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 - D11-0018
Review Name: DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/13/2011 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 06/13/2011 | DAVID MANN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 06/20/2011 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | >>> "Monica M. Soto" <MSoto@azdot.gov> 06/17/2011 12:44 PM >>> Regional Traffic Engineering has no comments on this submittal and recommends approval of this development. It will have no impact on any existing ADOT facilities. Thank you. |
| 06/20/2011 | LEERAY HANLY | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | PLANS INDICATE TRUNCATED DOMES BEING PLACED IN HC PARKING ACESS AISLE WHERE IT NARROWS DOWN TO THE STRIPED WALKWAY. THIS DETECTABLE WARNING SHOULD BE AT THE EDGE OF THE CURB RAMP IN FRONT OF THE DOORS. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE DETECTABLE WARNING STRIP NEEDS TO BE THE FULL WIDTH OF THE CURB-RAMP. |
| 06/20/2011 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 06/28/2011 | TIM ROWE | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Denied | PIMA COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT 201 NORTH STONE AVENUE TUCSON, ARIZONA 85701-1207 JACKSON JENKINS PH: (520) 740-6500 DIRECTOR FAX: (520) 620-0135 June 22, 2011 To: Jeff Stanley, P.E. JAS Engineering, INC Thru: Patricia Gehlen, CDRC Manager City of Tucson Development Services Department ____________________________________________ From: Tom Porter, Sr. CEA (520-740-6719), Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department Subject: Dollar General- 12th Ave & Drexel Dev. Plan – 1st submittal D11-0018 The Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department (PCRWRD) has reviewed the proposed sewer collection lines for the above-referenced project. The following comments are offered for your use: Obtain a letter from the PCRWRD’s Development Liaison Unit, written within the past year, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for the project is available in the downstream public sewerage system and provide a copy of that letter to this office. The required form to request such a letter may be found at: http://www.pima.gov/wwm/developer.htm#permits The development plan for this project cannot be approved until a copy of this letter has been received by this office. Sheet 2: Call out the private sewer easement with width and recordation information over the private BCS crossing the property south of site. Sheet 2: Keynotes 53, 54, 56 and 57 do not appear to be applicable. Please remove or clarify. 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 $50.00 (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. cc: Chad Amateau, PE Checked by:_________ Kristin Greene, PE, DLU Manager DLU Project folder |
| 06/28/2011 | JENNIFER STEPHENS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | 201 N. STONE AV., 2ND FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 AUDREY FARENGA ADDRESSING REVIEW PH #: 740-6800 FAX #: 623-5411 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: AUDREY FARENGA, ADDRESSING REVIEW SUBJECT: D11-018 DOLLAR GENERAL – 12TH & DREXEL/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DATE: June 27, 2011 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: Include a brief legal description on all title blocks. Delete all adjacent tax codes and dockets and pages. |
| 06/30/2011 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | SUBJECT: Dollar General D11-0018 Tucson Electric Power Company has reviewed and approved the development plan submitted June 21, 2011. It appears that there are no conflicts with the existing facilities within the boundaries of this proposed development. TEP will require a full set of approved plans. Henrietta Noriega-Office Specialist T.E.P. Design/Build Ph: (520) 917-8709 Fax: (520) 917-8793 Mailstop: DB-103 HNoriega@tep.com |
| 06/30/2011 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Dollar General 5663 S. 12th Avenue Development Package (1st Review) D11-0018 TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 6, 2011 DUE DATE: July 12, 2011 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 June 12, 2012. 2. D.S. 2-01.3.2.D Remove the address from the title block and provide it adjacent to the title block. Zoning acknowledges that D.S. 2-01.3.2.D asks for the address to be within the title block but Pima County Addressing has asked that the address not be put within the title block. 3. D.S. 2-01.3.3 Remove the reference to development plan D10-0025 from the plan and provide the new development package number D11-0018 and the grading plan numberT11BU00791 on the plan. 4. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.4 General Note 2, add development designator "28" and revise the subject to to read "3.5.9.2.C". Also change the "DEVELOPMENT DESIGNATOR" shown under "DEVELOPMENT PLAN NOTES AND CALCULATIONS". 5. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.6.b Revise General Note 26 to include "SEC. 2.8.5, AIRPORT ENVIRONS ZONE (AEZ)". 6. D.S. 2-01.3.7.A.9.b The "ALLOWABLE FAR" shown is not correct it should read 0.35. 7. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H Along the proposed parking area access lane heading south to Drexel Road there is a Keynote 29 that calls out for 24 LF of concrete header. Demonstrate on the plan how the requirements of LUC Section 3.3.6.8.A are met. 8. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H Along the proposed parking area access lane heading south to Drexel Road, on the TEP parcel to the south Keynote 29 that calls out a concrete header. Demonstrate on the plan how the requirements of LUC Section 3.3.6.8.A are met. 9. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H Provide a PAAL width dimension from the proposed loading space south to the extruded curb. 10. D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.5.d Demonstrate on the plan how the requirements of LUC Section 3.3.9.4 are met for the Long-Term bicycle parking. 11. D.S. 2-01.3.9.L Provide the sequence number for the proposed "INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT" shown on the plan. 12. D.S. 2-01.3.9.Q Provide a building height based on Median Sea Level, see LUC Section 2.8.5.11 13. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Provide a sidewalk width dimension from the top of the accessible ramp to the proposed building. 14. D.S. 2-01.3.9.R Per D.S. 2-08. Per D.S. 2-08.4.1.A A sidewalk is required from the proposed building to Drexel Road. 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/ D11-0018 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: Dollar General 5663 S. 12th Avenue Development Package (1st Review) T11BU00791 TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 6, 2011 DUE DATE: June 22, 2011 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 |
| 07/01/2011 | JOSE ORTIZ | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | 1. Revise the following: Driveway on 12th Avenue radius from 18 feet radius to 30 foot radius (based on arterial roadway designation) Driveway on Drexel radius to 25 foot (not called out) Contact Zelin Canchola or Jose Ortiz at 791-4259 with questions. |
| 07/08/2011 | FRODRIG2 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approved | Date Case Number Project Address July 8, 2011 D11-0018 DOLLAR GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Comments: The proposed DOLLAR GENERAL, Development plan, location at 5663 South 12th Avenue, Case No.D11-0018 meets the minimum standard requirements for Environmental Services and is approved. Environmental Services Department Development Plan Review Reviewer: Tony Teran Office Phone (520) 837-3706 E-mail: Tony.Teran @tucsonaz.gov |
| 07/12/2011 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Approved | Approved - no comments. J. Hershenhorn, 7/12/11 |
| 07/12/2011 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 07/12/2011, TO: Patricia Gehlen FROM: Laith Alshami, P.E. CDRC Engineering SUBJECT: Dollar General D11-0018, T15S, R13E, SECTION 01 RECEIVED: Development Plan Package and Drainage Report on June 13, 2011 The subject project has been reviewed. The project can not be approved at this time. Address the following comments before review can continue. Prepare a detailed response that explains the revisions that where made and references the exact location in the plan and in the Drainage Report where the revisions were made: Drainage Report: 1. The offsite watershed map does not have the elevation contour lines. Provide a contoured watershed map with the appropriate scale that shows the offsite watershed area clearly. 2. Provide an onsite watershed plan that shows existing conditions. 3. Provide a post development onsite watershed map that shows the offsite watershed discharge acceptance points and onsite sub watersheds and their discharge points. The onsite watershed map shall also show and label clearly the detention basin and waterharvesting basins with their dimensions and any proposed associated drainage structure such as inlet, outlet, erosion control structures or pads, etc. 4. Detention basins, in a balanced watershed, are required to reduce the onsite discharge for the 2, 10 and 100 year storms. Revise the report to verify compliance with this requirement. 5. The location of the detention basin and the method of discharge from the basin shall not alter the site existing drainage patterns. Verify in the text and on the onsite watershed map, this requirement. 6. Provide the 100-year water depth and water surface elevation in the proposed detention basin. The proposed structure finished floor elevation might need to be determined based on the water depth in the detention basin. 7. Provide a geotechnical report that determines the required building setback from the ponding water in the detention basin. Verify that the building is set back in accordance with the geotechnical report recommendations. 8. The geotechnical report shall also address slope treatment and stabilization requirements if applicable. Additionally, show on the drainage exhibits the proposed slope treatment based on the Soils Report recommendation. 9. Clarify in the text and on the plan how the water enters and exits the detention basin. 10. Provide design calculations for detention basin inlet and outlet, sidewalk scuppers, erosion control structures, and all proposed drainage structures. 11. Check if street drainage around the subject parcel impacts the site. 12. The drainage report shall address erosion control requirements for this project. 13. Address water harvesting requirements in more details and demonstrate how roof and site drainage will be directed to maximize water harvesting. 14. The drainage report shall address roof drainage and sidewalk scuppers. According to D.S. 3-01.4.4.F. 10-year flow has to be completely conveyed under sidewalks when concentrated runoff crosses any sidewalk/walkway. Additionally, show the roof drainage direction on the drainage exhibit and provide sidewalk scuppers for the roof drains. Please be advised that the 10-year flow requirement does not apply to roof drainage. Roof drainage has to be discharged in its entirety to avoid prolonged ponding on the roof that might cause the roof to collapse. Demonstrate compliance with the sidewalk scupper requirement including design calculations. Show roof drainage on the drainage exhibits. 15. According to Section 14.3 of the "Standard Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management In Tucson, Arizona", the proposed detention basin requires maintenance access ramp that shall be wide enough to accommodate vehicular access. The minimum width should be 15' and the ramp slope should not exceed 15 percent. Please be advised that maintenance ramps should be designed in such a way that does not allow inadvertent access to vehicles. Verify that the maintenance ramps will not reduce the required size of the basins. Smaller access ramps or the elimination of the ramp might be considered based on the size of the basin. 16. According to Section 3.3.5 "Low-Flow Channels" of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual the proposed basins floors shall be sloped to provide positive drainage. The section recommends a minimum of 0.5% floor slope and 0.2% low flow concrete channel slope. Please be advised that based on the City's experience with similar projects, 0.5% slope was difficult to construct and maintain which resulted in nuisance ponding in the basins. Show the provided positive drainage on the drainage exhibit. 17. In accordance with Chapter 4 of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual, the retention basin shall be designed to be natural looking, aesthetically pleasing and have multi-use. Verify compliance with these recommendations. 18. The detention basin may require security barriers. Check Section 4.3 of the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual for additional information. 19. The proposed building floor elevation shall be determined in the drainage report based on the site drainage. 20. Address drainage facilities maintenance responsibility and what needs to be done. Provide drainage facilities maintenance checklist. Every Sheet: 1. Provide a brief legal description in the Title Block as required by D.S. 2-01.3.3.2.B. 2. Provide the administrative address in the Title Block (D.S. 2-01.3.3.2.D). 3. The case numbers shown on every sheet appear to be incorrect. Revise the numbers (D.S. 2-01.3.3). General/Grading Notes: 4. Revise Grading Note #18 to read as follows: "CALL FOR SWPPP INSPECTION AND PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETINGS. FOR A PDSD ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS, CALL IVR (740-6970), OR SCHEDULE WITH A CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE AT THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, OR CONTACT DSD ENGINEERING AT 791-5550 EXTENSION 2101, OR SCHEDULE INSPECTIONS ONLINE AT: http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/inspections". 5. Revise all references to "Development Services Department" and "DSD" to "Planning and Development Services Department" and "PDSD" including Grading Note #26. 6. Add the following Grading Notes: a. The contractor shall remove the fine materials from the bottom of the detention/retention basin and scarify the basin bottom once the construction activities are completed in order to remove any fine material build up caused by construction and to restore soil percolation. install BMP's at the basin inlet(s) to prevent the fines from entering the basin b. See the associated Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan as a part of this grading permit. Base Layer/Site Plan: 7. Show the tie to the basis of bearing and one corner of the subject parcel (D.S. 2-01.3.8.A). 8. The Ingress/Egress/Utility Easement, off of Drexel Road, does not appear to have been dedicated and recorded. The easement dedication must be processed and the recordation information shall be provided on the plan (D.S. 2-01.3.8.B). 9. Provide the adjacent public right of way widths, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts and sidewalks (D.S. 2-01.3.8.C). 10. Show any existing storm drainage facilities on and adjacent to the site if applicable (D.S. 2-01.3.8.F). Site Plan: 11. Indicate proposed drainage solutions, such as origin, direction and destination of flow and method of collecting and containing flow (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.2). 12. Provide locations and types of drainage structures, such as, but not limited to, drainage pipes, erosion control pads, retention basins, etc. (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.3). Landscape Plan: 13. Ensure that the proposed landscaping does not obstruct visibility within the sight visibility triangles and the detention basin maintenance access. Geotechnical Report: 14. Submit a geotechnical report that addresses building setbacks fro the ponding water in the detention basin. 15. The report shall make recommendations concerning slope protection and stabilization. Grading Plan: 16. Provide the T11BU00791 case number in the Title Block (D.S. 2-01.3.3). . 17. Show and label grading limits. Include the grading limits symbol in the legend. 18. Show the locations of all downspouts and their erosion control pads. Provide construction details and all dimensions (i.e. length, width and depth, material, rock sizes, filter fabric, etc.) for the detention basin, all proposed drainage structures and erosion control pads. 19. The location of Keynotes 30, 34, 36, 47, 48, 49, 53, 54, 56, 57, 67, 68 and 73 do not appear to be shown on the site and grading plan. Revise as necessary. 20. Provide the P.A.A.L. width near the loading zone (D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.1). 21. Show future and existing sight visibility triangles at the Drexel Road access (D.S. 2-01.3.9.H.2). 22. Provide, if applicable, all proposed easements information as required by D.S. 2-01.3.9.L. 23. According to D.S. 3-01.4.4.F. 10-year flow has to be completely conveyed under sidewalks when concentrated runoff crosses any sidewalk/walkway. Verify if this applicable to this project. Additionally, provide sidewalk scuppers for the roof drains when applicable. Please be advised that the 10-year flow requirement does not apply to roof drainage. Roof drainage has to be discharged in its entirety to avoid prolonged ponding on the roof that might cause the roof to collapse. Show the roof drainage direction and demonstrate compliance with the sidewalk scupper requirements. 24. Clarify how the offsite runoff will be accommodated across the Drexel Road access. Provide all required construction details D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.2. 25. Show the detention basin 100-year ponding limits with water surface (D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.1). 26. Provide locations and types of all proposed drainage structures as required by D.S. 2-01.3.9.N.3 27. Provide all applicable setback lines including building setback from the proposed detention basin (D.S. 2-01.3.9.O). 28. Provide all grade breaks and high and low points. 29. According to D.S. 11-01.9.0, the minimum cut or fill setback shall be 2' from the parcel line. Verify compliance with this requirement especially for the proposed detention basin. 30. Show the trash enclosure slope, on Detail 1 on Sheet 4 that demonstrates positive drainage (D.S. 2-01.3.9.T). 31. All proposed work in the public right of way will require a right of way excavation permit or a Private Improvement Agreement. Contact Richard Leigh of Transportation Department Permit and Codes at 791-5100 for additional information. 32. Revise the Development Plan Package according to the Drainage Report revisions. SWPPP: 33. Since the proposed area to be disturbed exceeds one acre, a SWPPP is required. Submit a SWPPP with the next submittal. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4933 or Laith.Alshami@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Revised Development Plan Package and Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report and a SWPPP |
| 07/12/2011 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Add the CDRC case number and any related case numbers to the landscape and native plant preservation plans. Remove the incorrect case references. DS 2-07.2.1.B 2) A minimum distance of two (2) feet must be maintained between a PAAL and any wall, screen, or other obstruction. DS 3-05.2.2.B.3 Provide a curb to protect the wall along the east side of the Drexel Rd driveway. 3) All disturbed, grubbed, graded, or bladed areas not otherwise improved shall be landscaped, reseeded, or treated with an inorganic or organic ground cover to help reduce dust pollution. Revise landscape plan to identify the type and locations proposed for inert ground cover materials or seeded areas. A minimum two-inch layer is required. LUC 3.7.2.7. DS 2-06.5.2.C 4) DG will also be required for the south portion of the lot. Revise the landscape plan. 5) 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 2-04.2.1.A.15 An recorded agreement is required to utilize an off site wall for screening. |
| 07/13/2011 | PGEHLEN1 | TUCSON WATER NEW AREA DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/13/2011 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Passed | |
| 07/13/2011 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Passed | |
| 07/13/2011 | PGEHLEN1 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Passed | |
| 07/13/2011 | JANE DUARTE | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | |
| 07/14/2011 | JOHN WILLIAMS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Denied | COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES July 14, 2011 Jeff Stanley JAS Engineering P.O. Box 1888 Tucson, Arizona 85702 Subject: D11-0018 DOLLAR GENERAL Development Package Dear Jeff: Your submittal of June 10, 2011 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 (Zoning HC, Addressing, Wastewater, Zoning, Traffic, Engineering, Landscape, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised Geotechnical Report (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised Drainage Report (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Revised SWPPP Documents (Engineering, PDSD) 2 Copies Recording Covenant regarding Screening (Landscape, PDSD) 1 Check Made out to “Pima County Treasurer” for $50.00 (Wastewater) Should you have any questions, please call me at 837-4893. Sincerely, John Williams Planning Technician All comments for this case are available on our website at http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/ Via fax: (520) 624-0993 |
| 07/14/2011 | PGEHLEN1 | OTHER AGENCIES | TUCSON AIRPORT AUTHORITY | Approved | Hi Patricia, thanks for checking in on this one (the project is within the AEZ noise control and hazard districts). TAA does not oppose the subject development. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Take care Jordan D. Feld, CM, AICP Director of Planning Tucson Airport Authority 7005 S. Plumer Ave. Tucson, AZ 85756 jfeld@tucsonairport.org www.flytucsonairport.com 520-573-5115 office 520-573-8006 fax 602-821-7999 cell |
| 07/14/2011 | PGEHLEN1 | COT NON-DSD | TUCSON POLICE DEPARTMENT | Passed |