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.
Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE REVIEW v.1
Permit Number - DP22-0193
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE REVIEW v.1
Review Status: Requires Resubmit
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12/22/2022 | Site Landscape | APPROVED | |||
| 07/14/2023 | CDRC Post Review Express | PENDING ASSIGNMENT | |||
| 01/05/2023 | Site Engineering | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | 1. This plan lies in the "Ace Commons" Subdivision, platted in 2004 (S04-115). That subdivision included a drainage common area to the North, which may have accounted for a developed condition in your parcels with its retention volume. If that is true, your required FF volumes could potentially be lowered/negated depending on the actual retention volume provided for these parcels. If this is the case, ensure this is reflected in your drainage report 2. As per conclusion of the drainage report, show how the proposed parcel to the East will be graded to allow for proposed drainage. Show how soil will be stabilized to keep sediment from building up in CMP's. 3. Show cover between CMP's and top of ground, show this meets manufacture's standards 4. Provide a label and spot elevations for northern "non-contributing" basin 5. Drainage Report: The spillway table is titled "Northern Basin". Clarify if the table is referencing the Western Basin? 6. Drainage Report: Clarify how 2,445 cuft is provided in WS 1 per table 7: does not match with 2,570 cuft mentioned in previous discussion, especially with the note about above-ground SWH only 7. Clarify design of underground basin on plan set and in drainage report: drainage report states 'minimum 18" pipes' however the plan set calls out '1-8" pipes'. Moreover, clarify how the planned 1,354 cuft is provided underground (how many pipes will be required, etc) 8. Clarify Bottom width of Channel, the plan calls out 15.5', the FlowMaster report calls out 15', and the drainage report body calls out 14.5' 9. By Equation 8.1 in the Tucson Drainage manual, show how the channel will be stabilized to prevent low-flow erosion, or provide a maintenance plan and schedule for inspection of this issue 10. Provide spot grades at all curb cuts to show how water harvesting is maximized 11. Provide spot grades around and in the WHA's north and south of the building to show how water harvesting will be maximized 12. Provide a curb cut to direct water into the WHA southwest of the building 13. Provide a keynote for the outlet weir of the WHA Southeast of the building 14. Show a grade break in the street before the P.O.S system 15. Keynote 27 does not have an explanation in the keynotes 16. Provide a callout for the riprap along the channel and basin 17. Label top elevation of channel on plans 18. Provide inlet protection in the of a headwall and/or riprap at the CMP's 19. Provide a safety barrier along the northern "non-contributing" basin where the retaining wall drops off, as well as between the channel and the pedestrian walkway 20. Refuse enclosure detail B on sheet 7 of 13 appears to be mirror of actual site layout per sheet 4 of 13. Please clarify. 21. Underground Retention: As per the updated Detention/Retention manual, underground retention requires city engineer approval based on the following comments: a. As per the updated Detention/Retention manual 4.13.1.4, show how 150% of the required 100-yr detention volume is provided in the site drainage improvements b. Show how necessary first flush volume is retained and infiltrated into the surrounding soils and that the soil beneath the chamber will infiltrate in a reasonable amount of time through a geotechnical report (now), or an infiltration test completed (prior to final inspection) c. Ensure any landscaping comments regarding rainwater harvesting are addressed. Water harvesting must be maximized. Onsite flow should be primarily directed towards landscaping through the use of grading and curb cuts/scuppers d. Include plans for the design for the underground basin, including manufactures maintenance process. Include a note in the plan set requiring a maintenance schedule and process that follows the manufacturer's process. e. As per the Detention/Retention Manual 4.13.1.5, include an inspection and maintenance port into each chamber, or provide 5ft of clearance f. As per the detention/retention manual 4.13.1.7, process a covenant agreement for this project, a sample can be found at: https://webcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government/Flood%20Control/Rules%20and%20Procedures/Stormwater%20Detention-Retention/dssdr-final-201406-appendix-g.pdf g. Apply for city engineering approval by emailing Stephen Blood stephen.blood@tucsonaz.gov and Loren Makus loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov. Please provide proof of addressing the comments 18a-18f in that email Scott Haseman scott.haseman@tucsonaz.gov |
||
| 01/12/2023 | Site Zoning | REQUIRES RESUBMIT | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Mister Car Wash – 7471 S Houghton Rd. Development Package (2nd Review) DP22-0193 TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 11, 2023 COMMENTS: Resubmit revised drawings and a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06. Also, compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC) and the UDC Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, an applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One-year Expiration date is July 12, 2023. 2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided. 2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes. This comment is still applicable the require setback along meadow willow is 90 ft measure from the outside edge of the nearest adjacent travel lane . 1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – The required street perimeter yard setback from Houghton Rd is based on UDC Article 5.3.5.A, clearly show the required setback on the plan. Revise Development Package Calculation note 3 to shown the correct setback for Houghton Rd. The street setback listed is applicable for the setback to Meadow Willow Tr. This comment is still applicable, provide the height of the structure this structure may be required to meet setbacks. 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – It is not clear if the proposed vacuum enclosure called out under Keynote 21 is a fully enclosed structure. Also clarify what the height of this structure is, this structure may be required to meet the above setback requirements. 3.COMMENT: Provide Clarification on the car wash being a Self-service or Full service car wash. 4.COMMENT: Zoning cannot approve this development package until TSMR is approved. If approved please provide the TSMR case number adjacent to the title block on all sheets and provide a general note stating the case number, date of approval, what was modified and if applicable any conditions of approval. 5.COMMENT: Clarify if a land division is to be proposed with this development package. If you have any questions about this transmittal, Contact Paul Camarena at (520)837-4986 or by email Paul.Camarena@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
||
| 01/30/2023 | ROW Engineering Review | REVIEW COMPLETED | No Comments |