Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Permit Number - T06CM02271
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/13/2006 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. All landscaping and screening must comply with the sight visibility requirements of Development Standard 3-01.0. Plant materials located within sight visibility triangles should consist of ground cover or low-growing vegetation of a species that will not grow higher than thirty (30) inches. Some species of agave will typically grow in excess of 3 feet Verify both the proper and common name of plant material. 2. 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 2-03.2.1.A.15. The height of screening material adjacent to property lines is measured on the project side of the screen, at finish grade per DS 2-06.3.7.A.1 |
| 11/13/2006 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 12/01/2006 | HEATHER THRALL | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | Please see the zoning review comments. |
| 12/01/2006 | HEATHER THRALL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Heather Thrall Senior Planner PROJECT: T06CM02271 155 W. Valencia, New Dollar General Retail Store Commercial Site Plan TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 16, 2006 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with redlines and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. (Per last review). For record keeping purposes, please enlarge all typeface to 12 point lettering. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED 2. (Per last review) Per DS 2-02.2.1.2, please provide a legal description for the property. Staff noted the property is listed as being subject to a lot split in 2005 under Pima County Assessor's records. Please provide any lot split plans that have been approved through the city review process, as required. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED 3. (Per last review). Per DS 2-02.2.1.6, provide height notation - design grade to top of roof, clarify if any parapet walls are proposed and give their overall height from design grade. The C-1 allows a maximum building height of 30 feet. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED 4. (Per last review) Per DS 2-02.2.1.7, keep in mind after addressing comment 5, the south building setback, at minimum, must be equal to 1.5 times the height of the exterior building wall, as the adjacent site to the south is zoned R-3. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED 5. Call out the nearest edge of travel lane on Missiondale. The setback off a developing area street (Missiondale connects to a Major Streets and Routes) is the greater of 21 feet or the height of the structure from the nearest edge of travel lane. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED 6. Call out the future curb location along Valencia. The north setback for the building is the greater of 21 feet or the height of the structure from the back of the future curb. (Staff acknowledges the north setback distance is not an issue.) RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED 7. Per DS 2-02.2.1.8, with regards to parking: A) (Per last review) Parking areas must be a minimum of 15.5 deep in length with an additional 2.5 feet of vehicle overhang accommodated for - a total of 18 feet in length. Revise the parking spaces that have a 4 feet deep "interruption" at the north and west side of the site to meet these requirements (parking spaces 44/45 and 21/22) RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED B) Parking space 12 appears to be insufficient in length due to the adjacent dumpster's position conflicting with maneuverability when the dumpster enclosure doors are opened. RESPONSE: The dumpster has been moved, and now the doors are blocking the PAAL and the parking spaces on either side of the PAAL are too short. C) Provide back up spur to standards of 3-05 at the east end of the east parking lot. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED. D) Provide parking calculations for retail use, per LUC 2.3.4. (1:200 ratio) RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED. SEE LUC 3.3.4 E) Provide wheel stops for handicapped parking spaces to ensure signs are not compromised. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED. F) Provide 7' height notations for post between grade and bottom of handicapped parking sign RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED. G) Provide $518.00 fine notation for handicapped parking sign RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED. 8. Per DS 2-02.2.1.9, provide bicycle parking per LUC 2.3.4. parking ratios for retail establishments. Be sure to provide typical detail drawings for both the class 1 and class 2 bicycle storage areas - with dimensions. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED. PLEASE SEE DS 2-09 FOR EXAMPLES OF PARKING RACKS/LOCKERS AND PROVIDE SPECS. 9. Per DS 2-02.2.1.11, provide width of the PAAL at south side of site near dumpster location. RESPONSE: THOUGHT THE DUMPSTER WAS MOVED, THE PAAL AREA AT THE SOUTH SIDE WAS STILL NOT CALLED OUT FOR WIDTH. 10. Per DS 2-02.2.1.12 and Per DS 2-08, regarding sidewalks: A) provide pedestrian access from each street to the building. RESPONSE: Provided a marked route, however, it needs to be clarified how the sidewalk is constructed (concrete?) and how wide? And how is it going to go across a retention system with alternating grades? And where are the ramps going to go? Truncated domes? B) Provide clarification if sidewalks are raised from asphalt - with height difference (sidewalks must have physical separation from the asphalt) RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED. IF SIDEWALK IS IN FLUSH WITH ASPHALT THAT IS ALRIGHT DUE TO THE WHEEL STOP BARRIERS PROVIDED. JUST INDICATE WHETHER IN FLUSH OR CURB IS PROVIDED. C) Provide early warning systems (truncated domes) on the handicapped ramps RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED. REFER TO ANSI 705.5 D) Dimension landing adjacent to handicapped ramp, include distance from ramp edge to edge of open door (to building). ANSI access stipulates a 4' clear landing. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED. 11. Per DS 2-02.2.1.13, clarify if any free-standing signage is proposed with dimensions. RESPONSE: I SEE THE HANDICAPPED SIGN, IS THERE GOING TO BE A DOLLAR GENERAL STORE ADVERTISING SIGN OR NOT? 12. Per DS 2-02.2.1.14, this use/building size requires 1 loading zone, striped at a dimension of 12x35 feet at minimum. Revise plan to provide loading zone. RESPONSE: I SEE LOADING ZONE PROVIDED. DEMONSTRATE THAT A VEHICLE CAN MANEUVER PLEASE. 13. Per DS 2-02.2.1.19, per the Major Streets and Routes map, the maximum right of way for Valencia Road is 150 feet. Please provide a future site plan detail to show how the site will meet code should Valencia widen. Please identify where the centerline, travel lane, and curb are - with the distance between the curb and the property line clarified. RESPONSE: WAS NOT SUFFICIENT TO THE ABOVE REQUIRED ITEMS. ONLY A FUTURE RIGHT OF WAY LINE WAS PROVIDED. 14. Per DS 2-02.2.1.20, please show any easements with related recordation information. RESPONSE: STATED EASEMENTS WERE SHOWN. WHERE? TYPE, RECORDING INFORMATION WITH DOCKET AND PAGE NEEDED TOO. 15. Per DS 2-02.2.1.25, please show any free-standing lighting with measurements and elevation details. RESPONSE: NO INFORMATION GIVEN. 16. Per DS 2-02.2.1.28, please show the zoning of adjacent parcels. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED. 17. Per DS 2-02.2.1.31, please identify the site as currently vacant. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED. 18. Per DS 2-02.2.2.A.2. please provide Floor Area Ratio calculations, not to exceed .35, and include lot size information. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED. 19. Please provide a note "this project is subject to requirements of LUC 2.5.3.6.B, all uses must be contained entirely within an enclosed building." RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT WAS NOT ADDRESSED. 20. Depending upon the responses provided, further review comments may be forthcoming. Should you have any questions on this review, please contact me via email at Heather.Thrall@tucsonaz.gov or at 791-4541x1156. DUE TO THE LARGE AMOUNT OF COMMENTS NOT ADDRESSED ON THIS PLAN, I AM REQUESTING THE ARCHITECT CONTACT ME BEFORE RESUBMITTAL. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call (520) 791-5608. HCT C:\planning\site\DSD\T06CM02271 155 w valencia 2.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents |
| 12/21/2006 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: December 22, 2006 SUBJECT: Retail Store- 2nd- Site Plan Review TO: Philip Veneriano LOCATION: 155 W Valencia, T14S R13E Sec24, Ward 5 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: T06CM02271 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the revised site plan, Stormwater Detention/Retention Report and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. The site plan is not approved at this time. The following comments must be addressed prior to site plan approval: DRAINAGE REPORT: 1) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.5.C: The proposed site plan must match the post-development plan (Fig 6) in the submitted drainage report. All stormwater conveyance systems that are proposed on the site plan must be described and presented in detail with all hydraulic calculation sheets. Specifically provide a discussion on both HDPE pipes proposed under the pedestrian circulation paths. Provide calculations that show the 10-year flow is contained under the sidewalk areas. 2) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Provide cross-sections showing basin details (slopes, depth of flow, setbacks from property lines) and all inlet and outlet structures associated with the basin. 3) DS Sec.10-02.14.2.6: Either provide separately, or show a conceptual grading plan on the Site Plan, with the resubmittal of the Site Plan and re-submittal of the Drainage Report. The conceptual grading plan is required on this project due to the detention basin with the proximity to building setbacks. A Geotechnical Report is required. The soils report needs to discuss suitability and feasibility of the project. Description of existing soil constraints for the site, structural design recommendations, pavement design section, and other typical geotechnical data is needed. The soils report shall provide identification / assessment of any potentially hazardous geotechnical areas, provide proposed recommendations for setbacks from building to drainage areas include minimum distance from foundations to drainage swales, and provide infiltration test results. The geotechnical report shall specifically address all criteria listed in this section. See last sentence of this section for items 6 (c) & (d) regarding hydro-collapsing soils and 30-foot test boring for basin design. Recommendations need to be incorporated into the conceptual grading plan, Site Plan, and Drainage Report. SITE PLAN COMMENTS: 4) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.2: Provide the property description (legal description, Subdivision Plat Map with Book and Page) on the project location map located on Sheet G1. 5) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.4: Identify conditions within the square mile area shown on the project location map located on Sheet G1, such as subdivisions, major streets, and major watercourses. Reference recorded subdivision plats by book and page numbers. The location map must be to scale 1-inch is equal to 3 miles. 6) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.5: Provide the basis of bearing used for the lot dimensions and bearings. Basis of Bearing is required prior to site plan approval. 7) DS Sec.2-01.2.1.A.12: Provide vehicular circulation, clearly identified on the site plan. Refer to DS Sec.3-05.2.2 for Vehicular Use Are design and circulation. Specifically the revised site plan has proposed 2 new parking spaces along the south side of the storage area. Provide a back-up spur at the end of the row of parking with a minimum of 3 feet in depth, 3-foot radii, and a wheel barrier to prevent encroachment onto any unsurfaced area. Label all dimensions for both proposed back-up spurs. 8) DS Sec.2-01.2.1.A.14: Provide maneuvering area(s) on site plan for the proposed loading space. Refer to AASHTO for the national standards for turning radii. 9) DS.2-01.2.1.A.19: Revise the site plan to reflect the 150-foot Major Streets and Routes Plan right-of-way for Valencia Road. The proposed site plan shows a 60-foot half right-of-way width. 10) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.20: Provide recording information for the existing right-of-ways for Valencia Road and Missiondale Road. Recordation information is required prior to site plan approval. 11) DS Sec.2-01.2.1.A.21: Provide dimensions from the street monument lines to the existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, driveways and utility lines. 12) DS Sec.2-01.2.1.A.23: Provide existing topographic contours at intervals not exceeding two (2) feet and/or spot elevations as pertinent and Bench Mark based on City of Tucson Datum, including City Field Book and page number. Spot elevations are required to verify that on-site storm water runoff is collected into the proposed basins and that ponding on site will not occur. 13) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.32: The revised site plan relocated the refuse containers. Provide a detail for container area labeling and showing the dimensions for refuse container, show or label gates or doors for trash enclosures. The enclosure must have a minimum inside clear dimension of 10 feet by 10 feet between steel pipes that are required between the container and the enclosure's rear and sidewall. Refer to DS Sec.6-01.4.2 for specifications and requirements on access, placement of containers, bin enclosure and construction. Show maneuverability for refuse vehicles in plan view. Provide turning radius labeled on the site plan to show that collection vehicles can maneuver onsite. 14) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.15: Provide on the site plan all information associated with the drainage report. The following information must be indicated on the site plan: a) Show the areas of detention including the 100-year floodplain and ponding limits with labeled water surface elevations within the basins; b) Provide a detail for the location and type of drainage structure, label and dimension any proposed scuppers that are used for the pedestrian circulation path through the proposed detention basin and at the sidewalks adjacent to the building. Proposed scuppers under all sidewalks will be designed and constructed to convey the 10-year flood flow. Provide a Drainage Report showing scupper calculations that demonstrate that the 10-year flood flow is contained under all sidewalks; c) Indicate proposed ground elevations at different points on the lot, both onsite and offsite, to provide reference to future site drainage. Specifically along the PAAL and any scupper location at the basin; GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: Provide a copy of the Terracon Geotechnical Report that is referenced in the Drainage Report under the Detention/Retention Details Section. The geotechnical report must address the following: 15) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a, 10-02.14.2.6: The geotechnical evaluation needs to be submitted for review, addressing the following: a) Soils report should provide conformance with DS Sec.10-02.14.2.6 regarding 30-foot boring for basin, and provide discussion of potential for hydro-collapsible soils and any recommendation for setbacks from building to basin. b) The soils report shall provide identification / assessment of any potentially hazardous geotechnical areas, and state any geotechnical recommendations and whether there are special provisions for the soil preparation for this development. c) Provide slope stability recommendations for any proposed constructed slopes. d) Provide infiltration rates for the retention requirements of the 5-year storm showing that the maximum disposal time of 12-hours is met. GRADING PLAN: 16) DS Sec.11-01.2.1: A grading permit will be required for this project. Submit a copy of the Grading Plan with the grading permit application. A grading permit may not be issued prior to site plan approval. Subsequent Grading Plan comments may be necessary, depending upon the nature and extent of revisions that occur to the plans 17) Please ensure the grading plan is consistent with the Site Plan and Drainage Report. Grading standards may be accessed at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf 18) Provide a general grading note-specifying conformance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (excavation and grading requirements). 19) DS Sec.10-01.5.2.6: Be advised that the Grading Plan must accurately reflect the proposed detention/retention basin design and dimensions as called out on the proposed site plan and drainage report. Provide these details on the Grading Plan and label the details according to the requirements and dimensions of the drainage report. 20) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C.7: Provide a General Note referencing the Terracon Geotechnical Report, provide the name, address, job number, date, and phone numbers of the firms or individuals who prepared the report. State that the grading plan shall comply with recommendations within the report as well as any subsequent geotechnical addenda. 21) The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) submittal will be reviewed with the grading plan permit application. Further comments may be generated upon submittal of the grading plan permit application. For further information, visit: www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised site plan, revised drainage report, the referenced geotechnical report and a revised landscape plan that address the comments provided above. A grading plan permit application needs to be submitted at this time. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the site plan, drainage report, geotechnical report, and landscape plan. Please enclose "redlines" with the resubmittal package for reference. For any questions or to schedule a meeting, call me at 791-5550, extension 1189. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |