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 - S07-101
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/03/2008 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 01/07/2008 | CDRC1 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | January 7, 2008 To: Robert Lane Dowl Engineers Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department From: Chandubhai C. Patel, P.E., Civil Engineering Manager Development Review Division (Wsatewater) Pima County Development Services Department Subject: Riverfront Plaza, Lots 1-4 & Common Area A Tentative Plat - 3rd 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 Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. 1. 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. This is the 3rd request. 2. Sheet 1: LEGEND: Use different line types for existing and proposed EASEMENT LINE. 3. Sheet 1: In the SANITARY SEWER GENERAL NOTES, you have shown notes for both the private individual disposal systems and the sewer lines. Delete the note that is not applicable to this project. 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 next submittal will be $78.00. 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 the response letter. If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly. If you have any questions regarding the above comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Chandubhai C. Patel, P.E. CC: Project File |
| 01/17/2008 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | Landscaped areas must be separated /protected from vehicle use areas by vertical curbing. The curbing along the PAAL is labeled as being continuously flush with pavement. Revise landscape plan and cross section detail to show 6" vertical curbing with only some small segments made flush to allow for water harvesting. LUC 3.7.2.3.B |
| 01/28/2008 | 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 (3rd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 28, 2008 DUE DATE: February 07, 2008 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. Zoning acknowledges that two (2) Class 2 bicycle racks have been provided at the southeast corner of the existing building. However, the proposed location does not meet the requirements of D.S. 2-09.4.1. Review the revised D.S. 2-09 and relocate the Class 2 bicycle rack. As this development is a greater than 25% expansion, full code compliance, provide the required bicycle parking at the existing building. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q Show the bicycle parking for the existing building. 3. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K The pedestrian circulation/accessible route located within the landscape island directly north of the main entrance PAAL off of Irvington Road must be a sidewalk, not asphalt paving. This sidewalk can be flush with pavement at both the east and west end. Truncated domes are required at both the east and west end of the sidewalk. 4. D.S. 2-05.2.4.K The pedestrian circulation/accessible route located near the northeast corner of Bldg. #3 between the vehicle parking spaces must be a sidewalk, physically separated from the vehicle parking spaces. 5. D.S. 2-05.2.4.P The revised HANDICAPPED PARKING SPACE DETAIL 1/T-3 does not show the truncated domes in the correct location. The truncated domes should located the full width of the access aisle, 6 to 8 inches from the edge of concrete. 6. D.S. 2-05.2.4.Q The provided Class 2 detail does not show multiple racks as shown on the development plan/tentative plat. Revise the detail to show multiple racks with the appropriate dimensions. Review revised D.S. 2-09.5 and D.S. 2-09 Figure 9. 7. Ensure that all changes to the development plan are reflected on the landscape plans. 8. 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\S07-0101tpdp-3rd.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan and additional requested documents. |
| 01/29/2008 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 02/06/2008 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | 1. Dumpster plan detail of double wide enclosure requires a minimum of four rear wall protectors (bollards) or two per container area. Detail currently shows only two, which is not adequate. Please correct on resubmittal. If you have any questions you may contact Andy Vera at (520) 791-5543 ext 1212 or e-mail: Andy.Vera@tucsonaz.gov |
| 02/06/2008 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Manager SUBJECT: Riverfront Plaza Tentative Plat 2nd Resubmittal Engineering Review LOCATION: T14S R13E Section 35, 119-42-009C REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach ACTIVITY NUMBER: S07-101 SUMMARY: The revised Tentative Plat, Landscape documents, Drainage Report, PCWW letter, and response letter were received by Engineering. Site Reconnaissance Report was provided at separate submittal. A meeting was held December 13, 2007 at request of consultant to discuss rezoning condition for bank protection. 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. PROJECT SAC SUMMARY: The Riverfront Plaza project has a rezoning condition that requires bank protection along the West Branch of the Santa Cruz River Diversion Channel (WBSCRDC). The Drainage report has not addressed completion of this item, as the scour protection does not meet City scour requirements. There may be encroachment of the W.A.S.H. Ordinance wash of the WBSCRDC. The existing WBSCRDC is within a FEMA Special Flood Hazard Zone A and consists of a constructed channel, approximately 7 feet deep and top width 200 feet, with an updated 100-year flowrate of 9,908 cfs, with earthen bottom and 3:1(H:V) side slopes covered with rip rap and filter fabric, and has an existing 2.4-ft deep concrete toedown running along the toe of the slope adjacent to the project. The depth of the existing toedown does not meet scour protection requirements. The Santa Cruz River along the east side of the project is bank protected. Proposed encroachment may be needed to address additional scour protection structure, within the WBSCRDC W.A.S.H. The area of the W.A.S.H. 50-foot Study Area includes both City and County properties. From aerials, there is some minimal vegetation within the Study Area. Engineering will support certain types of additional erosion hazard protection if needed to be constructed within this W.A.S.H. Ordinance wash. Engineering does not recommend SAC scheduling until the following W.A.S.H., rezoning condition, and associated drainage report comments are addressed. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS: 1) Tucson Code Sec. 29-15(b)(1): Provide statement regarding whether there will be proposed encroachment into the overlay zone. A W.A.S.H. report will not be needed if all proposed infrastructure and disturbance is located outside of the 50-ft W.A.S.H. Study Area, as discussed in a meeting held November 16, 2007. 2) DS Sec.10-02.6.6: The revised drainage report states that the existing scour protection does not meet City of Tucson Floodplain regulations and City Drainage Standards with regards to scour protection. Although the proposed buildings are set at acceptable erosion hazard setback, the rezoning requirement for bank protection has not been met. Provide course of action and discuss proposed erosion hazard design to address rezoning requirement. Since the solution may include additional scour protection construction, a W.A.S.H. review may still be necessary. TENTATIVE PLAT COMMENTS: 3) 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: Pavement section design shall match geotechnical report for truck loading zones and areas where trucks pick-up solid waste and other heavy duty vehicles traverse. Clarify discrepancies (in standard details and/or with notation) for PAAL areas where different structural section is located. Further details shall be shown at grading plan review stage. 4) The following are considerations: a) Pima County sewer approval of onsite disposal system is needed for Tentative Plat approval. Response letter included a PCWW capacity document however, a final PDEQ letter must be obtained per the July 2007 letter. b) DS Sec.11-01: Please be aware that there may be a construction phasing diagram needed at grading plan review stage to identify construction traffic controls differentiating restaurant public access and construction traffic. 5) Submit the revised Drainage Report, revised Tentative Plat, and a response letter. The next submittal should address all the above items. 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 |
| 02/11/2008 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES February 11, 2008 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 January 3, 2008 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 6 Copies Revised Tentative Plat (Wastewater, ESD, Zoning, Landscape, Engineering, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plan (Zoning, Landscape, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, 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 |