Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

The login landing page when selecting 'View' is still occurring and is still pending further investigation. 

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: T02CM00404
Parcel: 11942002C

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T02CM00404
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/25/2002 JIM EGAN FIRE REVIEW Denied 1. FIRE HYDRANTS REQUIRED SUBMIT APPROVED COT WATER PLAN.
2. SUBMIT COMPLETE CODE REVIEW CHECKLIST.
3. FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED AND EXTENDED TO WITHIN 150 FEET OF ALL PORTIONS OF EXTERIOR WALLS.
02/08/2002 DAN CASTRO ZONING REVIEW Denied COMMENTS: 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.
CODE SECTION/ DEVELOPMENT STANDARD

1. This project is within the Scenic Corridor Zone (SCZ) and Hillside Development Zone (HDZ). A separate review is required for the SCZ. The case number for this review must be noted in the lower right corner of each sheet of the site and landscape plans. All required elements of the SCZ (i.e. 30 foot buffer, view corridors, approved colors, etc..) as shown on the approved SCZ plan must be added to the site plan, along with date of approval and any conditions placed on that approval.

The SCZ requires separate review. A thirty-foot-wide buffer area, adjacent to the future MS & R right-of-way, is to be preserved in place and maintained in its natural state. Maximum height of a structure is one-third the distance of the structure from the future-right-of-way, not to exceed 24 feet in height. Material and/or paint description for areas of structures and signage visible from the Scenic Route are reviewed for colors, which are predominant within the surrounding landscape, such as desert and earthtones. The SCZ process requires that the applicant offer to meet with the adjacent property owners and neighborhood associations. For more specific information on this process, please contact our office.

The HDZ review is done along with the review of the site plan. The ACS calculations must be reviewed and verified by the City Engineer. Refer to Land Use Code Sec. 2.8.1 for development criteria that needs to be submitted. Notes that must be added to the site plan include: 1) All proposed site work, including grading must comply with Development Standard 9-04.0. 2) Exposed exterior walls and roofs of structures, except satellite dishes, must be earthtone in color and will blend with the predominant natural colors found on the lot. Satellite dishes may be black. White is not permitted. 3) Building height is limited to 24 feet within the HDZ..
L.U.C. 2.8.1/ L.U.C. 2.8.2/ D.S. 2-12

2. Note the project address.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.3

3. a) Dimension the wheelstop on the typical parking space detail. Wheelstop must be located two and one-half (2½) feet from the front of the parking space.
b) Dimension back-up spurs. Refer to D.S. 3-05.2.2.D for design criteria.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8/ D.S. 3-05.2.3.C/ D.S. 3-05.2.2.D

4. a) Per L.U.C. 3.3.3.5, the number of bicycle parking spaces required is based on the number of vehicle parking spaces provided. Revise bicycle parking calculation as required.
b) Provide a fully dimensioned bicycle parking space detail. Refer to D.S. 2-09 for design criteria.
c) Note the number and type of bicycle parking spaces provided under the parking calculation.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9/ D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4/ L.U.C. 3.3.3.5/ D.S. 2-09

5. Per D.S. 2-08.4.1.A, a sidewalk must be provided to a project from each street on which the street has frontage. Continuous on-site pedestrian circulation system must be provided to the Via Ingresso and Mission Road right-of-way. For additional information regarding the pedestrian circulation system refer to D.S. 2-08.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A./ D.S. 2-08.4.1.A

6. If applicable, provide a detail of existing and/or proposed free standing signage and outdoor lighting on the site plan. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13/ D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.25

7. All existing or proposed easements must be shown on the plan including width, type, and recording docket and page reference.
D.S. 2-02.2.1A.20

8. Note the adjacent zoning classifications north, east, and south of the subject property.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.28

9. Note the existing use of the site. If site is undeveloped (vacant), state as so on plan.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31

10. Under the site calculations block on sheet one (1), building area is noted as 7,600 SF and site plan notes the building area as 7,500 SF. Revise for consistency.
D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.2

11. a) Revise "building coverage" note under site calculations block to "proposed F.A.R. (floor area ratio)" and note the maximum allowed F.A.R. (.50).
b) Note the maximum allowed lot coverage (70%) and proposed lot coverage percentage. Lot coverage calculation is made up of building area and vehicle use area divided by gross site area.
D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.3

12. Add the following note: "Loading space not required for this use".
D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.5

13. All requested changes must be made to the site and landscape plans
D.S. 2-07.2.1.A
02/11/2002 JOE LINVILLE NPPO REVIEW Denied See landscape comments.
02/11/2002 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied The legend on sheet NP-2 requires additions in order to present a complete analysis of the natural resources. LUC 3.8.6.4.A

The NUOS area must be delineated in a surveyable manner on the site plan and designated by legal description on a document recorded with the Pima County Recorder for a lot division. Revise the site plan to include legal description for the NUOS area.

To protect the natural areas, recorded covenants, which run with the land, will be provided in favor of the City of Tucson and of all owners with record interest in the natural area. Include the legal description and the required covenant (which should provide for perpetual preservation of the natural area) for review with the next submittal. Upon approval of the legal description and covenant the documents may be recorded. LUC Sec. 3.8.6.4.B& Sec. 2.8.1.7
02/25/2002 JAMES TATE FLOODPLAIN REVIEW Denied See Engineering
02/25/2002 JIM TATE ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied The following items must be revised or added to the site plan. Please include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all the engineering, flood plain, and solid waste comments have been addressed.

Site Plan:

1. Please include the project address on the site plan. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.3)

2. Please show the sight visibility triangles for the ingress/egress to the property from Via Ingresso. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.10)

3. Please show the width of the ingress/egress to the property from Via Ingresso.
(DS 2-02.2.1.A.11)

4. Clearly identify and dimension the pedestrian circulation and sidewalks. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.12)

5. Please show and dimension all signage. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.13)

6. Please clearly show the limits of all 100-year floodplains (the limits of all 100-yr events with peak discharges of 100 cfs or more). Show and label the Fema floodplain limits. Show the 100-yr water-surface elevations at sufficient intervals to define the drainage patterns on and adjacent to the site (particularly for the west branch of the Santa Cruz).
(DS 2-02.2.1.A.15 & Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 5.2.5)

7. Please include on the plan the estimated cut and fill quantities. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.17)

8. Show, dimension, and label the right-of-way for Via Ingresso, Mission Road, and the alley east of the property. Show, label, and dimension the MS&R future right-of-way for Mission Rd. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.19)

9. Clearly show the edge of pavement for all right-of-way. Please dimension from street centerline to existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, and edge of pavement. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.21)

10. The solid waste container location is not accessible. Maximum allowable back up distance for the solid waste vehicle is 40 ft. Outside turning radius for the vehicle is 50 ft. Please see
6-01 for solid waste standards. Particularly see DS 6-01.4.1.c & DS 6-01 fig.1)

11. Basis of elevation must be Bench Mark based on City of Tucson datum, including City Field Book and page number. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.23)

12. The basin maintenance ramp must be a minimum of 15 ft. wide with a maximum slope of 15%. Please show this ramp on the plan. (SMDDFM 14.3.4)

Hillside Development Zone

11. Please indicate the scale and contour interval on the plan. (DS 9.04.2.1.A)

12. The contour interval for the plan must be 10 ft. Please change the map and the calculations.
(DS 9-04.2.1.A.2)

13. The Average Natural Cross Slope must be multiplied by a linear adjustment factor
(see DS 9-04.2.1.F).

14. Slopes of 15% or greater must be outlined and identified on the map. (DS 9-04.2.2.D)

Drainage Report

15. Page 7 refers to a proposed channel to be developed southwest and southeast of the church. Please show the location of this channel on the plan. Please show a section of the channel and provide calculations for sizing. (SMDDFM, 2.3.1.5.C)

16. Page 7 says that the parking area will drain directly in to the West Branch of the Santa Cruz. Please show this location on the plan. Describe this structure. Describe the bank protection. Provide calculations sizing this structure. (SMDDFM, 2.3.1.5.C)

17. Where does offsite flow OFF-1 cross the property and how will it effect the parking area?

18. The hydraulic data sheet for OFF-1 has a basin factor of .03. Please explain the conditions that result in using this number. (SMDDFM 2.3.1.3.2)
02/25/2002 JIM TATE SANITATION REVIEW Denied See Engineering
04/16/2002 TACHONG1 HANDICAP-SITE REVIEW Needs Review

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
04/15/2002 TAMI ACHONG OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed