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: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Permit Number - T07CM01074
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/21/2007 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 11/21/2007 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 11/21/2007 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Circle K - 6th & I-10 T07CM01074 Site Plan (4th Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 21, 2007 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. This site plan was reviewed for full code compliance with the City of Tucson Development Standards (D.S.) and Land Use Code (LUC). 2. Zoning acknowledges that the wheel stop detail, and that most of the wheel stops have been removed from the vehicle parking spaces. This said provide a dimension for the vehicle overhang of the sidewalk. Also provide a dimension for the sidewalk width. There is a 6' dimension shown for the sidewalk at the north end of the vehicle parking spaces, near the billboard loading space. The minimum width of a sidewalk with a vehicle overhang is 6'-6". 3. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape plan. 4. Once the above comments have been addressed zoning is willing to provide an over the counter review for this site plan. Call or email for an appointment. 5. Additional comments may be forth coming depending on how each comment has been addressed. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956 C:\planning\site\t07cm01074-4th.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents |
| 11/27/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 11/27/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. A 6' wall is required to screen loading zones from 1-10 / Benson Hwy street frontages per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. 2. Note: The site plan and landscape plan must show identical site layout to avoid conflict between the two plans. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape plan. |
| 12/12/2007 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: December 12, 2007 SUBJECT: 3301 S 6th Avenue Site Plan- 4th Engineering Review TO: Lance Robinson LOCATION: T14S R13E Sec25 Ward 5 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: T07CM01074 (Site Plan) SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the revised site plan, Drainage Statement (L.E.A.D.S., Inc., 02NOV07), Geotechnical Investigation Report (Foree&Vann, Inc., 23MAY07 with addendum 16NOV07), and a copy of the Title Report. The Drainage Statement was reviewed for site plan purposes only. The site plan is not approved at this time. The following items need to be addressed: DRAINAGE STATEMENT: 1) Dry wells are highly discouraged due to substantial drywell failure within the City of Tucson. Floodplain Ordinance Tucson Code Section 26-10(c) states: The design of a detention or retention system, as reviewed and approved by the city engineer, shall include consideration of the degree of existing development within the basin and the capacity of the downstream drainage facilities. The systems will be designed with strict conformance to the public's health, safety and welfare. The effects of recharging storm runoff and possible pollution of the groundwater shall be evaluated for all systems employing infiltration systems, such as dry wells, in order to prevent contamination of the groundwater aquifer. Dry wells designed within gas stations do not satisfy a design that is in strict conformance with the public's health, safety or with a discussion or evidence on potential pollution of the groundwater aquifer. 2) The results of a required 30-foot-deep boring (DS Sec.10-02.14.2.6) should be examined to determine possible causes of slow infiltration or engineering measures needed to ensure infiltration. Threshold retention requirements may be waived in certain cases when stormwater retention is not feasible due to constraints imposed by subsurface conditions. In such cases detention criteria may be imposed in lieu of threshold retention requirements. A geotechnical report must be submitted to address the required 30-foot boring. 3) Provide a geotechnical report that specifically assesses the proposed underground stormwater retention/detention system beneath the pavement. The geotechnical report shall state whether the chambers are subject to collapsing or whether the pavement structure would be damaged from heavy traffic loads and provide a discussion on groundwater recharge for the proposed drywells. The Geotechnical Report and addendum does not address the underground systems 4) Provide references from the manufacture where these types of underground stormwater systems and dry wells have been used and their applicability to this project. All references should include use and maintenance of the underground stormwater system and how that system is achieving design criteria. The submitted references from Contech Stormwater Solutions do not include references to dry wells systems only underground retention systems. Under ground retention systems that do not use a method of dry wells to dispose of water is an acceptable form of retaining the 5-yr threshold. Dry wells are the main problem with the design of this project due to their high failure rate within the City of Tucson. 5) Verify that the recommendations in the required geotechnical report have been addressed in the Drainage Report, basin design and basin location. SITE PLAN: Engineering Division acknowledges that a Tentative Plat (S07-155) and grading plan (T07BU02153) have been submitted for review and comments have already been posted for each activity. All comments for development under the comments posted for S07-155 and T07BU02153 must be addressed. The site plan and grading plan can not be approved prior to Tentative Plat approval. 6) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.11: Revise the site plan so that it is designed in accordance with Street Development Standard 3-01.0. The following items need to be revised or added to the proposed site plan: a) Label the required 25-foot radii at the access point along 6th Avenue. b) Per TDOT the access point closest to the intersection of 6th Avenue and Benson Highway must be closed off, contact Jose Ortiz for further clarification. c) Revise the site plan to show all handicap access ramps with truncated domes per ANSI Standards. 7) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.19: Provide a letter of approval from Arizona Department of Transportation for the proposed site plan, specifically for the driveway closure adjacent to the intersection of 6th Ave and Benson Highway. Per ADOT they are doing site improvements for this intersection that may overlap with your project. This project must show that it is in conformance with the Development Standards and the approved ADOT improvement plan for sidewalk location and access ramps. Contact Steve Spear, Senior Permit Technician for ADOT review of the site plan. Sspears@adot.gov or (520)-838-2983. 8) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Revise the site plan to show all existing storm drainage facilities adjacent to the site. Provide the Improvement Plan reference number on the site plan for the storm drains and culverts that are adjacent to this site. 9) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.19: Revise the site plan to be in accordance with the Major Streets and Routes Plan. The following information must be revised or shown on the site plan: a) Revise the site plan to provide for the intersection widening for Benson Hwy and 6th Avenue. Benson Hwy and 6th Avenue both have a proposed MS&R r-o-w of 120-feet, which requires a taper. For both Benson Hwy and 6th Avenue the taper has ½ r-o-w of 75-feet in width for a length of 300-feet measured from the centerline Benson Hwy and 6th Avenue, then tapers for an additional 300-feet to meet the future ½ r-o-w of 60-feet. No improvements are allowed within this future r-o-w area. Contact Tucson Department of Transportation, Jose Ortiz, for clarity on the additional widening that is required for this intersection. Approval from TDOT is required prior to Tentative Plat or site plan approval. b) Revise the site plan to label and dimension the future curb and sidewalk area. For a 120-foot right-of-way the future curb and sidewalk area is dimensioned at 9-feet. 10) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.16: Revise the site plan, in conjunction with the submitted Drainage Report to reflect the following information. For additional information regarding drainage standards, see the City of Tucson Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management. a) Provide spot elevations at intervals along the proposed basin bottoms to show slope percentage. The bottom of basin slope must be 0.5% or greater to prevent accumulation of standing water and mosquito infestation. b) Dry wells are highly discouraged due to substantial drywell failure within the City of Tucson. Floodplain Ordinance Tucson Code Section 26-10(c) states: The design of a detention or retention system, as reviewed and approved by the city engineer, shall include consideration of the degree of existing development within the basin and the capacity of the downstream drainage facilities. The systems will be designed with strict conformance to the public's health, safety and welfare. The effects of recharging storm runoff and possible pollution of the groundwater shall be evaluated for all systems employing infiltration systems, such as dry wells, in order to prevent contamination of the groundwater aquifer. Dry wells designed within gas stations do not satisfy a design that is in strict conformance with the public's health, safety or with a discussion or evidence on potential pollution of the groundwater aquifer. c) The Drainage Report must meet or exceed the minimum criteria within the Development Standards and within the ADEQ Type 2.04 General Permit for drywells that drain areas at motor fuel dispensing facilities where motor fuels are used, stored or loaded. d) Verification is required when any drainage solution occurring outside the boundaries of individual lots is constructed with adjacent owner's permission, even if the same person owns the property at the time of platting. Per the site plan the down spout locations and riprap spillways encroach onto the adjacent property. Provide a notarized, signed agreement from the adjacent property owner stating approval of and long term use of the proposed splash pads. 11) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.20: There is an existing 10' electric easement, running east and west, which is located under the proposed structure. Provide documentation abandoning or re-describing this easement or provide a letter from the utility company stating that it is OK to construct the proposed structure over the easement. If the easement is abandoned the recordation data (docket and page) must be provided on the plan. Per your comment letter, provide documentation from Craig Gross, Deputy Director stating that the easement abandonment can be tied into the Certificate of Occupancy instead of the site plan. No documentation was included with the submittal. 12) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.20: There appears be a utility easement with sewer and overhead electrical, running north and south, under a portion of the propose structures. Provide documentation abandoning or re-describing this easement or provide a letter from the utility company stating that it is OK to construct the proposed structure over the easement. If the easement is abandoned the recordation data (docket and page) must be provided on the plan. . Per your comment letter, provide documentation from Craig Gross, Deputy Director stating that the easement abandonment can be tied into the Certificate of Occupancy instead of the site plan. No documentation was included with the submittal. 13) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.23: Revise the site plan to include the existing and proposed spot elevations and/or topography on the site plan. The site plan does not reference existing or proposed spot elevation or topography across the site to meet this requirement. 14) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.32: Provide a Trash Enclosure Detail on the revised site plan. Provide the minimum refuse enclosure requirements per DS Sec.6-01. Refer to the attached Figure 3 (included with the hard copy of the comment letter) per DS Sec.6-01 for the required refuse enclosure dimensions and construction. 15) DS Sec.11-01.9: Revise the site plan to provide the required 2-feet setback from all property boundaries to the proposed limits of grading, fill slopes, retention basin, block wall and any associated erosion protection. The plan view on the site plan shows that the limits of grading encroach within the required 2-feet setback for the top of fill slope for the basin along the north property line. Additionally the site plan shows only a 1-foot setback from the east property line to the proposed building, revise setback to 2-feet or provide a construction easement on the adjacent property to allow vehicles and equipment to encroach during the construction phase. Provide sufficient room to allow for the 2-feet setback from property lines to top of fill slopes and associated erosion protection. 16) Review and approval from TDOT Permits and Codes for all improvements within the public right-of-way will be required. A right-of-way use permit application will be required prior to construction. Refer to the following links for TDOT Forms and applications: a) http://www.tucsonaz.gov/dsd/Forms_Fees___Maps/Applications/applications.html / b) http://www.dot.ci.tucson.az.us/engineering/pia.php c) Or contact Thad Harveston at 741-3115 for all additional questions regarding r-o-w. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: 17) Provide a revised geotechnical report, or addendum, that specifically assesses the proposed underground stormwater retention/detention system beneath the pavement. Geotechnical Report and addendum does not address underground systems. The geotechnical report shall state whether the chambers are subject to collapsing or whether the pavement structure would be damaged from heavy traffic loads. 18) Provide infiltration rates for underground detention/retention design. The percolation rates provided in the addendum only address a retention basin that is 3.0 feet deep with a 1.5-foot of head; this does not reflect the underground system. If underground stormwater chambers are proposed for the retention requirements a pre- and post percolation test will be required to assure that the system drains within the required time limit of 12-hours. GRADING PLAN: 19) DS Sec.11-01.2.1: A grading plan permit application (T07BU02153) has been submitted for review and comments have been posted. A grading permit may not be issued prior to Tentative Plat or Site Plan approval. 20) Please ensure the grading plan is consistent with the Tentative Plat, Site Plan, Drainage Statement, and Geotechnical Report. Grading standards may be accessed at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf. 21) Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) requirements are applicable to this project. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans and text addressing stormwater controls for all areas affected by construction activities related to this development will be required with grading plan submittal. For further information, visit www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/stormwater.html. GENERAL COMMENTS: Provide an approved Tentative Plat, a revised site plan, Drainage Report, and Geotechnical Report at re-submittal. The revised site plan, Drainage Report, and Geotechnical Report must address the comments provided above. 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, and Geotechnical Report. If you have any questions, I can be reached at (520) 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division COT Development Services |
| 12/13/2007 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01/23/2008 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 01/23/2008 | CINDY AGUILAR | REJECT SHELF | Completed |