Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D09-0006
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/30/2009 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 04/30/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | NOT A COT OWNED/OPERATED PROPERTY |
| 05/04/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 05/05/2009 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: May 5, 2009 SUBJECT: QuikTrip #1452 Development Plan Core Review- 2nd 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 revised Development Plan Package, Drainage Report No. 2 (DOWL Engineers, 23FEB09 revised 29APR09), Geotechnical Evaluation (ConformaTech, 02DEC08) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (DOWL Engineers, 26FEB09 revised 29APR09). 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) Acknowledged. 2) Acknowledged. 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. This comment was not addressed. 4) Revise the Proposed Condition Drainage Map shown in Appendix E to clearly label the 100-year floodplain limits across the entire site (property line to property line). The map does not fully label the limits across the northeast or southwest portion of the site. This comment was not addressed. 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, Basin 2 outlet (Type 2 scupper), etc. All hydraulic structures must be discussed in the Drainage Report with supporting calculations. This comment was not fully addressed. 6) Clarify in the Drainage Report the percentage of basin perimeter that is constructed out of the proposed wall. 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 screen wall for large portion of the basin and seems to exceed this 35% requirement, clarify. This comment was not fully addressed. 7) Acknowledged. DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 8) Complied. 9) Complied. 10) Complied. 11) Complied. 12) DS Sec.2-01.3.2: Provide the following information in the Title Block: a) Complied. b) A brief legal description and a statement as to whether the project is a resubdivision are to be provided. The property is part of a subdivision plat that has been previously recorded (Avondale; Book 04, Page 042). c) Complied. 13) Complied. 14) Complied. 15) Complied. 16) Complied. 17) DS Sec.2-01.3.7.B.2.B: Provide the floodplain use permit that is required for construction of the vehicular use area and other improvements within the mapped 100-year floodplain and the elevation certificates that are required for the finished floor elevation of the proposed future building. The floodplain use permit will be required prior to grading plan approval. Provide the floodplain use permit application ($50 fee and associated activity number) with the next submittal of the Development Plan Package. 18) Acknowledged. Per email from Glenn Moyer, 01APR09. 19) Acknowledged. Per email from Glenn Moyer, 01APR09. 20) Acknowledged however per DS Sec.2-01.3.8.B sll 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. Specifically the 10-foot utility easement and the 10-foot x 10-foot electrical transmission easement. See Item #30. 21) Complied. 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 proposed limits stop short of both the northeast and southwest corners of the site, revise. The existing floodplain limits that is labeled on the plan set could not be verified within the proposed Drainage Report. This comment was not fully addressed. 23) Complied. 24) Acknowledged. 25) Complied. 26) Complied. 27) Complied. 28) Complied. 29) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.J: Revise the development plan documents to remove the label to "Existing & Future Curb" adjacent to Keynote #27 on the southeast corner of the site. Label should only read "Existing Curb" since the plan set now shows future curb location in the correct place. This comment was not fully addressed. 30) Restated/New- DS Sec.2-01.3.9.L: Revise the development plan documents to reword the labels for the easements (10'x10' Electrical Transmission Easement and 10' Utility Easement) that are to be abandoned. Specifically the labels should read so that only the recordation information for the abandonment can be filled in prior to final Development Plan approval. Example; "10' Utility Easement abandoned Docket___, Page___" and "10'x10' Electrical Transmission Easement abandoned Docket____, Page____." 31) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.2: Clarify on Sheet 9 or in a separate detail view 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. The 3-foot dimension could not be located in plan view (plans can not be scaled for construction purposes). This comment was not fully addressed. 32) Acknowledged. 33) Complied. 34) Complied. 35) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Revise Detail 2 on Sheet 10 to label the proposed filter fabric specifications. This comment was not addressed. All filter fabric call outs must at a minimum label the type and specifications for construction purposes. Refer to the Geotechnical Report for soil conditions and the design requirements of the Drainage Report for geotextile fabric requirements that are specific to this site. 36) Complied. 37) Complied. 38) Complied. 39) Complied. 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 the proposed Type 2 scupper and barricade railing. Verify the required minimum dimension of 5 feet for the public sidewalk once the barricade railing is installed at the scupper location per Standard Detail #205. 41) Complied. 42) Restated: 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) Restated: 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) Acknowledged. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN: The proposed SWPPP and Exhibits meet the minimum requirements of the AzPDES Construction General Permit (CGP). However the SWPPP and Exhibits can not be stamped approved until approval of the grading plan. Provide 2 copies of the SWPPP Report and Exhibits with resubmittal for stamp approval: 45) Complied. 46) Complied. 47) Complied. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan Package, Drainage Report and Floodplain Use Permit Application (with associated fee and permit activity number) 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 and Drainage Report. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 05/22/2009 | 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: 05/22/2009 DUE DATE: 05/29/09 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. 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. 3. 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. 4. DS 2-01.3.9.H.2 The indicated monument sign is located within the future sight visibility triangle. A DSMR will be required to be applied for and approved or relocate the sign. The minimum distance from the curb to the leading edge of the sign is 20'. Contact Heather Thrall (837-4951) for additional information regarding sign location requirements. 5. 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. 6. The e-mail from Glenn Moyer, indicated in your response letter, was not included in the submittal package. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 837-4961 TLS C:\planning\cdrc\developmentplan\D09-0006-2dp.doc 05/22/2009 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. |
| 05/28/2009 | JWILLIA5 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES May 28, 2009 Richard Cordova DOWL HKM 166 West Alameda Street Tucson, Arizona 85701 Subject: D09-0006 Quicktrip 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 3 sets of the DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 3 Copies Revised Development Package (Engineering, Zoning, 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, John Williams Planning Technician All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/ Via fax: (520) 624-0384 |