Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING
Permit Number - DP12-0001
Review Name: RESUB - SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/27/2012 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL FROM: Michael St.Paul, Planning Technician PROJECT: DP12-0001 (T12CM00034) 774 East Seneca Street Two duplexes (4units w/ 4 bedrooms in each unit) TRANSMITTAL: July 2, 2012 COMMENTS: This project is review per Development Standards Number 2-01 for a Development Package. Please attach a response letter with the next submittal, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1) This site is located in the R-2 zone (LUC Section 2.3.5.2.A.2). The Development Designator is "K" (LUC Sections 2.3.5.2.A.2 & 3.2.3.1.C) and the Perimeter Yard Indicator is BB (LUC Sections 3.2.3.1.C & 3.2.6.4). 2) This site has been significantly revised, rendering the previous review comments, including the DDO comments, no longer applicable. Two parcels (123-14-0600 & 123-14-0610) have been combined into a single parcel (123-14-061A), thereby doubling the site size to fifteen thousand, five hundred eighty two (15,582) square feet. Two (2) duplex buildings, for a total of four (4) units, with four (4) bedrooms in each unit, have been proposed for this site. 3) Provide continuous pedestrian circulation and access from each building entrance to the adjacent public street (DS 2-08.3.1 & DS 2-01.3.9.R, .T). The pedestrian circulation must be a sidewalk as defined in DS 2-8.4.1. Provide dimensions for the width for the sidewalk on the site plan. The minimum width is four (4) feet (DS 2-08.5.1.A). 4) Provide a dimension for the wheel stops for the front parking space along Seneca Street. The wheel stop must be two and a half (2 ½) feet from the front of the parking space (LUC Section 3.3.6.8.C). (See Illustration 3.3.6.8.C.) 5) A back-up spur must be provided at the south end of the PAAL (LUC Section 3.3.6.6.D.1). The back-up spur shall be a minimum of three (3) feet in depth and have a three (3) foot radii and a wheel barrier (LUC Section 3.3.6.6.D.2). See Illustration 3.3.6.6.D. The following comments pertain to formatting consideration required by DS 2-01: 6) "A title block shall be provided in the lower right quadrant of each sheet" (DS 2-01.2.4). 7) "A three (3) inch by five (5) inch space shall be reserved in the lower right quadrant of each sheet for an approval stamp" (DS 2-01.2.5). 8) "A small, project-location map shall be provided in the upper right corner of the cover sheet" (DS 2-01.2.6). 9) "The north arrow, contour interval, and scale s applicable to each sheet should be placed together in the upper right corner of each sheet" (DS 2-01.2.7). 10) Add the e-mail address to the owner's information (DS 2-01.3.1). 11) Provide the legal description on the site plan (DS 2-01.3.2.B). 12) Provide all easements of record, with recording information, on the site plan (D 2-01.3.8.B). 13) Provide the street information, with dimensions, on the site plan. Include curb and center line locations (DS 2-01.3.8.C, & DS 2-01.3.9.H.4). 14) Provide a typical width for the parking spaces (DS 2-01.3.9.H.5.a). 15) Provide a minimum of two (2) short-term and two (2) long-term bicycle parking spaces on site (LUC Section 3.3.8). Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned (DS 2-01.3.9.H.5.d). See bicycle parking design criteria (LUC Section 3.3.9). 16) Indicate the location of gang mailboxes for the site (DS 2-01.3.9.V). Be certain to avoid any conflicts with utilities, landscaping and pedestrian accessibility. 17) Indicate locations and types of proposed signage o the site plan, and avoid the above possible conflicts (DS 2-01.3.9.W). Please be aware that additional comments may be necessary relative to information provided with subsequent submittals. |
| 07/09/2012 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. A 5' wall is required to screen adjacent residential properties from the vehicle use area per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. Portion of the 5' wall depicted on the site and landscape plans do not extend the entire length of the parking area. Revise plans as necessary. 2. 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. 3. Additional comments may apply. |
| 07/24/2012 | ROBERT SHERRY | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | Clarify the rim elevations for the upstream and downstream manholes. The contour elevations in the area show MH#2 located between the 2412' contour and the 2414' contour but the rim elevation is show as 108.0' - how is this possible? MH#1 has a similar issue. Reference: City of Tucson Development Standard No. 2-01.0.0, Section 3.8 D and Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006. |