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.

Permit Number: T02CM00720
Parcel: 12416163A

Address:
880 E 20TH ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T02CM00720
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
05/23/2002 JIM EGAN FIRE REVIEW Approved
05/30/2002 PETER MCLAUGHLIN ZONING REVIEW Denied TO: Bruce Call FROM: Peter McLaughlin
2055 E. 20th Street Senior Planner
Tucson, AZ 85715 Dev Services Dept.
(520) 722-3668
FOR: Patricia Gehlen
Principal Planner
Development Services Dept.
PROJECT:
T02CM00720
Expansion -Napa Auto Parts Addition
880 E. 20th Street
Tucson, AZ
Site Plan Review (2nd review)

TRANSMITTAL: May 30, 2002

Zoning Review comments dated February 27, 2002 (see 1st review comments below) have not been addressed in the resubmittal
_________________________________________________
TO: Bruce Call FROM: Peter McLaughlin
2055 E. 20th Street Senior Planner
Tucson, AZ 85715 Dev Services Dept.
(520) 722-3668
FOR: Patricia Gehlen
Principal Planner
Development Services Dept.
PROJECT:
T02CM00720
Expansion -Napa Auto Parts Addition
880 E. 20th Street
Tucson, AZ
Site Plan Review (1st review) TRANSMITTAL: February 27, 2002

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.

1. This project is being reviewed as less than a 25% expansion.
DS 2-02

2. Because the portion of the parking lot along the north property line has been slightly reconfigured (two more spaces are shown than on the previously approved site plan), show dimensioned width of parking spaces in this area on the site plan. The back-up spur, as shown on the stamped approved plan along the east side of the parking lot must be provided per DS 3-05.2.2.D. Show the back-up spur fully dimensioned with a 3-foot depth on the site plan. Also, wheelstops, as shown on the approved plan, must be provided per DS 3-05.2.3.C.1, to prevent parked vehicles from overhanging adjacent landscaped areas. Show the wheelstops on the site plan, dimensioned two-and-one-half (2½) feet from the front of the parking spaces.
DS 3-05.2.2.D
DS 3-05.2.3.C.1
DS 3-05.2.3.C.2

3. The alley access is not permitted, nor does the last approved site plan indicate alley access. Revise the site plan to eliminate alley access and provide back-up spur as shown on last approved plan.

4. Any improvements not shown on the the stamped approved site plan and located within the MS&R right-of-way for Park Avenue, such as the northeasternmost parking space, must be removed at time of street widening. A stamp will be placed on the submitted site plan so stating.
LUC 2.8.3.5.C.3

5. If any new free-standing outdoor lighting or signage is proposed for this site, please detail on the site plan.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.25

6. The math in the bicycle parking calc is incorrect. Also, bicycle parking is based on the number of vehicle spaces provided. The bicycle parking calc should be as follows: 29 vehicle parking spaces provided ´ 0.08 = 2.32 bicycle parking spaces required. For uses with less than fifty vehicle spaces provided, two (2) class 2 bicycle parking spaces may be provided. State the number of bicycle parking spaces provided in the calcs. Show the location of bicycle parking spaces on the site plan.
DS 2-02.2.1.A.9
LUC 3.3.7.8.A

7. The street yard building setback scales to 24 feet on the drawing, but the stated dimension has been changed to 12 feet. Revise plan to show the new addition with its correct dimension. Revise the building dimension, square footage, percent expansion and building setback dimension where necessary. State the proposed street frontage setback for the new addition in the blank space in the lower right hand corner of the site information matrix. Front setback allowed must be revised to read the "the greater of 21 feet or height of structure from back of future curb". Revise as required.

8. General notes indicate use as "industrial" and parking calcs state "wholesale". Revise one or the other and applicable calcs and site plan as required for consistency.

9. Because the new addition has an exterior door, clearly demonstrate that it connects to the existing on-site pedestrian circulation system.



If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608.
05/31/2002 JOE LINVILLE NPPO REVIEW Denied See previous comments. PLans will not be accepted for resubmittal without NPPO Exception Application or Preservation plan.
05/31/2002 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied Previous comments of 3/01/02 have not been addressed fully, but still apply.
The expansion of the vehicular use area adjacent to Park Avenue is not in compliance LUC 2.8.3.5.C.3, see previous comments. A site/landscape plan indicating how the site will comply with LUC requirements when the right of way area may no longer be used is required along with MS&R covenant. LUC 2.8.3.5.F
Use of the right of way area to meet the 10' street landscxape border requirement is allowed only if approved by the City Engineer. LUC 3.7.2.4

The vehicle parking spaces facing 20th St. may not overhang the street landscape border. Wheelstop curbing as indicated on the last approved site plan or an approved alternative must be employed in this location. DS 2-06.3.3.E

Please clarify the notes under 'landscape calculations' to indicate which note applies to which border segment.
06/05/2002 BLANCA ESPINO ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied No response to 1st review comments.

1st review comments:
Site Plan
1. Indicate lot bearings along with dimensions. D.S. 2-02.2.1.5

2. Indicate existing sight visibility triangles from PAAL onto Local street. D.S. 2-02.2.1.10

3. Indicate location, type, size and height of existing and/or proposed signage, if applicable. D.S. 2-02.2.1.13

4. Indicate if streets are "Public" or "Private". D.S. 2-02.2.1.18
06/12/2002 PHIL SEADER HANDICAP-SITE REVIEW Denied

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
06/14/2002 TAMI ACHONG OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed