Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D09-0006
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/26/2009 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 03/02/2009 | DAVID MANN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 03/17/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. SHEET FOUR SHOWS ACCESSIBILE PARKING SIGNS 12' FROM THE CURB OF THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING. VERIFY WITH "PARK WISE", DON ANGEL 429-3318 THE EXACT LOCATION AND DISTANCE REQUIRED FOR THE SIGNAGE. 2. AT DETAIL 3/6, CHANGE THE DIMENSION 6'-6" TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SIGN TO READ 7'-0", COT ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE. 3. AT DETAIL 1/6, VERIFY WITH ZONING THE MINIMUM 4' WIDE REQUIREMENT FOR PEDESTRIAN ACCESSIBLE ROUTES INCLUDING THE CCCCURB RAMP. 4. DETAIL 6/7: NOTE THE MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 1:10 FOR CURB RAMP FLARED SIDES. |
| 03/24/2009 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: D09-0006 Quiktrip Store No.1452 5151 E. Speedway Blvd. Development Package Plan TRANSMITTAL: 03/24/2009 DUE DATE: 03/26/09 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 02/26/10. 2. DS2-01.2.4 Provide a title block in the lower right corner of each sheet. See DS 2-01.3.2 for required information in the title block. 3. DS 2-01.3.7.A.8 2 Case number D09-0006 has been assigned to this development plan (DP). Please place this number in the right corner of all sheets of the development plan, landscape plan, NPPO, and any other associated sheets. 4. DS 2-01.3.8.B The indicated easements that are to be abandoned or vacated by separate instruments, are to be abandoned or vacated prior to approval of this plan. Provide recording docket and page information of the abandonment on the site plan for each easement. 5. This site contains four (4) separate tax parcels therefore you will need to show how the parcels can work as stand alone parcels if sold separately or provide a Pima County Tax Parcel Combo and a recorded covenant regarding development and use of real property. Provide copies of the documents at the next submittal for review. 6. DS 2-01.3.9.H.2 Per the MS&R maps Speedway has a future right of way width of 120' as indicated on the site plan. A 120' ROW has a nine (9) foot future sidewalk width, indicate the location of the future curb on the sight plan. A relocation of the future sight visibility triangles will be required on the site plan as the existing and future curb locations do not appear to be in the same location. See engineering comments. 7. DS 2-01.3.9.H.d Bicycle parking provided on the DP does not meet the requirements of revised DS (Development Standard) 2-09. Per DS 2-09.4.1 Class 2 bicycle parking facilities will be located no more than fifty (50) feet from the main building entrance. The minimum access aisle for the bicycle parking space is five (5) feet. Revise sheet 5 and provide dimension on detail 2 of 7. The minimum distance from the bicycle rack to the front of the bicycle parking space is 36 inches per DS 2-09 Figure 9. Revise detail 2 of 7. In the bicycle parking calculations, 38 vehicle parking spaces are indicated as being provide, revise to show the 28 parking spaces being provided. 8. DS 2-01.3.9.Q Provide the height of the canopy structure on the foot print of the site plan. 9. DS 2-01.3.9.R See comment #11 regarding distance from a billboard to a pedestrian circulation path (sidewalk). 10. DS 2-01.3.9.V V Please indicate the location and type of postal service to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements. If mail is to be delivered to an area within a building please state so on the plan. 11. DS 2-01.3.9.W The indicated billboard does not appear to be located within the indicated easement. A new easement may be required to be recorded or relocation of the billboard. Clarify. This project is full code compliance; therefore the billboard must meet the requirements of LUC Sec. 3.5.4.26, Sec. 3.4.4.1.B.3 and Sec. 3.4.5, review and comply. For example; 1. A 12x35 loading zone is required in close proximity to the billboard. 2. Pedestrian access shall not be located under, or within five (5) feet of, a vertical line intersecting the ground and any structural element extending from a billboard, including, but not limited to, overhangs, cantilevered beams, and elevated walkways. 12. Additional comments may be forth coming based upon changes to the site plan and responses to the above comments. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 837-4961 TLS C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D09-0006dp.doc 03/24/2009 Development Services Department Zoning Review Section Terry Stevens Lead Planner Comments: Grading Plan 1. Provide all changes requested for the site plan on the grading plan. 2. The grading plan has been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until it has been approved by the Engineering, and Landscape Review Sections and until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 3. Zoning will re-review the grading plan on the next submittal to insure compliance with the approved site/development plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming. |
| 03/25/2009 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: March 25, 2009 SUBJECT: QuikTrip #1452 Development Plan Core Review- Engineering Review TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: 5151 E Speedway Blvd, T145S R14E Sec02 Ward 6 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: D09-0006 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package, Drainage Report No. 1 (DOWL Engineers, 23FEB09), Geotechnical Evaluation (ConformaTech, 02DEC08) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (DOWL Engineers, 26FEB09). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the draft policy for Development Plan Core Review, Development Standard 2-01. All comments reflect Development Plan, Grading Plan and SWPPP review. The following items need to be addressed: DRAINAGE STATEMENT: 1) DS Sec.10-02.14.3.4: Revise the development plan documents and report to label and dimension the required basin access ramp. Verify that the ramp meets the minimum width and slope requirement of 15-feet and 15%, respectively. Alternate means of access will be reviewed by the City Engineer on a case-by-case basis and must be specifically described in the Drainage Report and as a Note in the General Note Section of the development plan documents. 2) DS Sec.10-01.2.2: Provide a revised Geotechnical Report (or addendum) with infiltration rates for the retention basins. Infiltration rates must have a drain down time per 10-01.3.5.1.3. Verify that the Drainage Report and development plan documents match the geotechnical report. Per the Drainage Report Basin 1 on the south side of the proposed wall is provided at an average depth of 1.68 feet therefore infiltration rates are required to verify that standing water does not occur within this basin. 3) Revise the Drainage Report and the pre-existing watershed map to label and dimension the existing 100-year floodplain limits and water surface elevations for the regulatory flow along Magnolia Avenue. The HEC-RAS model submitted is for post conditions and does not account for existing flows. Existing floodplain limits must be provided to ensure encroachment and the need for elevation certificates for the finished floor elevation of the proposed future building. 4) Revise the Proposed Condition Drainage Map shown in Appendix E to clearly label the 100-year floodplain limits across the entire site. The map does not fully label the limits across the northeast or southwest portion of the site, revise. 5) Revise the Drainage Report to provide a discussion along with calculations for all proposed hydraulic structures. Provide specific details within the Drainage Report so that they can be verified on the proposed Development Plan package. Specifically the bubbler box, storm drain pipes, wall openings, Basin 2 outlet, scuppers, etc. 6) Clarify in the Drainage Report the need for the proposed retaining/site wall in the middle of Basin 1. Provide a discussion as to why the wall could not be built along the north side of the basin, south of the property line to satisfy screening requirements. Per DS Sec.10-01.4.3.1 structures such as retaining walls are acceptable for up to 35% of the basin perimeter. The wall is acting as a perimeter wall for a portion of the basin and seems to exceed this 35% requirement, clarify. 7) Revise the retention volume calculation sheets to provide the correct numerical value for the retention provided. There is a typo for the total retention provided on Page 2 of 2 in Appendix F. If the volume numbers are added up from the calculations (Basin 1 north side, Basin 1 south side and Basin 2) the total volume would be 4, 918.52 (3,256.52+440+1,222) not 4, 478.52. The number still exceeds the required volumes; however the report must provide accurate numbers. DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 8) Verify that the development plan documents and Drainage Report meet or exceed the Water Harvesting Ordinance No. 10597. Label all areas of water harvesting on-site and clearly show how stormwater from the vehicular use area or canopies drain into these areas to satisfy the requirements of water harvesting. 9) DS Sec.2-01.2.4: Revise the development plan documents to provide a Title Block in the lower right quadrant of each sheet. It is acknowledged that QuikTrip has its own standard for plan submittal; however the development plan documents must be per the requirements of Development Standard Sec.2-01. 10) DS Sec.2-01.2.5: Revise the development plan documents to include a 3-inch by 5-inch space in the lower right quadrant that shall be reserved for an approval stamp. 11) DS Sec.2-01.3.1: Revise the development plan documents to include the phone number for the owner of the site as shown on Sheet 1. 12) DS Sec.2-01.3.2: Provide the following information in the Title Block: a) The proposed name of the project or if there is no name the proposed tenants name. b) A brief legal description and a statement as to whether the project is a resubdivision are to be provided. c) The administrative street address. 13) DS Sec.2-01.3.3: The correct Development Plan Number (D09-0006) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets. 14) DS Sec.2-01.3.7.A.6.b: Provide a General Note on the development plan document for the overlay zone associated with this project. Specifically "LUC Sec.2.8.3, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone." It is acknowledged that the statement is on Sheet 2 however it needs to be clearly numbered as a General Note per DS Sec.2-01. 15) DS Sec.2-01.3.7.A.8: Provide the subdivision name along with the Book and Page Number since the property is part of a subdivision plat that has been previously recorded (Avondale; Book 04, Page 042). 16) DS Sec.2-01.3.7.B.2.A: Provide a note on Sheet 2 of the package to state; "This project is affected by the City of Tucson Floodplain Regulations." 17) DS Sec.2-01.3.7.B.2.B: Provide the following note on Sheet 2 of the package to state; "A floodplain use permit and finished floor elevation certificates are required." The floodplain use permit is required for construction of the vehicular use area and other improvements within the mapped 100-year floodplain and if applicable, depending on the revised Drainage Report and existing 100-year floodplain limits, the elevation certificates may be required for the finished floor elevation of the proposed future building. The floodplain use permit will be required prior to grading plan approval and the elevation certificates for the building will be prepared at that time and associated with the future building plans/permits. Provide the floodplain use permit application with the next submittal of the Development Plan Package. 18) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.B: Clarify the existing billboard easement and the location of the existing billboard. Per the development plan documents the existing billboard is not within the existing billboard easement, clarify and/or revise. 19) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.B: Verify that all easements are drawn with recordation information, location, width, and purpose of on the development plan documents. A Title Report was not submitted for this project, but is required to verify if additional easements affect this property. 20) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.B: All easements that are proposed to be abandoned and are in conflict with the proposed building location are required to be vacated prior to approval of the development plan documents unless permission from the easement holder(s) is provided. Specifically the 10-foot utility easement and the 10-foot x 10-foot electrical transmission easement. 21) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.C: Revise the development plan documents to label the shown existing right-of-way as "existing." 22) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.I.1: Revise the development plan documents to clearly label the proposed and existing 100-year floodplain limits across the entire site from property line to property line. The existing limits stop short of both the northeast and southwest corners of the site, revise. 23) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.I.3: Provide the symbol identical to that used to represent the water surface elevation on the development plan documents in the legend. 24) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.A: Clarify the proposed lot lines as shown on the development plan documents. Per the last recorded subdivision, Book 04, Page 042, this project proposes a lot combination, clarify. All lot combinations or reconfigurations will require approval from the Zoning Section of the City of Tucson Development Services Department prior to Development Plan Package approval. 25) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.2: Revise the development plan documents to correctly label the future sight visibility triangles for the access road off of Speedway Boulevard once the future curb location has been revised. Future sidewalk and curb area for the future MS&R right-of-way is 9 feet measured from the right-of-way line. 26) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.5.a: Clarify on the development plan documents any parking spaces that will required wheel stops to prevent vehicles from encroaching into any pedestrian access points or landscape areas. If the parking spaces are proposed at 18-feet then wheel stops may be required to allow for the required 2.5 foot overhang at these areas. 27) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.5.c: Revise the development plan documents to label all required loading zones per the Zoning Section comments. Verify that all lading zones have access and maneuverability. 28) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.I: Verify if street dedication in accordance with the Major Streets and Routes Plan is required at this time for this property. Provide a letter or an email from Tucson Department of Transportation (TDOT) for verification. Revise Sheet 5 to label and dimension the future right-of-way width. 29) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.J: If dedication or pedestrian improvements are not required through TDOT at this time correctly label and dimension the MS&R future sidewalk area, sight visibility triangles, curbing, etc for Speedway Boulevard. The dimensions shown for the future curb and sidewalk location is labeled incorrectly. The future sidewalk and curb dimension for a MS&R right-of-way width of 120-feet is 9-feet, measured from the future right-of-way line back to the street, revise. 30) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.L: Revise the development plan documents to dimension and label all proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) and whether the will be public or private, if applicable. 31) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.2: Clarify on Sheet 9 the top of berm located on the west side of Basin 1, south of the proposed wall. The transition from 3:1 to 4:1 slopes must provide a top of berm with a minimum width of 3 feet. 32) DS Sec.10-02.14.3.4: Revise the development plan documents to label and dimension the required basin access ramp. Verify that the ramp meets the minimum width and slope requirement of 15-feet and 15%, respectively. Alternate means of access will be reviewed by the City Engineer on a case-by-case basis and must be specifically described in a Note in the General Note Section of the development plan documents. 33) DS Sec.10-02.10.9.1.8: Revise the development plan documents, keynote # 3, for the proposed storm drain clean outs to correctly label the associated detail. The keynote labels detail 4, Sheet 10 which is incorrect, revise. 34) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Clarify on Sheet 9 the proposed wall opening locations as per Detail 2 on Sheet 10. Clarify if the symbol "." shown on Sheet 9 are the wall opening locations. Provide this symbol in the legend and clearly label them on Sheet 9 for construction purposes. 35) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Revise Detail 2 on Sheet 10 to label the proposed filter fabric specifications. 36) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Revise Sheet 5 of the development plan documents to fully dimension the proposed rip rap pad in Basin 2 for the 2.5 curb opening. All other pads on this sheet have been fully dimensioned with the exception of this one, revise. 37) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Revise Details 3 and 4 on Sheet 10 to clarify how the rock riprap transitions from the end of the concrete flumes to prevent scour or erosion at this transition point. Provide either a cut off wall at the end of the concrete flume opening or show how the riprap ties into the concrete curb openings to prevent water from eroding out behind the pads. Provide filter fabric specifications and or type in the details. 38) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Revise the development plan documents and the detail for the proposed 2.5-foot curb opening into Basin 2. Per the Drainage Report the curb opening at a minimum must be 2.5 feet, however Sheet 9 calls out 2.0 feet and Detail 4 calls out 3.0 feet, clarify the length and verify that it meets the minimum 2.5 feet per the report. 39) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Revise the development plan documents and the detail for the proposed 5.0-foot curb opening into Basin 2. Per the Drainage Report the curb opening at a minimum must be 5.0 feet, however Sheet 9 calls out 2.0 feet, clarify the length and verify that it meets the minimum per the report. 40) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Revise the development plan documents to provide a detail with a call out for the Basin 2 outlet. The detail must clearly label and dimension the rock riprap pad and the proposed scuppers to match the revised Drainage Report. 41) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Revise Sheet 9 of the development plan package to clearly label the storm drain from the proposed building to Basin 1. Provide the type of pipe, slope, size, etc for this storm drain. 42) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.Q: Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all handicap accessibility comments that are associated with this project, if applicable. 43) Approval from TDOT Permits and Codes will be required for all improvements within the public right-of-way and for the connection of the private storm drains into the public infrastructure. A right-of-way use permit application will be required prior to construction. Contact Thad Harvison, (520)-837-6592 or Thad.Harvison@tucsonaz.gov for all right-of-way requirements and permit applications. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: 44) DS Sec.10-01.3.5.1: Provide a revised Geotechnical Report (or addendum) with percolation rates for the retention basins for 5-year threshold to show that the drain down time meets the maximum allotted time. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN: The SWPPP does not meet the minimum requirements of the AzPDES Construction General Permit (CGP). Revise the SWPPP according to these comments: 45) Part III.A.3 and VIII.J.2: Ensure the SWPPP is signed by a person meeting the certification requirements of Permit Part VIII.J. The owner of the property, since known, is required to sign the owner certification section prior to SWPPP approval. 46) Part III.C.3.h: Show the location and registration number of all onsite dry-wells and dry-wells located on adjacent properties that could receive Stormwater from the site (if none exist, indicate that). 47) Part III.D.3: Include a copy of the completed NOI form that will be submitted to ADEQ. The NOI must be signed by the owner prior to SWPPP approval. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan Package, Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, SWPPP and Floodplain Use Permit Application that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Further comments may be generated upon re-submittal of the Development Plan Package, Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, and SWPPP. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 03/26/2009 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | The Landscape Section conditionally approves the Development Package and grading plans. Submit all revised plans for additional review. |
| 03/27/2009 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES March 27, 2009 Richard Cordova DOWL HKM 166 West Alameda Street Tucson, Arizona 85701 Subject: D09-0006 Quiktrip Store #1452 Development Package Dear Richard: Your submittal of February 27, 2009 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 4 sets of the DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 4 Copies Revised Development Package (ADA, Zoning, Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Geotechnical Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Floodplain Use Permit (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Lot Combo Form (Zoning, DSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4919. Sincerely, Patricia Gehlen CDRC Manager All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: 624-0384 dp-resubmittal |