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: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D05-0030
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/03/2006 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Basin slopes are required to have slopes no steeper than 2:1 for protected slopes for depths less than three feet. The only exception is when the basin is constructed with a structural element, such as a retaining wall for up 35% of the basin perimeter. DS 10-01.4 (P. 78) In order to receive approval for the design presented a Development Standard Modification Request DSMR will be required. Contact Patricia Gehlen for information regarding the modification request. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED. |
| 01/06/2006 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Traffic Engineering REJECTS this DP: 1. Show and label as to size (ie 20x110) both existing and future SVTs (DS 2-05.2.4.R) If the existing and future SVTs are coincident, label it as both existing and future. There is no near side SVT depicted. The far side SVT need only be a pedestrian SVT. The 110' SVT depicted is acceptable as it is conservative. D. Dale Kelch, PE Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov |
| 01/08/2006 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: David Rivera Principal Planner PROJECT: D05-0030 Star Bucks at Valencia Development Plan TRANSMITTAL: January 8, 2006 DUE DATE: December 15, 2005 COMMENTS: 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 August 23, 2006 2. This comment was not completely addressed. Please revise or add the following. Revise general note two on sheet two as follows. In the land use code under the I-1 zone the Food Service use is subject to performance criteria section 3.4.5.6.C. List the subject to section next to the restaurant use. Also revise the words restaurant use to Food Service Use. The words retail use should be revised to the specific use such as General Merchandise, Food and Beverage Sales, etc and include if applicable the subject to section number. Revise as required. Previous Comment: Please clarify what the retail use is going to be i.e., general merchandise, food store, etc. Submit a dimensioned copy of the floor plan for the proposed building to verify square footage and design. General note number two must be revised to include any applicable subject to section numbers for each use. DS 2-05.2.2.B.3 6. The previous comment has been left for the reference by the reviewer to ensure that the recordation information is listed on the plan prior to zoning approval unless other accommodations are made with the Zoning Manager Patricia Gehlen. Previous Comment: All existing and proposed easements must be drawn on the development plan. The existing easement location, purpose, width, and recordation information must be labeled. DS 2-05.2.3.C All proposed easements must be recorded by separate instrument and shown on the development plan along with the recordation docket and page number prior to approval of the development plan. DS 2095.2.4.G 7. It does not appear that the future curb and sidewalk have been correctly depicted on the plan. Valencia Road is slated to be widened to a total 150 feet of right of way. The future curb is to be constructed 12 feet from the future right of way line. The plan is depicted with a sidewalk or curb location greater than depicted on the cross section in development standards 3-01. Please review the development standards and revise the plan as required. Also please consult with the Engineering reviewer for more information on this issue. Previous Comment: Draw, dimension, and label the future curb and sidewalk for Valencia Road. Add a building setback from the future back of curb location to the building. (It is acknowledged that the building meets the required building setback from the existing back of curb.) DS 2-05.2.4.F 8. Per the Assessor's information lot 34 has been split within the last 20 years. Please provide the requested documentation for the approval of the lot split. Previous comment: Per review of the legal descriptions, it appears that lot splits have occurred on both properties depicted on this drawing. Please clarify when the lot splits occurred and were the splits approved through the DSD lot split process. If so please provide the COT stamped and approved documents for the splits. The lot-split process may be an issue if the lot splits are determined to have been done without COT approval. Additional Comments may be forthcoming on this issue. DS 2-05.2.4.A 9. The information for the drive-through has been depicted as requested. What his not clear is the location of the pick up window. The drive-through lane is to be measured from the pick up window towards the entrance to the lane. A maximum of six stacking spaces at an 18-foot length for each space is required. Please revise the drive-through lane to correctly depict the location of the drive-through window and a minimum of six stacking spaces at 18 feet each. Previous Comment: Per the plan it appears that a drive-through lane is proposed along the north and west sides of the building. If this in fact is a drive-through, please demonstrate that the drive-through lane has been designed to accommodate six 18-foot long vehicle spaces (ea.). Also indicate on the plan if the drive-through lane is for the Starbucks Restaurant or the Retail use. DS 2-05.2.4.D.3 Please add a width dimension for the standard vehicle parking spaces. The width for the handicapped spaces has been listed but was not shown for the standard spaces. Please add the requested information. 10. The maneuverability has not been demonstrated on the plan. Please contact the Engineering reviewer for information on radius requirements for demonstration of maneuverability into and out of the loading zone. Previous Comment: Demonstrate maneuverability into and out of the loading zone. In the real world most loading zones are not utilized because the maneuverability is never realistically depicted on the plan and therefore never works on the site. Please ensure that the loading is accessible and useable. DS 2-05.2.4.O 11. The sight visibility triangles are not depicted in the correct location if the curb has not been correctly drawn and dimensioned on the plan. Revise as required. Previous Comment: Depict on the plan the existing and future sight visibility triangles. DS 2-05.2.4.R 12. The proposed monument sign depicted on the plan may fall within the future sight visibility triangle. Please ensure that once the correct location of the curb has been determined and drawn that the monument sign is not placed within the revised sight visibility triangles. Previous Comment: Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, freestanding, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal location requirements can be met. DS 2-05.2.4.W 13. Additional comments may be forthcoming based on revisions to the plans and responses to the zoning comments. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. DGR C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D050030dp2.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development plan, and additional requested documents. |
| 01/25/2006 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES January 25, 2006 Antony C. Tsang A.C. Tsang Engineering Group, Inc. 4626 East Fort Lowell, Suite S Tucson, AZ 85712 Subject: D05-0030 Starbucks at Valencia Development Plan Dear Tony: Your submittal of December 15, 2005 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 for each agency explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLUELINES MUST BE FOLDED 5 Copies Revised Development Plan (Landscape, Zoning, Engineering, Traffic, DSD) 4 Copies Revised Landscape Plans (Zoning, Landscape, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Lot Split Documents (Zoning, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 791-5608, ext. 1179. Sincerely, Patricia Y. Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 325-0979 |
| 12/15/2005 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 12/20/2005 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 12/28/2005 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Coordinator DATE: December 28, 2005 SUBJECT: Engineering review of the Development Plan, Starbucks. The activity number is D05-0030. SUMMARY: The Development Plan and Drainage Report were received by Engineering on December 15th, 2005. Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Development Plan or the Drainage Report. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: DEVELOPMENT PLAN GENERAL COMMENTS 1. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Development Plan purposes only. 2. A Grading Plan and Permit will be required. The next submittal must address the following items: DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1. Tracy Bogardus stated in the Drainage Report, page 2, section Onsite Drainage that the condition of the dry well is uncertain and will require testing to determine the disposal rate. This information has not been provided. Provide the results of the recommended testing to determine the disposal rate of the dry well. SMDDFM 14.5. 2. Provide the dry well Arizona Department of Water Resources ADWR permit number / authorization number on the site plan adjacent to the callout of the dry well. 3. Label the basin "existing ret/det basin." |
| 12/29/2005 | MARILYN KALTHOFF | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approved | December 29, 2005 To: Tony Tsang, A. C. Tsang Engineering Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Project Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________ From: Michael Harrington (520-740-6579), representing the Pima County Departments of Wastewater Management and Environmental Quality Subject: Starbucks at Valencia Development Plan - 2nd Submittal D05-0030 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 Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. 1. The Pima County Department of Environmental Quality and Wastewater Management Department hereby approve the above referenced submittal of the development plan as submitted. Please note the following: Approval of the above referenced submittal does not authorize the construction of public or private sewer collection lines, or water distribution lines. Prior to the construction of such features, a Construction Authorization (Approval To Construct) may need to be obtained from the Pima County Environmental Quality. Also, air quality activity permits must be secured by the developer or prime contractor from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality before constructing, operating or engaging in an activity which may cause or contribute to air pollution. If you have any questions regarding the above mentioned comments, please contact me at the telephone number shown under my signature on the first page of this letter CC: Project File |