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 - S11-043
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/11/2012 | GBONILL1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/14/2012 | PGEHLEN1 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | October 2011 comments addressed. Project approved for solid waste and recycle. Jeff Drumm, P.E. Environmental Manager City of Tucson Environmental Services 520-837-3713 |
| 09/18/2012 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 09/25/2012 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Approved | 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: Sherry Hyde Senior Property Technician Pima County Assessor's Office DATE: 9/24/12 RE: Assessor's Review and Comments Regarding S11-043 THE BRIDGES- BLOCK 10- REVISED TENTATIVE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor's Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor's Office requirements. COMMENTS: " AS ACKNOWLEDGED IN THE ORIGINAL TENATIVE REVIEW,THERE MUST BE BEARINGS AND DIMENSIONS FOR ALL LOT LINES AND ALL COMMON AREAS. " AS ACKNOWLEDGED IN THE ORIGINAL TENATIVE REVIEW, ALL HATCHING, STIPPLING, STRIPING ETC. MUST BE REMOVED IN THE FINAL PLAT, UNLESS ANOTHER AGENCY REQUIRES IT. IF SO ALL LETTERING MUST HAVE THE HATCHING, ETC. CUT AWAY SO THEY ARE LEGIBLE. " AS ACKNOWLEDGED IN THE ORIGINAL TENATIVE REVIEW, ALL STREETS MUST BE NAMED IN THE FINAL PLAT, AND HAVE DIMENSIONS, BEARINGS AND CURVE DATA. 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. |
| 10/01/2012 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Approved | AUDREY FARENGA ADDRESSING REVIEW PH #: 740-6800 FAX #: 623-5411 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: AUDREY FARENGA, ADDRESSING REVIEW SUBJECT: S11-043 THE BRIDGES BLOCK 10/REVISED TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: September 27, 2012 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and we hereby approve this project. ***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.*** |
| 10/02/2012 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: S11-043 The Bridges - Block 10 Tentative Plat (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 3, 2011 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. The Zoning Review Section conditionally 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. 2. 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 extened expiration date for this tentative plat is August 31, 2013. 3. Provide the new "DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE" approval stamp on all development package sheets. This stamp can be found in "jpg, dwg, pdf" format at http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/cdrc-rezoning/cdrd-stamp. 4. The easements will need to be abandoned prior to approval of the final plat. D.S. 2-03.2.4.J Sheet 3 of 5 there is an easement called out under "EASEMENT NOTE" 1. This easement runs through proposed lots 26, 27, 60 & 61. Please clarify what is proposed for this easement as it encroaches almost half way into the above lots and will make it difficult to build. 5. Provide the new "DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE" approval stamp on all development package sheets. This stamp can be found in "jpg, dwg, pdf" format at http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/cdrc-rezoning/cdrd-stamp. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.com RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan, tentative plat. |
| 10/02/2012 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN | Approv-Cond | DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S11-043 The Bridges - Block 10 10/2/12 (X) Tentative Plat () Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan () Revised Plan/Plat () Board of Adjustment () Other CROSS REFERENCE: S08-100; C9-06-32 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: The Bridges PAD - PAD 15 GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: COMMENTS DUE BY: 10/9/12 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 (X) See Additional Comments Attached () No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: Conditonally-Approved Comment 10: Please include a note that states "Homes in Sub-Area B-IV will use double pane windows and foam core metal doors with upgraded door perimeter seals, which are standards features in new home construction to comply with energy efficient standards, this is consistent with the thresholds recommended in the empirical noise study prepared for this Sub-Area." REVIEWER: Jbeall 837-6966 DATE: 10/2/12 |
| 10/09/2012 | ELIZABETH LEIBOLD | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: October 9, 2012 TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Coordinator FOR: Pat Marum, P.E., Wood Patel Engineering SUBJECT: The Bridges Block 10 Tentative Plat Re-submittal Engineering Review LOCATION: T14S R14E Section 30 REVIEWER: Elizabeth Leibold CASE NUMBER: S11-043 SUMMARY: Engineering has reviewed the resubmitted development package for the Tentative Plat and other documents, and maintains conditional approval of the Tentative Plat. DRAINAGE REPORT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No. 2-03.2.4.L: Clarify / address the remaining drainage comments: a) In Section 1.5, assure further verbiage is added about how overall drainage is to be directed to Secondary Outfall Location which is located at the west side of the project near the existing railroad drainage crossing. Explain how the outlet is not directly in front of railroad crossing to allow for existing vegetation to continue to receive stormwater or other reasons. b) Provide clarification of developed conditions in drainage report and on plat planviews, clarifying the pre-developed and developed flowrates entering and existing the project site as well as developed Q100's for all inlet and outlet structures on the site. c) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.J.2 & 2-03.2.4.L.4: For the 100-year water surface elevations along Fiesta, state datum for calculations in report. 2) DS Sec.10-01.4.3.1: Address the remaining basin comments: a) DS Sec. 10-01.4.3: Per PAD C.4.2-3, outlet location shall be at west Secondary Outfall point. Let's discuss in a meeting. b) East small basin is not accepted due to compliance with PAD and hydrologic group soil D onsite; revise design to provide positive gradient to an outlet point and revise grades in Tucson Market Place entrance street so that storm water flows through subdivision to outfall location. Geotechnical addenda submitted indicates a perc rate that exceeds allowable infiltration rates. Submit geotechnical design recommendations for a trench drain scenario or material removal area and depths for a basin design that meets minimum requirements. c) DS Sec.10-02.9.4.1: Insufficient area is provided for spillway outlet. Address the remaining specific west basin outfall point comments: i) Insufficient area is provided for spillway outlet to provide energy dissipation. Provide drainage set back and design details for spillway after concrete outlet from spiral rib pipe, and provide calculations for pre and post developed velocities for proposed design to show that energy dissipation occurs after being conveyed across concrete spillway. ii) Add and provide additional details/sections and dimension energy dissipation spillway apron on detail K/5. d) Only 0.5% gradient is labeled in west basin. Revise and/or show more spot elevations to indicate positive gradients through waterharvesting / basin areas. Although minimum of 0.5% is required, 1 % may be needed to assure that post-construction conditions do not have ponding issues that may delay the project completion, especially with Hydrologic Group D soils at the site. e) DS Sec. 10-01.4.3.1: 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 basin. There shall be a minimum of 100-ft either to the base of an access slope or 4:1(H:V) side slope. f) DS Sec.10-01.3.3.4: State that erosion protection will be required for unattenuated flow conditions for the basin side slopes. Show on the plan and sections. TENTATIVE PLAT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 3) Address the remaining drafting comments: a) On Typical Lot Setback detail on sheet 3, FG elevation at corner of lot should match FPE on planview. b) Clarify area for mechanical equipment, A/C unit locations, and general access for Typical Lot Setback details on sheet 3. At minimum a note may be sufficient to clarify that A/C unit will not be set on side yards (if setback is only 5 ft, with a common wall, there is insufficient accessibility around a 3-ft A/C pad). 4) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a, 10-02.14.2.6: Submit addenda for the soils report that discusses the proposed geotechnical recommendations for engineered basin design. The geotechnical addenda and/or plans shall specifically address: a) Engineered basin design since the perc tests submitted showed 13 hr drain down time without safety factor. b) Label on planviews the geotechnical recommendations for building or pavement setbacks from drainage facilities or 100-yr limits in basin areas. c) Geotechnical recommendation for the sideyard setbacks. IBC code requires 10-feet at 5% from structures. Sideyard setbacks shown on Typical Lot Setback details on sheet 3 shall conform to IBC or geotechnical recommendations. A/C was indicated per response letter to be located at side yard - show A/C on typical detail for Fire reviewer's approval. 5) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C: All existing easements need to be drawn on the plat, and recordation information, locations, widths, and purposes shall be included. If easements are relocated, not in use, or proposed for abandonment, then the documentation of the vacation/abandonment/relocation shall be submitted prior to approval of Final Plat. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Any easements in conflict with proposed footprints of new buildings must be resolved prior to Final Plat approval. Regarding the Title Report, Schedule B current easement data, address the remaining comment: a) The 15-ft Communications easement - verify this easement on title report and on planviews. The next submittal shall not be submitted without a meeting with Engineering to go over remaining comments. If you have any questions, please call me at 837-4934. Elizabeth Leibold, P.E., CPM, CFM Civil Engineer Engineering Division Planning & Development Services |
| 10/09/2012 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | Regional Traffic Engineering has no comments on this submittal and recommends approval. ________________________________ Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are intended for use by the person(s)/entity(ies) named above and may contain confidential/privileged information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by email, and delete or destroy all copies plus attachments. . |
| 10/09/2012 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/10/2012 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | Review has been completed. Resubmittal is required. |
| 10/10/2012 | PGEHLEN1 | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | PIMA COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT 201 NORTH STONE AVENUE TUCSON, ARIZONA 85701-1207 JACKSON JENKINS PH: (520) 740-6500 DIRECTOR FAX: (520) 620-0135 September 26, 2012 To: PAT MARUM WOOD PATEL & ASSOCIATES Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6719), Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department Subject: THE BRIDGES--BLOCK 10; LOTS 1-84; BLOCKS "A" AND "B" & COM- MON AREAS "A", "B", "C" Development Plan - 2nd Submittal S11-043 The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD) has reviewed the proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project. The following comments are offered for your use: 1. Sheet 3: The 3:1 slope shown across the north end of the C.A. "A" transitioning into the Greenway Corridor is too severe for the sewer maintenance Vactor trucks to negotiate through. The same situation occurs just south of the southern most portion of C.A. "A" and between lots 16 and 17. 2. Sheet 5: Contact Mr. Steve Reuter of PCRWD @ 740-6608 in regards to the portion of the public sewer you are planning to abandon per this plan. 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 development plan. 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 third(3rd) submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $117.00 (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. cc: Chad Amateau, PE Checked by:_________ Kristin Greene, PE, DLU Manager DLU Project folder Ref. A. Development Plan Checklist Requirements - Chapter 18.71 of the Pima County Code - Section J http://www.pimaxpress.com/SubDivision/Documents/2006/DP_Requirements2Aug04.pdf Ref. C - Arizona Administrative Code, Title 18, Chapters 5 & 9 (R18-5-205) http://www.azsos.gov/public_services/Title_18/18-05.htm and (R-18-9-E301) http://www.azsos.gov/public_services/Title_18/18-09.htm Ref. D - PCRWRD Procedures, Preliminary Sewer Layout Requirements, 1984 (revised April 1988) http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/stddet/pdf/procedures.pdf Ref. E - PCRWRD Design Standards for Public Sewerage Facilities, 1983 (revised April 1988) http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/stddet/pdf/design_standards.pdf Ref. F - City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Details http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/stddet/pdf/all_det.pdf Ref. G - Pima County Code of Ordinances, Title 13 - Public Services, Division II - Sewers http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientID=16119&stateID=3&statename=Arizona Ref. H - City of Tucson/Pima County Standard Specifications for Public Improvements, 2003 Edition http://dot.pima.gov/transeng/stdspecsdet/standardspecs2003.pdf Ref. I - PCRWRD Engineering Directives http://www.pima.gov/wwm/eng/directives/ |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/11/2012 | CINDY AGUILAR | REJECT SHELF | Completed |