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: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Permit Number - D09-0009
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/18/2009 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 03/19/2009 | MARTIN BROWN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 03/23/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Accessible Parking Signage 12' away from front of parking area. This is too far to be associated with the parking. Confirm location and distance with Mr. Don Angel, "Park Wise", 429-3318. 2. Confirm accessible route access to Kolb Road requirement with Zoning comments. If required, a new marked crossing may be required. If allowed, provide large scale details showing all ramps, dimensions, detectable warnings, marked crossing and connection to accessible route. 3. Provide pole mounted accessible parking signage detail as required by "Parkwise". 4. Sheet 3.3, ADA Notes: a. Replace all ADA references throughout notes and sheet detail titles with 2006 IBC, Chapter 11 and ICC/ANSI 117.1. b. Confirm ICC/ANSI requirements. They do differ from ADAAG requirements. Make changes accordingly. |
| 03/25/2009 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | ADOT has NO COMMENT on this project. Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Notice: This email transmission and any attachments are intended for use by the person(s)/entity(ies) named above and may contain confidential/privileged information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by email, and delete or destroy all copies plus attachments. 2009 |
| 03/25/2009 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | CASE: D09-0009 QUICKTRIP - 1493 KOLB SITE: DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENT: NO OBJECTIONS OR ADVERSE COMMENTS Vehicle Trip Generation: Daily: 2,930 PM Peak: 241 Please call if you have questions or need additional information. ------------------------------------------- KoSok Chae, Ph.D. 177 N. Church Ave., Suite 405 Tucson, AZ 85701 520-792-1093 x487 [tel] 520-620-6981 [fax] www.PAGnet.org |
| 03/27/2009 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/31/2009 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | COT NON-DSD | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Approved | To Whom It May Concern: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on D09-0009 Quik Trip, a development plan review application for approximately 2.5 acres located at the southwest corner Kolb and Calle La Paz. This site is not within the Tucson International Airport or Ryan Airfield public disclosure areas or traffic pattern airspace. The Tucson Airport Authority does not oppose this application. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Respectfully, Jordan D. Feld, AICP Director of Planning Tucson Airport Authority 7005 S. Plumer Ave. Tucson, AZ 85756 jfeld@tucsonairport.org www.tucsonairport.org (520) 573-5115 office (520) 573-8006 fax |
| 04/08/2009 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | April 7, 2009 To: Kent Delph Greinier Engineering, Inc Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6719), representing the Pima County Departments of Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department and Environment Quality Subject: Quick Trip Store 1493 Dev. Plan - 1st Submittal D09-009 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 Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. Sheet C1.0: Fill in the blanks for General Note #13. Sheet C5.0: Call out the construction plan # G-2004-027 and size for the existing public sewer line shown on plan and call it out as public. Sheet C5.0: Call out the IMS#’s for all of the existing public manholes shown on plan. Sheet C5.0: Move the proposed private cleanout shown inside the public sewer easement to 5’ outside of the public sewer easement. Sheet C5.0: The proposed private BCS will need to be DIP because of the close approximation to the water line. This office will require a revised set of bluelines, and a response letter, addressing these comments. Additional comments may be made during the review of these documents. Pima County Code Title 13.20.030.A.2 requires that a wastewater review fee be paid for each submittal of the development plan. The fee for the first submittal is $166 plus $50 per sheet. For the second submittal, the review fee is $50 per sheet. For all subsequent submittals, the review fee is $39 per sheet. The next submittal of this project will be the second (2nd) submittal. A check for the review fee of this submittal in the amount of $100.00 (made out to PIMA COUNTY TREASURER) must accompany the revised set of bluelines and response letter. If the number of sheets changes, please adjust the review fee accordingly. If you have any questions regarding the above-mentioned comments, please contact me. |
| 04/09/2009 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: March 02, 2009 TO: DSD_CDRC@ tucsonaz.gov FROM: Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov SUBJECT: D09-0009 Quiktrip 1493 Kolb Site: Development Plan(3/19/09) Staff has no comments. |
| 04/10/2009 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Terry Stevens Lead Planner PROJECT: D09-0009 Quiktrip - 1493 Kolb Site Development Package TRANSMITTAL: 04/10/2009 DUE DATE: 04/15/09 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 03/18/10. 2. DS 2-01.2.3 All lettering and text (upper or lower case), and numbering, shall be a minimum of 3/32 inches in height to assure the plan will be legible during review and when digitized and/or reduced for archiving. 3. DS 2-01.2.4 A title block shall be provided in the lower right quadrant of each sheet. See DS 2-01.3.2 for content required in the title block. 4. DS 2-01.3.7.A.1 List as a general note: "Existing zoning is O-3." See following comment. 5. DS 2-01.3.7.A.3 This plan has been prepared in conjunction with a rezoning application, add the following note next to the existing zoning note: "Proposed zoning is OCR-1." 6. DS 2-01.3.7.A.4 Identify the proposed use of the property as classified per the Land Use Code. List all Land Use Code sections each proposed use is subject to. The proposed use for this project is "General Merchandise Sales "35", subject to: Sec. 3.5.9.2.A." Revise general note #3. 7. DS 2-01.3.7.A.6.b Add a note stating that this project has been designed to meet the overlay zone criteria for the following: Sec. 2.8.3, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone and Sec. 2.8.4, Gateway Corridor Zone. 8. DS 2-01.3.7.A.8 Case number D09-0009 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. 9. DS 2-01.3.7.A.9 In the site information note #4B revise the proposed heights to actually what is being proposed. Canopy - 19'-0", Store 18'-4". 10. DS 2-01.3.9.H.2 Show future sight visibility triangles. On a designated MS&R street (Kolb Rd.), the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section. Clearly indicate the location of the future curb along Kolb Rd. 150' right of way has a 12' sidewalk area (back of future curb). The proposed monument sign along Kolb Rd. does not appear to meet the required set back from back of future curb (20'). Contact Heather Thrall, with the sign department, for additional information regarding signs. Clarify the type of sign used, on the site plan a K-005H8 is indicated, on the colored elevation plans a K-005H10 is indicated. Revise. 11. DS 2-01.3.9.H.5 parking area access lanes (PAALs), they shall be designed in accordance with Sec. 3.3.0 of the LUC and Development Standard 3-05.0. Provide the widths of the PAALs south of the canopy and at both street entrances. 12. DS 2-01.3.9.H.5.a The indicated parking calculations are incorrect. Parking is to per LUC Sec. 3.3.4 for general merchandise sales, the rate of 1 parking space per 200 sq. ft. of GFA is required. Revise calculations general note #5A. In front of the trash enclosure there appears to be a parking space indicated. A parking space is not allowed to block access to a trash enclosure, relocate this parking space. If it is not a parking space indicated then the number of parking spaces in front of the building is 17 not 18 as indicated. 13. DS 2-01.3.9.H.5.c FYI: the loading zone required is a 12 x 35, the plan indicates a 12 x 55. 14. DS 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Development Standard 2-09.0. Provide, as a note, calculations for Class I and Class II bicycle spaces required and provided. Per LUC Sec 3.3.4 bicycle parking is required at the rate of 8% of the provided vehicle parking spaces, revise calculation #6A. This project can use all class two bicycle parking spaces because of having less than 50 vehicle parking spaces. Please provide a dimensioned detail for class 2 bicycle parking spaces and type of rack. Be aware that that development standard 2-09 has been revised. Once provided and reviewed further comments may result. The revised standards can be found at the DSD web site: http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Codes___Ordinances/DevStd209.pdf Please provide a plan view detail of the proposed class 2 bicycle parking spaces. Single rack spaces placed in a row will allow a minimum of seventy -two (72) inch length per bicycle parking space and a minimum of thirty (30) inches between outer spaces of racks. A five (5) foot wide access aisle measured from the front or rear of the seventy-two (72) inch long parking space will be provided beside each row. Lighting will be provided such that all facilities are thoroughly illuminated and visible from adjacent sidewalks, parking lots, or buildings, during working hours. 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(s) and will be along the front side of the building as well as along other sides of the building that has an entrance. 15. DS 2-01.3.9.O. All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown. The indicated setbacks in the site information note #2D and #2B is incorrect. Along Kolb Rd. the required setback is 21' or the height of the building wall from back of future curb. Along Calle La Paz the required setback is 21' of the height of the building wall from the edge of the nearest travel lane. Revise calculations and site plan. 16. DS 2-01.3.9. Q. Provide the square footage and the height of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building(s). 17. DS 2-01.3.9. R. Show on-site pedestrian circulation as required by the LUC utilizing location and the design criteria in Development Standard 2-08.0. Per DS 2-08.3.1 a pedestrian circulation path is required to connect all public access areas of the development and the pedestrian circulation path located in any adjacent streets. Provide a pedestrian circulation path connecting from the building to the sidewalk located along Kolb Rd. 18. Additional comments may be forth coming depending on changes made to this 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\D09-0009dp.doc Grading notes for permits plus. With DEVELOPMENT PLAN 04/10/2009 Development Services Department Zoning Review Section Terry Stevens Lead Planner Comments: 1. 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. 2. Zoning could not verify that the grading plan was in compliance with the approved development plan. Please submit two copies of the approved and stamped development, landscape, and NPPO plans with the next grading plan submittal. 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. |
| 04/14/2009 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | DEVELOPMENT PLAN/LANDSCAPE REVIEW 1) As a general note state on the Development Plan stating that the project is designed to meet the Gateway Corridor Zone criteria. DS 2-01.3.7.A.6.b 2) Provide revised calculations and plantings for the street landscape borders based on DS 2-06.3.4.C.2. which states "In situations where the street landscape border is wider than the minimum ten (10) foot requirement, the landscape border width needs to be determined for the purposes of calculating the fifty (50) percent vegetative coverage requirement, Sec. 3.7.2.4 of the LUC. The width is that area between the required screen and the property line. 3) Vegetation or structures higher than thirty (30) inches must be located outside of the sight visibility triangle (svt). Revise the plans to locate plantings which grow taller than thirty inches, such as Texas ranger, behind the svt's. 4) Clarify the proposed screening along Calle de la Paz. North of the driveway a vegetative screen is called out, but a wall is provided. South of the driveway a vegetative screen is called out, but not provided. DS 2-07.2.2.A.3 5) The water harvesting plan proposes to deliver run-off to WH3, but many of the plants along Kolb Road appear to be located in S-3. 6) The copy of the plans we received did not include a legible irrigation equipment schedule, as the plans were too light to read. Please verify that the upcoming submittal is legible. 7) If a new development is using an existing screen on an adjacent property to meet screening requirements, a copy of the recorded covenant locating the existing screen(s) on adjacent property is required. DS 2-03.2.1.A.15 8) Per condition of rezoning many of the proposed walls are required to be graffiti resistant. Clarify how this is to be accomplished and identify where appropriate materials and finishes will be employed. C9-06-24 9) Consider the landscaping as it relates to the proposed sign. The materials accompanying the application state that sign details will be submitted as a separate review and permit. The conditions of rezoning require integration of free-standing signs into the landscape plan. Modify plantings if necessary to resolve potential conflicts. C9-06-24 10) The interior landscape border along the east property line should have one tree for every thirty-three feet. Revise the landscape plan to provide the calculations and the requirements for this east landscape border. LUC Table 3.7.2.4-I 11) The water use values used in the Water Harvesting Plan are not consistent with the ADWR Plant List. Please refer to http://www.azwater.gov/dwr/Content/Find_by_Program/Drought_and_Conservation/LowWaterPlantLists/TucsonAMA/2007_Plant_List_apha_botanical.pdf for the appropriate values. 12) Consider including the ETM-RG by reference with the controller detail on C.7.2. GRADING PLAN Revise the Grading Plan to coordinate with any changes made to the Development, Landscape, and Water Harvesting Plans. |
| 04/15/2009 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#209414 April 14, 2009 Grenier Engineering, Inc. Attn: Kent A Delph P.E. 5517 E 5th St. Tucson, AZ 85711 To Kent Delph : SUBJECT: QuickTrip – 1493 Kolb Site D09-0009 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted April 1, 2009 It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. Enclosed is a copy of a TEP facilities map showing the approximate location of the existing facilities. The customer is responsible for the new trenching to relocate them as well as the relocation cost. In order to apply for electric service, call the New Construction Department at (520) 918-8300. Submit a final set of plans including approved site, offsite and electrical load plans. Include a CD with the AutoCAD version of the plans. If easements are required, they will be secured by separate instrument. Your final plans should be sent to: Tucson Electric Power Company Attn: Rich Harrington New Business Project Manager P. O. Box 711 (DB-101) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-918-8726 Please call the area Designer Nancy DiMaria at (520) 918-8267, should you have any questions. Sincerely, Henrietta Noriega Office Specialist Design/Build hn Enclosures cc: City of Tucson (Email only) N. DiMaria Tucson Electric Power |
| 04/15/2009 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Returned the Drainage Statement copy to Mike Wooton (QuickTrip) to have him address it with his Engineer. The Drainage Statement submitted was only 3 sheets and did not address any of the requirements witih DS Sec.10-02 for how a Drainage Statement or Report format is supposed to be submitted. Gave Mike till Friday to return a full Drainage Report with all aspects of the design to DSD Engineering for reivew. If the report does not come in by Friday this project will be denied based on not having enough information to do a full review. JG |
| 04/15/2009 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Talked with civil engineer, Grenier Engineering, and they advised that they will need till Monday to get me a report. I expressed my concerned about have only 2 days to review a DP package, but told them that if they got me the report by Monday I would except it and do the 1st engineering review. Project is due out 4-15. Mr. Delph also said that he would contact Patricia Gehlen to see if he can get the due date pushed back a few days. If the report is not in on Monday then it will be denied and will be reviewed for engineering comments on the 2nd submittal. JG |
| 04/15/2009 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Grenier Engineering dropped off the drainage report this afternoon. Will start review tomorrow, 4/14/09. Due 4/15/09. JG |
| 04/15/2009 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: April 15, 2009 SUBJECT: QuikTrip #1493 Development Plan Core Review- Engineering Review TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: 1925 N Kolb Road, T145S R15E Sec06 Ward 2 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: D09-0009 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package, Drainage Report (Grenier Engineering, Inc., 13APR09), Geotechnical Evaluation (ConformaTech, 17MAR08) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Grenier Engineering, Inc., 18MAR09). 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. However the proposed basin behind the store used for the retention requirements is too far away from the vehicular use area to consider other means of access besides a ramp. 2) 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 documents. Specifically the storm grate, 18-inch RCP storm drain pipe, curb openings, wall openings and/or spacing to allow stormwater into the basin, scuppers, etc. 3) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.6.C: Revise the Drainage Report to provide for all requirements for the basin maintenance section from the referenced Development Standard. 4) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.M.2: Revise the Drainage Report and post hydrology map to show that the area underneath the gas canopy is not hydraulically connected to the proposed storm drain system within the vehicular use area causing contaminants to enter the public storm drain system. 5) DS Sec.10-02.10.9.1.8: Revise the Drainage Report to provide the required clean out and/or manholes for all storm drain junctions. Provide the pipe diameter and the invert and rim elevations of all clean outs in plan view for grading purposes. 6) DS Sec.10-02.10.3.4: Revise the Drainage Report to show that the portion of the proposed storm drain system that extends into the public right-of-way is constructed out of reinforced concrete with the minimum diameter of 18-inches. Provide revised calculation sheets for all pipe sizing and type. DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 7) 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. 8) 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. 9) 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. 10) DS Sec.2-01.3.3: The correct Development Plan Number (D09-0009) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets. 11) DS Sec.2-01.3.7.A.6.b: Provide a General Note on the development plan document for the overlay zones associated with this project. Specifically "LUC Sec.2.8.3, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone" and "LUC Sec.2.8.4 Gateway Corridor Zone." 12) 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 (Monte Catalina Estates; Book 22, Page 021). 13) DS Sec.2-01.3.7.C.1: Provide a General Note on the development plan document; "All new public roads within and adjacent to this project will be constructed in accordance with approved plans. Construction plans will be submitted to the City Engineering's Office for review and approval." 14) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.C: Revise the development plan documents to label the shown right-of-way as either "existing and/or future." 15) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.F: Revise the development plan documents to provide the Improvement Plan number for all existing drainage improvements. 16) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.G.5: Revise the development plan documents to provide the dimensions for all proposed parking area access lanes (PAALs). Verify that all areas, PAALs and driveway entrances, meet the minimum widths required per DS Sec.3-05. 17) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.1: Revise the development plan documents and detail 21 to verify that they meet the minimum requirements for Standard Public Improvement details. All Handicap Ramps within the right-of-way must meet or exceed the requirements of Standard Detail # 207. 18) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.2: Revise the development plan documents to correctly label the near side dimensions for the future sight visibility triangles for the access road off of Kolb Road. Label and dimension the future sidewalk and curb area for the MS&R right-of-way, 12-feet measured from the right-of-way line. 19) 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. 20) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.5.a: Clarify that the details for the proposed onsite curbing meet the minimum requirements of Standard Details for Public Improvements #209 for both vertical and/or wedge curbing. All proposed curbing must at a minimum meet or exceed the minimum requirements for Standard Details for Public Improvements. 21) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.J: Revise the development plan document to correctly label and dimension the MS&R future sidewalk area, sight visibility triangles, curbing, etc for Kolb Road. The required dimensions for the future curb and sidewalk location must be labeled. The future sidewalk and curb dimension for a MS&R right-of-way width of 150-feet is 12-feet, measured from the future right-of-way line back to the street, revise. 22) 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. 23) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.2: Revise the development plan documents to show that the area underneath the gas canopy is not hydraulically connected to the public storm drain system causing contaminants to enter through the proposed culvert. 24) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.2: Revise the development plan documents and Drainage Report to show conformance with the Geotechnical Report. Specifically for the retention basin and the required trench drain (page 13). 25) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.2: Revise the development plan documents and details to provide the water surface elevations within all retention basins. Verify that all dimensions are shown for the construction of the basins, i.e. length, width, depth, side slopes, etc. 26) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.2: Revise the Drainage Report, development plan documents and details to provide all construction details for all hydraulic structures. Provide the D50 size, thickness, filter fabric specifications, method of placement, trench drain, etc. 27) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.2: Revise the development plan documents and details to provide specific details for the proposed catch basin within the northeast basin. Provide at a minimum a 6-inch invert from basin bottom to top of grate to allow settling out of sediment and contaminants prior to entering the public storm drain system. 28) DS Sec.10-02.10.9.1.8: Revise the development plan documents to provide the required clean out and/or manholes for all storm drain junctions. Provide the pipe diameter and the invert and rim elevations of all clean outs in plan view for grading purposes. 29) DS Sec.10-02.10.3.4: Revise the development plan documents to show that the portion of the proposed storm drain system that extends into the public right-of-way is constructed out of reinforced concrete with the minimum diameter of 18-inches. A right-of-way use permit will be required for any construction or improvements within the public right-of-way. 30) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Provide the Improvement Plan number for all existing drainage infrastructure (storm drains and catch basins) within the Public Right-of-Way. 31) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Revise the development plan documents to provide a manhole at the junction of the 18-inch storm drain and the existing drainage infrastructure within the public right-of-way. Provide a detail reference for this improvement for construction purposes. Per DS Sec.10-02.10.9.1.8 "Manholes shall be located at such places as junctions, changes in pipe size, curves and angle points in excess of 10 degrees and points where an abrupt change in grade occurs." Verify that the design conforms to the requirements within this section. 32) 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. 33) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.Q: Revise the development plan documents to include a pedestrian access point to all street frontages (Kolb Road). Per DS Sec.2-08.3.1 this path must connect all public access areas of the development and the pedestrian circulation path located along the adjacent roads. 34) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.R: Revise the development plan documents to show the required 6-foot wide sidewalk with curb along the street frontage of Kolb Road. Per the adopted Mayor and Counsel policy all sidewalks along MS&R right-of-ways for arterial and collector streets require 6-foot wide sidewalks. 35) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.R: Revise the development plan documents to show the required 5-foot wide sidewalk with curb along the street frontage of Calle La Paz. All new development requires a minimum 5-foot sidewalk, revise. 36) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.S: Provide on the development plan documents a detail for the proposed refuse container that meets the minimum requirements within DS Sec.6-01. Refer to Figure 3 and DS Sec.6-01.4.2 for specifications and requirements on access, placement of containers, bin enclosure (approach pad) and construction. Refer to Environmental Services for further clarity on refuse requirements. 37) DS Sec.11-01.9: Revise the development plan documents and associated details to provide the word "minimum 2 foot" setback from all property boundaries to the proposed limits of grading, water harvesting basins, fill slopes, block wall and any associated erosion protection. 38) 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. 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: 39) Per City of Tucson Code Ordinance 10209, Chapter 26 Section 26-42.2: "For land disturbing activities that fall under the jurisdiction of this Article, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan must be prepared and certified by an engineer, or a landscape architect and submitted along with the application for a grading permit to the City of Tucson Development Services Department." The SWPPP exhibits included within the development plan documents must be signed and sealed by the engineer of record. 40) Part III.C.2.c: Clarify the total acres of the site and the number of acres that will be disturbed (include off-site borrow and fill areas, staging and equipment storage areas). The SWPPP report conflicts with note #1 on the exhibit. 41) Part III.C.2.d: Indicate the percentage of the site that is impervious before and after construction. 42) Part III.C.3.a: Use arrows to show the directions(s) where stormwater will flow for all areas within the project limits (This is for the period during construction, not final contours. Flow direction may change as project grading progresses; when this occurs, maps are to be updated.). 43) Part III.C.3.b: Show areas of soil disturbance and areas that will not be disturbed. 44) 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. 45) Part IV.C.3: Provide sizing criteria and show calculations for sediment basin(s) and indicate whether basin(s) will be temporary or permanent (i.e., post-construction). 46) Part IV.C.3: Provide reason(s) or rational why a sediment basin was determined to not be possible at the project site (if applicable). GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised Development Plan Package, Drainage Report, and SWPPP 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, and SWPPP. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 04/16/2009 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | >>> Jim Stoyanoff 04/15/2009 2:50 PM >>> No comment. |
| 04/17/2009 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 04/17/2009 | ROBERT YOUNG | PIMA COUNTY | PIMA CTY - DEV REVIEW | Passed | |
| 04/21/2009 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Approved | |
| 04/22/2009 | ANDY VERA | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Convenience store will generate both refuse and recycle waste streams and will require a minimum of two single enclosures or one double wide enclosure to demonstrate adequate means for solid waste disposal. 2. Require a minimum 14 ft x 40 ft minimum clear approach in front of enclosure. DS 6-01.4.1.C. This area must not conflict with other service/staging areas such as loading zones or fuel trucks. 3. Provide a detail drawing of solid waste enclosure/s within DP. Refer to DS 6-01.4.0. Insure that the enclosure is equipped with gates that can be secured open and closed; there is a minimum inside clear container service area of 10 ft x 10 ft between the rear and side wall protectors and the front gates; and the gates are mounted to a separate gate post at the face of the enclosure and NOT to the CMU wall. Please provide corrections on resubmittal. If you have any questions you may contact Andy Vera at (520) 791-5543 ext 1212 or e-mail: Andy.Vera@tucsonaz.gov |
| 04/23/2009 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | Comments to post shortly |
| 04/23/2009 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES April 23, 2009 Kent A Delph Grenier Engineering, Inc. 5517 East 5th Street Tucson, Arizona 85711 Subject: D09-0009 Quiktrip 1493 Kolb Site Development Plan Dear Kent: Your submittal of March 19, 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 9 sets of the DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 9 Copies Revised Development Package (ADA, DUPD, Wastewater, Zoning, Landscape, Engineering, ESD, Addressing, DSD) 2 Copies Color, dimensioned elevations (DUPD, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) PLEASE NOTE THAT ADDRESSING HAS NOT YET POSTED COMMENTS. PLEASE DO NOT RESUBMIT PRIOR TO ADDRESSING POSTING COMMENTS. SHOULD THEY POST AN APPROVAL, ONE LESS SET OF THE DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE WILL BE REQUIRED UPON RESUBMITTAL. 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: 326-7508 |
| 04/23/2009 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 JENNIFER STEPHENS ADDRESSING OFFICIAL PH: 740-6480 FAX #: 740-6370 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: JENNIFER STEPHENS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL SUBJECT: D09-0009 QUIKTRIP-1493 KOLB SITE/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: 4/27/09 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and the following matters must be resolved prior to our approval: Delete address 1925 N. Kolb Road on all locations. Delete all street directions on Vicinity Map. Include Title Blocks on pgs. 1 and 2. Delete adjacent taxcodes. |
| 06/24/2009 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Completed | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING AND DESIGN COMMENTS Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT D09-0009 Quicktrip () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment () Other - CROSS REFERENCE: C9-06-24 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: General Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: N/A COMMENTS DUE BY: April 15, 2009 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: ( ) No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment ( ) Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions ( ) RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies (ü) See Additional Comments Attached ( ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: (ü) Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat (X) Development Plan (X) Landscape Plan ( X ) Other - Color Elevations & Sign Detail REVIEWER: drcorral 791-4505 DATE: March 31, 2009 1. Please renumber the rezoning conditions to jibe with original listing i.e., under Land Use Compatibility, the consecutive number should be 8, not 1, etc., under the General Notes Section. 2. Elevations were not provided with submittal. Please provide color dimensioned elevations and illustrate that all sides of buildings and canopy have similar architectural treatment which staff must verify. (Rezoning condition no. 8) 3. Parking area immediately in front of Quicktrip store entrance does not provide one canopy tree for each motor vehicle parking spaces. Please add a canopy tree. (per Rezoning condition no. 16). 4. Please provide sign details illustrating how signs will be integrated into the overall landscape. Details or signs are to be submitted as part of the development plan. (per Rezoning condition no. 14). |