Permit Review Detail
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/31/2002 | PHIL SEADER | HANDICAP-SITE | REVIEW | Denied | |
| 06/12/2002 | JIM TATE | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Site Plan: 1. The sidewalk to Mission must be concrete. DS 2-08.5.1.C 2. The sidewalk must be physically separated from the vehicular travel lane by means of curbing. DS 2-08.4.1 3. Chip seal is not acceptable on local streets. See DS 3-01.3.1 for minimum structural section for local streets. 4. Curbing is required on the street from the parking lot to Mission. DS 3-01.3.2 5. The Ingress/Egress is in Pima County. The county must approve all work in the Mission Rd. right-of-way. 6. Show the location of the box culverts that are under Mission. A previous review comment required the location of offsite flow OFF-1. The Site Plan shows this flow on the west side of Mission. This is not where the flow enters the property. Please show the culverts and the flow in the correct location. 7. Show water surface elevations for the West Branch of the Santa Cruz. Show the 100- yr. flow. (789 cfs). DS 2-02.2.1.A.15 & Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 5.2.5. Previous review comment 6. 8. There are two 5'X6' box culverts under Mission Rd. south of the property. Show the quantity and location of the 100-yr flow from this offsite source where it enters the property. (See drainage comments). DS 2-02.2.1.A.15 & Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 5.2.5. Previous review comment 6. 9. Show drainage flow arrows for the new proposed developed area. DS 2-02.2.1.A.16 10. Section 2.8.2.6.C of the City of Tucson Land Use Code states that drainageways in a Scenic Corridor Zone are to be maintained in their natural states. The proposed road from the parking lot to Mission is in the drainageway and in a Scenic Corridor Zone. Please relocate. Hillside Development Zone 11. The 2430 contour length is incorrect. The total contour length does not equal the sum of the individual lengths. Drainage Report 12. The grades of the property to the east do not match those used in the drainage analysis. The area to the east is higher than that shown. The property owner has evidently done some filling and a playground area and RV storage area now exist. The drainage structure at the northeast corner of the property has been filled and a small culvert placed. The Drainage Report must evaluate drainage conditions based on existing grades. Water surface elevations and flood conditions must take into account those grades. 13. There are two 4'X6' box culverts under Mission south of the property. Because of the fill mentioned in comment 11 above, offsite flows from these culverts will enter the property from the south. Please quantify and show the location of this offsite flow. Discuss the effect of this flow on the proposed basin. 14. The small culvert at the northeast corner of the property (under the access to the RV storage) can not handle the anticipated flows. Water surface elevations in the parking lot and proposed street (from Mission to the parking lot) must be evaluated based on existing grades and structures. Show appropriate calculations. An all weather access requires 100-yr water depths of less than 1 ft. 15. The small culvert at the northeast corner of the property can not handle the anticipated flows. Based on existing grades and structures where will flows exit the property? Quantify these flows and provide location. 16. Sidewalks must be flood free for all storm discharges of up to a 10-yr. event. Please show with the appropriate calculations that the sidewalk from the parking lot to Mission will meet this standard. DS 2-08.4.1.E 17. Page 7 of the Drainage Report refers to a proposed channel to be developed southwest and southeast of the church. If this structure is to be eliminated from the plan please delete it from the report. 18. The results in Table 3 page 7 do not agree with the hydraulic data sheets provided for proposed developed conditions. 19. All flood limits, flow quantities in excess of 100 cfs, and appropriate water surface elevations determined in the drainage report must be shown on the site plan. 20. Show with the appropriate calculations that offsite flows will not enter the basin. |
| 06/12/2002 | JIM TATE | SANITATION | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/12/2002 | JAMES TATE | FLOODPLAIN | REVIEW | Denied | See Engineering Folder for a complete list of comments. Drainage Report The grades of the property to the east do not match those used in the drainage analysis. The area to the east is higher than that shown. The property owner has evidently done some filling and a playground area and RV storage area now exist. The drainage structure at the northeast corner of the property has been filled and a small culvert placed. The Drainage Report must evaluate drainage conditions based on existing grades. Water surface elevations and flood conditions must take into account those grades. There are two 4'X6' box culverts under Mission south of the property. Because of the fill mentioned in comment 11 above, offsite flows from these culverts will enter the property from the south. Please quantify and show the location of this offsite flow. Discuss the effect of this flow on the proposed basin. The small culvert at the northeast corner of the property (under the access to the RV storage) can not handle the anticipated flows. Water surface elevations in the parking lot and proposed street (from Mission to the parking lot) must be evaluated based on existing grades and structures. Show appropriate calculations. An all weather access requires 100-yr water depths of less than 1 ft. The small culvert at the northeast corner of the property can not handle the anticipated flows. Based on existing grades and structures where will flows exit the property? Quantify these flows and provide location. Sidewalks must be flood free for all storm discharges of up to a 10-yr. event. Please show with the appropriate calculations that the sidewalk from the parking lot to Mission will meet this standard. DS 2-08.4.1.E Page 7 of the Drainage Report refers to a proposed channel to be developed southwest and southeast of the church. If this structure is to be eliminated from the plan please delete it from the report. The results in Table 3 page 7 do not agree with the hydraulic data sheets provided for proposed developed conditions. All flood limits, flow quantities in excess of 100 cfs, and appropriate water surface elevations determined in the drainage report must be shown on the site plan. Show with the appropriate calculations that offsite flows will not enter the basin. |
| 06/20/2002 | 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. b) HDZ approval is required prior to site plan approval. c) Revise general note 15. Maximum allowed building height within the HDZ and SCZ for non-residential development is 30 feet. L.U.C. 2.8.1/ L.U.C. 2.8.2/ D.S. 2-12 2. Note the surface of the outdoor bicycle parking facility. Refer to D.S. 2-9.7.2 for criteria. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9/ D.S. 2-09.7.2 3. Sidewalks may not be constructed with decomposed granite. Refer to D.S. 2-08.5.1.C for sidewalk composition. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A./ D.S. 2-08.5.1.C 4. Label and dimension future curb location along Mission Road. Per the Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan, the future curb is located 12 feet in front of future property line for a 150 foot right-of-way. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.21 5. All requested changes must be made to the site and landscape plans D.S. 2-07.2.1.A |
| 06/25/2002 | JOE LINVILLE | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Include recording information on the site plan for the NUOS areas and submit the executed recorded covenant. LUC 3.8 |
| 06/25/2002 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/26/2002 | JIM EGAN | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/01/2002 | MONICA VALDEZ | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |