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: DEV PKG
Permit Number - DP13-0071
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/20/2013 | SPOWELL1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/20/2013 | RONALD BROWN | ADA | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 05/30/2013 | KBROUIL1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Denied | Detail for no parking fire lane sign incorrect. Please refer to C.O.T. amendments to the 2012 Internation Fire Code (section 503.3) for correct detail. |
| 06/04/2013 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Denied | Here are some comments from Regional Traffic Engineering; * Page 9; reconstruction of I-10/Wilmot T.I. is not currently planned within the five year program. The PAG 2014-2018 TIP does not list the project. Please remove. * Page 11&16; it is stated that Wilmot/I-10 ramps, the AM LOS for the WB approach went from an E to an F, which is primarily due to the delay increasing from 53.9 seconds to 70.8 seconds for the WB left/thru. This should be discussed in more detail and provide the proper mitigation. * Page 11; when was the fatality, on Wilmot, in regards to this report? * Page 11; last paragraph, remove the mitigation suggestions planned unless they are part of this project. * Appendix Site Plan; how are the two ingress/egress easements going to be restricted from future development and unnecessary traffic? * In general; there are frequent mentions of the need for traffic signals. Since this the initial tenant of the larger Blackhawk development, what instrument is available to have the cost be shared for future developments as mentioned before. This was also noted in the Traffic Impact Analysis for A.C. Tsang Engineering by DMA Engineering LLC, dated February 2008. Thank you. ________________________________ 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. . |
| 06/06/2013 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Carl's Jr @ 7632 S. Wilmot Development Package (1st Review) DP13-0071 TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 10, 2013 DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administrative Manual (AM) & Technical Standards Manual (TSM) were addressed. 1. Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, An applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One year Expiration date is May 15, 2014. 2. This proposed development was reviewed for full code compliance with the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administrative Manual (AM) & Technical Standards Manual (TSM). 3. Review the Layout Document located at http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/files/dsd/DevPackageSubmittalLayout.pdf and revise the order of the development package sheets to meet this layout document. The following comments are based on the requirements of Administrative Manual (AM) 2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS. 4. A.M. 2-06.3.3 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. That said there are numerous text strings that do not meet this requirement. 5. A.M. 2-06.3.4 & A.M. 2-06.4.2 A title block shall be provided in the lower right quadrant of each sheet and include the following information; a. The proposed name of the project or if there is no name, the proposed tenant's name. b. A brief legal description.. c. The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e sheet xx of xx). 6. A.M. 2-06.3.7 & A.M. 2-06.4.4 A small, project-location map shall be provided in the upper right corner of the cover sheet. The project-location map shall cover approximately one (1) square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of 3" = 1 mile, and provide the following information; a. Show the subject property approximately centered within the one (1) square mile area. b. Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and all streets that abut the subject property. c. Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled. 7. A.M. 2-06.4.3 Provide the following relevant case numbers on the plan adjacent to the title block on all sheets, DP13-0071, C9-01-05, S07-025 & C15-95-16. 8. A.M. 2-06.4.7.A.1 Provide a General Note stating "EXISTING ZONING IS C-2." 9. A.M. 2-06.4.7.A.2 Provide a General Note stating "GROSS AREA OF THE SITE IS 46,828 SQ. FT./1.075 ACRES" 10. A.M. 2-06.4.7.A.3 List the rezoning conditions of the plan. 11. A.M. 2-06.4.7.A.4 Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses. That said provide a General Note stating "EXISTING USE - VACANT, PROPOSED USE - FOOD SERVICE, SUBJECT TO: USE SPECIFIC STANDARD 4.9.4.M.1 and 4.9.13.P." 12. A.M. 2-06.4.7.A.6 Provide a General Note stating "THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA SEC. 5.4, MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES (MS&R) SETBACK ZONE" 13. A.M. 2-06.4.7.A.8 Provide a General Note stating the floor area for each building. 14. A.M. 2-06.4.8.A Provide site boundary information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted. That said there is an "L1" listed at the north end of a future access isle, provide the boundary information for "L1". 15. A.M. 2-06.4.8.C The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. That said provide this information of Wilmot Road. 16. A.M. 2-06.4.9.F All existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) shall be indicated on the drawing with zoning boundaries clearly defined. 17. A.M. 2-06.4.9.H.5 Dimension the back-up spur shown at the east end to the eastern most parking area. See UDC Section 7.4.6.F.4 18. A.M. 2-06.4.9.H.5 Per UDC Section 7.4.6.H Barriers, such as post barricades or wheel stop curbing, are required in a vehicular use area to prevent vehicles from extending beyond the property lines, to prevent cars from damaging adjacent landscaping, walls, or buildings, overhanging adjacent sidewalk areas, and/or driving onto unimproved portions of the site. That said there are two (2) access lanes that appear to provide access to the unimproved area to the north. Provide some type of barrier at the north end of the access lanes. 19. A.M. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a Provide a standard vehicle parking space detail. 20. A.M. 2-06.4.9.H.5.a There is a "SITE PLAN DEY NOTE" #23 that states "PATIO/SIDEWALK AREA". Zoning was not able to find this keynote on the plan. If patio area is proposed and this area will be used for customers to sit and eat it is part of the use area and needs to be included in the vehicle parking space calculation. 21. A.M. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d The bicycle parking spaces calculation is not correct. Per UDC Table 7.4.8-1, COMMERCIAL USE GROUP, Food Service, Short-Term - 1 space per 2,000 sq. ft. GFA. Minimum requirement is 2 spaces, Long-Term - 1 space per 12,000 sq. ft. GFA. Minimum requirement is 2 spaces. That said the bicycle parking calculation should include the number of Short & Long Term required and provided. Until comment 20 has been addressed the required bicycle parking cannot be verified. 22. A.M. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d Key note 20 calls out "BICYCLE RACK AREA (SEE DETAIL ON THIS SHEET AND DETAIL C4.1.4), Zoning was not able to find a detail on sheet C4.0. 23. A.M. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d Detail C4.1.4 does not meet the requirements of UDC 7.4.9.B.2.f, .g, & .h. For your information per UDC 7.4.9.B.2.d A single rack is designed and located to accommodate two bicycles. 24. A.M. 2-06.4.9.H.5.d Show the required Long-Term bicycle parking on the site plan and provide a detail that meets the requirements of UDC 7.4.9.D. 25. A.M. 2-06.4.9.Q Provide the proposed height of the building within the footprint on the site plan. 26. A.M. 2-06.4.9.U Indicate graphically, where possible, compliance with conditions of rezoning. 27. Provide a copy of the required cross access and parking agreement with your next submittal, see rezoning comment 8. 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/ DP13-0077 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package & copy required cross access and parking agreement. |
| 06/11/2013 | JOHN BEALL | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Passed | |
| 06/11/2013 | RONALD BROWN | ZONING HC | REVIEW | Denied | SHEET C4.0 1. Show the required detectable warning strips at all marked crossings as per the 2009 Edition, ICC A117.1, Sections 406.12, 13 and 14 as applicable. a. The accessible route to the dumpster does not have to be accessible. 2. Show dimensional widths for all marked crossings, ramps and landings. 3. Indicate that all accessible route slopes comply with the 2009 Edition, ICC A117.1, Section 403.3; 5% maximum running slopes and 2% maximum cross slopes. SHEET C4.1 4. At detail C4.1.14 a. Revise note three to read 2009 Edition, ICC A117.1 not ADA. b. Show the flared side of the corner curb ramp at a maximum slope of 1:10 as required by ICC A117.1, Section 406. 5. At detail C4.1.13 a. The minimum depth of the accessible parking space is to be 18'-0". Reference Zoning standard parking space size requirements. b. At note 2, delete all reference to ADA and reference 2009 Edition, ICC A117.1. c. Reference ramp to detail C4.1.14. 6. At detail C4.1.3 a. Delete all ADA references. b. At note 1, the bottom of the sign is to be 7'-0" a.f.g. c. At note 3, the sign is to be located just inside the curb line, not 6'-0" away. d. Change City of Tempe to City of Tucson, T.C.C. 20-222. e. Delete note 1 at the Van Accessible sign requirements. f. Delete the 6'-0" dimension at all three partial accessible parking plans and relocate sign to a point just inside the curb line. END OF REVIEW |
| 06/11/2013 | ZELIN CANCHOLA | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Zelin Canchola TDOT traffic Engineering PROJECT: Carl's Jr @ 7632 S. Wilmot Development Package (1st Review) DP13-0071 TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 11, 2013 Develpoment plan denied. Development plan must reflect offsite improvements into the development site. 1. Marked southbound turn lane, with bike lane included, shall be incorperated into site plan with a minimum storage of 100 feet. Turn radius shall be indicated according to development standard (Technical Standards Manual Section 10-01 Minimum curb return radius. Site visibility triangles shall be shown on development plan according to Technical Standards Manual Section 10.01.5.0 for entrance to project site from wilmot as well as the driveways from local access. |
| 06/12/2013 | ELIZABETH LEIBOLD | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: June 12, 2013 TO: Mark Johnson, P.E.Bury + Partners-Holdings, Inc SUBJECT: Development Package Engineering Review submittal PROJECT: Carl's Jr Restaurant Development Package LOCATION: 7632 S WILMOT RD, Ward 5 FEMA PANEL: 2905 L, X-unshaded REVIEWER: Elizabeth Leibold ACTIVITY NUMBER: DP13-0071 SUMMARY: The Development Package including site plan, grading plans, copy of Drainage Report, Geotechnical Engineering Report and TIA on diskette, and other documents was submitted and reviewed. Due to significant number of comments, additional review comments may be forthcoming. Development Services Department Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan at this time until the following comments are addressed. BASE PLAN SHEETS COMMENTS: 1) City of Tucson Administrative Manual Section (Admin Man Sec.) 2-06.4: Add DP13-0071 activity number to Development Package sheets. 2) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.8.B: On sheets C1.0, C4.0, and C6.0 at minimum, show all easements on and immediately adjacent to or overlapping the Carl's Jr parcel per Final Plat sheets 2, 3, & 4. MASTER COVER SHEETS/ GENERAL NOTES: 3) Admin Man sec.2-06.4.7.B: List the following notes on plan under drainage or general notes: a) "The developer, any successors and assigns, will hold the City of Tucson, its officers, employees, and agents harmless from any and all claims for damages related to the use of this development as shown hereon, now and in the future, by reason of flooding, flowage, erosion, or damage caused by water, whether surface flood or rainfall." b) "Drainage will remain in its natural state and will not be altered, disturbed, or obstructed other than as shown on this site plan." c) Add a note stating that the project is designed to meet the overlay zone criteria: LUC Sec. 2.8.3, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone. 4) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.4: Clarify for the project-location map on sheet C0.0. The project-location map to be located on the first sheet of the development package in the upper right corner, shall cover approximately one square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of three inch equals one mile, and provide the following information: a) Identify major watercourse - Old Rodeo Wash. b) Assure the adjacent subdivision labels are provided and legible. c) Provide section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale. 5) Check spelling of I-10 on cover sheet title. DRAINAGE COMMENTS: 6) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.8.H: Address comments for the following drainage elements: a) Show existing stormdrain system running along Wilmot frontage and spine road adjacent to Carl's Jr project. b) On sheets C1.0 and C6.0, label elevations for clean-outs / junction manhole rims and inverts along existing storm sewer system. c) Provide drainage report aside from master report that explains design for Carl's Jr that is not shown in master report, specifically addressing the following comments: i) The proposed basin shall show positive gradients and bleed off to storm drain system if other bleed off is not provided. ii) Clarify on plans or explain how end of stormdrain pipes function. iii) Address proposed system in addendum/report, that provides direction of flow on drainage report exhibit(s). iv) Show positive gradients with any necessary bleed-off pipes, so that no potential ponding occurs. v) If retention systems are intended, address the following: (1) explain how the amount of runoff from developed conditions exceed 9 cfs (which is accounted for in master drainage plan). (2) Provide factor of safety for percolation. (3) Provide infiltration testing results for proposed location of retention system. vi) Provide a discussion and exhibit for offsite watersheds. vii) Show existing stormwater drainage pipe at south side of project on drainage exhibits. viii) Include discussion of stormwater that comes from offsite drainage from the east to the site and is conveyed by stormdrain system recently constructed. ix) Discuss in Drainage Report and label on Development Package planviews on sheet C4.0 water harvesting areas. x) Label locations of Q100 entering and exiting the site on drainage exhibits, and on grading plan sheet C6.0. xi) Provide administrative address and activity number (DP13-0071) on the report cover page. xii) Provide verification that any drainage solutions which occur outside the boundaries of the parcel are constructed with adjacent owners' permission. (If not accounted for on Final Plat, additional notarized documentation of that approval will be submitted with the drainage report.) d) Delineate and label geotechnical recommended horizontal setbacks from basin to proposed building and pavement structures on planviews. SITE AND GRADING COMMENTS: 7) City of Tucson Technical Standards Manual Section (Tech Man Sec.) 2-01: Address the following grading comments on sheet C6.0: a) Provide contour interval with north arrow/scale. b) Provide Cut / fill quantities and disturbance area on either C0.0 or C6.0. c) Show more spot elevations on sheet C6.0. Include more spot elevations for ramps for the on-site pedestrian circulation, showing ADA ramps around proposed restaurant circulation system. Also, clarify hatching area for pedestrian access shown at west side of proposed building at it crosses drive-through area. 8) The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. Show existing or proposed sidewalks along abutting right-of-way for Wilmot Road. Label the MS&R future sidewalk (6-ft min width) along Wilmot. 9) Some of the existing utilities are shown yet not clearly labeled. The following information regarding existing utilities shall be provided: the location of any existing fire hydrants, sanitary and storm sewers, including the pipe diameter and the invert and rim elevations of all manholes and cleanouts; the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD) reference number; locations of gas lines, electric and telephone lines, poles, and communications cables, on-ground junction boxes, and street lights. Assure that the existing sanitary sewer line is shown on sheets C1.0 and C6.0. 10) IBC 1101.2: Truncated domes are required for any ramps along the accessible routes. Add to legend or provide note to clarify handicap ramps. 11) Show loading zone on a planview. 12) Show sight visibility triangles for Wilmot Road on sheet C4.0. SURVEY RELATED COMMENTS: 13) Effective DFIRM's are currently NAVD88. Label basis of elevation with datum explanation for topography / drainage information / design grades on plan sheets C0.0, C1.0, and C6.0. Assure that there are no discrepancies for topography and drainage report-related minimum finished floor elevation or other elevations. 14) Assure that all easements listed on the Schedule B of title report are clearly drawn, labeled with Book/page or Docket/page, and/or listed as a blanket easement, and/or labeled with accurate dimensions and bearings on the plat. Provide a copy of the Title Report, Schedule B with current easement data. Address also redlines on plans and provide copy of redlines with resubmittal. A response letter is required with the resubmittal of the revised Development Plan package, acknowledging or addressing all of the above comments. For resubmittal, provide response letter, title report, revised plan sheets, drainage report specific to site, copy of geotechnical report, copy of TIA, Final Drainage Report (master report), and diskette. If you have questions or would like to set up a meeting, call me at 837-4934. Elizabeth Leibold, P.E., CPM, CFM Civil Engineer Engineering Division Planning & Development Services Dept |
| 06/13/2013 | PGEHLEN1 | COT NON-DSD | TUCSON POLICE DEPARTMENT | Approved | I have no issues with this request. CSO Becky Noel #37968 Tucson Police Dept 837-7428 |
| 06/13/2013 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Revise the site drawing to include the following information: a. The invert and rim elevations of all manholes and cleanouts; along with the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD) reference number. b. Any existing or proposed utility easements Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual No. 2-06.0.0, Section 4.8 and Section 107.2.13, IBC 2012. 2. Verify the proposed point of connection to the public sewer; the records for Pima County Wastewater Management do not show any sanitary sewers or manholes located west of Wilmot Road at that location. 3. An approved development plan is not to be used for construction of on-site utilities (e.g. water service to the building, building sewer, site lighting, or electrical service to the building). The construction of the on-site utilities may be included with the permit for constructing the building or as a separate permit. |
| 06/14/2013 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the plans to provide the required landscape border along Wilmot Road. Parking may not be located in the landscape border. Street landscape borders must be a minimum of ten feet wide as measured from the street property line. UDC 7.6.4.C.2.a 2) Revise the Cover Sheet to include the landscape related sheets in the Sheet Table. 3) The Native Plant Preservation Plan proposes a nursery on an adjacent lot. Revise the Native Plant Preservation Plan to show the limits of grading and easements. AM 2-11.4.4.A.1 4) Revise the tree calculations on L1.0 to comply with UDC 7.6.4.B.1.a and & 7.6.4.C.1.a. 5) Revise note on the Native Plant Preservation Plan to cite City Codes. UDC 1.4.1.A. 6) List the applicable rezoning file number and conditions of approval. Revise as necessary. AM 2-06.4.7 |
| 06/17/2013 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items: 1) Two rolled sets of the plans 2) 1 disk containing all items submitted. 3) All items requested by review staff 4) All items used to approve these plans. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/12/2013 | SHANAE POWELL | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 11/12/2013 | CPIERCE1 | REJECT SHELF | Completed |