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 - D09-0031
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/02/2009 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 09/02/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | NOT A COT OWNED/OPERATED PROPERTY |
| 09/03/2009 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Provide a copy of the TIA that addresses potential off-site improvements to the median on Grant Road. |
| 09/04/2009 | DAVID MANN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | Show fire hydrant locations. May need sprinklers if greater than 300 feet.Please indicate existing fire hydrant location(s) with dimensions to property lines. Refer to C.O.T. amendments to the 2006 IFC, section 503 for location and spacing requirements. New hydrants may be required. Indicate if fire sprinklers are intended. Be advised separate permits are needed for underground fuel tanks, fire sprinklers, fire alarms, if installed. |
| 09/08/2009 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Reference Floor Plan Sheet 4, Floor Plan sheet 5, Detail 1/9 and Detail 1/11: As per 2006 IBC, ICC (ANSI) 117.1, Section 406.7, a 3' deep clear length landing must be provided at the top of the ramp; as per detail 1/9, 4'-0" minimum to the face iof the column does not work; as per detail 1/11, 4'-6" to the column face does not work; and as per the floor plan sheet 4, 10'-0' works and floor plan sheet 5, 12'-0" works. Please calculate a final and accurate dimension that works for all 4 details and provide one dimension. 2. Detectable warnings are not required at the end of the curb ramp at the parking aisle as long as the aisle is not part of a marked crossing. END OF REVIEW |
| 09/15/2009 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Quick Trip Store 1492 Development Package (1st Review) D09-0031 TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 15, 2009 DUE DATE: September 17, 2009 DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 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 September 01, 2010 2. This project was review for full code compliance of the City of Tucson Land Use Code, Development Standard 2-01.0 and Development Package Submittal Requirements Draft dated 12-20-07. 3. D.S. 2-01.3.2.D Provide an administrative street address on the plan. 4. D.S. 2-01.3.3 Provide the following case number adjacent to the title block on each sheet: D09-0031. 5. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.4 General Note 3 remove the "SUBJECT TO SEC. 3.5.9.2.A" from the proposed use as it is not applicable in the I-1 Zone. 6. D.S. 2-01.3.8.B The easements shown on the plan as to be abandoned will need to be abandoned prior to approval of this development package. 7. D.S. 2-01.3.9.b Sheet 2 of 27, "LAND USE REQUIRMENTS - CITY OF TUCSON, the "ALLOWED/REQUIRED" Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is not correct. Per LUC Section 2.7.2.2.G.3 General Merchandise Sales "34" in the I-1 zone, and LUC Section 3.2.3.2.B the allowed FAR is 2.00. Also revise the Development Designator to "34". 8. D.S. 2-01.3.9.E There appears that some type of lot split/lot line realignment is proposed, this will require a subdivision plat and will need to be approved prior to approval of the development package. 9. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d It does not appear that the proposed Class 2 bicycle parking meets the requirements of D.S. 2-09.4.1. Provide a dimension from the proposed Class 2 bicycle parking to the main entrance of the proposed building. If the location of the Class 2 bicycle parking does not meet the requirements of D.S. 2-09.4.1 and you propose to leave the bicycle parking as shown on the plan a Development Standard Modification Request (DSMR) is required. If the DSMR is approved provide on the plan the DSMR case number, date of approval, what was approved and any conditions of approval. 10. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d The provided bicycle parking space calculation is not correct. Based on 30 vehicle parking spaces provided x 8% the required number of Class 2 bicycle parking is two (2). Revise the bicycle parking calculation to reflect the correct number of required bicycle parking spaces. 11. D.S. 2-05.3.9.R Provide a dimension from the open main front door to the handicapped ramp to verify that the minimum 4'-0" sidewalk has been maintained. 12. D.S. 2-05.3.9.R Provide a copy of the site plan for the parcel located directly south of this project so that Zoning can verify that the required pedestrian circulation/accessible route is provided from the proposed hotel project. 13. If applicable ensure all changes are made to the grading and landscape plans. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.com Sshield1 on DS1/planning/New Development Package/ D09-0031 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package. CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Quick Trip Store 1492 Grading Plan (1st Review) T09BU01312 TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 15, 2009 DUE DATE: September 17, 2009 GRADING PLAN COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 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 cannot approve the grading plan until the development package has been approved. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.com RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package and additional requested documents. |
| 09/16/2009 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: September 16, 2009 SUBJECT: QuikTrip #1492 Development Plan Core Review- Engineering Review TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: 1421 N Grant Road, T145S R13E Sec03 Ward 1 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: D09-0031 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package, Drainage Report No. 1 (DOWL Engineers, 02SEP09), Geotechnical Evaluation (Kleinfelder, 01SEP09) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (DOWL Engineers, 02SEP09). 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) Due to the required shared drainage scheme and easements proposed in the meeting held with the applicants for QuikTrip and Value Place Hotel not all comments have been reflected in this letter. A revised all inclusive Drainage Report is required that addresses both sites and all onsite and offsite flow that effect both the QuikTrip and Value Place Hotel. 2) DS Sec10-02.2.3.1.5: Provide a revised Drainage Report that is all inclusive of both sites, QuikTrip and Value Place Hotel. Since the Value Place Hotel is utilizing the detention/retention basin, storm drains, curb cuts, and vehicular use areas for their proposed drainage scheme the Drainage Report must show that all aspects of drainage meets the minimum requirements within DS Sec.10-02. 3) DS Sec.10-02: Verify that the elevation shown on the proposed development plan document matches the elevation in the proposed Drainage Report. Specifically the datum referenced used in the report calls out NGVD 1929 vertical datum and the plan set calls out NAVD 1988 vertical datum. Verify that all elevations match and/or include a conversion factor in the report for the difference in NGVD29 and NAVD88 datum. 4) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.2.E: Revise Section 1.4 of the Drainage Report to provide a discussion on the long term maintenance and use for the shared detention/retention basin and storm drain pipes. The basin and storm drains will require a separate easement for maintenance and construction for all portions that cross property boundaries. 5) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.6.B.1: Provide and describe Reservoir-Routing Calculation sheets for the basin for the 2-, 10- and 100-year design floods. 6) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.6.B.2: Provide and describe the stage-storage and stage-discharge relationships with any Hydraulic Calculation Sheets prepared during the evaluation. 7) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.6.B.3: Submit plotted inflow and outflow hydrographs. 8) 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. DEVELOPMENT PLAN: 9) Due to the meeting held with the applicants for both QuikTrip and Value Place Hotel this comment letter does not reflect all of the comments or quality control comments that must be addressed prior to resubmittal of the site plan. Make sure that all dimensions, details, sections, keynotes, proposed improvements and all other aspects of this project meet the minimum requirements within DS Sec.2-01, 3-01, 3-05, 10-01 and 10-02 and are reflected on the development plan sheets. 10) DS Sec.2-01.3.3: The correct Development Plan number (D09-0031) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets where indicated by "D######." Currently the project does not have an associated DSMR case number, remove the reference on all sheets. Or if a DSMR is being requested provided the assigned case number for reference. 11) 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. Per the meeting that was held with the applicants a Final Plat process will be submitted to revise property boundaries, abandon existing easements and add any required easements for access, drainage, and utilities. 12) 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. Clarify all easements shown as "Private or Public." 13) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.C: Revise the development plan documents to provide the recordation information (Book and Page) for Grant Road where referenced as "BK___ PG__" on all applicable sheets. 14) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.C: Clarify the right-of-way that is shown on Sheet 4. Verify that both existing and future MS&R right-of-way are shown on the plan sheets. Currently the document shows a 30-foot ½-right-of-way as existing and future, however per the MS&R Map the future right-of-way for Grant Road is 120 feet (60-foot ½-right-of-way). Clarify center line of the road and/or where the ½-right-of-way is measured from. 15) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.E: Verify that all elevations proposed on the development plan documents match the elevation proposed within the Drainage Report. The Drainage Report references NGVD 1929 datum while the plan set references NAVD 1988 datum, clarify. 16) DS Sec.2-01.3.8.F: Revise the development plan documents to label all existing storm drainage facilities adjacent to the site. Provide a label for the existing catch basins and storm drainage improvements within the right-of-way of Grant Road and the existing 36 inch RCP within the bank protection of the Santa Cruz River. Provide the Improvement Plan number for all existing drainage improvements. 17) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.G: Provide a notarized letter of approval from the adjacent property owner along with the required temporary construction easements for all proposed offsite improvements. Specifically the proposed drainage infrastructure that is being constructed on the adjacent property (both within the right-of-way and adjacent to the Santa Cruz River). A notarized approval letter from all property owners is required along with a construction and maintenance easement that must be recorded prior to Development Plan Package approval. 18) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H: Refer to comments from Jose Ortiz, PE City of Tucson Transportation and Engineering for all comments associated with the improvements along Grant Road within the public right-of-way. 19) 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. 20) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.I: If dedication or pedestrian improvements are not required through TDOT at this time label and dimension the correct MS&R right-of-way lines, future sidewalk and curb, sight visibility triangles, etc for Grant Road. 21) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.K: Revise the development plan documents to dimension and label all proposed easements (utility, drainage, access, etc.) and whether the will be public or private. 22) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N: Per 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. 23) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.3: Per DS Sec.10-02.10.9.1.8 revise the development plan documents to provide the required clean out 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. 24) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.N.5: Per DS Sec.10-02.10.3.4 revise the development plan document 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. 25) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.L: Revise the development plan documents and all proposed easements to label them as either "public or private." All proposed easements must have recordation information provided either as docket and page or book and page. 26) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.R: Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all handicap accessibility comments that are associated with this project, if applicable. 27) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.T: Revise the development plan documents to show the required 6-foot wide sidewalk with curb along the street frontage of Grant 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. If sidewalks already exist along the frontage of both streets provide photo documentation showing that the existing sidewalk is in good condition. If the sidewalk is missing in spots or is cracked and buckled a new 6-foot sidewalk will be required. A DSMR will be required for modifying the development standards to allow the existing sidewalk, if less than the minimum 6-foot required, to remain. The DSMR must be approved prior to development plan approval. All exhibits and discussion must reflect any changes made by the approved DSMR. Provide a General Note to list the DSMR number, the Development Standard being modified along with the date of DSMR approval. 28) DS Sec.2-01.3.9.W: Revise the location of the proposed sign adjacent to the western most entry point so that it is not in conflict with the existing and/or future sight visibility triangles. Or provide verification that the sign meets the minimum 30-inch height requirement to prevent unobstructed view. 29) DS Sec.11-01.9: Revise the development plan documents and associated details to verify the required minimum 2-foot setback from all property boundaries to the proposed limits of grading, basins, fill slopes, block wall and any associated erosion protection. 30) Prior approval from TDOT Permits and Codes will be required for all improvements within the public right-of-way, specifically the portion of the water harvesting basin and outlet weir that extends into the Grant Road right-of-way. 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: 31) 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. 32) 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. 33) Provide 3 copies of the revised SWPPP at resubmittal (1 for CDRC records, 1 for the Engineering Inspector and 1 for the job site) for stamp approval. 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 |
| 09/16/2009 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | PDSD Landscape Section Review of Development Package (including grading plan) J. Linville 09/17/09 1) GENERAL NOTE 55 on sheet 2 refers to an unrelated case and should be removed. 2) DS 2-06.3.8.I Revise the plans to include floodplain information, including the location of the 100-year flood limits for all flows of one hundred (100) cfs or more with 100-year flood water surface elevations. 3) Provide additional plants including trees along the River Park at the east side of the property. The proposed cross section for the Santa Cruz River Park Corridor typically includes a 48 foot wide landscape space between the trail and adjacent development. Design integration with the adjacent River Park is encouraged. 4) Revise the landscape and native plant preservation plans to show the phases represented on the development plan and to indicate that each phase complies with all requirements as a separate entity. Show and label any temporary improvements that may be needed to make the site function for each phase as one entity. DS 2-05.2.4.C 5) A vehicular use area must be provided with post barricades or wheel stop curbing designed to prevent parked vehicles from extending beyond the property lines; damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings and to prevent vehicles from driving onto unimproved portions of the site (including future phases or projects) per DS 3-05.2.3.C. Revise the plans as necessary. 6) Revise the Native Plant Preservation Plan include to any protected native plants in adjacent right-of-way areas that may be affected by construction, if applicable. LUC 3.8 7) Revise the grading plans to correspond with any changes made to the development plans. |
| 09/21/2009 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | September 18, 2009 To: RICHARD CORDOVA DOWL HKM 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: QUIKTRIP STORE NO. 1492 Dev. Plan –1st Submittal D09-031 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. The PCWMD will determine if the downstream public sewer system has the necessary treatment and conveyance capacity to serve this project. Please be aware that this office will not be able to approve the above referenced project until such capacity has been verified. No action on your part is necessary to initiate this determination. Sheet 1: Add a Permitting Note that states: A PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT MUST BE SECURED FROM PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK ON THIS PROJECT. Sheet 8: The section of proposed sewer pipe shown connecting to the proposed public manhole in the R-O-W should be marked as public. Also the proposed manhole just inside the property line should also be marked as public with a 20’ public sewer easement shown around the proposed manhole. Please show the recordation information for this new public sewer easement. 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. |
| 09/22/2009 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | 4350 E. Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714 Post Office Box 711, Tucson, AZ 85702 WR#216382 September 21, 2009 Quiktrip Corporation Attn: Richard Cordova 166 W Alameda Street Tucson, Arizona 85701 Dear Mr. Cordova : SUBJECT: Quiktrip Store 1492 D07-0036 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted September 2, 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. Any relocation costs will be billable to the customer. 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, electrical load, paving off-site improvements and irrigation plans, if available 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: Mr. ricahrd Harrington New Business Project Manager P. O. Box 711 (DB-101) Tucson, AZ 85702 520-917-8726 Should you have any technical questions, please call the area Designer Mike Kaiser at (520) 918-8244. Sincerely, Elizabeth Miranda Office Support Specialist Design/Build lm Enclosures cc: DSD_CDRC@tucsonaz.gov, City of Tucson (email) M. Kaiser, Tucson Electric Power |
| 09/24/2009 | JWILLIA4 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES September 23, 2009 Richard Cordova DOWL HKM 166 West Alameda Street Tucson, Arizona 85701 Subject: D09-0031 Quicktrip Store #1492 Development Package Dear Richard: Your submittal of September 2, 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 8 sets of the DETAILED cover letter explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 8 Copies Revised Development Package (Traffic, Fire, HC Site, Engineering, Zoning, Landscape, Wastewater, DSD) 2 Copies Revised NPPO Plans (Landscape, DSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Traffic Impact Analysis Report (Traffic, DSD) 2 Copies SWPPP Documents (Engineering, DSD) 2 Copies Property to South Last Approved Site Plan (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 |