Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you can not find what you are looking for please submit a records request.
Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE
Permit Number - T02CM02336
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/10/2002 | JIM EGAN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 05/17/2002 | 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.Note the project address. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.3 2. a) Note the maximum building height allowed and proposed under general note number three (3). b) Gross floor area is based on the sum of the horizontal areas of the proposed building and patio measured from the exterior faces of the exterior walls. Please revise all applicable notes and calculations. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6/ L.U.C. 6.2.7/ D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.2/ D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.3 3. a) Revise the number of vehicle parking spaces required, to be based on the correct GFA of the building and patio. b) Note the parking space angle (degree) to verify compliance with L.U.C. Table 3.3.7-I. c) Revise parallel parking spaces to be 23 feet in length. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8/ D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4/ L.U.C. 3.3.4/ D.S. 3-05.2.1.B.2 4. a) Per L.U.C. 3.3.3.5, the number of bicycle parking spaces required are based on the number of vehicle parking spaces provided. b) Provide a fully dimensioned bicycle parking space detail. Refer to D.S. 2-09 for design criteria. c) Add the number and bicycle space type to be provided. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9/ L.U.C. 3.3.3.5/ D.S. 2-09/ D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4 5. Per D.S. 2-08.4.1.A, a sidewalk must be provided to Magdalena Road. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12/ D.S. 2-08.4.1.A 6. If applicable, provide a detail of existing and/or proposed freestanding 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. Note the number of loading spaces required and provided under parking calculation B. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.14/ D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.5 8. Label and dimension the future curb along Harrison Road. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.21 9. Add the applicable "subject to" section to general note number four (4). (Food Service "subject to" Sec. 3.5.4.5.A). D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31 10. Under general note three (3), note the maximum allowed F.A.R. (.35) and proposed F.A.R. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.3 11. All requested changes must be made to the site and landscape plans. D.S. 2-07.2.1.A |
| 06/07/2002 | DOUG WILLIAMS | FLOODPLAIN | REVIEW | Denied | The following items must be addressed prior to resubmittal of the drainage report: 1. A soils report with percolation test results is required to be submitted with the drainage report. Percolation testing procedures should be in accordance with the recommended procedure of the Pima County Department of Transportation-Flood Control District. 2. Provide a retention basin maintenance reponsibility note and a detailed inspection list and basin performance criteria for regular and as-needed maintenance, in accordance with the City of Tucson's Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management (SMDDFM), Sections 1.5.2 and 14.3 (Dev. Std. 10-02.0). |
| 06/07/2002 | DOUG WILLIAMS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Depict future curb location in accordance with the City of Tucson's Major Streets and Routes Plan and Development Standard 2-02.1 A (21) (see redlines on plans for location/dimension). 2. The minimum distance between driveways is 12 feet. As a minimum, the new southern driveway entrance proposed on Harrison Rd. should not extend past the extension/alignment of the south property line. The required distance may be up to 6' from property line alignment, depending upon the location of the existing driveway to the south (ref. TCC Sec. 25 - streets and sidewalks). 3. There appears to be existing curb on Magdalena Rd. New sidewalk (4') must be provided along this property frontage, in accordance with Development Standards 3-01.3.3 A and B, and 3-01.4.0. Conveyance of the 10-year discharge (retention basin outlet channel) is required to be provided under the sidewalk, in accordance with Dev. Stds. 3-01.4.4 F and 2-08.4.1 E. 4. Call out/depict a concrete driveway apron (Pima County/City of Tucson Standard Detail 206) at the Magdalena Rd. egress. 5. Demonstrate water harvesting by depressing landscape areas 6" max. Provide a note on Site, Grading and Landscape plans to this effect. 6. Provide administrative/project address on plans. |
| 06/07/2002 | DOUG WILLIAMS | SANITATION | REVIEW | Denied | The dumpster enclosure accessibility appears to conflict with the loading zone - please depict maneuverability/accesibility for both, in accordance with Development Standards 6-01.0 and 2-02.1 A (#'s 14 and 32). Please discuss/address why two dumpsters are proposed with this development. |
| 06/12/2002 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | Based on the following code section one of the following two options is available related to screening from residential properties to the south and west. LUC "3.7.3.5 Phased Development. Where screening for phased development is required: A. The perimeter screening element along the property lines must be installed during development of the first phase; or B. Where the undisturbed natural desert is maintained in areas to be developed in subsequent phases, a temporary screen may be erected around the perimeter of the initial phase, subject to the following. 1. Temporary screening may be an opaque wood fence or a chain link fence with wood slats. 2. Temporary screening must be replaced by a permanent screen if construction of the subsequent phases is not started within two (2) years of the date the original phase received a certificate of occupancy." If 3.7.3.5.B is appropriate, revise the plan to provide a 5' high screen along the project limits and label the remaining portion of the property outside the grading limits as undisturbed natural desert. A 5' high screen is required between the vehicular use area and Magdalena Road per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. General Note 2 on sheet LS-1 regarding sight visibility requires clarification. There appears to be misalignment of the text. The opening of the trash enclosure must be completely screened from Harrison Road. Although the site plan sheet 1 hints at a gated opening, the dumpster detail on sheet 3 does not indicate appropriate screening. LUC Table 3.7.2-I NPPO mitigation for the removed zizyphus obtusifolia should appear on the landscape plan. |
| 06/12/2002 | PHIL SEADER | HANDICAP-SITE | REVIEW | Denied | |
| 06/12/2002 | JOE LINVILLE | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Mitigation is required for the removed zizyphus obtusifolia per LUC Table 3.8.6-I. Include the mitigation plants on the landscape plan. DS 2-15.3.4.B Revsie the notes on sheet CV-1 to refer to the Development Services Department, rather than the Planning Department. LUC 3.8.6.7 Revise the preservation plan aerial to show the grading limits and indicate that the remaining portion of the property will remain undisturbed at this time. 2-15.3.1.A |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 06/17/2002 | TAMI ACHONG | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |