Review Type
Outcome
Est. Completion Date
Completed
Engineering Traffic Review
No Comments
07/05/2023
06/14/2023
Reviewer:
Reviewer Comments:
Building Review
No Comments
07/05/2023
06/14/2023
Reviewer:
Reviewer Comments:
Planning Review
No Comments
07/05/2023
06/13/2023
Reviewer:
Corrections:
Correction 1:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The height of the ecology blocks is not clearly marked on the plans. Please define the height of the ecology block wall on the preliminary storm and utilities site plan.
PMC 20.58.005 (2) (ii) Rear and Side Property Lines. All retaining walls shall be set back from any rear or side yard property line by a minimum of six feet. The maximum height of any singular retaining wall within 30 feet of a rear or side property line shall be six feet above finished grade. A minimum of six feet of stepback shall be provided between any terraced retaining walls proposed within 30 feet of a rear or side property line. No more than a total of three stepped retaining walls (complying with the maximum six-foot height limit above finished grade) shall be placed within 30 feet of a rear or side property line. A Type I visual barrier landscape buffer shall be provided in front of all retaining walls, in accordance with the city’s vegetation management standards (VMS) manual. [Preliminary storm and utilities, pg.1]
Correction 2:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The calculations were provided in the DRT response letter, but not on the elevations. Please resubmit elevations with the street-facing wall consisting of at least 60% windows and/or transparent doorways and include the calculations of this percentage on sheet A-201 of the exterior elevation plans.
PMC 20.26.300 (3)(d) Building Entrances and Design. At least one building entrance for an individual building (or individual tenant spaces) shall face each public street frontage or be located within 50 lineal feet from a public street frontage. Directly linking pedestrian access shall be provided between the street right-of-way and each building entrance. No less than 60 percent of the surface area of any street-facing wall shall consist of windows and/or transparent doorways.
[elevations, pg. 1]
Correction 3:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Clearly label where silva cells have been added on the storm plan. Ensure that silva cell detail is included on civil permit application. [Preliminary storm and utilities, pg.1]
Correction 4:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The height of the ecology blocks is not clearly marked on the plans. Please define the height of the ecology block wall on the preliminary storm and utilities site plan.??? ? ???? ? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???????? ?????? ??? ????????? ????? ????? ?? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ???????? ???? ?? ? ??????? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??????? ?????? ?? ??? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ? ???? ?? ? ???? ?? ???? ???????? ???? ????? ?? ??? ???? ????? ???????? ?????? ? ??????? ?? ??? ???? ?? ???????? ????? ?? ???????? ??????? ??? ???????? ????????? ????? ???????? ?????? ? ???? ?? ? ???? ?? ???? ???????? ????? ?? ???? ???? ? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ????????? ????? ?????????? ???? ??? ??????? ???????? ?????? ????? ????? ???????? ?????? ????? ?? ?????? ?????? ? ???? ?? ? ???? ?? ???? ???????? ????? ? ???? ? ?????? ??????? ????????? ?????? ????? ?? ???????? ?? ????? ?? ??? ????????? ?????? ?? ?????????? ???? ??? ?????? ?????????? ?????????? ????????? ????? ??????? ???????????? ????? ??? ?????????? ????
Reviewer Comments:
Engineering Review
No Comments
07/05/2023
06/08/2023
Reviewer:
Corrections:
Correction 1:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Show how sanitary sewer connection to trash enclosure will be feasible in this location. [PRE-1 020223]
Correction 2:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Show approximate pavement removal extents for infiltration trench excavation footprint. [PRE-1 020223]
Reviewer Comments:
Fire Review
No Comments
07/05/2023
05/23/2023
Reviewer:
Reviewer Comments:
Engineering Traffic Review
No Comments
03/24/2023
04/28/2023
Reviewer:
Corrections:
Correction 1:
Other/Miscellaneous
Comments:
Sight distance analysis may be required during civil review to ensure driveway(s) can meet City standards for entering sight distance. Any sight obstructions (signage, trees, fences, etc.) must be identified.
Both site driveways must be upgraded to meet City/ADA standards. Drop approach 01.02.18 will be applicable at this location.
During civil design channelization/striping plan will be required. Proposed channelization arrows & striping cannot be located on sidewalk. Arrows must be thermoplastic
During civil design AutoTurn analysis will be required to ensure design vehicles can safely navigate site.
Remove on-site loading zone within driveway throat. This design will likely cause operational issues that will impact E Main.
Call out replacement of existing easterly driveway with curb/gutter/sidewalk
Per Puyallup Municipal Code Section 11.08.135, the applicant/owner would be expected to construct half-street improvements including curb, gutter, planter strip, sidewalk, roadway base, pavement, and street lighting. Any existing improvements which are damaged now or during construction, or which do not meet current City Standards, shall be replaced. Per previous communication:
-Existing 8ft sidewalk can remain, commercial driveways must be upgraded to meet ADA & City standards.
-Eastern driveway removed and replaced with City standard sidewalk.
-You’ll need to work with planning to ensure your design can retain existing street trees.
Traffic Scoping:
Provide details on how exiting building will be used in the future
If future use is not known, scoping worksheet will need to assume worst case scenario based on drive-thru type land uses.
Provide operational analysis of nearby signalized intersections (5th St SE/E Main, 15th St SE/E Main). Slight variations in trip distribution estimates will trigger thresholds for analysis.
Traffic Impact fees (TIF) will be assessed in accordance with fees adopted by ordinance, per PMC 21.10. Impact fees are subject to change and are adopted by ordinance. The applicant shall pay the proportionate impact fees adopted at the time of building permit application
Reviewer Comments:
Engineering Review
Revisions Required
03/24/2023
03/23/2023
Reviewer:
Corrections:
Correction 1:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The City adopted the 2019 Manual in July 2022. Update the storm design and references, information and tables in the report to align with the 2019 Manual. [Drainage Report, Page 1]
Correction 2:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Remove the word, "project". Be careful when using the term "Project Site." The 2019 Manual has two different meanings for "Project Site" and "Site." [Drainage Report, Page 1]
Correction 3:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Update references to the 2014 Ecology Manual with equivalent reference points in the 2019 Manual. Requirements for soils testing have subtly changed so confirm the testing criteria is still met. [Soils Report, Page 6]
Correction 4:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Submit an updated Soils report with the completed referenced observations conducted during the wet weather months. [Soils Report, Page 9]
Correction 5:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Grain Size Analysis may be used if soils are unconsolidated by glacial advance. Please confirm site soils have this characteristic. [Soils Report, Page 9]
Correction 6:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Provide calculations that arrive to the design infiltration rate. [Soils Report, Page 9]
Correction 7:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Be sure to review Latest City Standards updates. Design enclosure per City Standard Section 208.1. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 8:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Steep slopes are potentially in the vicinity of the proposed infiltration gallery. confirm slopes down stream of the facility location. All facilities shall be a minimum of 50 feet from any steep (greater than 15%) slope. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 9:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Stormwater infiltration BMPs shall be set back 100-feet from retaining walls to prevent short circuiting of stormwater by free-draining rock behind the retaining walls, unless the bottom of the infiltration BMP is greater than 2-feet below the lowest point on the retaining wall. Confirm preliminary elevations of the wall and facility on plans. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 10:
See Document Markup
Comments:
What is this block next the a catch basin?. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 11:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Show existing overhead power and poles. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 12:
See Document Markup
Comments:
There is a street tree in the vicinity of the proposed water service lines. Show existing street trees and solution to conflict on plans. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 13:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Provide a Table to reasonably estimate the quantity of existing and proposed hard surface areas. Include off-site areas. Use table attached to sheet as a guide for what is needed. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 14:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Show limits of disturbance and show all critical areas and steep slopes. No clearing, filling, grading or other alteration occurs within any critical areas or associated buffer unless specifically authorized pursuant to Chapter 21.06 Environmentally Critical Areas Management of the Puyallup Municipal Code [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 15:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Give approximate cut/fill quantities. include excavation for storm system. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 16:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Infiltration systems must be a minimum 10' from other structures, including other infiltration systems. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 17:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Delineate between the existing limits and new/replaced limits of the asphalt/concrete pavements. Use a sawcut line and proposed asphalt shading. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 18:
See Document Markup
Comments:
All new/replaced hard surface and converted vegetation areas must meet the latest Ecology standards. If any new/replaced area goes to the existing system's basin, you must show the existing system is adequately sized using the latest standards. This calculation is possible but requires detailed basin and storage sizing clarifications. You must consider the amount of storage the non-disturbed existing hard surface area will be using in the existing infiltration gallery per the previously constructed standards. Then show the storage space left over has capacity for the new/replaced hard surface area in the basin. Add this narrative to Storm report. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 19:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Create a separate preliminary drainage basin map showing existing and new/replaced areas that go into existing storm system and any existing and new/replaced area going into the new storm system. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 20:
See Document Markup
Comments:
There are two sets of contours in locations that appear to be existing surface to remain. Confirm proposed contours are only shown in new/replaced areas. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 21:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Show how sanitary sewer connection to trash enclosure will be feasible in this location. [PRE-1 020223]
Correction 22:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Show approximate pavement removal extents for infiltration trench excavation footprint. [PRE-1 020223]
Reviewer Comments:
Planning Review
Revisions Required
03/24/2023
03/22/2023
Reviewer:
Corrections:
Correction 1:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The landscape plan it states, “utilities and code required offsets prevent the installation of trees within the type IIa street front setback area”. If frontage improvements and associated 10’ planter strip are not required as a part of this project, we will require that type IIa landscaping with associated trees be planted at a maximum of 30’ intervals and the existing three street trees retained where possible or replanted in like.
a.Are the three existing street trees planned to be removed as a result of the placement of these utilities?
b.Can the proposed utilities and grease interceptor be placed outside of the required 12’ perimeter landscaping area? The existing street trees need to be retained where possible.
[landscape plan, pg. 1]
Correction 2:
See Document Markup
Comments:
1.The landscape plan it states, “utilities and code required offsets prevent the installation of trees within the type IIa street front setback area”. If frontage improvements and associated 10’ planter strip are not required as a part of this project, we will require that type IIa landscaping with associated trees be planted at a maximum of 30’ intervals and the existing three street trees retained where possible or replanted in like.
a.Are the three existing street trees planned to be removed as a result of the placement of these utilities?
b.Can the proposed utilities and grease interceptor be placed outside of the required 12’ perimeter landscaping area? The existing street trees need to be retained where possible. [landscape plan, pg. 1]
Correction 3:
See Document Markup
Comments:
All internal landscape islands and connector strips shall include a single row of structural soil cells (EX. Silva cells, or equivalent) along the perimeter of all internal parking lot landscape islands where parking spaces are proposed (under the pavement directly abutting the outer edge of the landscape island, except in drive lanes). [landscape plan, pg. 1]
Correction 4:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Existing tree(s) on the site which is larger than 15” in Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) is considered to be a ‘significant tree’ and must be retained, where possible.
a.If your site includes any significant trees, then you must include a tree risk assessment completed by a certified arborist and provided with your land use application.
[landscape plan, pg. 1]
Correction 5:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Please denote what use the striped loading area on the west of the new restaurant will be utilized for. [site plan, pg.3]
Correction 6:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The height of the ecology blocks is not clearly marked on the plans. Please define the height of the ecology block wall on the preliminary storm and utilities site plan.
PMC 20.58.005 (2) (ii) Rear and Side Property Lines. All retaining walls shall be set back from any rear or side yard property line by a minimum of six feet. The maximum height of any singular retaining wall within 30 feet of a rear or side property line shall be six feet above finished grade. A minimum of six feet of stepback shall be provided between any terraced retaining walls proposed within 30 feet of a rear or side property line. No more than a total of three stepped retaining walls (complying with the maximum six-foot height limit above finished grade) shall be placed within 30 feet of a rear or side property line. A Type I visual barrier landscape buffer shall be provided in front of all retaining walls, in accordance with the city’s vegetation management standards (VMS) manual. [Preliminary storm and utilities, pg.1]
Correction 7:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Provide the height of the proposed trash and recycling receptacle and associated enclosures on the elevation plans.
PMC 20.30.045 (7) Trash and Recycling Receptacles. Trash and recycling receptacles shall be screened from adjacent properties and public rights-of-way by an opaque visual barrier no lower than the highest point of the receptacles.
[site plan, pg.3]
Correction 8:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The rotating Taco Time sign onsite is nonconforming as to height and setback in addition to rotating motions not being permitted per PMC 20.60.020. Please note whether the existing will remain.
If the project plans to remove the rotating sign, new signage must conform with the current zoning sign code PMC 20.60. [site plan, pg.3]
Correction 9:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Please include a designated bicycle parking area that accommodates up to five (5) bicycle spaces. Refer to PMC 20.55.015 (below) for bicycle parking area requirements.
See PMC 20.55.016 Motorcycle/bicycle parking requirements. [site plan, pg. 3]
Correction 10:
See Document Markup
Comments:
If the existing building will be used for another restaurant, parking requirements are being met. However, if the use will change, then parking requirements may change.
[site plan, pg. 3]
Correction 11:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The plans show an 8’ deep pedestrian-oriented plaza area along the eastern portion of the southern façade, but not along the western portion. Please increase the size of the plaza space on the western side of the façade to a minimum of 8’.
Required bike parking has none been shown on the plans. Since the plaza space is required to include amenities, it may be beneficial to add the bike parking along the western portion of the southern façade in addition to increasing that space to 8’ in depth.
[site plan, pg. 3]
Correction 12:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The calculations were provided in the DRT response letter, but not on the elevations. Please resubmit elevations with the street-facing wall consisting of at least 60% windows and/or transparent doorways and include the calculations of this percentage on sheet A-201 of the exterior elevation plans.
PMC 20.26.300 (3)(d) Building Entrances and Design. At least one building entrance for an individual building (or individual tenant spaces) shall face each public street frontage or be located within 50 lineal feet from a public street frontage. Directly linking pedestrian access shall be provided between the street right-of-way and each building entrance. No less than 60 percent of the surface area of any street-facing wall shall consist of windows and/or transparent doorways.
[elevations, pg. 1]
Correction 13:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The calculations were provided in the DRT response letter, but not on the elevations. Please resubmit elevations with the street-facing wall consisting of at least 60% windows and/or transparent doorways and include the calculations of this percentage on sheet A-201 of the exterior elevation plans.
PMC 20.26.300 (3)(d) Building Entrances and Design. At least one building entrance for an individual building (or individual tenant spaces) shall face each public street frontage or be located within 50 lineal feet from a public street frontage. Directly linking pedestrian access shall be provided between the street right-of-way and each building entrance. No less than 60 percent of the surface area of any street-facing wall shall consist of windows and/or transparent doorways.
[elevations, pg. 1]
Correction 14:
Other/Miscellaneous
Comments:
SEPA Checklist
1. Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP):
DAHP is requesting that an Inadvertent Discovery Plan is created and kept onsite during construction. Their comment e-mail is viewable through the CityView Portal.
2. Puyallup Tribe of Indians:
The Puyallup Tribe has stated that 1115 E Main is located within a high probability area for impacting cultural resources. They are asking for verification as to whether or not the project will be removing the existing parking lot in order to complete a new/larger parking lot or if you are only adding on. If the existing parking lot is getting torn up, it will need an Archaeological monitory during ground disturbance. Their comment e-mail is viewable through the CityView Portal.
3. Department of Ecology:
The Department of Ecology provided a comment e-mail. This comment e-mail is viewable through the CityView Portal.
4. Nisqually Indian Tribe:
The Nisqually Indian Tribe provided a comment letter. This comment letter is viewable through the CityView Portal.
5. One public comment was received via telephone by a neighboring property owner, Michael Ewing at 1033 E Main. He would like to express his concern over the proposed trash enclosure. The existing Taco Time trash enclosure onsite has allegedly resulted in rodents becoming an issue on their property. The proposed trash enclosure is proposed to be located closer to their property line where his residence is. In addition to this, he stated that the existing Taco Time drive-through produces a significant amount of sound and light that has impacts on their property. Mr. Ewing is concerned with the addition of another drive-through and associated light and sound impacts. He would like to recommend a possible sound or visual buffer such as “insulated” vinyl fencing.
Correction 15:
Other/Miscellaneous
Comments:
Critical Areas
1. The wetland delineation and streams report prepared by Beaver Creek Environmental have been reviewed by our third-party consultant, Confluence Environmental Company. Confluence has confirmed that there are no wetlands present on the site. However, corrections need to be made to the report and resubmitted to the City for review. In addition to this, they are requesting that additional information be required regarding the floodplain habitat. Please see their full review letter in Documents & Images in the CityView Portal titled "Confluence Environmental Company Puyallup Taco Time wetland Report Review 101122"
Correction 16:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Clearly label where silva cells have been added on the storm plan. Ensure that silva cell detail is included on civil permit application. [Preliminary storm and utilities, pg.1]
Correction 17:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The height of the ecology blocks is not clearly marked on the plans. Please define the height of the ecology block wall on the preliminary storm and utilities site plan.
PMC 20.58.005 (2) (ii) Rear and Side Property Lines. All retaining walls shall be set back from any rear or side yard property line by a minimum of six feet. The maximum height of any singular retaining wall within 30 feet of a rear or side property line shall be six feet above finished grade. A minimum of six feet of stepback shall be provided between any terraced retaining walls proposed within 30 feet of a rear or side property line. No more than a total of three stepped retaining walls (complying with the maximum six-foot height limit above finished grade) shall be placed within 30 feet of a rear or side property line. A Type I visual barrier landscape buffer shall be provided in front of all retaining walls, in accordance with the city’s vegetation management standards (VMS) manual. [Preliminary storm and utilities, pg.1]
Reviewer Comments:
Building Review
No Comments
03/24/2023
03/21/2023
Reviewer:
Reviewer Comments:
Fire Review
No Comments
03/24/2023
02/23/2023
Reviewer:
Reviewer Comments:
Engineering Traffic Review
Revisions Required
10/15/2022
11/03/2022
Reviewer:
Corrections:
Correction 1:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Show frontage proposed curb and gutter and sidewalk where existing driveway will be removed per city standards account for utility cuts in sidewalk and road. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 2:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Show commercial driveway approach and ADA compliant sidewalk and ramps per City standard details. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 3:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Correction 4:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Correction 5:
Other/Miscellaneous
Comments:
Sight distance analysis may be required during civil review to ensure driveway(s) can meet City standards for entering sight distance. Any sight obstructions (signage, trees, fences, etc.) must be identified.
Both site driveways must be upgraded to meet City/ADA standards. Drop approach 01.02.18 will be applicable at this location.
During civil design channelization/striping plan will be required. Proposed channelization arrows & striping cannot be located on sidewalk. Arrows must be thermoplastic
During civil design AutoTurn analysis will be required to ensure design vehicles can safely navigate site.
Remove on-site loading zone within driveway throat. This design will likely cause operational issues that will impact E Main.
Call out replacement of existing easterly driveway with curb/gutter/sidewalk
Per Puyallup Municipal Code Section 11.08.135, the applicant/owner would be expected to construct half-street improvements including curb, gutter, planter strip, sidewalk, roadway base, pavement, and street lighting. Any existing improvements which are damaged now or during construction, or which do not meet current City Standards, shall be replaced. Per previous communication:
-Existing 8ft sidewalk can remain, commercial driveways must be upgraded to meet ADA & City standards.
-Eastern driveway removed and replaced with City standard sidewalk.
-You’ll need to work with planning to ensure your design can retain existing street trees.
Traffic Scoping:
Provide details on how exiting building will be used in the future
If future use is not known, scoping worksheet will need to assume worst case scenario based on drive-thru type land uses.
Provide operational analysis of nearby signalized intersections (5th St SE/E Main, 15th St SE/E Main). Slight variations in trip distribution estimates will trigger thresholds for analysis.
Traffic Impact fees (TIF) will be assessed in accordance with fees adopted by ordinance, per PMC 21.10. Impact fees are subject to change and are adopted by ordinance. The applicant shall pay the proportionate impact fees adopted at the time of building permit application
Reviewer Comments:
Planning Review
Revisions Required
10/15/2022
10/24/2022
Reviewer:
Corrections:
Correction 1:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The landscape plan it states, “utilities and code required offsets prevent the installation of trees within the type IIa street front setback area”. If frontage improvements and associated 10’ planter strip are not required as a part of this project, we will require that type IIa landscaping with associated trees be planted at a maximum of 30’ intervals and the existing three street trees retained where possible or replanted in like.
a.Are the three existing street trees planned to be removed as a result of the placement of these utilities?
b.Can the proposed utilities and grease interceptor be placed outside of the required 12’ perimeter landscaping area? The existing street trees need to be retained where possible.
[landscape plan, pg. 1]
Correction 2:
See Document Markup
Comments:
1.The landscape plan it states, “utilities and code required offsets prevent the installation of trees within the type IIa street front setback area”. If frontage improvements and associated 10’ planter strip are not required as a part of this project, we will require that type IIa landscaping with associated trees be planted at a maximum of 30’ intervals and the existing three street trees retained where possible or replanted in like.
a.Are the three existing street trees planned to be removed as a result of the placement of these utilities?
b.Can the proposed utilities and grease interceptor be placed outside of the required 12’ perimeter landscaping area? The existing street trees need to be retained where possible. [landscape plan, pg. 1]
Correction 3:
See Document Markup
Comments:
All internal landscape islands and connector strips shall include a single row of structural soil cells (EX. Silva cells, or equivalent) along the perimeter of all internal parking lot landscape islands where parking spaces are proposed (under the pavement directly abutting the outer edge of the landscape island, except in drive lanes). [landscape plan, pg. 1]
Correction 4:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Existing tree(s) on the site which is larger than 15” in Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) is considered to be a ‘significant tree’ and must be retained, where possible.
a.If your site includes any significant trees, then you must include a tree risk assessment completed by a certified arborist and provided with your land use application.
[landscape plan, pg. 1]
Correction 5:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Please denote what use the striped loading area on the west of the new restaurant will be utilized for. [site plan, pg.3]
Correction 6:
See Document Markup
Comments:
On the survey submitted there is an ecology block wall along the northern portion of the site. If I am interpreting the preliminary storm and utilities site plan correctly, it appears that the ecology block wall will be placed again along the northern portion of the site again along the edge new parking lot. If this is correct, please label this on the preliminary storm and utilities site plan, and please define the height of the ecology block wall.
PMC 20.58.005 (2) (ii) Rear and Side Property Lines. All retaining walls shall be set back from any rear or side yard property line by a minimum of six feet. The maximum height of any singular retaining wall within 30 feet of a rear or side property line shall be six feet above finished grade. A minimum of six feet of stepback shall be provided between any terraced retaining walls proposed within 30 feet of a rear or side property line. No more than a total of three stepped retaining walls (complying with the maximum six-foot height limit above finished grade) shall be placed within 30 feet of a rear or side property line. A Type I visual barrier landscape buffer shall be provided in front of all retaining walls, in accordance with the city’s vegetation management standards (VMS) manual. [site plan, pg. 3]
Correction 7:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Provide the height of the proposed trash and recycling receptacle and associated enclosures on the elevation plans.
PMC 20.30.045 (7) Trash and Recycling Receptacles. Trash and recycling receptacles shall be screened from adjacent properties and public rights-of-way by an opaque visual barrier no lower than the highest point of the receptacles.
[site plan, pg.3]
Correction 8:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The rotating Taco Time sign onsite is nonconforming as to height and setback in addition to rotating motions not being permitted per PMC 20.60.020. Please note whether the existing will remain.
If the project plans to remove the rotating sign, new signage must conform with the current zoning sign code PMC 20.60. [site plan, pg.3]
Correction 9:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Please include a designated bicycle parking area that accommodates up to five (5) bicycle spaces. Refer to PMC 20.55.015 (below) for bicycle parking area requirements.
See PMC 20.55.016 Motorcycle/bicycle parking requirements. [site plan, pg. 3]
Correction 10:
See Document Markup
Comments:
If the existing building will be used for another restaurant, parking requirements are being met. However, if the use will change, then parking requirements may change.
[site plan, pg. 3]
Correction 11:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The plans show an 8’ deep pedestrian-oriented plaza area along the eastern portion of the southern façade, but not along the western portion. Please increase the size of the plaza space on the western side of the façade to a minimum of 8’.
Required bike parking has none been shown on the plans. Since the plaza space is required to include amenities, it may be beneficial to add the bike parking along the western portion of the southern façade in addition to increasing that space to 8’ in depth.
[site plan, pg. 3]
Correction 12:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The plans show the awning only part of the required plaza area. The pedestrian-oriented plaza is required to be covered by awnings covering at least 6’ of the plaza space and run the full width of the front of the building as well.
a.Please extend the awning to extend at least 6’ over the 8’ pedestrian-oriented plaza and run the full length of the front of the building.
PMC 20.26.300 (3)(b)(i) A pedestrian-oriented plaza space in front of the building at least eight feet deep running the full width of the building. This area shall be covered by awnings covering at least six feet of the plaza space. This plaza space shall include amenities such as bike parking, bench seating, planters, fountains, artwork, decorative railing, decorative light fixtures, hanging baskets or other features that are pedestrian scaled in nature;
[elevations, pg. 1]
Correction 13:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The surface area of the street-facing wall must consist of at least 60% windows and/or transparent doorways. In your design review narrative, you state that 53% of the street fronting façade is glazed from 2’-8’ above grade. Please resubmit elevations with the street-facing wall consisting of at least 60% windows and/or transparent doorways and include the calculations of this percentage on the elevation plans.
PMC 20.26.300 (3)(d) Building Entrances and Design. At least one building entrance for an individual building (or individual tenant spaces) shall face each public street frontage or be located within 50 lineal feet from a public street frontage. Directly linking pedestrian access shall be provided between the street right-of-way and each building entrance. No less than 60 percent of the surface area of any street-facing wall shall consist of windows and/or transparent doorways.
[elevations, pg. 1]
Correction 14:
Other/Miscellaneous
Comments:
SEPA Checklist
1. Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP):
DAHP is requesting that an Inadvertent Discovery Plan is created and kept onsite during construction. Their comment e-mail is viewable through the CityView Portal.
2. Puyallup Tribe of Indians:
The Puyallup Tribe has stated that 1115 E Main is located within a high probability area for impacting cultural resources. They are asking for verification as to whether or not the project will be removing the existing parking lot in order to complete a new/larger parking lot or if you are only adding on. If the existing parking lot is getting torn up, it will need an Archaeological monitory during ground disturbance. Their comment e-mail is viewable through the CityView Portal.
3. Department of Ecology:
The Department of Ecology provided a comment e-mail. This comment e-mail is viewable through the CityView Portal.
4. Nisqually Indian Tribe:
The Nisqually Indian Tribe provided a comment letter. This comment letter is viewable through the CityView Portal.
5. One public comment was received via telephone by a neighboring property owner, Michael Ewing at 1033 E Main. He would like to express his concern over the proposed trash enclosure. The existing Taco Time trash enclosure onsite has allegedly resulted in rodents becoming an issue on their property. The proposed trash enclosure is proposed to be located closer to their property line where his residence is. In addition to this, he stated that the existing Taco Time drive-through produces a significant amount of sound and light that has impacts on their property. Mr. Ewing is concerned with the addition of another drive-through and associated light and sound impacts. He would like to recommend a possible sound or visual buffer such as “insulated” vinyl fencing.
Correction 15:
Other/Miscellaneous
Comments:
Critical Areas
1. The wetland delineation and streams report prepared by Beaver Creek Environmental have been reviewed by our third-party consultant, Confluence Environmental Company. Confluence has confirmed that there are no wetlands present on the site. However, corrections need to be made to the report and resubmitted to the City for review. In addition to this, they are requesting that additional information be required regarding the floodplain habitat. Please see their full review letter in Documents & Images in the CityView Portal titled "Confluence Environmental Company Puyallup Taco Time wetland Report Review 101122"
Reviewer Comments:
Engineering Review
Revisions Required
10/15/2022
10/12/2022
Reviewer:
Corrections:
Correction 1:
See Document Markup
Comments:
The City adopted the 2019 Manual in July 2022. Update the storm design and references, information and tables in the report to align with the 2019 Manual. [Drainage Report, Page 1]
Correction 2:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Remove the word, "project". Be careful when using the term "Project Site." The 2019 Manual has two different meanings for "Project Site" and "Site." [Drainage Report, Page 1]
Correction 3:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Update references to the 2014 Ecology Manual with equivalent reference points in the 2019 Manual. Requirements for soils testing have subtly changed so confirm the testing criteria is still met. [Soils Report, Page 6]
Correction 4:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Submit an updated Soils report with the completed referenced observations conducted during the wet weather months. [Soils Report, Page 9]
Correction 5:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Grain Size Analysis may be used if soils are unconsolidated by glacial advance. Please confirm site soils have this characteristic. [Soils Report, Page 9]
Correction 6:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Provide calculations that arrive to the design infiltration rate. [Soils Report, Page 9]
Correction 7:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Be sure to review Latest City Standards updates. Design enclosure per City Standard Section 208.1. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 8:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Steep slopes are potentially in the vicinity of the proposed infiltration gallery. confirm slopes down stream of the facility location. All facilities shall be a minimum of 50 feet from any steep (greater than 15%) slope. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 9:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Stormwater infiltration BMPs shall be set back 100-feet from retaining walls to prevent short circuiting of stormwater by free-draining rock behind the retaining walls, unless the bottom of the infiltration BMP is greater than 2-feet below the lowest point on the retaining wall. Confirm preliminary elevations of the wall and facility on plans. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 10:
See Document Markup
Comments:
What is this block next the a catch basin?. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 11:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Show existing overhead power and poles. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 12:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Correction 13:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Correction 14:
See Document Markup
Comments:
There is a street tree in the vicinity of the proposed water service lines. Show existing street trees and solution to conflict on plans. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 15:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Provide a Table to reasonably estimate the quantity of existing and proposed hard surface areas. Include off-site areas. Use table attached to sheet as a guide for what is needed. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 16:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Show limits of disturbance and show all critical areas and steep slopes. No clearing, filling, grading or other alteration occurs within any critical areas or associated buffer unless specifically authorized pursuant to Chapter 21.06 Environmentally Critical Areas Management of the Puyallup Municipal Code [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 17:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Give approximate cut/fill quantities. include excavation for storm system. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 18:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Infiltration systems must be a minimum 10' from other structures, including other infiltration systems. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 19:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Delineate between the existing limits and new/replaced limits of the asphalt/concrete pavements. Use a sawcut line and proposed asphalt shading. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 20:
See Document Markup
Comments:
All new/replaced hard surface and converted vegetation areas must meet the latest Ecology standards. If any new/replaced area goes to the existing system's basin, you must show the existing system is adequately sized using the latest standards. This calculation is possible but requires detailed basin and storage sizing clarifications. You must consider the amount of storage the non-disturbed existing hard surface area will be using in the existing infiltration gallery per the previously constructed standards. Then show the storage space left over has capacity for the new/replaced hard surface area in the basin. Add this narrative to Storm report. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 21:
See Document Markup
Comments:
Create a separate preliminary drainage basin map showing existing and new/replaced areas that go into existing storm system and any existing and new/replaced area going into the new storm system. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Correction 22:
See Document Markup
Comments:
There are two sets of contours in locations that appear to be existing surface to remain. Confirm proposed contours are only shown in new/replaced areas. [Preliminary Storm and Utilities rev1]
Reviewer Comments:
Building Review
No Comments
10/15/2022
10/10/2022
Reviewer:
Reviewer Comments:
Fire Review
No Comments
10/15/2022
10/10/2022
Reviewer:
Reviewer Comments: