Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: DEV PKG
Permit Number - DP21-0172
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/12/2021 | SBEASLE1 | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 07/20/2021 | SBLOOD1 | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Development Package Comments: Sheet 1 1. Rename the vicinity map to "Project Location Map" and see that it conforms to Admin Manual section 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 a. Show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area; b. Identify major streets and regional watercourses within the square mile area and all streets that abut the subject property; and, c. Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled. 2. Provide the date of the geotechnical report along with name, mailing and emailing addresses, and phone number, of the firm who prepared the report as per Admin Manual section 2-06.4.1. Sheet 2 3. Please include any drainage, street and road, utilities, and wastewater management notes that apply from AM 2-06.4.7. Sheet 8 4. Please show the proposed concrete valley gutter on the plan. Sheet 9 5. Provide a detail of handrail if needed at the headwall. 6. Provide pavement elevations at the northwest driveway to confirm that there is enough cover from top of pipe. 7. Please verify all paving construction notes reference the correct sheets and detail numbers. (ex. Note 5 references a detail that is found on C1.3, not C1.5) Sheet 10 8. Please dimension the cover of the pipe from the proposed grade on profiles #2 and #3. 9. Please verify and be consistent with all pipe sizes and type. Sheet C5.1 calls out 18" HDPE for the storm drain pipe in profile 1 10. Provide elevations to confirm that the subgrade/pavement section will not conflict with the top of concrete pipe. Typ. on all profiles. 11. Provide the headwall elevations. Be consistent with what is shown on sheet C5.1. 12. Callout the handrails at headwalls and provide a standard detail. Sheet 11 13. Please provide a few spot elevations at the existing driveway to understand the drainage beyond the limits of new pavement. 14. Please revise the grading of the drive thru east of the building. There are a few low points on the west side of the drive thru. Match the highpoints on both the west and east sides of the drive thru. Provide a cross section of this area to clarify. 15. Please revise the grading in the trash enclosure. There is a low point at the back of the enclosure and the drainage does not follow the drainage arrows. 16. Revise the grading at the sidewalk southwest from the proposed Whataburger building. With the proposed grades, everything would drain east instead of matching the sidewalk to the north where everything drains west. 17. Revise the grading at the sidewalk and ADA ramp west of the two parking stalls. Currently, the east side of the sidewalk drains south and the west side of the sidewalk drains north. The ADA ramp does not match the sidewalk ramp detail A on sheet C1.4. 18. Please include "C" to the legend on the first sheet. 19. Please callout the highpoint at the entrance of the northeast driveway. 20. Extend the rip rap to basin floor. Sheet 12 21. Revise the grading on sheet C6.1 to match the Section C profile. Sheet 13 22. Add the station at sewer cleanouts and manholes to match what is on the profiles on sheet C7.2. Drainage Report Comments: General Comments 1. Please list the parameters used for calculations within the body of Drainage Report and where they came from. Report says calculations done in accordance with SMDDFM but parameters don't match tables in Chapter 4. PC-HYDRO and MAG standards are also cited in Appendix B. Please revise as necessary 2. Appdx B - PC Hydro Data sheets do not include calculations for watershed A3 3. Culvert/Stormdrain calculations and discussion missing. Please revise as necessary. 4. What is the discharge (cfs) in the proposed pipes under the existing driveway in Watershed A3? How will the addition of these pipes affect the existing culvert under Valencia and the existing detention/retention basin north of Jack-in-the-Box? Please add discussion in Report. Page 4 5. Section 5.0 - What are the peak discharges (onsite and offsite) for the existing and developed watersheds? Please include in a table within body of report for ease of comparison. Page 12 6. Appdx B - Weighted Coefficient - "Lot Area assumes 56% Rooftop and 44% Landscaping" but the outline for this area is for the building footprint only. Landscape Area shown as separate weighted coefficient. Please revise as necessary. Pages 14-16 7. Appdx B - PC Hydro Data sheets (A1 UNDEVELOPED +A2 DEVELOPED) for all three calculations. Please specify what CP each sheet is for and if it is for. Page 25 8. Stormdrain calculations reference MAG standards while Report body says these were done in accordance with City of Tucson Standards. Please revise as necessary. Review and Comments provided by third party engineer reviewers under contract with the City of Tucson. For Questions or Concerns contact: Stephen Blood (520) 837-4958 Stephen.blood@tucsonaz.gov |
| 08/02/2021 | JPEELDA1 | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | |
| 08/04/2021 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Completed | |
| 08/06/2021 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: PDSD Zoning Review PROJECT: Whataburger – 5050 E Valencia Rd Development Package (1st Review) DP21-0172 TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 6, 2021 DUE DATE: August 9, 2021 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and any redlined plans along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06. Also, compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC) and the UDC Technical Standards Manual (TSM). 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 July 07, 2022. CONTENT REQUIREMENTS 1. COMMENT: 2-06.4.3 – Provide the development package case number, DP21-0172, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 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 - Zoning and Land Use Notes 2. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.4 – The current use listed under ‘SITE DATE “ should be listed as “VACANT” and the proposed use should be listed as “FOOD SERVICE: EXCLUDING SOUP KITCHENS SUBJECT TO USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS 4.9.4.M.1 and 4.9.13.P“. 3. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6 - This project is located within the Airport Avigation Easement and Disclosure Area and will require review by Scott Robidoux Airport Planner. Contact Scott at srobidoux@flytucson.com. 4. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.6.a - Provide a general note on the cover sheet stating “THIS PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC ARTICLE 5.4 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R) AND 5.5 GATEWAY CORRIDOR ZONE (GCZ).” 2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide: 5. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.a – Under “SITE DATA” there is a reference to “CANOPY AREA 993 SF”, unless this canopy area is going to be used as outdoor seating remove the reference. 6. COMMENT: 2-06.4.7.A.8.b – Per UDC TABLE 6.3-4.A: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE C-1, C-2, C-3, OCR-1, & OCR-2 ZONES, C-2 Zone, Lot Coverage is not applicable, remove all references to lot coverage from the plan. 2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions 7. 2-06.4.8.B – Provide the recordation information for all existing easements shown on the plan. 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. 8. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.E – Until land split S21-043 is approved Zoning cannot approve this DP. 9. COMMENT: 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. 10. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Per UDC Article 7.4.6.F.2.a.(2) show the required 1’-0” setback from the building to the drive-through. 11. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5 – Dimension the stacking spaces see UDC Article 7.4.7.B.1. 12. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The vehicle parking space ratio shown under “PARKING SPACES REQUIRED” is not correct and should “1/100sf”. 13. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – The wheel stop location dimension shown on the accessible parking stall detail, sheet 3 is not correct, see UDC Article 7.4.6.H.3. 14. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.a – Provide a sign mounting height dimension for the ADA signage on the detail. Based on the location of the signs shown on the plans the minimum height to the bottom of the lowest sign shall be 84”. 15. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.H.5.d – Provide a detail for the short- & long-term bicycle parking that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Articles 7.4.9.B, .C & .D are met. 16. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.J – Show and dimension the future curb and sidewalk on the plan. 17. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.L – As access is proposed across the proposed parcel to the east provide some type of easement or agreement. The easement/agreement will need to be recorded prior to approval of this DP. Zoning acknowledges the access easement across the parcel to the west. 18. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.O – The street perimeter yard setback listed under “SITE DATA” is not correct. Per UDC Article 11.4.6 definition of Established Area Setback, major streets and routes do not qualify for established area street perimeter yard setbacks. Per UDC Article 6.4.5.C.2 and Table 6.4.5.C-1, ADT of 1,000 or greater, the required street perimeter yard setback to Valiance is 21’ or the height of the building exterior wall, greater of the two, measured to he back of future curb. Provide a street perimeter yard setback dimension from the proposed building to the back of future curb\. 19. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.Q – Provide the height and use within the footprint of the building on the plan. 20. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Clearly demonstrate on the plan that the sidewalk area between the southern most accessible sign and the building is not less than 4’-0”, see TSM 7-01.4.3.A. 21. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Clearly demonstrate on the plan that the sidewalk area between the proposed required area for the short-term bicycle parking and the curb is not less than 4’-0”, see TSM 7-01.4.3.A. 22. COMMENT: 2-06.4.9.R – Clarify what the ADA accessible ramp is for shown near the southwest corner of the building is for. This ramp gives the impression that this is a safe route for a person with a disability. 23. COMMENT: 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. Also provide a general note stating “ALL SIGNAGE REQUIRES SEPARTE PERMITS”. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact Elisa Hamblin at Elisa.Hamblin@tucsonaz.gov. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package |
| 08/12/2021 | SBEASLE1 | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Reqs Change | Email from: David.Stiffey@TucsonAz.gov To: CDRC Wed 8/11/2021 7:32 PM 1. P.A.G. standard 207 curb ramps must be installed at the new ingress/ egress entry off of Valencia, at the east end of the project. 2. Please show sight visibility triangles/ dimensions at the new ingress/ egress entry off of Valencia, at the east end of the project. 3. Any non-compliant sidewalk/ ramps along Valencia adjacent to property, needs to be brought up to compliance. David Stiffey City of Tucson |
| 08/13/2021 | AWARNER1 | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Reqs Change | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department, Plans Coordination FROM: Anne Warner, PLA PDSD Landscape/Native Plant Preservation Section PROJECT: Whataburger ACTIVITY NO: DP21-0172 Address: 5050 E Valencia Rd Parcel: 140-39-0420 Zoning: C-2 Existing Use: Undisturbed Sonoran Desert Proposed Use: Food Service TRANSMITTAL DATE: August 13, 2021 DUE DATE: August 9, 2021 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Landscape Review Section comments were addressed. This plan has been reviewed for compliance with applicable development criteria in the City of Tucson Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-11 and Technical Manual (TM) Section for landscape, native plants and water harvesting. 1. UDC 2-10.4.1 Identification and Descriptive Data A. All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the landscape plan will be identical in size and location to those shown on the base plan (site plan or tentative plat). Should amendments be required to the base plan through the review process, the same amendments will be made to the landscape plan which will then be resubmitted along with the base plan. Ensure that Zoning and Engineering comments are addressed prior to landscape section approval. 2. Please provide all landscape calculations on the landscape plan, including required trees for the parking areas and landscape border coverage. 3. Please label the existing and future rights of way for Valencia Rd, UDC 7.6.4.C.2.a. on all landscape/irrigation plans. 4. Valencia Rd is in the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone, UDC 5.3.4. A 30’ natural buffer along Valencia is required. If area is degraded or disturbed the buffer area shall be restored as closely as possible to its previous native state. UDC 5.3.4.A.3 This buffer area is in lieu of a 10’ landscape border along Valencia Rd. 5. UDC 5.3.4.B. The Scenic Routes buffer area is measured from the future MS&R right of way, except as follows; where the MS&R roadway design includes installation of a sidewalk, pedestrian way, or bike path, the buffer may be measured from the MS&R projected back of the sidewalk, pedestrian way, or bike path if the buffer does not encroach more than ten feet into the future MS&R right of way with the written permission of the City of Tucson Department of Transportation. The use of the MS&R is permitted only if the area can be landscaped. 6. Provide sheet numbers or detail reference numbers if referring to civil drawings (water meter). Note that a separate water meter is required for irrigation. 7. Provide a maintenance schedule for the landscape and irrigation for this project. UDC 2-10-4.2.A.4. 8. Include parking area calculations for required trees, 2-10-4.2.A.2.c. Ensure that trees in vehicular use areas are planted within and adjacent to parking so that they afford the greatest amount of shade in paved areas, UDC Technical Standards Manual 5-01-.3.2 and UDC 7.6.4.B.1.a. 9. An approved Native Plant Preservation Plan Sections 7.7.4 is required or a request for an exception from the Native Plant Preservation requirements in accordance with Sections 7.7.3.D.3 & .4 of the Unified Development Code (UDC) and Admin. Manual Section 2-11.0.0 is required prior to Grading Plan approval. 10. A Commercial Rainwater Harvesting plan is required, UDC Technical Standards Manual – Section 4-01.0.0, Section 5-01.0.0 Landscaping and Screening. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package YOUR NEXT STEPS: Submit documents to the Filedrop https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp Select "Existing Application" 1) Comment Response Letter (your response to the reviewer's Requires changes comments) 2) Plan Set (or individual sheets) 3) Any other items requested by review staff If you have any questions, please contact me at anne.warner@tucsonaz.gov |
| 08/20/2021 | SBEASLE1 | COT NON-DSD | REVIEW | Approved | Email from: Eric Latto To: CDRC Fri 8/20/2021 4:29 PM Approved. Eric Latto, Transit Service Coordinator Department of Transportation and Mobility City of Tucson 520-954-3717 |
| 08/23/2021 | SBEASLE1 | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Email from: COTDSDPermits To: D. Maldonado Cc: C. Espinoza Mon 8/23/2021 10:08 AM Returned for Corrections: DP21-0172 DESCRIPTION: Site/Grading/Swppp - Whataburger Restaurant. 5050 E VALENCIA RD FEE BALANCE: $0 (zero) Thank you for the payment. INCLUDE IN YOUR RESUBMITTAL 1) Comment Response Letter (your response to the reviewer's Requires Change comments) 2) Plan Set (all pages, full set, even if no changes were made) 3) Any other documents requested by review staff Please title your 2nd submittal documents according to this example: 2_Comment Response Letter, 07.01.21 FILEDROP https://docs.tucsonaz.gov/Forms/tucsonpermitapp (Select "Existing Application", then enter permit number) SEE REVIEW COMMENTS and documents on PRO: www.tucsonaz.gov/pro (If information is not available, check back later after data transfers to PRO.) - Home page, Activity Search, enter the Activity/Permit Number - Permits - click on blue tab and you will see different sections - Reviews section - click on REVIEW DETAILS - Documents section - click on VIEW Thank you. Sharon Beasley, Permit Specialist City of Tucson, Planning and Development Services Email for Development Pkgs: COTDSDpermits@TucsonAz.gov (disregard the email response that will be sent automatically) Email for Building Permits: PDSDinquiries@TucsonAz.gov |