Extracted text (via pymupdf)
16614 characters
PLANNING AND ZONING Development Services Department 10000 N. El Mirage Road, El Mirage, Arizona 85335 623-876-2996; Fax 623-876-4605; TDD 623-933-3258 www.elmirageaz.gov MEMORANDUM TO: Matt Izzo, VESPRO FROM: Jose A. Macias, Senior Planner Development Services Department, Planning & Zoning RE: PZ23-05-09: Desert Truss Site Plan Amendment DATE: June 1, 2023 Mr. Izzo, Please see the comments from the El Mirage Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for the light manufacturing use site plan amendment. BUILDING & SAFETY 1. Building Safety has reviewed Development Application PZ23-05-09 and found the Site Plan Amendment to meet the building planning code requirements. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 2. No comment. ENGINEERING 3. See attached memorandum. FIRE DEPARTMENT 4. No comment. PLANNING & ZONING 5. A Site Plan zoning application will be required for City review and approval for when the undeveloped portion of the property is ready to be developed. 6. A final plat if required shall be submitted for City review and approval to record any easements and or any dedication of land prior to issuing the Certificate of Occupancy. Separate fees apply. POLICE DEPARTMENT 7. No comment. PUBLIC WORKS 8. No comments on the site plan amendment for the Desert Truss project. Engineering Development Services Department 10000 N El Mirage Road, El Mirage 85335 623-972-8116; Fax 623-876-4605; TDD 623-933-3258 www.elmirageaz.gov MEMORANDUM TO: Jose Macias, Planner/GIS FROM: Bryce Christo, P.E., Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: Desert Truss West Development Application Review - Updated DATE: 05-31-23 Below are the Engineering Department’s comments for the above referenced submittal provided in May 2023. These items will have to be addressed prior to the Planning and Zoning Meeting. 1. None. The below items will have to be addressed during the Construction Plan Submittal. Narrative 1. Section 3 a. The majority of the site falls within Zone X (Shaded) which has a slightly different definition than the one shown. b. In general, development within or modification of the floodplain is discouraged. 2. Section 6 – It is the City’s understanding that all farming activities along the west side of Dysart Road, between Peoria Avenue and Olive Avenue, has ceased. 3. Section 7 a. Eight foot wide detached sidewalks will be required along Dysart Road and shall be installed as part of the Desert Truss project. b. Additional right of way may be required along the proposed deceleration lane. See Comment #6 below. 4. Section 8 a. It is noted that this property will be developed in one phase. It should be clarified that the layout shown on the Site Plan will be constructed in one phase but there is potential for other buildings to be constructed in the future. b. It is noted that the eastern half of the property will remain in agricultural production. It is believed that the proposed site is no longer served by irrigation water. 5. No reference to the proposed rail spur is made in the Narrative. It is assumed that the construction of the spur would be a separate project for the future. Coordination with and approval from BNSF would be required. Site Plan/Civil Plans 6. The City will construct the five lane (2-M-2) roadway section for the ultimate Dysart Road and both the right of way and 8-foot PUE along the Desert Truss property has 2 already been dedicated per the Copperwing Final Plat. The project is responsible for an eight-foot-wide detached meandering sidewalk, streetlights, ITS conduit and landscaping/irrigation along the Dysart Road frontage. The project will also be responsible for any deceleration/turn lanes and associated right of way/easement revisions. Offsite Plans will be required to show these improvements. 7. The Zoning is PAD/EI. 8. Show the square footage of the southernmost Gantry. Verify whether the area of the Gables building is 2,500 or 1,875 square feet. 9. Show the dimension from the southern face of curb of the proposed driveway to the northern right of way line of the railroad. 10. The retention basin south of the proposed buildings cannot be within the building setback line. 11. A stop sign is recommended for the driveway at the intersection with Dysart Road. 12. The driveway shall be able to accommodate a WB-67 vehicle without encroaching into the adjacent lane. 13. Any fire access road shall be designed to handle 75,000 lbs. A Geotechnical Report will be required for this project, and it should provide a recommended design section for this access road. 14. It appears additional right of way will need to be dedicated along Dysart Road near the deceleration lane. Right turn lanes may be 11.5 feet wide. 15. Plans shall include applicable City Notes. Call out MAG, City, etc. details to be used. Use the City’s Design & Development Standards Manual (DDSM) as a guide for the final design. Preliminary Grading & Drainage Plan (Updated Grading & Drainage Plans were not provided with this submittal so the August 2022 comments have been provided below) 16. Verify the slope does not exceed 2% in any direction within ADA parking spaces. 17. Side slopes adjacent to the public right of way, areas where pedestrian access is permitted and within Public Utility Easements (PUE) shall be 6:1 or flatter. There shall be at least two feet of level ground between any wall or vertical obstruction and the top of any side slope grading. 18. The proposed retention basins shall be located a minimum of 4 feet away from any structures and shall not be located within any building setbacks, easements, or fire lanes. 19. Basin DB1 appears to be too close to the proposed rail spur. Please verify. 20. The volume provided for Basin DB1 should be 115,273 cubic feet per the Drainage Report. 21. Label basin volumes required and the basin overflow elevations for each basin. 22. This plan shows portions of the existing irrigation ditches to be removed. Any removal of these ditches shall be coordinated with the farmer prior to the release of any Engineering permit. Preliminary Utility Plans (Updated Utility Plans were not provided with this submittal so the August 2022 comments have been provided below) 23. The Utility Plans shall show all utilities and utility easements including electric, gas, phone and cable, if applicable. 24. Onsite sanitary sewer and water mains/services will be private and will be reviewed by the City. The water main between the backflow preventer and main will be reviewed by EPCOR. The sanitary sewer connection will be reviewed by EPCOR. 25. Water meters/vaults shall be located within the right of way and backflow preventers shall be located on private property but not within the PUE. 3 26. The landscaping service requires its own meter and backflow preventer. 27. The maximum length of a dead end water main is 400 feet. 28. Fire hydrants shall adhere to City Details EM-360, 361 and 362. If bollards are required, they shall adhere to City Detail EM-364. The backflow preventers shall adhere to City Details EM-351, 352 or 353. 29. Water valves are required along the fire line, approximately every 500 feet, and at locations so that the maximum number of hydrants to be out of service is two. 30. Hydrant location/spacing will be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department. 31. All utilities shall maintain a minimum of 6 feet of clearance from all fire hydrants and fire suppression devices per City Detail EM-361. 32. Any hydrants within the project site will be private and painted “Safety Red” per City Detail EM-360. All hydrants require markers per MAG Detail 122. 33. Water and sewer lines or services are not recommended to run through retention basins as shown on the plans. If this is desired, the utilities must have a minimum of 4 feet of cover from the bottom of the basin to the top of the pipe. 34. Is the 6-inch sanitary sewer considered a service line or a main. What is the slope? Will there be manholes or cleanouts? 35. Each new building will require a backwater valve per City Detail EM-442. 36. See Section 6-3 of the City’s Design and Development Standards Manual (DDSM) to determine if a pretreatment device is required. 37. Show utility horizontal and vertical clearance information per MAG Detail 404 and City Detail EM-402. 38. Each proposed driveway shall have at least one streetlight. Preliminary Landscape Plans 39. Add City Landscaping and Irrigation Notes (City Detail EM-101-4) to the plan set. 40. Show the sight distance requirements at the proposed driveway per City Detail EM-158 and the TIS. 41. The Water Report calls out a 2-inch landscape service and meter while these plans call for 1.5-inch. Please verify which is correct. 42. Palo Verde trees are not allowed within the City. Please revise. 43. All plantings at maturity shall maintain a minimum of 6 feet of clearance from all fire hydrants and fire suppression devices per City Detail EM-361. 44. No walls or trees shall be placed within the Public Utility Easement (PUE). 45. Trees shall not be placed within 5 feet of any City curb or sidewalk or within 6 feet of any public utility. 46. DG, or another approved soil stabilization measure, is required on all non-paved, improved areas both on site and within the right of way adjacent to the project site. 47. Add a note to the plans that the maintenance for all landscaping and irrigation shown on the plans will be the responsibility of the property owner. 48. Update all of the City Details to the 2023 versions. Preliminary Photometric Lighting Plans 49. Any light or combination of lights which cause light on a public street, other than lights specifically intended for that purpose, shall not exceed one foot candle as measured from the center line of the street. Show the foot candles along the centerline of Dysart Road to verify that the proposed lighting will not exceed the maximum limit. Exterior Elevations 50. No comments. 4 Preliminary Drainage Report (An updated Drainage Report was not provided with this submittal so the August 2022 comments have been provided below) 51. Section 3.1 a. The report states that a berm and chain link fence is proposed for construction along the north shared property line. This is not shown on the plans by either Desert Truss or G3. b. The report states that G3 will reduce, if not eliminate, all offsite flows from the north. What if Desert Truss develops first? 52. Section 4.3 - Use the City Runoff Coefficients per City Code Section 155.054(B)(6)(a). Concrete = 0.95, roofs/asphalt = 0.85, grass = 0.15 and desert/rock lawn = 0.70. 53. Section 4.4 – The report states the ultimate outfall as 1101.72 but the Grading Plans show 1101.00. Please verify which is correct. 54. Section 4.5 – Remove the dissipation rate from the calculations. 55. Appendix A - The City’s Dysart Road plans only show one proposed scupper that will drain to the Desert Truss property, approximately 200 feet north of the south property line. The Desert Truss plans show a proposed scupper, approximately 50 feet south of the north property line. Calculations will be required for this scupper and the basin that it drains to. This Drainage Area (DA-6?) must extend to the ultimate Dysart Road centerline? This will also reduce the size of Catchment Area E per the Dysart Road Drainage Report. Final Water Report 56. The water service area for the Copperwing Logistics Center is in the process of being transferred to EPCOR. The City of El Mirage will still be responsible for fire protection and the design of that system will be reviewed and approved by the City. 57. Section 3.3 – Add the referenced City of Phoenix criteria in the Appendix. 58. Section 3.4 – Section 3.2 states that the 50,000 square foot future building would be used for the fire flow calculations. This building size would require 4,750 gpm before the reduction. 59. Appendix B – The Fire Flow Test shows the static pressure exceeds 80 psi which may require individual pressure reducing valves be installed on private services. 60. Provide a Table that shows the maximum velocity, head loss in ft/1000 ft and minimum pressures for the Average Day, Maximum Day and Peak Hour Demands. Final Sewer Report 61. Section 1.0 – The City has never owned the existing sewer main adjacent to the site. That main was designed, constructed and is maintained by EPCOR. 62. Section 4.1 – The section states the City does not allow tapping into an existing manhole without written authorization, The manhole in question belongs to EPCOR so that decision shall be made by that agency. 63. Table 4.1 a. Where did the Daily Unit Rate of 0.400 gpd/unit for the offices come from? b. The Qp for the Manager’s Office should be 1.67 gpm. c. This report assumes the future buildings are warehouses while the Water Report assumed they were commercial. There is also no mention of the future buildings in the report. 64. Table 4.2 – For pipes under 12 inches, the d/D = 0.50. 65. Section 5.0 – ATCs will be signed by EPCOR as it is their collection system. 5 Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) 66. The City’s Dysart Road project is now anticipated to be complete in late 2024. ALTA Survey 67. Some of the text on Sheet 1 is shown as squares. Please revise the PDF. 68. The Schedule B number references on Sheet 3 appear to be off by 1 (i.e., #11 should actually be #12). 69. Schedule B Item #20 is noted as “shown” but does not appear on the plans (keeping Comment #75 in mind). Deed 70. No comments Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 71. Section 3.2 & 7.2 – The project site lies within a Water and Wastewater Service Area that is in the process of being transferred to EPCOR. 72. Section 3.3 – The “stormwater manhole” found on the southern boundary of the site is actually an irrigation manhole that helps direct the water from the existing concrete ditch through the TI Cold site to the south. 73. Section 3.4.5 – The sanitary sewer manhole found at the southeast corner of the property was installed by EPCOR and is located within the right of way, not on the subject property. Miscellaneous 74. A Final Plat will be required prior to Certificate of Occupancy. The Plat shall show any right of way and/or easement dedications including: a. Additional right of way due to the deceleration lane. b. 1-foot VNAE c. A Public Access Easement where the proposed driveway encroaches onto the private property. 75. Due to the location of the adjacent Flood Zone “A”, a Floodplain Use Permit (FUP) or similar permit may be required. Contact the Flood Control District of Maricopa County to determine what is required. A copy of the FUP shall be provided to the City prior to the release of any Engineering permit. 76. A Geotechnical Report will be required to provide on-site pavement sections. Verify the proposed pavement sections can handle 75,000 lbs. for the fire access lane. 77. A Haul Permit will be required if 500 cubic yards or more of material will be brought into or out of the site. This will require a separate application, an exhibit showing the haul route and insurance from the company performing the haul. The fee is $300. 78. An Approval to Construct (ATC) will be required from MCESD for the water and sewer line extensions. A copy shall be provided to the City prior to the release of any Engineering permit. 79. A Dust Control Permit from the County will be required prior to the release of any Engineering permit. 80. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required per the City’s SWPPP Guidelines document. A Notice of Intent (NOI) from ADEQ will be required prior to release of any Engineering permit. 81. Any cutting of the pavement in the reconstructed Dysart Road will require Pavement Cut Fees per the most current Fee Schedule and would require the street to be renovated with 6 a slurry seal or micro seal for 10 feet on either side of the cut for the full width of all lanes affected. 82. The City will not release any permits until EPCOR provides the City with their approval of the water and sewer plans and reports. The applicant is responsible for submitting plans to EPCOR for review and approval. The above comments are meant to be general in nature and are not considered to be all inclusive. Additional comments will arise during the formal permit submittal.