Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Permit Number - D09-0039
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - CDRC - DEV PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/17/2010 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 02/23/2010 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/23/2010 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: February 23, 2009 SUBJECT: Taco Bell Development Plan Package- 2nd Engineering Review TO: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager LOCATION: 1720 W Speedway Blvd, T14S R13E Sec03, Ward 1 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: D09-0039 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning Development Services Department has received the revised development plan package, Hydrologic/Hydraulic Report (Stanley Engineering & Drainage, Inc., 04DEC09 revised 16FEB10) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Stanley Engineering & Drainage, Inc., 03DEC09 revised 16FEB10). Engineering Division has reviewed the submitted development plan and Hydrologic/Hydraulic Report and does not recommend approval of the development plan package at this time. This review falls under the policy for Development Plan Core Review, Development Standard 2-01. All comments reflect Development Plan, Grading Plan and SWPPP review. The following items still need to be addressed: HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULIC REPORT: 1) Acknowledged. DEVELOPMENT PLAN PACKAGE: 2) Restated: DS Sec.2-01: Revise the development plan documents to clarify the Sheet Index and sheet count. Per the Index there are 15 sheets proposed within the plan set however the plan set only goes to Sheet 14 of 15, clarify. 3) Restated: 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 on all sheets that shall be reserved for the CDRC approval stamp. Sheets 3, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 of 15 do not include this 3-inch by 5-inch space for the required approval stamp. 4) Complied. 5) Complied. 6) Complied. 7) Complied. 8) Complied. 9) Restated: 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 Specifically Keynote #39 on Sheet SP1 references Sheet SD3 however the easement is not shown. Clarify the location in plan view for the 1-foot No Access Easement as referenced in Keynote #5 on Sheet SD3. 10) Complied. 11) Complied. 12) Restated: DS Sec.2-01.3.9.H.2: Revise the development plan documents to correctly label the far side dimension for the sight visibility triangles that are drawn. Pedestrian sight visibility triangles are dimensioned at 20-foot stem by 30-foot leg (plan view shows 20'x23'), revise. 13) Acknowledged. 14) Acknowledged. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN: 15) Acknowledged. Will be required at the preconstruction meeting. 16) Acknowledged. Will be required at the preconstruction meeting. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised development plan package 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 resubmittal of the development plan package review. For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Planning and Development Services |
| 02/23/2010 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Taco Bell Development Package (2nd Review) D09-0039 TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 23, 2010 DUE DATE: March 03, 2010 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 December14, 2010. 2. Due to changes required by Pima County Addressing please remove the administrative address from the title block. Provide the administrative address adjacent to the title block. D.S. 2-01.3.2.D Provide the administrative street address within the title block. 3. This comment was not addressed correctly. The sheet numbers show X of 15 but only 14 sheets were submitted. SD.S. 2-01.3.2.E Provide page number and number of pages within the title block 4. Zoning acknowledges that a subdivision plat is in progress. This plat will need to be approved prior to approval of the development package. The new subdivision case number will need to be listed on all sheets of this development package. D.S. 2-01.3.8.A Clarify what the heavy dashed line, with dimensions and bears, is. 5. Sheet SD3 Keynote 5 and legend 5 talk about a "1 FT. WIDE NO VEHICULAR ACCESS EASEMENT" please clarify the location of the no vehicular access easement. D.S. 2-01.3.8.B All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. 6. Zoning acknowledges that there are now 28 vehicle parking spaces shown on sheet SP 1. As three (3) of these spaces are located on a proposed adjacent parcel provide a copy of a recorded cross access and parking agreement. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.a The vehicle parking space calculation show 28 spaces required and 28 spaces provided but there area only 27 provided on the plan. A Board of Adjustment for Variance is required. 7. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.a Sheet SP2 "SITE AREA + PARKING DATA" "PARKING CALCULAITON #1" based on a total building square footage of 114,592/200 the required parking should be 573 not 578. 8. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.a Sheet SP2 "SITE AREA + PARKING DATA" "TUCSON FEDRAL CREDIT UNION" parking calculation is not correct. Per Development Plan D08-0028 and LUC Section 3.3.4 the required parking for a Financial Service is One (1) space per one hundred seventy-five (175) sq. ft. GFA. That said Development Plan D08-0028 shows "6,000 SF/175 = 34 required , 44 Provided. 9. 10. Zoning acknowledges that curbing has been added. The area between the curbing is still required to be a sidewalk. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R The striped area between the western vehicle parking spaces is required to be a sidewalk, physically separated from the parking spaces. 11. 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/ D09-0039 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: Taco Bell Grading Plan (2nd Review) T09BU01825 TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 23, 2010 DUE DATE: March 3, 2010 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 |
| 02/26/2010 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/01/2010 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approved | To: AL CAPPELLO LOOKER & CAPPELLO ARCHITECTS 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 Wastewater Management and Environment Quality Subject: TACO BELL @ ALBERTSON'S (EL RIO PLAZA) Dev. Plan – 2nd Submittal D09-039 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 Pima County Department of Environmental Quality and Wastewater Management Department hereby approve the above referenced submittal of the development plan as submitted. Please note the following: Approval of the above referenced submittal does not authorize the construction of public or private sewer collection lines, or water distribution lines. Prior to the construction of such features, a Construction Authorization (Approval To Construct) may need to be obtained from the Pima County Environmental Quality. Also, air quality activity permits must be secured by the developer or prime contractor from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality before constructing, operating or engaging in an activity which may cause or contribute to air pollution. |
| 03/02/2010 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES March 2, 2010 Al Capello & Michele Sawko Looker & Capello Architects, Inc. 2070 E. Southern Avenue Tempe, Arizona 85282 Subject: D09-0039 Taco Bell @ Albertsons El Rio Plaza Development Package Dear Al & Michele: Your submittal of December 14, 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 a set of 3 DETAILED cover letters explaining how each outstanding requirement has been addressed: ALL BLACKLINES MUST BE FOLDED 3 Copies Revised Development Package (Zoning, Engineering, PDSD) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4917. 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: (480) 968-6571 |