Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE
Permit Number - T01OT00527
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/24/2001 | DAN CASTRO | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | COMMENTS: Provide a response letter with the next site plan submittal that states how all the Zoning Review Section comments were addressed. CODE SECTION/ DEVELOPMENT STANDARD 1. a) Label the height of proposed storage units. b) In addition, storage unit square footage must be calculated under the lot coverage calculation. c) Label the height of the existing buildings on the plan. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6; D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.3 2. a) Revise building setback to south property line (adjacent C-1 zoning). Zoning south of the subject property is C-1 and R-2 zoning. Per L.U.C. 3.2.6.4 perimeter yard indicator "BB", the building setback required from C-1 zoning is based on the height of the proposed exterior building wall. Revise building setback from C-1 zoning. b) In addition label the adjacent C-1 zoning boundary south of the subject property. For additional information regarding zoning boundaries, please contact Planning Department Drafting Section 791-4541. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7; L.U.C. 3.2.6.4; D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.28) 3. Dimension the standard vehicle parking space width on the site plan. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8) 4. a) Provide a fully dimensioned typical bicycle parking space detail on the site plan which includes specific type of rack, number of bicycles it supports, and maneuverability. Refer to D.S. 2-09 for design requirements. b) Clearly delineate the bicycle parking location on the site plan. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9; D.S. 2-09) 5. If applicable, provide a detail of proposed free standing signage and outdoor lighting on the site plan. This also includes a detail of the proposed bicycle parking location sign. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13; D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.25) 6. If applicable, all existing or proposed easements must be shown on the plan including width, type, and recording docket and page reference. This also includes easements which have been abandoned or are proposed for abandonment. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.20) 7. It appears that the proposed 6' high cmu wall proposed along north property line will be located within the sight visibility triangle. Per D.S. 3-01.5.1.A.1 lines of sight may not be obscured between 30 inches and six (6) feet through a triangular area adjacent to the ingress/egress point. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.10; D.S. 3-01.5.1.A.1) 8. All requested changes must be made to the site and landscape plans. (D.S. 2-07.2.1.A) If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro, (520) 791-5608 |
| 09/24/2001 | PATRICIA GILBERT | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | Indicate the size of the existing vegetation. On the landscape plan a native plant preservation summary of the plants required for mitigation . Please refer to DS 2-07.2.2.A.1. and 2-15.3.4.B.2. Information on the site plan shall be included on the landscape plan. The landscape plan should include location map, legal description and the project address. Refer to DS 2-07.2.1. One canopy tree is required in the vehicle use area. Where a landscape border abuts a vehicle use area, canopy trees within those landscaped area may count towards the vehicle use area canopy tree requirement, provided there is a minimum of one canopy tree within the vehicle use area. Refer to 2-06.3.3.A. The quantity, size and both the proper and the common name of each species is required to be in the planting plan. Indicate the location of the lantana plants. Please refer to DS 2-07.2.2.A.1. When vegetation is used to satisfy a screen requirement the size of the proposed plant material must be a minimum of 5 gallons. If the proposed plant, Texas Ranger is being used as a vegetative screen specify the mininum size required on the planting plan. DS 2-06.3.5.A. Please add a general note addressing the irrigation standards found in DS 2-06.5.4. Should changes/amendments to the base/site plan occur through the review process, the same changes/amendments will be made to the landscape plan when resubmitted. Refer to DS 2-07.2.1.A. Additional comments could be made from the second submittal. |
| 10/10/2001 | PATRICIA GILBERT | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Native plant preservation plan or an exception application is required. Refer to DS 2-15 and LUC 3.8. ****** |
| 10/10/2001 | MIKE BERGHUIS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/17/2001 | MIKE BERGHUIS | FLOODPLAIN | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/17/2001 | JIM EGAN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/17/2001 | MIKE BERGHUIS | SANITATION | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 10/17/2001 | PHIL SEADER | HANDICAP-SITE | REVIEW | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/01/2001 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |