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

Permit Number: DP13-0226
Parcel: 10603087D

Address:
3200 N ORACLE RD

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: DEV PKG

Permit Number - DP13-0226
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
11/18/2013 SPOWELL1 START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
11/18/2013 RONALD BROWN ADA REVIEW Passed
11/21/2013 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
11/22/2013 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: December, 2, 2013
SUBJECT: QuikTrip #1464 Development Plan Package- Engineering Review
TO: Metro TED; Attn: Lisa Bowers
LOCATION: 3200 N Oracle; T13S R13E Sec25
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP13-0226


SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package and Drainage Report (The WLB Group, 15OCT13). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administration Manual (AM) and Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Refer to the following link for further clarification:
http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az

The following items need to be addressed:


SITE PLAN:

1) AM Sec.2-06.4.2.B: Revise the development plan document to include a brief legal description of the subject property within the Title Block.

2) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP13-0226) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets.

3) AM Sec.2-06.4.7: Revise the development plan package and Grading Note #3 to complete the blanks.

4) AM Sec.2-06.4.7: Revise the development plan package and Grading Note #4 to provide the dates of the soils report together with the names, addresses and phone numbers of the firms or individuals who prepared the report. Provide a copy of the soils report for review.

5) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.A.6: Revise the development plan document and General Note #4 to reference the correct code reference for the overlay applicable to the site, specifically state that "the project is designed to meet the overlay zone criteria for Sec.5.4, Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Setback Zone."

6) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.A: Provide Zoning approval for the new lot line reconfiguration. The proposed lot lines will require a lot line reconfiguration application for review and approval prior to development plan package approval.

7) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Provide approval from the Arizona Department of Transportation for all proposed work along Oracle Road. Engineering Section did not review any portion of the proposed work along Oracle since the review falls under the ADOT regulations. The development plan document can not be approved until ADOT approves the plan set.

8) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Provide approval from City of Tucson DOT for all work proposed within the right-of-way of Fort Lowell Rd. Traffic Engineer received a copy of the plan set and will do a DP review for all proposed work and dimensions associated with the MS&R plan. Refer to comment 11 for MS&R requirements and intersection tapering dimensions that area required.

9) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan document to label and dimension the existing and future SVTs for all driveway entrances. Arterial Streets require a 20'x345' near side and a 20'x125' far side SVT (unless the roadway is separated by a median then a 20'x30' far side SVT is applicable).

10) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan document to clearly dimension all PAAL widths to verify minimum requirements, specifically the PAAL located adjacent to and around the proposed gas canopy. Verify the 1-foot separation from the structure and 24-foot PAAL per UDC 7.4.6.F.2.a.1.

11) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.J: Revise the development plan document to include all dimensions for the MS&R Streets adjacent to the project. Provide dimensions for future right-of-way, sidewalk area, intersection tapering (Fort Lowell Rd), SVTs, etc. Verify that required improvements are not constructed within this area.

12) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.L: Per the proposed development plan document it appears that some proposed grading and construction of the vehicular use area, pedestrian ADA access, landscape planters, etc. will take place on the adjacent property. Provide written notarized approval along with a temporary construction easement for any and all work that is proposed offsite and a long-term maintenance easement for the proposed drainage infrastructure offsite.

13) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan document to provide a pedestrian access path from the building to all streets on which the project has frontage. Specifically provide a sidewalk from the building to the street sidewalk along Fort Lowell Road. Sheet C100 does not label or dimension the cross walk as shown on Sheet C113 (ADA Compliance Plan), revise to show on all sheets.

14) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all handicap accessibility comments that may be associated with this project.

15) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Revise the development plan document to provide for a double refuse enclosure per TSM Sec.8-01. Revise the plan set and any associated details for the refuse enclosures to show that it meets TSM Sec.8-01, Figure 2 and Figure 3a for the required enclosure walls with gates, concrete thickness and compressive strength, concrete approach apron dimensions, space from wall to bollards, anchoring bolts, 14'x40' clear approach for each container, etc. Any deviation from the standard will require a Technical Standard Modification Request (TSMR), it is advisable that prior to submitting the TSMR to contact Environmental Services to see if they would support the modifications.


SWPPP: The SWPPP does not meet the minimum requirements of the AzPDES Construction General Permit (CGP). Revise the SWPPP according to these comments:

16) Revise all Section on the SWPPP Exhibits to verify conformance with the City of Tucson Ordinance 10209 and the AZPDES 2013 CGP. The new 2013 permit for the state became effective June 23, 2013 and the SWPPP must comply with the new requirements. Refer to http://www.azdeq.gov/environ/water/permits/cgp.html.

17) Part 6.3.(5)b: Revise the SWPPP and Section 1.7 to clarify the area of disturbance. Per the development plan package and notes the area to be disturbed is 2.54 acres however this section only states 1.78, clarify.

18) Part 6.4(1): Revise the SWPPP to include a copy of the CGP-2013 (AZG2013-001) permit.

19) Part 6.4(2): Revise the SWPPP Report to include the correct NOI certification under the CGP-2013 (AZG2013-001) permit.


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.

For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929.


Jason Green, CFM
Senior Engineer Associate
Engineering Division
Planning & Development Services Department
12/06/2013 RONALD BROWN ZONING HC REVIEW Reqs Change GENERAL
1. The City of Tucson standard minimum size of all lettering, both upper and lower case is 3/32" actual, not CAD designated. Several sheets of this submittal have lettering sizes that do not meet this standard. Please revise these sheets and resubmit.
SHEET C100
2. Delete the curb ramp and detectable warning strip located in the middle of the most southerly curb run.
3. Delete all references to ADA. Accessibility for this project is goverened by the 2012 IBC, Chapter 11 and the 2009 ICC A117.1 as stated on Sheet C002.
4. Provide a detectable warning strip at the top of the accessible parking aisle located on the west side of the building.
5. Provide a detectable warning strip for the west end of the marked crossing located at the north east corner of the building.
6. Provide a marked crossing at the accessible drive crossing located in the south east corner of the site.
7. Provide a note stating that all accessible route slopes are to comply with the 2009 ICC A117.1, Section 403.3; 5% max running slope and 2% max cross slope.
SHEET C113
8. Delete all note references to ADA. Reference accessible requirements as per the 2012 IBC, Chapter 11 and the 2009 ICC A117.1.
9. Delete the accessible route shown from the south entry through the accessible parking aisle and back and forth accross the front of the gas fueling canopy area. Access to this area is from an auto.
10. Delete the accessible route shown from the fueling area to Fort Lowell Road. Access to this area is from an auto. An accessible route to Fort Lowell Road is not required.
SHEET C510
11. Details L1 and L6:
a. Show the accessible route and access from the accessible parking aisle.
b. Show location of the accessible parking signage.
SHEET C511
12. Detail F1
a. Provide detectable warning strip as per ICC A117.1, Sections 406.12, 13 and 14 as applicable.
b. Identify the marked crossing.
13. Detail L11: Show the flared sides of the curb ramp at a maximum slope of 1:10 as per ICC A117.1, Section 406 or delete the flared sides completely and provide a return curb.
END OF REVIEW
12/06/2013 MICHAEL ST. PAUL ZONING REVIEW Denied CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Michael St Paul
Planning Technician

PROJECT: DP13-0226
3200 North Oracle Road
Retail (Quick Trip #1464)

This site is located in the C-2 zone (UDC Section 4.7.21).
The proposed use is Retail: General Merchandise Sale, Excluding Large Retail Establishment (UDC Table 4.8-4) with the Use Specific Standard, UDC Section 4.9.9.B.1).


TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 6, 2013

DUE DATE: December 11, 2013

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Unified Development Code, The Administrative and Technical Manuals were addressed.

This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Package Standards listed in section 2-06 of the City of Tucson Administrative Manual. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC).

The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az

This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above

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 November 14th 2014.

2. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS)
Section

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.1.1 PURPOSE
This standard has been prepared for the purpose of informing applicants of the submittal and review requirements for development package documents to assure proper and adequate information is presented in a consistent manner, thereby providing the basis for an efficient and timely review. The development package documents are prepared in support of applications for building permits and related reviews.

The information that is requested establishes the basis upon which the project will be approved and could affect what is required of the property in the future, should there be a proposal for expansion or for a different use of the property.

This standard does not waive any applicable city regulations or codes.

2-06.1.2 APPICABILITY
This standard shall be used for all site plans and tentative plats submitted to PDSD for review.

2-06.2.1 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Development Package applications are available from PDSD. Completed applications and accompanying materials shall be submitted to PDSD. Incomplete or inaccurate applications will not be accepted, nor will any application in which the pre-application conference or neighborhood meeting requirements have not been met. The types of documents and the specific number of copies required of each of the documents are on the PDSD website or may be obtained from PDSD. Resubmittals of development packages require a comment response letter that details how all previous comments have been addressed. Provide the same number of copies of the comment response letter as plans provided.
The following documents and information shall be submitted upon application:

2-06.2.1 Application Form
A completed application signed by the property owner or authorized designee;

2-06.2.2 Development Package
A development package must be prepared to the format and content requirements described herein;

2-06.2.3 Related Reviews
In addition to the plan process, a project may require review for other types of plans and documents. The applications for those processes are submitted to the appropriate department for review and approval. These related reviews can be applied for so that review can occur concurrently with the development package application. However, it must be understood that, should the related application be approved subject to conditions or denied, this may affect the;

2-06.2.4 Concurrent Reviews
The development package is designed to allow for concurrent review of any site related reviews. Concurrent review means that all plans and documents needed for the review are submitted as one package. Examples of site related reviews include but are not limited to: site plans, landscape plans, NPPO plans, water harvesting plans, grading plans, SWPPP plans, floodplain use permits, and overlay reviews. Separate applications are often required for the different site related reviews even if the plans are submitted concurrently; and,

2-06.2.5 Fees
Fees in accordance with Section 4-01.0.0, Development Review Fee Schedule.

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.1 - Each sheet shall measure 24 inches by 36 inches and include a minimum one inch margin on left side and one-half inch margin on all other sides to facilitate efficient record keeping. A larger sheet format may be used with the approval of the Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD).

2-06.3.2 - All mapped data shall be drawn at an engineering scale having no more than 50 feet to the inch. This scale is the minimum accepted to assure the plan will be legible during review and when digitized and/or reduced for record-keeping purposes. The same scale shall be used for all sheets within the set. Smaller scales (60:1 or greater) may be used for some or all of the sheets with the prior approval of PDSD when it is determined legibility and the ability to be digitized and/or reduced for archiving will not be affected.

2-06.3.3 - All lettering and text (upper or lower case), and numbering, shall be a minimum of three-thirty-seconds inches in height to assure the plan will be legible during review and when digitized and/or reduced for archiving.

2-06.3.4 - A title block shall be provided in the lower right quadrant of each sheet.

2-06.3.8 - The north arrow, contour interval, and scale as applicable to each sheet should be placed together in the upper right corner of each sheet.

1) COMMENT: The north arrow and scale are missing on sheet 6 of 42.


2-06.3.12 - An index of sheets in the development package shall be provided on the first sheet.

2) COMMENT: Provide the continuous sheet numbers in the index. You may provide both.

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.1 - The name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s), or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional, such as a surveyor, architect, landscape architect, or engineer. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines.

3) COMMENT: Provide the email address for all the above on the cover sheet.

2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet:

4) COMMENT: Provide the site address.


2-06.4.2.D - The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx).

5) COMMENT: Se comment concerning the sheet index.

2-06.4.3 - The administrative street address and relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

6) COMMENT: Provide the address for the site adjacent to the title and in the title block. Also provide the case number (DP13-0226) and any Board of Adjustment case number. (The proposed sign location in the ROW should require a BOA variance.)

2-06.4.4 - 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.

2-06.4.2.A - Show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area;

2-06.4.2.B - Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and all streets that abut the subject property; and,

7) COMMENT: Label Miracle Mile and provide the water courses (Navajo Wash & Cemetery Wash) in the project-location map.

2-06.4.2.C - Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled.


2-06.4.7 - General Notes
The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable.

2-06.4.7.A.2 - List the gross area of the site/subdivision by square footage and acreage.

8) COMMENT: The square footage of the site is less than the square footage of the grading area. The site is not a stand-along site. The parking calculations are based upon the shopping center. Provide all calculations based upon the shopping center. Provide an updated site plan for the shopping center with the current and proposed vehicle and bicycle parking.

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.

9) COMMENT: Change "subject to" to "use specific standards" in the General Notes on sheet 2. .State the applicable use specific standard (Section 4.9.9.B.1), along with the code reference, on the plan: "Out door display or storage of fertilizer, manure, or other odorous material shall be located at least 30 feet from any interior lot lie."

2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide:

2-06.4.7.A.8.a - Floor area for each building;

10) COMMENT: Along with the gross floor area of each building on the site plan and canopy, provide the outside seating area square footage.

2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Percentage and area in square feet of building and accessory building coverage;

11) COMMENT: Remove the lot coverage ratio from the plan. Lot coverage is not applicable for this use in the C-2 zone. Lot coverage is only for residential use in this zone.


2-06.4.7.A.8.d - When the proposed site is part of a larger site, the calculations encompass the entire site, whether existing or proposed. If the project is being phased, calculations must show that, at each phase, requirements are being met.

12) COMMENT: Provide the calculations for the entire site, shopping center, and demonstrate that the use of the shopping center calculation is appropriate to this site.


2-06.4.7.C - Streets and Roads Notes

2-06.4.7.C.2 - List the following note on all development package documents: "No structure or vegetation shall be located or maintained so as to interfere with the sight visibility triangles in accordance with Section 10-01.5.0, Sight Visibility, of the Technical Standards Manual."

13) COMMENT: Provide the previous note (2-06.4.7.C.2) in full on the site plan.

2-06.4.7.C.3 - Provided the following notes as applicable:

2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions
The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided.

14) COMMENT: Provide the street information for Fort Lowell Road. Delineate and dimension the existing and future right-of-way and curb locations on the plan (UDC Section 5.4). The future ROW is one hundred (100) feet, and expands to one hundred thirty (130) feet for intersection widening.

2-06.4.8.B - All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided.

15) COMMENT: Provide all the above easement information on the site plan, including the shopping center.

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.

16) COMMENT: Provide the above information for the shopping center on the plans.

2-06.4.8.D - The following information regarding existing utilities shall be provided: the location and size of water wells, water pumping plants, water reservoirs, water lines, 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. If water mains and sewers are not located on or adjacent to the tract, indicate the direction, distance to, and sizes of those nearest the property.
Identifying the locations of all utilities and service equipment immediately adjacent to the project is especially important in situations where pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation or landscaping can be in conflict. By knowing the location of the existing utilities, design of the project can take those elements into consideration and can help avoid expensive and time-consuming relocation of utilities, major redesign, or requests to vary regulations after commencement of construction.

17) COMMENT: Provide the above information for the shopping center on the plans.

2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development
The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes.

2-06.4.9.E - Proposed land splits or existing lot lines shall be drawn on the plan with dimensions and the identification number and approximate square footage of each lot. (Please be aware that, if land division occurs and the number of lots falls within the definition of subdivision, a subdivision plat is required.) Land splits require a separate permit and review.

18) COMMENT: The proposed lot line reconfiguration divides existing subdivision lots. A subdivision shall be required for the proposed split.

"any division of land, improved or unimproved, for the purpose of financing, sales, or lease, whether immediate of future, in one of four ways: Any property whose boundaries are fixed by a recorded plat, which is divided into three or more lots, tracts, or parcels of land" (UDC DEFINITIONS - S Section 11.4.20 & A).

A Block Plat would be most appropriate to this shopping center (UDC Section 8.4.1 BLOCK PLAT).

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. If the property is being rezoned, use those boundaries and classifications. The basis for this requirement is that some zoning requirements on a project are based on the zoning classification of adjacent property. Also, in some instances, each zone has to be taken into consideration on property that is split by two or more zoning classifications, as each may have different requirements.

19) COMMENT: Provide the zoning for all the adjacent properties on the site plan.


2-06.4.9.H - Proposed Traffic Circulation

20) COMMENT: See comments from traffic.


2-06.4.9.H.2 - Show future and existing sight visibility triangles. On a designated MS&R street, the sight visibility triangles are based on the MS&R cross-section.

21) COMMENT: Delineate with dimension all existing and future sight-visibility triangles (SVTs) on the site plans.

2-06.4.9.H.3 - Indicate fire circulation, including accessibility and vehicle maneuverability.

22) COMMENT: See Fire Department's comments.

2-06.4.9.H.4 - Indicate if existing streets are public or private; provide street names, widths, curbs, sidewalks, and utility locations, all fully dimensioned.

23) COMMENT: Provide the existing information for Fort Lowell (See 2-06.4.8).

2-06.4.9.H.5 - If utilizing parking area access lanes (PAALs), they shall be designed in accordance with Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

24) COMMENT: Provide the dimensions for the PAAL between the canopy and the parking spaces along the south side of the building.

2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

25) COMMENT: Provide a fully dimensioned typical for the proposed standard parking spaces. Also provide the typical parking spaces for the shopping center. Provide dimensions for the PAAL width to both the north and south of the canopy. The minimum width for a two-way PAAL is twenty-four (24) feet (UDC Section 7.4.6.D, Table 7.4.6-1, Figure 7.4.6-A). The canopy and any building overhang must be setback one (1) foot from the PAAL (UDC Section 7.4.6.F.2.a). If the canopy or building overhang is to encroach upon the PAAL the minimum vertical clearance is fifteen (15) feet (UDC Section 7.4.6.E.2). Provide the clearance height for the structures on the plan.

2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Section 7.4.9, Bicycle Parking Design Criteria, of the UDC. Provide, as a note, calculations for short and long term bicycle spaces required and provided.

26) COMMENT: It appears that there are two (2) bicycle parking areas on the site plan, but only one is labeled. Identify all of the bicycle parking areas. Provide a fully dimensioned plan view detail for the short-term bicycle parking. Also provide a floor-plan detail for the long-term bicycle parking that is to be provided in doors. Provide the vehicle and bicycle parking calculations for the shopping center. Depict the proposed short-term and long-term bicycle parking for the shopping center on the plans with any additional details for the bicycle parking.

2-06.4.9.I - Show all right-of-way dedications on or abutting the site and label. If the development package documents have been prepared in conjunction with a subdivision plat or is required as a condition of approval of a review process, such as a rezoning, street dedications in accordance with the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan may be required by these processes.
Projects bounded by streets having only a portion of the right-of-way width dedicated will be required to dedicate right-of-way, up to one-half, to complete the street width.
Should there be any proposed street or alley vacation, provide this information. If vacation has occurred, include the recording information.

27) COMMENT: Delineate and dimension the future right-of-way, include the future widening on Fort Lowell Road. Dedication of future right-of-way is required for any subdivision plat.

2-06.4.9.J - If street dedication is not required or proposed and the project site is adjacent to a Major Street or Route, draw the Major Street right-of-way lines for those streets. (Add the MS&R future sidewalk, right-of-way lines, sight visibility triangles, etc.)

28) COMMENT: Depict the future right-of-way, curb locations, sidewalks and SVTs on the site plan.

2-06.4.9.L - All proposed easements (utility, sewer, drainage, access, etc.) are to be dimensioned and labeled as to their purposes and whether they will be public or private. The easements may have to be recorded and the recordation information added to the development package prior to approval.

29) COMMENT: Provide all proposed easement information on the plan.

2-06.4.9.M - Grading Plan

2-06.4.9.M.1 - A conceptual grading plan is required on projects with significant topographic conditions. The PDSD Engineering Administrator or designee will determine the need for such a plan.

2-06.4.9.O - All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown.

30) COMMENT: Dimension the setback location of the canopy for both the existing and future curb locations to Fort Lowell Road and Oracle Road.

2-06.4.9.R - Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual.

31) COMMENT: Provide complete pedestrian circulation for the new development. Provide access to the existing shopping center. One of the proposed crosswalks, in what appears to be the revised parking for the existing development, goes behind parking spaces. Provide access to Fort Lowell Road on the site plan. Access is indicated on the ADA plan, but is not provided on the site plan.

2-06.4.9.S - Show existing or proposed pedestrian circulation along abutting rights-of-way. Such sidewalks must comply with accessibility requirements for the physically disabled and the design criteria in Section 10-01.0.0, Street Technical Standards, of the Technical Standards Manual.

32) COMMENT: Depict the pedestrian access to and along the right-of-way.

2-06.4.9.T - Show refuse collection areas, including locations of dumpsters, screening location and materials, and vehicle maneuverability, fully dimensioned, and access route. If dumpster service is not proposed, indicate type of service. For specific information on refuse collection, refer to Section 8-01.0.0, Solid Waste and Recycle Disposal, Collection, and Storage, of the Technical Standards Manual. Refuse collection on all projects shall be designed based on that section, even if collection is to be contracted to a private firm.

33) COMMENT: See comments by the engineering section.

2-06.4.9.W - Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Indicate if there are any existing billboards on site. Compliance to the Sign Code, Chapter 3 of the Tucson Code, is required.

34) COMMENT: The monument signs shall require separate permits.

2-06.4.9.X - Show compliance with landscaping and screening requirements by locations, material descriptions, and dimensions. Specific plant or hardscape material shall be detailed on a landscape plan. A detailed landscape plan is required. In accordance with Section 2-11.0.0, Landscape Plan Requirements.

35) COMMENT: See review comments by the landscaping section.

2-06.5.3.G - Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions

2-06.5.3.G.2 - Provide two copies of the protective covenants or common use agreements for any shared areas being established by easements over individually-owned property.

36) COMMENT: Provide copies of the cross access and cross parking agreement.


If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Michael St. Paul, (520) 837-4959.

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package site plan and any requested documents.

Provide two copies of the revised site plan and the new CD. The shopping center is being revised by this project. Provided, updated and revised, plans for the shopping center. Include all relevant calculations; such as vehicle and bicycle parking calculations along with loading calculations. List the current uses in the overall shopping center for the parking calculations. (For example, there is a charter school on the site.)

Provide the last approved site plan for the shopping center.

Submit a Block Plat proposal to the CDRC pre-sub committee (UDC Section 8.4).
12/10/2013 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Approved
12/11/2013 HEATHER THRALL SIGNS SIGN CODE REVIEW Denied REVIEW: By H.Thrall ( Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov or 837-4951)
FOR: Proposed QuikTrip signage
AT: 3200 N Oracle Road, NE corner Fort Lowell/Oracle Roads
PROJECT: DP13-0226
DATE: 12/10/13
ZONE: C-2
CODE: Chapter 3 T.C.C -Sign Code, C-2 zone on MSR= General Business District


1) The C-2 zoning of this parcel, combined with location on a non-scenic arterial route, renders the property subject to the General Business District of the Sign Code. Per the Sign Code Administrator's August 29, 2013 determination letter, (project T13SA00249) because the existing shopping center sign at the very southwestern most part of the overall shopping center is going to remain, the proposed QuikTrip meets the definition of a "self-contained premise" within the General Business District. A self contained premise may have a total of 1 freestanding sign for its sole use, at a maximum of 32 square feet sign area.
2) On 11/13/13, the Sign Code Advisory & Appeals Board (SCAAB) denied a variance request for the installation of two freestanding signs, both exceeding 32 square feet sign area, for this proposed establishment.
3) The development package (DP) for QuikTrip, as currently submitted, shows 2 freestanding signs are proposed: 1 on Oracle at 23.83 square feet in sign area and 1 on Fort Lowell at 68.90 square feet sign area. The DP should be revised to be consistent with Sign Code Administrator's determination and SCAAB case denial - 1 freestanding sign at 32 square feet sign area for the sole use of the tenant, which can be on placed on either street frontage.
4) Ensure all signage in the legend and shown on the drawings are noted with "All proposed signage to be reviewed and approved under separate permit process subject to the City of Tucson Sign Code."
5) Per UDC 7.4.6.F.2.b, Parking Area Access Lane (PAAL) must be setback two feet from a wall, screen or other obstruction over 6 inches. If the Oracle sign is to remain, demonstrate the sign and associated bollards off the Oracle frontage meet this requirement.
6) Acknowledged note indicating any freestanding sign in Fort Lowell right of way would be removed at no cost to the City of Tucson upon commencement of right of way expansion. Note, a separate Temporary Revocable Easement (TRE) application would be required to be processed through the City of Tucson Real Estate Division to utilize the right of way.
7) Current and future Sight Visibility Triangles (SVT) are needed for both street frontages, regardless of which street front the sign would be installed.
8) Identify existing nonconforming shopping center pole sign at the SW most corner of the overall development, and note that it will remain.
12/11/2013 ZELIN CANCHOLA COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Reqs Change From Zelin Cacnhola TDOT

Subject DP13-0226 Q-Trip #1464

Plan will need to be revised.

1. Provide existing and future sight visibility triangles for driveways.

2. Provide existing and future right of way dimentions for Ft Lowell including the intersection tapering according to the Major Streets and Routes plan. 300 feet from the centerline of Oracle to the west the Right of Way should be 130 feet the tapers 300 feet to the west back to 100 feet. Verify existing half ROW of 65 feet

3. Provide approval from the Arizona Department of Transportation for propsed work on Oracle road.

4. Ensure proposed sign on Ft Lowell does not fall within sight visibility triangle.

5. Traffic Report is acceptable and will follow recommendations for Ft Lowell. ADOT will comment for recommendations on Oracle.
12/12/2013 JOE LINVILLE NPPO REVIEW Approved
12/12/2013 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change Revise the plans as requested by other agencies. An additional review is required.
12/12/2013 TOM MARTINEZ OTHER AGENCIES AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION Denied Patricia,

Your submittal for the proposed development on the east side of SR 77 (Oracle Road) north of Fort Lowell Road has been reviewed and the following comments are offered:

1. ADOT requires the installation of a right-turn lane on Oracle Road along the site. The new right-turn lane will be 14 feet wide (12-foot lane and 2-foot gutter), measured from the solid white line to the face of curb. In addition, we are requiring 5 feet of additional pavement between the right-turn lane and the adjacent through lane. Also, the width of the adjacent through lane shall be 12 feet.

2. There are currently three existing driveways on Oracle Road serving the site. One of the existing driveways on Oracle Road will be eliminated, and two driveways will continue to serve the development as shown in the October 2013 Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the Quick-Trip - Store No. 1464 and as shown on the Development Plan for the site. The two driveways on Oracle Road (Driveways 2 and 3 in the TIA) will allow right-in/right-out movements only.

3. Sun Tran should be contacted regarding the relocation of the existing bus stop on Oracle Road. The new bus stop will need to be constructed to current ADOT standards and specifications.

4. The existing light poles on Oracle Road along the site will need to be relocated to accommodate the new right-turn lane. The signal pole and control cabinet at the northeast corner of the Oracle Road/Fort Lowell Road intersection need to be relocated as well. Also, we require all gas and fluid utilities to be moved outside the pavement.

5. New sidewalk will need to be installed on Oracle Road along the site, including sidewalk ramps at the driveways to meet A.D.A. (Americans with Disabilities Act) requirements.

6. In order to accommodate the widening of Oracle Road along the site, additional right-of-way may be required. The additional right-of-way will be dedicated to ADOT by separate instrument.

7. The existing southbound left-turn lane at the Oracle Road/Fort Lowell Road intersection will need to be lengthened in order to accommodate the anticipated left-turn volume. The October 2013 Traffic Impact Analysis for the Quick Trip - Store No. 1464 shows that the traffic volume and the delay for future conditions during the AM peak hour will result in a Level of Service E for the southbound left-turn movement. Extension of the southbound left-turn lane will help to maintain the safety and efficiency of traffic operations on Oracle Road. The lengthening of the southbound left-turn lane could be accomplished by eliminating the northbound u-turns at the median opening at Navaho Road.












DSD_CDRC@tucsonaz.gov
DP13-0226/Quick Trip Oracle and Ft Lowell
December 12, 2013
Page 2




8. Construction plans for work in ADOT right-of-way, traffic signal plans for the modification of the traffic signal at the Oracle Road/Fort Lowell Road intersection and a signing and striping plan need to be submitted for our review. The developers/owners of the site will be responsible for all costs associated with the roadway and intersection improvements within State right-of-way.

9. The October 2013 Traffic Impact Analysis for the Quick Trip - Store No. 1464 needs clarification and/or revision before ADOT can accept the report in its final version.

We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Development Plans for the proposed Quick Trip Store No. 1464 at the intersection of SR 77 (Oracle Road) and Fort Lowell Road.


Maria Deal
Transportation Engineering Specialist
1221 S. 2nd Ave.
Tucson, AZ 85713
520.388.4235
mdeal@azdot.gov




-----Original Message-----
12/12/2013 PGEHLEN1 COT NON-DSD ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Reqs Change ESD offers the following comments after review of the Development Plan:
1. See Engineering comment #15 regarding the required provision of the double refuse enclosure per TSM Sec. 8-01.
2. Show sufficient grading information in order to demonstrate that the concrete slab for the enclosure slopes at 1% toward the gate opening, and that the 14' x 40' clear area required in front of each container slopes away from the enclosure at 2% per TSM Section 8 Figure 3A.
3. Per TSM Section 8.01.4.0.B, add a general note specifying the anticipated method of collection and frequency based on the calculated tonnage from Table 1 for the intended use.
If there are any questions I can be reached at kperry@perryengineering.net
12/13/2013 PATRICIA GEHLEN ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Reqs Change This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please include the following items with your resubmittal:

1) Two rolled sets of the plans
2) A disk containing all items submitted with this submittal
3) All items requested by review staff
4) All items needed to approve this plan (for records)

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
06/03/2014 CPIERCE1 REJECT SHELF Completed