11/10/2005 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Center Plans Coordination Office FROM: Peter McLaughlin Senior Planner FOR: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: Silverbell Crossings RCP S04-188 Tentative Plat TRANSMITTAL: November 10, 2005 DUE DATE: November 17, 2005 1. Per comment # 2, fill in the SCZ case number near the title block in the lower right hand corner of all sheets of the plat, landscape and NPPO plans. DS 2-03.2.2.B.1 2. As previously acknowledged in response comments, a Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ) application must be submitted and approved before the tentative plat can be approved. Include the SCZ case number, date of approval, approved colors and conditions in the general notes. 3. It is acknowledged in response comment 11 that, because some of the lots are less than 4,000 square feet, building elevations of all proposed model units with height dimensions shall be submitted for review. These will assist in determining compliance with perimeter yard setbacks and screening of mechanical equipment. The elevations can be preliminary drawings. The model home construction plans will be used to determine exact setbacks and screening requirements at time of application for building permits. DS 2-10.3.2.D.2 If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608. |
| 11/18/2005 | 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: S04-188 SILVERBELL CROSSING/REVISED TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: 11/17/05 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: Change Kellen Canyon Av. to Kellen Canyon Court, this should be all one street name. Baby Bruno Drive and Bruno Baby Way cannot both be used. Please choose one and label the street adjacent to lots 62-66 and 123-143 the same name. Choose a new street name for Baby Bruno Av. with the suffix of Drive, Lane, Road, Trail or Way. Avenue is reserved for a true North-South street. |
| 11/23/2005 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | Traffic Engineering recommends APPROVAL of this TP. D. Dale Kelch, PE Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov |
| 11/29/2005 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S04-188 Silverbell Crossing November 3, 2005 (X) Tentative Plat () Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Santa Cruz Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: Yes (Scenic) COMMENTS DUE BY: 11/17/05 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 (X) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: 6/08/05 |
| 12/28/2005 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Coordinator SUBJECT: Silverbell Crossings Tentative Plat 2nd Re-submittal Engineering Review REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach ACTIVITY NUMBER: S04-188 SUMMARY: The revised Tentative Plat, Drainage addendum, copy of title report, geotechnical addendum, and revised Landscape documents were received on November 3, 2005. Development Services Department Engineering Division has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval at this time. Some of the comments were not completely addressed. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Tentative Plat purposes only. TENTATIVE PLAT / DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS: 1) Per D.S. 2-03.2.4.K: A geotechnical addendum was provided with this submittal. Provide a complete soils report for the entire site. The report should discuss suitability and feasibility of the project; the report should discuss existing geotechnical conditions, and proposed recommendations for foundations and pavement design. Also include recommendations for fill material, slope grades, minimum distances from foundations to swales, and identification and assessment of any potentially hazardous geotechnical areas. The soils investigation study must outline the determination of the erosive properties of areas or lands to be graded or disturbed which may create sediment deposition or erosion per Tucson Code Sec.26-11(a)(2)f. 2) Land Use Code Section (LUC) 2.8.2.2: Address all Scenic Corridor Zone comments from SCZ review. 3) Assure that the NPPP sheets match the erosion protection and layout per the revised Tentative Plat and reflect updated areas of proposed improvements near the wash areas. Rip rap will not be approvable within the Camino De Oeste Wash. 4) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.C.2.b: Clarify in drainage report how the minimum FFE's were determined for lots 143, 102, and 101. 5) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.5: Provide further discussion and clarity to the Tentative Plat regarding the proposed basins: a) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.5. Explain downstream stormwater flow impact to the golf course due to changes in flow characteristics from the discharge designed for the proposed subdivision. b) Provide documentation from downstream properties (Silverbell Municipal Golf Course and Parks and Recreation) agreeing to receive these flows. c) DS Sec.10-01.4.3: Where human activity zones are proposed in the basin areas, 8:1(H:V) side slopes are needed at location of pedestrian access, and shall not conflict with inlets to the basins. For safety considerations, provide more access areas, labeling grades for various side slopes of the basins, specifically in the general vicinity of lots 41, 42, 47, 53, 67, 101, and between 74 & 75. d) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a: Provide infiltration test results that show compliance with required drain time, and provide discussion as to whether a geotechnical engineering recommended safety factor will be used per DS Sec.10-02.14.5.9. Also explain why 200+ feet of bleed pipe is needed. 6) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.B.6: Regarding the variance General Note 33.I on sheet 2, provide updated status of this condition. 7) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.1: It was stated in the Drainage Report response letter that the proposed emergency access does not have all-weather access. It is unclear where the alternate access is located - clarify in response letter. 8) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.C: Regarding Camino Del Oeste Wash area shown on sheet 5, clarify whether this is a dedicated area (public) or a Common Area (private). 9) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.F: Sheet 5 still indicates an emergency access Clarify response as to location of relocated access. If private easements are utilized, protective covenants establishing the right of access and incorporation of the future phases into this project are required. It was determined by the Drainage Report that the existing chip-sealed road near Camino De Oeste Wash does not have AWA and thus can not be utilized as a 20-ft emergency / maintenance access. 10) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C&3.1.E: In the response letter and on plan sheets clarify location of the following items listed in Schedule B item 9 and 11 of the updated title report that was submitted: a) Underground telephone lines; b) the existing sewer manhole near north boundary; c) existing monitoring wells, label type of monitoring well on plan. 11) DS Sec.2-03.2.3: In response letter, there was a request for clarification of the comment regarding existing conditions and existing easements near the property. Per this section of the development standards: "The following information shall be provided on the plat to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 100 feet of the site…" DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C: "All existing easements will be drawn on the plat, and recordation information, locations, widths, and purposes shall be included. If the easement is not in use and proposed for abandonment, so indicate. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status." Label type of utility easement, width and docket/page for gas line near north boundary in order to clarify type of gas line, location, and width of easement. 12) DS Sec.2-03.2.3: Provide documentation from WAPA regarding acceptance of the proposed improvements within the WAPA easement. The revised SCZ submittal and a complete soils report will be required to be submitted prior to Tentative Plat re-submittal. Submit revised Tentative Plat, revised Drainage Report, a bound copy of the geotechnical report, notarized documentation from the property downstream, and a response letter. The response letter shall not have "acknowledged" for response; detailed explanations of how the comments were addressed and how the plan was revised are required. The next submittal should address all the above items. If you have questions or would like to schedule the meeting, call me at 791-5550, extension 2204. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Development Services |