Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE
Permit Number - T02CM05644
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/02/2003 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | The landscape plan may require revision in order to comply NPPO regulations. Additional comments may apply pending review of a proper NPPO Plan, see NPPO comments. DS 2-15.3.4 |
| 01/02/2003 | JOE LINVILLE | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | The native plant preservation information received is not acceptable. A native plant inventory and preservation per DS 2-15.0 is required. The plans must be prepared by a plant professional as defined in LUC 3.8.4.4. Two copies of the plan will be required. The landscape plans may require revision in order to comply with the regulations. Additional comments may apply pending review of the plans. An OK to submit by the Landscape Section will be required prior to resubmittal. |
| 12/10/2002 | JIM EGAN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 12/20/2002 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | HANDICAP-SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 12/20/2002 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | SITE PLAN TRANSMITTAL TO: CDG Architects 345 E. Toole Avenue #202 Tucson, AZ 85701 FROM: Peter McLaughlin Senior Planner FOR: Patricia Gehlen Principal Planner PROJECT: T02CM05644 King Street Apartments 327 W. King Road TRANSMITTAL: December 20, 2002 Upon completion of the following revision/addition, an over the counter review may be arranged to obtain stamped approval by the zoning review section without resubmitting the site plan. The following item must be revised on or added to the site plan: 1. Per LUC 2.3.5.2.A.2, the proposed residential use in the R-2 zone is subject to LUC 3.5.7.1.F. Please add a note to the zoning information stating this restriction. LUC 2.3.5.2.A.2 2. Revise the perimeter yard setback requirements to state specifically which perimeter yard building setback has the 10' or H requirement (east property line building setback) and which has the H requirement (west and south property lines bldg. setback) LUC 3.2.6.4 DS 2-02.2.1.A.7 3. Because the perimeter yard setbacks to adjacent R-2 zoned property to the east are based on greater of 6' or H, add the maximum proposed height above finished grade for the east walls of the buildings, including the storage room. Revise the maximum allowed height the zoning information to read 25 feet and add the maximum proposed heights to the zoning info for clarity. LUC 3.3.7 4. Dimension the length and width and vehicle overhang area for the four parking spaces located to the north of the office/rec room, or provide a parking typical. Also, dimension the PAAL width behind these four spaces. DS 2-02.2.1.A.8 & .11 5. If easements exist on the site, please show their location, type, width and provide recordation information. DS 2-02.2.1.A.20 6. Since the units are attached, required parking must be based on number of bedrooms. Please include the number of bedrooms per unit proposed and revise parking calcs if necessary. DS 2-02.2.2.4 LUC 3.3.4 7. State the existing use of the property (i.e. vacant). DS 2-02.2.1.A.31 If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608. PSMc: H:\PETER\Siteplans02\T00CM05644a |
| 12/23/2002 | JIM TATE | SANITATION | REVIEW | Denied | See Engineering folder comments. |
| 12/23/2002 | 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 comments have been addressed. Site Plan 1. Maximum back-up distance for the solid waste vehicle is 40 ft. Relocate the enclosure or obtain written permission from the Department of Solid Waste Management (Rene Duarte) for the proposed location. DS 6-01.4.1.c 2. Dimension both back-up spurs per DS 3-05.2.2.D 3. Show basin 100-yr. peak ponding limits and WSEL. The Drainage Report specifies the peak WSEL as 73.95. Some ponding will occur in the driveway. 4. Include the specific maintenance notes specified in the Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 14.3.2 on the Site Plan. Drainage Report 1. The Site and Grading Plans show drainage openings in the existing west wall. Drainage from the property on the west is not discussed in the Drainage Report. The proposed development would block flow from the west. Stormwater must be accepted and released from developments essentially at the same locations. and with the same magnitudes, as encountered under existing conditions. Address this in the Drainage Report. SMDDFM, 12.5 2. Include a basin maintenance checklist in the report. SMDDRM, 2.3.1.6.C |
| 12/23/2002 | JAMES TATE | FLOODPLAIN | REVIEW | Denied | See Engineering Folder comments. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01/14/2003 | TAMI ACHONG | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |