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 Review Detail

Permit Number: T02OT00059
Parcel: 12218234A

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T02OT00059
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/14/2002 JIM EGAN FIRE REVIEW Approved
01/24/2002 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 is comprised of more than one lot, a lot combination is required prior to the approval of this site plan. Please provide the following documentation to the Zoning Review Section for review: signed, notarized, and recorded affidavit (copy attached to the review comments), copy of recorded legal descriptions (Exhibit "A" in affidavit), and approved Pima County Tax Combination Form.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.2

2. Note the 1st floor square footage and 2nd floor square footage under general information block.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6

3. a) Is the proposed 2nd floor office use for the retail establishment on the first floor? If so, the 2nd floor office must be parked at 1 space per 200 SF. GFA. If the office is not related to the retail use on-site you may park the 2nd floor office at 1 space per 250 SF GFA. Until this is clarified vehicle parking calculation may not be verified for compliance.
b) Add the square footage of the 2nd floor office to the parking calculation.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8; D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4

4. If applicable, provide a detail of proposed free standing signage and outdoor lighting on the site plan.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13; D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.25

5. If applicable, all existing or proposed easements must be shown on the plan including width, type, and recording docket and page reference.
D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.20

6. Is General Merchandise Sales proposed use? If so, please note as so under the general information block and add the applicable "subject to" LUC Section 3.5.9.2.A.
D.S. 2-02.2.1A.31

7. Is the floor area for the 2nd floor included in the floor area ratio calculation? If not please revise calculation.
D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4

8. All requested changes must be made to the site and landscape plans.
D.S. 2-07.2.1.A
02/06/2002 JOE LINVILLE NPPO REVIEW Denied Submit Native plant Preservation Plan or Application For Exception, LUC Sec 3.8, DS 2-15
02/06/2002 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied A minimum 10' wide street landscape border is required on the property along Richey Boulevard. The right of way area may only be used to meet the border requirement with approval of the City Engineer. Include verification of the required approval with the next submittal. LUC Sec. 3.7.2.4.

The proposed screen walls located at the intersection of the Speedway Boulevard and Richey Boulevard landscape borders encroach in excess of the maximum allowed. Revise the plan as necessary to reduce encroachment, while providingthe required screening. LUC Sec. 3.7.3.2.C.3

Landscape areas should provide for stormwater harvesting. Revise the landscape plan to indicate use of all runoff. LUC Sec. 3.7.4.3.B

Identify existing landscaping to remain by genus and species,
50% vegetative coverage is required for the existing poritohn of the Speedway Boulevard street landcsape border. DS 2-07.2.2, LUC 3.7.2.4.
02/12/2002 LAITH ALSHAMI FLOODPLAIN REVIEW Denied
02/12/2002 LAITH ALSHAMI ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied Laith Alshami, Floodplain and Engineering comments, 02/12/2002:

1- Label and dimension all sight visibility triangles (DS 2-02.2.10).
2- Show limits of the 100-year floodplain and water surface elevation (DS 2-02.2.15).
3- Provide estimated cut and fill quantities (DS 2-02.2.17).
4- It is not clear if the contour lines shown herein are existing or proposed. According to (DS 2-02.2.16) and (DS 2-02.2.23), existing contours and proposed grades should be shown (show the contour lines elevations).
5- Show the tie to Bellvue Street monument line.
6- The Site Plan should be stamped by a registered civil engineer to certify the floodplain information.
02/12/2002 LAITH ALSHAMI SANITATION REVIEW Approved
02/14/2002 PHIL SEADER HANDICAP-SITE REVIEW Approved

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
02/15/2002 MONICA VALDEZ OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed