Plan Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: PIA RESUBMITTAL
Plan Number - T06PI00059
Review Name: PIA RESUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/01/2007 | ASHOFFS1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | COT STREETS DIVISION | Approved | Please submit Utility Clearance Letters from El Paso Natural Gas and Kinder Morgan. |
| 02/01/2007 | ASHOFFS1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | COT WATER NEW DEVELOPMENT | Approved | Please submit Utility Clearance Letters from El Paso Natural Gas and Kinder Morgan. |
| 02/01/2007 | ASHOFFS1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | PC WASTEWATER MGMT | Approved | Please submit Utility Clearance Letters from El Paso Natural Gas and Kinder Morgan. |
| 02/01/2007 | ASHOFFS1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | QUEST COMMUNICATION | Approved | Please submit Utility Clearance Letters from El Paso Natural Gas and Kinder Morgan. |
| 02/01/2007 | ASHOFFS1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER CO | Approved | Please submit Utility Clearance Letters from El Paso Natural Gas and Kinder Morgan. |
| 02/01/2007 | ASHOFFS1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | COX COMMUNICATION | Approved | Please submit Utility Clearance Letters from El Paso Natural Gas and Kinder Morgan. |
| 02/01/2007 | ASHOFFS1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | SOUTHWEST GAS CORP | Approved | Please submit Utility Clearance Letters from El Paso Natural Gas and Kinder Morgan. |
| 02/01/2007 | ASHOFFS1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | KINDER MORGAN ENERGY | Denied | Please submit Utility Clearance Letters from El Paso Natural Gas and Kinder Morgan. |
| 02/06/2007 | JOSE ORTIZ | DOT TRAFFIC | REVIEW | Denied | February 6, 2007 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T06PI00059 PROJECT NAME: Hilton Garden Inn PROJECT ADDRESS: 6575 S Country Club Rd PROJECT REVIEWER: Jose E. Ortiz PE, Traffic Engineer Resubmittal Required: Traffic Engineering does not recommend approval of the PIA Plan; therefore a revised PIA Plan is required for re-submittal. The following items must be revised or added to the plan. 1. Include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. 2. If applicable place the CDRC Case numbers on the cover sheet. 3. The proposed right of way work along Country Club needs to be shown in this plan set. Call out for 25' curb returns at the access point. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-4259 x305 or Jose.Ortiz@tucsonaz.gov |
| 02/08/2007 | GARY WITTWER | DOT LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/09/2007 | ASHOFFS1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | EL PASO NATURAL GAS | Approved | Please submit Utility Clearance Letters from El Paso Natural Gas and Kinder Morgan. |
| 02/15/2007 | LANCE PETERSON | DOT STREET MAINTENANCE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/02/2007 | Estevan Tineo | DOT ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | March 2, 2007, T06PI00059, HILTON GARDEN INN PIA. The following comments, at a minimum, must be addressed in the next submittal. 1. General Comment. Since this project proposes to modification a major water facility (previous comment 1), the proposed modifications (lowering of Tucson Water main) must be reviewed and approved by Tucson Water prior to this plan approval. 2. Previous comment 2. Include in your pavement note "2" AC over 4" ABC minimum or match existing, whichever is greater" 3. Previous comment 3. Excess r/w will have to be abandoned prior to this plan approval. 4. Previous comment 9. This comment has not been adequately addressed. The proposed ramps must comply with ADA regulations, ramp cross slope must not exceed 2%, ramp landing must not exceed 2%, sidewalk crossing within driveway cross slope must not exceed 2%, and sidewalk ramp slope must not exceed 12:1, Revise. 5. Previous comment 11. See comment 1. 6. Previous comment 13. Sheet 4 indicates "Heavy Duty Welded Steel Grate"? This is not in accordance to City Standards. Call out a City Standard Grate Detail. 7. Previous comment 14 not addressed. The Structural analysis was carried based on IBC building code for a structural carrying vehicular loading? And no geotechnical analysis? Revise analysis in accordance to standard practice roadway structural loading, and include geotechnical analysis. 8. Previous comment 16 not adequately addressed. The HEC-RAS analysis cross sections ignore bends in the channel section (bend losses). For example the analysis should include a section at the structure outlet (between section E and D) , and another section between section and weir. 9. Previous comment 16 not adequately addressed. The HEC-RAS analysis assumes open channel flow for the entire channel reach, however the upstream portion contains a culvert (7.4 X 3 box culvert)? Revise analysis to take into account the proposed box culvert. In addition, the box culvert must be modeled in according to typical HEC-RAS/HEC techniques. 10. General comment: Per the approved DP indicates 6' sidewalk, new storm drain and catch basin along Valencia Road, these items must be included on these plans. 11. General comment: Per comment 10, curbing is required when sidewalk or pedestrian path is installed adjacent to a roadway. 12. General comment: The proposed inverted roadway cross slope, for the proposed knuckle, must not exceed 3% per City Development Standards. Revise accordingly. 13. General comment. For the proposed knuckle, show will the varying cross slope impact vehicular travel? Is the roadway longitudinal run-out (roadway cross slope rate change relative to longitudinal travel) within the AASHTO Green Book Geometric Design Guidelines? 14. General comment: Please find attached to the redline comments of the notes that must be included on the PIA plans, replace notes accordingly. |
| 03/05/2007 | ASHOFFS1 | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 03/05/2007 | ASHOFFS1 | PIA COORDINATOR | CUSTOMER CALLED; PLANS @ AMBASSADOR | Completed | |
| 03/05/2007 | ASHOFFS1 | PIA COORDINATOR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |