Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE
Permit Number - T02CM01904
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/10/2002 | 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. Since this conversion results in a less than 25% living area expansion, a full code compliance review is required for the proposed dwelling unit only and the last approved site plan is required for site reference. Attached is a copy of the last approved site plan (1980) found in DSD records. 2. Note the building height for unit #2. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6 3. Per L.U.C. 3.2.6.4 development designator BB, the minimum building setback required for the perimeter yard setback is the greater of 10 feet or ¾ height of the exterior building wall. The north and west property line building setbacks do not meet the minimum building setback required. A lot development option (LDO) may be applied for to allow waive this code requirement. For more information regarding the LDO process please contact me at the number noted below. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7/ L.U.C. 3.2.6.4 4 a) Provide the vehicle parking calculation for the entire site. Refer to L.U.C. 3.3.4 for multi-family parking requirements. b) Note the number of bedrooms in each unit. c) The carport north of unit 3 and carport between units 1 and 4 are not shown on the last approved site plan. Provide the approved site plan indicating these carports have been approved or if a permit has not been obtained both carports must be permitted as part of this project. d) Parking spaces 1-4 located east of the swimming pool are not shown on the last approved site plan. Per L.U.C. 3.3.7.5, a street may not be used for maneuvering directly into or from a parking space located outside the right-of-way. All new parking spaces as a result of this expansion (2 parking spaces required for new unit) and driveway for new spaces must be paved and striped with maneuverability on-site. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8/ D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4/ L.U.C. 3.3.4/ L.U.C. 3.3.7.5 5. a) Per L.U.C. 3.3.4 "multi-family dwelling", bicycle parking is required for four (4) or more units. Provide bicycle-parking calculation and note the number and type of bicycle parking spaces required. b) Provide a fully dimensioned bicycle parking space detail. Refer to D.S. 2-09 for design and location criteria. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9/ D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4/ L.U.C. 3.3.4/ D.S. 2-09 6. Dimension right-of-way for both Brighton Lane and Hart Lane. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.19 7. If an LDO is applied for, note the LDO case number, date of approval, and conditions imposed on the site plan. |
| 05/22/2002 | JOE LINVILLE | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit a native plant preservation plan or application for exception to LUC 3.8. |
| 05/22/2002 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | A landscape plan is required. Provide plan including all required content. DS 2-07.2.2 A 10' wide street landscape border is required Brighton Lane adjacent to Unit 2. LUC 3.7.2.4 Expansions to the vehicular use/parking areas on the site must be landscaped, including street landscape borders and canopy trees. LUC 3.7.2.4. & 3.7.2.3 Show all existing and proposed walls on the site and landscape plans. Walls may not be placed in front of required landscape borders or within sight visibility triangles. New parking areas must be screened with a 5' masonry wall from adjacent properties. LUC Table 3.7.2-I |
| 06/12/2002 | PAUL MACHADO | FLOODPLAIN | REVIEW | Denied | |
| 06/12/2002 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Blue Denim, Inc. 5461 W. Idle Hour Place SUBJECT: 5729 E. Pima Street Site plan T02CM01904 (First Review) T14S, R14E, Section 1 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Site Plan. The Site Plan (SP) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Site Plan: 1. Please provide adjacent property grades for review in accordance with in 2000 IBC section 13 concerning fills. 2. Show existing and future, if applicable, sight visibility triangles on Hart Lane. 3. Please show point of access (driveway apron or curb radii) per D.S. 2-02.2.1.11. 4. Please provide Drainage patterns and finished grades per D.S. 2-02.2.1.16. 5. Please list estimated cut & fill quantities per D.S. 2-02.2.1.17. 6. A DSMR request is required for any construction in the future sight visibility triangle. 7. Please show a typical cross section of the P.A.A.L. or call out the percentage of slopes. 8. Please show the proposed roof drainage patterns, 100% of the 10-year flow must be conveyed under the sidewalks. Please provide supporting calculations to demonstrate compliance with D.S 3-01.4.4. 9. Dimension from street monument lines and right-of-way etc. per D.S. 2-02.1.19. 10. Dimensions from street monument lines to existing and proposed curbs, S/W, utilities etc. per D.S. 2-02.2.1.21. 11. Show existing topography at intervals not exceeding 2' with CI called out and/or spot elevations per D.S. 2-01.2.1.23. 12. A separate permit is required for any work done in the right-of-way, call 791-4942 for additional information. 13. Add note regarding maximizing landscaped areas 6" for water harvesting. 14. Show adjacent FFE to show compliance with the 2' grading differential ordinance. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 or pmachad2@ci.tucson.az.us Paul Machado Senior Engineering Associate, |
| 06/12/2002 | PAUL MACHADO | SANITATION | REVIEW | Denied | |
| 06/12/2002 | PHIL SEADER | HANDICAP-SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/14/2002 | JIM EGAN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 06/17/2002 | ELAINE ROSE | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |