Plan Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: PIA SUBMITTAL
Plan Number - T07PI00026
Review Name: PIA SUBMITTAL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/23/2007 | JOSE ORTIZ | DOT TRAFFIC | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/24/2007 | ROBERT SHERRY | WATER | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/27/2007 | GARY WITTWER | DOT LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Please provide standard Sight Visibility Triangles on the Irvington intersection. Sign wall appears to be too close to Irvington. 2. Please add a general note to the irrigation sheets- " Keep all major irrigation equipment and main line out of the ROW." |
| 08/31/2007 | LANCE PETERSON | DOT STREET MAINTENANCE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | We have reviewed this plan and have the following comments: 1. If it is required for Streets and Traffic Maintenace to sign the mylars, then a signature block is needed. 2. It is our understanding that these improvements will be maintained by Parks and Recreation. 3. All work in the right of way should be coordinated with Paul Rosenboom at 791-3154 ext 234. No further comments. 8/31/07 |
| 09/10/2007 | LHENDRI1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | COT STREETS DIVISION | Completed | Submit UCL Letters. |
| 09/10/2007 | LHENDRI1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | COT WATER NEW DEVELOPMENT | Completed | Submit UCL Letters. |
| 09/10/2007 | LHENDRI1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | PC WASTEWATER MGMT | Completed | Submit UCL Letters. |
| 09/10/2007 | LHENDRI1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | QUEST COMMUNICATION | Completed | Submit UCL Letters. |
| 09/10/2007 | LHENDRI1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER CO | Completed | Submit UCL Letters. |
| 09/10/2007 | LHENDRI1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | COX COMMUNICATION | Completed | Submit UCL Letters. |
| 09/10/2007 | LHENDRI1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | SOUTHWEST GAS CORP | Completed | Submit UCL Letters. |
| 09/10/2007 | LHENDRI1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | EL PASO NATURAL GAS | Completed | Submit UCL Letters. |
| 09/10/2007 | LHENDRI1 | UTILITY CLEARANCES | KINDER MORGAN ENERGY | Completed | Submit UCL Letters. |
| 09/11/2007 | Estevan Tineo | DOT ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | T07PI00026 Parque De Santa Cruz River Park: 1. Is this plan a Grading Plan or PIA Plan? The plan, as prepared, is not in accordance to PIA plan requirements. Also, the PIA review process is intended for PIA reviews only, not Grading Plan reviews. Grading Plans are reviewed by DSD. 2. The plans indicate significant improvements in the ROW that should be on a PIA plan. Improvements in the ROW must be on a PIA plan. 3. The plans indicate attaching to an existing box culvert (Sheet 88) a pedestrian bridge. This is not acceptable. Box culverts are designed to convey flow and carry vertical loading not designed to carry lateral loads at the edges of the walls. In order to provide safe access pedestrian access, I suggest extending the box culvert to provide the needed width for the pedestrian path. 4. The plan proposes placing structures (walls and fencing) in the ROW? Typically, these type of structures require TRE's, please see Jim Rossi of DOT Reastate. 5. Since these plans are not in accordance to PIA requirements, only a few comments were provided, resubmit per PIA requirements. Please see DOT Engineering Website, Permits and Codes, PIA's for PIA requirements before resubmitting plans. |
| 09/14/2007 | LHENDRI1 | PC-PARK & REC | PIMA COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION | Denied | PER REVIEWERS STEVE ANDERSON & JEFF KREAMER OF PIMA COUNTY PARKS AND REC - NATURAL RESOURCES on 8/28/07: Steve and I have reviewed the Plans submitted by Westland Resources for the Santa Cruz River Park. Following are our noted concerns. The greatest concern is the methods chosen for some pedestrian wash crossings. These were not acceptable. Other concerns were less significant. Total Plan Set: 98 pages Sheet 3: Key note four, "fill erosion at base of tree". A precautionary note was added to avoid covering bark. Sheet 5: Storm water drainage must not flow over path. It must be designed to flow under the path. Sheet 13: a) show Park boundaries/property lines. b) state the method in which additional corridor will be dedicated to the public. c) "at grade crossings not acceptable", pedestrian bridges needed. Sheet 16: Extend post & cable barrier at Airport Wash Crossing. Sheet 17: Avoid near 90 degree intersection of paths. Smooth transition of one path into the other path. Sheet 21: Again, at path intersection, transition paths. Sheet 22: Alter culvert design to increase flow capacity and avoid side cutting erosion. Sheet 25: Show Drexel Road Alignment, and R/W boundaries. Sheet 46: Improve transition at path intersection. Sheet 88: At pedestrian bridge, position two removable bollards instead of just one. Plan set will be returned to Westland today. |
| 09/17/2007 | LHENDRI1 | PARK AND RECREATION | REVIEW | Denied | COMMENTS BY GLEN HICKS - 9/17/07 of TUCSON PARKS AND REC. AND FELIPE MURRIETA OF LANDSCAPING & IRRIGATION. (MURRIETA COMMENTS below AFTER Glen Hicks' Comments) FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov SUBJECT: T07PI00026 Parque de Santa Cruz GENERAL COMMENTS Safety railing appears to be needed in a number of locations along the paved path and trail. Install post and cable instead of barbed wire fence adjacent to west property line. Install post and cable for entire length of west property line. Where the path and trail meet, add radii to facilitate smooth travel. Replace Hopseed and Rosewood plants with Creosote. Seed mix for park areas not shown. Mix should include, but not be limited to: Brittlebush Creosote Desert Marigold Penstemon Desert mallow SPECIFIC COMMENTS Sheet 2: Where rip-rap drainage crosses paved path divert drainage to designed culverts or pipe drainage under path. Sheet 9: Move path farther east away from property line. Sheet 13: At-grade crossing is not acceptable - may need bridge. Transition of path and trail to sidewalk and street is unclear. Sheet 14: Entry wall interferes with smooth travel through entryway. Sheet 16: Add bench Sheet 17: Add bench. Where is crosswalk? In addition to the comments above, see redline comments below. Redline comments of "Parque de Santa Cruz" FIRST REVIEW of 100% plans from Westland Resources LANDSCAPING & IRRIGATION REVIEW BY FELIPE MURRIETA - 9/14/07 GENERAL QUESTIONS: Is the bridge at Airport wash designed to carry the weight of maintenance vehicles? If so how large? Cushman type only or crewcabs also. Will there be a Gross Vehicle Weight Limit sign? If the bridge will not be designed for large vehicles then the bollards need to be pulled closer together to prevent that. What measures are being taken to prevent bird perching within the horizontal members in the roof of the ramada? (The print is hard to read.) Is DG to be stabilized? (Special concern adjacent to hard surfaces and retention basins where overflow could cause DG erosion.) GENERAL COMMENTS Did NOT receive any specifications for the project. Since these generally supercede plans/diagrams these need to be made available to COT P&R. Removable/permanent bollards are shown at 10 ft. O.C. at some locations (Entry 3 Calle Santa Cruz, possibly entry #4 at NW quad of Drexel Rd. & Calle Santa Cruz) which is too wide. Spacing should be limited to a maximum of 6 ft. 0.C. and possibly pulled back away from road toward wall so all openings are also 6 ft. maximum (and to provide staging place for vehicles to remove bollards). Poly tubing does NOT meet COT P&R Irrigation Standards for use at any locations especially in areas such as adjacent to water ways or undeveloped areas where damage by burrowing creatures is so prevalent. The intended purpose appears to be for temporary irrigation to establish vegetation in areas to be mitigated but the probability of the poly tubing remaining functional until that time is very low. In lieu of changing irrigation design to PVC hard piping or sprinkler systems, what additional warranties or measures (physical or contractual) are being taken to ensure that COT P&R is not burdened with continuing repairs? (For example, extended warranties or maintenance periods including all repairs to the poly systems for XX months or years at no cost to COT.) In the event that COT P&R would approve such warranties or measures, please see both specific & general notes dealing with improvements needed to further satisfy the poly tubing being accepted as a variance to COT P&R irrigation standards. Some areas (especially "H-H") need more emitter laterals in order to avoid excessively long distribution tubing (spaghetti). Several Habitat Headers appear to be too small to accommodate flows for the number of emitters required and connect at the center of an emitter lateral, instead of at the end of the grid with a PVC manifold. Please see comments suggesting increased sizes and adhere to the following minimum specifications: All poly grids shall be fed by at least two ¾ inch PVC outlets. (This can be two sides of a ¾ inch PVC tee.) All poly to be .700 OD Netafim polyethelene tubing. Flows need to be limited to no more than 4.0 GPM for each connection to a grid (or 8.0 GPM per grid per ¾ inch tee connected). No more than 4.0 GPM per ½ inch PVC lateral, 8.0 per ¾ inch. PVC lateral, 12 GPM per 1 inch PVC lateral, 22 GPM per 1 ¼ inch PVC lateral, and 30 GPM per 1 ½ inch PVC lateral. All valves should flow above minimum flow of flow sensor; recommend no less than 6 GPM if possible. All mainline fittings to be sched. 80 PVC. PVC male adapters shall NOT be used on any mainlines, manifolds, or risers; sched. 80 T.O.E. nipples shall be used for transitions from solvent weld to IPS threads. All valve boxes shall be concrete with C.I. bolt down lids (except as noted for emitters and flush ends). Need flow data for each station/zone. Controllers seem to be oversized (listed as 30 stations x 2). West side ("B") only shows 20 stations allowing 24-station controller with 4 spares. East side ("A") only shows 21 stations allowing 24-station controller with 3 spares. SPECIFIC COMMENTS: Shrub valves A15 & A14 appear to be looped. Shrub valve B15 appears to have unnecessarily long lateral by approx. 960 ft. of 1 inch; recommend splitting in to two stations unless flows will be excessively low (less than 6 GPM). Habitat valve A18 & A21 appear to be easily combined to eliminate A21 by stepping up laterals south of A18 as follows: 1 ¼ inch to 1st regulator, 1 inch to 2nd & 3rd regulators, and then adding a 1 inch lateral to connect the two zones. This suggestion is based on visual observations only, which need to be calculated and verified due to lack of flow data on plans and limited plan review time. Key Notes: Recommend stating page number for details (specifically drinking fountain details.). Page 28: Detail P1001 Acc. Drinking fountain detail - Eliminate P-trap. All fittings shall be sched. 40 ABS or SDR PVC sewer fittings for use on drainage systems. Copper supply line shall be ¾ inch minimum to accommodate hose bibb flows and supply line to brass isolation ball valve shall be no less than 1 inch PVC. PVC male adapters shall NOT be used; transitions from solvent weld to IPS threads shall be with sched. 40 couplings (SxS) into sched. 80 PVC T.O.E. nipples into IPS threads. Specifications for drinking fountain shall be as follows: Haws model 3500 with 6336LD (locking hose bibb option) mounted clear of "through" sidewalk and with minimum clearances so as to meet ADA requirements as interpreted by COT. Page 38: Missing detail and sheet number on note for owl burrow. Page 55: Detail 8 is missing or may have been omitted and should either be deleted or state no detail. Page 56: Should have note stating irrigation to meet COT P&R standards. Page 56: See redline comments typical for all irrigation sheets. Page 56: No emitter schedule for Atriplex Polycarpa, Zizyplus Obtusifolia, and Condalia Warnockii. Page 60: Please note the following observations: Maximum continuous flows for 2 - 1 ½ inch meters shall be no more than 100 GPM (50 each). Master valve specified cannot support very low flows and high flows. Flow sensor must be capable of reading down beyond smallest zone if possible; recommend splitting system north and south into 2 master valves and 2 flow sensors to allow more accurate flow monitoring as shown in the following recommendation: Master Valves to be 2 - 1½ inch Buckner VBDW12 with flows from 0 to 80 GPM. Flow sensors to be 2 - 1¼ inch Rain Master brass flow sensors (model FS-B125) to allow monitoring from 3 to 50 GPM. (This will require two flow sensor cables & two MV "hot" wires per controller.) Page 79: Please note the following observations: Maximum continuous flows for 2 - 1 ½ inch meters shall be no more than 100 GPM (50 each). Master valve specified cannot support very low flows and high flows. Recommend installing split master valve/flow sensor manifold with 2 master valves and 2 flow sensors to allow more accurate flow monitoring as shown in the following recommendation: Master Valves to be 2 - 1½ inch Buckner VBDW12 with flows from 0 to 80 GPM. Flow sensors to be 2 - 1¼ inch Rain Master brass flow sensors (model FS-B125) to allow monitoring from 3 to 50 GPM. (This will require two flow sensor cables & two MV "hot" wires per controller.) Page 75: Potable water shown as both 1 ½ inch PVC and 1 inch PVC with obvious reason or location for reduction. If no explanation exists than recommend one continuous size throughout to avoid unnecessary restrictions. Please see redline comments on details on page 80 & 81. Page 80: Remote Control Valve Assy (Drip) - This detail intended for small (3/4 to 1 inch) drip valves only. For larger applications refer to COT P&R Irrig. Std. Detail #6 and install filter in separate valve box (concrete w/CI lid). Page 81: Detail 7, Emitter location - Habitat lateral extension must be same size as lateral. Page 81: Detail 4, Emitter location - Shrub lateral extensions to be PVC. Page 81: Detail 6. NOT acceptable. Refer to detail 8 page 80 or provide manifold detail w 4 - 45º elbows (sched. 80, SxS) for risers & sched. 80 T.O.E. nipples for gate valves 2 inches & smaller. Page 80 or 81: Provide detail for Antenna installation (or a reference to the Rain Master detail) showing the following: High gain antenna and substituting 2 inch x 21'-0" galvanized riser (instead of 1 ½ inch RM spec.) and showing 2 inch galvanized ridgid sweep and 2 x 1 inch galvanized bell reducer connecting to communication conduit to controller. END OF FELIPE MURRIETA'S COMMENTS |
| 09/17/2007 | LHENDRI1 | PIA COORDINATOR | CUSTOMER CALLED | Completed | |
| 09/17/2007 | LHENDRI1 | PIA COORDINATOR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |