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: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Plan Number - S07-101
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/29/2007 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/02/2007 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | July 2, 2007 ACTIVITY NUMBER: S07-101 PROJECT NAME: Riverfront Plaza PROJECT ADDRESS: 1350 W Irvington Rd PROJECT REVIEWER: Jose E. Ortiz PE, Traffic Engineer 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. 1. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. 2. A private improvement agreement (PIA) will be necessary for the proposed work to be performed within the Right-of-way. An approved tentative plat is required prior to applying for a PIA. Contact the PIA Coordinator for additional PIA information at 791-5550 ext. 74937. 3. The access points shall have 25' radius curb returns. (DS 3-01.0 figure 6) 4. Provide the Traffic Impact Analysis to address required off-site improvements such as right turn/decel lane(s), off-site re-striping to accommodate left turning maneuvers, and so on. 5. Any required off site improvements will need to be schematically illustrated on the tentative plat. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x76730 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 07/02/2007 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 07/09/2007 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Denied | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#184068 July 9, 2007 DOWL Engineers Attn: Robert W. Lane, PE 166 W Alameda Street Tucson, Arizona 85701 Dear Mr. Lane: SUBJECT: Riverfront Plaza S07-101 Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has reviewed the plan submitted June 29, 2007. TEP is unable to approve the plan at this time. There are existing electrical facilities within the boundaries of this project. In order for TEP to approve the plan the facilities and easements must be depicted on the plans. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facility map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. All costs associated with the relocation of the facilities in conflict will be billable to the developer. Please resubmit two revised bluelines to City of Tucson for TEP's review. You may contact the area Designer, Mike Kaiser, at 918-8244 should you have any questions. Sincerely, Elizabeth Miranda Office Specialist lm Enclosure cc: DSD_CDRC@Tucsonaz.gov, City of Tucson M. Kaiser, Tucson Electric Power |
| 07/11/2007 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | >>> "Douglas Kratina" <DKratina@azdot.gov> 07/11/2007 1:00 PM >>> ADOT has NO COMMENT S07-101 DOWL ENGINEERS RIVERFRONT PLAZA |
| 07/17/2007 | CDRC1 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | July 16, 2007 To: Robert Lane Dowl Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ___________________________ From: Tom Porter, representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environment Quality Subject: Riverfront Plaza, Lots 1-4 & Common Area A Tent. Plat - 1st Submittal S07-101 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. 1. Obtain a letter from the PCWMD's Development Services Section, written within the past 90 days, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for the project is available in the downstream public sewerage system and provide a copy of that letter to this office. The required form to request such a letter may be found at: http://www.pima.gov/wwm/forms/docs/CapResponseRequest.pdf. The tentative or preliminary plat for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. 2. All Sheets: Show the jurisdiction's case number, S07-101, in or near the title block of each sheet. This case number should be shown larger and bolder than any associated cross-reference numbers. 3. Sheet 1: Show the public and private sewer lines using different line-types, so that they can readily be distinguished from each other. Also, show and describe examples of these different linetypes in the legend on Sheet 1. 4. Sheet 1: Add a General Note that states: THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE ______ EXISTING AND______ PROPOSED WASTEWATER FIXTURE UNIT EQUIVALENTS PER TABLE 13.20.045(E)(1) IN PIMA COUNTY CODE 13.20.045(E). And fill in the blanks with the appropriate values. 5. Sheet 2: The sanitary sewer easement width and location are not clearly shown on plan. 6. Sheet 2: The sewer directional flow arrows are missing. 7. Sheet 2: The BCS to the existing building on site is not clearly shown. It should be marked as private BCS and the slope/length and size of pipe should be shown. 8. Sheet 2: The existing public sewer entering the property from the north should be shown on plan. Also all existing public manholes within 100' of property should have IMS#'s/rim and invert elevations shown on plan. The manholes should also be marked as public. 9. Sheet 2: Show the BCS to the proposed buildings. This office 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 tentative or preliminary plat. 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 second (2nd) submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $100.00 (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. |
| 07/27/2007 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Provide a copy of approved site plan, landscape plan and Native Plant Preservation plan for the site and for the existing development. 2. Add the CDRC subdivision case number (S07-101) to all sheets of the landscape plan, NPP plan, and tentative plat. DS 2-07.2.1.B 3. Dimension all landscape areas, including street landscape borders and perimeter landscape borders, on the landscape plan. Also, dimension the distance from the back of the landscape border, and state the height, of the existing masonry wall located along Irvington Road and along the east side of the existing development. DS 2-07.2.2.A.2 4. Dimension the minimum width of the parking medians (the unpaved inside dimension) in the typical detail #6 on sheet L10 from the inside of tree planters in the vehicle use area. An unpaved area, which is a minimum four (4) feet in width, must be provided for the canopy trees. LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.c, DS 2-07.2.2.A.2.e, DS 2-06.3.3.E.2 5. Within vehicular use areas, one (1) canopy tree is required for each 10 motor vehicle parking spaces and every parking space shall be located within forty (40) feet of the trunk of a canopy tree (as measured from the center of the tree trunk) per LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.a. Revise plan drawing and vehicular use area calculation accordingly. Note: In areas where a required landscape border falls within the vehicular use area, up to 50% of the canopy trees may be counted towards both the minimum parking lot canopy tree requirement and the landscape border canopy tree requirement per LUC 3.7.2.3.b 6. Refer to DS 2-07.2.2.B and DS 2-06.5.4 for the specific content required in the following elements of the landscape plan: Grading Information, Irrigation Plan, Construction Details. Revise landscape plan to include required content and specifications. Grading information on the landscape plan shall include contour lines, spot elevations, percent slope across the site and direction of slope of paved areas, slope ratios of detention/retention basin sides, existing grades on adjacent rights-of-way and adjacent sites, and the methods by which water harvesting/ storm runoff is used to benefit planting areas on the site. DS 2-07.0, LUC 3.7.4.3 7. The Landscape Plan shall include irrigation specification design and layout per DS 2-06.5.4.A & DS 2-06.5.4.B including source of irrigation, sleeves for driveways and sidewalks, locations of valves, low-flow bubblers or drip irrigation, including the irrigation for the existing developed portion of the site. 8. List the quantities to be provided for each vegetation type listed in the right hand column of the Landscape Material Schedule. 9. Add the existing and future sight-visibility triangles (SVTs) to the landscape plan. Also, show any utility locations. DS 2-05.2.4.D.2 |
| 07/27/2007 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Denied | >>> Andy Steuart 07/27/2007 3:18 PM >>> S07-101 Riverfront Plaza: Tentative Plat Review - Request the following: -Dashed lines be annotated along the E. & S. boundaries to portray 1' No Access Easement for proposed plat. -Words be provided to abandon 1' N.A.E. and 20' wide utility and private sewer easement that were dedicated by existing plat, but no long applicable to proposed plat. -Per 7/27/07 discussion between Dowl Eng. & D.O.T./R.E., request consideration to vacate and convey existing 20' wide alley R/W along the outside of the W. boundary of Subject Plat. -In the identification block on the lower right hand corner, Sheet 1 of 2, request "A development of a portion of "Riverview Plaza"..." be changed to "A development of a portion of "Irvington Plaza"..." |
| 07/27/2007 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | CASE: S07-101, RIVERFRONT PLAZA, TENT PLAT REVIEW COMMENT: NO OBJECTIONS OR ADVERSE COMMENTS Vehicle Trip Generation: Daily: 4,882 PM Peak: 448 Please call if you have questions Tom Cooney, Travel Forecasting Manager Pima Association of Governments 177 N. Church Ave, #405 Tucson, AZ 85701 Tel: (520) 792-1093, Fax: (520) 620-6981 Web: www.PAGnet.org and www.RTAmobility.com |
| 07/27/2007 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Approv-Cond | 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: Gary Ault, Mapping Supervisor Pima County Assessor's Office Mapping Department DATE: July 26, 2007 RE: Assessor's Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat S07-101 RIVERFRONT PLAZA T141335 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor's Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor's Office requirements. COMMENTS: PLEASE MAKE THE FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENTS BY FINAL PLAT STAGE: 1. THE LOT AND COMMON AREA BOUDARIES SHOULD BE MORE DEFINED WITH A SOLID, THICKER LINETYPE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUBMITTAL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL ROSANNA WERNER AT 740-4390 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. ROSANNA WERNER |
| 07/27/2007 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approv-Cond | 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: S07-101 RIVERFRONT PLAZA/TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: July 26, 2007 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1.) CORRECT CASITAS DEL SOL 29048 TO 22030 IN LOCATION MAP OF FINAL PLAT. 2.) CORRECT RANCHO RIO II 29048 TO 54007 IN LOCATION MAP OF FINAL PLAT. ***The Pima County Addressing Section can use digital CAD drawing files when submitted with your final plat Mylar. These CAD files can be submitted through Pima County Addressing. The digital CAD drawing files expedite the addressing and permitting processes when we are able to insert this digital data into the County's Geographic Information System. Your support is greatly appreciated.*** |
| 07/30/2007 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Riverfront Plaza S07-0101 Tentative Plat/Development Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 26, 2007 DUE DATE: July 30, 2007 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a separate response letter for zoning, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. Section 5.3.8.2, LUC, permits a maximum of one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a development plan. If, at the end of that time, the development plan 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 development plan is June 28, 2008. 2. Provide a copy of the last approved development/site plan. 3. D.S. 2-03.2.1.G The title block has incorrect information. The Portion stating "A DEVELOPMENT OF A PORTION OF RIVERFRONT PLAZA" should read "BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF IRVINGTON PLAZA". 4. D.S. 2-03.2.2.A.1 & D.S. 2-05.2.2.A.1 List the phone number for the owner of this project. Also list the name, address and telephone number for the developer for this project. 5. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.1 Place the S07-101 subdivision case number in the lower right corner of the plat next to the title block. 6. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.1 Place the S07-0101 subdivision case number in the lower right corner of the plat next to the title block. 7. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.4 Add the following note: "THE NUMBER OF LOTS IS 4". 8. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.5 & D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.3 General Note 4, Proposed use, following "GENERAL MERCHANDISE SALES" add "SUBJECT TO: 3.5.9.2.C. 9. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.7 & D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.10 Add a note to the plan stating "THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OVERLAY ZONES CRITERIA: SEC. 2.8.3, MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES (MS&R)". 10. D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.8 & D.S. 2-05.2.2.B.11 General Note 3 add the gross site area by square footage. 11. D.S. 2-05.2.3.B The "20.00' Utility & Private Sewer easements dimension called out along the west property does not line up with the western most line of the easement. 12. D.S. 2-05.2.3.B The "20.00' Utility & Private Sewer easement called out as to be abandoned will need to be abandoned prior to the tentative plat/development plans approval. Provide documentation supporting the abandonment of this easement. 13. D.S. 2-05.2.3.C Label the future curb along Irvington Road. 14. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D Provide a dimension for the proposed parking area access lane (PAAL) located just east of the proposed "2 STORY OFFICE BUILDING" along the east property line and the PAAL between Lot 1 and Lot 2. 15. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D Provide a dimension for the PAAL located along the north property line. 16. D.S. 2-05.2.4.D The existing PAAL located along the east side of the existing building does not meet the minimum width for a two-way PAAL. 17. D.S. 2-03.2.2.J & D.S. 2-05.2.4.G If applicable show all proposed easements graphically on the plan and label as to their purposes and whether they will be public of private. 18. D.S. 2-05.2.4.I Provide building setback dimensions, from all proposed and existing buildings to all property lines. Include the required setback dimensions for the MS&R. 19. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K Clearly delineate on the plan all sidewalks. It is unclear where the continuous pedestrian circulation/accessible route is located. Review D.S. 2-08 for all pedestrian circulation/accessible route requirements. Additional comments maybe forth coming. 20. D.S. 2-05.2.4.M Provide, as a note, the square footage of the each proposed structure and the specific use proposed. 21. D.S. 2-05.2.4.M Per General Note 4 the total Gross Floor Area is 60,175. The sum of the square footage listed for each building on the plan is 60,511, please clarify. Additional comments maybe forth coming. 22. D.S. 2-05.2.4.M The 6131 sq. ft. restaurant building appears to have some type of overhangs or patios shown on the plan, please clarify. 23. D.S. 2-05.2.4.N Label the height and provide overall dimensions of each proposed structure on the plans. 24. D.S. 2-05.2.4.O Show all loading zones, fully dimensioned, and provide, as a note, the number of loading spaces required and the number provided. For your information per LUC Sec. 3.4.4.1.B.2 on projects containing more than one (1) building loading spaces shall be provided for each building. Additional comments maybe forth coming. 25. D.S. 2-05.2.4.O Label the existing loading space. 26. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P The parking calculation should clarify how much of the existing building is retail and how much is restaurant. 27. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P The parking calculation square footage and the sum of the square footage listed for each building on the plan does not add up, please clarify. Additional comments maybe forth coming. 28. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Provide a calculation which supports that this center meets the definitions of a shopping center, LUC Sec 6.2.19, i.e. fifty (50) percent retail/office which will allow the center to be parked per LUC Sec. 3.3.5.6.A, one (1) space for each two hundred (200) square feet of GFA. 29. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P The ACCESSIBLE SPACES REQUIRED is not correct. Per the 2006 International Building Code, Table 1106.1, Total spaces provided, 301-400, eight (8) accessible spaces are required. Revise. 30. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Provide a dimensioned typical parking space detail for standard parking spaces. 31. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Detectable warnings (truncated domes) will be required at all curb access ramps. ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 Sec. 406.13. Show on the plan and detail. 32. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P Provide a detail for the required disabled signage. 33. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q The proposed Class 2 bicycle parking rack does not meet the requirements of the revised D.S. 2-09. Please review D.S. 2-09 and revise the detail accordingly. Provide a plan layout which provides the required clearance per D.S. 2-09.5 34. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q The provided bicycle parking calculation is incorrect. The total number required is 27, 50% Class 1 and 50% Class 2, revise the calculation. 35. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Per D.S. 2-09.4.1 Class 2 bicycle parking facilities will be located no more than 50 feet from the main building entrance(s) and will be along other sides of the building that have entrances (see Figure 8). The Class 2 bicycle must be distributed among all buildings. 36. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Per D.S. 2-09.4.2 Class 1 bicycle parking facilities will be located as reasonable as possible for the convenience of the employee. This plan shows all of the Class 1 bicycle parking located near the northern most buildings, this does not constitute "as reasonable as possible'. Distribute the Class 1 bicycle parking among all proposed buildings. 37. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Show the bicycle parking for the existing building. 38. D.S. 2-05.2.4.T Fully dimension the refuse collection areas. 39. D.S. 2-05.2.4.U Provide a separate letter that indicates how all rezoning conditions have been complied with. 40. D.S. 2-05.2.4.W Indicate the location and types of existing and proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal and billboards). 41. Ensure that all changes to the development plan are reflected on the landscape plans. 42. Additional comments may be forth coming depending on how each comment has been addressed. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D07-0028dp.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents. |
| 07/31/2007 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S07-101 Riverfront Plaza (XXXX) Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan (XXXX) Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment ( ) Other CROSS REFERENCE: NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Santa Cruz Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 7/30/07 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 (XXXX) 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: drcorral 791-4505 DATE: July 25, 2007 |
| 08/02/2007 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 08/03/2007 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Single enclosure for two-story office buildings @ NE corner does not provide adequate clear approach of 14 ft x 40 ft due to the inability to maneuver from required left turn. DS 6-01.4.1.C Recommend moving refuse enclosure to the NW corner of bldg and add a single enclosure for recycling or construct a double enclosure to accomodate for two dumpsters. 2. All enclosures except for lot 3 need to be set back an additional 5 ft to allow for service vehicle to position itself perpendicular to enclosure. The sevice vehicle should be a minimum of 3 ft from any vertical curb/structure for maneuvering. DS 6-01.0 figure 1. Also, enclosure gates must open a minimum of 180 degrees so they do not encroach within the 14 ft x 40 ft clear approach area. 3. Require an addition single enclosure for retail lot located between lots 2 & 3 (minimum one enclosure per retail space). Recommend designing for 1 double enclosure and 1 single enclosure to accomodate for recycling. DS 6-01.3.2.B. 4. Require an additional single enclosure for lot 2 to accomodate for each business. Also, recommend adding an additional single enclosure for large retail space at lot 2 and restaurant at lot 3 or a double enclosure for each to accomodate for recycling. 5. Reposition enclosure for lot 1 to a 30 degree angle to allow service vehicle an adequate and direct approach. 6. No enclosure detail provided. Provide detail for single and double refuse enclosures and gates and include: A. Side and rear wall protection with a 10 ft x 10 ft inside clear service area between the wall protection and the front gate/s, per dumpster. DS 6-01.4.1.B & 6-01.4.2.C.2. B. Gates equipped with the ability to be secured in the open position during service and when closed. DS 6-01.4.2.C.4 Demonstrate within detail and annotate the following: " Positive locking with (bayonet) anchors, Qty - 4, 1"dia. x 6" long galvanized pipe flush with concrete. Recommend constructing gates to the face of the CMU wall or post with the ability to open a minimum of 180 degrees where possible so gate do not encroach within the 14' x 40' required clear approach. Please make corrections on resubmittal. |
| 08/09/2007 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Denied | DATE: August 08, 2007 TO: DSD_CDRC@ tucsonaz.gov FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov SUBJECT: S07-101 Riverfront Plaza: Tentative Plat Review(7/2007) Denied Please schedule a meeting with Parks and Recreation to discuss impacts to the following adjacent public parks: Santa Cruz River Park Julian Wash Linear Park Paseo de los Arboles Park |
| 08/20/2007 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Manager SUBJECT: Riverfront Plaza Tentative Plat Submittal Engineering Review LOCATION: T14S R13E Section 35, 119-42-009C REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach ACTIVITY NUMBER: S07-101 SUMMARY: The Tentative Plat, Landscape documents, Drainage Report, and title report paperwork were received by Engineering. Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Tentative Plat at this time. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Tentative Plat purposes only. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS: 1) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No.2-03.2.4: Address the following drainage report comments: a) On drainage exhibit Figure E-1, revise north arrow. 2) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.5.G: Proposed storm drain systems along north boundary must be accepted by TDOT and Pima County Regional Flood Control District; provide confirmation that the two pipes will be accepted by TDOT and PCRFCD prior to resubmittal. Otherwise show a proposed sheet flow outlet design for north boundary. Any improvements within the W.A.S.H. Ordinance wash and study area triggers an Overlay review. W.A.S.H. Overlay reports are generally comprehensive and require time for a Stormwater Advisory Committee meeting and review. 3) Tucson Code Sec. 29-15(b)(1): The plans and report indicate 2 proposed drainage outlets crossing both City and County parcels and entering the W.A.S.H. Ordinance Study Area of the West Branch of the Santa Cruz River Diversion Channel (WBSCRDC). Address the following comments for encroachment into the overlay zone: a) A W.A.S.H. report will need to be submitted if the project proposes any encroachment into the W.A.S.H. Ordinance Study Area. b) Label West Branch of the Santa Cruz River Diversion Channel along the north boundary of the development as a City of Tucson "Watercourse Amenities, Safety, and Habitat (W.A.S.H.) Ordinance Wash" c) Tucson Code Chapter 23A.Article II.Division 3.Sec.23A-50, LUC Sec.2.8.1.5.A: For further W.A.S.H. Ordinance overlay zone process, full notice procedure, and notification questions, see sections 23A-50 and 23A-51 in the Tucson Code , or contact CDRC Manager Patricia Gehlen 837-4919. d) It is imperative that the W.A.S.H. Report substantiates that all proposed grading design (any mandatory trails, maintenance access improvements, crossings, utility improvements, erosion protection, outlet improvements, or other drainage improvements or grading activities) provide the minimum disturbance of the wash and study area. e) Tucson Code Sec.29-15(b)(1): Assure that there are complete discussions regarding any effects on hydrology and hydraulics to the study area due to each of the elements a - i listed in this section of the Tucson Code. 4) DS Sec.10-02.7.6.1: Provide Erosion Hazard setback computations from the WBSCRDC. From field visits and other drainage information, there is no scour or bank protection along the northwest boundary, other than dumped rock. Revise 1D and IM response on cover sheet. Explain compliance with rezoning conditions for bank protection. TENTATIVE PLAT COMMENTS: 5) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No. 2-03.2.1.G.3: Clarify title block description as to whether the project is a resubdivision or development of specific lots within Irvington Plaza Bk42 pg41. 6) DS Sec.10-02.7.6.1: Delineate, dimension and label the EHS from WBSCR Diversion Channel. 7) Label water harvest areas with volume on planview per drainage report. 8) DS Sec.2-03.3.1.J: Explain how the rezoning conditions are met for this project. 9) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a & Sec.2-03.2.4.K, Sec.10-02.14.2.6, Sec.2-05.2.4.I: Please submit a separate bound report of the geotechnical evaluation for this project. The geotechnical report shall address the following items: existing geotechnical conditions for the site, suitability of the soils for this project, proposed recommendations for foundations and pavement design, recommendations for any proposed slope grades, boring data, any other typical geotechnical recommendations used to review the Tentative Plat. 10) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.4: Address the following topography comments: a) Provide topography contour lines on planview sheet 2 for proposed grades and ground elevations for reference to future grading and site drainage. b) Provide general spot elevations for proposed conditions including low and high points on sheet 2. c) With spot grades, show minimum grades away from structures to accommodate for sufficient positive flow around buildings. d) Provide cross section at WBSCRDC into site to include WASH study area. e) Provide flow arrows and indicate roof drainage for proposed buildings. 11) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.6: The 100-year flood limits for SCR and WBSCR with water surface elevations for all flows of 100 cfs or more will be drawn on the plat. 12) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.B.7: Reference any of the following special overlay zones that are applicable, and add a note stating that the plat is designed to meet the overlay zone(s) criteria. LUC Sec. 2.8.3, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone, and Sec. 29-12 through 29-19 Watercourse Amenities, Safety, and Habitat (WASH) Ordinance of the Tucson Code. 13) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.D: Regarding the existing public right-of-way for Irvington Road, label new access ramps. 14) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.C: State use for common area A on planview. Clarify common area description information in title block. 15) DS Sec.6-01.4.1.I & 3.2.A: Add detail for solid waste pick-up areas, with 10-ft minimum dimension between bollards, both ways and indicate enclosure/gate. 16) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.J. All proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. 17) DS Sec.11-01: A Grading Plan and Permit will eventually be required. 18) Provide Pima County sewer approval of onsite disposal system for Tentative Plat approval. LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS: 19) LUC 3.7.4: Show/label how water harvesting will be provided on Landscape Plan. 20) DS Sec.3-01.5.1.A.2: Assure correct SVT's are shown on Landscape Plan. 21) DS Sec.3-01.5.1.A.1: Other than trees as noted below, plant materials located within existing and future sight visibility triangles shall be limited to ground cover or low-growing vegetation of a species that will not grow higher than thirty inches. Trees may be located within existing and future sight visibility triangles only if clear of leaves and branches to a height of at least six feet above grade upon installation, and at all times thereafter. The trunk caliper of any species selected may not exceed twelve inches in diameter at maturity. Trees with multiple trunks are not allowed. Trees may not be planted in a line that could result in a solid wall effect as viewed from the motorist's perspective. The number and location of trees within existing and future sight visibility triangles may be restricted or modified by the City of Tucson in order to preserve visibility. The next submittal should address all the above items. Submit the revised Tentative Plat, revised Landscape Plan, revised Drainage Report, and a bound copy of soils report. You may call to schedule an appointment to go over these comments, or if you have any questions, please call me at 837-4934. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Development Services |
| 08/21/2007 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES August 21, 2007 Robert W. Lane PE DOWL Engineers 166 West Alameda Street Tucson, Arizona 85701 Subject: S07-101 Riverfront Plaza Tentative Plat Dear Robert: Your submittal of June 29, 2007 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 BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 10 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (TEP, Wastewater, Traffic, ESD, Zoning, Real Estate, Landscape, Engineering, Parks and Recreation, DSD) 5 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Landscape, Engineering, Parks and Recreation, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Bound Soils Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Traffic Impact Analysis (Traffic, DSD), 3 Copies Approved Site, Landscape and NPPO Plans (Zoning, Landscape, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. 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: 624-0384 |